Update on the Quays cycle route

LennoxR

Weepsie wrote: »

Possibly, but you'd still have to merge with traffic and yield to it more than should be necessary. Dublin is a small even with its sprawl. It's unnecessary for many people (not all) to be entering the city by car

Perhaps, but I quite like the idea of a segregated cycle boardwalk, should that be the proposal.

It would eliminate the dodgiest aspect of riding on the quays at the moment - sharing the bus lane with buses that constantly pull in in front of you.

(edit, @ Hive Mind, I hadn't considered the problem of bridges or left turns, good points though)

That said, if the proposal is that cyclists should simply be diverted onto the current boardwalk with no modifications then it is indeed cr_ap idea and unusable.

jimmycrackcorm

LennoxR wrote:

Just to play devil's advocate, why not? What if the boardwalk was resurfaced?

It reminds me of the of road cycle paths near my house that I don't use because if I'm on the road I can travel with the traffic. But on the cycle paths I have to stop at every estate entrance to check for cars entering and exiting the estates.

Also like cycle paths there will be pedestrians blocking the way.

I can't understand why there couldn't be priority traffic in favour of buses and cyclists during commute times.

CramCycle

Christ on a bike, they really need either people with backbone or people who are not influenced by brown envelopes. All this talk. I feel like death in that Monty Python sketch, all they do is talk. At this point, if they had closed the quays off to private traffic during peak hours with no planning, the problem would have resolved itself by now. Private operators would have put in car parks on the outskirts, buses would have jumped in number as well as alternative routes coming online.

ThisRegard

HivemindXX wrote: »

However my main complaint would be the shambles that will be every bridge. The loss of priority and mingling with pedestrians will be made worse by the poor sight lines the walls will almost certainly result in.

I was thinking of this myself, how would they even attempt to try a solution at each bridge? There's no space, the footpaths are narrow enough for pedestrians at the corner of each one, not even taking into account the Ha'penney and Millennium bridges, and the motor cross traffic will be a disaster. Most will stick with the buslane.

DanDublin1982

LennoxR wrote: »

Just to play devil's advocate, why not? What if the boardwalk was resurfaced?

(Not being confrontational, just want to tease this out).

The surface would be my main problem yes but where you have a boardwalk you will also have pedestrians whatever the surface. A problem that simply wouldn't exist if the cycleway was on road.

I mailed Ciaran Cuffe and in fairness he got back to me fairly quickly. He sent me on some pages on the report on this and the boardwalk proposed will be for Eillis and Aaran quays only. The rest of the cycle way is still on the road....for now at least.

magicbastarder

CramCycle wrote: »

Christ on a bike

WWJD? would he wear hi-vis?

monument

The detail of this are not acceptable http://irishcycle.com/2017/04/29/liffey-cycle-route-solution-includes-2-85-metre-shared-cycling-and-walking-path/

Here's the main bits:

West of the James Joyce Bridge / Blackhall Place:




At the James Joyce Bridge, I don't know how the boardwalk could intersect with the bridge as suggested on the right hand side here, so, it'll likely end up being a narrowed shared pinch point worse than the Grand Canal's ones:


At Queen Street and Mellows Bridge between the two boardwalks -- this would not be too much of a compermise if it was not for the other sections of shared paths and crossing footpaths a total of 7 times in less than 600 metres:

Weepsie

monument wrote: »

The detail of this are not acceptable

Crossing footpaths 7 times in less than 600 metres!

Indeed, a moronic idea. The number of vehicles that will be in the wrong lane there too will probably be cause issues particularly those who do it on purpose to get further up quays and then cross bus lane.

It's as though drivers don't realise they create the traffic problems

HivemindXX

Weepsie wrote: »

It's as though drivers don't realise they create the traffic problems

They don't. This should be obvious right? When you can look at the quays, completely jammed with cars every morning, and still read people saying that the reason the quays are so bad is cyclists or maybe busses or anything but all the cars.

Jesus seems like a brakeless fixie kind of guy to me. Read in to that what you want.

@ThisRegard, I hadn't even thought about the ha'penny and milllenium bridges. They are already a mess for any pedestrians trying to walk along the path due to the crowds that build up and completely block the path every couple of minutes. I wonder what the chances are that people will accept changing the priority here so that pedestrians get more green time. I can see the AA and various councillors now..."I am completely behind increasing crossing time for pedestrians but not at the expense of the poor victimised motorist".

Weepsie

I got to thinking that all involved on the official side, Dublin CC, Cuffe, Varadkar (previously), Shane Ross etc are all useless and nothing more than Talking Heads. They've Stopped Making Sense because now they want to Take Us to the River basically on a Road to Nowhere. They had a Once in a Lifetime chance to make a real change, but I fear this plan will lead to carnage. They'll be nothing more than Cyclo Killers.

Kaisr Sose

Weepsie wrote: »

I got to thinking that all involved on the official side, Dublin CC, Cuffe, Varadkar (previously), Shane Ross etc are all useless and nothing more than Talking Heads. They've Stopped Making Sense because now they want to Take Us to the River basically on a Road to Nowhere. They had a Once in a Lifetime chance to make a real change, but I fear this plan will lead to carnage. They'll be nothing more than Cyclo Killers.

AKA

The Fun Boy Three and The lunatics have taken over the asylum ...

Corca Baiscinn

Weepsie wrote: »

I got to thinking that all involved on the official side, Dublin CC, Cuffe, Varadkar (previously), Shane Ross etc are all useless and nothing more than Talking Heads. They've Stopped Making Sense because now they want to Take Us to the River basically on a Road to Nowhere. They had a Once in a Lifetime chance to make a real change, but I fear this plan will lead to carnage. They'll be nothing more than Cyclo Killers.

I understand the urge to rant but apart from letting off steam, casting the blame net so wide isn't going to get us anywhere. I'm seldom found defending SR but afaik neithr he nor Leo has had any function re Liffey Cycle Route. C Cuffe does hav but I do have some sympathy since he's caught between a rock and a hard place in that while he's undoubtedly pro cycling and pro cycling infrastructure he represents one of the areas affected by the diversion and is presumably coming coming under heavy pressure from the people who can reelect him to DCC or vote him out. Either that or he has a sense that the whole plan will fall if he doesn't accept the proposed changes.

Monument says that busses and pedestrians will also be affected. I don't know of any pedestrian lobby apart from Cosain in Galway and the lady from Kilmainham if she ever got going, but surely bus companies and bus passengers could be asked to comment. How will Dublin bus for eg be affected and if adversely is there time for them to tell the council it's not on? It's still a Bank Hol w/e but hopefully, the cyclists objecting here will have emailed/phoned/tweeted in objections to their councillors by first thing Tuesday morning

Weepsie

Ah I just really wanted to make a lot of Talking Heads related jokes to be honest.

magicbastarder

Weepsie wrote: »

They've Stopped Making Sense because now they want to Take Us to the River basically on a Road to Nowhere.

demmed if you do, demmed if you don't.

Kaisr Sose

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I understand the urge to rant but apart from letting off steam, casting the blame net so wide isn't going to get us anywhere. I'm seldom found defending SR but afaik neithr he nor Leo has had any function re Liffey Cycle Route. C Cuffe does hav but I do have some sympathy since he's caught between a rock and a hard place in that while he's undoubtedly pro cycling and pro cycling infrastructure he represents one of the areas affected by the diversion and is presumably coming coming under heavy pressure from the people who can reelect him to DCC or vote him out. Either that or he has a sense that the whole plan will fall if he doesn't accept the proposed changes.

Monument says that busses and pedestrians will also be affected. I don't know of any pedestrian lobby apart from Cosain in Galway and the lady from Kilmainham if she ever got going, but surely bus companies and bus passengers could be asked to comment. How will Dublin bus for eg be affected and if adversely is there time for them to tell the council it's not on? It's still a Bank Hol w/e but hopefully, the cyclists objecting here will have emailed/phoned/tweeted in objections to their councillors by first thing Tuesday morning

I am sorry but if C Cuffe or any Councilor feels a seat is more important than doing the right thing, then we are in Talking Head /Fun Boy Three and Boomtown Rats territory.

If they wish to reduce congestion in the city they have to address the cause of it - poor public transport and excessive vehicular traffic in the city centre. Building a boardwalk for cyclists is not addressing the fundamental issue...but aren't they all great, listening to all stakeholders and coming up with innovative solutions to keep themselves all in robes and office to continue to do great things for the city! We are so lucky!

Weepsie

There's a thread over in the Motors forum right now asking What would you do if you were minster for transport...

Now there are a few good and obvious ideas about public transport, infrastructure etc but an awful lot are missing the bloody obvious. Just far too many car centric ideas when moving away from private car ownership should really be the ideal and more GoCar type schemes and car pooling should be promoted. I know it's the Motors forum, and a lot of it is general interest in the actual mechanics and look of cars, and cars from the Hobby point of view, but still.

monument

I started liffeycycle.com -- I hope it helps people to text and email councillors before tomorrow's transport committee meeting ...and ask others to please do the same.

tomasrojo

Some discussion of contacting the councillors concerning the Liffey Cycle Route here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057735952&page=2

Grassey

I received the following back from Ciaran. Will I hold my breath for a modified option 7.... No.

Thanks for taking the time to write to me.

 

As someone who has cycled on the streets of Dublin daily for over thirty years I agree with much of what you're saying.

 

However there is a very real concern from residents in and around Stoneybatter and Smithfield that stopping private car traffic on the North Quays will lead to cars diverting onto Blackhall Place, North King Street, George's Lane, North Brunswick Street and Church Street. Imposing more car traffic, noise and pollution right beside those who live on the ground floor on these streets seems unfair. Of course the induced traffic will decrease, but there is a real danger of a significant increase in car traffic on these streets in the short to medium term.  Do you mind me asking where you are living yourself and how familiar you might be with these particular streets?

 

Also I don't feel that there is sufficient political support on the Council for Option 7. Local Sinn Féin, Fine Gael, Labour and Independent representatives and councillors have come out strongly against Option 7 and I believe will influence their colleagues on the council to vote against it. A split vote could endanger the project. It is my view is that if we go ahead with Option 8 we can opt for an improved version (more similar to Option 7) at a later stage.

 

To be honest, the City Council will be introducing traffic management measures on Bachelors Walk this August in preparation for the Luas Cross-City line at O'Connell Bridge, and we may well end up reconsidering the plans, but if we lose momentum now, we may end up getting nothing. That's why I'm currently supporting the Manager's report that will be presented tomorrow for Option 8. The Transportation Strategic Policy Committee can be watched online tomorrow here. It kicks off at 3.30pm

 

If you've any further thoughts I'm prepared to listen, and perhaps change my mind.


All the best,

Ciarán

[\quote]

magicbastarder

that's the response i got too (albeit with a few minor differences). to be fair, he was the only councillor to respond in any fashion so far (with the caveat that i sent the emails late last night)

tomasrojo

Yeah, only one to get back to me, much the same response. On the face of it, it's a reasonable response. But Option 8 is crap, for buses, pedestrians and cyclists. And it's only there so that they can say they made a concession to motorists.

CramCycle

I'd sooner they scrapped it altogether than put in place an option not fit for purpose.

beauf

CramCycle wrote: »

I'd sooner they scrapped it altogether than put in place an option not fit for purpose.

Same here. TBH I've not examined it in detail but my instinct is that it will make it much slower route for cyclists.

beauf

HivemindXX wrote: »

On the North vs South debate I find the North quays to be worse. I go this way during the busiest commuting time in the morning and the bus lane is jammed with busses, coaches and taxis. A huge number of which are trying very slowly to change lanes to go around obstructions (busses at stops, taxis stopped anywhere they like and delivery vehicles). My only trips along the south quays are well after busy commuting times so I guess the comparison isn't fair but I find it a lot less crowded and therefore better. It does have the quality of changing from three lanes to two lanes and back again at least twice which is something that does not help cyclist safety at all.

I think we are at cross purpose. The north quays is slower, the south faster. Which I think is what people mean when they say its better.

But I would find the north quays less dangerous for that same reason. its usually slower, and easier to change lanes etc. The south more dangerous as its all moving faster and more lane changing. But then I'm going to the Phoenix park, and crossing left to right outside Guinness needs you to have experience of merging at speed.

I was considering it n terms of a cycle route to encourage novice cycles to use the bike.

HivemindXX wrote: »

As far as how many people get to the point or the convention centre by car versus public transport I don't know the numbers but I think you should bear in mind that it doesn't take all that many extra cars to jam up the city centre. Just because traffic slows to a crawl when there is something on does not mean that a large percentage of the attendees are arriving by car. Even if they do I don't think that implies that they should be facilitated at the expense of improving the more efficient and more sustainable options.

I was more thinking its a single lane one way system for much of that area. So very little traffic causes queues. I find driving around it, takes ages. if there's anything on driving in to this area, out the tunnel, north wall, or even down the quays is excruciating. No idea what the volume is.

Considering you've got train, dart and luas on its doorstep.

tomasrojo

CramCycle wrote: »

I'd sooner they scrapped it altogether than put in place an option not fit for purpose.

I definitely won't be using it if it has a two cycle lanes and pedestrians crammed into 2.8m. I suspect the boardwalks will be utter rubbish too. You'll have to queue at every bridge, and you'll be dodging pedestrians trying to get a view of the Liffey between junctions.

In fact, it sounds so bad that it'll end up one of the roads, like the N11, that I spend my time looking at maps trying to find routes around.

magicbastarder

actually, that may end up being a good thing (good thing in a long term basis) - if this idea crashes abnd burns, it'll prove the idiocy of bad compromises regarding cycling and city centre planning.

onmebike

magicbastarder wrote: »

actually, that may end up being a good thing (good thing in a long term basis) - if this idea crashes abnd burns, it'll prove the idiocy of bad compromises regarding cycling and city centre planning.

Or will it prove that even if you build a brand new 'perfectly good' bit of infrastructure, that crowd of lycra warriors still won't use it and we're still a terrible bunch?

tomasrojo

I'm not sure what'll happen if they build it. Some awful infrastructure still gets used (Fairview, for example, because it's hard to avoid the route coming from the north-eastern suburbs into town, and the road is so hostile. But I think Fairview was like that to begin with. The north quays are only a bit stressful in places (for adult cyclists), rather than outright hostile.

Annie get your Run

CramCycle wrote: »

I'd sooner they scrapped it altogether than put in place an option not fit for purpose.

onmebike wrote: »

Or will it prove that even if you build a brand new 'perfectly good' bit of infrastructure, that crowd of lycra warriors still won't use it and we're still a terrible bunch?

We need to communicate this to DCC now, before it's built. Even if option 8 is passed we need to tell them we won't cycle on it and that they're wasting taxpayers money and then we need to find journalists who will tell the public that cyclists won't use it. There's another thread here about communicating to the Councillors so hopefully everyone on here has done that.

matc66

Just starting on live stream now.