Limerick improvement projects

dave 27

Cookiemunster wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LimerickCouncil/status/1366383277981003781?s=19

Makes sense to redesignate this as essential. They should be able to get 8 weeks work done before the shops reopen in May. And with them not having to worry about keeping access to those shops open, it should speed them up a bit.

is there a link to what the finished plans look like? theres so many floating around its hard to tell which is the one

Cookiemunster

dave 27 wrote: »

is there a link to what the finished plans look like? theres so many floating around its hard to tell which is the one

https://mypoint.limerick.ie/en/consultation/oconnell-street-revitalisation-project-phase-i/chapter/application-drawings

johnnyryan89

dave 27 wrote: »

is there a link to what the finished plans look like? theres so many floating around its hard to tell which is the one

Easiest way to sort that is you take the picture of whichever one is the most boring and unimaginable photo you've seen, and that's probably it.

breezy1985

Cookiemunster wrote: »

https://mypoint.limerick.ie/en/consultation/oconnell-street-revitalisation-project-phase-i/chapter/application-drawings

The cycle lanes have disappeared I see

cgcsb

So council are STILL providing turning lanes to provide more capacity for cars and are STILL providing no cycling infrastructure. Honestly why bother.

breezy1985

cgcsb wrote: »

So council are STILL providing turning lanes to provide more capacity for cars and are STILL providing no cycling infrastructure. Honestly why bother.

Cycle lanes in the space where they are putting the bollards would have suited everyone. Gets bikes of the paths and out of the way of cars.

The big test will be seeing if anyone bothers to pull cars parked in the bus lane

mastershake

breezy1985 wrote: »

Cycle lanes in the space where they are putting the bollards would have suited everyone. Gets bikes of the paths and out of the way of cars.

The big test will be seeing if anyone bothers to pull cars parked in the bus lane

Those drawings look to be out of date.Date is 2019. I would imagine the latest plans will have allowances for cycling lanes in both directions.

Cookiemunster

mastershake wrote: »

Those drawings look to be out of date.Date is 2019. I would imagine the latest plans will have allowances for cycling lanes in both directions.

They're not out of date. The planning process was done in 2019. The contract was put out to tender in January 2020 and was awarded in December 2020. Those are the drawings that were used for the planning and tender processes.

From the Part 8 Planning Report.

Due to the existing one-way system within the city centre, and the limited cycle network, it was not proposed to include cycle lanes on Phase 1 of the O'Connell Street Revitalisation as it would not provide additional cyclist connections over the relatively short length of the scheme. However, the inclusion of the bus lane on the eastern side provides a less heavily-trafficked lane for use by cyclists, improving ease of movement southbound

Vanquished

mastershake wrote: »

Those drawings look to be out of date.Date is 2019. I would imagine the latest plans will have allowances for cycling lanes in both directions.

The finalised plans (with the cycle lane) are now on the Council website:

https://www.limerick.ie/council/services/planning-and-property/oconnell-street/revitalisation

breezy1985

Vanquished wrote: »

The finalised plans (with the cycle lane) are now on the Council website:

https://www.limerick.ie/council/services/planning-and-property/oconnell-street/revitalisation

Nice one. A 2 direction cycle lane will have the added benefit of taking bikes off Henry st. and Catherine St.

Cookiemunster

The feckers would update the site after I'd spent ages trawling it trying to find the latest plans. That page was only showing alternative routes up to this afternoon.

dave 27

There was a number of plans floating around its hard to keep up, personally I was hoping for something along the lines of the below. The current ones don't particularly blow me away, nothing special about them really

https://antaiscelimerick.wordpress.com/2017/06/29/oconnell-street-revitalisation-lucroc-project/amp/

jpharvey

I just want trees, greenery, more trees, shrubs, flowers and more trees.

Cookiemunster

A new 150 bed Bon Secours hospital is to be built across the road from Northern Trust.
https://www.limerickpost.ie/2021/03/03/bon-secours-health-system-announces-new-private-hospital-for-limerick/

mart 23

jpharvey wrote: »

I just want trees, greenery, more trees, shrubs, flowers and more trees.

There is no need for a forest. A few will do.

banie01

Cookiemunster wrote: »

A new 150 bed Bon Secours hospital is to be built across the road from Northern Trust.
https://www.limerickpost.ie/2021/03/03/bon-secours-health-system-announces-new-private-hospital-for-limerick/

One would have to wonder if this will be the eventual end of Barrington's as a hospital?
It's had a lot of money put into it by the Bons(and previous owners)
The main building itself is I'm going to assume a protected structure?
It's adaptability and scope for improvement has surely been exhausted now?
And as an actual hospital? As someone who's spent quite a bit of time in and out of there over the last couple of years, it's a Warren that is easy to get lost in when swapping between floors and following some of the meandering corridors IMO.

That said, an only recently completed extension probably means it will soldier on.

It could be developed into some stunning residential property tho IMO.
Modern standards, high ceilings and luxury encased in the original building on the Riverside!

LeoD

breezy1985 wrote: »

Nice one. A 2 direction cycle lane will have the added benefit of taking bikes off Henry st. and Catherine St.

With all due respect, the cycle lanes are a waste of space and only add to barren look of the street. At 1.5m wide with steel poles on one side and concrete planters on the other they are not that safe and will only allow single file cycling. I also think there is a high risk of collisions between pedestrians and cyclists as there is no clear separation between the two groups. They also don't connect to or from anything so they don't provide a useful cycling link. Of course we shouldn't be driving thousands of cars up the street either but sticking in cycle lanes means there's 3m taken off the street that could have been used for seating/dining/social space. The new and improved pedestrian space will only be a small bit bigger than what's there today.

Cookiemunster

LeoD wrote: »

With all due respect, the cycle lanes are a waste of space and only add to barren look of the street. At 1.5m wide with steel poles on one side and concrete planters on the other they are not that safe and will only allow single file cycling. I also think there is a high risk of collisions between pedestrians and cyclists as there is no clear separation between the two groups. They also don't connect to or from anything so they don't provide a useful cycling link. Of course we shouldn't be driving thousands of cars up the street either but sticking in cycle lanes means there's 3m taken off the street that could have been used for seating/dining/social space. The new and improved pedestrian space will only be a small bit bigger than what's there today.

Which is the reason they weren't originally included with the original plan. As I posted earlier.

Due to the existing one-way system within the city centre, and the limited cycle network, it was not proposed to include cycle lanes on Phase 1 of the O'Connell Street Revitalisation as it would not provide additional cyclist connections over the relatively short length of the scheme.

LeoD

I'm aware of the council's original pathetic reason for not considering cycling as a mode of transport on O'Connell St because that's what they do all day every day. The core problem with OCS are the two lanes up the middle - one of which will be stuffed with motor traffic - heading in the same direction. Adding bits onto the side doesn't address that or fix anything but when I see the name on the drawings I'm not surprised (despite the Dutch name).

breezy1985

LeoD wrote: »

With all due respect, the cycle lanes are a waste of space and only add to barren look of the street. At 1.5m wide with steel poles on one side and concrete planters on the other they are not that safe and will only allow single file cycling. I also think there is a high risk of collisions between pedestrians and cyclists as there is no clear separation between the two groups. They also don't connect to or from anything so they don't provide a useful cycling link. Of course we shouldn't be driving thousands of cars up the street either but sticking in cycle lanes means there's 3m taken off the street that could have been used for seating/dining/social space. The new and improved pedestrian space will only be a small bit bigger than what's there today.

If it's space and safety you require just get rid of the cars.

That safety line is pure bull and has been trotted out before. Pedestrians just need to look before crossing same as a normal road but no blame the bikes

As for connectivity sure e we have to start somewhere. If you use that argument in a city with no cycle lanes you are stuck forever

With all due respect

LeoD

breezy1985 wrote: »

Pedestrians just need to look before crossing same as a normal road

Not going to spend much time on this but there are a lot of differences between a "normal" road and this. In 'normal' street layouts, it's easy to distinguish the road from the footpath by the difference in height and materials used. Same can also be said with trying to distinguish a cycle track from the footway. This is particularly important for visually impaired people - ever think of them? From what I can see in the drawings, the only distinction between the 'footway' and the cycle lane is a slightly different shade of grey brick used - the footway, cycle lane and carriageway are all flush. For those who can see them, the bollards will appear to be the dividing boundary between the footway and the carriageway so I have no doubt people will saunter across the footway - as they should be able to in a pedestrian friendly street - and won't notice that they've entered a cycle lane. It is completely unreasonable to expect people to identify cycle lanes by the brick pattern or to expect to be constantly vigilant for a cyclists.

Insect Overlord

LeoD wrote: »

It is completely unreasonable to expect people to identify cycle lanes by the brick pattern or to expect to be constantly vigilant for a cyclists.

It's unreasonable to expect people to be responsible for their own actions now. Fantastic. We'll have to introduce mandatory bubble wrap walking suits for everybody at this rate. :rolleyes:

breezy1985

LeoD wrote: »

Not going to spend much time on this but there are a lot of differences between a "normal" road and this. In 'normal' street layouts, it's easy to distinguish the road from the footpath by the difference in height and materials used. Same can also be said with trying to distinguish a cycle track from the footway. This is particularly important for visually impaired people - ever think of them? From what I can see in the drawings, the only distinction between the 'footway' and the cycle lane is a slightly different shade of grey brick used - the footway, cycle lane and carriageway are all flush. For those who can see them, the bollards will appear to be the dividing boundary between the footway and the carriageway so I have no doubt people will saunter across the footway - as they should be able to in a pedestrian friendly street - and won't notice that they've entered a cycle lane. It is completely unreasonable to expect people to identify cycle lanes by the brick pattern or to expect to be constantly vigilant for a cyclists.

So your problem is with the design. If the cycle lane was stepped down and used a different colour it would be ok by you. I agree on that as I prefer the "on road" as opposed to "on path" lanes. Maybe the council could put rumble strips for the visually impaired at the edge of the cycle lane like at crossings

Big difference between the council choose the wrong design and "the cycle lane is a waste of space"

LeoD

Insect Overlord wrote: »

It's unreasonable to expect people to be responsible for their own actions now. Fantastic. We'll have to introduce mandatory bubble wrap walking suits for everybody at this rate. :rolleyes:

When you're finished making childish comments and rolling your eyes look up sustainable safety and in particular the principles of forgiveness and legibility.

LeoD

breezy1985 wrote: »

So your problem is with the design. If the cycle lane was stepped down and used a different colour it would be ok by you. I agree on that as I prefer the "on road" as opposed to "on path" lanes. Maybe the council could put rumble strips for the visually impaired at the edge of the cycle lane like at crossings

Big difference between the council choose the wrong design and "the cycle lane is a waste of space"

Running 2 lanes in the same direction up the middle of the street means the overall design is doomed before you even begin to talk about anything else. Keeping those lanes and trying to add a bit of a cycle lane on either side doesn't make it any better.

LeoD

And while the cycle lanes may be marked as being 1.5m on the drawings, you need a minimum clearance of 50-65cm between bollards and other types of barriers (planters in this scenario) and the useable part of the cycle lane so in effect, the useable width of these cycle lanes is about 35-50cm.

breezy1985

LeoD wrote: »

And while the cycle lanes may be marked as being 1.5m on the drawings, you need a minimum clearance of 50-65cm between bollards and other types of barriers (planters in this scenario) and the useable part of the cycle lane so in effect, the useable width of these cycle lanes is about 35-50cm.

35cm is pure lies you won't even fit a bike in that. You are just using the usual BS scaremongering to try claim the lane should be scrapped

breezy1985

LeoD wrote: »

Running 2 lanes in the same direction up the middle of the street means the overall design is doomed before you even begin to talk about anything else. Keeping those lanes and trying to add a bit of a cycle lane on either side doesn't make it any better.

The current O'Connell St. is mostly 4 lanes wide so why do you keep talking about these 2 lanes

Clareman

Folks this is a regional forum not a cycling or an infrastructure forum, please bring technical discussions around lanes/barriers to a more suitable forum, this isn't the place for them.

Cookiemunster

Cookiemunster wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LimerickCouncil/status/1366383277981003781?s=19

Makes sense to redesignate this as essential. They should be able to get 8 weeks work done before the shops reopen in May. And with them not having to worry about keeping access to those shops open, it should speed them up a bit.

Well, nearly three weeks later not a sign of any works beginning. Disappointing to say the least.