DART+ (DART Expansion)

You repeatedly saying that it is a leisure route idea doesn't make it the case. Before you even said it was the motivation, I can tell you it's not the main motivation of anybody involved with it on the official side and also not the main focus for most people advocating for it. Leisure and tourism are both secondary considerations, but they are clear benefits too.

Re the Rock Road, I could be wrong, but I think you might be a bit confused by what I mentioned about the Rock Road -- the trial includes a two-way cycle path on the Rock Road to the DLR route at its boundary. My overarching point was that Strand Road was the main route to the Docklands, in time likely the fastest due to fewer junctions and in distance the shortest to most of the Docklands.

The effect of the level crossing is minimal -- you're grasping at straws or just seen the issue from a windscreen point of view as bicycles are not cars and, with dedicated space, many, many more can cross in the same time a few cars can (this is yet another reason why a cycle path is efficient use of the road space on Strand Road). The wait time at the level crossing isn't that long when you can always get near the front of it, the two-way path on the Rock Road will lead people to it, and overall, comparing routes, there's more potential for delay with all the large junctions on the inland route.

And all of that is before we even start to talk about comfort. You're bluffing or don't know what you're talking about. 

You now say "cringe btw Cian, using Google HQ as your signpost), the vast majority of commuters are not captured in your arbitrary" -- but the choice of location of the tip of the Docklands was a direct reply to your claim that Strand Road is "in no way the most direct route to the Docklands".

Clearly, if you move further south, there's more of a detour, but having a quick look even around Merrion Square / Row / Baggot Street area, that's within the percentage difference, at least some people are willing to detour for, if the detour route is safer or generally more attractive.  

And, in fact, as mentioned, Strand Road is a more direct route to most of the rest of the Docklands. So, you're shifting the goal posts to suit when you are shown to be wrong. But again, a trial will flesh this and many other things out and that's why people like you are afraid of a trial -- you know deep down that will likely be proven wrong or at least you know the balance will not be in your favour even if some motorists are inconvenienced or there's some other downsides (like level crossing closures, there's always plusses and minuses).

You laugh at traffic evaporation, but evidence and a key local example of such have been provided. So, I can only presume your argument here is as paper-thin as your commitment to supporting sustainable transport where it affects motorists.

And nobody said the traffic to Dublin Port would evaporate. It's worth noting for those reading that Strand Road isn't a main HGV route to the port. 

Between Aircoach, Dublin Express, and Dart/Dublin Bus, I'm not clear why you think that the provision to Dublin Airport doesn't amount to the level of service that offers people an alternative to their cars... What if people are too posh even for an express coach? Get a taxi, a limo, or whatever. On a budget? Get the Dart/bus and 41, and it's only €2. What if they still want to drive? They still can, and as I said, south of somewhere around Blackrock, using the M50 will make more sense.

You say it's about access to key infrastructure, but people managed when the Irish Water works were ongoing. You don't have a good reply to that. You just say you don't have to "explain” the Ballsbridge issues you were claiming that happened, and you say it "should he obvious to anyone with a brain and a map." But that's not how people movement happens and as with other points, you haven't addressed my full point on that which included: "...at the end of the day, even if the city council's traffic counts were wrong somehow, the Irish Water works went on for months, and no big deal was made of it except one of two days where there were major issues, and those happen anytime (even with no Irish Water works or cycle route). People on the southside rush off to The Irish Times and RTE when they are even somewhat inconvenienced, but the sky did not fall in."

Again, this is why you're fearful of a trial and especially public consultation only during the trial, which would need to be based on details of problems (which you're unwilling or unable to provide), and not just vagueness.

The project being dreamed up during Covid does not invalidate it -- loads of cities have made more radical moves which disrupted more traffic than Strand Road has, and some of those cities acted before Covid, and others kept acting in the years since. Those cities are examples showing this kind of trial would not be "disastrous for cycling infrastructure" and that more of this thinking would be beneficial to sustainable transport all around.

Again, like the successful city centre transport plan. But it would also have benefits even for projects like the level crossing closures -- showing that bold action can work and there can be a modal shift.

Laughing at a well-documented effect, such as traffic evaporation, makes it clear your support for sustainable transport is based on not disrupting current car use much.