Blackrock Park is being wrecked

ted1

breezy1985 wrote: »

Move it. Nothing shall get in the way of our Marxist cyclist lefty agenda to destroy the car and kill all grannys who dare walk upon the pathways


No bourgeois grave shall stop us comrades

Looks like it can be moved. Section 2.1.3 (iii) deep well
https://www.dlrcoco.ie/sites/default/files/atoms/files/blap_chapter2.pdf

http://eapps.dlrcoco.ie/documents/s60224/BlankQuestionReportDoc.pdf

Chinasea

Think the cycle lanes are absolutely fantastic. Blown away by the smiling faces on the little children on the lanes that we see on the Seapoint to Sandycove stretch.

Blackrock park cycle path is looking really great. Not sure what the markings on the cycle paths will be like, they will need to be extra intense in some spots, but caution needed by all at the pedestrian exit from the Halting Site. It’s very close to the cycle path. We don’t want the path being negated due to mutual negligence. I am guessing hopefully that has been well factored in.

AndrewJRenko

Chinasea wrote: »

Think the cycle lanes are absolutely fantastic. Blown away by the smiling faces on the little children on the lanes that we see on the Seapoint to Sandycove stretch.

Absolutely - I saw one three-generation group at the weekend, girl of about 10, mum in her thirties and granny in her sixties, all big grins and lots of chat.

This just wouldn't have happened without the CMR.

Chinasea

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Absolutely - I saw one three-generation group at the weekend, girl of about 10, mum in her thirties and granny in her sixties, all big grins and lots of chat.

This just wouldn't have happened without the CMR.

Indeed. Twitter is so positive about it. On the other hand the local Facebook pages are very sour.

Truthvader

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Just say as a non cyclist, I'm in favour of anything i think will make our city a cleaner, healthier, all round more pleasant place to live and cycle lanes definitely have a part to play in that. It will take years for it to become embedded and attitudes to change, though, but i hope we get there. Small things but i also love the benches and tables dotted around the streets, just a simple little initiative that, added up, can make a big difference. Still wondering what has happened to the swans in the park, though. Why did they just up and disappear?

I know 99.9 % of people are in favour of public transport and cycling for other people

Joe_ Public

Truthvader wrote: »

I know 99.9 % of people are in favour of public transport and cycling for other people

I drive when i have to, though never during rush hour unless it's absolutely unavoidable, i walk to the shops or for coffee or a beer, i use the dart when i want to venture into town and think it's high time i invested in a bike because i believe it would enhance the quality of my modest existence. Whats your point?

Seaswimmer

Not Blackrock Park but Clonkeen Park (behind Super Valu in Deansgrange) is currently getting the same treatment. Smooth tarmac and cycle/pedestrian path doubled in size at least. I presume Kilbogett Park will get the same treatment in time. Great thing about these improvements is that it dosent detract from the amenity in any way as there is plenty of land.

Seaswimmer

Chinasea wrote: »

Indeed. Twitter is so positive about it. On the other hand the local Facebook pages are very sour.

The recent Blackrock Main Street improvement scheme had the local Facebook pages in meltdown. Consistent opposition to the plans. Submissions to DLR were 74% in favour. In my experience you get weary going on social media sites trying to justify some new infrastructure. Much easier to leave everybody complain and let the council take the flak..

MJohnston

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Not Blackrock Park but Clonkeen Park (behind Super Valu in Deansgrange) is currently getting the same treatment. Smooth tarmac and cycle/pedestrian path doubled in size at least. I presume Kilbogett Park will get the same treatment in time. Great thing about these improvements is that it dosent detract from the amenity in any way as there is plenty of land.

I like around from Clonkeen Park and it’s so welcome. The footpath before was absolutely tiny, impossible to distance. Kilbogget isn’t as bad though and it has two parallel paths, so it might not need widening.

Seaswimmer

MJohnston wrote: »

I like around from Clonkeen Park and it’s so welcome. The footpath before was absolutely tiny, impossible to distance. Kilbogget isn’t as bad though and it has two parallel paths, so it might not need widening.

I suspect at it is on the DLR Park to Park route that they will upgrade it. If DLR want to encourage commuter cyclists then at least the path should be fit for purpose and allow people travel at a reasonable speed. Although repainting the lines and walking symbols again would help in the short term as they are completely worn off.

MJohnston

Seaswimmer wrote: »

I suspect at it is on the DLR Park to Park route that they will upgrade it. If DLR want to encourage commuter cyclists then at least the path should be fit for purpose and allow people travel at a reasonable speed. Although repainting the lines and walking symbols again would help in the short term as they are completely worn off.

I walked through Clonkeen this morning and there was a notice up about the works. The title was "Clonkeen and Kilbogget Park Upgrades" or similar, so it seems like they're definitely going to work on both.

Glencarraig

MJohnston wrote: »

I walked through Clonkeen this morning and there was a notice up about the works. The title was "Clonkeen and Kilbogget Park Upgrades" or similar, so it seems like they're definitely going to work on both.

Shanganagh Park also.

AndrewJRenko

I went through Blackrock Park yesterday, looked great, with a few cyclists taking advantage of the space. It will look even better when they finish off the landscaping.

Cyrus

first thing:

how has this nonsense of widening everyhing for distancing requirements got held of everyone, the changes of catching covid passing someone on a path is almost 0, yet you have people stepping out into traffic to avoid someone walking towards them its mental.

on blackrock park, in my opinion this is a good thing, the rock road is a shambles as it is and its safer to have cyclists going through the park with a dedicated and safe cycle lane.

as others have noted they need a solution for the lane beside the dart station as its a bottle neck.

the key to improved cycling infastructure is to use parks like this where possible and have a safe, seperate, dedicated cycle infastructure.

Cyrus

Seaswimmer wrote: »

I managed to get back to shopping on the bike and trailer today and then I saw this topic. Full weekly shopping ex Cornelscourt including 10kg bag of Roosters. The most encouraging aspect was that 3 different people in Dunnes asked me about the trailer when I was packing the shopping..

full weeks shopping?? how many runs

MJohnston

Cyrus wrote: »

first thing:

how has this nonsense of widening everyhing for distancing requirements got held of everyone, the changes of catching covid passing someone on a path is almost 0, yet you have people stepping out into traffic to avoid someone walking towards them its mental.

It's because people want to distance but the pedestrian infrastructure that exists in mostly places is wholly inadequate for doing so.

I think social distancing, whatever its value in regards to the virus itself, has been extremely valuable in shining a light in just how much space has been surrendered to cars over the decades. I'm glad to see so many places recapturing it.

spurious

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Absolutely - I saw one three-generation group at the weekend, girl of about 10, mum in her thirties and granny in her sixties, all big grins and lots of chat.

This just wouldn't have happened without the CMR.

Those sort of groups are great, but what happens when the Eddy Merckxx wannabees in their tights start flying at speed through your lovely group and any grannies and children they come across?

There are a couple of the aforementioned tight wearers that regularly fly through not only a red light, but also a lollipop person as the children at the end of my road try to cross to school. It's THOSE f*ckers that drivers have an issue with, not normal cyclists, with or without shopping trailers.

Cyrus

MJohnston wrote: »

It's because people want to distance but the pedestrian infrastructure that exists in mostly places is wholly inadequate for doing so.

I think social distancing, whatever its value in regards to the virus itself, has been extremely valuable in shining a light in just how much space has been surrendered to cars over the decades. I'm glad to see so many places recapturing it.

thats fine, but i take issue with it being used as a reason as its largely nonsense,

if we want to pedestrianise places like blackrock and dalkey then do it, but this scare mongering and insulting peoples intelligence is wrong.

personally my preference (as someone who doesnt live in the centre of either town) is to have them pedestrianised as it would suit me better as a consumer, but the people who live in the environs have valid concerns (for example the residents of the side streets off castle street in dalkey are worried about increased traffic on their road if the main street is pedestrianised).

Cyrus

spurious wrote: »

Those sort of groups are great, but what happens when the Eddy Merckxx wannabees in their tights start flying at speed through your lovely group and any grannies and children they come across?

There are a couple of the aforementioned tight wearers that regularly fly through not only a red light, but also a lollipop person as the children at the end of my road try to cross to school. It's THOSE f*ckers that drivers have an issue with, not normal cyclists, with or without shopping trailers.

apparently those lads dont exist according to the resident cyclists :pac:

breezy1985

Cyrus wrote: »

apparently those lads dont exist according to the resident cyclists :pac:

No they do and the laws currently exist to pull them but sadly like with all road law there never seems to be anyone round to enforce it.

The idea that it is only a certain type of "tight wearing" cyclist that does this is stupid though.

breezy1985

Cyrus wrote: »

first thing:

how has this nonsense of widening everyhing for distancing requirements got held of everyone, the changes of catching covid passing someone on a path is almost 0, yet you have people stepping out into traffic to avoid someone walking towards them its mental.

on blackrock park, in my opinion this is a good thing, the rock road is a shambles as it is and its safer to have cyclists going through the park with a dedicated and safe cycle lane.

as others have noted they need a solution for the lane beside the dart station as its a bottle neck.

the key to improved cycling infastructure is to use parks like this where possible and have a safe, seperate, dedicated cycle infastructure.

My worry about park cycle lanes though is they quickly become useless for anyone other than kids because pedestrians walk on them making the journey a crawl

Cyrus

breezy1985 wrote: »

My worry about park cycle lanes though is they quickly become useless for anyone other than kids because pedestrians walk on them making the journey a crawl

perhaps they need to better seperate them, some sort of physical barrier between the walking area and cycling area?

MJohnston

Cyrus wrote: »

thats fine, but i take issue with it being used as a reason as its largely nonsense,

if we want to pedestrianise places like blackrock and dalkey then do it, but this scare mongering and insulting peoples intelligence is wrong.

personally my preference (as someone who doesnt live in the centre of either town) is to have them pedestrianised as it would suit me better as a consumer, but the people who live in the environs have valid concerns (for example the residents of the side streets off castle street in dalkey are worried about increased traffic on their road if the main street is pedestrianised).

My point is that it's not scaremongering. People want to keep their distance. People want to have activities they can do when they're in lockdowns.

As for Dalkey, the likelier outcome is that people just don't drive through it at all anymore, which is great for everyone.

breezy1985

Cyrus wrote: »

perhaps they need to better seperate them, some sort of physical barrier between the walking area and cycling area?

People would just see 2 paths

MJohnston

spurious wrote: »

Those sort of groups are great, but what happens when the Eddy Merckxx wannabees in their tights start flying at speed through your lovely group and any grannies and children they come across?

There are a couple of the aforementioned tight wearers that regularly fly through not only a red light, but also a lollipop person as the children at the end of my road try to cross to school. It's THOSE f*ckers that drivers have an issue with, not normal cyclists, with or without shopping trailers.

I was willing to go along with your hyperbole until this last bit, but it's just utter nonsense. Drivers make zero distinction between which type of cyclist they ignore or endanger and subsequently injure or kill. Most cyclists who are killed by drivers are not of the 'tight wearer' variety, they're older folks or young children.

markpb

spurious wrote: »

Those sort of groups are great, but what happens when the Eddy Merckxx wannabees in their tights start flying at speed through your lovely group and any grannies and children they come across?

Why are an irresponsible subset of cyclists always used as a reason not to build cycling infrastructure but the same doesn’t apply to joggers, pedestrians, drivers, delivery/van drivers? Have you ever asked what will happen when the Hamilton wannabees in their Civics start flying at speed through a pedestrian crossing on a new road?

Cyrus

MJohnston wrote: »

My point is that it's not scaremongering. People want to keep their distance. People want to have activities they can do when they're in lockdowns.

As for Dalkey, the likelier outcome is that people just don't drive through it at all anymore, which is great for everyone.

but why do people want to keep their distance? because they have been scaremongered into thinking walking past someone is dangerous.

as for dalkey, maybe, at the moment they have gone for a half measure which is imo worse for all, a squareabout that the drivers on castle street dont seem to realise they dont have row onto, narrowing of the street but keeping it two way (hilarity ensues when any kind of commerical vehicle tries to get down and sorcha in her land rover plows on as well).

They would have been better off just pedestrianising it all together. Dalkey is one of the places that would benefit from this given the vibrant restaurant and bar scene, as opposed to blackrock which is less appealing in the evening.

MJohnston

Cyrus wrote: »

but why do people want to keep their distance? because they have been scaremongered into thinking walking past someone is dangerous.

So what? Every little helps and most people want to do the right thing. I'm not really tuned into your cynicism about this, I've gotta say.

as for dalkey, maybe, at the moment they have gone for a half measure which is imo worse for all, a squareabout that the drivers on castle street dont seem to realise they dont have row onto, narrowing of the street but keeping it two way (hilarity ensues when any kind of commerical vehicle tries to get down and sorcha in her land rover plows on as well).

They would have been better off just pedestrianising it all together. Dalkey is one of the places that would benefit from this given the vibrant restaurant and bar scene, as opposed to blackrock which is less appealing in the evening.

Yes, Dalkey should be fully pedestrianised, beautiful village completely ruined by cars. I'll bet Robert Burns wants to do it too, but there are a lot more well-off, car-ridden NIMBYs in this particular suburb to put a stop to it.

Cyrus

MJohnston wrote: »

So what? Every little helps and most people want to do the right thing. I'm not really tuned into your cynicism about this, I've gotta say.

Yes, Dalkey should be fully pedestrianised, beautiful village completely ruined by cars. I'll bet Robert Burns wants to do it too, but there are a lot more well-off, car-ridden NIMBYs in this particular suburb to put a stop to it.

maybe its just me, i just find it mind boggling that people will step off a path onto a busy road to allow another pedestrian pass when there is no danger in it, and that misinformation has been used as a reason to change some infastructure when its not really a reason at all. Its not about doing the right thing, because walking past someone isnt the wrong thing.

As for you referring to dalkey as a village, that could get you tarred and feathered by the locals

MJohnston

It's just courtesy! I don't mean this in an angry way at all but you need to stop thinking about it in terms of what you think it will do for you — what if the person you're passing is extra anxious, or they have a condition which puts them in more danger from Covid, or whatever. Give people space, let them give others space.

I would agree with you that Covid should not have needed to be used as a reason to make these changes to infrastructure, but where I differ is I think we should have been acting with the same courtesies pre-Covid too. So many people just walk, drive, or cycle around the world completely oblivious to the existence of other people with different needs.