Clontarf to City Centre Cycle & Bus Priority Project discussion (renamed)

Don't put words in my mouth! I'm not saying that at all!

I'm saying that a two way cycle track should have been built on the park side.

I'm also saying that the idea of putting a two way cycle lane is a completely illogical one. You are forcing cyclists to interact with 12 different junctions and car entrances on that side of the road, 3 of them major ones, junctions that wouldn't exist at all on the park side, leaving for a much safer cycling environment on the park side.

The number of people in Fairview who would benefit from cycling between shops would be tiny and irrelevant compared to the numbers who would cycle through Fairview on the way too and from work (or start/end there).

Take a look:

Honestly, I don't know how you could look at the above and think it would be better forcing cyclists to interact with all those junctions, then having them a lovely junction free cycle next to a pretty park!!

I'm not justifying it, but looking at the above mess of junctions, I predict at least some cyclists will continue to cycle the wrong way on the park side, given how much more pleasant it is then the village side.

Finally there is also the problem around Westwood, where folks cycling on the shared path inside the park join the cycle path heading towards the Clontarf cycle path. For that 400 meter section between the Park and Clontarf, I suspect most of them will cycle the wrong way on the cycle path to get to the two way Clontarf cycle path. I mean for most it would make sense for them to cross the road twice, once just before Westwood, only to have to cross back 400 meters later to get on the Clontarf Cycle Path.

A two way cycle path on the Fairview Park side would eliminate this issue.

That is the point, there is already a two way cycle path from Clontarf to Howth, it would have made much more sense and be safer and more pleasant to have continued it along this section too and perhaps all the way into town.

While this new cycle path is welcome, it is another example of poor design.

BTW For the second day in a row, someone parked smack bang right in the middle of the cycle path on Griffith Avenue! Today the person was boldly parked right in front of the traffic warden in front of the school!!

A reminder that the primary goal of this cycle path is to create a safe cycle path for children to cycle to school. I watched as young children had to pull out into the road and traffic to get around this person who was happily sitting in the car!

I need to get a go pro or something to record this madness and send it onto DCC for enforcement.

Lets say you are cycling from your home in Fairview (lets say West side of Fairview) to Tesco in Fairview and then back. With the current setup you would cycle to the shop on the shop side, but to cycle home you would need to cross to the park side, cycle it and then cross back to get to your home anyway.

And I HATE single lane cycle lanes, I've seen first hand how **** they are up in Griffith Avenue.

• Far too narrow in places, so you can't overtake a slower cyclists like a child and are instead forced to dangerously swerve into traffic to overtake.
• People just happily park their car in the middle of the cycle lane every day, forcing children out into the road to overtake them.
• Narrow lane full of dirt, debris, leaves, muck, water. A two way cycle lane would be much easier to the council to clean and would give you some hope and space to cycle around these.
• Cars parked next to the cycle lane, doors opening into the lane. A two way lane would give you more space to avoid those opening doors.

Imagine we built roads like this, just one way and narrow, with no space to overtake slower drivers or manoeuvre around obstacles. You would be called mad if you suggested that, but seemingly it is ok to force it on cyclists!

Removing the footbridge would be a good thing. It is a relic of old fashioned urban planning, where thinking was to keep people out of the way of cars so they could go faster! Replacing it with a high quality pedestrian crossing would be an improvement. Also the bridge is not accessible to wheelchair users, etc.

As for the rail bridge, the new one way cycle path is already pretty decently wide under it and you could just use it as a narrow two way one. I mean people are already using it as a two way cycle path in my experience, pretty much everyone cycling from Fairview park to the Clontarf Cycle path are just cycling the wrong way along it under the rail bridge to get to the Clontarf path.

I believe it is 2m wide, to put that in perspective parts of the Griffith Avenue cycle path narrows to just 1m at many points! The relative decent width of this new cycle path is how people are getting away with cycling the wrong way along it.

Though obviously you could design it to be used properly, flashing signs both sides saying slow down, narrow cycle path. Speed bumps on the approach to it, etc. And maybe you could even give it slightly extra width, there is grass verge under the bridge on the other side! But in the end you are talking about no more then 20 meters of narrowed two way path that most people are using as such anyway!