New Cycle lanes!

gscully

Cabaal wrote: »

Not seen them, are they part of the footpath or road?

I've seen them, but only because I was cycling

At the moment, they are just intermittent red marks about a metre out from the kerb on each side of the road. When I was passing the side entrance to Superquinn this morning, they were removing existing road markings, so I'd say it'll take a week or two before they're complete.

Cabaal

gscully wrote: »

I've seen them, but only because I was cycling

At the moment, they are just intermittent red marks about a metre out from the kerb on each side of the road. When I was passing the side entrance to Superquinn this morning, they were removing existing road markings, so I'd say it'll take a week or two before they're complete.

Interesting, hmmm I saw the council removing road markings around the new waterford crystal building this morning...I'm curious will they put a cycle lane up that way?

dayshah

Richie Cranium wrote: »

Anybody notice how they put another speed bump in the bus lane to stop people going into the lane just to avoid a speed bump,who actually decides these things??

It sounds like a logical response to what some motorists were doing.

gscully

Cabaal wrote: »

Interesting, hmmm I saw the council removing road markings around the new waterford crystal building this morning...I'm curious will they put a cycle lane up that way?

I can imagine them all the way out the Cork Rd if that's the case. In the middle of the tourist trap, cycle lanes are almost necessary to give the impression that the council care

Cabaal

dayshah wrote: »

It sounds like a logical response to what some motorists were doing.

Yeah seems pretty logicl, abit ****e for the bus driver and the people on the bus but the amount of people pulling into the bus lane to avoid the speed bump was a joke

Bloody idiots

Cabaal

gscully wrote: »

I can imagine them all the way out the Cork Rd if that's the case. In the middle of the tourist trap, cycle lanes are almost necessary to give the impression that the council care

Well true, but at the same point it might be no harm.
Alot of that road is more then wide enough for a cycle lane, in addition the cork road could do with them as its a busy route for students/workers on bikes.

I've seen in work the amount of bikes has def increased on the bike racks due to the bike to work scheme, only fair they are given decent space to get to work.

This only applies of course if the cycle lanes are properly designed....which they generally are not

gscully

Cabaal wrote: »

Yeah seems pretty logicl, abit ****e for the bus driver and the people on the bus but the amount of people pulling into the bus lane to avoid the speed bump was a joke

Bloody idiots

You should see the idiots in Lismore Park (generally boy-racers) drive up onto the footpath just to avoid the speedbumps!

Cabaal wrote: »

Well true, but at the same point it might be no harm.
Alot of that road is more then wide enough for a cycle lane, in addition the cork road could do with them as its a busy route for students/workers on bikes.

I've seen in work the amount of bikes has def increased on the bike racks due to the bike to work scheme, only fair they are given decent space to get to work.

This only applies of course if the cycle lanes are properly designed....which they generally are not

The more cycle lanes we have, the better. Most drivers today won't have encountered so many cyclists on the road and will not have the awareness that's needed as the emphasis was on buying cars back in the good ol' days of the celtic tiger. Now, with the emphasis on saving money, and with the cycle to work scheme, there are many more cyclists about and drivers need to keep a watchful eye out. A workmate of mine had a luck escape last week when a car came through a roundabout and straight into him. Thankfully he just had bruising and a damaged bike.

wmpdd3

Richie Cranium wrote: »

Anybody notice how they put another speed bump in the bus lane to stop people going into the lane just to avoid a speed bump,who actually decides these things??

There was a crash there the other day when a golf swerved into the bus lane to avoid the bump, then stayed there till just outside the church, where he swerved back into the main lane and hit the car that was behind him before.

No harm having the extra bump, though I doubt it was a planned bump.

What's worse is when cars traveling in the opposite direction swerve into you lane to avoid the bump traveling towards Dunmore.

Chris P. Bacon

dayshah wrote: »

It sounds like a logical response to what some motorists were doing.

True it is logical every car that was in front of me always went into the bus lane just to avoid a speed bump but they should of put it in there when they put the first one in.

If you notice every speed bump in Waterford people try to avoid them for whatever reason i dont know,there only speed bumps there not going to damage your car if your going slow..

Chris P. Bacon

Also the cycle lane from the topaz garage to the roundabout is an accident waiting to happen,just going past earlier and when there is actually cyclists using the lanes the drivers are swerving to the right into oncoming traffic to avoid the cyclists because the road simply isn't wide enough.

Dum_Dum

It's obvious to everyone, except the council, that the Dunmore Road is not wide enough.

This is a cheap 'solution', whereas a properly surfaced riverside walkway and cycleway is a proper long term solution. Corporation thinks a few white lines and coloured tarmac will stop a cyclist from being squashed.

If the council don't like cars and motorists, then I suggest they start issuing demolition orders for vast tracts of suburbs. Suburban living requires the motor car; the morons gave permission for construction, now they want to penalise the residents.

Also can the tree-huggers/wannabe cave-dwellers estimate how much extra fuel is burnt stopping for and slowing for the mushrooming bumps and traffic lights?

Cabaal

Dum_Dum wrote: »

It's obvious to everyone, except the council, that the Dunmore Road is not wide enough.

Thats not the case for all of the road, another problem with many motorists is they are unable to judge the width of their car. As such they tend to try go into other lanes

This is a cheap 'solution', whereas a properly surfaced riverside walkway and cycleway is a proper long term solution. Corporation thinks a few white lines and coloured tarmac will stop a cyclist from being squashed.

Before I even bother to address this point can I ask are you a cyclist?
I don't mean out on a bike once in awhile, have you commuted to work and do you atleast do a few km on a week to week basis?

If the council don't like cars and motorists, then I suggest they start issuing demolition orders for vast tracts of suburbs. Suburban living requires the motor car; the morons gave permission for construction, now they want to penalise the residents.

Does it?, with a bike the vast majority of Waterford city is within 20min, people can often be very lazy and I've heard many a motorist admit to and seen them drive 50metres to the shop from their house. Is this a requirement?

Also can the tree-huggers/wannabe cave-dwellers estimate how much extra fuel is burnt stopping for and slowing for the mushrooming bumps and traffic lights?

How much fuel is wasted going over 60mph on the motorway?
Fuel efficiency can drop alot once people reach over 60mph yet its rare to see any people doing less then 70mph on the motorway on a day to day basis. I'm sure these people are concerned about fuel efficiency?

Given a lot of people drive over the speed limit on the Dunmore road I'd imagine this is one of the big reasons why they have to break so hard and accelerate so hard to get back upto the speed they were at. If people accelerated slower then they wouldn't waste fuel

dayshah

Dum_Dum wrote: »

If the council don't like cars and motorists, then I suggest they start issuing demolition orders for vast tracts of suburbs. Suburban living requires the motor car; the morons gave permission for construction, now they want to penalise the residents.

Waterford is about the same physical size of the inner cities of Paris or London. You can cycle from just about anywhere in our sprawling metropolis to the city centre in 30min, cycling at a relaxed pace.

gscully

Dum_Dum wrote: »

This is a cheap 'solution', whereas a properly surfaced riverside walkway and cycleway is a proper long term solution.

That would be a good distance away from the road. What if the cyclist wanted to go shopping, rent a DVD, pick up a prescription?

A cycle path by the river is no solution at all. That's not to mention how walkers and cyclists would be bitten alive by the horseflies down there!

JPA

gscully wrote: »

That would be a good distance away from the road. What if the cyclist wanted to go shopping, rent a DVD, pick up a prescription?

A cycle path by the river is no solution at all. That's not to mention how walkers and cyclists would be bitten alive by the horseflies down there!

It's also assuming people are cycling for pleasure. Some are not!

dayshah

gscully wrote: »

That would be a good distance away from the road. What if the cyclist wanted to go shopping, rent a DVD, pick up a prescription?

A cycle path by the river is no solution at all. That's not to mention how walkers and cyclists would be bitten alive by the horseflies down there!

A path by the river would be nice for tourism, but there is no right of way down there, and its prone to flooding.

However, who needs a path by the river if you have one of these bad boys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79K_pP36fjU

Cabaal

I see they now have all the lines for the cycle lanes from the cork road roundabout to the ballybeg turn off at waterford crystal, about time they've done this

Road is abit too narrow to go any further unless they move the footpath or something

coolperson05

while there at it thrown in a bus lane. All the green area in Ballybeg. Buses could speed past on a Friday evening! :P