Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Podge_irl · 25-07-2021 11:57PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117652771#Comment_117652771

Local residents do not own the roads in their vicinity. The alternative plan pushed by the local Sandymount group that was given preferential treatment far over and above what resident's suggestion are normally given, was utterly appalling planning. Ultimately, however, as the residents are so keen to point out - we are talking about a regional route so the views of residents from all over South Dublin should be just as relevant.

Larbre34 · 26-07-2021 12:57AM

It wasn't given preferential treatment for planning reasons, the red carpet was rolled out for their plan by the City Council, to try to avoid having the Council's plan taken to Court, because the Council knew the basis proposed for it, by them, was so flimsy.

Cards on the table now. S2S is the only acceptable plan. The only high quality cycleway that will be permitted locally, is one by the shore, on or beside the inevitable flood protection measures in the next few years. The locals don't own the roads, but they do have the ear of elected representatives and they do have the resources to keep the fight going indefinitely. That may frustrate some of you, but its just reality.

Also, a consortium including NAMA has just this week lodged its application for an SHD on the IGB site, 600 new homes. That plan factors in the R131 and R802 as two-way regional routes, for improved public transport provision as well as car traffic. If you think the high ups in the DoHP are going to permit that to be jeopardised by Owen Keegan's 'Moby Dick' on Strand Road, you'd be mistaken.

We'll probably get the High Court decision soon, itself a very interesting development for all local authorities who have provided measures under the COVID banner. Irrespective though, I don't see Strand Road ever happening, it's been overtaken by too many events. And really, that's what the residents were relying on all along.

markpb · 26-07-2021 01:31AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117661282#Comment_117661282

You might end up being right, who knows. However your continuous stream of reasons why official Ireland won’t let this happen is getting tiresome. You’ve suggested that TII won’t let it happen because something, something, Dublin Port. Then there was the daft notion that building a new school would require a two way road so that would block it. Then Brexit came into play, I can’t even remember what that was about. And now you’ve somehow linked IGB planning with Strand road. None of these things even came close to happening. You’ve summed it up nicely, the residents have the money to waste court time and DCC money until they get what they want.

buffalo · 26-07-2021 08:09AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117661330#Comment_117661330

I'm still waiting for the Green Party and/or the Government to fall!

magicbastarder · 26-07-2021 08:43AM

there's a certain irony that the IGB site, which will be one of the first places in ireland to suffer from rising sea levels, might need better motorised access.

Fighting Tao · 26-07-2021 08:47AM

The Luas Red Line is to be extended to the IGB site, and it will be served with busses, cycle lanes, and pedestrian network...also easy access to the Dart. Why does it need a lot of vehicular access? It is close to the city centre, and will have a substantial transport network. Is it to appease the minority that demand the right to drive in the city? Another red herring!

To be honest, it makes town/urban planners look like prostitutes who will design and write whatever the highest bidder is willing to pay for rather than follow best practice.

Larbre34 · 26-07-2021 09:47AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117661704#Comment_117661704

Not prostitutes, professionals.

If you hire a lawyer, engineer, tax advisor etc, you're not hiring them to go against your interests. You want them to represent your position to the fullest extent of the law and for maximum gain. Why would anyone be naive enough to expect it to be otherwise?

Fighting Tao · 26-07-2021 10:10AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117661949#Comment_117661949

Working as a professional for over 20 years, I have gone against my employers wishes many times, wether working directly for them as an employee or as a contractor. It has never resulted in me losing a job or contract. Professionals do whats right, regardless of what the person/company paying them wants.

Larbre34 · 26-07-2021 04:56PM

A lot of piety on show and given the subject matter thats probably fair enough. However, let me explain some more reality.

You complain about my priorities, but, everything I offer as a solution is within the planning laws. If it wasn't, it wouldn't get passed by the respective authority. Its perfectly reasonable to propose a scheme that is both legal and profitable.

The civic good? Who are you to define the civic good? As we speak, the civic good is best served by building homes. It is also served by making them of a high quality and sustainable.

Again, this won't go down well here, but here's a typical hierarchy for consultant planners in the private sector in Dublin, in terms of getting a scheme over the line.

1. Basics like height, density and unit size

2. Added value to services and utilities to provide for the scheme

3. Energy and water efficiency, including passivity, grey water systems, waste management etc

4. Architectural standard, durability and sustainability.

5. Internal fabric standard, durability and sustainability (including things like fire safety and building systems management)

6. Mobility.

Mr. Cats · 26-07-2021 06:36PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117661949#Comment_117661949

it seems that your professional opinion can be changed for the highest bidder. Lawyers are required to represent their client. I’m not aware that engineers are required to do so? I would think that actually they are required to comply with building standards etc.

What you are describing is dishonest, unethical and unprofessional. Yes, it’s naive to think that everybody will act in line with the standards expected of their profession. It’s not naive to regulate and strive and request that they do so. Ask the living former residents of Grenfell Towers why this is so.

The fact you readily admit that your “professional opinion” is available to be adjusted for the highest bid discredits you and your opinions in my view.

There’s lots of names for people who behave in the way you’ve just admitted.

Larbre34 · 26-07-2021 08:48PM

I'm not an engineer, I'm a Planner. You should consider distinction carefully. Nothing we propose can be realised without the highest standards of engineering and architectural design in the submitted plan.

You mention lawyers. The situation with Planners is quite similar. It's about interpretation. A lawyer will defend a client without fear or favour, but always within the confines of the law or in an attempt to establish a precedent. Similarly, I will do my best to get a scheme approved to the maximum advantage of my client, but always within the law. And like the lawyer, my efforts will be accepted or rejected by the proper authority. Theres absolutely nothing dishonest in that and I resent your interpretation. In fact your opinion is churlish and naive.

Grenfell Tower? Give me a break. That was the fault of appalling project management by K&C Borough Council / GLA and you're forgetting it was cladding added in refurbishment that caused that, not anything a Planner would have had a hand in. So in fact, please apologise for the clumsy comparison.

Mr. Cats · 26-07-2021 09:46PM

You introduced lawyers and engineers into the discussion saying they were equivalent - I was responding to your quoted post.

The engineers working on the cladding of Grenfell signed off that it was safe and within the law. No doubt this was what they were requested to do by their client. This is equivalent to your admitted approach to town planning on my view. If a planning rule is there to protect people’s health and you can find a way around it through a technicality, your approach seems to be its best for my paymaster so I’ll go for it. If the authorities don’t stop me, then “it’s their mistake/issue not mine.” F@@k the people’s health. Thats despicable behaviour on my view.

If, as you admit, you will skew your opinion to suit your client, it begs the question of why you are posting in this thread with various reasons about why the scheme should not go ahead? Most people here are posting honestly, due to firmly held beliefs on cycling infrastructure etc. Your posts seem to be disingenuous at best, throwing out various spurious reasons why it shouldn’t. You make out like you’re not invested in the topic, just an observer , yet all your posts are trying to find a logic why it shouldn’t proceed. So not so objective after all.

Given that by this stage we’ve established that you will put forth opinions that you don’t believe in, to advance a position that you may or may not believe in, if the price is right, I for one won’t be engaging with you further. What’s the point in debating something with somebody who doesn’t even hold true what they’re saying themselves?

buffalo · 26-07-2021 09:48PM

I believe judgement is due this Friday on the trial by the way.

Peregrine · 26-07-2021 09:49PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117665670#Comment_117665670

Yes, looks like it. That was quick. Barely five weeks.

Peregrine · 29-07-2021 05:19PM

Legal diary for tomorrow:

Heraclius · 29-07-2021 06:03PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117665670#Comment_117665670

I'll cross my fingers that he finds in favour of the cycle lane. What do you think the odds are?

magicbastarder · 29-07-2021 06:22PM

depends on where he lives!

29-07-2021 07:47PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117679664#Comment_117679664

I'm sure a certain someone will be along to tell us soon enough

Larbre34 · 29-07-2021 08:02PM

Hereeeeeeee's Larry!

I have no idea. Really I don't.

There were some points I believed should have been included in the case, but weren't. Will the case be strong enough then, as presented? Probably, but not certainly. Odds? 65/35.

What's not in doubt is that Councils across the State will be paying very close attention to the ruling.

29-07-2021 09:05PM

Aye, could go either way but honestly I don't think so

Its my hope that, in the same vane as the recent Kerry CoCo greenway ruling, a positive ruling here would clear the way for a flood (see: trickle) of new pedestrian and cycling infrastructure and further deprioritizing of motor traffic in towns and cities across the country.

Fingers crossed 🤞

Larbre34 · 29-07-2021 09:14PM

The issues at stake on the Kerry Greenway versus Strand Road are entirely unconnected.

Ironically, the Greenway case was a challenge by an environmentalist (among others) to elements of Bord Pleanála's role in infrastructure approval!

And neither relate to wishful thinking, simply to the law.

Peregrine · 30-07-2021 03:28AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117679664#Comment_117679664

I know which way I want it to go and, while I'll be bitterly disappointed, a judgement against Dublin City Council and its implications is a possibility we should prepare for. They probably made seven or eight different arguments and only one has to make any sense for them to win.

If it does go against Dublin City Council, I expect whatever loophole it is to be fixed through the Oireachtas but that will take precious time that we don't have.

yascaoimhin · 30-07-2021 10:40AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681109#Comment_117681109

" I expect whatever loophole it is to be fixed through the Oireachtas"

Undoubtedly. A ruling against will have massive impacts for Local Authorities across the country in their ability to manage the roads for any and all reasons. Like imagine making an LA produce an environmental impact assessment report in order to install a speed bump or a chicane?

30-07-2021 11:03AM

There is a big difference in installing a speed bump to closing off a heavy trafficked route that takes cars going South to North out of the city centre.

This is the route to Clontarf, Sutton Howth for southsiders like me and no, I dont want to take the Dart in the evening, I want to use the direct route by car and thats via the East Link.

I really dont understand this insanity and thankfully Sandymount residents are affluent and influential.

I note none of these crazy schemes are bring proposed in disadvantaged areas, the locals wouldnt be going the expensive legal route, they would take matters into their own hands.

Chips Lovell · 30-07-2021 11:13AM

I'd imagine that whatever the judgement, it may not be the end of it. I'd say if the challenge fails, there'll be more legal action, whether its an appeal or whatever. For the challengers, they probably don't even need to win, just drag it out long enough in the hope that the circumstances change and the plan gets abandoned.

magicbastarder · 30-07-2021 11:17AM

it's funny; a few years back the council proposed closing a road off to traffic, in the drumcondra/glasnevin area, and there was significant pushback from the locals. but a trial was agreed, and at the end of the trial, the locals wanted the roadblock retained.

this is why trials are a good thing.

30-07-2021 11:27AM

Was it a major route that carried thousands of cars everyday.

Pretty pointless trialling something when you know there is no where for thousands of cars to go except through Sandymount village.

Its not as though people are going to cycle to Howth from Blackrock or cycle to the airport or cycle to the Port tunnel if their journey is to Belfast.

This plan has to fail unless there is another plan to build a new road to take the displaced traffic, the existing network cant take it and displacing it all onto the Merrion Road will make this route much for dangerous for schoolchildren cycling this route to the many schools in Booterstown, Ballsbridge and further into the city centre.

And again there is no way even an experienced cyclist will be able to cross lines of moving traffic to access the proposed cycle lane, it would be suicide for a child or an inexperienced cyclist to do this in rush hour traffic or at anytime of the day really.

Does anyone know what the plan is here, is all traffic to be stopped with a right turn filter for cyclists only, this is the only way this could possibly work.

Seth Brundle · 30-07-2021 11:33AM

This plan has to fail unless there is another plan to build a new road to take the displaced traffic, the existing network cant take it and displacing it all onto the Merrion Road will make this route much for dangerous for schoolchildren cycling this route to the many schools in Booterstown, Ballsbridge and further into the city centre.

To be fair, a route is not unsafe. It is others who use the route that make it unsafe e.g. drivers who fail to look for other road users properly.

Podge_irl · 30-07-2021 11:38AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117682074#Comment_117682074

Yes, literally nowhere for them to go except Sandymount village. Dublin being notorious for only having two roads and being otherwise a vast swathe of cycle lanes.

Why wouldn't someone cycle from Howth to Blackrock?

30-07-2021 11:41AM

What is the viable alternative.

I had four children I took to see their grandparents every sunday,usually on my own.

I packed the car and drove over the East Link, do you think I should have put the whole family in a cargo bike and cycled from Booterstown to Sutton.

or should I have stood waiting for a bus to take me to a Dart station and then waited an hour on the other side for another bus to the folks house.

Look out the window today, its July and rain is non stop, going to rain most of tomorrow too,life is hard enough for most people at the moment, dont make it impossible by making necessary journeys people have to make even harder.

Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Comments