Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

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....

all that happened is that they were told to stop till April, no wrong doing was found to be have done

site_owner

Larbre34 wrote: »

Also today you'll have seen an FoI outcome released by the residents groups, throwing the whole "consultation" process into question.

What time / where is this being released?

CramCycle

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'd love to see Mr. Flynn's degree in virology or epidimiology as he appears to be assigning characteristics to the council that he himself suffers from in spades in regards dubious-ness.

Regardless, the council claim they got independent advice, for all claiming they ran rampant. So if it turns out they were in the wrong, then I presume they will be taking those consultants to task. They obviously feel confident they are in the right, hence continuing the work and to be honest, based on the Times article, it sounds Mr. Flynn is reaching. Certainly, he doesn't seem to grasp that either a) if not a success it will return to the status quo before the measure and b) if it is a success it won't.

Peregrine

Larbre34 wrote: »

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.

Amazing how this iron-clad gotcha legal argument of yours isn't even featuring in the plaintiffs' challenge.

It's almost as if it's written in primary legislation, in no uncertain terms, that this cost threshold isn't relevant for cycling and public transport projects. This has already been explained to you.

tomasrojo

CramCycle wrote: »

Certainly, he doesn't seem to grasp that either a) if not a success it will return to the status quo before the measure and b) if it is a success it won't.

c) He doesn't want to take a chance on it being a success. He has a vision of the future, and it's a boot (possibly cleated, with socks adjusted to the correct height) stamping on a human face - forever.

Larbre34

Peregrine wrote: »

Amazing how this iron-clad gotcha legal argument of yours isn't even featuring in the plaintiffs' challenge.

It's almost as if it's written in primary legislation, in no uncertain terms, that this cost threshold isn't relevant for cycling and public transport projects. This has already been explained to you.

Yeah good man, thanks.

At the discretion of the legal team, some issues were put into the JR request, other issues directly related to planning regs are in the Section 5 to An Bord Pleanála. All aspects will be reviewed in these combined processes.

CramCycle

tomasrojo wrote: »

c) He doesn't want to take a chance on it being a success. He has a vision of the future, and it's a boot (possibly cleated, with socks adjusted to the correct height) stamping on a human face - forever.

To be fair I find the fact that the Gardai weren't measuring sock height during Covid checkpoints a bigger crime than those breaching other public health guidance. Shows where their priorities really lie.

Larbre34

site_owner wrote: »

What time / where is this being released?

RTE news online since this morning.

fat bloke

Seeing as cyclists aren't welcome, I wonder... if we all took to driving over and back the road for a month or so...:pac:

Fighting Tao

fat bloke wrote: »

Seeing as cyclists aren't welcome, I wonder... if we all took to driving over and back the road for a month or so...:pac:

That is just a normal day there. Pre-covid traffic was often blocked from the Liffey right to Merrion gates in the afternoon/evenings. It was never as bad heading southbound for some reason.

Seems like a few people love the smell of car fumes.

Thelonious Monk

I might drive over and do laps of Sandymount village all day tomorrow. Traffic will be chaos there tomorrow anyway with the nice weather.

ted1

fat bloke wrote: »

Seeing as cyclists aren't welcome, I wonder... if we all took to driving over and back the road for a month or so...:pac:

I’ll be cycling in the primary position on strand road in Future

tomasrojo

Larbre34 wrote: »

RTE news online since this morning.

Is it this?
https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2021/0225/1199438-sandymount-cycleway/

Larbre34

tomasrojo wrote: »

Is it this?
https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2021/0225/1199438-sandymount-cycleway/

Tis

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

RTE news online since this morning.

I see nothing wrong with the consultation, NTA asked for it to be extended and more people supported it.

tomasrojo

It's not about Strand Road though.

tomasrojo

I'm not following this closely enough maybe, but the Beach Road consultation doesn't seem to blow the Strand Road story wide open, as they say in newspaper-drama movies.

Weepsie

LSo they have a problem that lots of non residents supported the cycleway plans when consultation was extended, yet they don't have problem with a counsellor from an other district is fighting their battle?

And sure we hear of the people of Ringsend and irishtown are against it.

If that's one of their arguments it's nothing but nimbyism at its finest, same as the mobhi road residents so dead against both bus connects and the metro North that would have massive positive impact for people from beyond their little bubbles

Thelonious Monk

As I said earlier, the people supporting the locals here would not be supporting the locals wanting the Phoenix Park gates closed, even though it could lead to more traffic in surrounding areas.
Basically people want to be able to drive everywhere with no constraints.

tomasrojo

It's a local road, for local people. Except it has an R in front of it.

Thelonious Monk

Anyway, I'm going to let this one go, can't see it happening now and I thought it was audacious to start with, fair play to DCC for trying at least, but at the end of the day Irish people do not want to get out of their cars.

Larbre34

tomasrojo wrote: »

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.

In fairness to DLR, they went mostly with low impact, proportionate measures. If you look at Dundrum and Blackrock, both villages are bypassed by a high quality route, so the works that were implemented were suitable and beneficial. In fact, had DCC done similar, reduced Sandymount village to a single lane with cycle priority and left Strand Road alone to carry the main traffic, we wouldn't be where we are today.

I've said many times, the Government *said* go out an improve mobility locally to suit pandemic conditions. They didn't change any laws to bolster that, so the planning laws never stopped applying. When DCC took the absolute piss by putting forward a huge impact scheme like Strand Road, it always exceeded the spirit of the Govt's direction and it was ALWAYS going to be challenged.

In persisting with their approach, DCC have now brought this legal challenge down on their head. The full judicial review on 27th April will affect every single local scheme enacted under "covid mobility", including the Quays and including DLRs work on the Seapoint to Dun Laoghaire Coast. If the High Court rules against DCC, all of those will likely have to be torn up. I'm sure DLR will be delighted with DCC in that event.

So again, its all down to negligent DCC management and their will be consequences.

DoraDelite

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Anyway, I'm going to let this one go, can't see it happening now and I thought it was audacious to start with, fair play to DCC for trying at least, but at the end of the day Irish people do not want to get out of their cars.

It's the selfishness of the minority that gets to me. They couldn't care less about anyone but themselves. They don't care about their neighbours, communities or making the city a nicer place to be.

Fighting Tao

Don’t forget, that STC even got their back of an envelope drawings onto the table for the second consultation. They cannot claim foul play since that happened.

tomasrojo

Larbre34 wrote: »

In fairness to DLR, they went mostly with low impact, proportionate measures. If you look at Dundrum and Blackrock, both villages are bypassed by a high quality route, so the works that were implemented were suitable and beneficial. In fact, had DCC done similar, reduced Sandymount village to a single lane with cycle priority and left Strand Road alone to carry the main traffic, we wouldn't be where we are today.

Dundrum Main Street was a fairly major two-way thoroughfare though.

Peregrine

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Anyway, I'm going to let this one go, can't see it happening now and I thought it was audacious to start with, fair play to DCC for trying at least, but at the end of the day Irish people do not want to get out of their cars.

Not a lot to be done about this between now and April. Take a break. It's exhausting. Plenty of other projects to put your energy into.

tomasrojo

Larbre34 wrote: »

The full judicial review on 27th April will affect every single local scheme enacted under "covid mobility", including the Quays and including DLRs work on the Seapoint to Dun Laoghaire Coast. If the High Court rules against DCC, all of those will likely have to be torn up.

I have no legal background, but I'm still going to take this one with a pinch of salt. Mind you, it probably would be a fitting legacy for Mannix Flynn's time in local government.

Peregrine

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yeah good man, thanks.

At the discretion of the legal team, some issues were put into the JR request, other issues directly related to planning regs are in the Section 5 to An Bord Pleanála. All aspects will be reviewed in these combined processes.

These planning regulations? :pac:

The submission also noted that the cyclists in computer generated image of the track “are not wearing a face covering of any description”.

The two-way track would mean cyclists were only one metre apart, the submission, made by Farry Town Planning Ltd on behalf of Mr Flynn states. “This would in our opinion facilitate the transmission of air-borne droplets to a greater degree than exists under the present layout,” it said.

“We believe that this proposal would increase transmission rates.”

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

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

In fairness to DLR, they went mostly with low impact, proportionate measures. If you look at Dundrum and Blackrock, both villages are bypassed by a high quality route, so the works that were implemented were suitable and beneficial. In fact, had DCC done similar, reduced Sandymount village to a single lane with cycle priority and left Strand Road alone to carry the main traffic, we wouldn't be where we are today.

I've said many times, the Government *said* go out an improve mobility locally to suit pandemic conditions. They didn't change any laws to bolster that, so the planning laws never stopped applying. When DCC took the absolute piss by putting forward a huge impact scheme like Strand Road, it always exceeded the spirit of the Govt's direction and it was ALWAYS going to be challenged.

In persisting with their approach, DCC have now brought this legal challenge down on their head. The full judicial review on 27th April will affect every single local scheme enacted under "covid mobility", including the Quays and including DLRs work on the Seapoint to Dun Laoghaire Coast. If the High Court rules against DCC, all of those will likely have to be torn up. I'm sure DLR will be delighted with DCC in that event.

So again, its all down to negligent DCC management and their will be consequences.

I would have it’s down to Mannix Flynn not liking cyclists. If DCC win ,then they are it shows they are right.

To be honest it's a pity there was a stay on the works but I think their grounds for overturning the council decision are pretty weak.

But I think also that is the noisey minority's objective. Delay, pointless consultation, obstruct and kick it into touch and hope it goes away. I'm optimistic there is sufficient pressure on the council by pro groups to get this over the line.