Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Fighting Tao

So if someone is killed due to how dangerous strand road currently while these delays are happening, and the cranks lose the court case because they are just being cranks and nothjj in by more. Could they be sued?

magicbastarder

no. they are not responsible for the current road layout.

Weepsie

Larbre34 wrote: »

No, it isn't. You've made it that way because its what you chose to see.

The opposition to the cycleway comes from Sandymount, Merrion, Irishtown, Ringsend, Bath Avenue, Beggars Bush, Ballsbridge and beyond.

Take a look at the Ringsend community facebook pages if you want to see the most unvarnished and vitriolic opprobrium.

I'm saying, that out of the huge number of opponents, there are no doubt a few lawyers giving guidance on what is and isn't possible.

You're the one who made it, wrongly, into being about elitism, and frankly its just lazy and weak.

Sounds like a lot of opposition from people who are not in the area then, and for whom it probably won't make a blind bit of difference.

Larbre34

Weepsie wrote: »

Sounds like a lot of opposition from people who are not in the area then, and for whom it probably won't make a blind bit of difference.

Diverted traffic accessing the east link will potentially be a very big issue for all the areas I mentioned.

Seth Brundle

Larbre34 wrote: »

Diverted traffic accessing the east link will potentially be a very big issue for all the areas I mentioned.

So essentially, we should have a long consultation process any time the council wish to divert traffic temporarily (and following a consultation process)?

Larbre34

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So essentially, we should have a long consultation process any time the council wish to divert traffic temporarily (and following a consultation process)?

Eh, yes.

But lets be clear. With no metrics being set and no structured planning approval having taken place that includes a condition to time limit the trial, nobody has any faith that the DCC executive will remove the arrangement after 6 months anyway.

Their conduct in the administration of this matter from the beginning has convinced opponents that the only thing they can be trusted to be, is untrustworthy.

Fighting Tao

Larbre34 wrote: »

Diverted traffic accessing the east link will potentially be a very big issue for all the areas I mentioned.

Trucks will use the m50 to access to port. It will be a huge win for the community if it even gets rid of the trucks.

People tend to adapt their mode of transport when changes are implemented. There will be many more cyclists rather than motorists as people switch to bikes as it is safer and more efficient.

Citing traffic is a red herring. How did the areas around Grangegorman get on? They haven’t noticed a difference in traffic. Also the areas surrounding the quays when a Lane of cars was changed to two lanes of cyclists.

So basically using traffic as an excuse is BS that is easily seen through.

Fighting Tao

Larbre34 wrote: »

Eh, yes.

But lets be clear. With no metrics being set and no structured planning approval having taken place that includes a condition to time limit the trial, nobody has any faith that the DCC executive will remove the arrangement after 6 months anyway.

Their conduct in the administration of this matter from the beginning has convinced opponents that the only thing they can be trusted to be, is untrustworthy.

There were 2 consultations already. The STC group even got their back of an envelope effort onto the table. It was disregarded for the bill it was.

Larbre34

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Citing traffic is a red herring. How did the areas around Grangegorman get on? They haven’t noticed a difference in traffic.

Who mentioned trucks? I'm talking about 2 and 3 axle stuff, mainly cars and vans. You know, all the vans that are keeping people supplied with their online shopping these days?

I'm absolutely not getting into Grangegorman, thats its own whole saga. Suffice to say, judgement is withheld on that until traffic returns to post-pandemic normal.

Weepsie

Larbre34 wrote: »

Diverted traffic accessing the east link will potentially be a very big issue for all the areas I mentioned.

It like people think that the traffic will go on a really, really long rat run and take in every neighbourhood just to p!ss them off.

And see here. The problem you have is traffic and drivers. You should be putting your energy into encourage people onto bikes , busses, trains and shared modes of transport. This is the absolute perfect time to do so rather than have a whinge about what will be no.mlre than a minor inconvenience for a few unimaginative people

Larbre34

Weepsie wrote: »

It like people think that the traffic will go on a really, really long rat run and take in every neighbourhood just to p!ss them off.

Don't be obtuse.

Some of the re-routed traffic will affect some of the neighbourhoods, some of the time. And its not rat running. The East Link is a main route to take traffic out of the City Centre. This trial intends to cut off direct northbound access to it. The only alternative to driving through the City Centre to cross the river, is to approach the East Link from an alternative route to R131 Strand Road/Beach Road.

Those alternatives are either through Sandymount, via Sydney Parade, Serpentine Avenue, etc. Through Irishtown via Bath Avenue, Londonbridge Road, Church Road etc. Or through Ringsend, via Ballsbridge, Haddington Road, Beggars Bush, South Lotts Road etc etc.

Fighting Tao

Larbre34 wrote: »

Don't be obtuse.

Some of the re-routed traffic will affect some of the neighbourhoods, some of the time. And its not rat running. The East Link is a main route to take traffic out of the City Centre. This trial intends to cut off direct northbound access to it. The only alternative to driving through the City Centre to cross the river, is to approach the East Link from an alternative route to R131 Strand Road/Beach Road.

Those alternatives are either through Sandymount, via Sydney Parade, Serpentine Avenue, etc. Through Irishtown via Bath Avenue, Londonbridge Road, Church Road etc. Or through Ringsend, via Ballsbridge, Haddington Road, Beggars Bush, South Lotts Road etc etc.

Jaysus. It will affect me more than you. I live across the east link and drive/cycle(odd time) through the area on my work commute. On a good day pre-pandemic, it would take me 45 minutes to get to the east link toll from Booterstown at rush hour. On an average day 1.5 hours. Do you hear me whinge??

Do you really think people want to cross the east link? This will encourage them to use other modes of transport.

PaulieC

Fighting Tao wrote: »

So if someone is killed due to how dangerous strand road currently while these delays are happening, and the cranks lose the court case because they are just being cranks and nothjj in by more. Could they be sued?

Do you have some metric that shows that the road is "dangerous" ? It can be a pain, sure, but I've never been involved in, seen or heard of anything happening on that road.

Seth Brundle

PaulieC wrote: »

Do you have some metric that shows that the road is "dangerous" ? It can be a pain, sure, but I've never been involved in, seen or heard of anything happening on that road.

The only metric you would find is fatalities as many non-fatal incidents would not be reported to the gardai.
Is that really how you want to measure whether or not safety improvements should be considered?
Have you ever cycled it? I have and I definitley do not feel safe on it.

Dick Turnip

PaulieC wrote: »

Do you have some metric that shows that the road is "dangerous" ? It can be a pain, sure, but I've never been involved in, seen or heard of anything happening on that road.

Would you let your kid cycle on it? That's one metric.

Larbre34

I wouldn't characterise Strand Road as being more or less dangerous to cycle on currently than any main urban route. The surface is decent, sightlines are pretty good etc.

But lets be clear, objecting to any traffic management scheme doesn't even slightly make those objectors liable for any future incidents when the status quo is maintained.

Thelonious Monk

It's not the road that's dangerous it's the motorists on it. They seem to be very impatient on Strand Road from my experience, as they usually don't have enough space to overtake you, with traffic coming on the other side, so they usually close pass you and almost hit you, or when there's a small gap in traffic on the other side they put the foot down and angrily blaze past you for holding them up. This is magnified on sunny days when there are far more cars/bikes.
It's just quite unpleasant and it would totally turn people off cycling along there, never mind kids.

PaulieC

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The only metric you would find is fatalities as many non-fatal incidents would not be reported to the gardai.
Is that really how you want to measure whether or not safety improvements should be considered?
Have you ever cycled it? I have and I definitley do not feel safe on it.

It's my route to work (in the good old days when work outside the house was a thing), so yes. It's probably the road I am most familiar with.

Feeling safe isn't a metric. It's a feeling

Dick Turnip wrote: »

Would you let your kid cycle on it? That's one metric.

I have and do. Again, it's not a metric, it's a feeling.

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's not the road that's dangerous it's the motorists on it. They seem to be very impatient on Strand Road from my experience, as they usually don't have enough space to overtake you, with traffic coming on the other side, so they usually close pass you and almost hit you, or when there's a small gap in traffic on the other side they put the foot down and angrily blaze past you for holding them up. This is magnified on sunny days when there are far more cars/bikes.
It's just quite unpleasant and it would totally turn people off cycling along there, never mind kids.

my experience differs. I find the motorists no more or less dangerous than any other road. Not all motorists are the same.

Dick Turnip

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The only metric you would find is fatalities as many non-fatal incidents would not be reported to the gardai.
Is that really how you want to measure whether or not safety improvements should be considered?

Exactly, the RSA are so obsessed with fatalities as the only metric of road safety.

If huge proportions of the population don't cycle as they think the roads and streets are too dangerous, then the RSA are failing the population on how truly safe the roads are.

Thelonious Monk

PaulieC wrote: »

my experience differs. I find the motorists no more or less dangerous than any other road. Not all motorists are the same.

Any road where there isn't much space is the same in Dublin, the scenarios I presented above regularly happen.

DoraDelite

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Any road where there isn't much space is the same in Dublin, the scenarios I presented above regularly happen.

Yep, I have the same experience as you. Not just on the bike, try driving Strand Road at the speed limit (or any road in Dublin) and watch the road raging, tail gating, foaming at the mouth behind you. I have been overtaken dangerously on more than one occasion on that road while driving.

Seth Brundle

PaulieC wrote: »

It's my route to work (in the good old days when work outside the house was a thing), so yes. It's probably the road I am most familiar with.

Feeling safe isn't a metric. It's a feeling

I responded about a metric which was that apart from numbers of people getting killed, you don't have one.
What you are left with then is feelings and the majority would not feel safe cycling there.
Maybe a metric might be based on belief: do you believe that the road is safe to let a child cycle to school on - Yes or No?

eeeee

The surface on the Strand Road is shyte, from the Merrion Gates to Sean Moore road. You have to cycle in the middle of the lane at the very least to avoid the holes and subsiding roads, the roundabouts and their approaches and off them are in shyte too. With the on road parking you ahve to cycle right out nearly onto the right hand side of the lane.
I cycle that road every day and it's not pleasant, not in any way, shape or form. Traffic gets pissed you're in front of them and you get multiple passes on blind bends, cutting in, cutting across you, cars on the other side of the road passing cyclists on blind bends driving at you.
I do a lot, a lot of cycling, well used to traffic, my commute brings me through town and down the length of the quays every day (pre covid) and the Strand Road is no where near 'good' to cycle on.
You almost never see familes, kids etc. cycling along it. The Blackrock - Sandycove lane has brought out way, way more kids, families, old people, women that I have never seen before on that road in years of cycling on it. It's so busy you get held up cycling along, it's great to see. This cycle lane will do the same.
I can't wait for it to go in.

Thelonious Monk

DoraDelite wrote: »

Yep, I have the same experience as you. Not just on the bike, try driving Strand Road at the speed limit (or any road in Dublin) and watch the road raging, tail gating, foaming at the mouth behind you. I have been overtaken dangerously on more than one occasion on that road while driving.

Don't know where you live but I'm near a road called Springdale in Raheny, and similar experiences here except they are even angrier. I had someone threaten me 2 weeks ago as he close passed me as he couldn't get past for a few seconds.
So now I just cycle on the footpath on that stretch, obviously getting out of the way of pedestrians if required, but they are hardly ever there.

silverharp

Dick Turnip wrote: »

Would you let your kid cycle on it? That's one metric.

lol no, always cycled with my kids on the path on the Strand road and if going to Blackrock, that path too until you hit the park

Weepsie

eeeee wrote: »

You almost never see familes, kids etc. cycling along it. The Blackrock - Sandycove lane has brought out way, way more kids, families, old people, women that I have never seen before on that road in years of cycling on it. It's so busy you get held up cycling along, it's great to see. This cycle lane will do the same.
I can't wait for it to go in.

Same in the phoenix park with the former parking now a cycle lane. Families, older people and a more even gender balance using it, and using it a lot.

You put in good facilities, they will be used, and the naysayers will eventually see very little difference to their lives anyway, (may get a a nice property price bump). Only the diehards will cling on to the dream of traffic and private vehicles being everywhere, causing all the issues.

magicbastarder

the stupid thing is that even the idea of low traffic neighbourhoods - as was proposed out around harold's cross - was fought tooth and nail by locals.
but it's funny how these things go. the closure of a rat run was trialled between griffith avenue and drumcondra a few years ago, and the locals were dead set against it. but when the period of the trial came to an end, they were dead set against the bollards being removed.

tomasrojo

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Any road where there isn't much space is the same in Dublin, the scenarios I presented above regularly happen.

Yeah, I'm not going to comment on Strand Road because I don't know much about it,but narrow-laned roads with fairly heavy traffic are always unpleasant, with close passes and impatient risk-taking.

magicbastarder

Larbre34 wrote: »

I wouldn't characterise Strand Road as being more or less dangerous to cycle on currently than any main urban route. The surface is decent, sightlines are pretty good etc.

the sightlines make it more likely that motorists will try a stupid overtake, in my experience. the roundabouts are not pleasant either, the road is too narrow to justify them and there's one especially where inbound traffic is not visible to traffic coming from the left till the last moment - you really have to take the lane on approach and several times i'd either had to drop anchor, or the motorist who should have yielded had to do similar.

inbound at rush hour was usually a ****show too, at evening rush hour. there'd be essentially no space left for cyclists in among the static traffic.

anyway, saying it's no more or less dangerous to cycle than any main urban route; that's either a quite unintentional damning with faint praise, or missing the point.

BabysCoffee

Fighting Tao wrote: »

There were 2 consultations already. The STC group even got their back of an envelope effort onto the table. It was disregarded for the bill it was.

If it was decided to proceed with the back of the envelope effort would they be bringing it to court?