If cycle lane bollards don't belong in Architectural Conservation Areas, why do cars?

Flinty997

Not sure where you mean?

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120865416#Comment_120865416

What on earth makes you think I'm trying to prove that cars don't make noise?

Cars do make noise. My point is that the noise isn't the problem. Cars make far worse problems than noise.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120867628#Comment_120867628

Going A to B via Z is rarely the best route.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120867606#Comment_120867606

Here:

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3696288,-6.2306892,3a,75y,0.79h,79.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sdWs9P96CdZTbnEmVFGcnvQ!2e0!5s20220601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

The white line on the footpath divides the cycle lane from the footpath. Where the woman in the green top is running is actually a cycle path and this is a great picture as it shows how people walk in the cycle path all the time.

Here is a picture from a quieter time where you can see the cycle symbols on the path more clearly:

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3696602,-6.2307813,3a,75y,14.56h,74.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssDfbgbg-3kFGlh09b3u42g!2e0!5s20210501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Flinty997

In fairness the photo is exactly the moment the school ends. Also its not a fully segregated cycle lane but a shared use footpath.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120867800#Comment_120867800

Yes, exactly that is the point, it is useless!

It is even worse at like 8:30 to 9 in the morning at school start time, you know, the time when adults might be cycling to work!

But even at non school times, it is pretty bad with people constantly walking in the cycle path. These type of cycle paths don't work.

Yes, it would need to be fully segregated, but how would you do that here? The only way to properly segregate it from the footpath, would be to build an actual fence between the cycle lane and the footpath, not bollards, a fence. Something like the fence down at Fairview park that now separates the footpath from the new cycle path.

And of course doing that would go against what folks are talking about in this thread as it would create more visual clutter.

Also why would you want to take more space away from pedestrians, rather then using the space on the road? Again there is already a cycle path on the road too, they just upgraded it by putting kerbing in, etc.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120867852#Comment_120867852

It doesn't have to take space from pedestrians. From kerb to property line there must be 30 ft or more in parts.

The difficulty is the Irish habit of ignoring rules. Same issue in the phoenix park. They already a railing in place. Didn't use it.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120867920#Comment_120867920

You obviously don't know Griffith Avenue so. There isn't actually that much space on the footpath.

Well unless you are suggesting cutting down all the mature trees on Griffith Avenue to replace them with a cycle lane?!

Yeah, that won't fly at all!

And again, why would you do that when their is already a cycle path on the road and plenty of space there!

EDIT, this is what the "footpath" actually looks like, double tree lined, only way to put a cycle path in there that didn't take space from the footpath would be to cut down lots of trees!

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.371945,-6.2374015,3a,37.5y,126.19h,78.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sejNZ_rw7MjWD8VpyJbyXgQ!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Spook_ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120865416#Comment_120865416

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120861668#Comment_120861668

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120867704#Comment_120867704

TBF to Peregrenus you and others created the diversion to Z

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120868020#Comment_120868020

All I said was consider the effect on the (historic) buildings of traffic noise and pollution and vibration.

Then someone claimed cars were effectively noiseless, (proved wrong by studies), that parked cars made no noise (how did they get there, and leave ?) then it was noiser in Georgian times, hence they needed pneumatic tires (even though they haven't been invented yet )and cork city is noiser than in the middle of the cork countryside.

None of which counters my original point above. Neither does your selective quoting my posts out of context.

There isn't a genuine concern for these buildings if you want to thunder past them at high speed. Or the visual impact on some high speed tour of the city.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120867973#Comment_120867973

There are places where there's enough space to park cars on the verge. Certainly don't know G.Ave enough to cherry pick a narrow section.

But across the city that frequently choose on road cycle lanes rather than segregated infrastructure. Where is plenty of space for them. I accept it's a compromise done for expediency and may be revisited later.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120868546#Comment_120868546

Griffith Avenue now has segregated infrastructure. Its just taken space from the roadway - which was correct as there was ample space. Why on earth would it be better to have it on the path?

Flinty997

"...Integrated Cycling is cycling with the general traffic, with or without marked cycle lanes.

Segregated Cycling is cycling on dedicated cycle tracks or cycle ways that are separated from the general traffic by a physical barrier...."

I'm not entirely sure that floppy bollards on the road with general traffic is segregated.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120869745#Comment_120869745

It's considered to be, yes. A barrier doesn't have to be continuous or rigid; a row of bollards is taken to be a barrier.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120869760#Comment_120869760

Bit of digging reveals they are considered "light segregation "

https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/light-protection-cycle-lanes_2.pdf

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120869745#Comment_120869745

Griffith Avenue has concrete segregation? The lane is too small and not a good example, but its much better on the road than on the path.

Floppy bollards, to somewhat return to the original point, are hopefully just temporary until better segregation can be built.

magicbastarder

one reason i'd be sceptical about griffith avenue not being suitable to on-path cycle lanes is visibility. on the assumption that if they had gone with that, the parking would have remained - so cyclists would frequently not have been visible to motorists, because they'd have a line of parked cars between themselves and the motorists, and also a line of trees too (the trees can cast significant shade when in leaf too). so a motorist turning off griffith avenue may encounter cyclists at short notice they had not seen until they'd started to make their turn.

The J Stands for Jay

..

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120868546#Comment_120868546

"There are places where there's enough space to park cars on the verge."

Those cars are basically parked between the trees. Basically tree surrounded by grass, then some space where a car (illegally parks), then another tree surrounded by grass. The only way to do what you are suggesting would be to bulldoze a row of trees.

Here is an example: https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3709454,-6.234418,3a,75y,266.4h,77.78t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZEzH9EGOIimBMRtuLx-nPA!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

The car and van are parked between the trees.

"Certainly don't know G.Ave enough to cherry pick a narrow section."

I live near by and walk it 3 or 4 times a day for the past 20 years. And I'm certainly not cherry picking anything!

You should actually walk Griffith Avenue yourself and you would see for yourself that what you are suggesting isn't possible without cutting down the trees. Plus you'd have a very nice walk.

Griffith Avenue is famous for being Europes longest double tree lined road. Cutting down trees to build a cycle lane would never be allowed. And again it doesn't need to, there is plenty of space on the road for the cycle lane, which has always been there!

"I'm not entirely sure that floppy bollards on the road with general traffic is segregated."

The cycle lane is separated by concrete kerbing, not floppy bollards!

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120863403#Comment_120863403

Yeah no room there.

If people are happy with it, great.

Peregrinus

Suggestion: of the various uses to which roadway can be put, parking should probably have the lowest priority. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorists who are actually travelling and vehicle that are making deliveries or collections should all be facilitated before the provision of storage space for private property that is not currently being used.

TokenJogger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058304684/if-cycle-lane-bollards-dont-belong-in-architectural-conservation-areas-why-do-cars

Because cars aren't permanent fixtures like bollards

You have missed the logical fallacy here

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120873197#Comment_120873197

There's no logical fallacy at all. Architecture doesn't just concern itself with permanent fixtures or static objects. A house is a "machine for living", and the activities that go on in a space, and the use that is made of it, are a central concern of architecture. In many ways, they're the whole point of architecture — especially so when we are talking about the architecture of public spaces, like streets.

Parking might impact on architectural concerns in a different way to bollards, but it certainly impacts on them, and quite possibly more profoundly than bollards do.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120873194#Comment_120873194

Interestingly in Amsterdam they are currently removing a lot of on street parking (1,2000 per year, goal to remove 11,000 spaces in total), instead moving the cars to underground car parks.

The space freed up from the remove parking is then used for little green parks, play grounds, seating for restaurants, etc.

I'm sure you won't be surprised to hear that it leads to streets that are vastly more visually and architecturally attractive and much more liveable and safer streets.

Before:

After:

Before:

After:

Also note the bollards to stop motorists from driving into the plants!

irelandrover

There's a street near me in Eindhoven that is one of the main streets into the city.

They are redoing it now after a large consultation period.

Car parking is being reduced from 190 spaces to 120. Trees are being doubled. Flood defences being improved.

Eindhoven is putting a lot of focus into greening the streets. Mainly to reduce the temperature in the city during the hotter summers but also to improve water retention during the winter to reduce flooding.

When the people in the street we're surveyed they didn't require as much parking as was there. A lot of parking was used for staff of businesses elsewhere. The city decided this wasn't a priority and it is up those business to sort.

TokenJogger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120873218#Comment_120873218

// Slow hand clap

Stupendous way to ignore the point and go off on one

Temporary and permanent are different, take a moment, summon up all the intellect you have and try to understand that

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120878038#Comment_120878038

Of course temporary and permanent are different; that's why we have two different words for them. I'm not sure why you are banging on about a point on which no-one has disagreed with you.

Your claim is not merely that temporary and permanent are different, but that one of them matters to architecture while the other does not. And while you have repeated the claim in various forms a couple of times, you've never bothered to explain or justify it, or offer any argument in support of it. When the claim is questioned your response is just to sneer.

If you want to continue the conversation, you need to move on from sneering and actually offer an argument in support of your belief. Its the only way you are ever going to win acceptance for it.

Podge_irl

Parking places are every bit as permanent as bollards.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120879019#Comment_120879019

Plus the fact that they are almost always full in the city center during the day, makes for a pretty stupid distinction!

Like fair enough if the parking was used for like just a maximum of one hour a day, that would be temporary, but when we all know that cars are parked there all day long and if one car leaves, another will replace it within a few minutes, they clearly they create a pretty permanent visual clutter.

Honestly I don’t see how anyone could look at the OP’s picture and not say that all the cars in the picture are what make the street look ugly and cluttered. Frankly the white bollards of the cycle lane are basically unnoticeable compared to all the cars.

That street would look vastly more attractive if you removed all the parking and replaced it with greenery and plants like the Dutch examples I posted above. You could even remove the white bollards for the cycle lane then, as you would instead use greenery and plants as the divider between the cycle lane and the traffic lane.

It would turn a visually very ugly street into a far more attractive place and would help open up the view of the buildings and contrast much more attractively with them.

VonLuck

I am of the strong opinion that there should be zero on-street parking the majority of city centre streets, besides disabled parking. They severely detract from the area. Just look at old photos of Dublin prior to the car. It seems like a much nicer city.

If you need to park your car, there are plenty of private car parks to avail of.