Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Cosmos7

Is there lots of case law with people challenging whether other road realignment works needed part 8 ?

Peregrine

Cosmos7 wrote: »

Is there lots of case law with people challenging whether other road realignment works needed part 8 ?

There's no road realignment involved in this project. This is just road markings, bollards and changes to junctions. All defined as traffic calming measures under Section 38 of the Road Traffic Act 1994. The alignment remains the same.

Kermit.de.frog

The Dublin Cycling Campaign Group took a legal action on a technicality that deprived a community near Sheriff Street of much needed investment and hundreds of homes last year. One of the most deprived, poverty stricken and crime ridden areas in Dublin and they did that.

If you want to win people over don't do things like that.

So when it comes to this action they can't complain.

Peregrine

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The Dublin Cycling Campaign Group took a legal action on a technicality that deprived a community near Sheriff Street of much needed investment and hundreds of homes last year. One of the most deprived, poverty stricken and crime ridden areas in Dublin and they did that.

If you want to win people over don't do things like that.

So when it comes to this action they can't complain.

They took legal action against An Bord Pleanála who allowed Ballymore and Oxley to illegally build a large non-residential car park as part of a residential development without including it for consideration in the application. The judge found that they "took an informed decision to deliberately not include" it as part of the application to get around SHD legislation.

Far from your depriving poverty stricken areas of much needed luxury apartments narrative. In stark contrast to this case, they outlined why they thought the law was broken from the start. And they were right. The blame for that residential development being delayed lies with the developers who took the informed decision to break the law and ABP for allowing them — not the people who called them out on it.

Don't pretend you care for the community on Sheriff Street. Your post is oozing contempt for them.

Kermit.de.frog

Peregrine wrote: »

The blame for that residential development being delayed

I care deeply about that area.

And, you're wrong, it's scrapped.

They took a case on a technicality that has deprived jobs and housing in one of the most deprived areas of Dublin.

With that comes reputational damage and anger.

We are in a housing crisis and they did that. Doesn't affect them of course.

Not buying it. This is karma - want to play like that how can you complain? We'll all take cases on technicalities with zero concern for those affected.

The Spy Queen

I live on londonbridge road. On any normal day the traffic on it is terrible. i am an avid cyclist also and mainly use bike to commute to work on the northside of dublin. This project is not like closing minor roads in seapoint, sandycove or Dun Laoghaire this is a main route to get from one side of dublin to the other not to mention our main indoor concert venue. This project will affect negatively way more people than it will benefit. Do the proper thing and put the Cycleway on the outside of the sea wall and while they are there could they raise it a foot or two. This project is ridiculous in my opinion.

BabysCoffee

The Spy Queen wrote: »

I live on londonbridge road. On any normal day the traffic on it is terrible. i am an avid cyclist also and mainly use bike to commute to work on the northside of dublin. This project is not like closing minor roads in seapoint, sandycove or Dun Laoghaire this is a main route to get from one side of dublin to the other not to mention our main indoor concert venue. This project will affect negatively way more people than it will benefit. Do the proper thing and put the Cycleway on the outside of the sea wall and while they are there could they raise it a foot or two. This project is ridiculous in my opinion.

I cycle to most concerts, it's definitely a more fun way to travel than car. I'm looking forward to be able to do it more safely in the future on this cyclepath.

Fighting Tao

The Spy Queen wrote: »

I live on londonbridge road. On any normal day the traffic on it is terrible. i am an avid cyclist also and mainly use bike to commute to work on the northside of dublin. This project is not like closing minor roads in seapoint, sandycove or Dun Laoghaire this is a main route to get from one side of dublin to the other not to mention our main indoor concert venue. This project will affect negatively way more people than it will benefit. Do the proper thing and put the Cycleway on the outside of the sea wall and while they are there could they raise it a foot or two. This project is ridiculous in my opinion.

The port tunnel was built to remove traffic from the city centre. It can be accessed via the m50, so a few going to concerts can manage between cycling, waking, public transport, and if they really need to...via the port tunnel. So another excuse.

MojoMaker

Oh dear Spy Queen. Open-minded up to the point you inserted "avid cyclist" into the mix as if to justify how bad things must be if "even an avid cyclist like me opposes this"....let's just agree, you are a local resident who doesn't want your ability to drive and park anywhere you like in the D4 area affected by a community project with which you have no great affinity.

The guff about the 3 Arena is particularly galling. If you're in the D4 area you should be walking to the venue and encouraging the kids to walk (or cycle).

The only groups this will negatively affect are drivers who refuse to review and potentially modify their driving habits - change is difficult and the transition period will be tricky, no doubting that - but there is a ton of traffic on that road right now that could be considered non-essential, the road being used simply because it's there.

We need a national mindset shift away from traffic and private car usage and if councils can help by altering otherwise immovable opinions and mindsets then so be it, because gentle persuasion certainly hasn't worked.

magicbastarder

MojoMaker wrote: »

If you're in the D4 area you should be walking to the venue and encouraging the kids to walk (or cycle).

The Spy Queen made no mention of driving to the venue *herself*. i have cycled the strand road in the lead up to concerts and the traffic on it is almost certainly not from locals.

Thelonious Monk

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The Dublin Cycling Campaign Group took a legal action on a technicality that deprived a community near Sheriff Street of much needed investment and hundreds of homes last year. One of the most deprived, poverty stricken and crime ridden areas in Dublin and they did that.

If you want to win people over don't do things like that.

So when it comes to this action they can't complain.

How would these apartments benefit your average Sheriff Street resident?

Thelonious Monk

The Spy Queen wrote: »

Do the proper thing and put the Cycleway on the outside of the sea wall and while they are there could they raise it a foot or two

It's a protected unesco biosphere so I'm pretty sure building anything there isn't an option.

magicbastarder

has there been any thought given to mandating one road for approaching the east link, and another for departing?

magicbastarder

and i think i asked before, but isn't there going to be an increase in dart frequency, so the merrion gates will be shut for even longer at rush hour?
though i assume that plan predated covid.

Weepsie

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I care deeply about that area.

And, you're wrong, it's scrapped.

They took a case on a technicality that has deprived jobs and housing in one of the most deprived areas of Dublin.

With that comes reputational damage and anger.

We are in a housing crisis and they did that. Doesn't affect them of course.

Not buying it. This is karma - want to play like that how can you complain? We'll all take cases on technicalities with zero concern for those affected.

I worked there for a long time. Those jobs and and housing where not going to the people in the area who need it most. In fact every development there does it's best to hide away those that call it home and have called it home for the longest time.

PLus it was very black and white. They would have broken the law in going ahead with building it.

silverharp

MojoMaker wrote: »

Oh dear Spy Queen. Open-minded up to the point you inserted "avid cyclist" into the mix as if to justify how bad things must be if "even an avid cyclist like me opposes this"....let's just agree, you are a local resident who doesn't want your ability to drive and park anywhere you like in the D4 area affected by a community project with which you have no great affinity.

The guff about the 3 Arena is particularly galling. If you're in the D4 area you should be walking to the venue and encouraging the kids to walk (or cycle).

The only groups this will negatively affect are drivers who refuse to review and potentially modify their driving habits - change is difficult and the transition period will be tricky, no doubting that - but there is a ton of traffic on that road right now that could be considered non-essential, the road being used simply because it's there.

We need a national mindset shift away from traffic and private car usage and if councils can help by altering otherwise immovable opinions and mindsets then so be it, because gentle persuasion certainly hasn't worked.

your stadium comment clearly shows you didnt read her post correctly , and imagining the poster's "real" intentions is another fail

Larbre34

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's a protected unesco biosphere so I'm pretty sure building anything there isn't an option.

I think we need to debunk this b0ll1x.

The boundary of the Dublin Bay Biosphere, is at the Dublin Mountains on one end and Dublin Airport at the other. It includes somewhere in the region of 250,000 homes and hundreds of kilometres of roads as well as factories, hospitals, shopping centres etc. Most obviously, it includes the poo factory and massive incinerator at Poolbeg.

It definitely includes the Sutton to Fairview coastal cycleway, itself straddling the boundary of a wildlife preserve.

At Sandymount, the "biosphere" includes an existing shared footpath/cycletrack and 3 or 4 carparks.

It is not beyond the talents of Dublin City Council to get the finger out and begin the process of designing a promenade cycleway tomorrow and support it through the not insurmountable obstacle of being in the biosphere! Who knows, they might even be able to remove a carpark or two in the process. Wouldn't that be dandy.

Thelonious Monk

I would prefer the setup with a one way road either way, less cars and noise.

Larbre34

I think we need to move on the thinking from this. In my view, the trial as proposed by DCC, is very unlikely to happen now.

I see Cllr Donna Cooney on twitter saying things like "its happening anyway". Unless she got herself a seat on the High Court while I wasn't looking, its just bonkers talk from her and people should inform themselves of where things are at rather than listening to her.

silverharp

does it mean the car parks at the front will be closed, that will be a benefit

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

I think we need to move on the thinking from this. In my view, the trial as proposed by DCC, is very unlikely to happen now.

I see Cllr Donna Cooney on twitter saying things like "its happening anyway". Unless she got herself a seat on the High Court while I wasn't looking, its just bonkers talk from her and people should inform themselves of where things are at rather than listening to her.

ReRead your own post.
You say it’s not happening.
You then Give out about her saying it is happening.

Did you get a seat on the high court ?

Seth Brundle

This is what the NIMBYists are against...

https://twitter.com/DubCityCouncil/status/1333788985731125251?s=19

Larbre34

ted1 wrote: »

ReRead your own post.
You say it’s not happening.
You then Give out about her saying it is happening.

Did you get a seat on the high court ?

What part of "in my view, is unlikely" did you not comprehend?

Larbre34

Seth Brundle wrote: »

This is what the NIMBYists are against...

The design, scale and impact of R131 Strand Road/Beach Road is in a different universe from the Grangegorman filter. You really must be more honest in what you are trying to convince people of.

Thelonious Monk

You can see from responses to all these things like Grangegorman how many people just don't want any change to the status quo.
If the Strand Road thing goes ahead, I certainly can't see it going beyond a trial. I honestly think the only hope for proper modal change is when the gridlock gets so bad it's almost impossible to drive anywhere like Moscow or Bogota.
In Malta, it's a microcosm of Irish transport planning or lack of, they have basically no public transport and 2 cars per household in the most densely populated place in Europe. Their solutions appear to be building more roads and overpasses all over the place to accommodate more traffic. At least we can't do that here within the M50 anyway, so I'm just going to hold out for total gridlock and hope it gets worse and worse.

Seth Brundle

Larbre34 wrote: »

The design, scale and impact of R131 Strand Road/Beach Road is in a different universe from the Grangegorman filter. You really must be more honest in what you are trying to convince people of.

They are against the trial changing of a traffic lane into a segregated cycle path
The existing road is unsafe for cycling. The trial will provide a segregated route safw for vulnerable road usees.
These safe segregated lanes have been shown to increase usage and decrease the risk to vulnerable road users.
The NIMBYists don't want this and want something which they know will take years to happen, if it even happens simply because they don't want to lose their ability to drive and park where they want to.
Which bit did I miss out on or in what way have I not been honest?

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

What part of "in my view, is unlikely" did you not comprehend?

Is Cllr Donna Cooney not entitled to her view ?

buffalo

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I honestly think the only hope for proper modal change is when the gridlock gets so bad it's almost impossible to drive anywhere like Moscow or Bogota.

That's when the clamouring for another lane/road/bypass gets loudest.

Thelonious Monk

buffalo wrote: »

That's when the clamouring for another lane/road/bypass gets loudest.

In Dublin at least, there's not really room for more roads.

Larbre34

ted1 wrote: »

Is Cllr Donna Cooney not entitled to her view ?

She is of course. She needs to express it as a view though, a hope, an aim, not a definite. She is misleading people and could end up looking very silly.