Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

First Up · 05-03-2021 11:06AM

Seth Brundle wrote:

...but you're not! You are following the mantra that drivers should have priority. This has been recognised across the world as the wrong policy to have within a city.

Equality isn't priority.

Fighting Tao · 05-03-2021 11:10AM

First Up wrote: »

Equality isn't priority.

It is priority when there is 7m plus wide of tarmac given over to drivers.

The idea that cars should have priority is dead in cities thankfully. People should have priority and therefore people walking and cycling take up less space than two armchairs and a couch that has an average occupancy of 1.2 people.

I just wish regional towns and villages woke up and changed their ways too.

Please bear in mind that I haven’t been on a bike in about 4 months. Therefore I am most certainly a fully fledged motorist at the moment.

Seth Brundle · 05-03-2021 11:11AM

First Up wrote: »

Equality isn't priority.

...what is your point?
Drivers should have equality?
ok then.
Let drivers pay accordingly for the deaths on the roads.
Let drivers pay accordingly for the damage they cause.
Let drivers travel at a speed equal to vulnerable road users.
Let drivers have an amount of road space in the city equal to their percentage of commuters (bearing in mind that this would involve many more roads being reallocated away from cars).

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 11:35AM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Let drivers have an amount of road space in the city equal to their percentage of commuters (bearing in mind that this would involve many more roads being reallocated away from cars).

Certainly in the city centre, people who habitually drive are allocated way more than 30% of available public space.

(Again, don't know enough about Sandymount and how it connects to neighbouring areas to comment on them directly myself.)

First Up · 05-03-2021 11:44AM

It's clear from this forum that for the cyclistas, Strand Rd has attained symbolic status and become an ideological battleground. No room for logic in that and I should have known better than try to introduce it.

Best of luck to all, especially anyone depending on DCC for a sensible solution.

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 11:45AM

First Up wrote: »

It's clear from this forum that for the cyclistas, Strand Rd has attained symbolic status and become an ideological battleground.

You've posted more here than anyone else?

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 11:46AM

First Up wrote: »

cyclistas

It's "ciclista".

First Up · 05-03-2021 11:47AM

tomasrojo wrote:

You've posted more here than anyone else?

And probably collected more abuse than anyone else but who's counting?

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 11:49AM

First Up wrote: »

And probably collected more abuse than anyone else but who's counting?

You can flag abuse. If you're going to call people childish names though, you might expect some push-back.

Seth Brundle · 05-03-2021 11:49AM

First Up wrote: »

It's clear from this forum that for the cyclistas,

By using attempts at insults, you belittle your own argument :rolleyes:

First Up wrote: »

Strand Rd has attained symbolic status and become an ideological battleground.

I think it is more that as people who have firsthand seen how scary it can be to cycle on that road, the trial of something safe is too good to allow some NIMBY residents and politicians to block just so they can continute to have the unsustainable levels of traffic travel along the road.

First Up wrote: »

No room for logic in that and I should have known better than try to introduce it.

Personally, I had thought you were trolling and got the reaction that you were looking for.

First Up wrote: »

Best of luck to all, especially anyone depending on DCC for a sensible solution.

A sensible solution would involve the de-prioritisation of motor vehicles in favour of the likes of BusConnects, and sustainable travel.

CramCycle · 05-03-2021 12:01PM

First Up wrote: »

I described the impact of preventing motor vehicles accessing Sean Moore Rd via Strand Rd in an earlier post. Have a look at it - and the replies.
.

MOD VOICE: Via PM please. Please send a link with the posts and I will look into it, the previous warning still stands to all posters, not just yourself.

First Up · 05-03-2021 12:07PM

Seth Brundle wrote:

I think it is more that as people who have firsthand seen how scary it can be to cycle on that road, the trial of something safe is too good to allow some NIMBY residents and politicians to block just so they can continute to have the unsustainable levels of traffic travel along the road.

About 250 meters between Irishtown Park and the promenade need to be reconfigured to get a safe and equitable solution for everyone. Other options for that deserve more thought, as do the consequences of what DCC want to do.

Peregrine · 05-03-2021 12:48PM

First Up wrote: »

About 250 meters between Irishtown Park and the promenade need to be reconfigured to get a safe and equitable solution for everyone. Other options for that deserve more thought, as do the consequences of what DCC want to do.

For the second time, it's 750 metres. Not 250 metres. Have you even been to Sandymount? How could anyone who knows Strand Road think the park and the promenade are 250 metres away?

Peregrine wrote: »

Expert transport advice for the CEO of Dublin City from a guy who can't measure distance between two points properly.

Peregrine · 05-03-2021 12:58PM

First Up wrote: »

And probably collected more abuse than anyone else but who's counting?

Being called out on your false statements and traveling goalposts isn't abuse. You've made more posts on this thread than anyone except one other user but have made no effort to understand the proposal or even the area. Instead, you decided to double down every time you were challenged.

First Up wrote: »

It's clear from this forum that for the cyclistas, Strand Rd has attained symbolic status and become an ideological battleground. No room for logic in that and I should have known better than try to introduce it.

Best of luck to all, especially anyone depending on DCC for a sensible solution.

If by "cyclista" you mean just wanting to get from A to B without being run over then I'll wear it as a badge of honour.

You've introduced many things to thread but logic is not one of them.

Alias G · 05-03-2021 01:01PM

First Up wrote: »

About 250 meters between Irishtown Park and the promenade need to be reconfigured to get a safe and equitable solution for everyone. Other options for that deserve more thought, as do the consequences of what DCC want to do.

It is actually closer to 700 metres between the end of the promenade and Sean Moore park but is is not like you to be disingenuous now is it.

Not withstanding that, suppose a boardwalk solve that issue. What do you intend to to at the other end of strand road to accommodate a safe segregated cycle path. For the 300 metres from Merion gates, there is no promenade to build over. The road has private dwellings on either side and no means of providing for a cycle path without utilising the road space.

The days of Strand road as a main arterial route are finished once Dart frequencies are increased and the gates are down for up to 50% of the time. When the good citizens of Sandymount blocked the building of a flyover there, they ensured the future redundancy of the road as a main thoroughfare for motorised traffic.

If you absolutely must drive to the east link itself, you can still access if via Merion road/Serpentine avenue/Tritonville road. If your final destination happens to be somewhere beyond the east link itself, a better alternative will likely be more obvious. The idea that sandymount green would become clogged with rat runs is pure nonsense.

AndrewJRenko · 05-03-2021 01:05PM

First Up wrote: »

About 250 meters between Irishtown Park and the promenade need to be reconfigured to get a safe and equitable solution for everyone. Other options for that deserve more thought, as do the consequences of what DCC want to do.

And by equitable, you mean that cyclists will continue to have their lives and safety, and that of their families, endangered daily by motorists speeding through the area with four empty seats while checking their WhatsApp funny pictures group chats.

Equitable indeed.

First Up · 05-03-2021 01:20PM

Peregrine wrote:

For the second time, it's 750 metres. Not 250 metres. Have you even been to Sandymount? How could anyone who knows Strand Road think the park and the promenade are 250 metres away?

250 metres was quoted in one study and I'll find it later. Google Maps shows Marine Rd to Roslyn Park as 300 meters. That is almost exactly the length of the beach. I ran out to the bird sanctuary and harbour wall for many years. It took about 2 minutes to get across the bit of beach and on to the promenade.

Fighting Tao · 05-03-2021 01:27PM

First Up wrote: »

250 metres was quoted in one study and I'll find it later. Google Maps shows Marine Rd to Roslyn Park as 300 meters. That is almost exactly the length of the beach. I ran out to the bird sanctuary and harbour wall for many years. It took about 2 minutes to get across the bit of beach and on to the promenade.

Makes sense. If you were a frequent runner then you would have been completing 5k runs in 20 minutes at that pace. Maybe you didn’t realise you covered ~500m in the 2 minutes.

Alias G · 05-03-2021 01:54PM

First Up wrote: »

250 metres was quoted in one study and I'll find it later. Google Maps shows Marine Rd to Roslyn Park as 300 meters. That is almost exactly the length of the beach. I ran out to the bird sanctuary and harbour wall for many years. It took about 2 minutes to get across the bit of beach and on to the promenade.

Are you actually going to argue with a map? You really don't know when you are wrong do you?

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 02:00PM

Alias G wrote: »

Are you actually going to argue with a map? You really don't know when you are wrong do you?

Unless the representation on the map is incorrect, Roslyn Park is not at the far end of the beach.

First Up · 05-03-2021 02:15PM

Fighting Tao wrote:

Makes sense. If you were a frequent runner then you would have been completing 5k runs in 20 minutes at that pace. Maybe you didnâ€™t realise you covered ~500m in the 2 minutes.

Haha, I wish.

First Up · 05-03-2021 02:16PM

Alias G wrote:

Are you actually going to argue with a map? You really don't know when you are wrong do you?

Did you look at the map?

Alias G · 05-03-2021 02:19PM

First Up wrote: »

Did you look at the map?

I didn't have to. I went to the trouble of measuring it myself and surprise surprise, got the same answer.

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 02:20PM

First Up wrote: »

Did you look at the map?

Tell you what, instead of sending us off to watch long videos or do your homework for you, you send us a screenshot of the 250m that you think is required.

Peregrine · 05-03-2021 02:20PM

First Up wrote: »

250 metres was quoted in one study and I'll find it later. Google Maps shows Marine Rd to Roslyn Park as 300 meters. That is almost exactly the length of the beach. I ran out to the bird sanctuary and harbour wall for many years. It took about 2 minutes to get across the bit of beach and on to the promenade.

Do you mean Marine Drive? The promenade doesn't start at Roslyn. To run the 750 metre distance between Marine Drive and the promenade in 2 minutes, you would have to run at 22.5 km/h.

270 metres was quoted in a report by the National Transport Authority when it was asked to look into operating a one way section between Merrion Hall and Merrion Gates based on one of the opposition groups' napkin-based engineering drawings. That's the southern end of Strand Road if you're not familiar.

Here's a line from the conclusion about how long it could take to clear that one way section:

Applying this departure rate to our queuing
example above would imply that a vehicle arriving at the back on the queue at exactly 13:00 would
encounter a residual queue of 1746 vehicles and the time to clear the queue would be 7 hours and 12 minutes

7 hours and 12 bloody minutes. You want this for the 750m northern section? The plan to make the entire road one way which you are opposing would result in a lot less congestion.

The report said it would be dangerous and infeasible. The fact that you were taking this debunked idea and presenting it as your own brilliant idea for the northern section until you mixed up the distance involved shows just how deep into the barrel you're willing to scrape.

buffalo · 05-03-2021 02:20PM

Alias G wrote: »

Are you actually going to argue with a map?

Ah, but does the map take into account the curvature of the earth?

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 02:22PM

Potentially non-Euclidean geometry comes into play as well

buffalo · 05-03-2021 02:26PM

We haven't discounted that First Up knows of a wormhole on Strand Road. That extra 500m?

interstellar-wormhole-explanation.gif?w=640

tomasrojo · 05-03-2021 02:30PM

Energize!

First Up · 05-03-2021 02:47PM

Reading maps on the phone can be tricky. I'll try again:
The promenade starts nearly opposite the Gilford Rd junction with Strand Rd. The non-tidal part of the beach is opposite Seafort Avenue and the distance shows on Google Maps at about 370 meters.

Yes, thats longer than the 250 I earlier estimated but hardly an insurmountable engineering challenge or too long to accommodate an alternate flow system. And any delay it would cause would still be easier than a diversion through Sandymount Village or on Londonbridge Rd.

Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Comments