Deise Greenway. Cycle path. Waterford City to Dungarvan.

comeraghs

Great news that more money has been allocated to this great project. It'll be a great quality of life & tourism boost to the City & County when completed.

https://www.facebook.com/deise.greenway


What a year it’s been so far!! On the back of the recent funding announcement, Waterford City & County has even more to celebrate today as the Deise Greenway is to receive a further 1.1 MILLION EURO IN FUNDING.

This will be for the eastern end of the route, to cover from Bilberry (near the non-toll bridge in Waterford City) out as far as Kilmeaden. This section of the Greenway passes through beautiful and safe countryside, meters from the River Suir, the Waterford & Suir Valley tourist train, new WIT campus and Mount Congreve Gardens.

STIG83

Will it be running beside Waterford Suir valley railway?

deisegreenway

STIG83 wrote: »

Will it be running beside Waterford Suir valley railway?

Hi, yes the route will run directly beside the railway. As soon as we know the start dates for construction, we'll be posting them. Once all funded sections are completed (hopefully early next year), around half of the 48km Waterford to Dungarvan distance will be complete.

reni10

I am not saying this is not a good thing and I look forward to it but I wonder why 2million is allocated to something like this when it would only cost about 3 million to extend the runway at Waterford Airport and there is no allocation to that at all?

Stokolan

reni10 wrote: »

I am not saying this is not a good thing and I look forward to it but I wonder why 2million is allocated to something like this when it would only cost about 3 million to extend the runway at Waterford Airport and there is no allocation to that at all?

We cant cycle on the runway.

But I would say it has something to do with Europe. I believe a lot of the greenway/cycle lanes is being done to keep them happy.

deisegreenway

Stokolan wrote: »

But I would say it has something to do with Europe. I believe a lot of the greenway/cycle lanes is being done to keep them happy.

We're very lucky here in Waterford that an EU-designated cycle route called EuroVelo 1 passes from one side of the county to the other, the abandoned railway line being an obvious choice for it. This might well qualify it for European funding.

Either way, we'll take the money any way it comes, it'll give the region a much-needed boost.

STIG83

What will happen at Carroll's Cross seeing as the railway went through the quarry and at Kildermody where the landowner cleared the trees without permission?

beazee

beazee

deisegreenway

STIG83 wrote: »

What will happen at Carroll's Cross seeing as the railway went through the quarry and at Kildermody where the landowner cleared the trees without permission?

These and other observations were submitted to the council during the 2-month submission phase which ended in March. The council is currently reviewing these and we await the outcome.

Silverado

I get the impression that the Greenway will be used for both cycling and walking. I have to say that having experienced this along European long distance walking routes that I don't like it.

Only last month a bicycle collided with my wife in Spain on a coastal walking route. Fortunately she wasn't seriously injured but I have never liked the multi use concept on the Continent.

The Germans may have it right when they divide the route left and right for cycling and walking. There aren't many easy answers but I am never comfortable when I see a mountain bike hurtling towards me at speed on a narrow path, I don't like the concept of traffic on a walking route.

Poor Uncle Tom

deisegreenway wrote: »

Either way, we'll take the money any way it comes, it'll give the region a much-needed boost.

Interesting, I had occasion recently to drive the road between Dungarvan and Stradbally, actually about 20 times during a week, at different times of the day, three weeks ago. I noticed lots of cyclists on the road section between Seapark in Abbeyside and St. Lawrence s hall in Ballinroad and it was quite remarkable that the only people using the cycling paths were school kids. All other cyclists were using the car lanes despite the fact that there are dedicated cycle paths only approximately 1m from them.

What did these cycle paths cost? Or was it a case that because the money was there it was thrown at cycling lanes, where only school kids (to their full credit) use them.

It seems to be a case that if you wear lycra you take precedence on the road to do whatever you wish, or cycle where you like. I have not witnessed any Garda on a bicycle using the cycle paths or enforcing their use.

How will this new Greenway be policed? Where will the funding come from for that? Are there proposed access points for emergency services? Will the full route have lighting, first aid or water stops? will there be toilets at intervals?

Believe it or not I am interested in this, I just want to find out exactly how much thought has gone into this, or is it just a case that because the money is there it will be thrown at a half thought out plan, similar to the multiple cycle lanes between Ballinroad and Abbeyside.

CatFromHue

I'm just looking at Google Maps at that section, I think, and a couple of things I noticed.

There's a roundabout but the cycle lane doesnt take you through the roundabout but off one exit to where you have to cross the road like a pedestrian ie. stand and wait til it's safe to cross

The cycle lane is a footpath divided between a cycle lane and path by paint on the ground. This could end up with pedestrians walking on the cycle lane.

The cycle lane ends abruptly at one point where you have to get back on the road.

I was only looking at a few 100m's and I have to say I wouldn't use them. The bit I was looking at probably cost a bit to put in but is of not much use to an adult who'll be cycling between 20-30kmp/h.

It is a problem in Ireland and England where alot of cycle lanes aren't fully thought out and are of no real benefit to cyclists, sometimes they actually hinder them badly!

There is a Greenway in the West which is very good by all accounts. Check out their website for more info on how these things work.
http://www.greenway.ie/index.html

I have to say I think this will be a great thing for Waterford as is there anywhere else you can walk/cycle for a bit of a stretch right beside the river? I don't know of anywhere anyway.

gman2k

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

It seems to be a case that if you wear lycra you take precedence on the road to do whatever you wish, or cycle where you like. I have not witnessed any Garda on a bicycle using the cycle paths or enforcing their use.

Many Cyclists don't own Lycra, maybe that's your bias coming through.
I'm sure you know that the use of cycle lanes is not compulsory also.

O Riain

Many motorists really have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to cyclists.

I am not a cyclist but I drive and I have never had an issue with a cyclist, I understand they have every right to be on the road as I do and that they are vulnerable as they have no protection around them like me. I slow down and give them space when I can, some people should learn to do this this.

Poor Uncle Tom

gman2k wrote: »

Many Cyclists don't own Lycra, maybe that's your bias coming through.
I'm sure you know that the use of cycle lanes is not compulsory also.

Correct, many cyclists don't own Lycra, but the ones I'm referring to do.

I'm also aware that it's not compulsory for cyclists to use cycle lanes but the very least they could do when a local authority spends hundreds of thousands of euros to put the bloody things in for the safety of cyclists, is to move across the 1m and cycle on them. Is that too much to ask?

Poor Uncle Tom

O Riain wrote: »

Many motorists really have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to cyclists.

I am not a cyclist but I drive and I have never had an issue with a cyclist, I understand they have every right to be on the road as I do and that they are vulnerable as they have no protection around them like me. I slow down and give them space when I can, some people should learn to do this this.

And that would be driving correctly, in line with the rules of the road. I would expect no less from any motorist, myself included as I cycle as well and I would report any motorist I found endangering a cyclist, but that ISBN't what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about the Stephen Roach wannabes or the Sean Kelly wannabes who are too 'professional' to use a cycle lane and consider the public roadway their own private cycle track. Unless I'm mistaken it is also not safe to use a public road for cycle time trials or racing practice without informing the gardai first.

deisegreenway

A lot of very valid points made in the last few posts.

1) Narrow tracks dangerous for cyclists...that's true, many are too narrow. The Deise Greenway will be very wide at 4 meters for most of it, narrowing to 3 meters in certain places. We'll see if we can find out if there are plans for a line separating cyclists and walkers

2) Cyclists not using facilities provided...the greenway is like any other facility in that sense...some people ignore cycling paths because they deem them too flat, too hilly, too bumpy, too many people/kids, traffic is too slow/fast, too many stops/crossings etc. There'll always be a small element that the Deise Greenway won't appeal to.

3) Access points for emergency vehicles, policing, lighting etc. All these and more were mentioned by us in our group submission to the council. As can be seen on the drawings published earlier this year, the council are also using a 3rd party that specialises in greenway design. To their credit, the council want this to be a world-class route, not just best-in-Waterford or best-in-Ireland. As a group, we also want to ensure this standard is reached..."do it once and do it well".

In Ireland, most people haven't sat on a bike since they made their Confirmation! A large part of this has been a lack of places to do so safely. We see the Greenway as being a place for people to explore new countryside, where students can commute to campus, where parents and kids can enjoy a few fun-filled hours in safety, where tourists have another reason for visiting Waterford and where young and old alike can walk or get back on their bikes and enjoy the great outdoors!

Chiparus

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Interesting, I had occasion recently to drive the road between Dungarvan and Stradbally, actually about 20 times during a week, at different times of the day, three weeks ago. I noticed lots of cyclists on the road section between Seapark in Abbeyside and St. Lawrence s hall in Ballinroad and it was quite remarkable that the only people using the cycling paths were school kids. All other cyclists were using the car lanes despite the fact that there are dedicated cycle paths only approximately 1m from them.

What did these cycle paths cost? Or was it a case that because the money was there it was thrown at cycling lanes, where only school kids (to their full credit) use them.

It seems to be a case that if you wear lycra you take precedence on the road to do whatever you wish, or cycle where you like. I have not witnessed any Garda on a bicycle using the cycle paths or enforcing their use.

How will this new Greenway be policed? Where will the funding come from for that? Are there proposed access points for emergency services? Will the full route have lighting, first aid or water stops? will there be toilets at intervals?

Believe it or not I am interested in this, I just want to find out exactly how much thought has gone into this, or is it just a case that because the money is there it will be thrown at a half thought out plan, similar to the multiple cycle lanes between Ballinroad and Abbeyside.

Cycle paths are not compulsory.

I too would be interested in how much was spent on the construction of a shared cycle/footpath outside the Whitfield clinic, It looks positively dangerous.

Chiparus

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

And that would be driving correctly, in line with the rules of the road. I would expect no less from any motorist, myself included as I cycle as well and I would report any motorist I found endangering a cyclist, but that ISBN't what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about the Stephen Roach wannabes or the Sean Kelly wannabes who are too 'professional' to use a cycle lane and consider the public roadway their own private cycle track. Unless I'm mistaken it is also not safe to use a public road for cycle time trials or racing practice without informing the gardai first.

What , you want cyclists to call the guards to tell them that they are going out for a cycle?

gman2k

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

And that would be driving correctly, in line with the rules of the road. I would expect no less from any motorist, myself included as I cycle as well and I would report any motorist I found endangering a cyclist, but that ISBN't what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about the Stephen Roach wannabes or the Sean Kelly wannabes who are too 'professional' to use a cycle lane and consider the public roadway their own private cycle track. Unless I'm mistaken it is also not safe to use a public road for cycle time trials or racing practice without informing the gardai first.

Without going off topic too much:
Cyclists of all description from children to racing cyclists are legally entitled to use the roads, and are under no compulsion to use separate cycle paths where provided.
Motorised vehicles do not have first preference to the roads. It is a shared space: pedestrians, cyclists, agricultural machinery, equestrian, wheelchair users etc etc....
If you find that other road users are causing you anxiety, then maybe it's time for some inward reflection.
'Sporting cyclists' (racers, sportifs etc) gernerally cycle too fast to be safe on cycle paths - which in Ireland are generally shared pedestrian spaces. The majority of cycle lanes in Ireland are also poorly designed, poorly maintained, poorly lit and rarely swept.
And yes, you are mistaken regarding 'racing practice' (I presume you mean training?). Organised club road races would always be carried out in conjunction with AGS.

I for one, look forward to the Deise Greenway, it will be a fantastic asset to the area, and hopefully act as a catalyst to get more people out on their bikes, and lead to further investment in cycling infrastructure. The SE has tremendous potential for cycling related tourism, I just wish there was a Ballyhoura type track in the area!

deisegreenway

gman2k wrote: »

I for one, look forward to the Deise Greenway, it will be a fantastic asset to the area, and hopefully act as a catalyst to get more people out on their bikes, and lead to further investment in cycling infrastructure. The SE has tremendous potential for cycling related tourism, I just wish there was a Ballyhoura type track in the area!

I think thats the positivity we need to have, this greenway can bring so many spin-off benefits and ideas, as we've seen in Mayo.

It's worth reading the feedback for that greenway on TripAdvisor; Waterford can have that and far more.

Poor Uncle Tom

deisegreenway wrote: »

2) Cyclists not using facilities provided...the greenway is like any other facility in that sense...some people ignore cycling paths because they deem them too flat, too hilly, too bumpy, too many people/kids, traffic is too slow/fast, too many stops/crossings etc. There'll always be a small element that the Deise Greenway won't appeal to.

Very true, can you see any potential for serious anti-social behaviour problems with the concept as it currently stands? I'm not referring to cyclists but to other valid submissions made to the Local Authority.

On that note does anyone know if those submissions will be acknowledged or responded to?

deisegreenway wrote: »

3) Access points for emergency vehicles, policing, lighting etc. All these and more were mentioned by us in our group submission to the council. As can be seen on the drawings published earlier this year, the council are also using a 3rd party that specialises in greenway design. To their credit, the council want this to be a world-class route, not just best-in-Waterford or best-in-Ireland. As a group, we also want to ensure this standard is reached..."do it once and do it well".

Apart from mentioning those points to the council, the drawings and details as presented to date don't seem to take account of all the issues. As a group, realistically, what input can you have to the overall design?

deisegreenway wrote: »

We see the Greenway as being a place for people to explore new countryside, where students can commute to campus, where parents and kids can enjoy a few fun-filled hours in safety, where tourists have another reason for visiting Waterford and where young and old alike can walk or get back on their bikes and enjoy the great outdoors!

I'm behind all that, very laudable and for that purpose alone it is worthwhile.

Chiparus wrote: »

What , you want cyclists to call the guards to tell them that they are going out for a cycle?

Nope, that would be silly. I think you are missing the fact that I'm referring to a section of the cycling community who are never just 'going out for a cycle'.

gman2k wrote: »

Cyclists of all description from children to racing cyclists are legally entitled to use the roads, and are under no compulsion to use separate cycle paths where provided.

I do understand and agree that this is correct.
I suppose my point is simply if the facilities are provided why not use them, instead of saying just because the facilities are provided they don't have to be used.

gman2k wrote: »

Motorised vehicles do not have first preference to the roads. It is a shared space: pedestrians, cyclists, agricultural machinery, equestrian, wheelchair users etc etc....

Correct, conversely cyclists do not have first preference either.

gman2k wrote: »

If you find that other road users are causing you anxiety, then maybe it's time for some inward reflection.

No anxiety, just stating my own opinion.

gman2k wrote: »

It is a shared space: pedestrians, cyclists, agricultural machinery, equestrian, wheelchair users etc etc.... 'Sporting cyclists' (racers, sportifs etc) gernerally cycle too fast to be safe on cycle paths- which in Ireland are generally shared pedestrian spaces. The majority of cycle lanes in Ireland are also poorly designed, poorly maintained, poorly lit and rarely swept.
And yes, you are mistaken regarding 'racing practice' (I presume you mean training?). Organised club road races would always be carried out in conjunction with AGS.

Now, There's a lot in that paragraph that could actually go towards reinforcing my opinion.
'sporting cyclists' as you call them, may very well be the only section of the cycling community who routinely do not use the cycle lanes provided and while I agree that their club events are generally well marshaled, their practices, training, etc., where they travel the same pace as in the events are not marshaled and there are no advance warnings to other road users, etc.

If you turn the situation on its head and think of it like this, there are a lot of roads that I would like to drive on at 100kph but the roads are not capable of handling traffic travelling at that speed, so what do I do, I slow down to a safe travelling speed and use the road as it is meant to be used. Seriously, what is wrong with this group of cyclists slowing down and using the lanes provided as they are meant to be used? and at safe speeds for other users?

On the one hand you say about a public road... It is a shared space: pedestrians, cyclists, agricultural machinery, equestrian, wheelchair users etc etc.... to validate cyclists not using cycle paths in preference to using public roads, but then you say....'Sporting cyclists' (racers, sportifs etc) gernerally cycle too fast to be safe on cycle paths- which in Ireland are generally shared pedestrian spaces. Then perhaps they should slow down and use the lanes provided safely for all users.

gman2k wrote: »

I for one, look forward to the Deise Greenway, it will be a fantastic asset to the area, and hopefully act as a catalyst to get more people out on their bikes, and lead to further investment in cycling infrastructure. The SE has tremendous potential for cycling related tourism, I just wish there was a Ballyhoura type track in the area!

I agree with this sentiment, but isn't it hypocritical to expect investment in cycling infrastructure and at the same time argue that the infrastructure provided doesn't have to be used?

Cabaal

Silverado wrote: »

The Germans may have it right when they divide the route left and right for cycling and walking.

Even if they tried the same thing in Ireland odds are it just woudn't be obeyed,

The Irish unlike the German's just don't give a monkeys when it comes to rules, be it on roads when people drive cars etc, cycle paths or shared cycle/footpaths.

From my own experience although people like Pool Uncle Tom like to complain about motorists, by far motorists use our road ways in a far more dangerous manner then any cyclist I've ever seen in any country.

What many people appear top forget is motorists are driving around several tonnes of metal that can very easily kill somebody. If a cyclist does something dangerous and they hit something, odds are they'll injure or kill themselves instead of anyone else.

Cabaal

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

I have not witnessed any Garda on a bicycle using the cycle paths or enforcing their use.

Why would they enforce something that can't be enforced? Cyclists don't have to use the cycle lanes. The fact you think they must shows how uneducated you are when it comes to cyclists....it also shows you likely have no practical real life everyday experience with cycling in Ireland.

If I go out for a cycle on a road bike it would actually be more dangerous for me to use a cycle path or shared cycle path then for me to use the road.

Why? Because odds are I'll be doing 25km/hour plus. I don't feel safe using shared cycle paths with foottraffic because more often then not people will walk in the cycle lane part or they'll have a dog and the lead will stretch across the cycle lane. Even in city traffic its safer for me to use the road.

Another reason is most cycle paths are designed by idiots, they require a cyclist to yield at every junction and drive way. Something they woudn't have to do if they cycle on the main road. (see picture below as a perfect idiotic example)



They are also poorly designed when it comes to roundabouts, effectively forcing a cyclist to dismount to walk across. If however they stay on the main road they'd have equal access to the roundabout.

Will the full route have lighting, first aid or water stops? will there be toilets at intervals?

Seriously? You think the whole route should be lighted?

if people plan on using this route then its upto them to go prepared, bring food and water if you plan on doing the entire route.

Anyway, back to the actual topic at hand.

Personally i can't wait for the entire route to be done, I don't have much interest in cycling it myself but I'd like to run the entire route and back. I've already run the old N9 from Kilkenny to Waterford and loved it...and only met a hand full of cars as well

Poor Uncle Tom

Cabaal wrote: »

From my own experience although people like Pool Uncle Tom like to complain about motorists,

attack the post not the poster......

Cabaal wrote: »

If a cyclist does something dangerous and they hit something, odds are they'll injure or kill themselves instead of anyone else.

You give out about motorists bad driving but seem to accept dangerous behaviour by cyclists, how do you rationalise that one?

Cabaal wrote: »

Why would they enforce something that can't be enforced? Cyclists don't have to use the cycle lanes.

You're right there, at present it is not possible to enforce the use of cycle lanes, but I think their use should be encouraged.

Cabaal wrote: »

The fact you think they must shows how uneducated you are when it comes to cyclists....it also shows you likely have no practical real life everyday experience with cycling in Ireland.

I seem to have angered you, you must have a penchant for lycra.....:D

Cabaal wrote: »

If I go out for a cycle on a road bike it would actually be more dangerous for me to use a cycle path or shared cycle path then for me to use the road.

Why? Because odds are I'll be doing 25km/hour plus. I don't feel safe using shared cycle paths with foottraffic because more often then not people will walk in the cycle lane part or they'll have a dog and the lead will stretch across the cycle lane. Even in city traffic its safer for me to use the road.

Isn't that because you are not using the cycle path safely rather than the cycle path itself not being safe.

I see nothing wrong in you travelling at 25km plus if you wish to do so when the conditions are right for it. Doing that speed in an urban environment is idiotic and looking for trouble.

Cabaal wrote: »

Another reason is most cycle paths are designed by idiots, they require a cyclist to yield at every junction and drive way. Something they woudn't have to do if they cycle on the main road.

They are also poorly designed when it comes to roundabouts, effectively forcing a cyclist to dismount to walk across. If however they stay on the main road they'd have equal access to the roundabout.

I agree that they could be designed much better and should be designed for easy bicycle use not just shoehorned in between a footpath and carriageway. But, at least cycle paths are being put in place, that's a start.

Cabaal wrote: »

Seriously? You think the whole route should be lighted?

Nope, I was just asking the question.

Cabaal wrote: »

if people plan on using this route then its upto them to go prepared, bring food and water if you plan on doing the entire route.

Agreed, but we are talkingabout ALL sections of the community being able to use this as a recreation facility, arn't we? That's why I ask if we are prepared for it, from a design point. Afterall you have just finished giving out about badly designed cycle routes.

Cabaal wrote: »

I'd like to run the entire route and back.

That would actually be one of the best areas for running as the old railway line had very gentle slopes.

beazee

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

rather than the cycle path itself not being safe.

So the Killure Rd bicycle lane is all hunky dory?

Separated from the traffic and yielding to traffic at the entrances to the estates? Perfectly safe for motorists!
Only to vanish couple of meters forward. Sandwiching cyclists and traffic together with no yield signage to whichever party:

Doing that speed in an urban environment is idiotic and looking for trouble.

Is Waterford City now a "slow traffic zone" with speeds capped at 25 kmh?

Personal experience shows the only time a motorist was about to knock me of me bike was at 12-14 kmh climbing and he was in a hurry to start his job that morning. Since I upped my speed I had no trilling encounters.

But, at least cycle paths are being put in place, that's a start.

Yep! The <median> section on The Quay, towards the Tower Hotel, where a cycle lane from 3" width suddenly goes down to less than 1". Makes me SO MUCH safer as a cyclist! So happy they put all their effort to paint the completely useless cycle lane!

NB: In case anyone tried to argue 1" is enough, please have a read through:
http://www.cyclemanual.ie/manual/tools/width-calculator-tools/

whisky_galore

Silverado wrote: »

I get the impression that the Greenway will be used for both cycling and walking. I have to say that having experienced this along European long distance walking routes that I don't like it.

Only last month a bicycle collided with my wife in Spain on a coastal walking route. Fortunately she wasn't seriously injured but I have never liked the multi use concept on the Continent.

The Germans may have it right when they divide the route left and right for cycling and walking. There aren't many easy answers but I am never comfortable when I see a mountain bike hurtling towards me at speed on a narrow path, I don't like the concept of traffic on a walking route.

The one in Cork has a line down the middle on the most recently developed stretch. Doesn't stop walkers (or cyclists) using their respective sides...walking pairs/groups taking up the whole width..walkers with off-lead dogs and their 'leavings'...and the odd Tour De France wannabe weaving through. Granted the available width there is narrower than what is in Waterford, but just goes to show how unthinking bozos spoil it for everyone.

iphonehead

Do you know what, I just read the whole thread shaking my head. This is a wonderful opportunity for Waterford, and here we are bickering about everything from Lycra to cycle lanes to airport runways. Can we not as a city and county for once just get behind something in a unified fashion, work through the problems that will inevitably crop up and then be thankful at our amazing new resource... You know if we won 6.9 million on the lottery in this city we'd moan it wasn't 7... So there you go, shoot me down, lecture me and tut tut me and patronise me, but if this city is to get up off its arse we need a bit more belief and positivity in these new opportunitys. Rant over

Cabaal

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

You give out about motorists bad driving but seem to accept dangerous behaviour by cyclists, how do you rationalise that one?

perhaps you missed where I said....

What many people appear to forget is motorists are driving around several tonnes of metal that can very easily kill somebody. If a cyclist does something dangerous and they hit something, odds are they'll injure or kill themselves instead of anyone else.

Saying a cyclist will likely kill or injure themselves is acceptance that they can do what they want?? What weird world do you live in?

You're right there, at present it is not possible to enforce the use of cycle lanes, but I think their use should be encouraged.

Want the use encouraged?, then rip up pretty much 90% of them in Ireland and re-design them based on cycle lanes in Neatherlands & parts Germany,

The very fact that the law changed in the past 18 months to enable cyclist to not have to cycle in cycle lanes shows that even the government see's that they are not fit for purpose.

I see nothing wrong in you travelling at 25km plus if you wish to do so when the conditions are right for it. Doing that speed in an urban environment is idiotic and looking for trouble.

I'm guessing you drive at atleast 25km/hour in your car in a urban environment? But a person could walk out infront of you at any moment from anywhere.

Yet you think its idiotic for a cyclist but its ok for most cars to drive faster then this?

Shared cycle lanes don't work in a city, they are not safe. If you've used them regularly you'd know this.

I agree that they could be designed much better and should be designed for easy bicycle use not just shoehorned in between a footpath and carriageway. But, at least cycle paths are being put in place, that's a start.

What we have are cycle lanes for the sake of cycle lanes. They are unsafe for designed use in the vast majority of cases.

Not using the cycle lane in most cases is actually safer and ensures a better journey for the cyclist,
- they are less likely to encounter dogs being walked/leads crossing cycle lane
- less likely to encounter people walking in the cycle lane
- less likely to encounter cars parked in their way (many motorists love parking in them)
- less likely to get a puncture (glass etc) or skid due to leaves collecting on the cycle lane
- less likely to have to dismount to cross junctions/roundabouts etc
- less likely to be hit from the side by a motorists coming out of a driveway etc

Would you be ok as a motorist with being forced off perfectly good, wide and well maintained roads onto poorly designed and maintained roads on the basis of....well atleast you have a road?

Poor Uncle Tom

Cabaal wrote: »

What we have are cycle lanes for the sake of cycle lanes. They are unsafe for designed use in the vast majority of cases.

Not using the cycle lane in most cases is actually safer and ensures a better journey for the cyclist,
- they are less likely to encounter dogs being walked/leads crossing cycle lane
- less likely to encounter people walking in the cycle lane
- less likely to encounter cars parked in their way (many motorists love parking in them)
- less likely to get a puncture (glass etc) or skid due to leaves collecting on the cycle lane
- less likely to have to dismount to cross junctions/roundabouts etc
- less likely to be hit from the side by a motorists coming out of a driveway etc

These are all good points, which is why they should all be taken into account in the design of this new amenity on the old railway line instead of just jumping in and accepting something that is not designed for purpose.

We have discovered here that there are more than one type of cyclist, I think it could be broadly be divided into two groups (recreational cyclists and sporting cyclists) and for the sake of arguement if we take a school kid as being representative of a recreational cyclist and a cyclist in training for a rás as being representative of the sporting cyclist.

If we take this as being the case I think it is fair to say we can't get one cycle lane to cater for both groups safely. So which group of cyclists do we design the cycle lanes for?

I think the majority of cycle lanes are safe for school kids to use, yes we can get a lot of examples of where they are poorly designed or badly thought out, but I'm sure these can be rectified. On the other hand it would be nearly impossible to get a cycle lane in an urban environment that could be used solely for sporting cyclists safely, short of providing a dedicated track.

I started out posting on this thread citing a specific stretch of road, some of it has cycle lanes on both sides. What would be wrong with having just one of those lanes and adding the space saved from the other land back into the carriageway widths, that way you could have the best of both worlds, a cycle lane for the recreational cyclist and a wider carriageway for the sporting cyclist.

Back on topic, the greenway, which cyclist group has the current proposal been designed for use by?