Braemor Road trees being chopped :(

delta_bravo

As a cyclist I'm glad they sorting out this road. The surface of the road and the bike lanes were terrible for cycling. In many cases the bike lanes had cars parked on them forcing you to go on the road which cars were often travelling on at high speed as it was a long straight with no ramps. What I would like to see is the removal of the bike lane and have cycle lane markings on a newly tarmaced road.

Tragedy

delta_bravo wrote: »

As a cyclist I'm glad they sorting out this road. The surface of the road and the bike lanes were terrible for cycling. In many cases the bike lanes had cars parked on them forcing you to go on the road which cars were often travelling on at high speed as it was a long straight with no ramps. What I would like to see is the removal of the bike lane and have cycle lane markings on a newly tarmaced road.

Which is the opposite of what they're doing - and even worse, they're making the road far narrower so that if you do choose to cycle on the road, it's inordinately far more dangerous.

Cienciano

Was driving down this road last week and couldn't believe what they did. Thought they were widening the road or something. When I see the reasons for it, it really beggars belief! How can a county council be so idiotic?

delta_bravo

Tragedy wrote: »

Which is the opposite of what they're doing - and even worse, they're making the road far narrower so that if you do choose to cycle on the road, it's inordinately far more dangerous.

Not really. A wide road allows cars to build up speed which is exactly what is happening now. A narrower road with traffic calming measure which has an onroad cycle lane makes it a far safer environment for cyclists.

Tragedy

delta_bravo wrote: »

Not really. A wide road allows cars to build up speed which is exactly what is happening now. A narrower road with traffic calming measure which has an onroad cycle lane makes it a far safer environment for cyclists.

How does road width influence speed? I've done a lot of research on road safety and I can assure you, there is no consensus on the psychological affects of road width vis-a-vis speeding.

Also, I cycled Braemor Road twice daily for over 2 years and never noticed speeding. I then drove it twice daily 18 months ago for a long period driving to Milltown from Knocklyon and again, never noticed rampant speeding.

I cycle enough around Dublin to absolutely loathe roads that are too narrow for both cycle lane and passing car traffic, yet have both. They are incredibly dangerous, and to new and inexperienced cyclists incredibly off putting and frightening.

Also, when did traffic calming come into it?

monument

Tragedy wrote: »

Off road cycle lanes are a failure, instead of using the width of the road to facilitate a cycle track they're narrowing the road and building a no doubt exorbitant off road cycle track that
1)No-one will use
2)Will never be maintained

Progress!

It's unlikely that the cycle tracks will never be used.

The planned off-road mostly segregated cycle tracks are -- at least on paper -- nothing like the off-road cycle tracks built in Dublin in the past.

While I don't think the design is absolute perfection, it is far, far better than most cycle track design around Dublin.

Tragedy wrote: »

How does road width influence speed? I've done a lot of research on road safety and I can assure you, there is no consensus on the psychological affects of road width vis-a-vis speeding.

That's interesting. It's portrayed as consensus.

I agree that a lot of road narrowing done here (without cycle lanes / tracks) has made things worse for cyclists.

Tragedy wrote: »

Also, when did traffic calming come into it?

The scheme is full of it. Full of traffic calming that is.

Pedestrian tables at side roads, raised cycle track between footpaths and the main carriageway, lane narrowing (even if there's a lack of consensus), corrner tighting, turning lane removal etc

Tragedy

monument wrote: »

It's unlikely that the cycle tracks will never be used.

The planned off-road mostly segregated cycle tracks are -- at least on paper -- nothing like the off-road cycle tracks built in Dublin in the past.

While I don't think the design is absolute perfection, it is far, far better than most cycle track design around Dublin.

I honestly have yet to see a segregated cycle track being used by more cyclists than the road beside which it runs, in my experience cycling around South Dublin (generally Knocklyon to CC, Knocklyon to Dun Laoghaire, and Dun Laoghaire to CC).

That's interesting. It's portrayed as consensus.

So are a lot of things The literature is fairly ambiguous and the main problem with the studies are that they either ignore heterogeneity, or compare the same road before/after while ignoring that the road was materially altered in other ways. I'd recommend you read up on it, if you're interested and have half an hour to spend!

The scheme is full of it. Full of traffic calming that is.

Pedestrian tables at side roads, raised cycle track between footpaths and the main carriageway, lane narrowing (even if there's a lack of consensus), corrner tighting, turning lane removal etc

Pedestrian tables? Nothing like that mentioned in the scheme, only 'tacticle paving' which I believe means the sandstone coloured pimpled material they have at crossings, it's not a table and it certainly isn't traffic calming.
A slightly raised cycle track isn't traffic calming (and as an aside, the current cycle track is raised).
I don't know what corner tighting is and regardless, none of the corners are being re-engineered.
The turning lanes being removed at Woodside Drive, Braemor Drive, Landscape Avenue, Redwood Court, Milltown Drive and Landscape Court aren't traffic calming, they're the result of the road being narrowed and physically not having the space to allow turning lanes.

The only traffic calming measure is the reduction of the road width, and I could write a far more convincing report on why that appears to be ineffectual than DLR did when arguing for it's use.

All that said, I hope that the offline cycle lane is built to a high standard, that it is maintained properly, that the surface isn't made of chocolate and that it isn't being continuously interrupted by the entrances to people's houses.
But IME with DLRCC and SDCC, none of that is likely to be true^

annfield1978

The scheme although not finished yet is looking very good, and is a great facility to encourage children to cycle

ollaetta

annfield1978 wrote: »

The scheme although not finished yet is looking very good, and is a great facility to encourage children to cycle

Have to agree. Like many I was very sceptical about this scheme but must now concede that it's turning out well.

ellee

Hmm, yes, but I personally am getting anxious about the new tress. Where are they?

Didn't they say they'd plant more? I see no sign of tree planting yet.

Larbre34

ellee wrote: »

Hmm, yes, but I personally am getting anxious about the new tress. Where are they?

Didn't they say they'd plant more? I see no sign of tree planting yet.

Its not a good time for it, if you dont get trees planted by the end of October you need to wait until Spring or you risk dead loss. Theres still a fair bit of work going on at the junctions anyway from what Ive seen, no point doing half the landscaping before the construction is done

SlushPuppie

Well they have begun planting trees on the upper end of the road, near Super Value. I asked a worker about them. Can't remember what species he said they were, but they will not grow very large, at least not large enough to lift the paths again and hide the cables overhead. They will, he said have quite a bit of foliage on them. I was hoping for cherry trees or something with a bountiful spring bloom, that would develop a bit of character. Right now the ones they're planting are all identical in height and width, with straight tall trunks and upward pointing branches, a line of clones. I hate that manicured 'lollipop' look, like what an eight year old draws.

I was walking down Orwell Park road recently and the trees there are gigantic, old and characterful. It makes such a difference aesthetically. Can't imagine the residents there would allow such butchery.

In regards to the cycle lane, it certainly is neater, smoother and wider, but alas as a driver I find myself constantly stuck behind fat bottomed lycra wearers who simply refuse to use it. What is their excuse? I know the road's not finished yet, but if they continue to do this it will frustrate drivers to no end, especially when they cycle two abreast. Since the single white line is in place the whole length of the road it is now more difficult to overtake them, and buses for that matter.

All in all I don't feel it was money well spent. Most of those trees could have been kept, since only a few were uprooting the paths. As for the cycle lane, it was never maintained....more than likely the same thing will happen to this one.

ellee

SlushPuppie, there was nearly no practical notice, there was a letter in the door one day, and the trees were gone when I came back from work the following day. My memory is we got the letter on Friday and the trees were gone on Monday but I might be wrong. It was very much a fait accompli.

I'm sure there was probably lengthier more obscure notice somewhere but I for one didn't see it. I had noticed the markings on the trees but I didn't realise they were planning to cut them down.

That said I'm only living there since 2007 and this is the second time they've undertaken major works trying to fix the cycle path so I think the trees must have been causing considerable problems really. Someone else upthread said they were coming to the end of their natural life also.

And finally, they weren't the most handsome trees in the world. Not like the ones on Orwell Road. Still they were better than no trees. I do hope the new ones are a decent replacement. I am glad to hear they've started planting at least.

SlushPuppie

@Ellee

I remember getting a notice about a plan to narrow the road and install "traffic calming measures" -which I thought meant ramps, thank God that's not happening- before Christmas of last year. Not a word about cutting the trees down though. It wasn't until a neighbour of mine started tying yellow ribbons around them did most people become aware of what was happening, by that stage it was too late. Oh well, at least there will be trees blooming next year to break up the concrete monotony.

RacoonQueen

SlushPuppie wrote: »

In regards to the cycle lane, it certainly is neater, smoother and wider, but alas as a driver I find myself constantly stuck behind fat bottomed lycra wearers who simply refuse to use it. What is their excuse? I know the road's not finished yet, but if they continue to do this it will frustrate drivers to no end, especially when they cycle two abreast. Since the single white line is in place the whole length of the road it is now more difficult to overtake them, and buses for that matter.

They're using the road because there are often cars and vans parked in them and people walking in them. They can't go round obstacles as they have to bump their bike down off the 'kerb' and they have grass on the other side.
It hasn't been the best planning cycle lane wise. I'd be unlikely to use them myself.

That and the use of cycle lanes is not mandatory.

ardmacha

When reconstructing roads like this they should put the electric cables underground when everything is dug up, or at least as far as possible. DLRCoCo have a poor record in this regard compared to some other local authorities.

That and the use of cycle lanes is not mandatory.

They absolutely should be made mandatory, especially where the road has been narrowed.

SlushPuppie

I could see that point with the old cycle lane, but now the kerb has been deliberately lowered to accomodate ease of access on and off the path should one need to move off. Very rarely do I see cars parked in the cycle lanes on Braemor Road. Pedestrians generally don't walk in them either.

It may not be mandatory to use the lane -although I think it should be, when it's been provided- however neither is it unreasonable for me to be pissed off when cyclists simply refuse to pull into the empty lane to allow me to overtake, instead of making me watch them pedal all the way up the hill. Lower kerb = no excuse.

LXFlyer

RacoonQueen wrote: »

They're using the road because there are often cars and vans parked in them and people walking in them. They can't go round obstacles as they have to bump their bike down off the 'kerb' and they have grass on the other side.
It hasn't been the best planning cycle lane wise. I'd be unlikely to use them myself.

That and the use of cycle lanes is not mandatory.

Actually - I would say that the cycle lanes on Braemor Road are some of the better designed ones - they're flat, they're wide, and they merge with the road in advance of junctions, meaning cyclists don't have to stop at each junction.

monument

RacoonQueen wrote: »

They're using the road because there are often cars and vans parked in them and people walking in them. They can't go round obstacles as they have to bump their bike down off the 'kerb' and they have grass on the other side.
It hasn't been the best planning cycle lane wise. I'd be unlikely to use them myself.

That and the use of cycle lanes is not mandatory.

Are you talking cycle lanes/paths in general or these new cycle paths?

RacoonQueen

ardmacha wrote: »

When reconstructing roads like this they should put the electric cables underground when everything is dug up, or at least as far as possible. DLRCoCo have a poor record in this regard compared to some other local authorities.

They absolutely should be made mandatory, especially where the road has been narrowed.

What about the cars that park on them? What does the cyclist do then?

SlushPuppie wrote: »

I could see that point with the old cycle lane, but now the kerb has been deliberately lowered to accomodate ease of access on and off the path should one need to move off. Very rarely do I see cars parked in the cycle lanes on Braemor Road. Pedestrians generally don't walk in them either.

It may not be mandatory to use the lane -although I think it should be, when it's been provided- however neither is it unreasonable for me to be pissed off when cyclists simply refuse to pull into the empty lane to allow me to overtake, instead of making me watch them pedal all the way up the hill. Lower kerb = no excuse.

Why is there a kerb at all? A road bike is not designed for going up and down from kerbs. However 'low' it is. The way it is now cyclists are still likely to find a random barrier or cone blocking their way with works ongoing (and cars and people) and with the 'kerb' a lot of the way along it may be difficulty for them to get around it without them having to stop and get on the road. 'Very rarely' seeing people are cars in them is too often. Would you like if someone just left their bike in the middle of the road and walked off? or just walked along on the road rather than use the path? I used to cycle that way too and from work and am driving it at the moment. See cars/vans/people in the lane every day. As a cyclist maybe I'm more inclined to notice...

lxflyer wrote: »

Actually - I would say that the cycle lanes on Braemor Road are some of the better designed ones - they're flat, they're wide, and they merge with the road in advance of junctions, meaning cyclists don't have to stop at each junction.

Agreed, however, my issue is that they are still essentially taking cyclists off the road, I don't like that.

monument wrote: »

Are you talking cycle lanes/paths in general or these new cycle paths?

The new cycle paths.

SlushPuppie

See cars/vans/people in the lane every day

Again I still do not see your point. I just drove up the road this morning. In the areas past Spar, where the works are complete, the cycle lanes were both clear, I did not see one car parked in them. Only in areas where the works are currently obstructing people's driveways are they being forced to park in the lanes, but that's fair enough. Occassionally I see a car parked on the verge beside the cycle lane, but not in it. It is illegal to park on a cycle path anyway, unless there is a time restriction sign in place, so generally people don't do it. I would agree that on Braemor Road this should be enforced with proper signage.

When all the works are complete I really don't think there will be any excuse not to use them.

Why is there a kerb at all? A road bike is not designed for going up and down from kerbs.

The kerb -if you could even call 1 to 2 inches of concrete a 'kerb'- is there to create a clear distinction/barrier between motorists and cyclists. For about 50% of the way, the kerb doesn't even exist, just a white line. So I don't see this as any great obstacle on a cyclist's part. When the road has been narrowed and the cycle lane is accessible, it should be mandatory as far as I'm concerned, otherwise you are simply choosing to obstruct traffic.

RacoonQueen

SlushPuppie wrote: »

Again I still do not see your point. I just drove up the road this morning. In the areas past Spar, where the works are complete, the cycle lanes were both clear, I did not see one car parked in them. Only in areas where the works are currently obstructing people's driveways are they being forced to park in the lanes, but that's fair enough. Occassionally I see a car parked on the verge beside the cycle lane, but not in it. It is illegal to park on a cycle path anyway, unless there is a time restriction sign in place, so generally people don't do it. I would agree that on Braemor Road this should be enforced with proper signage.

When all the works are complete I really don't think there will be any excuse not to use them.

The kerb -if you could even call 1 to 2 inches of concrete a 'kerb'- is there to create a clear distinction/barrier between motorists and cyclists. For about 50% of the way, the kerb doesn't even exist, just a white line. So I don't see this as any great obstacle on a cyclist's part. When the road has been narrowed and the cycle lane is accessible, it should be mandatory as far as I'm concerned, otherwise you are simply choosing to obstruct traffic.

And again I see obstructions every day, just because there wasn't one when you passed doesn't mean they're not there at other times.
1 - 2 inches is a big jump, too much of a jump for a good road bike to be navigating and why should it have to...the kerb is unesccessary.
I have no problem overtaking bikes safely if they're on the road along here, don't really see the issue if they're on the road.
To say they're 'simply choosing to obstruct traffic' is a terrible response. They're vehicles and are entitiled to use the road if it suits them better, for whatever their reason may be. The main problem with cycle lanes, cyclists should be considred to be in the same lane as the traffic they are travelling in the same direction as, lanes segregated in this way make motorists less aware and far less considerate of cyclists. Not quite as bad as the ones completely on footpaths but I imagine they'll be treated the same way by motorists who don't even notice that the cyclist is there which makes them dangerous to use.
No need for the kerb, without the kerb (and obstructions) the lanes would be very usable but sure with the way many Irish drive you can just stick your hazard lights on and pull onto it anytime you like.

SlushPuppie

They do it even when there are no obstructions in the lane. They also typically cycle a meter out from the kerb, sometimes two abreast, and since the road is now much narrower and the single white line is in place, it is difficult to overtake them, at least for a good stretch of the road between Supervalue and Spar. It's always the lycra wearers i.e the one's who look like they cycle everywhere and should know better, and they they do it quite arrogantly, if you beep at them to move they get irate, but sure what do they expect? They're holding drivers up and they're refusing to use a perfectly adequate cycle lane designated for their them just because "I can cycle in the middle of the road if I want to, I don't HAVE to use it". This is the attitude that irks motorists. When I cycled I never assumed I could do that on a narrow road with lots of traffic, when there was a cycle lane for me to use. I would expect to get beeped at otherwise. If the lanes were obstructed obviously that would be different, but generally on Braemor Road they are not (well at least the new ones).

They do need signs up though to make it abundantly clear that cars must not park in them.