Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Trudee

Peregrine wrote: »

That's interesting because I requested all 2650 responses to the Strand Road consultation from Dublin City Council and filtered them for ones containing the words "serpentine", "pedestrian" and "crossing". Out of the 2650 submissions, there were no submissions that asked for pedestrian crossings at the junction of Serpentine Avenue and Merrion Road.

Maybe I missed yours but it still wouldn't be a lot.

Nothing interesting about it, sent email to Owen Keegan, Brendan O’Brien and Clare French plus Pembroke Cllr’s so maybe check with them about submissions in relation to this particular junction.

Fighting Tao

So the consultation process was not used, and therefore it wasn't taken into account. Hmm.....how did you expect it to be taken into account for the Strand Road changes then? Unless I am misunderstanding the consultation process.

Peregrine

Trudee wrote: »

Nothing interesting about it, sent email to Owen Keegan, Brendan O’Brien and Clare French plus Pembroke Cllr’s so maybe check with them about submissions in relation to this particular junction.

Fair enough, I don't have your e-mails about the proposal. Given that online submissions outnumbered e-mails 10:1, there would have to be a lot of e-mails about this junction to change my point. Why is nobody else on Serpentine Avenue asking for these pedestrian crossings? Did they all e-mail too?

I do have all e-mails between Dublin City Council and the Serpentine Avenue, Tritonville Road and Claremont Road "community group" whose focus is entirely on the Strand Road cycle route and they didn't ask for it either.

I agree that it's an issue but your beef is with your neighbours and community groups.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

Hope Dublin Bus are ready to quickly move the routes back to Strand Road once the trial is called off tomorrow.

So we are near the end of tomorrow and it’s still going ahead.
Busses still operating on the new route

CramCycle

ted1 wrote: »

Do we are near the end of tomorrow and it’s still going ahead.
Busses still operating on the new route

I presume that DB would have to give notification to the NTA, have it approved and give notice before such a change occurred so I wouldn't stress to much about DB changing back for awhile yet.

nomdeboardie

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think i found the kick out of the kerb at the roundabout more irritating than the roundabouts themselves:

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3366121,-6.2179068,3a,75y,110.59h,65.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYh2iKw8SL1r4_MQUC-2tnw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DYh2iKw8SL1r4_MQUC-2tnw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D70.35471%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

i think their sole purpose was to irritate cyclists. or maybe just me.

Darwinian filter for unwary cyclists (who collide either with the curb or with cars as they're pinched together). For the rest of us, a reminder to TAKE THE LANE NOW!

Thelonious Monk

ted1 wrote: »

So we are near the end of tomorrow and it’s still going ahead.
Busses still operating on the new route

Someone said court is tomorrow, so if it's being called off it'll be called off tomorrow. Which is why I find it strange they're actually doing so much work if there's a strong chance it'll be called off.

magicbastarder

well, consider what would happen if everyone realised DCC would call off works at the sniff of legal action; when they make a decision, it may be strategic on their part to proceed until ordered not to by a judge. and you can see the rationale for that.

ted1

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Someone said court is tomorrow, so if it's being called off it'll be called off tomorrow. Which is why I find it strange they're actually doing so much work if there's a strong chance it'll be called off.

Way do you find strange, there is nothing wrong with what they are doing.

We live in a world where people constantly object. If we were to stop at every objection we’d never get anything done.
You keep playing till the ref blows his whistle

Larbre34

That's rubbish.

DCC know where the situation is, they've known since Monday that by this weekend, they'll either be able to carry on, or they'll be halted for a number of months

To be paying contractors through the nose, with taxpayers money, to do be digging up today what they may well have reinstate after tomorrow, is reckless, negligent and a dereliction of their duty as the local authority and of the Chief Executive as accounting officer.

They are trying to bulldoze, railroad, front it out; whatever adjective you like and its disgraceful.

bbuzz

https://twitter.com/irishdocsenv/status/1365026485631860737?s=21

Larbre34

Larbre34 wrote: »

That's rubbish.

DCC know where the situation is, they've known since Monday that by this weekend, they'll either be able to carry on, or they'll be halted for a number of months

To be paying contractors through the nose, with taxpayers money, to do be digging up today what they may well have reinstate after tomorrow, is reckless, negligent and a dereliction of their duty as the local authority and of the Chief Executive as accounting officer.

They are trying to bulldoze, railroad, front it out; whatever adjective you like and its disgraceful.

I think it's great

Thelonious Monk

ted1 wrote: »

Way do you find strange, there is nothing wrong with what they are doing.

We live in a world where people constantly object. If we were to stop at every objection we’d never get anything done.
You keep playing till the ref blows his whistle

I want this done as much as anyone and I would use it regularly but if there are counsellors involved and lots of money and it's a rich area, I mean surely it'll be called off tomorrow - which is why I don't understand why they didn't wait for the decision.

Larbre34

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think it's great

You enjoy the tax you pay being spaffed up the wall is it?

Thelonious Monk

Larbre34 wrote: »

You enjoy the tax you pay being spaffed up the wall is it?

In fairness if it turns out to be a waste of money it's Mannix and co.'s fault, not DCC.

Weepsie

Larbre34 wrote: »

You enjoy the tax you pay being spaffed up the wall is it?

How much is the legal case going to cost the state because a few people are afraid of change? Won't even give it a go, and didn't bother engaging in the consultation phase?

If you cares that much about tax wastenyoud also surely be dead set against the case

CramCycle

Larbre34 wrote: »

You enjoy the tax you pay being spaffed up the wall is it?

I presume they won't do anything to revert unless instructed by a judge or ABP, no different than any ABP case. So unless the case is "won" by Mannix then it isn't a waste. i presume they will just make it as safe as possible without altering the works too much.

magicbastarder

Larbre34 wrote: »

You enjoy the tax you pay being spaffed up the wall is it?

should everything in the state be stopped at the threat of legal action?
you do know how many people use the law as a weapon rather than a defence, do you?

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

You enjoy the tax you pay being spaffed up the wall is it?

Surely a legal challenge againest a 6 month trial is a waste of taxpayers money.

Grassey

Larbre34 wrote:

To be paying contractors through the nose, with taxpayers money, to.. .

Sit idle waiting for the court to say carry on lads, sorry for the delay, thanks for hanging on while I dealt with this storm in a teacup would be a waste of money also.

magicbastarder

Larbre34 wrote: »

they've known since Monday that by this weekend, they'll either be able to carry on, or they'll be halted for a number of months

To be paying contractors through the nose, with taxpayers money, to do be digging up today what they may well have reinstate after tomorrow

forgive me if i'm misremembering your previous statements, i may be confusing you with someone else; but you're a businessperson IIRC?

if i engage the services of someone to dig up a road or otherwise engage in civil engineering works, who schedule staff and equipment for such works, is suggesting a *three day* advance warning of such action enough to allow the works to be halted at no cost to the taxpayer; is this how such contracts work?
i mean, if i engage someone to carry out works costing five or six figures, can i on a whim of a few day's notice tell them to stop, without them charging me for such little notice of cessation of works?

further, if i incur costs running to (say) five figures for temporary cessation of those works, and then find out i am given the green light to proceed, can i apply to whomever took the case deemed inadequate by the courts, for them to refund me the money wasted by an unnecessary cessation? if not, who should i blame for the waste of taxpayer's money?

Larbre34

Depends how they engaged the contractor.

But work of this type is generally off the minor works lists, in which case its day rate stuff anyway and if the Contractor gets a lot of work that way from DCC then a) they would otherwise be engaged elsewhere fixing footpaths or doing permanent reinstatements and b) no contractor with half a brain is going to piss off their biggest meal ticket by complaining about getting messed about for a few days.

In any case, thats not the biggest money headache facing the Council, its the fact that its going to cost €250,000 (even before the Parks Depts latest additions) and they've exceeded the value threshold for carrying out a Part 8 process by 100%!! Absolute banana republic carry-on.

Anyway, we'll see what the Judge makes of it tomorrow.

site_owner

10 minutes to go, any solicitors on here that can watch the stream and put an end to the suspense?

Effects

CramCycle wrote: »

I thought some had been removed a good while ago, not that they made much of a difference bar one positive that people did slow, slightly, while driving over them.

I saw them working on them last week, and again this week.

You can see it here as well: https://www.instagram.com/p/CLuKXQbMoQE/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

site_owner

All works stayed pending hearing in April

Larbre34

Yeah, look, we are where we were always going to be on this, the conduct of the City Council throughout saw to that.

Also today you'll have seen an FoI outcome released by the residents groups, throwing the whole "consultation" process into question. Believe me when I say this, we are ALL better served by a statutory planning process, the parameters are there for a reason and it gives legitimacy to public works schemes like this.

I am beyond disgusted with every move of DCC here. Financially, administratively, operationally, they have come up well short as a local authority and I suggest they should be the focus of any ire here, not residents or Councillors or drivers or cyclists. I mean ripping up the traffic islands and mini roundabouts up to yesterday when the writing was on the wall was just vandalism. They also removed the pedestrian protection railings from in front of the primary school, which of course is due to reopen on Monday. At the very least I hope they'll have someone down there this afternoon to replace them in time, but what kind of City Council staff are we actually dealing with here....

magicbastarder

the traffic islands should never have been put there in the first place, cycle lane or no. most of the near misses i've had cycling on that road are due to the islands (and stupid drivers).

tomasrojo

How is the behaviour of DCC different from DLRCC anyway? They did hasty emergency cycling and walking infrastructure as well, with minimal consultation, with the option of undoing after the trial. Dundrum Main Street was altered pretty comprehensively.

magicbastarder

some more detail:

Order halting works on Sandymount cycleway issued by High Court
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/order-halting-works-on-sandymount-cycleway-issued-by-high-court-1.4495901

whether or not it's an accurate representation of what was actually presented in court, the article would suggest a large part of the argument put forward was that the cycle path is not covid compliant.

tomasrojo

magicbastarder wrote: »

some more detail:

Order halting works on Sandymount cycleway issued by High Court
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/order-halting-works-on-sandymount-cycleway-issued-by-high-court-1.4495901

whether or not it's an accurate representation of what was actually presented in court, the article would suggest a large part of the argument put forward was that the cycle path is not covid compliant.

I can see from the way it's presented there why some people are saying the case is very weak. The env. impact and covid-compliant bits are grasping at straws. The only bit that seems relevant to me is the notion that it's not temporary and that it's intended to be part of a network. I presume if the project is ultimately halted it'll be on those grounds.

EDIT: If this is drawn out long enough, the justification of covid emergency measures might also no longer be applicable, I suppose. Vaccination effects of transmission seem to be towards the more optimistic end of projections.