Clontarf to City Centre Cycle & Bus Priority Project discussion (renamed)

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123402623#Comment_123402623

In the short term there's not a whole lot they can do but if it's only for 10 weeks (which seems very generous) in order to improve the safety of that junction for 10+ years, it's worth doing.

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403044#Comment_123403044

How is it that the road safety audit can find fault with the plan after it is implemented, but that the issue wasnt raised at planning, design or construction phase.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123400335#Comment_123400335

The €70m project officially opened in November last year, after years of disruption for local residents and businesses.

The Indo deliberately misleading readers again?

Los Cafeteros

Yeah fully agree with you that a long term improvement is worth short term disruption.

The main issue here is that the proposed remedy seems to be against best practice for cycle lane design and other measures like improving sightlines bar erecting barriers in the parking space haven't been considered(as far as we know).

Removing the left at edges has definitely increased traffic up Fairview ave Lower also- find this turn by far the most hazardous on bike and driving.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403118#Comment_123403118

It isn't an audit finding fault, use of the new layout has revealed the issue. The issue may not exist in theory but it does in practice, that is not unusual. I think we should be glad that they accept that the issue exists in practice, too often government agencies say "well the issue doesn't exist in the theoretical design so it doesn't exist at all" and wash their hands of such issues.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403848#Comment_123403848

While I agree, part of the issue was that they didn't follow the standards set out in the National Cycle Design Manual, not just here, but in many elements of the design of this cycle path. It is likely this issue would have been avoided had they followed the design manual in the first place.

And it seems crazy that in the redesign they continue to ignore the design manual and instead going with their own overly complex and questionable design over what the cycling manual recommends.

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403848#Comment_123403848

Well then their theory was incorrect.

expectationlost

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403848#Comment_123403848

the visibility issue couldnt have been forseen?

CatInABox

Seems like they've had their mind changed in this, they'll be removing the obstacles AMD changing the surface of the cycle path to red first before they make any decision on doing further works.

https://twitter.com/donna_cooney1/status/1919292276787822613

Seems sensible, you'd wonder why they didn't just go this path on the first place?

p_haugh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123419189#Comment_123419189

So what should've been the design in the first place? To completly skip out on this step before committing to the complete re-work would've been an interesting decision, glad they came to their senses

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123419529#Comment_123419529

Ah, I meant that this process for making small incremental changes to fix this was the path that they should have used once it was apparent that there was a problem. I've no idea what the final design should look like, but it's not that far off being a safe design right now, to be honest. Hopefully these changes are enough, but the next thing I'd try after this is a bollard right on the corner, it'd make cars slow down dramatically before they attempt that turn.

Realistically, it's only going to be fixed fully with the Merino scheme.

p_haugh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123419540#Comment_123419540

Apologies, I was agreeing with you. My first sentence was directed at DCC and their weird decision making

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123417948#Comment_123417948

Not always, no. It's a dynamic situation with many factors at play, it isn't always possible to perceive all issues at design stage. It's not uncommon for practical application to reveal issues which were not picked up in theoretical design.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123421386#Comment_123421386

Indeed, no design is perfect, and to get it to "perfect"in the design phase is best impossible. At a certain point in the process, you are better off building what you have designed, and then correcting any issues that have arisen with the actual finished product.

In this case, I don't think many people are complaining about the issue being there, but are instead complaining about how the council have reacted since it's been found.

bk

I'm very glad to hear it. Seems like a sensible approach to make these changes and then wait to see how it goes.

In fairness, they have made other quick changes in the past, like putting the red paint on the cycle path in front of the gym.

The article doesn't mention it, but I hope this change also includes removing the barriers from the parking space and either replacing it with greenery or if they don't want to make a permanent change there yet, then perhaps a different temporary measure like low planter boxes that stop cars parking there, but improve visibility.

I hope lessons are being learned from this project and will be applied to future cycle lane projects, BusConnects, etc.

expectationlost

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123421386#Comment_123421386

It should be visible to engineers on flat maps but do they not do 3d previs of the routes too these days.

Bsharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123422803#Comment_123422803

On some schemes there's a 3D visual representation developed using microsimulation software, but the visuals are automated on a cycle so wouldn't represent real life dynamic conditions; they're only for public consultation.

You could model different dynamic scenarios, but its timely and expensive, so not typically put forward in tendering that favours lowest cost.

Thelonious Monk

A bus must have been 40cm by me when passing me by on the lane. They can get very close to you on some sections where there's only the kerb between you and the road. They should really give some space sometimes, I think they could hit people with their mirror if the cyclist is close to the road in the lane.

Citizen Six

New lights at the zebra crossings at bus stops, on trial.

Stark

Hmm, if someone's ignoring the zebra crossing they're probably going to ignore those lights. At least the lights look less insane than the Liffey valley ones.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123450808#Comment_123450808

And everyone is going to ignore them. Pedestrians won't wait for them to change either - they'll just cross. Complete waste of time really.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123450819#Comment_123450819

They changed immediately when I pressed them, and it stays red for 15 seconds. Then it takes 60 seconds until it allows another press to trigger the sequence again.

But I agree about it being a waste. Both cyclists/scooters/pedestrians ignore the crossing most of the time.

p_haugh

Irish cycle article on the new lights:

https://irishcycle.com/2025/05/14/traffic-lights-across-cycle-paths-to-be-trialled-at-bus-stops-on-dublins-amiens-street/

cgcsb

What a stupid waste of money. The ironic thing is all this is spent in some misguided effort to protect pedestrians from cyclists, yet there are vast swathes of the city where pedestrians cannot safely or conveniently cross a road with speeding CARS on it. There are junctions where you have to cross 5 times to get to where you're going and they're wasting money on this crap. The cycle lane isn't even 2m wide you can safely cross in 2 steps, you just have to LOOK and use common sense.

VonLuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123453454#Comment_123453454

I think it's largely to aid those with impairments, such as the blind. While I completely agree that hardly any cyclist will stop at these lights, how else can you provide "safe" infrastructure for the visually impaired to get to the bus stops in these locations?

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123453492#Comment_123453492

How does a blind person cross a road that doesn't have traffic lights?

They stick their pole out, try and listen for cars, maybe have a guide dog and they then cross and hope for the best!

The point is there are literally thousands of roads you have to cross all over Dublin that don't have lights and are vastly more dangerous then crossing a cycling path.

Take this one at the end of the Malahide road, cars, buses and trucks blast through it every day. I've seen people almost hit multiple times here, but no lights, just cross and hope for the best:

VonLuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123454002#Comment_123454002

I appreciate that, but many of these situations have been like that for a long time and I guess they want to set a new standard and do it "right", not that I think it's practical! The problem is likely that it's a straight stretch of cycle patch where cyclists would be going at a reasonable pace as opposed to a slow turn the cars would make in your image above.

Not saying I agree with any of it, just playing devil's advocate!

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123454341#Comment_123454341

The situation in the picture above is literally a new build, part of the same C2CC scheme!

There are literally dozens of streets along this scheme where pedestrians of all types have to cross the street with no lights.

Or go to Grace Park Road, where ChildVision is, the school for children with sight loss (and other related facilities) and that street has multiple road crossings with no traffic lights!

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with a single light at the odd key location. The problem is buying and maintaining such lights costs a lot of money. Apparently some disability groups want them at every crossing on a cycle path. That would make building cycle paths vastly more expensive. That is how you end up with multi million Euro cycle paths!

I worry that it would greatly slow down how quickly we can roll out cycle paths by over engineering them and massively increasing costs.

But what really annoys me, it simply doesn't make any sense, the pedestrian crossings like the one in the picture above are VASTLY more dangerous, not just for the less sighted, but all pedestrians. Yet I don't hear the same disability groups complaining about them!

It is just super weird and really makes no sense.

markpb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123454341#Comment_123454341

What you're suggesting is exactly what should be happening but it's not. There seems be a small but vocal number of disability advocates in Ireland who have a big problem with cycling infrastructure and DCC are willing to listen to them and try to address their concerns. The same group however, seem less preoccupied with road infrastructure which is why you don't see DCC introducing these kinds of things at road jucntions, only at cycle-lane junctions.

Thelonious Monk

It's down to appeasing disability advocates like Gary Kearney that despise cyclists and are fine with cars mowing pedestrians down but just hate anyone who uses a bike for some reason. All of it is completely irrational.