Greater Dublin Area cycle network - this is set to change things!

monument

At last the NTA has released the draft GDA cycle network:

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/public-consultations/current/cycle-network/

"The National Transport Authority today (September 10,2013) launched a public consultation to seek the views of the public and interested parties on its draft Consultation on Cycle Network proposals for the Greater Dublin Area. The Proposals include increasing the length of the region’s cycle network to 2,840km (from today’s 500km), and includes primary and secondary routes, as well as Greenways."

"Please note the closing date – 5.00pm on Monday, October 14th, 2013."

Iwannahurl

I hope the plan includes indicators to measure outcomes as well as outputs, and quality as well as quantity.

References to cumulative km of cycle lanes/paths, while potentially useful, make me nervous.

As far as the bean-counters are concerned five hundred separate 1 km scraps of dodgy cycle lane can be officially recorded as a 500 km "cycle network".

murphaph

The greatest obstacle to Dutch style cycle networks that allow cyclists to easily beat cars In commute times is the sheer number of WALLS we build in Ireland. Almost every estate is walled or fenced in and it's a favourite past time of residents' associations to have any and all "short cuts" etc. sealed up because of anti-social behaviour (rather than seeking to tackle the root cause).

monument

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I hope the plan includes indicators to measure outcomes as well as outputs, and quality as well as quantity.

References to cumulative km of cycle lanes/paths, while potentially useful, make me nervous.

As far as the bean-counters are concerned five hundred separate 1 km scraps of dodgy cycle lane can be officially recorded as a 500 km "cycle network".

It includes quality of service provisions and they have already ranked at least samples of what's out there.

conorhal

murphaph wrote: »

The greatest obstacle to Dutch style cycle networks that allow cyclists to easily beat cars In commute times is the sheer number of WALLS we build in Ireland. Almost every estate is walled or fenced in and it's a favourite past time of residents' associations to have any and all "short cuts" etc. sealed up because of anti-social behaviour (rather than seeking to tackle the root cause).

I would have said that the two single greatest obstacales are the fact that it rains 11 months of the year and you only get to turn off the central heating for 5 months in a really good year. We have no more the envoirnment for cycling then we did for the much vaunted 'cafe society' that ministers wanted to create. Nobody in their right mind would abandon their car.

The second biggest obstacle, in the city center anyway, is the width of footpaths and roads, great european capitals with wide imperial boulavards and wide pavements are easy to adapt for bikes, medeval layouts not so much, and no matter how many roads you paint a third of red, you can't make them any wider.

On another note, whovever designed and approved the bike lane along Conyngham Rd shoud be shot. The CoCo in it's infinate greed and wisdom spent a fortune on red tarmac and then painted paid parking spaces across it. What kind of special idiot doesn't realise that you can't park AND cycle in the same space?
It this is typical of the type of cycle lanes you're going to get, I hope they don't bother.

Iwannahurl

conorhal wrote: »

I would have said that the two single greatest obstacales are the fact that it rains 11 months of the year and you only get to turn off the central heating for 5 months in a really good year. We have no more the envoirnment for cycling then we did for the much vaunted 'cafe society' that ministers wanted to create. Nobody in their right mind would abandon their car.

I must be doubly cracked so. Central heating off for 6+ months of the year (1997 building regs semi-d) and cycle in pretty much all weathers.

Truth is, the exercise keeps you warm. And btw, it does NOT rain for 11 months.

Iwannahurl

murphaph wrote: »

The greatest obstacle to Dutch style cycle networks that allow cyclists to easily beat cars In commute times is the sheer number of WALLS we build in Ireland. Almost every estate is walled or fenced in and it's a favourite past time of residents' associations to have any and all "short cuts" etc. sealed up because of anti-social behaviour (rather than seeking to tackle the root cause).

You do have a point.

I spotted the father and son pair below just after they had hauled their bikes across the wall barring the most direct route from their estate to the nearest supermarket. They kindly agreed to let me take a photo of them with their shopping bag.

They are saving themselves a 4 km round trip. Some locals regard this as anti-social behaviour in itself, and have suggested that a railing be fitted along the top of the wall to prevent it. Several years ago the 'problem' was mentioned to the local community Garda, and he remarked that it might be useful to take photos in order to identify the 'offenders' to the authorities. That's not my motivation, btw.

Alias G

conorhal wrote: »

I would have said that the two single greatest obstacales are the fact that it rains 11 months of the year and you only get to turn off the central heating for 5 months in a really good year. We have no more the envoirnment for cycling then we did for the much vaunted 'cafe society' that ministers wanted to create. Nobody in their right mind would abandon their car.

The second biggest obstacle, in the city center anyway, is the width of footpaths and roads, great european capitals with wide imperial boulavards and wide pavements are easy to adapt for bikes, medeval layouts not so much, and no matter how many roads you paint a third of red, you can't make them any wider.

Dutch weather is as equally crap as here so how come they are such avid cyclists. Improving cycling infrastructure and thereby removing motorised traffic from the city centre would sort out your second issue.

BenShermin

conorhal wrote: »

I would have said that the two single greatest obstacales are the fact that it rains 11 months of the year and you only get to turn off the central heating for 5 months in a really good year. We have no more the envoirnment for cycling then we did for the much vaunted 'cafe society' that ministers wanted to create. Nobody in their right mind would abandon their car.

Cycling past Dublin gridlock this evening with my flatcap and raincoat on to shield me from the light mist, I thought to myself, nobody in their right mind would abandon their bicycle!

Iwannahurl

Alias G wrote: »

Dutch weather is as equally crap as here so how come they are such avid cyclists. Improving cycling infrastructure and thereby removing motorised traffic from the city centre would sort out your second issue.

Any chance someone could do a graph comparing modal share for cycling with annual rainfall in a bunch of cities worldwide? I'll bet €5 there's no correlation.

BenShermin wrote: »

Cycling past Dublin gridlock this evening with my flatcap and raincoat on to shield me from the light mist, I thought to myself, nobody in their right mind would abandon their bicycle!

Or their flat cap.

galwaycyclist

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Any chance someone could do a graph comparing modal share for cycling with annual rainfall in a bunch of cities worldwide? I'll bet €5 there's no correlation.

There is but in Europe its likely to be inverse - the further South you go the less cycling you will see.

dowlingm

conorhal wrote: »

I would have said that the two single greatest obstacales are the fact that it rains 11 months of the year and you only get to turn off the central heating for 5 months in a really good year. We have no more the envoirnment for cycling then we did for the much vaunted 'cafe society' that ministers wanted to create. Nobody in their right mind would abandon their car

+32C today in Toronto. In four months it might be -22C. Some people will cycle both those days.

Cookie_Monster

conorhal wrote: »

I would have said that the two single greatest obstacales are the fact that it rains 11 months of the year and you only get to turn off the central heating for 5 months in a really good year. We have no more the envoirnment for cycling then we did for the much vaunted 'cafe society' that ministers wanted to create. Nobody in their right mind would abandon their car.

.

it rains more in Amsterdam than Dublin both in volume and number of days. The cold doesn't matter either, activity keeps you warm, once it above zero you can be in shorts on the bike no probs

Spook_ie

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

it rains more in Amsterdam than Dublin both in volume and number of days. The cold doesn't matter either, activity keeps you warm, once it above zero you can be in shorts on the bike no probs

Not 100% true according to www.meteofrance.com

Dublin comparaison avec Amsterdam - Moyennes annuelles de référence
Dublin Amsterdam
Nombre de jours avec précipitations (> 1mm) 130 129
Hauteur de précipitations (mm) 734,7 779,5

Dublin comparaison avec Amsterdam - Moyennes annuelles de référence
Dublin Amsterdam
Durée d’insolation (heures) 1410 1581

Dublin comparaison avec Amsterdam - Moyennes annuelles de référence
Dublin Amsterdam
Température minimale (°C) 6,4 6,1
Température maximale (°C) 13,0 13,4

monument

That's great data showing how close the two cities are in terms of weather.

Gerry Hat Trick

Hope you don't mind me jumping in on your thread but as someone who cycles 5miles into Stephens Green for work it strikes me that apart from the issue of finance and proper design standards achieving those targets for new cycle journeys requires a joined up approach with a whole host of other institutions apart from NRA...
1) schools - on my commute the average cyclist seems to be a middle aged male. In fairness a few of the lads in my sons school seem to cycle but at my daughters secondary school there are just 5 bikes possibly because they insist students arrive in school in uniform ( a long skirt unsafe for cycling)
2) UCD seems to be digging up their internal road network every other year but still does not have a decent cycle network on campus and seem much more interested in fee paying car parks
3) Councils - I can't see NRA maintaining the network. Unless the Councils fund/prioritise sweeping and maintaining cycle tracks we'll just have more of the very variable quality we have at the moment. Compared to other cities who have made a lot more progress for cyclists more will have to be done to design safer lanes and encourage others to make the change to bikes
4) Gardaí - unless there is a real prospect of enforcement cyclists and motorists will continue to ignore the basic rules of the road including parking in cycle lanes
5) Employers - those of us lucky enough to have a safe place to lock the bike and shower / changing facilities know how important this is for long distance commuting. How about incentives for Councils/employers to provide these. After all in many places car drivers get free parking which is at odds with supporting public transport or cycling
6) as others have said linking up cycling with the facility to carry bikes on DART/LUAS/commuter trains - investing hundreds of millions on the LUAS without a facility to carry bikes was one of the more short-sighted moves of the Celtic Tiger in my view

I know we don't do joined up approaches very well in this country but I'm planning on having a good read at the weekend and actually making a submission. Any and all other views welcome

hfallada

It would be great if they would redo some of the surfacing in the current cycle lanes. I hate cycling in Dublin city as the cycle paths are covered in drains, broken Tarmac and the worse is them starting and finishing randomly.

Cookie_Monster

Spook_ie wrote: »

Not 100% true according to www.meteofrance.com

what has France got to do with either place?
Wikipedia data shows it to be true. I don't really care what the french think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin#Climate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam#Climate

Spook_ie

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

what has France got to do with either place?
Wikipedia data shows it to be true. I don't really care what the french think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin#Climate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam#Climate

Probably just as much as Wiki has to do with them. Just happens to be a site where the data for both cities is presented in the same format ( side by side) for both. You don't like the French much by the look of it :-(

MGWR

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

what has France got to do with either place?
Wikipedia data shows it to be true. I don't really care what the french think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin#Climate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam#Climate

Wikipedia is not authoritative.

MGWR

hfallada wrote: »

It would be great if they would redo some of the surfacing in the current cycle lanes. I hate cycling in Dublin city as the cycle paths are covered in drains, broken Tarmac and the worse is them starting and finishing randomly.

What revenue source could be drawn on to pay for it? Bicycles do not burn fuel, and so fuel tax is not available. Start registering bicycles in a mandatory fashion? (which would mean more government agency expansion, oh goody)

Cookie_Monster

MGWR wrote: »

Wikipedia is not authoritative.

its a credible source for something like this and all those figures are referenced as well, I posted some info put pedantic pete over there had to call it out as usual...

The wikipedia data is sourced from the below so seems pretty authoritative to me
Source #1: Met Éireann
Source #2: European Climate Assessment & Dataset,
Source #1: Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (1981–2010 normals, snowy days normals for 1971–2000)[39]
Source #2: Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (1971–2000 extremes)

Cookie_Monster

MGWR wrote: »

What revenue source could be drawn on to pay for it? Bicycles do not burn fuel, and so fuel tax is not available. Start registering bicycles in a mandatory fashion? (which would mean more government agency expansion, oh goody)

reduction in emissions and reduced carbon tax payments and fines
reduced vehicle usage and there for reduced road wear and tear = maintenance savings
Huge long term future health care cost reductions due to a healthier population
increased spend in local shop due to cyclists = more VAT (referenced in this or another active thread)

Spook_ie

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

its a credible source for something like this and all those figures are referenced as well, I posted some info put pedantic pete over there had to call it out as usual...

The wikipedia data is sourced from the below so seems pretty authoritative to me
Source #1: Met Éireann
Source #2: European Climate Assessment & Dataset,
Source #1: Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (1981–2010 normals, snowy days normals for 1971–2000)[39]
Source #2: Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (1971–2000 extremes)

You don't put a source, then expect to get called out on it, as for Meteo France it's the equivalent (French version) of Met Éireann and Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9t%C3%A9o-France

and if you do a search using the terminology " dublin vs amsterdam weather" it leads to a nice forum where they compare city weather around the world, Meteo France being one of the more used sources for its ease of comparison
http://monde.meteofrance.com/monde/climat?87206.path=climatstation%252F03969

BTW the names not Pete

Spook_ie

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

reduction in emissions and reduced carbon tax payments and fines
reduced vehicle usage and there for reduced road wear and tear = maintenance savings
Huge long term future health care cost reductions due to a healthier population
increased spend in local shop due to cyclists = more VAT (referenced in this or another active thread)

Reduction in traffic = reduction in emissions via reduction in fuel used = reduction in tax take

Reduction in traffic = reduction in number of fines

Long term health costs probably off set by increase in pensions payable to people living longer

Leaves you the VAT on your cycle shopping, how far can you stretch that?

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Reduction in traffic = reduction in emissions via reduction in fuel used = reduction in tax take

Reduction in traffic = reduction in number of fines

Long term health costs probably off set by increase in pensions payable to people living longer

Leaves you the VAT on your cycle shopping, how far can you stretch that?

Dublin -v- Amsterdam - you couldn't get a gnat's fart between them, climatically speaking.

Using QALYs - Quality-Adjusted Life Years - is generally recognised as the best method for assessing public health interventions.

Reduced fuel consumption increases the country's energy security and, because of spillover effects between the energy and food markets, it improves our food security.

By your logic the government should knock a few quid off cigarettes and encourage us all to smoke thereby raising more revenue, cutting the pensions bill and reducing the cost of having to treat those pesky diseases associated with old age.

btw - in the case of pensions, the bill for people living longer would easily be offset by the fact that they would also have longer productive and active lives where they could continue to contribute to society through, for example, volunteering, childminding etc.

Lepidoptera

The idea that the weather in Ireland is too poor for cycling compared to other more cycling friendly places is a bit of a myth that has been covered in a variety of places, such as here, though looks like some of their links have become outdated now.

Overall, Ireland doesn't deal with nearly the extremes in either heat or cold, nor does it have frequent snow issues in winter, that other places do. For all the complaining people do, it is actually a temperate climate

Aard

For everybody moaning about Ireland's weather, you'd be hard pushed to find many better climates for year-round commuter cycling. OK so we mightn't be #1 but we're not the worst by a long shot. We have neither the sweltering heat of the Southern European countries, nor the freezing winters of the North. Rainfall is comparable to other cycling friendly cities.

murphaph

MGWR wrote: »

What revenue source could be drawn on to pay for it? Bicycles do not burn fuel, and so fuel tax is not available. Start registering bicycles in a mandatory fashion? (which would mean more government agency expansion, oh goody)

To be fair, we should provide cycle infrastructure from general taxation as the benefits are there for everyone. Fewer vehicles mean less pollution and noise, reduced accident risk etc.

It is simply "nicer" living and working in a place with more pedestrians & bikes and fewer motorised vehicles.

I'm a non-cyclist.

Lepidoptera

Spook_ie wrote: »

Reduction in traffic = reduction in emissions via reduction in fuel used = reduction in tax take

Reduction in traffic = reduction in number of fines

Long term health costs probably off set by increase in pensions payable to people living longer

Leaves you the VAT on your cycle shopping, how far can you stretch that?

This is a rather bizarre and short-sighted way to approach society, only caring for what short term gains you can squeeze from a situation rather than looking at the big picture.

Reducing a population's overall dependence on a non-renewable resource like petrol, cutting down on traffic congestion on the roads (which will have a variety of benefits, such as reducing traffic accidents and the injuries/fatalities that accompany them, as well as improving the air quality, plus some of the more intangible effects like reducing stress/increasing the amount of pedestrian safety and numbers, etc) is of much greater long term benefit than the extra tax you can add onto the petrol prices. That's playing a losing game as you're creating more problems by developing an increasing dependence on something that will not last and comes with a variety of its own problems, and it is short sighted to focus on what little you gain now to ignore the bigger picture of how much you could gain by shifting the focus even a little.

This is even more bizarre in suggesting that having a healthier and more active population is detrimental because people might live longer and then put more of a strain on pensions. The pension problem already exists. That is going to exist regardless. Suggesting that the quality of people's lives should be sacrificed for the sake of trying to further preserve an already failing and flawed system is not only poor logic, but highly callous.

It doesn't even make much sense. People being active and healthy throughout their lives rather than sedentary are less likely to suffer from as many physical and mental health problems. Overcrowding is currently a serious issue in the medical system here, and one that is not likely to improve any time soon. Similarly, cost is always a factor. The healthier the population can keep itself, the less overburdened the medical system will be.

More importantly, people's quality of life improves, which is really the goal here. The pension system isn't going to be sorted out by people being more sedentary and driving more and dying earlier due to poor health. That just means you live in a really poor, miserable society.

Spook_ie

hfallada wrote: »

It would be great if they would redo some of the surfacing in the current cycle lanes. I hate cycling in Dublin city as the cycle paths are covered in drains, broken Tarmac and the worse is them starting and finishing randomly.

Replied by

MGWR wrote: »

What revenue source could be drawn on to pay for it? Bicycles do not burn fuel, and so fuel tax is not available. Start registering bicycles in a mandatory fashion? (which would mean more government agency expansion, oh goody)

Replied by

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

reduction in emissions and reduced carbon tax payments and fines
reduced vehicle usage and there for reduced road wear and tear = maintenance savings
Huge long term future health care cost reductions due to a healthier population
increased spend in local shop due to cyclists = more VAT (referenced in this or another active thread)

Replied by

Spook_ie wrote: »

Reduction in traffic = reduction in emissions via reduction in fuel used = reduction in tax take

Reduction in traffic = reduction in number of fines

Long term health costs probably off set by increase in pensions payable to people living longer

Leaves you the VAT on your cycle shopping, how far can you stretch that?

@ Lepidoptera I think you're chewing the wrong end of the stick, my post is specifically about how Cookie M is going to pay for something, his suggestion is by the savings in carbon tax etc.

Though I do agree with you that the world does need to do something about its reliance on fossil fuels I doubt that a cycle path from here to New York is going to cure future problems but research into alternative power sources might allow my children and grand children to actually visit somewhere rather than dream of it

Lepidoptera wrote: »

This is a rather bizarre and short-sighted way to approach society, only caring for what short term gains you can squeeze from a situation rather than looking at the big picture.

Reducing a population's overall dependence on a non-renewable resource like petrol, cutting down on traffic congestion on the roads (which will have a variety of benefits, such as reducing traffic accidents and the injuries/fatalities that accompany them, as well as improving the air quality, plus some of the more intangible effects like reducing stress/increasing the amount of pedestrian safety and numbers, etc) is of much greater long term benefit than the extra tax you can add onto the petrol prices. That's playing a losing game as you're creating more problems by developing an increasing dependence on something that will not last and comes with a variety of its own problems, and it is short sighted to focus on what little you gain now to ignore the bigger picture of how much you could gain by shifting the focus even a little.

This is even more bizarre in suggesting that having a healthier and more active population is detrimental because people might live longer and then put more of a strain on pensions. The pension problem already exists. That is going to exist regardless. Suggesting that the quality of people's lives should be sacrificed for the sake of trying to further preserve an already failing and flawed system is not only poor logic, but highly callous.

It doesn't even make much sense. People being active and healthy throughout their lives rather than sedentary are less likely to suffer from as many physical and mental health problems. Overcrowding is currently a serious issue in the medical system here, and one that is not likely to improve any time soon. Similarly, cost is always a factor. The healthier the population can keep itself, the less overburdened the medical system will be.

More importantly, people's quality of life improves, which is really the goal here. The pension system isn't going to be sorted out by people being more sedentary and driving more and dying earlier due to poor health. That just means you live in a really poor, miserable society.

Grudaire

Spook_ie wrote: »

Though I do agree with you that the world does need to do something about its reliance on fossil fuels I doubt that a cycle path from here to New York is going to cure future problems but research into alternative power sources might allow my children and grand children to actually visit somewhere rather than dream of it

In fairness reducing reliance on fossil fuels will most likely take several different approaches. Reducing the amount of power required is most likely going to be one of the tools used. Cycling is a natural alternative to short car journeys.

Spook_ie

Cliste wrote: »

In fairness reducing reliance on fossil fuels will most likely take several different approaches. Reducing the amount of power required is most likely going to be one of the tools used. Cycling is a natural alternative to short car journeys.

Walking is a far cheaper more energy efficient mode, how much steel,energy carbon fiber etc. building a bike compared to building a set of walking shoes?

markpb

Spook_ie wrote: »

Walking is a far cheaper more energy efficient mode, how much steel,energy carbon fiber etc. building a bike compared to building a set of walking shoes?

A cycle commute of 5-10km is feasible, a walking commute of the same distance is not.

BenShermin

Spook_ie wrote: »

Walking is a far cheaper more energy efficient mode, how much steel,energy carbon fiber etc. building a bike compared to building a set of walking shoes?

My friend cycles a Raleigh high nelly built in the 60s to and from work every weekday (22km return cycle). Somehow I doubt a pair of walking shoes would last that long !

Grudaire

Spook_ie wrote: »

Walking is a far cheaper more energy efficient mode, how much steel,energy carbon fiber etc. building a bike compared to building a set of walking shoes?

I get the feeling that if I said that postboxes are green you'd disagree :pac:

murphaph

Spook_ie wrote: »

Walking is a far cheaper more energy efficient mode, how much steel,energy carbon fiber etc. building a bike compared to building a set of walking shoes?

Actually cycling is much more efficient than walking. But we're playing silly beggars now aren't we.

Spook_ie

Cliste wrote: »

I get the feeling that if I said that postboxes are green you'd disagree :pac:

No, but I would specify which country I was refering to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_box#Colours

Spook_ie

markpb wrote: »

A cycle commute of 5-10km is feasible, a walking commute of the same distance is not.

Assuming an average walking speed of 5 kph You mean to tell me you couldn't do an hour to two hours walk?

AltAccount

I'd expect it's not that it can't be done, it's convincing people to change mode.

Someone's using their car to commute 10k, probably taking 15+ mins each way. You could probably convince them to change to cycling at 25-30 mins each way, but you're unlikely to convince them to walk 2 hours each way to and from work (based on your 5kph figure).


Halve the numbers for a 5k commute and you'll probably get the same effect/decision.

markpb

Spook_ie wrote: »

Assuming an average walking speed of 5 kph You mean to tell me you couldn't do an hour to two hours walk?

You're asking would I spend 10-20 hours commuting a week? No.

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Walking is a far cheaper more energy efficient mode, how much steel,energy carbon fiber etc. building a bike compared to building a set of walking shoes?

Your campaign to persuade people to vacate the roads and leave them only for those users powered by the internal combustion engine who pay 'road tax' seems to be foundering, but no doubt you'll persist anyway.

Good luck.

monument

Please back on topic of the network review.

Spook_ie wrote: »

Assuming an average walking speed of 5 kph You mean to tell me you couldn't do an hour to two hours walk?

If you keep this up it's only a matter of time that your troll-like following of cycling related threads will be enough to ban you for a long time.

petronius

There are impediments to cycling being more of a success in dublin - the weather can be a nuisance however I have easily cycled most days from feb-nov and with decent raingear and a shower in work it is not a problem.
The more pressing obstacles to cycling is the anti-cycling lobby those who put pylons in the middle of a cycle lane, those drivers who illegally park in a cycle lane, drivers who go so close to the curb encroaching on the space for a cyclist lack of connectivity between cycle lanes (how often have i been cycling from a cycle lane onto the road to be confronted with a van or car blocking or forcing the cyclist into the middle of the road. The lack of cycle racks is also a barrier - while the dublin bikes scheme is no doubt a massive success, it has robbed the cyclists of many bike racks to lock their bikes

monument

petronius wrote: »

There are impediments to cycling being more of a success in dublin - the weather can be a nuisance however I have easily cycled most days from feb-nov and with decent raingear and a shower in work it is not a problem.
The more pressing obstacles to cycling is the anti-cycling lobby those who put pylons in the middle of a cycle lane, those drivers who illegally park in a cycle lane, drivers who go so close to the curb encroaching on the space for a cyclist lack of connectivity between cycle lanes (how often have i been cycling from a cycle lane onto the road to be confronted with a van or car blocking or forcing the cyclist into the middle of the road. The lack of cycle racks is also a barrier - while the dublin bikes scheme is no doubt a massive success, it has robbed the cyclists of many bike racks to lock their bikes

The cycle network and Dublin City Council addresses a lot of that -- the quality segregation suggested puts a stop to parking, encrohing on the space of cyclists, and the lack of connectivity between lanes.

Dublin City Council are planning large and I also think mid-scale cycling parking. On-street bike racks won't solve the problem if we're expecting so much more cyclists -- that's their view and it seems to ring true.

Also: Given how many times the average Dublin Bike is used a day, it's fairly good use of space.

beauf

AltAccount wrote: »

...
Someone's using their car to commute 10k, probably taking 15+ mins each way. ..

That would also vary enormously on where you are going. Dublin City Center at peak you could be talking 40 mins maybe more each way.

Jawgap

petronius wrote: »

There are impediments to cycling being more of a success in dublin - the weather can be a nuisance however I have easily cycled most days from feb-nov and with decent raingear and a shower in work it is not a problem.
The more pressing obstacles to cycling is the anti-cycling lobby those who put pylons in the middle of a cycle lane, those drivers who illegally park in a cycle lane, drivers who go so close to the curb encroaching on the space for a cyclist lack of connectivity between cycle lanes (how often have i been cycling from a cycle lane onto the road to be confronted with a van or car blocking or forcing the cyclist into the middle of the road. The lack of cycle racks is also a barrier - while the dublin bikes scheme is no doubt a massive success, it has robbed the cyclists of many bike racks to lock their bikes

I don't think there is an anti-cycling lobby as such - just a lot of thoughtlessness both in terms of how infra-structure is used and how it is designed.

Something I'd like to see done is to offer 'challenge' funding to local authorities. I had experience of this in the UK where the government would make a pot of money available for a range of projects and authorities bid for it - the kicker was that the project had be paid for from their own funds, then if it delivered at the level agreed the authority got the money it expended plus 10%.

Put something like that in place and you might see a much lesser length of cycle lane constructed, but if the metric was usage, I bet it would be well designed and constructed........


........then we'd have to put up with threads complaining about congestion on those tracks

beauf

Jawgap wrote: »

I don't think there is an anti-cycling lobby ...

There's certainly a tide of negativity towards cycling and cyclists by some. For example people who follow cycling threads on boards simply to post negative comments. Or media articles that constant take stats out of context, for example lumping them in with motorcyclists, and write a article about cyclists around that.

They are of course doing this simply to get attention.

Jawgap

beauf wrote: »

There's certainly a tide of negativity towards cycling and cyclists by some. For example people who follow cycling threads on boards simply to post negative comments. Or media articles that constant take stats out of context, for example lumping them in with motorcyclists, and write a article about cyclists around that.

They are of course doing this simply to get attention.

But people who follow threads just to post negative comments about cyclists you can count on one hand, and newspapers trying to sell newspapers, or websites trying to generate traffic are hardly a 'lobby' - they're just doing what the media does.

I don't get a sense there's negativity towards cycling - quite the opposite in fact given the number of new bike shops opening, the numbers on the road, the size of groups and the number of questions I get in work about which bike to buy.

Plus there's plenty of articles online and in print discussing the merits of cycling...........just because there's a few vocal residual idiots doesn't mean there's negativity.

monument

It might be more correct to say that there's an anti-change lobby or a status quo lobby.

Lepidoptera

Jawgap wrote: »

But people who follow threads just to post negative comments about cyclists you can count on one hand, and newspapers trying to sell newspapers, or websites trying to generate traffic are hardly a 'lobby' - they're just doing what the media does.

I don't get a sense there's negativity towards cycling - quite the opposite in fact given the number of new bike shops opening, the numbers on the road, the size of groups and the number of questions I get in work about which bike to buy.

Plus there's plenty of articles online and in print discussing the merits of cycling...........just because there's a few vocal residual idiots doesn't mean there's negativity.

Media doesn't exist or operate within a vacuum. It influences and drives - as well as reflects - the feelings of the culture and the general population within which it operates. Its power of influence, both overt and in more subtle ways, is one of the biggest reasons it cannot really be ignored as it's an exceptionally potent tool. To just dismiss that as an avenue of lobbying because 'it's just newspapers trying to sell newspapers' doesn't make much sense.

Lobbying is all about influence. Being supported by media that largely either ignores cyclists or presents them in a negative light generates a lot of influence for certain positions without even needing to do any active lobbying. That doesn't mean that there aren't also people who enjoy cycling and look upon it positively, and if you spend a lot of time seeking out cycling related media, you are bound to find the more positive sources and come into contact with others who share your feelings. The bigger issue is what kind of media and general messages about cycling are going to be influencing the general population - what is the overall image of cycling presented to people?

That becomes critical when issues like such a cycle network come into play, or the creation of any new transport policy or conditions really. The people who make these decisions don't operate within a cultural vacuum either - much less so actually. Their livelihood depends upon keeping on top of and managing competing influences. If cycling is continually presented in a negative or ambivalent light by general mass market media, then they aren't really going to care if there are also articles people can go look up discussing the merits. They'll care if there's an overall shift in opinion.

This cycle network could be a great thing for cycling in Dublin, but it also could create a few more problems down the line if not handled with a good deal of insight into current cycling conditions.