Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

magicbastarder · 20-02-2021 01:08PM

and i think i asked before, but isn't there going to be an increase in dart frequency, so the merrion gates will be shut for even longer at rush hour?
though i assume that plan predated covid.

silverharp · 20-02-2021 02:04PM

MojoMaker wrote: »

Oh dear Spy Queen. Open-minded up to the point you inserted "avid cyclist" into the mix as if to justify how bad things must be if "even an avid cyclist like me opposes this"....let's just agree, you are a local resident who doesn't want your ability to drive and park anywhere you like in the D4 area affected by a community project with which you have no great affinity.

The guff about the 3 Arena is particularly galling. If you're in the D4 area you should be walking to the venue and encouraging the kids to walk (or cycle).

The only groups this will negatively affect are drivers who refuse to review and potentially modify their driving habits - change is difficult and the transition period will be tricky, no doubting that - but there is a ton of traffic on that road right now that could be considered non-essential, the road being used simply because it's there.

We need a national mindset shift away from traffic and private car usage and if councils can help by altering otherwise immovable opinions and mindsets then so be it, because gentle persuasion certainly hasn't worked.

your stadium comment clearly shows you didnt read her post correctly , and imagining the poster's "real" intentions is another fail

Larbre34 · 20-02-2021 02:17PM

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's a protected unesco biosphere so I'm pretty sure building anything there isn't an option.

I think we need to debunk this b0ll1x.

The boundary of the Dublin Bay Biosphere, is at the Dublin Mountains on one end and Dublin Airport at the other. It includes somewhere in the region of 250,000 homes and hundreds of kilometres of roads as well as factories, hospitals, shopping centres etc. Most obviously, it includes the poo factory and massive incinerator at Poolbeg.

It definitely includes the Sutton to Fairview coastal cycleway, itself straddling the boundary of a wildlife preserve.

At Sandymount, the "biosphere" includes an existing shared footpath/cycletrack and 3 or 4 carparks.

It is not beyond the talents of Dublin City Council to get the finger out and begin the process of designing a promenade cycleway tomorrow and support it through the not insurmountable obstacle of being in the biosphere! Who knows, they might even be able to remove a carpark or two in the process. Wouldn't that be dandy.

Thelonious Monk · 20-02-2021 02:37PM

I would prefer the setup with a one way road either way, less cars and noise.

Larbre34 · 20-02-2021 02:59PM

I think we need to move on the thinking from this. In my view, the trial as proposed by DCC, is very unlikely to happen now.

I see Cllr Donna Cooney on twitter saying things like "its happening anyway". Unless she got herself a seat on the High Court while I wasn't looking, its just bonkers talk from her and people should inform themselves of where things are at rather than listening to her.

silverharp · 20-02-2021 03:07PM

does it mean the car parks at the front will be closed, that will be a benefit

ted1 · 20-02-2021 03:15PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

I think we need to move on the thinking from this. In my view, the trial as proposed by DCC, is very unlikely to happen now.

I see Cllr Donna Cooney on twitter saying things like "its happening anyway". Unless she got herself a seat on the High Court while I wasn't looking, its just bonkers talk from her and people should inform themselves of where things are at rather than listening to her.

ReRead your own post.
You say it’s not happening.
You then Give out about her saying it is happening.

Did you get a seat on the high court ?

Seth Brundle · 20-02-2021 03:22PM

This is what the NIMBYists are against...

https://twitter.com/DubCityCouncil/status/1333788985731125251?s=19

Larbre34 · 20-02-2021 03:23PM

ted1 wrote: »

ReRead your own post.
You say it’s not happening.
You then Give out about her saying it is happening.

Did you get a seat on the high court ?

What part of "in my view, is unlikely" did you not comprehend?

Larbre34 · 20-02-2021 03:26PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

This is what the NIMBYists are against...

The design, scale and impact of R131 Strand Road/Beach Road is in a different universe from the Grangegorman filter. You really must be more honest in what you are trying to convince people of.

Thelonious Monk · 20-02-2021 03:31PM

You can see from responses to all these things like Grangegorman how many people just don't want any change to the status quo.
If the Strand Road thing goes ahead, I certainly can't see it going beyond a trial. I honestly think the only hope for proper modal change is when the gridlock gets so bad it's almost impossible to drive anywhere like Moscow or Bogota.
In Malta, it's a microcosm of Irish transport planning or lack of, they have basically no public transport and 2 cars per household in the most densely populated place in Europe. Their solutions appear to be building more roads and overpasses all over the place to accommodate more traffic. At least we can't do that here within the M50 anyway, so I'm just going to hold out for total gridlock and hope it gets worse and worse.

Seth Brundle · 20-02-2021 03:35PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

The design, scale and impact of R131 Strand Road/Beach Road is in a different universe from the Grangegorman filter. You really must be more honest in what you are trying to convince people of.

They are against the trial changing of a traffic lane into a segregated cycle path
The existing road is unsafe for cycling. The trial will provide a segregated route safw for vulnerable road usees.
These safe segregated lanes have been shown to increase usage and decrease the risk to vulnerable road users.
The NIMBYists don't want this and want something which they know will take years to happen, if it even happens simply because they don't want to lose their ability to drive and park where they want to.
Which bit did I miss out on or in what way have I not been honest?

ted1 · 20-02-2021 03:36PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

What part of "in my view, is unlikely" did you not comprehend?

Is Cllr Donna Cooney not entitled to her view ?

buffalo · 20-02-2021 03:37PM

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I honestly think the only hope for proper modal change is when the gridlock gets so bad it's almost impossible to drive anywhere like Moscow or Bogota.

That's when the clamouring for another lane/road/bypass gets loudest.

Thelonious Monk · 20-02-2021 03:43PM

buffalo wrote: »

That's when the clamouring for another lane/road/bypass gets loudest.

In Dublin at least, there's not really room for more roads.

Larbre34 · 20-02-2021 04:10PM

ted1 wrote: »

Is Cllr Donna Cooney not entitled to her view ?

She is of course. She needs to express it as a view though, a hope, an aim, not a definite. She is misleading people and could end up looking very silly.

buffalo · 20-02-2021 04:13PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

She is of course. She needs to express it as a view though, a hope, an aim, not a definite. She is misleading people and could end up looking very silly.

As opposed to someone who listed a six month trial of a cycle track beside the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement as reasons why the Green Party will fall apart? :pac:

Larbre34 · 20-02-2021 04:14PM

buffalo wrote: »

As opposed to someone who listed a six month trial of a cycle track beside the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement as reasons why the Green Party will fall apart? :pac:

Stay tuned bro.

Peregrine · 20-02-2021 04:19PM

buffalo wrote: »

As opposed to someone who listed a six month trial of a cycle track beside the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement as reasons why the Green Party will fall apart? :pac:

Don't forget the central government stepping in and stopping it because of Brexit. Any day now..

ted1 · 20-02-2021 04:23PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

She is of course. She needs to express it as a view though, a hope, an aim, not a definite. She is misleading people and could end up looking very silly.

As could you. Im still awaiting Dublin port and the government to pipe up. You said it was being cancelled as it strategic route for Brexit.
Of course hers is a view.

Seth Brundle · 20-02-2021 04:38PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

She is of course. She needs to express it as a view though, a hope, an aim, not a definite. She is misleading people and could end up looking very silly.

Hang on. Nothing has changed unless I'm mistaken. The project is going ahead and whilst a there is a pending case, no outcome has been made to show that she is misleading people.
You on the other hand...

Thelonious Monk · 20-02-2021 04:53PM

In other South Dublin news, work began on the south quays today between Merchant and Usher Quay for new cycling infra. Mannix must have missed this one.

Fighting Tao · 20-02-2021 08:43PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

The design, scale and impact of R131 Strand Road/Beach Road is in a different universe from the Grangegorman filter. You really must be more honest in what you are trying to convince people of.

The ‘R’ in R132 stands for regional. It is not a ‘N’ national road and the way it is used at present is like a national road. It was never designed for the traffic it currently takes. Therefore, putting the ‘regional’ back in R131 makes sense. It will lesson the traffic and make it a more friendly environment for everyone.

Seth Brundle · 20-02-2021 10:14PM

https://twitter.com/ccferrie/status/1363187816046473217?s=19

Larbre34 · 21-02-2021 01:04AM

Those comments evidently predate the initiation of the court action.

However, its a telling line in the article, that the City Council said the work was exempt from Planning Permission because of Government advice etc.

Unfortunately for the Council, no Government can come out and verbally set aside bits of the law, crisis situation or not. As you'll have seen, every aspect of Covid restrictions this past year - fines for movement or travel, setting up quarantine hotels, the forced closure of various customer facing businesses - all required legislation or statutory instruments, stemming either from the Health Act of last March, or specific to their sector.

And so, if anything is likely to kill the Sandymount "trial", its this carelessness by the Government, compounded by the City Council and the NTA being over zealous.

What I mean by that is, where there is general acceptance of sensible (temporary) measures, that aren't too expensive or impactful, and nobody crys foul, then they'll go ahead and if successful for a post Covid world, they can be formally adopted later.

The snag is, when they are challenged, as this project has now been, the planning laws still apply as recourse for those who object. The City Council know this as well as anyone, they are just trying to style it out and hope the opposition goes away. It isn't going to.

The very best that can come of this for the Council, is a slap on the wrist and a direction to carry out the Part 8, using baseline data from normal times, not the pandemic era. At worst, they'll be warned off ever revisiting it again.

Cosmos7 · 21-02-2021 01:44AM

Yawn. No one gove a **** about the council getting the cones out until rich people might be inconvenienced. Then rich people share crying to their friends in the judiciary

Cosmos7 · 21-02-2021 02:04AM

'Impact splitting'

ted1 · 21-02-2021 02:05AM

Larbre34 wrote: »

The very best that can come of this for the Council, is a slap on the wrist and a direction to carry out the Part 8, using baseline data from normal times, not the pandemic era.

Do you not understand, there is no more normal.

The world has changed. Working from home is here to stay.

Cosmos7 · 21-02-2021 02:12AM

The traffic is terriblle

Cosmos7 · 21-02-2021 02:30AM

Withdraw and apologise for any suggestion that the ducks in a row lads have any influence over our judiciary

Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Comments