has cork city been ruined by bike lanes?

jabberwock

Knasher wrote: »

https://sites.google.com/site/cccdrawings/drawings-1

You can see all the plans for it there. Looks like it is going to be single lane with a two way cycle lane on the inside and parallel parking for most of it, apart from the church where the current parking will remain.

Thanks, I had seen that page but wrote off the lower pictures since it was titled UCC. >.<

ofcork

Looks like the parking outside the church will have cars reverse in to the spaces.

jabberwock

ofcork wrote: »

Looks like the parking outside the church will have cars reverse in to the spaces.

Very Rough estimate - 50 parking spots removed. (using google maps to get total current)

FrStone

Flesh Gorden wrote: »

Pretty much a car park from 8-9am and from 2pm-6pm with mile long ques from both sides coming from Silversprings and going towards it from the Mayfield side,
and another one from the junction by Dunnes Ballyvolane all the way back towards the Fire Station.

A proper and well planned North Ring Road linking the M8, Blarney and Ballincollig before rejoining with the N27 would be one of the best things that could happen to the city.

The current one is one of the most clogged roads in the city which along with the new Dunkettle should be prioritized for available funding.

Yep, you are on the ball here. However it's been obvious that there is a need for this with years. However the Northside of the city is always neglected roads wise.

TINA1984

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

The N22 has not been completed:
http://www.nra.ie/mapping/n22-cork-northern-ring-ro/index.xml

You might find this interesting:
http://www.corkindependent.com/20140313/news/the-missing-link-frozen-north-ring-would-bring-economic-boost-S81108.html

The new NRR is almost certainly not going to be built for many years to come, and even when it is constructed it's not going to form a complete circle around the city. Ignoring/putting on the backburner infrastructure for other transportation modes, which seems to be your wish here, just isn't logical.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Regarding the N40:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N40_road_(Ireland)#cite_note-4
The N40 road (commonly known as the Cork South Ring Road) is a national primary road in Cork City, Ireland, which forms an orbital route around the south side of the city,

As you might know, The vast majority of the Cork Metropolitan area's population and economic activity lies along the N40/N25 corridor. The Southside of the urban area itself, which compromises 85% of the city's population, has been split and bypassed by the N27 and N40 completely for 15 years now.

As such its reasonable to conclude that the city is effectively if not wholly bypassed, the N40 is the primary arterial route for the Greater Cork area.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I can't lay claim to the idea of developing an orbital route of the city,
it was recommended by the same engineers in the same report who suggested the need for cycling lanes in Cork.

From a quick scan of that report, there is no suggestion that Road infrastructure should be built before cycling infrastructure which appears to be your contention.

lolosaur

jabberwock wrote: »

Thanks, I had seen that page but wrote off the lower pictures since it was titled UCC. >.<

Who ever done out those maps needs there head smashed in with a bike lock.

Ive never been so offended by a map in all my life

Stepping Stone

TINA1984 wrote: »

From a quick scan of that report, there is no suggestion that Road infrastructure should be built before cycling infrastructure which appears to be your contention.

Surely it is logical if they want to improve cycling safety/ infrastructure, etc that they need to reduce the volume of vehicular traffic in the city centre?

While it is brilliant that they are thinking about it, in practice it makes no sense. They are overloading an already busy area. As it stands, public transport is being affected. This is very definitely not best practice. Public transport is something that should be given priority, as it is the form of transport that should be most used/ encouraged. They just appear to have a very blinkered vision of what they are doing without looking at the over all impact on the rest of the city.

If they actually started to move traffic away from the city centre, then there would be more room for other users, but as it stands, there has been nothing done to reduce vehicular traffic. Seriously, sometimes I wonder if they ever sit back and look at the bigger picture. As a result of the flyovers being built in the western section of the N40, traffic flows freely to the tunnel, where it promptly gets backed up and is stuck for ages. More people will use town as a result because it is quicker. This is inevitable. I know that there are plans to change the Dunkettle Interchange but until that happens, it is a serious issue.

As it stands, there is too much traffic to start taking lanes out and dedicating them to cyclists who have already identified serious issues with them. I think that having dedicated cycle lanes is a brilliant idea, but there is no joined up thinking. They simply do not work well in their current configuration. Reduce traffic and then have a really good plan and go with it. For all the rubbish that is spouted about comparing Cork to other cities in terms of cycling infrastructure, I have never been anywhere else where the cycle lanes just end suddenly at a wall (South Douglas Road), are not marked at all until you get to the end and the end is signed or simply appear to swap sides of the road at random. They are a bloody danger as they are to cyclists. When I drive, I like to know where a cyclist is. With a lot of the cycling infrastructure, it is impossible to know what is about to happen (I include cyclists who are not familiar with the layout in this).

TLDR: Cycle lanes are good, but just not the way that they have been done in Cork City. :mad:

AugustusMinimus

TINA1984 wrote: »

The new NRR is almost certainly not going to be built for many years to come, and even when it is constructed it's not going to form a complete circle around the city. Ignoring/putting on the backburner infrastructure for other transportation modes, which seems to be your wish here, just isn't logical.

Define many. It is very likely that the NRR will be bundled with the M20 South due to traffic issues that will be cause by abruptly ending a motorway in Blackpool. Varadkar is as Dublin centric a minister as you'll find. Get someone else into transport and things may change rapidly.

You are also incorrect. When completed, the NRR, the SRR and the M8 between junctions 18 and 19 will completely circle the city. All 3 roads will be redesignated as the N40.

TINA1984 wrote: »

As you might know, The vast majority of the Cork Metropolitan area's population and economic activity lies along the N40/N25 corridor. The Southside of the urban area itself, which compromises 85% of the city's population, has been split and bypassed by the N27 and N40 completely for 15 years now.

85% of the city's population on the South side ? This is clearly not true.

TINA1984 wrote: »

As such its reasonable to conclude that the city is effectively if not wholly bypassed, the N40 is the primary arterial route for the Greater Cork area.

No it isn't. The NRR is badly needed. I would think at least 35 to 40% of Cork's population is on the north side of the city which has little in terms of road infrastructure. All the lack of an NRR is doing is further burdening the SRR which is starting to creak under the strain.

Dannyboy83

TINA1984 wrote: »

The new NRR is almost certainly not going to be built for many years to come, and even when it is constructed it's not going to form a complete circle around the city.

No, that's incorrect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N40_road_(Ireland)
It is intended that once the Cork North Ring Road is completed, that the N40 will comprise a complete orbital route of Cork city.

Ignoring/putting on the backburner infrastructure for other transportation modes, which seems to be your wish here, just isn't logical.

The corollary being that it is more logical to increase congestion for 92% of commuters in order to facilitate 2% of commuters?

You do understand that the cycling infrastructure is being implemented primarily with the aim of 'alleviating congestion'?

TINA1984

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Define many. It is very likely that the NRR will be bundled with the M20 South due to traffic issues that will be cause by abruptly ending a motorway in Blackpool. Varadkar is as Dublin centric a minister as you'll find. Get someone else into transport and things may change rapidly.

You are also incorrect. When completed, the NRR, the SRR and the M8 between junctions 18 and 19 will completely circle the city. All 3 roads will be redesignated as the N40.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

No, that's incorrect.

As I understand it, and I don't think anyone knows definitively what's going to happen, the M20 South/N22 NRR will only be built to connect the M20 to the M8. The western section of the scheme is cost prohibitive due to requiring a viaduct and afair was decoupled from the rest of the original NRR scheme in the mid 2000s.

Seeing as the M20 schemes are on the NRA suspended list, along with many other projects, I would speculate that the dream of a fully constructed orbital N40 to be decades away from completion.

(fwiw I would consider the M20 North scheme more important the M20 south scheme and should be constructed first)

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

85% of the city's population on the South side ? This is clearly not true.

I would think at least 35 to 40% of Cork's population is on the north side of the city which has little in terms of road infrastructure. All the lack of an NRR is doing is further burdening the SRR which is starting to creak under the strain.

You would think wrong, the vast majority of the the urban area's population is on the southside of the city & 'burbs. I don't really think this has ever been in dispute tbh. OF course, if you have stats suggesting otherwise feel free to share.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

You do understand that the cycling infrastructure is being implemented primarily with the aim of 'alleviating congestion'?

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

The corollary being that it is more logical to increase congestion for 92% of commuters in order to facilitate 2% of commuters?

If the infrastructure isn't there then people aren't going to use it. As I'm sure you're aware once things like Cycle Lanes & QBCs are built then people use them. Once Cork Bikes is in operation I would reckon the cycle lanes will be quite well utilised.

Whilst we have you here, and seeing as the discussion has opened up abit with roads & population chit chat, citing your favoured Irish Engineers report and things like the Cork LUTS strategy. What do you suggest be done in order to achieve the following?

....Urban areas also require substantial investment to move towards a low-carbon sustainable model. This will involve investment in bus lanes, cycle lanes, pedestrian facilities and facilities for the mobility impaired, as well as initiatives to attract car users onto public transport or other modes of travel...

Specifics please. If the bike lanes shouldn't be built on Washington St. then where do they go?

AugustusMinimus

You put forward the contention that 85% of the population of urban Cork lives on the south side of the city. From this map alone you can tell that the north side of the urban area contains a lot more than just 15% of the land area of urban Cork. Add in the fact that the South side has more industrial parks, green areas and a massive dump, then that 15% stat of yours looks quite foolish IMO.

Also note that the map below doesn't count Glanmire as a part of urban Cork which has a population of 25,000 or more.

Do you have any reference to prove this 15% ?

lolosaur

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

You put forward the contention that 85% of the population of urban Cork lives on the south side of the city. From this map alone you can tell that the north side of the urban area contains a lot more than just 15% of the land area of urban Cork. Add in the fact that the South side has more industrial parks, green areas and a massive dump, then that 15% stat of yours looks quite foolish IMO.

Also note that the map below doesn't count Glanmire as a part of urban Cork which has a population of 25,000 or more.

Do you have any reference to prove this 15% ?

68% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

But that is only true a quarter of the time.

daveohdave

TINA1984 wrote: »

Once Cork Bikes is in operation I would reckon the cycle lanes will be quite well utilised.

Ah, the good old If You Build It, They Will Come rule. Ultra-reliable.

TINA1984

daveohdave wrote: »

Ah, the good old If You Build It, They Will Come rule. Ultra-reliable.

Not really, no. We've only one Irish example to use, that's the Dublin Bikes scheme. Its been widely accepted to have been quite successful and has indeed expanded its operations since it opened. So using that as my basis, I'd wager the Cork, Limerick & Galway bike schemes will follow suit.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

You put forward the contention that 85% of the population of urban Cork lives on the south side of the city. From this map alone you can tell that the north side of the urban area contains a lot more than just 15% of the land area of urban Cork. Add in the fact that the South side has more industrial parks, green areas and a massive dump, then that 15% stat of yours looks quite foolish IMO.

Also note that the map below doesn't count Glanmire as a part of urban Cork which has a population of 25,000 or more.

Do you have any reference to prove this 15% ?

I put forward the contention that 85% of the Cork Metropolitan Area's population lives south of lee.

I'm using the CASP definition of the Cork Metropolitan area as my reference which puts the Metro Cork area population at in/near 400k. Suffice to say it seems clear that most of the Cork Metro regions population lies south, east & west of the river away from the NRR corridor.






And no, offhand I do not have a source for the 85% figure. I''ve read it in some official document, can't recall which.

However, Some basic arithmetic on my part puts the Northside + Mallow + Blarney + Tower + WGH + Glanmire at in and around 80k which equates to approx 15%-20% of the CASP area population lying north of the Lee, depending on whether or not you want to include the rural populations & hinterlands of the named towns. Feel free to dispute/refute/finetune my figures.

FrStone

TINA1984 wrote: »

I put forward the contention that 85% of the Cork Metropolitan Area's population lives south of lee.

I'm using the CASP definition of the Cork Metropolitan area as my reference which puts the Metro Cork area population at in/near 400k. Suffice to say it seems clear that most of the Cork Metro regions population lies south, east & west of the river away from the NRR corridor.

Sure the population of the whole county of Cork is just of 500,000. Therefore I doubt the metropolitan area is 400k. The city itself has a population of circa 120,000.

Harry Angstrom

Some cyclists seem to think that the South Main Street cycle lane is a contraflow for them. I was happily cycling up South Main Street today towards the traffic lights at Sullivan's Quay/Barrack Street in the cycle lane when a nutter on a bike came towards me going fairly quickly in the opposite direction.
Cyclists are their own worst enemies sometimes. I do a lot of cycling but I would quite happily pull a cyclist off his/her bike if he/she took a red light at a pedestrian crossing while I was crossing.

evilivor

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Some cyclists seem to think that the South Main Street cycle lane is a contraflow for them. I was happily cycling up South Main Street today towards the traffic lights at Sullivan's Quay/Barrack Street in the cycle lane when a nutter on a bike came towards me going fairly quickly in the opposite direction.
Cyclists are their own worst enemies sometimes. I do a lot of cycling but I would quite happily pull a cyclist off his/her bike if he/she took a red light at a pedestrian crossing while I was crossing.

South Main Street was planned as a contra-flow cycle lane - are you sure you were in the right?

Harry Angstrom

evilivor wrote: »

South Main Street was planned as a contra-flow cycle lane - are you sure you were in the right?

So, if a cyclist cycles against traffic down the South Main Street, and wants to turn right at Washington Street towards the Grand Parade, how exactly does that work out?

Knasher

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

So, if a cyclist cycles against traffic down the South Main Street, and wants to turn right at Washington Street towards the Grand Parade, how exactly does that work out?

It is marked as contra-flow in the plans, but it doesn't seem to indicate if it is left turn only, or what should happen when you get to that junction.

TheChizler

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Some cyclists seem to think that the South Main Street cycle lane is a contraflow for them. I was happily cycling up South Main Street today towards the traffic lights at Sullivan's Quay/Barrack Street in the cycle lane when a nutter on a bike came towards me going fairly quickly in the opposite direction.
Cyclists are their own worst enemies sometimes. I do a lot of cycling but I would quite happily pull a cyclist off his/her bike if he/she took a red light at a pedestrian crossing while I was crossing.

The recently erected signs direct cyclists from the bottom of Barrack St. to Washington St., so contra flow. Cyclists going with traffic literally go with traffic in the same lane, the same going down Washington St. from Grand parade towards UCC. I presume the idea is turn left after South Main St., nowhere else to go unless you dismount and cross the road. It's still a work in progress so maybe there's more plans.

A more sensible approach when going to Grand Parade would be to continue down the new cycle lane on Sullivans Quay and cross the river at Nano Nagle bridge.

Edit: Also, assault??

Red Nissan

TheChizler wrote: »

It's still a work in progress so maybe there's more plans.

More plans? Does it look to you like there ever was a plan in the first place?

TheChizler

Red Nissan wrote: »

More plans? Does it look to you like there ever was a plan in the first place?

I presume there's drawings available somewhere, so yes. Watched the contractors consult blueprints when they were building, so unless they were reading the funnies...

Seriously though I can see what they were getting at, and as a past UCC student having a contra-flow cycle lane down Washington St. makes sense. The implementation however is up for debate.

Harry Angstrom

TheChizler wrote: »

The recently erected signs direct cyclists from the bottom of Barrack St. to Washington St., so contra flow. Cyclists going with traffic literally go with traffic in the same lane, the same going down Washington St. from Grand parade towards UCC. I presume the idea is turn left after South Main St., nowhere else to go unless you dismount and cross the road. It's still a work in progress so maybe there's more plans.

A more sensible approach when going to Grand Parade would be to continue down the new cycle lane on Sullivans Quay and cross the river at Nano Nagle bridge.

Edit: Also, assault??

If a cyclist is going down the South Main Street in a contraflow lane, they'd better be prepared for cars coming out of Hanover Street and turning on to South Main Street. Motorists tend to be creatures of habit and I doubt that too many of them will be looking right when they come out of Hanover street to turn onto South Main Street, even though the cyclist would have the right of way.

TheChizler

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

If a cyclist is going down the South Main Street in a contraflow lane, they'd better be prepared for cars coming out of Hanover Street and turning on to South Main Street. Motorists tend to be creatures of habit and I doubt that too many of them will be looking right when they come out of Hanover street to turn onto South Main Street, even though the cyclist would have the right of way.

Again this is where increased signage etc is needed, it's the same thing cycling down by the Bailey. Currently in order to cycle through on the lane you either have to break the pedestrian lights across Washington st or the lights for cars coming down Grattam St, hopefully they sort it in due course.

evilivor

TheChizler wrote: »

Again this is where increased signage etc is needed

And compliance. I was on the bike recently heading down the South Mall - turning right towards Angelsea and coming towards me was a dick on a little commuter bike - the one's with the tiny wheels - blithely cycling against the traffic of the Mall. These are the kind of morons that give cyclists a bad name.

Stepping Stone

evilivor wrote: »

And compliance. I was on the bike recently heading down the South Mall - turning right towards Angelsea and coming towards me was a dick on a little commuter bike - the one's with the tiny wheels - blithely cycling against the traffic of the Mall. These are the kind of morons that give cyclists a bad name.

I encountered one of these fools last winter. Dark, wet night, I was leaving the South Mall and heading towards Anglesea St when a cyclist appeared right in front of me, centre of the lane coming from Anglesea St. Clearly going the wrong way on a one way section. Visibility was poor, they had absolutely no lighting on the bike and I never expected it. I slammed on the brakes but they swerved and carried on. I swear that some people need to actually want to be killed. It was crazy. There are cycle paths on the footpath that could have been used if they wanted to go contra-flow.

I saw another cycling on the footpath on Sullivan's Quay. Another cyclist who was unlocking their bike from the railing on the quay side stopped them and asked them what they were doing. Apparently you are allowed to cycle on the footpath if you are going contra-flow. I dread to think what will happen when they get behind the wheel of a car...:mad:

Malari

Stepping Stone wrote: »

I encountered one of these fools last winter. Dark, wet night, I was leaving the South Mall and heading towards Anglesea St when a cyclist appeared right in front of me, centre of the lane coming from Anglesea St. Clearly going the wrong way on a one way section. Visibility was poor, they had absolutely no lighting on the bike and I never expected it. I slammed on the brakes but they swerved and carried on. I swear that some people need to actually want to be killed. It was crazy. There are cycle paths on the footpath that could have been used if they wanted to go contra-flow.

I saw another cycling on the footpath on Sullivan's Quay. Another cyclist who was unlocking their bike from the railing on the quay side stopped them and asked them what they were doing. Apparently you are allowed to cycle on the footpath if you are going contra-flow. I dread to think what will happen when they get behind the wheel of a car...:mad:

What the...:rolleyes:

Red Nissan

Nearly saw a father and his young son getting clobbered today, they cam straight off the cycle lane to cross Washington Street and half way across the father realised that he did not have the right of way.

I might have it on dashcam, if I find it and think it's any good I'll be back.

The city though is now unusable. And that's before they close St Patrick's Street.

The business of the City is not going to be carried on bicycles. It is definitely going to denude the City even further, I can see now why a few of my colleagues recently released property in the center and are enjoying early retirement, only now with a portion of the work done can I see the destruction that they saw coming.

I think I'l have to get myself a bigger version of those drones, the traffic back ups are reminiscent of the four hour delays in the 70's, crossing town now is a two hour trip in light traffic.

The City is doomed as we know it. They might as well pedestrianize the whole lot between the ring roads.

TheChizler

Red Nissan wrote: »

The city though is now unusable. And that's before they close St Patrick's Street.

...

The City is doomed as we know it. They might as well pedestrianize the whole lot between the ring roads.

In fairness that's a little bit played up. I drive through these streets nearly every day and the changes haven't caused me any hassle. The construction down by UCC causes disruption but road works aren't permanent.

daveohdave

Are you driving through the city at 3am? I've driven in Cork all my life, and in my estimation it's nearly as bad as it was before the tunnel again.