Phoenix Park Cycle lanes: Another perspective

NeedsTraining

I have always been an advocate of cycle lanes are for bikes, not walkers, not runners, not skaters etc etc.
I definitely felt strong about this is the Phoenix Park.

However, I have changed my opinion on this as and from yesterday.

After parking on Chesterfield Avenue, I got the baby out of the car, put her in the buggy, crossed the road (on the way to the zoo) with the aim of going onto the walking path. But then, how was I to get onto the walking path? Not possible to get the buggy over the barrier, no breaks in the barrier. Even if we did get over or under the barrier, we would have had to push the buggy through the long wet grass and then we would have been on the path. Needless to say, the decision was made to stay on the cycle lane (trust me, I was conscious of cyclists, with having been knocked off in the park myself previously).

Just my opinion, but would be interested in what others think about this?
Surely there is a better way to gain access to the walking paths?

I won't be using the cycle lanes again on the park, but more importantly I won't be giving out about all the walkers, runners, skaters, family outings using the cycle lane.

Caroline_ie

This has been discussed many times already.

What do I think of it?

- Bikes are better than babies.

DualFrontDiscs

I've given this some thought recently. As I understand it, the cycle lanes in the park don't have the same status as 'regular' bike lanes. I'm happy to be corrected on this.

Anyway, I consider them them to be similar to a beach side 'boulevard', the like you might see in old Baywatch reruns with cyclists, walkers, roller skaters, buggies, walkers, etc. A mixed use (non-car) path.

I don't think they're appropriate for 'hammering' on. The fact that the road surface in the park in poor doesn't really change this.

I could go on........

DFD*

*Don'tFindDefaults.

Lumen

Yes, it is a stupid design. We should find the idiot responsible and force him to babysit for us when we go cycling.