City to Clontarf Cycle Route

jon1981

Interested Observer wrote: »

Well feck me you're right. I always just stick to the cycle lane on the path outside the park. Will be going through the park tomorrow morning.

Meh, I still beat folk that go through the park :cool:

Shedite27

Has anyone actually seen a plan where a lane disappears or is the IT talking rubbish?

The Plans on Page 63 of the latest plan I can find clearly shows 2 lanes inbound on the strech they talk about...
http://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/Planning/Documents/Part%208%20Report%20and%20Drawings.pdf

jon1981

Did anyone notice the lady with the camera and tripod recording the traffic turning onto Marino mart from the malahide road this morning. She was positioned beside the bicylce lane by the park.

Not sure if she was from the council or a local collecting footage for some protest...or could just like recording traffic

Interested Observer

jon1981 wrote: »

Meh, I still beat folk that go through the park :cool:

You're obviously quite quick then, because I think I beat everyone who was at that junction with me comfortably this morning. Far as I'm concerned now there is zero reason to not use the lane in the park.

jon1981

Interested Observer wrote: »

You're obviously quite quick then, because I think I beat everyone who was at that junction with me comfortably this morning. Far as I'm concerned now there is zero reason to not use the lane in the park.

Yep, if i went through the park, I'd also beat the folk on the path along the park :cool:


just kidding... has anyone measured it on google maps? how many vital seconds do you lose at the exit gate by the bridge?

highdef

Ok, so from what I have gathered, the cycle lane through the park is more less completely straight AND is a shorter distance than the current and proposed cycle lanes. A quick look on Google maps does indeed confirm this.
In addition, a cyclist gets a pleasant break from all the nearby traffic by cycling through the park.
Some cyclists are complaining about leaves on the current cycle lane in the park. Will the planned new cycle lane not be passing immediately adjacent (and probably partly under) the 42 large mature trees that are being saved? Forgive my innocence but I have a funny feeling that the leaves will also fall off those deciduous trees onto the dedicated cycle path and because there will no vehicular traffic, I would imagine there would be a similar build of leaves on it in the autumn months.

I'm failing to see why the current cycle lane through the park cannot be upgraded to a fully segregated lane that is pedestrian free. That alone would save so much money, probably in the millions. And the fact that posters here have said that it is quicker is making me wonder why so many cyclists want to go adjacent to the road where it's noisier, full of fumes and generally a much less pleasant route.

PS: I know the area but don't commute there by any means of transport.

brocbrocach

highdef wrote: »

I'm failing to see why the current cycle lane through the park cannot be upgraded to a fully segregated lane that is pedestrian free.

It doesn't even need to be fully segregated, pedestrian and cycle ways can be separated by a white line as happens in multiple other places. If cyclists have to slow down to avoid straying kids, drunks and animals it's not the end of the world.

highdef

brocbrocach wrote: »

It doesn't even need to be fully segregated, pedestrian and cycle ways can be separated by a white line as happens in multiple other places. If cyclists have to slow down to avoid straying kids, drunks and animals it's not the end of the world.

Whilst I personally think that is fine, regular cyclist commuters are not just out for a cycle...they are commuting from A to B and want to do so ASAP with as few obstacles and hindrances along the way. For the safety of both cyclists and pedestrians, I think it's best for all that they are kept away from each other to avoid conflict.

BTW, I am speaking as someone who does not and has never commuted to my workplace by bicycle. I'm trying to look at this in a non biased way and am not trying to be on any particular side.

Tenzor07

I cycled down from the Malahide road intending to go into the park and time the route through the park, however if you go straight ahead from the end of the Malahide road there's only a pedestrian gate there, you'd have to dismount and carry the bike over it, or turn left down towards the Westwood gym and sharp right into the park....

Forget it! Just used the cycle lane, dodging pedestrians as I did...

So unless you're coming from the Howth road direction it's not faster to go into the park.

jon1981

Interesting ... according to Map Pedometer ... around the park is quicker


694m



722m

Leroy42

Yeah, because the current layout of the entrance/exit points of the park are totally inadequate. They need to stop locking the gate for a start!

They entrances around Howth Rd the one you have highlighted at Malahide road have been stuck on to the existing entrances rather than created specifically.

By making these actually fit for purpose it will make a significant difference.

Interested Observer

jon1981 wrote: »

Interesting ... according to Map Pedometer ... around the park is quicker

Well it's shorter. Whether it's quicker is another matter.

jon1981

Interested Observer wrote: »

Well it's shorter. Whether it's quicker is another matter.

It's always quicker, you don't have gates or the exit at the park to pause at while along the road.

brocbrocach

Interested Observer wrote: »

Well it's shorter. Whether it's quicker is another matter.

Yeah you have lovely straight wide lane in the park compared to the twisty cluttered path outside.
Plus you get to see squirrels, herons, etc going through the park. Good for the head.

highdef

So people are complaining about a gate. In the current grand scheme of things, abandoning the current plan to remove a lane of vehicular traffic in one of the worst pinch points in the city is an infinitely bigger project than removing a gate or two, upgrading the path surface, install lighting, maybe realign it to get it even straighter at the East end of the park and ensure it is more segregated from pedestrians than is currently the case, not that there are many.

I personally think that realigning it would be a waste of tax payers money as the distance shortened as a result would literally be a few seconds and really not worth it.

Another benefit of routing through the park is that is a much better bigger area for workers to work in. I'd imagine working conditions would be quite cramped and somewhat dangerous if working at the side of the road on Fairview strand, even with barriers erected.

I'm just trying to look at the wider picture here.

buffalo

highdef wrote: »

I'm just trying to look at the wider picture here.

Is the wider picture not discouraging private transport to combat climate change and trying to increase modes of active travel to decrease rates of obesity and heart disease?

Tenzor07

highdef wrote: »

So people are complaining about a gate. In the current grand scheme of things, abandoning the current plan to remove a lane of vehicular traffic in one of the worst pinch points.

As Buffalo says, the aim is also to reduce pollution and promote sustainable forms of transport.

There needs to be provisions for Bus rapid transit routes which are being planned, so you need to provide for those busses and separate them from normal bus routes which would serve all stops to city centre.
So what's required here would be two bus lanes and one car lane.
Sadly this won't happen as local residents led by Nial Ring think that a few crusty old trees are more important than solving the issues of local traffic congestion and pollution.

Moflojo

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Sadly this won't happen as local residents led by Nial Ring think that a few crusty old trees are more important than solving the issues of local traffic congestion and pollution.

I assure you if the plan was to create an additional lane for motor traffic, rather than a cycle path, Nial Ring would be the first lad down there with a chainsaw.

Murph_D

Anyone have any idea what's going on with this? Tenders were supposed to go out last summer.

Thelonious Monk

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1364559327143620609

This says it's starting in August, I'll believe it when I see it

Murph_D

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1364559327143620609

This says it's starting in August, I'll believe it when I see it

What do you think of the final design? There have been a lot of changes since the original proposal, which I think was in 2012!

odyssey06

Can't make head or tails of the 60 page PDF ... are they still planning to route it on a new cycle track parallel to Alfie Byrne Road which continues from the Clontarf promenade along what is currently wasteground?

Murph_D

odyssey06 wrote: »

Can't make head or tails of the 60 page PDF ... are they still planning to route it on a new cycle track parallel to Alfie Byrne Road which continues from the Clontarf promenade along what is currently wasteground?

No. We are talking about Clontarf to Amiens St. via North Strand.

Shedite27

Looks decent, fully segregated track all the way, few comments from me
- The junction with North circular road looks tough to cycle, the road furniture means cyclists can't cycle straight through.
- still one lane inbound past Marino mart (down from 2). That'll be a big battle ground with drivers.
- I love the junction at Alfie Byrne/Clontarf for cyclists, much esier to get to the cycle path (is that a first cycling roundabout in Ireland?)
- with the route they've built down East Wall road, it looks like it may be more plesant to come inbound through Clontarf, turn left on Alfie Byrne, then right on East Wall Road, and rejoin at the bridge at the far corner of Fairview Park

cgcsb

Progress check. I've not heard anything re tenders and August is coming up fast. The last media mention seems to be October last year when the IT more less had the project scrapped over the Irish Water issue. DCC website still says August but nothing on DCC website is reliable.

Thelonious Monk

Keen to hear about this myself, the never ending story

cgcsb

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Keen to hear about this myself, the never ending story

tbh as I've not heard anything at this point I'd be assuming the August goal for starting is well gone as contractors would need some notice to get their act together and give notice to all the utility providers etc. It would be a shame if this one ended up on the big pile of projects that spent millions in consultation and design and then evaporated.

Thelonious Monk

I can't see it happening in its current format anyway, businesses are already starting to moan about it and residents in Ballybough etc about detoured traffic.
It wont happen and they'll put in a fancy road crossing and resurface the bike lane in Fairview park, if we're lucky.

cgcsb

Agreed. It's in good company:

The pedestrianisation of Liffey st, College Green, North Stephen's Green, the permanent Liffey cycle route, the Clonskeagh cycle route, the new walking/cycling bridges in the docklands, the Templebar public realm scheme, Dublin bikes extension to suburbs, canal and river route cycle schemes, the co-housing scheme, the O'Devaney Gardens regeneration scheme and my personal favourite; the Poolbeg West housing project.

All great plans, with money spent on them, poof, nowhere to be seen or heard of ever again, no explanation offered at all, the tax payers will just accept this. They'd have a revolution in most countries but not here.

Thelonious Monk

I'm just home from work after cycling from city centre to Raheny via Fairview/Howth Road. Absolutely horrible, close pass after close pass, doors swinging open from parked cars in Fairview with a buses on the other side of you, it's a nightmare. The Howth road just has a white line for a bike lane on a narrow road so every car passes you with 2 or 3 feet to spare on some parts. Hadn't done my normal commute in a long time. They've done nothing to improve it and I wont hold my breath for improvements.