Liffey quays cycle route: Detailed drawings online

RainyDay wrote: »

How do you route cyclists around the Luas platforms?

Not my area of expertise - but it has to be easier/safer than routing cyclists both directions from the proposed position next to the river through every junction all down the quays? A lot of people already cycle the LUAS route through the city, though I'd guess the legal aspect and risk from tramlines deter more.

How much would it cost to change the (by)law to allow cycling on the LUAS lines and install some safety veloSTRAIL?

At the Dublin City Council Transportation Strategic Policy Committee meeting yesterday the manager stated that they are reviewing the different routes, taking into account the nearly 1,200 submissions, and local residents' concerns.

While one route may have been preferred by a majority of submissions, he did state that they have no preference one way or the other at this stage.

He stated that he would revert to the Committee at the next meeting in three months time.

Webcast is here:
http://www.dublincity.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/189515

RainyDay wrote: »

I think it is insurmountable, unless you could dig down or build up. You really can't run a cycle track in front of or behind a platform, with the level of pedestrian traffic that would be coming on or off the platform. Unless you could somehow route cyclists (or peds) at a different level, but the level change would probably be unacceptable for cycling.

If it can be done, I'd be reasonably confident there's a standard for doing it in the Netherlands. But I have no idea whether it can actually be done.

New iteration of the plan is now out for consultation;

https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/liffey-cycle-route/

Single direction cycle lanes are included on each side of the river, which is a better idea than a two direction route on one side imo. Where this plan falls down is that the cycle lanes switch from river side east of O'Donovan Rossa Bridge to building side west of it. I don't think that the switch over will work, particularly as the number of people using this facility increases as ebikes and escooters become more popular. Waiting for lights to get to the other side of the road and the sheer numbers of people jostling for position will just result in people using the road lanes anyway.

I don't get why the cycle lanes can't continue on the river side which would be much better for all concerned. I would also question the need for additional boardwalks on the south quays which seem like they will cause unnecessary hassle and controversy at the Millennium Walkway and, in particularly the Ha'penny Bridge, not to mention adding substantial cost.

I think the earlier proposal of extending Croppies Acre to the river and moving the road behind it was a better idea but that ship has sailed as car space takes precedence over people space.

A nice example of cycle lanes switching sides here:

https://twitter.com/BicycleDutch/status/1131594268034736128?s=09

Is there an explanation anywhere as to why it swaps sides? I mean instead of just staying on the water side.

Mr. Grieves wrote: »

A nice example of cycle lanes switching sides here:

https://twitter.com/BicycleDutch/status/1131594268034736128?s=09

But look how well everyone is behaving. Cyclists staying in the cycling lane. Motorists staying in their lane. Pedestrians waiting for green. Buses/trams being good.


Here the cyclists would have piled up infront of the motorists blocking their immediate progress while some suicidal pedestrians attempt to walk across and end up in everyones way. The motorists turning would stack up and block the lane going in the other direction and totally block the diagonal cycle track. Someone would skip the whole queue and bully their way in.


The buses would probably break the red light and nearly kill everyone.



In the meantime, a taxi driver would stop in the dead middle of the junction blocking absolutely everyone to pick up a fare.

cgcsb wrote: »

Is there an explanation anywhere as to why it swaps sides? I mean instead of just staying on the water side.

The report merely states that it uses the riverside where it does because that has the busiest bus stops (and I would imagine, the most cars turning left). But that doesn't really explain why it can't just stay river-side before that section.

My only guess would be they prefer the building-side for the cycle paths because that allows for cyclists to turn onto the route more easily from side streets?

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

But look how well everyone is behaving. Cyclists staying in the cycling lane. Motorists staying in their lane. Pedestrians waiting for green. Buses/trams being good.


Here the cyclists would have piled up infront of the motorists blocking their immediate progress while some suicidal pedestrians attempt to walk across and end up in everyones way. The motorists turning would stack up and block the lane going in the other direction and totally block the diagonal cycle track. Someone would skip the whole queue and bully their way in.


The buses would probably break the red light and nearly kill everyone.



In the meantime, a taxi driver would stop in the dead middle of the junction blocking absolutely everyone to pick up a fare.

FUD

The consultation on this closes tonight so speak now or forever hold your peace.

I raised a few concerns, specifically about how poor the design quality is and how the plan seems to completely ignore what's proposed under bus connects.

EG:

-The 2 way cycle route on Queen street seems to be no more
-2 way bus movements on Grattan bridge, essential for bus connects, seems to have been forgotten
-Instead of moving the Ellis Quay bus stop closer to the Blackhall place Junction, as per bus connects to improve connectivity, they're moving the bus stop FURTHER AWAY, so that cars can turn right there.
-Hilariously the eastern footpath on Mellows bridge seems to be converted into a bike lane, so that cars can continue to take up almost all the road space.
-Then there's that switchover from quay side to building side, which is basically designing in fatal accidents.

Lessons:
This will have to be done again due to inconsistencies with Bus Connects which means more delay.

The pedestrian still comes last

Car is still king and must be inconvenienced, even slightly.

Bit of a thread bump, so we're long overdue an update on the permanent scheme and it seems like the covid mobility measures have produced some of what was promised and in parts will provide superior design solutions. I wonder does DCC want to get a refund from that consultant or was their brief actually that much of a mess, possibly both. Eitherway the design proposed in these plans by ROD are a hatched job at increasing car priority and increasing the danger to vulnerable road users.

The plan to further penalize pedestrians for existing (yes it's possible and DCC will find a way, see image) at the Mellow's bridge appears to be firmly dropped in favour of a 2 way cycle route on Queen/Mellows/Bridgefoot as part of covid mobility.

The cross over from building side to Liffey side at the four courts remains for some reason. a more sensible cross over by Toucan crossing at the Sherwin bridge seems to have been overlooked.

Speaking of Sherwin Bridge, assassination of pedestrians seems to remain the order of the day at present so no change from the ROD hatchet job.

James Joyce bridge still has that cycle lane that isn't useful to humans.

The Church St junction under covid mobility is again far superior to the ROD 'design'. Instead of turning lanes for cars we have a wide cycle lane and sufficient room for pedestrians to exhale slightly.


https://consultation.dublincity.ie/++preview++/traffic-and-transport/liffey-cycle-route/supporting_documents/Liffey%20Cycle%20Route%20Drawings.pdf

monument wrote: »

I cannot say too much without the backing to say such, but my understanding is that the consultants are not at fault.

I suspected as much. I seen two ROD designs one with the cross over at the fourcourts and one with the cross over further down. The fourcourts option was only released to public.

I expect the brief was confused and didn't seem to take any notice of the latest bus connects plans. Can't see how DCC would accept the mellows bridge design without sending it straight back. DMURS and the NCM were flat out disregarded.

The Dublin City Traffic Management plan changes everything. If its ever implemented we'll have a car ban on Bachelors and Aston which creates a lot more space so a totally different design is called for.

The car ban on the quays is supposed to come in 2025 according to their timetable so that will basically supercede the liffey cycle route project. There'd be no point building it now and then having space for a 2 way cycle scheme next year