cycle route - Grand Canal

monument

nak wrote: »

Not much anti-social behaviour, I use it everyday for part of my commute. Have heard of a few incidents in the afternoons, none in the mornings as it's quiet. I don't mind the gates, same as stopping at lights really. Nice to ride on a quiet route with no cars.

How is dismounting and getting a bike passed a gate not designed for bikes the same as stopping at lights?

Dr.Millah

I went from Lucan to town everyday during the summer along the N4. Enjoyed it and its a nice cycle that you can keep a nice speed up throughout. Once u get used to the lane changes (only a few to avoid merging off) its really simple and safe.

tomasrojo

I used to commute from Lucan to town and I went along Nangor Road/Long Mile Road. Bit longer but it was quieter. This was ten years ago though.

bogmanfan

I do this route every day. I use the N4 on the way in, but that's early in the morning (leave house at 6am). I come home along the North Circular Rd, then into Phoenix Park, and down the Strawberry Beds. Nice route with light traffic. I don't like the look of the N4 outbound around the M50/Liffey Valley interchanges at all.

mrsFitz

It is such a lovely route, and it finishes right beside where I live, but I never cycle it because that picture of the cargo bike is taken by me, of my kids and hubby:( Even on my ''normal'' dutch mothersbike I cant get through those gates.
So I end up cycling the roads with several kids hangin out of me, and when going to and from town take the chapelizod road, coming back that hill in chapelizod is a pain even on a normal bike, nevermind with 3 kids in a cargo bike.
I hate those gates and hope the person who invented them **********

Beasty

Threads merged

Beasty

G-Man

Hi,
Gates have been changed, well at least one at grand canal... See my earlier post
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75779000&postcount=51

Sorry it does not look tricycle friendly.

Straatvark

MTB the Dublin --> Kilcock via Royal Canal--> Sallins --> Dublin via Grand Canal today. 90+km. 6 hours. Brilliant day! Pretty muddy.

I can kiss the guy who installed the new gates since July - after 3 days with panniers the old ones were not funny.

Did I mention it was muddy? :rolleyes:

gussy81

wow i just saw your photo of the new kissing gate!!! is it only on one? what a difference that will make!!!!

a148pro

I have been meaning to post a picture of an experimental gate they have up at the moment, they're inviting submissions on it. Have to take a photo next time I'm out there, think it looks pretty like the one in G-Man's post but I'll get a photo of it soonish. Have to say its great to see the council being pro-active on it and I should really be doing my but out by putting it up here and inviting submissions. Will do it in next week.

I've never had a problem with anti-social behaviour tbh, there's often lads drinking and hanging around but I've had no hassle.

Are the gates for horses? I thought they were to stop people joyriding cars / mopeds. I don't mind the horses.

In fact the most dangerous thing I've encountered on the route is cyclists. I jog on it a lot and have earphones in. A lad flashed past me at top speed recently while I was stopped and stretching, really annoyed me because I could easily have stepped out in front of him prob seriously hurting both of us, what is the need to go so fast on a non-dedicated cycle track when there's pedestrian traffic?

tomasrojo

a148pro wrote: »

I have been meaning to post a picture of an experimental gate they have up at the moment, they're inviting submissions on it.

nak posted this:



Is that what you had in mind?

a148pro

Yep thats the one! My work here is done...

feck sake lads

tomasrojo wrote: »

nak posted this:



Is that what you had in mind?

that design would i imagine be a pain in the ass if you had loaded panniers on your bike:mad:

gussy81

which gate is this at? is this the only one?

Straatvark

gussy81 wrote: »

which gate is this at? is this the only one?

I did not count, but would say about the 1ste (coming back into Dublin) 66% of them are converted. Only the last couple is not converted yet.

The area inside the two 'arches' are now covered by a flat sheet metal - more visible in the night during your approach.

Paniers would still not fit, so not perfect - for me personally I would not mind pushing the front trough and lifting the back wheel over. (But i don't commute every day with panniers)

gussy81

wits 1ste?

a148pro

What's it like to cycle through without panniers?

I also presume pannier users will prefer this to the existing gates, though obv if there's a solution that accomodates panniers too it would be better.

Straatvark

gussy81 wrote: »

wits 1ste?

The first two-thirds. I did not count them - to tired. Since i was coming back into Dublin that would be start incrementing the gate number as the canal lock numbers decrease.

monument

What exactly is the actively CCTV for if it can't be used to limit and police motorbike uses?

Why is there a need for gates between sections? Why did they not secure sides of the route correctly?

From the Cycle Infrastructure Design by the UK Department of Transport. The NTA's cyclemanual.ie has nothing on it...

My highlighting and my comments in square brackets...

8.14 Access control

8.14.1 Barriers at cycle route access points are commonly provided to prevent entry by cars and vans etc. They become more of a problem for cyclists when designed to exclude motorcycles. ***Motorcycle barriers should only be introduced after a definite need has been established*** [this was never done on any part of the Grand Canal route!], because measures that reliably exclude motorcycles invariably exclude some cyclists, including users of tricycles, cycle trailers and handcranked cycles. Wheelchairs and mobility scooters will also be excluded. Dismounting to manoeuvre a cycle with an occupied child seat through barriers can be hazardous.

8.14.2 Measures to control motorcycles are only as good as the weakest point in the route boundary [loads of weak points within barriers] – if fencing can be breached, access barriers will have little or no effect. If potential misuse by motorcyclists is raised as an issue during the consultation stage of a new project, it might be better to set capital funds aside to cover the cost of barriers, should they prove necessary, and monitor the scheme in operation. If concerns are found to be justified, funds will therfore be available to address them.

8.14.3 Arrangements may be required to accommodate wheelchair users to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. A common method for allowing wheelchairs to bypass access controls is to install a gate equipped with a RADAR (Royal Association for Disability and Rehabilitation) lock. These locks can be opened with a key purchased from RADAR. However, this may still result in loss of access to some types of bicycle and tricycle, and many disabled people will not have a key.

8.14.4 Bollards are the preferred method of access control for larger vehicles, spaced a minimum of 1.2 metres apart, preferably 1.5 metres. For an additional deterrent effect, they can be installed as two staggered rows with a minimum 1.2 metres between rows (see Figures 8.5 and 8.6). Bollards should ideally be placed at least 5 metres from any bend or junction, so that riders can approach them straight on. Bollards can be hazardous on unlit routes and at sites where forward visibility is restricted by the layout or by other users.

8.14.5 Where motor vehicle access is required for maintenance, removable bollards or a selfclosing gate for pedestrians and cyclists adjacent to a locked main gate can be used. Selfclosing gates can also be used where gates are required to prevent livestock escaping. If there is a series of gates in close succession it may be preferable to fence off the cycle route to reduce the need for users to stop and start. This also reduces the likelihood of gates being left open. Specially designed cattle grids are available for use on cycle tracks and footpaths.

8.14.6 Barriers with a wheelchair bypass are commonly used. They offer access for unladen solo bicycles and will deter most motorcyclists (see Figure 8.7). This type of barrier can cause problems for cyclists with panniers, laden tandems, tricycles, child trailers and some types of mobility scooter and is therefore unsuitable for long distance recreational routes [The Grand Canal is a recreational route in its self and is part of a much longer route]. The low barriers can damage cycle wheels or cause a fall if a rider fails to line up properly on approach. They may also create a trip hazard for blind or partially sighted users

8.14.7 Aframe barriers (Figure 8.8) permit ordinary cycles, tandems and most wheelchairs to pass, but they need to be carefully installed to ensure they operate as intended. They exclude some powered wheelchairs, mobility scooters and many types of bicycle trailer. [the ones used are in ways worse than A-framed barriers as they are lower and block panniers)

8.14.8 Where access controls are next to a carriageway they need to be set back far enough to accommodate likely users. For example, a family group waiting for others to pass through the controls could require a space 5m long to ensure all are clear of the carriageway.

8.14.9 Conventional kissing gates can be altered to accommodate solo cycles and wheelchairs but will invariably exclude most nonstandard bikes including trailer bikes, trailers, tandems, tricycles and many cycles adapted for disabled users. They are not generally recommended on cycle routes.

feck sake lads

the bollards are a good idea but gates are only a pain in the ass getting on and off the bike, mind you they have gates on the newry canal also a pain.

monument

And an even bigger pain when you can't even pass them or can't use panniers or a trailer!

OR if you're disabled with a large wheelchair or you're a parent with a large pram.

RacoonQueen

tomasrojo wrote: »

nak posted this:



Is that what you had in mind?

Are these the whole way up the canal now? Have seen them on each side of the Kylemore road and at Clondalkin village so assume they're all along this stretch now?

Sean02

The "Kissing Gates" used by OPW are far better for keeping out motorbicks. It only take 5 seconds to be back peddeling, a small price to pay for preserving this fantastic facility for walkers, cyclists and fishing. It's a shame that with alll the millions spent on Dublin traffic system noting was ndone to utilise the Royal and Grand towpaths. If it was'nt for the fact that the planners made a cock up of ESB power to Adamstown there wouuld'nt be a new path to-day.

jameverywhere

monument wrote: »

And an even bigger pain when you can't even pass them or can't use panniers or a trailer!

OR if you're disabled with a large wheelchair or you're a parent with a large pram.

As a semi-frequent pannier user, I find this very annoying indeed. Especially since I attach my panniers securely to the bike (lost a bag off a bike once--it wasn't a bike-specific bag, but it still made me paranoid). Taking them off is annoying.

Even worse, though, is the lack of access for wheelchairs, trikes, and other mobility aids. Doesn't Ireland have some kind of disibility legislation requiring equal access to all?? Especially in 100% public places???

Doctor Bob

jameverywhere wrote: »

Doesn't Ireland have some kind of disibility legislation requiring equal access to all?? Especially in 100% public places???

I believe - but I'm not certain - that the legal provisions apply to public buildings (new and retro-fitted), public services and private buildings (new only?), but not to public spaces.

http://www.universaldesign.ie/
http://www.nda.ie/
Disability Act 2005

Sean02

Jameverywhere how about the alternative i.e. no gates or deterant from the gurriers. Free access for wheelchairs is all very well but access to where in many the towpaths are just about passable on bike. These A frame and bollards are very nice as with the trial gates in Ballyer will last only a few weeks. They certaintly would be a joke in the Cabra /Finglas towpaths. The present swing gates are effective and vandal proof. As I said a 5 second delay with or without panniers, a small price to pay.

petethedrummer

Sean02 wrote: »

As I said a 5 second delay with or without panniers, a small price to pay.

It is longer than five seconds. There used to be 11 of those gates to my place of work and as I've said before that meant 110 unnecessary dismounts and remounts of my bike per week, roughly 5000 per year. That's beyond retarded planning. Also if you meet another cyclist at a gate it more than doubles the '5' seconds. All this cycle track is good for is a leisurely stroll or pootle on a bike. It could be a great cycling highway.

If a few fellas get on it with scooters so what, they're on the roads already. It's not gonna turn in to Mad Max II.

monument

Doctor Bob wrote: »

I believe - but I'm not certain - that the legal provisions apply to public buildings (new and retro-fitted), public services and private buildings (new only?), but not to public spaces.

http://www.universaldesign.ie/
http://www.nda.ie/
Disability Act 2005

From the act:

“service” means a service or facility of any kind provided by a public body which is available to or accessible by the public generally or a section of the public and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, includes—

(a) the use of any place or amenity owned, managed or controlled by a public body,

(b) the provision of information or an information resource or a scheme or an allowance or other benefit administered by a public body,

(c) any cultural or heritage services provided by such a body, and

(d) any service provided by a court or other tribunal.

Access to services...

Access to services, etc.

26.—(1) Where a service is provided by a public body, the head of the body shall—

(a) where practicable and appropriate, ensure that the provision of access to the service by persons with and persons without disabilities is integrated,

(b) where practicable and appropriate, provide for assistance, if requested, to persons with disabilities in accessing the service if the head is satisfied that such provision is necessary in order to ensure compliance with paragraph (a), and

(c) where appropriate, ensure the availability of persons with appropriate expertise and skills to give advice to the body about the means of ensuring that the service provided by the body is accessible to persons with disabilities.

(2) Each head of a public body referred to in subsection (1) shall authorise at least one of his or her officers (referred to in this Act as “access officers”) to provide or arrange for and co-ordinate the provision of assistance and guidance to persons with disabilities in accessing its services.

(3) This section shall come into operation on 31 December 2005.

Accessibility of services supplied to a public body.

27.—(1) Where a service is provided to a public body, the head of the body shall ensure that the service is accessible to persons with disabilities.

(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply if the provision of access by persons with disabilities to any services provided to the body—

(a) would not be practicable,

(b) would not be justified having regard to the cost of doing so, or

(c) would cause unreasonable delay in making the goods or services available to other persons.

(3) In this section references to the provision of services include references to the supply of goods.

(4) This section shall come into operation on 31 December 2005.

Sean02 wrote: »

Jameverywhere how about the alternative i.e. no gates or deterant from the gurriers. Free access for wheelchairs is all very well but access to where in many the towpaths are just about passable on bike.

If that excuse was any way valid we would have never used dropped kerbs on footpaths for the disabled and prams because it aids cyclists illegally cycling on footpaths and motorists parking on them.

Sean02 wrote: »

As I said a 5 second delay with or without panniers,

Where are you getting five seconds from?

At 15km/h, 20km/h, or 30km/h etc you have to factor in the amount of time and energy to slow down and stop, fumble past the barrier, and then get going again.

X11 or even just four or five times and that's a lot of extra stopping. A lot of extra time and energy when the state is supposed to be promoting cycling as a form of transport, and as already said you can double or more the stopping time when there's a few people cycling.

Sean02 wrote: »

...a small price to pay.

It's not a small price to pay as there is no proven problem -- UK guidelines (we lack any) set out that the cost of installing barriers should be factored into projects but that they should not be installed until there is a problem.

In any case the gates do not seem to be working -- I've seen more than a few horses inside of them.

jameverywhere

Sean02 wrote: »

Jameverywhere how about the alternative i.e. no gates or deterant from the gurriers. Free access for wheelchairs is all very well but access to where in many the towpaths are just about passable on bike. These A frame and bollards are very nice as with the trial gates in Ballyer will last only a few weeks. They certaintly would be a joke in the Cabra /Finglas towpaths. The present swing gates are effective and vandal proof. As I said a 5 second delay with or without panniers, a small price to pay.

What's wrong with those pillar things that stop cars and motorcycles but allow pedestrians, bikes, trikes, and wheelchair users thru?

Also, where pedestrians are allowed wheelchairs should be allowed; where bikes are allowed trikes should be allowed (I personally know someone with a disability who rides a trike due to balance issues).

RacoonQueen

On the canal path between Portobello bridge and Harolds Cross bridge they have a 'no bikes' policy (bike painted on the towpath with an x through them) seems rather odd is it a DCC thing that you can't cycle on the towpath then when you get up to SDCC area you can?