Greenways [greenway map of Ireland in post 1]

Surprised that map doesn't seem to plan for Mallow to Dungarvan.

This probably deserves a separate thread. It is much bigger than the greenways.

The proposed National Cycle Network would extend to about 3,500km. Only about a quarter of this (some 900km) is currently included in the Greenways Programme. Of this 900Km, about 400km is currently existing greenways/ other cycleways infrastructure.

It would be a massive upgrade on our current cycling infrastructure, especially for travel between cities/towns. The map is deliberately vague - the thick lines on the map are because the corridors are

So the hard work of defining these "corridors" (i.e. routes) remains to be done. And most of the network won't be delivered until 2031-40. Still, it would be important to have a plan that has Government approval. Or is this just Eamon Ryan's wishlist? What odds on the Greens in Government after the next election? I think the network includes every constituency, plus a few cross-border.

Westport - Achill, Navan - Kingscourt, the one heading north from Limerick and Conemara Greenway not shown either.

It's pointless producing a map like this, they'd be better off producing and keeping up-to-date a map of the existing network would be more useful. The NCN concept seems pointless too, why not just keep funding projects in the current fashion? Like could Claremorris - Collooney miss out on construction funding with funds going to feasibility studies on some of the aspirational stuff in the NCN which doesn't have a natural route and is years away from construction?

Perhaps I'm cynical about all this but it feels like an exercise in getting the most km built for the money spent. Or else being drawn up by people who don't understand cycling.

The national network seems to reflect a road network where they think someone might cycle from Kilkenny to Limerick via Thurles. How many would ever do that?

I'm not against towns being linked obviously but the focus should be improving the infrastructure within cities and towns first. It still seems very poor but it's where you have to spend a lot of money on junction design and make difficult decisions.

NCN document seems to state it includes many existing and in progress Greenway routes (i.e. if they lie on an inter-urban NCN corridor, there is no duplication)

As for some like Westport-achill not being included, one of criteria for NCN primary/secondary nodes is population centers. >10k for secondary, >20k for primary, with some exceptions for sparsely populated areas.

Think of NCN as the master plan for cycling in the country - it includes most Greenway projects as a subset but also adds loads of new routes not covered by any existing Greenway plan or project.

That was pretty much the basis of one submission: "What are you actually doing here, are you superseding plans or will other plans supersede this. Are you keeping this as an organic and constantly-updated network map or a one-off?"

There's variations now between local urban network plans, completed schemes, part 8 plans, section 38 plans, bus connects plans and now this National Cycle Network. It's getting out of hand, and one needs to be a "master" plan. Unfortunately this is just another set of plans on top of 4 or 5 others. I can't imagine the roads network being progressed in this manned, in 2024.

Well I'm OK with that too, just that we now have at least three different master plans!

That's exactly it yep!

I don't mind them doing yet another master plan but it'd be good if they could at least talk about the pervious ones and whether this supersedes them!

Now we have loads of plans that contradict each other, and when planning applications go in on stretches of road, we have no idea whether they're compliant or not. Developers can't be criticized for lack of adherence to a master plan at this stage, so we'll end up with all sorts of weird and wonderful designs with 2-way, then 1-way, then shared space, then footpath, then no segregation etc.

Well there are always going to be some variation, for example shared spaces will be used where there isn't space to have separate cycle lanes and footpaths. This is particularly going to be the case in urban areas. Kildare Co Co yesterday opened consultation on Proposed Sallins Grand Canal Greenway Link Part 8 - it has a ramp which requires cyclists to dismount. I don't think there is an expectation anywhere that every metre of Greenway will be 100% the same.

Also worth noting that Part 8s and Section 38s are not different master plans, almost everything is going to have to go through the planning system regardless. BusConnects is also different, it is a project and the intention is to build out the infrastructure under that project.

The NCN and LAPs don't go to that level of detail, whatever they should will be indicative only. The detailed design will almost always differ from high level plans if you look close enough.

I can't comment on the road outside your house but it is possible that plans supercede others.

The LA cycle plan goes into absolute minute detail, including explicit rationale behind decisions made on detailed design. It's the Cork Cycle Network Plan 2017. It's a very good document. It is absolutely not indicative only. We then got CMATS which deviated a bit from that on routing.

The section 38, part 8 and bus connects all have detailed design and all deviate from the CCNP 2017. Now we have a new NCN plan that deviates on routing (not detailed design) from the LA cycle network, CMATS, the Section 38's, the Part 8 and Bus Connects.

At this stage I'm not sure whether you're deliberately misunderstanding what I'm saying but: I do think that a master plan is warranted, just that this appears to be "yet another master plan" where we already had at least one other reasonably good one.

Buffalo's post above pretty exactly captures my point, basically. If you're going to make another master plan, at least pay some reference to the others: whether you're superseding them or taking priority. Better still, just leave plank pages for places like the Cork harbour, where very good plans already exist.

My understanding regarding the NCN vs CycleConnects vs whatever else already existed.

Consider the NCN as the N roads, the job being to connect all the most significant settlements at a national level

Cycleconnects is per county and more granular, its your R and L road network, connecting settlements within the county.

The NCN isn't a design document, I see it as basically a "scheme priority indicator" aka if you plan these key routes you're more likely to get funding.

Which *IMO* would be a good thing, there's some cracking greenways already and more to come, but if you're not linking up the population centres safely you're doing nothing for modal shift.

The most critical work to do is town centres to suburbs, but then it's true interurbans. And those going through each 5k centre, and in the process passing close to a number of smaller centres means you suddenly have places that are a 15/20 minute cycle (for the 1% brave enough currently) opening up to a whole host of new people who would otherwise have been in the car to get there.

A good example is Naas to Newbridge, its only 10 minutes longer by bike than by car centre to centre, and you'd lose that easily in Newbridge traffic and finding parking. I'm not saying it would suit everyone to do, but how many that might do you think would even remotely consider braving the dual carriageway as it stands?

Do you mean Kilmacthomas? There's a bike rental at the Coach House that you can return to Dungarvan I believe. With an associated mini bus.