City to Clontarf Cycle Route

Shedite27

According to Irishcycle.com there was a cycle route approved last night. Any idea where I could find what was approved?

That site has lots of articles about it over the past 3 years (presumably as plans continued to change), so tough to see what they actually agreed on. Was it the Dec 2016 proposal on DCC website?

Or does the "subject to amendments that the route be redesigned" caveat mean that they just allocated funding but didn't actually approve a plan/route.

Tenzor07

Sutton to City cycle route through Fairview finally approved, great news to reduce motor traffic and increase cyclist safety and decrease journey time by bike...

Ah not according to the IT headline!
Traffic-lanes-to-be-lost-to-accommodate-dublin-cycle-path

07Lapierre

Wait till the journal.ie gets this...

Tenzor07

07Lapierre wrote: »

Wait till the journal.ie gets this...

Leroy42

It sounds terrible TBH. Can they not utilise the current cycle path through the park, upgrade it so that it is usable?

To reduce the main artery into the city centre from that side of the city seems crazy? Already there can be quite a backup of cars turning right onto Fairview Strand and if they restrict the traffic to one lane won't it all just be backed up?

Tenzor07

Leroy42 wrote: »

It sounds terrible TBH. Can they not utilise the current cycle path through the park, upgrade it so that it is usable?

Quite simply, NO.

God, I cycle down there every most mornings and drive very occasionally, reducing that stretch to a single lane is going to make it an absolute nightmare in a car. Maybe that's the point. Buses are going to suffer too because private cars already use the bus lane a ton.

Is this a problem that needs to be solved for cyclists? I don't have a problem down there in rush hour in the morning or evening tbh.

07Lapierre

Katelyn Billions Camper wrote: »

God, I cycle down there every most mornings and drive very occasionally, reducing that stretch to a single lane is going to make it an absolute nightmare in a car. Maybe that's the point. Buses are going to suffer too because private cars already use the bus lane a ton.

Is this a problem that needs to be solved for cyclists? I don't have a problem down there in rush hour in the morning or evening tbh.

it's a great idea, IF we had a cheap reliable public transport system to take those commuters who leave their cars at home. But this won't happen, so yes, it'll be chaos for motorists. Frankly, I'm amazed it was voted in!

jon1981

This needs a double whammy approach. If we are going to encourage more cycling through more cycle road infrastructure then we need to encourage employers to install showers, secure lockups...etc. through grants.

Im very privileged with my employer to have 20 showers in work. Many are not.

Im also amazed this got passed. I cycle that stretch every morning and the junction at the bottom of malahide road turning to fairview is carnage.

P.s. the comments on the Irish Times FB article are equally amusing and infuriating. Serious levels of ignorance being displayed.

magicbastarder

jon1981 wrote: »

P.s. the comments on the Irish Times FB article are equally amusing and infuriating. Serious levels of ignorance being displayed.

Am having a bit of fun in there at the moment

Regarding running the cycle path through the park. It's a public park, not a thoroughfare. I'm happy with the argument that commuting cyclists should be provided with an option that is separate from a recreational area.

jon1981

jon1981 wrote: »

Im very privileged with my employer to have 20 showers in work. Many are not.

This is true and tbh I've barely thought about it, but if my office didn't have showers I would not be cycling to work, simple as that.

Leroy42

magicbastarder wrote: »

Am having a bit of fun in there at the moment

Regarding running the cycle path through the park. It's a public park, not a thoroughfare. I'm happy with the argument that commuting cyclists should be provided with an option that is separate from a recreational area.

The Phoenix Park is a public park that manages to have cycle lanes in it.

If they were to go ahead with this then current car drivers will have to find an alternative. Either public transport or bike.

PT will require significant increases in the current capacities, with the necessary investment that will require.

And as Jon1981, a significant improve in the infrastructure, both public and private, to cyclists and the journey end. Parking, showers etc.

This is all on top of the estimate €4m cost of this? Just to save a few trees that could realistically be moved into the park to free up the space or alternatively by better utilising the existing badly used space in the park

Tenzor07

Shower previous to your commute, bring wet wipes with you and deodorant/hair gel/makeup/comb/hand towel..
Wear a clean wicking cycling jersey etc.

If you're still suffering from odor after all that then drive..

magicbastarder

Leroy42 wrote: »

The Phoenix Park is a public park that manages to have cycle lanes in it.

Alongside one of the main thoroughfares from d15 into the city centre. I wouldn't regard it as a useful comparison with fairview park.

Tenzor07

Leroy42 wrote: »

This is all on top of the estimate €4m cost of this? Just to save a few trees that could realistically be moved into the park to free up the space or alternatively by better utilising the existing badly used space in the park

I agree with you, the passion shown by locals for those old trees led by rabble rouser Nial Ring put a stop to it... They would rather have a motorway running past their doors than a cycle lane..

Leroy42

magicbastarder wrote: »

Alongside one of the main thoroughfares from d15 into the city centre. I wouldn't regard it as a useful comparison with fairview park.

I don't understand your point. You are saying that Fairview Park can't possible be used for a cycle lane (apart from the fact that it already is) even though plenty of parks across the world do. Why?

Not in its current guise, the current set up is terrible. But make that better rather than starting again with another bike lane which happens to take a away a much needed lane.

jon1981

Is this a done deal? I mean they approved it, but does it mean they'll go ahead? I see another petition coming!!

Tenzor07

Leroy42 wrote: »

I don't understand your point. You are saying that Fairview Park can't possible be used for a cycle lane (apart from the fact that it already is) even though plenty of parks across the world do. Why?
Not in its current guise, the current set up is terrible. But make that better rather than starting again with another bike lane which happens to take a away a much needed lane.

You've never commuted or cycled into city centre via Fairview, so to explain, it would be like trying to travel southbound from O'Connell street down Abbey street and around the customs house just to get to D'Olier street

Leroy42

Tenzor07 wrote: »

You've never commuted or cycled into city centre via Fairview, so to explain, it would be like trying to travel southbound from O'Connell street down Abbey street and around the customs house just to get to D'Olier street

I cycle it everyday. I really have no idea what you are talking about. I think I must be confused. From my reading, they are talking about removing one of the inbound lane from Howth Rd/Clontarf Rd junction through to Annesley Bridge to provide a cycle path in order to keep the currrent trees in place.

There already is a cycle lane through the park. Start and end are rubbish but easily made better. Make the join back to the road better and you're all set.

Why is it not possible to improve on the current option without starting totally afresh? And in doing so removing a lane from the inbound traffic.

I'm all for better cycling infrastructure but this is a wholly unnecessary waste of public resources.

Leroy42

jon1981 wrote: »

Is this a done deal? I mean they approved it, but does it mean they'll go ahead? I see another petition coming!!

My reading of it is the council really want to get rid of those trees and since there was such objections they have come up with a plan they know is going to scare the bejaysus out of all the motorists so they will 'accept' they tree plan.

jon1981

Leroy42 wrote: »

My reading of it is the council really want to get rid of those trees and since there was such objections they have come up with a plan they know is going to scare the bejaysus out of all the motorists so they will 'accept' they tree plan.

I was thinking that too...but would they really play a game like that? Seems abit petty.

If they already had this approved plan an option why didnt they disclose it at the same time as the plan to cut down trees. I'm sure it would have reduced the petition numbers had they been aware of the worse options up for discussion.

Spending 4m euro on 300m of a cycle lane is madness. That being said, i don't know how much the previous rejected option cost.

Tenzor07

Leroy42 wrote: »

There already is a cycle lane through the park. Start and end are rubbish but easily made better. Make the join back to the road better and you're all set..

No one who commutes will divert into the park, probably on a shared path with dog walkers and prams, take a jolly cycle through the park and end up out at annesley bridge..eventually!

Leroy42

I go through the park everyday. Enter at the Howth Rd/Clontarf Rd junction and exit just before the lights on Annesley Bridge.

It is far from perfect, as I have pointed out, but it is usable. Make some improvements and it would be a more than adequate option.

It is very rare that you get pedestrians on the path, but on the odd occasion it is hardly the loss of the TdF we are talking about.

And even with a new cycle path you will still get people crossing onto it, runners, cars parked etc. Look at the newly opened cycle path on the seafront. New tarmac seems to be the only place people can walk/run

site_owner

Tenzor07 wrote: »

No one who commutes will divert into the park, probably on a shared path with dog walkers and prams, take a jolly cycle through the park and end up out at annesley bridge..eventually!

It's a shorter, more direct route through the park though

jon1981

The only issue with the route through the park is it assumes everyone is going into town. If you're heading up towards fairview strand it's of no use. I know the majority head into town but it's a consideration.

brocbrocach

[quote="jon1981;104865
785"]The only issue with the route through the park is it assumes everyone is going into town. If you're heading up towards fairview strand it's of no use. I know the majority head into town but it's a consideration.[/quote]

I get you but the route they're planning is into city centre, Fairview traffic can take the route its always took.

Tenzor07

site_owner wrote: »

It's a shorter, more direct route through the park though

Is it? for travelling from Malahide road to city centre? Does it not go up the centre of the park, back around and on shared paths covered in leafs etc?

site_owner

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Is it? for travelling from Malahide road to city centre? Does it not go up the centre of the park, back around and on shared paths covered in leafs etc?

If connecting clontarf to the city it's direct and a 40 or 50 metres shorter.
Coming from malahide road it's still a little shorter but only by a few metres.


It's the same setup as the cycle lane on the coast for 75% of the route and I've had way more close calls with people crossing to their car, as well as rugby and soccer teams training in clontarf than in Fairview.

For the vast majority of cyclists it's probably an ideal route already

jon1981

The leaves are major concern of mine for the current route through and along the park. I've already wiped out on that section and I know others who have also leading to broken collar bones. It this happens at slow speed also.


I would prefer we lose a few trees to widen the existing lane along the park to at least put some distance between the lane and remaining trees. Also being shaded by those trees currently means the lane thaws less quickly in the winter. Actually I think this is why the cycle lane in the Phoenix park is on the outside and the walking lane on the inside. It always frustrated me that a walker had to cross the cycle lane to get to the walking lane, but I guess this is the reason.

brocbrocach

site_owner wrote: »

If connecting clontarf to the city it's direct and a 40 or 50 metres shorter.
Coming from malahide road it's still a little shorter but only by a few metres.


It's the same setup as the cycle lane on the coast for 75% of the route and I've had way more close calls with people crossing to their car, as well as rugby and soccer teams training in clontarf than in Fairview.

For the vast majority of cyclists it's probably an ideal route already

Yep. Look at it on google maps. The path through the park is straight as an arrow, following the road is almost a half circle around.
I've never been slower to get to Annesley Bridge than a cyclist ahead of me who took the road or roadside cyclepath.
It's true about the leaves and the frost but I find it safer than the present cycle lane outside the park at the moment.

brocbrocach

brocbrocach wrote: »

Yep. Look at it on google maps. The path through the park is straight as an arrow, following the road is almost a half circle around.
I've never been slower to get to Annesley Bridge than a cyclist ahead of me who took the road or roadside cyclepath.
It's true about the leaves and the frost but I find it safer than the present cycle lane outside the park at the moment.

Well feck me you're right. I always just stick to the cycle lane on the path outside the park. Will be going through the park tomorrow morning.

jon1981

Katelyn Billions Camper wrote: »

Well feck me you're right. I always just stick to the cycle lane on the path outside the park. Will be going through the park tomorrow morning.

Meh, I still beat folk that go through the park :cool:

Shedite27

Has anyone actually seen a plan where a lane disappears or is the IT talking rubbish?

The Plans on Page 63 of the latest plan I can find clearly shows 2 lanes inbound on the strech they talk about...
http://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/Planning/Documents/Part%208%20Report%20and%20Drawings.pdf

jon1981

Did anyone notice the lady with the camera and tripod recording the traffic turning onto Marino mart from the malahide road this morning. She was positioned beside the bicylce lane by the park.

Not sure if she was from the council or a local collecting footage for some protest...or could just like recording traffic

jon1981

jon1981 wrote: »

Meh, I still beat folk that go through the park :cool:

You're obviously quite quick then, because I think I beat everyone who was at that junction with me comfortably this morning. Far as I'm concerned now there is zero reason to not use the lane in the park.

jon1981

Katelyn Billions Camper wrote: »

You're obviously quite quick then, because I think I beat everyone who was at that junction with me comfortably this morning. Far as I'm concerned now there is zero reason to not use the lane in the park.

Yep, if i went through the park, I'd also beat the folk on the path along the park :cool:


just kidding... has anyone measured it on google maps? how many vital seconds do you lose at the exit gate by the bridge?

highdef

Ok, so from what I have gathered, the cycle lane through the park is more less completely straight AND is a shorter distance than the current and proposed cycle lanes. A quick look on Google maps does indeed confirm this.
In addition, a cyclist gets a pleasant break from all the nearby traffic by cycling through the park.
Some cyclists are complaining about leaves on the current cycle lane in the park. Will the planned new cycle lane not be passing immediately adjacent (and probably partly under) the 42 large mature trees that are being saved? Forgive my innocence but I have a funny feeling that the leaves will also fall off those deciduous trees onto the dedicated cycle path and because there will no vehicular traffic, I would imagine there would be a similar build of leaves on it in the autumn months.

I'm failing to see why the current cycle lane through the park cannot be upgraded to a fully segregated lane that is pedestrian free. That alone would save so much money, probably in the millions. And the fact that posters here have said that it is quicker is making me wonder why so many cyclists want to go adjacent to the road where it's noisier, full of fumes and generally a much less pleasant route.

PS: I know the area but don't commute there by any means of transport.

brocbrocach

highdef wrote: »

I'm failing to see why the current cycle lane through the park cannot be upgraded to a fully segregated lane that is pedestrian free.

It doesn't even need to be fully segregated, pedestrian and cycle ways can be separated by a white line as happens in multiple other places. If cyclists have to slow down to avoid straying kids, drunks and animals it's not the end of the world.

highdef

brocbrocach wrote: »

It doesn't even need to be fully segregated, pedestrian and cycle ways can be separated by a white line as happens in multiple other places. If cyclists have to slow down to avoid straying kids, drunks and animals it's not the end of the world.

Whilst I personally think that is fine, regular cyclist commuters are not just out for a cycle...they are commuting from A to B and want to do so ASAP with as few obstacles and hindrances along the way. For the safety of both cyclists and pedestrians, I think it's best for all that they are kept away from each other to avoid conflict.

BTW, I am speaking as someone who does not and has never commuted to my workplace by bicycle. I'm trying to look at this in a non biased way and am not trying to be on any particular side.

Tenzor07

I cycled down from the Malahide road intending to go into the park and time the route through the park, however if you go straight ahead from the end of the Malahide road there's only a pedestrian gate there, you'd have to dismount and carry the bike over it, or turn left down towards the Westwood gym and sharp right into the park....

Forget it! Just used the cycle lane, dodging pedestrians as I did...

So unless you're coming from the Howth road direction it's not faster to go into the park.

jon1981

Interesting ... according to Map Pedometer ... around the park is quicker


694m



722m

Leroy42

Yeah, because the current layout of the entrance/exit points of the park are totally inadequate. They need to stop locking the gate for a start!

They entrances around Howth Rd the one you have highlighted at Malahide road have been stuck on to the existing entrances rather than created specifically.

By making these actually fit for purpose it will make a significant difference.

jon1981

jon1981 wrote: »

Interesting ... according to Map Pedometer ... around the park is quicker

Well it's shorter. Whether it's quicker is another matter.

jon1981

Katelyn Billions Camper wrote: »

Well it's shorter. Whether it's quicker is another matter.

It's always quicker, you don't have gates or the exit at the park to pause at while along the road.

brocbrocach

Katelyn Billions Camper wrote: »

Well it's shorter. Whether it's quicker is another matter.

Yeah you have lovely straight wide lane in the park compared to the twisty cluttered path outside.
Plus you get to see squirrels, herons, etc going through the park. Good for the head.

highdef

So people are complaining about a gate. In the current grand scheme of things, abandoning the current plan to remove a lane of vehicular traffic in one of the worst pinch points in the city is an infinitely bigger project than removing a gate or two, upgrading the path surface, install lighting, maybe realign it to get it even straighter at the East end of the park and ensure it is more segregated from pedestrians than is currently the case, not that there are many.

I personally think that realigning it would be a waste of tax payers money as the distance shortened as a result would literally be a few seconds and really not worth it.

Another benefit of routing through the park is that is a much better bigger area for workers to work in. I'd imagine working conditions would be quite cramped and somewhat dangerous if working at the side of the road on Fairview strand, even with barriers erected.

I'm just trying to look at the wider picture here.

buffalo

highdef wrote: »

I'm just trying to look at the wider picture here.

Is the wider picture not discouraging private transport to combat climate change and trying to increase modes of active travel to decrease rates of obesity and heart disease?

Tenzor07

highdef wrote: »

So people are complaining about a gate. In the current grand scheme of things, abandoning the current plan to remove a lane of vehicular traffic in one of the worst pinch points.

As Buffalo says, the aim is also to reduce pollution and promote sustainable forms of transport.

There needs to be provisions for Bus rapid transit routes which are being planned, so you need to provide for those busses and separate them from normal bus routes which would serve all stops to city centre.
So what's required here would be two bus lanes and one car lane.
Sadly this won't happen as local residents led by Nial Ring think that a few crusty old trees are more important than solving the issues of local traffic congestion and pollution.

Moflojo

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Sadly this won't happen as local residents led by Nial Ring think that a few crusty old trees are more important than solving the issues of local traffic congestion and pollution.

I assure you if the plan was to create an additional lane for motor traffic, rather than a cycle path, Nial Ring would be the first lad down there with a chainsaw.

Murph_D

Anyone have any idea what's going on with this? Tenders were supposed to go out last summer.

Thelonious Monk

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1364559327143620609

This says it's starting in August, I'll believe it when I see it