Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

how much money wasted at clonskeagh road "cycle lane"?

Options
  • 27-03-2014 6:39pm
    #1
    Plasid
    Registered Users Posts: 99 ✭✭


    These road works that seem to have been in place for months have now moved to the opposite side of the road, but any cyclist using the new "lane" like to comment of the appalling surface applied and the nice kerb? I just wonder will the next section be as poor quality and have a little edge to "hop" off while turning into UCD?

    Any contact in DunL/R council to ask these questions re cost? Probably same person responsible to the cycle journey machine placed thereabouts that misses all the right hand turning bikes going into the college... :D


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Bristolscale7
    Registered Users Posts: 541 ✭✭✭Bristolscale7


    photos?


  • Options
    #3
    lamaq
    Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭lamaq


    Haven't seen the finished version yet but you would have to wonder why that section was chosen, there was nothing wrong with it before.


  • Options
    #4
    Plasid
    Registered Users Posts: 99 ✭✭Plasid


    I'll grab some photos 2moro if i get a chance, I just hate wasted money on poorly conceived and executed plans


  • Options
    #5
    Zen0
    Registered Users Posts: 469 ✭✭Zen0


    Been meaning to have a rant about that cycle journey counter notice machine thingy for some time. Where it's positioned it obscures the view by motorists coming out from the left of cyclists approaching the junction. Obviously not designed by a cyclist.

    As for the new cycle path, I don't like it. The kerb on it makes it more dangerous to pass a slow cyclist.


  • Options
    #6
    Ninap
    Registered Users Posts: 534 ✭✭✭Ninap


    Haven't used it yet, but thought it looked reasonably decent; much better than the usual bike lanes (ie, continues through junctions without nonsensical 'Yield' signs etc)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Jovetic
    Registered Users Posts: 202 ✭✭Jovetic


    Bugs me people that park in cycle lanes. It's not somewhere to pull over :mad:


  • Options
    #8
    Mr. Grieves
    Registered Users Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Mr. Grieves


    It has appalling drainage, after it rains it's covered in standing water.

    Going in the opposite direction, they seem to have removed the left-turning lane onto Bird Avenue and widened the painted cycle lane, not really sure why.


  • Options
    #9
    reallyunique
    Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭reallyunique


    I like the new bike lane at UCD, the little kerb isn't so big that I can't hop onto the road if I need to but it encourages cars to keep out. Drainage is a problem though and the surface isn't as smooth as it might be. It feels safer than before and it's wider too. I don't consider this type of cycling infrastructure to be a waste of money.
    The removal of the left-turn lane to Bird Avenue is a great idea. The previous solution of having a cycle lane crossing the left-turn lane ending up in the middle of the road was ill advised. Again the lane is wider and feels like part of the design rather than something tacked on afterwards.

    @Zen0: The lane is wide enough for me to pass slower traffic with a reasonable margin to spare, even if you get pushed toward the road the "drop" is only about 1cm. Most roads seem to have gouges deeper than that so it shouldn't be a problem.

    @Iamaq: Agreed, it wasn't the area I would have chosen to fix but I guess they were re-surfacing near the Mosque and probably doing a few other bits in the area and thought "what the heck!".

    DLR seem to be doing their best to improve things for cyclists on Churchtown Rd and even on parts of the N11 (still hate the UCD-Donnybrook bit). It's not exactly Dutch standard but it's a lot better than what was there before.


  • Options
    #10
    kenmc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,276 ✭✭✭kenmc


    you do know that you don't have to use it, don't you?


  • Options
    #11
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    It's part of the Luas-UCD-Dart cycle route.

    Details here:
    http://www.dlrcoco.ie/newsevents/latestnews/title,8755,en.html

    Drawings here: http://www.dlrcoco.ie/media/media,8757,en.pdf

    €250,000 has been recently earmarked for the UCD-Luas section: http://irishcycle.com/2014/01/20/cycling-ranks-high-in-e32m-funding-for-greater-dublin-area-transport-projects/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Tourman
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Tourman


    you do know that you don't have to use it, don't you

    As a cyclist it galls me to see cyclist using the road when a reasonable cycle lane exists. Its surly much safer in the lane than trying to share than busy road space with cars, lorries and buses. Its up to us as cyclist first and fore most to attend to our own safety.
    Just because we can use the road space doesn't me we should.


  • Options
    #13
    omicron
    Registered Users Posts: 821 ✭✭✭omicron


    monument wrote: »
    It's part of the Luas-UCD-Dart cycle route.

    Details here:
    http://www.dlrcoco.ie/newsevents/latestnews/title,8755,en.html

    Drawings here: http://www.dlrcoco.ie/media/media,8757,en.pdf

    €250,000 has been recently earmarked for the UCD-Luas section: http://irishcycle.com/2014/01/20/cycling-ranks-high-in-e32m-funding-for-greater-dublin-area-transport-projects/

    250000 for one section of cycle lane and some signs through mulvey park seems to be a bit of a waste.


  • Options
    #14
    greasepalm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,270 ✭✭✭greasepalm


    and for all that money spent means longer qs for motorists in the morning with single lane traffic now at turning for bird ave,it still wont stop cyclists running through the red light there.


  • Options
    #15
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    Tourman wrote: »
    you do know that you don't have to use it, don't you

    As a cyclist it galls me to see cyclist using the road when a reasonable cycle lane exists. Its surly much safer in the lane than trying to share than busy road space with cars, lorries and buses. Its up to us as cyclist first and fore most to attend to our own safety.
    Just because we can use the road space doesn't me we should.

    Define reasonable...

    Nice rant though!


  • Options
    #16
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,000 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Tourman wrote: »
    you do know that you don't have to use it, don't you

    As a cyclist it galls me to see cyclist using the road when a reasonable cycle lane exists. Its surly much safer in the lane than trying to share than busy road space with cars, lorries and buses. Its up to us as cyclist first and fore most to attend to our own safety.
    Just because we can use the road space doesn't me we should.

    Admittedly I live outside the city, but I have yet to encounter a cycle lane where I felt safer that cycling on the road parallel to it. I'd also gues I'm not in the minority in preferring to use the road for safety reasons.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #17
    Tourman
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Tourman


    AltAccount wrote: »
    Define reasonable...

    Nice rant though!

    Oxford pocket Dictionary defines it as Fair or moderate.


  • Options
    #18
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    Tourman wrote: »
    Oxford pocket Dictionary defines it as Fair or moderate.

    Very clever.

    How do you describe a fair or moderate bike Lane that cyclists are being unreasonable in avoiding it?


  • Options
    #19
    Tourman
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Tourman


    Brian? wrote: »
    Admittedly I live outside the city, but I have yet to encounter a cycle lane where I felt safer that cycling on the road parallel to it. I'd also gues I'm not in the minority in preferring to use the road for safety reasons.

    Just because it feels its doesn't make it safer. You are less likely to be hit by a vehicle in a cycle lane. But you probably couldn't travel as quickly on a cycle lane. Well I can't any way


  • Options
    #20
    Tourman
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Tourman


    AltAccount wrote: »
    Very clever.

    How do you describe a fair or moderate bike Lane that cyclists are being unreasonable in avoiding it?

    My comments concern the cycle lanes I use along the N11 from Loughlinstown to Nutley lane. After that it does get a little erratic.
    The cycle lane by the N11 going the other direction, from Donnybrook Church to Bray.

    And for the most part the cycle lane along the road from Sandyford to the back gate at UCD where the new lay out this post concerns.


  • Options
    #21
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,571 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    monument wrote: »
    It's part of the Luas-UCD-Dart cycle route.

    Details here:
    http://www.dlrcoco.ie/newsevents/latestnews/title,8755,en.html

    Drawings here: http://www.dlrcoco.ie/media/media,8757,en.pdf

    €250,000 has been recently earmarked for the UCD-Luas section: http://irishcycle.com/2014/01/20/cycling-ranks-high-in-e32m-funding-for-greater-dublin-area-transport-projects/

    Wow, that's a crazy plan, I've never heard of anyone walking to booterstown dart from UCD, wonder why route doesn't go down greenfield park and nutley Lane.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Diarmuid
    Registered Users Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭Diarmuid


    greasepalm wrote: »
    and for all that money spent means longer qs for motorists in the morning with single lane traffic now at turning for bird ave,it still wont stop cyclists running through the red light there.

    I cycle that route every morning. It's bumper to bumper for kilometers. The left turning lane was 30meters long (if that). The absence of the lane is going to make no practical difference to the journey times on that road.

    I have no idea why you would think it would or should change the RLJ there. Maybe you felt the post was missing a logical fallacy


  • Options
    #23
    kenmc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,276 ✭✭✭kenmc


    Tourman wrote: »
    you do know that you don't have to use it, don't you

    As a cyclist it galls me to see cyclist using the road when a reasonable cycle lane exists. Its surly much safer in the lane than trying to share than busy road space with cars, lorries and buses. Its up to us as cyclist first and fore most to attend to our own safety.
    Just because we can use the road space doesn't me we should.

    good road > reasonable cycle lane.


  • Options
    #24
    Tourman
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Tourman


    kenmc wrote: »
    good road > reasonable cycle lane.

    Safety and concern for other road users . The sections I mention surface on cycle path as good as road.


  • Options
    #25
    Tourman
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Tourman


    Maybe going a little off topic with road versus cycle track. My fault .it might need a different thread.


  • Options
    #26
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,060 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Tourman wrote: »
    you do know that you don't have to use it, don't you

    As a cyclist it galls me to see cyclist using the road when a reasonable cycle lane exists. Its surly much safer in the lane than trying to share than busy road space with cars, lorries and buses. Its up to us as cyclist first and fore most to attend to our own safety.
    Just because we can use the road space doesn't me we should.

    Yep, we should all get out of the way of the motor vehicles, lest their drivers be incompetent enough to hit us. Well said!

    In fact, it's probably safer if we just don't cycle at all. We should all walk - but only on footpads of course, and the footpads should have five foot high concrete barriers separating them from the road. Just in case.

    Oh wait, what about the houses with driveways? Those cars have to drive across the footpath... Tunnels - we'll put the footpaths underground, where the cars can't go. In fact, there's already a sewer system in place, we can just use that to walk in.

    There we go, we should abandon our bikes and instead use the sewer to get from place to place. Sure we'll reek of human waste, but it's "much safer than trying to share than busy road space with cars, lorries and buses".


  • Options
    #27
    Tourman
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Tourman


    buffalo wrote: »
    Yep, we should all get out of the way of the motor vehicles, lest their drivers be incompetent enough to hit us. Well said!

    In fact, it's probably safer if we just don't cycle at all. We should all walk - but only on footpads of course, and the footpads should have five foot high concrete barriers separating them fr

    Oh wait, what about the houses with driveways? Those cars have to drive across the footpath... Tunnels - we'll put the footpaths underground, where the cars can't go. In fact, there's already a sewer system in place, we can just use that to walk in.

    There we go, we should abandon our bikes and instead use the sewer to get from place to place. Sure we'll reek of human waste, but it's much safer than trying to share than busy road space with cars, lorries and buses.

    A well balanced , reasoned and rational argument.


  • Options
    #28
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,060 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Tourman wrote: »
    A well balanced , reasoned and rational argument.

    Thank you, sometimes I surprise even myself.


  • Options
    #29
    kenmc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,276 ✭✭✭kenmc


    Tourman wrote: »
    Safety and concern for other road users . The sections I mention surface on cycle path as good as road.

    so why are you commenting on something else then?


  • Options
    #30
    reallyunique
    Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭reallyunique


    My kids "feel" safer on a dedicated cycle path. My wife, who commutes every day by bike but hates cycling (but less than taking the car, walking or bus) also feels safer. I like them too when I'm not in a hurry, which is not that often.
    Thing is, I'm a looney. I cycle on the roads with traffic that can't/won't see me or consider my safety and I think that's fine, which is pretty daft behaviour as far as most people are concerned. The cycle paths make normal people feel that cycling is less of an adventure sport and more like something that they might do.
    If it gets them out of their cars and has them clogging up all the cycle lanes then there'll be more space on the roads for looneys like me.
    Dedicated cycling infrastructure good!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    omicron wrote: »
    250000 for one section of cycle lane and some signs through mulvey park seems to be a bit of a waste.

    I don't agree with a lot of the detail in the plan (mainly the shared use and shared crossings), but in fairness, there's more than just one section of cycle lane....

    There's a few sections of cycle lanes and raised paths linked together on the UCD side; there's a section of new cycle path along a green area; there's a contra-flow lane/path on the Luas end; there's kerbs moved at a few sections throughout including footpath buildouts / junction turn tightening, there's new tocan crossings; there's signs throughout; there's likely a good deal of resurfacing and possablly some diversions of water or telecoms services.

    Keep in mind: Normal pedestrian crossings start at at least €10,000 each.

    copacetic wrote: »
    Wow, that's a crazy plan, I've never heard of anyone walking to booterstown dart from UCD, wonder why route doesn't go down greenfield park and nutley Lane.

    In my view the shared use sections lower the quality of the walking experance, but to be fair to those who planned the route, idea is to improve the walking environment along the route for people walking different parts of it (ie Luas-UCD or UCD-Dart and all the points in-between), it's not expected that many would walk from the full distance from the Luas line to the Dart.

    A report suggests that the signs on both sides will direct people to UCD, not to the transport modes on the opposite sides of the college.


Advertisement