BusConnects - Cyclist Support Vital

LennoxR · 12-12-2018 12:19am

I'll be very clear about this. If they put a ban on cyclists on my two main routes into the city centre: Harolds X and Rathmines, I will not be obeying. Simple as that. This appears to be a very poor plan for cyclists.

schemingbohemia · 12-12-2018 12:41pm

This type of infrastructure is not what I had in mind when I started this thread!!

Taxuser1 · 12-12-2018 1:49pm

this is horrendous. i've always been more of a power straight line time triallist. Now it appears I will need to work on my cornering and sprinting out of corner technique for the above prologue stage.

LennoxR · 13-12-2018 12:31pm

Taxuser1 wrote: »

this is horrendous. i've always been more of a power straight line time triallist. Now it appears I will need to work on my cornering and sprinting out of corner technique for the above prologue stage.

You might want to work on your swimming or kayaking skills as well because that route above posits crossing the canal on a currently non-existent bridge. :mad:

magicbastarder · 13-12-2018 1:27pm

bollocks to that. set up a ramp. have ye not seen 'BMX bandits'?

aldark · 24-01-2019 2:40pm

I think this is new - its the core bus corridor design for rathfarnham to city centre - including the plans for getting cyclists off the rathmines and rathfarnham roads.

https://busconnects.ie/media/1453/12-busconnects-cbc-rathfarnham-to-city-centre-040119-fa.pdf

Plan in rathfarnham is to redirect cyclists onto brookvale downs, then onto a lane, then onto dodder park road. Brookvale Downs is a quiet residential estate - presumably kids playing, cars reversing onto road etc. Seems bonkers.

There's a new 2 way cyclist only bridge over the dodder proposed. Coming back from town cyclists will have to cross the road to get onto the 2 way track and continue on up to brookvale rd (crossing dodder park road at ped lights) emerging at the entrance to rathfarnham village.

there's a lot of toucan crossings in the plan. I can't understand why cyclists have to be removed from that stretch of rathfarnham - the road is very broad there.

There are 2 routes proposed for rathmines - one keeping it as it is, the 2nd is another horror show of rerouting through residential roads and pedestrian crossing junctions at the canal etc.

I'd imagine that legislation will be introduced to keep cyclists off the quality bus corridors. The rathfarnham and rathmines kludges are far worse than the existing designs - they're busy routes - do the planners really want 1000's of cyclists reduced to really slow stop-start speeds and pressing buttons at traffic lights to cross the road?

loyatemu · 24-01-2019 2:59pm

aldark wrote: »

I'd imagine that legislation will be introduced to keep cyclists off the quality bus corridors.

there's been no official mention of this - AIUI where alternative routes have been provided they'll be recommended but not mandatory.

The circuitous route through the backstreets of Rathmines is now listed as Plan B. Plan A involves making Rathmines village one-way (for cars) which I imagine will prompt howls of protest from some local interests.

aldark · 24-01-2019 3:19pm

I know, no mention at all, yet.

But as I see it, this plan is mainly focussed on buses with cycling included for optics only. The NTA would face a lot of criticism after paying a ton of cash to rathgar residents for the 1m of garden space if the buses are still held up with cyclists!

I'd assume that NTA will lobby for legislation to keep cyclists off their brand new bus lanes + whatever other restriction takes their fancy - revisiting mandatory cycle lane use etc.

Weepsie · 24-01-2019 3:30pm

With the frequency of stops for busses, at rush hour at least (every couple hundred metres), cyclists are really not going to slow them down that often. People will believe what they want to believe though.

Grassey · 24-01-2019 6:24pm

aldark wrote:

I'd imagine that legislation will be introduced to keep cyclists off the quality bus corridors.

There is literally no way someone on a bike is going to detour off into Brook Vale when the alternative is continue downhill a few hundred meters in a straight line. Legislation or not.

radia · 25-01-2019 12:40pm

How could it even work? I live nearby and shop (using my bike) in Rathmines regularly. How can they distinguish cyclists for whom Rathmines Road is their destination from those using it as a through route and ban one but not the other?
Also, the proposed squiggly detour introduces significant potential for clashes between cyclists and children at school drop-off points. No cyclist in their right mind would use it when they have the alternative of a grand straight road without rugrats milling around and Chelsea tractors pulling across to stop unpredictably, doors opening into your path etc.

Problem is that punishment passes from buses and taxis will increase because 'you're not entitled to be here'.

All on one of the roads - if not the road - most heavily used by cyclists in the country!

Lunacy.

Fian · 30-01-2019 4:59pm

aldark wrote: »

I think this is new - its the core bus corridor design for rathfarnham to city centre - including the plans for getting cyclists off the rathmines and rathfarnham roads.

https://busconnects.ie/media/1453/12-busconnects-cbc-rathfarnham-to-city-centre-040119-fa.pdf

Plan in rathfarnham is to redirect cyclists onto brookvale downs, then onto a lane, then onto dodder park road. Brookvale Downs is a quiet residential estate - presumably kids playing, cars reversing onto road etc. Seems bonkers.

There's a new 2 way cyclist only bridge over the dodder proposed. Coming back from town cyclists will have to cross the road to get onto the 2 way track and continue on up to brookvale rd (crossing dodder park road at ped lights) emerging at the entrance to rathfarnham village.

there's a lot of toucan crossings in the plan. I can't understand why cyclists have to be removed from that stretch of rathfarnham - the road is very broad there.

There are 2 routes proposed for rathmines - one keeping it as it is, the 2nd is another horror show of rerouting through residential roads and pedestrian crossing junctions at the canal etc.

I'd imagine that legislation will be introduced to keep cyclists off the quality bus corridors. The rathfarnham and rathmines kludges are far worse than the existing designs - they're busy routes - do the planners really want 1000's of cyclists reduced to really slow stop-start speeds and pressing buttons at traffic lights to cross the road?

On the section of Rathfarnham Road between Main Street and Dodder
Park Road, there is insufficient road width to provide a cycle lane in
either direction. Consequently it is proposed to redirect cyclists from
Rathfarnham Road to Brookvale Road through an existing pedestrian
access. It is intended to widen this access through land take from the
adjacent filling station. Cyclists would be directed through Brookvale
Downs onto a new two-way cycle track on Springfield Avenue
where they join a new cycle lane facility on Rathfarnham Road.
To accommodate the new bus lanes on this section of Rathfarnham
Road, it is proposed to utilise land take from adjacent properties. The
indicative extents of this land take are included in the Appendix of this
brochure. To maintain bus priority through the Dodder Park Road and
Rathfarnham Road, it is intended to provide a bus only signal on the
southern and northern approaches to the junction. The junction will
be upgraded with toucan crossings at all four approaches.
Between this junction and Terenure Road North, it is proposed to
maintain a single bus lane and general traffic lane in both directions.
Cyclists will be served with a two-way cycle track on the west of
Rathfarnham Road. This would require a new cycle bridge over the
Dodder River. At the Rathdown Park junction, it is intended to maintain
bus priority through this junction by providing a bus only signal on the
city bound lane. To accommodate these new bus lanes on this section
of Rathfarnham Road, it is proposed to utilise land take from adjacent
properties. The indicative extents of this land take are included in the
Appendix of this brochure. At the Terenure Road North junction it is
intended to extend the existing bus lane and proposed cycle track as
far as the junction stop line. These additional lanes will be provided
through removal of the existing on-street parking spaces. Bus
movements through this junction will be managed with bus
only signals.

This is really important, the is the first indication I have seen on paper that they are proposing to restrict cyclists from travelling in the bus lanes.

I think this needs to be opposed. The N11 is the only example I need to decide how much reassurance I should take from "but don't worry we will build you a lovely cycle lane to use instead of the road".

The one silver lining though is that it seems ??? they propose to do this in limited places through "bus only signalling" rather than by a general removal of the right to cycle in bus lanes. Or perhaps that is just giving them a longer set of lights?

Rather than taking a circuitous route I could see myself taking the "general traffic" lane as an alternative, if it transpires that cyclists are banned from the bus lane (and i do mean "take the lane".) I suspect the howls of protest from car drivers might get more traction than complaints from cyclists in overturning this proposal, though probably only after it has been put in place.

LennoxR · 30-01-2019 5:29pm

aldark wrote: »

I think this is new - its the core bus corridor design for rathfarnham to city centre - including the plans for getting cyclists off the rathmines and rathfarnham roads.

https://busconnects.ie/media/1453/12-busconnects-cbc-rathfarnham-to-city-centre-040119-fa.pdf

Plan in rathfarnham is to redirect cyclists onto brookvale downs, then onto a lane, then onto dodder park road. Brookvale Downs is a quiet residential estate - presumably kids playing, cars reversing onto road etc. Seems bonkers.

There's a new 2 way cyclist only bridge over the dodder proposed. Coming back from town cyclists will have to cross the road to get onto the 2 way track and continue on up to brookvale rd (crossing dodder park road at ped lights) emerging at the entrance to rathfarnham village.

there's a lot of toucan crossings in the plan. I can't understand why cyclists have to be removed from that stretch of rathfarnham - the road is very broad there.

There are 2 routes proposed for rathmines - one keeping it as it is, the 2nd is another horror show of rerouting through residential roads and pedestrian crossing junctions at the canal etc.

I'd imagine that legislation will be introduced to keep cyclists off the quality bus corridors. The rathfarnham and rathmines kludges are far worse than the existing designs - they're busy routes - do the planners really want 1000's of cyclists reduced to really slow stop-start speeds and pressing buttons at traffic lights to cross the road?

B*llocks to that. I live in that area and there is no way I would obey a rule like that banning cycling from the main road.

This is scandalous this plan, it really is. Apart from not only being a main commuting corridor for hundreds or thousands of cyclists, the road in question is also the main route for leisure cyclists towards the mountains. Unacceptable.

Furthermore: this:

Between this junction and Terenure Road North, it is proposed to
maintain a single bus lane and general traffic lane in both directions.
Cyclists will be served with a two-way cycle track on the west of
Rathfarnham Road. This would require a new cycle bridge over the
Dodder River.

Is complete pie in the sky BS. There is only one viable crossing point over the river Dodder in this area, between two steeply rising ridges, which are also crowned by houses and private property. And the viable space is occupied by the existing Bridge and the existing Rathfarnham Road. There is no scope whatsoever for a new cycle bridge over the Dodder even if this were likely to be funded. I'm getting angry about this now.

Grassey · 30-01-2019 10:31pm

So does this compliment... Or contradict... Or ignore the dodder greenway plans then?

My reading would be that there will now be a two way shared surface on each side of the road... Built under 2 different projects, that look to fail at integrating.

Springfield Avenue to Rathfarnham Road Junction

â€¢ Reduce carriageway width down to 6.5m and form a 4m wide shared surface along the northern side of the carriageway. The existing footpath, cycle track and shared surface along the southern side of the carriageway is to be retained.

buffalo · 31-01-2019 7:42am

Fian wrote: »

This is really important, the is the first indication I have seen on paper that they are proposing to restrict cyclists from travelling in the bus lanes.

Which part are you talking about?

Fian · 31-01-2019 10:28am

This part (amongst others):

On the section of Rathfarnham Road between Main Street and Dodder
Park Road, there is insufficient road width to provide a cycle lane in
either direction. Consequently it is proposed to redirect cyclists from
Rathfarnham Road to Brookvale Road through an existing pedestrian
access.

Chips Lovell · 31-01-2019 10:34am

My reading of that is that it just refers to the cycle lane though? It says nothing about restricting cyclists from using the bus lane if they prefer.

Budawanny · 31-01-2019 5:11pm

LennoxR wrote: »

B*llocks to that. I live in that area and there is no way I would obey a rule like that banning cycling from the main road.

This is scandalous this plan, it really is. Apart from not only being a main commuting corridor for hundreds or thousands of cyclists, the road in question is also the main route for leisure cyclists towards the mountains. Unacceptable.

Furthermore: this:

Between this junction and Terenure Road North, it is proposed to
maintain a single bus lane and general traffic lane in both directions.
Cyclists will be served with a two-way cycle track on the west of
Rathfarnham Road. This would require a new cycle bridge over the
Dodder River.

Is complete pie in the sky BS. There is only one viable crossing point over the river Dodder in this area, between two steeply rising ridges, which are also crowned by houses and private property. And the viable space is occupied by the existing Bridge and the existing Rathfarnham Road. There is no scope whatsoever for a new cycle bridge over the Dodder even if this were likely to be funded. I'm getting angry about this now.

I'm not sure about the Terenure Road North junction concerns you have. If you take this plan at face value ( I know) then the continuation of the cycleway is predicated on land take for the bus lane anyway. if there are space requirements they can be met.
but if you visualise 3/4 metres of bridge literally right to the west side of the road bridge, then its easily feasible I think.

if you look at the appendix map you can see that the cycle bridge is parallel to the road bridge so is nothing dramatic.

LennoxR · 31-01-2019 6:29pm

Budawanny wrote: »

I'm not sure about the Terenure Road North junction concerns you have. If you take this plan at face value ( I know) then the continuation of the cycleway is predicated on land take for the bus lane anyway. if there are space requirements they can be met.
but if you visualise 3/4 metres of bridge literally right to the west side of the road bridge, then its easily feasible I think.

if you look at the appendix map you can see that the cycle bridge is parallel to the road bridge so is nothing dramatic.

Right well, first of all that's assuming it would actually be built, at great expense, for no good reason. All of which I doubt.

But secondly, it's a very old bridge, 19th century or earlier, not at all easy to expand. And thirdly, the land take that would make this possible, if I am envisaging it correctly, would run into major objections I would imagine from the very wealthy property owners on the Terenure side of the river.

In any case, call me cynical but I would say that the cycling infra will never be built.

ED E · 31-01-2019 6:37pm

Word is they're not banning cycles from bus lanes. I can't point to that in black and white, yet.

aldark · 01-02-2019 1:13pm

Maybe, they could always introduce a new category of bus lane specifically for these routes though and ban cyclists from that.

Based on the designs I've seen so far, I think the aim is to get cyclists out of the way, not to better integrate us into the road infrastructure.

So would not be at all optimistic that any sense will prevail. Time to lobby the pols I think.

ED E wrote: »

Word is they're not banning cycles from bus lanes. I can't point to that in black and white, yet.

buffalo · 06-02-2019 12:38pm

Well here's someone in an official role saying something positive:

NTA Deputy Chief Executive Hugh Creegan said they accept not all cyclists will use that diversion. “Our problem is we can’t fit everything in, that’s our problem. Something has to give.”

He said they’ve tried to put in reasonable alternatives. “And in the case of Kildare Road, that actually is a more direct alternative for a lot of cyclists, and may be attractive.”

Those who don’t turn off, and stay on Crumlin Road could use the bus lane, he said. “Which is safer than merging with general traffic.”

https://www.dublininquirer.com/2019/02/06/council-briefs-busconnects-and-cyclists-the-liffey-cycle-route-and-getting-more-of-the-amber-man

nomdeboardie · 06-02-2019 1:19pm

As long as they let the bus drivers know that :rolleyes:

Chips Lovell · 06-02-2019 1:21pm

nomdeboardie wrote: »

As long as they let the bus drivers know that :rolleyes:

I think finding a cure for stupidity is beyond the NTA's remit.

nomdeboardie · 06-02-2019 1:35pm

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think finding a cure for stupidity is beyond the NTA's remit.

True, but at least if drivers are explicitly told that cyclists have a right to use the bus lane we're covered for funeral expenses if our relatives sue :P

Chips Lovell · 06-02-2019 1:38pm

AFAIK, they are are told. It's always been the law. But you'll always get idiots in buses, taxis, and even private cars, who think they aren't allowed there or, better still, know they are allowed, but think they should get off them anyway.

magicbastarder · 01-03-2019 9:54am

don't stand near the pram, you're likely to be fatally wounded by supersonic toys.

BusConnects chiefs propose making Rathmines one-way for cars
https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/busconnects-chiefs-propose-making-rathmines-15903601

Chips Lovell · 01-03-2019 9:57am

Many lattes will be shot out of many noses.

CPTM · 01-04-2019 5:43pm

aldark wrote: »

I think this is new - its the core bus corridor design for rathfarnham to city centre - including the plans for getting cyclists off the rathmines and rathfarnham roads.

https://busconnects.ie/media/1453/12-busconnects-cbc-rathfarnham-to-city-centre-040119-fa.pdf

Plan in rathfarnham is to redirect cyclists onto brookvale downs, then onto a lane, then onto dodder park road. Brookvale Downs is a quiet residential estate - presumably kids playing, cars reversing onto road etc. Seems bonkers.

Hi there, I am actually looking at buying a house in Brookvale Downs where the proposed bike lane is set to pass through. It's made me a little hesitant. Do you think the bike lane would be used, or will people just fly on down the Rathfarnham road in the bus lane?

If they do go through the estate, is it even a bad thing to have cyclists passing through an estate? I can't make up my mind whether this is a good thing or a bad thing for the houses in Brookvale Downs.

Grassey · 01-04-2019 6:10pm

CPTM wrote:

Do you think the bike lane would be used, or will people just fly on down the Rathfarnham road in the bus lane?

Nobody in their right mind would detour off the main road down a narrow shared use lane, through the estate and back onto to a different road perpendicular to where they started, where they now need to cross at a pedestrian crossing in order to continue from rathfarnham towards terenure.

Seth Brundle · 01-04-2019 6:11pm

Given the option would you rather have cars flying down your street or bicycles?

Plus surely having quick sustainable transport on your doorstep is an advantage?

CPTM · 01-04-2019 6:26pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Given the option would you rather have cars flying down your street or bicycles?

Plus surely having quick sustainable transport on your doorstep is an advantage?

Yes, I'm all about that. I cycle to work every day, and my wife gets a bus. It's actually why we like the house, because of the bus routes available.

I'm more worried about the value of the house changing, or the noise/disruption it might cause during implementation. Does anyone know when, between 2021 and 2027, the proposed works are due to be carried out? I know it's due to take about two years per corridor, but I wonder if they've decided which one they'll do first.

I think having a cycle lane going through an estate would make it more secure?

Grassey · 01-04-2019 6:27pm

I'd say the only disruption for that estate would be a fresh layer of tarmac and some coloured paint slapped down.

magicbastarder · 19-06-2019 7:44am

looks like the scaremongering has had its intended result, to a extent anyway.

Dublin’s bus network redesign to be carried out over ‘phased basis’
BusConnects plan now due to be implemented between 2021 and 2023, instead of end of 2019
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dublin-s-bus-network-redesign-to-be-carried-out-over-phased-basis-1.3930058

Chips Lovell · 19-06-2019 8:31am

Pushing it out beyond the next general election.

magicbastarder · 19-06-2019 8:37am

the absolute PITA about this is that it's going to stall all sorts of work; there are roads which really need to be resurfaced or repaired, but they were holding off on (AFAIK) because why surface a road if it's going to be reconfigured for busconnects?
this will just kick that can further down the road.

Macy0161 · 19-06-2019 8:38am

They should save the trees by making the effected routes bus lanes (i.e. current legal users) only, and resident access only (with long detours to get to the driving route). All these idiots will be giving out about why the trees were left get so big the next time one of these trees come down in a storm.

Chips Lovell · 19-06-2019 8:42am

I'd be surprised if it ever happens in the shape originally envisaged.

Hurrache · 19-06-2019 9:07am

Macy0161 wrote: »

They should save the trees by making the effected routes bus lanes (i.e. current legal users) only, and resident access only (with long detours to get to the driving route). All these idiots will be giving out about why the trees were left get so big the next time one of these trees come down in a storm.

Removing trees on the basis they may some day fall over, sure why bother planting any in the future. There's preventative maintenance on them as it is anyway. But because people don't want trees remove where possible, it doesn't make them idiots either.
(edit: the people who are saying trees that will be cut down that won't, or the media publishing photos of tree lined avenues which won't be affected, for their own agenda are however.)

magicbastarder · 19-06-2019 9:30am

what bugs me is the 'save the trees because of climate change!' argument (i've seen this many times).
some maths:
an average car will produce over 150g of CO2 per km driven (a petrol car managing 5.6l per 100km produces 130g of CO2 per km; you would not expect to get that efficiency in an urban area in a petrol car).
a tree - under ideal conditions - can absorb maybe 100g of CO2 per day. it's actually closer to half that, so let's say 75g as a compromise.

this means that simply driving 500m in a car produces as much CO2 as a single tree can absorb in one day.

on a road near me (mobhi road), there are trees roughly every 20m, so 50 on each side of the road per km; if you drive the 1km along that road, and make the return trip, in one day; in one car, you have taken up the CO2 sequestration of 4 of those 100 trees.

i.e. just 25 cars making a return trip on that road per day overwhelms the ability of the trees to deal with the CO2 emitted. that's less than one third the capacity of a single double decker bus (based on a passenger capacity of 1.3 people per car)

i'm a tree hugger, i know there's a hell of a lot more utility to street trees than just carbon sequestration, but that aspect of it is so miniscule as to be irrelevant. (and i know no-one here made the argument, i just felt like giving out).

Hurrache · 19-06-2019 9:38am

I understand you're not saying the argument for keeping trees is for CO2 reasons, my issue anyway with 'save the trees' is mainly from an aesthetic point of view. We've enough grey concrete and black tarmac. Look at how O'Connell Street turned out.

mirrormatrix · 19-06-2019 11:25am

Well this sort of fear mongering (put out by UCD twitter the other day) probably doesn't help matters:

https://dublintrees.com/2019/06/11/potential-loss-of-trees-to-dublins-new-core-bus-route-corridor/

Hurrache · 19-06-2019 12:12pm

The Irish Times haven't been covering themselves in glory either.

LennoxR · 19-06-2019 12:36pm

Whatever about the trees, I thought we'd established that this plan's cycling provisions weren't up to much, no?

Chips Lovell · 19-06-2019 12:39pm

To me, the biggest flaw in the plan was they attempted to pander to everyone and pleased virtually no one.

You can easily minimise the tree issue by making more parts of the route one-way for general traffic or bus/bike only and only permit local access. Similarly, rather than divert more general traffic through residential areas, they should be attempting to reduce it instead. However, by attempting to minimise disruption to motorists they managed to alienate a whole other swathe of people instead without actually winning the "car is king" types over

Chips Lovell · 19-06-2019 12:42pm

LennoxR wrote: »

Whatever about the trees, I thought we'd established that this plan's cycling provisions weren't up to much, no?

True, but I don't think the cycling provisions are the main reason the plan is being pushed back.

average_runner · 19-06-2019 12:51pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

what bugs me is the 'save the trees because of climate change!' argument (i've seen this many times).
some maths:
an average car will produce over 150g of CO2 per km driven (a petrol car managing 5.6l per 100km produces 130g of CO2 per km; you would not expect to get that efficiency in an urban area in a petrol car).
a tree - under ideal conditions - can absorb maybe 100g of CO2 per day. it's actually closer to half that, so let's say 75g as a compromise.

this means that simply driving 500m in a car produces as much CO2 as a single tree can absorb in one day.

on a road near me (mobhi road), there are trees roughly every 20m, so 50 on each side of the road per km; if you drive the 1km along that road, and make the return trip, in one day; in one car, you have taken up the CO2 sequestration of 4 of those 100 trees.

i.e. just 25 cars making a return trip on that road per day overwhelms the ability of the trees to deal with the CO2 emitted. that's less than one third the capacity of a single double decker bus (based on a passenger capacity of 1.3 people per car)

i'm a tree hugger, i know there's a hell of a lot more utility to street trees than just carbon sequestration, but that aspect of it is so miniscule as to be irrelevant. (and i know no-one here made the argument, i just felt like giving out).

But you don't need to touch the trees, why not make the roads one way only, have the bus on the left, car in the middle and a cycle lane with separation on the right

LennoxR · 19-06-2019 12:52pm

Chips Lovell wrote: »

True, but I don't think the cycling provisions are the main reason the plan is being pushed back.

Yeah I d say that'd be mainly the result of a lot of wealthy people facing losing their front gardens or parts thereof.

But Personally I wouldn't be a fan of the plan at all. As someone else has said it tried to create these bus corridors without taking any space from cars and relegating cyclists to very impractical routes. Just my two cents.

average_runner · 19-06-2019 12:54pm

LennoxR wrote: »

Yeah I d say that'd be mainly the result of a lot of wealthy people facing losing their front gardens or parts thereof.

But Personally I wouldn't be a fan of the plan at all. As someone else has said it tried to create these bus corridors without taking any space from cars and relegating cyclists to very impractical routes. Just my two cents.

In fairness I don't think any one should lose their garden and can understand their anger over. For example Crumlin Road is not full of rich people but they want to take some of their small gardens, best of luck and it will end up in court.

Chips Lovell · 19-06-2019 1:25pm

LennoxR wrote: »

Yeah I d say that'd be mainly the result of a lot of wealthy people facing losing their front gardens or parts thereof.

I don't know. That's certainly the caricature, but in my area at least, there's fairly strong opposition to it despite the fact that only a handful of people stand to have their gardens affected by it. Was one of the main issues raised in the local election campaign etc.

BusConnects - Cyclist Support Vital

Comments