Cycle infrastructure planned for north Dublin

Folks are a little bit unsure of how it works at the moment. There's a massive roadworks obstruction at the top of Parliament street (hopefully some new outdoor seating) so when you're going contraflow and crossing over onto Grattan Bridge it's a bit tricky with the pedestrian crossing.

Then a bit of confusion when you come off Grattan onto the bottom of Capel as you're still contraflow so a lot of pedestrians aren't expecting you. It's one of the tightest two way cycle lanes I've seen in the city so is a bit of a squeeze.

Everyone will eventually get used to it, worth being extra careful at the moment though until they do! Overall, still far safer than what I was doing, bit quicker too.

The part from Summerhill to Drumcondra looks almost finished, looking forward to that

Yes it's open. The bit between Drumcondra and Bloody Sunday bridge remains closed for another month

Is it actually a useful link though? Is the Chapelizod road a desired route for pedestrians? Really its the Phoenix Park that needs to be connected as you note.

I think it's going from the focal point of the Memorial straight north to land south of the Magazine Fort: https://maps.app.goo.gl/GayDaSYSpbepsckQ6

It's the OPW. They're a disaster.

We live relatively close to Emo Court in Laois. When my boys were small, we routinely brought them out to the lake, where we would cycle with like (like many others with small children).

When the OPW took over the running of it, we were stopped, and told cycling was forbidden on safety grounds. I pointed out that we were out for a slow spin with two small boys, we were unlikely to be crit racing around the track, and that it was common to see families do this any weekend.

The lady told me that the boys could cycle, but I had to put my bike back on the car.

What a disaster that is...

Not sure where to post this, but comments on the Journalism thread triggered something for me…

Is anyone else worried where the obsession with cycle lanes might take us? I get that they are a positive for cyclists in certain urban settings, but is the aim of categorising as much of the country as served by cycle lanes where we want to go? The political obsession with being able to point to €Xmillions spent on 'active travel' etc. Will it just lead to more and more views that there's no place for cyclists on roads… more calls for mandatory use of cycle lanes where they're provided (especially given that I'd say most people already think this is the case)? Will the argument be reduced to "why did you call for the government to spend gazillions of tax payers money on cycle lanes if you're not going to use them? Of course the law should be changed to make them compulsory"?

I rarely use them except on places like dual carriageways (and even then the standards sometimes have me re-joining the main road to avoid being treated like a second class road user - see for example N11 southbound approaching Cherrywood flyover. I cycle faster than most casual commuters. My commute each way would be close to 40km. I don't want to/ can't dawdle. I need to overtake and don't want to be brought on scenic and time wasting detours by the cycle lane design. In normal school term traffic I'm faster than a car doing the same commute. I'm not some lycra warrior thinking I'm in the TdF, I'm not race training. I'm not the cycling equivalent of a boy racer in a Civic. If cycle lanes were to become the stick to beat cyclists like me with then it just wouldn't be worth it for me to cycle.

Greenways have the potential to be incredible additions to the fabric of society. But I've rarely come across a cycle lane that I've been impressed by - they're either poorly designed (see above), poorly maintained or are effectively shared spaces with pedestrians. It's throwing good money at bad designs to fix the wrong problem. And I just assume that the cycling community will be blamed when it finally dawns on people that half the expenditure was wasted.

On the other hand, I could just be overreacting 😁

All agreed, but that's not what I was getting at.