Dun Laoghaire Traffic & Commuting Chat

They're wrong so. The academic literature is fairly clear on this:

"information showing that at the lower 20-mph speed of most roundabouts, the chance of a
pedestrian being killed if hit by a vehicle is 15%. On the other hand, at conventional
intersections where the speeds are typically 30 to 40 mph the chances of being killed if
hit by a vehicle range from 45% to 85% "

Pedestrian safety is also an issue of perceived vs. real risks. Even though
pedestrian safety at roundabouts seems to be high (based on international experience and
limited U.S. experience) many pedestrians do not perceive roundabouts to be safe. Yet,
compared to intersections controlled by two-way stop signs, roundabouts improve
pedestrian safety, especially for crossing major streets. Approach speeds are lower and
unexpected right or left-turning movements do not exist at roundabouts."

And for car on car collisions too:

"The circulatory vehicle movements at roundabouts eliminate
or drastically reduce the critical conflicts resulting from red light running, left-turns
against opposing traffic, right-angle conflicts at corners, and rear-end collisions. As a
result roundabouts significantly reduce vehicular crashes.

According to Persaud2, modern roundabouts are safer than other methods of
intersection traffic control. After examining 24 intersections that were converted to
roundabouts in eight states in a variety of urban, suburban and rural settings, he
concluded that roundabouts reduced all vehicular crashes by 39 percent and injury
crashes by 76 percent. He estimated reductions in the numbers of fatal and incapacitating
injury crashes to be about 90 percent."

DLR tried a variant of a dutch style roundabout in Killiney about a decade ago. Local motorists couldn't cope with it.

A similar style roundabout with safe crossing points for pedestrians and cyclists would be required if we want to encourage parents to allow kids cycle to school etc.

Thats before you consider traffic increased volume which was the reason given for removing the old roundabout.

Exactly. Local motorists couldn't cope with the idea of yielding priority to more vulnerable road users. It is quite common practice in societies with grown up active travel cultures. But car brained paddy can't fathom it. Not sure what kind of motoring education you received, but i learned to yield to pedestrians at a zebra crossing. What was so logically different about killiney roundabout? Thankfully younger generations tend to be more accepting of pedestrian and cycling friendly infrastructure.

As a counterpoint, this entire post is deliberately obtuse.

As I said, they reversed all priority as set down in the rules of the road, leaving one roundabout to operate effectively the opposite to every other in the country, and expected people to just use the force or something, to understand that.

It was a dangerous chaos and the Council undid it because they were forced to undo it when questions of legal liability were levelled against them.

Unfortunately there are many drivers who aren't paying attention (and many cyclists / pedestrians don't want to start that thing)

I can't count the number of cars sailing through the lights at the roundabout at Glenageary Shopping Centre turning onto Glenageary Road Upper.

Or turning onto Tiviloi Road from Patrick Street and going through a red light

The sequencing at Honeypark is back to normal now which is obviously bad news for the conspiracy theorists on here

If they did nothing else but repurposed some of the space outside SuperValu then that would be progress. There are 3 lanes on that smalll slip road. 2 parking and one driving. While the footpath is wide it is narrowed by post boxes, shopping trolley bay, bike racks, and solar bins.ect. A few trees, benches and a bit of greenery wouldnt go astray. It is west facing so gets the sun (when we have it) most of the day…

That Honeypark junction - has the CoCo abandoned works? I haven't noticed any major progress since last May approx!

I cycle through the modified Baker's corner, and the CoCo has IMO done a very poor job. Cyclists are now forced off the roadway and have to queue at the pedestrian lights along with pedestrians. A woman picked a row with me last week saying cyclists shouldn't be at the pedestrian lights!

That intersection and road stretch aren't known, and aren't a problem, for accidents or health and safety. Theres absolutely no need to spend a fortune changing it, or plenty of other similar DLRCOCO roads that didn't need changing. Those tax payer euros, and those valuable construction workers, could be put to much better use doing things more useful for the state like building houses.

We're lucky the other parties do their best to hold back such frivilous schemes. Going looking for extremely expensive, needless, "proper solutions" for things that don't need fixing, that cost the tax payers a fortune, is exactly why the country voted the Greens into oblivion at the last general election, and why the Greens lost half their council seats in the last local elections.

Back to the new Deansgrange draft:

Options 2-4: I think bicycle parking should be retained somewhere on the east south-side (main shop). Otherwise cyclist visiting that side only will have to cross and re-cross the road just to use racks on the south-west (Bank+Lidl) side (which already has a few rack)!

Can anyone understand Option 3... "All parking in front of shops removed" but also "Access road and parking on the inside of the island retained"? And what's the idea of the ultra-short new cycle track and then arrow down the inner road in front of the houses. Maybe this is what's referred to later as the 'quiet street' that could be developed?

Option 3 & 4 remove the lane in front of the shops (I think). Here’s the thing: cars travelling west on Kill Lane, e.g. after exiting left from the main SuperValu/hop parking lot, and who want to go north onto Deansgrange Road, are already prohibited from turning right, so have to instead head south onto Clonkeen or straight across to the othr side of Kill Lans and do a U-turn. If Clonkeen is busy, the little road at least allowed them to nip in and do a regular right from there. Thing are already bad enough, with the additional restriction on turning right from Lidl!

Option 4: I presume they mean just that the right turn lane on Clonkeen, not the right turn itself, would be removed.

So the Greens that lost half their council seats are still to blame? I guess it'll always be their fault for some.