Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

AndrewJRenko

First Up wrote: »

So cyclists and motorists don't like each other and are uncomfortable in each other's company. I wonder who didn't know that?

Anyone who hasn't yet worked out that most cyclists ARE motorists isn't really in a great position to talk on this topic.

Fighting Tao

Strand road is currently so dangerous that the locals have taken to installing turntables rather than reverse pit of driveways. . https://www.linkedin.com/posts/manoj192_dublinproperty-dublincity-parkinglotpaving-ugcPost-6770980468784463872-v27o

breezy1985

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Strand road is currently so dangerous that the locals have taken to installing turntables rather than reverse pit of driveways. . https://www.linkedin.com/posts/manoj192_dublinproperty-dublincity-parkinglotpaving-ugcPost-6770980468784463872-v27o

Did anyone notice the single piece of traffic on the road

ted1

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Strand road is currently so dangerous that the locals have taken to installing turntables rather than reverse pit of driveways. . https://www.linkedin.com/posts/manoj192_dublinproperty-dublincity-parkinglotpaving-ugcPost-6770980468784463872-v27o

They should be more common. Crazy amount if people reversing into main roads. There’s a car park in Dawson street that has had it for years. As a kid I thought it wa great

CramCycle

Just to be clear, lets take the cycle path out of it. I think this is a good idea if they just made it one way. Nice they can make a cycle path but it would be a good idea even without the cycle path for the local residents.

First Up

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Anyone who hasn't yet worked out that most cyclists ARE motorists isn't really in a great position to talk on this topic.

Both at the same time?

ted1

First Up wrote: »

Both at the same time?

Motorcyclists.....

magicbastarder

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Strand road is currently so dangerous that the locals have taken to installing turntables rather than reverse pit of driveways. . https://www.linkedin.com/posts/manoj192_dublinproperty-dublincity-parkinglotpaving-ugcPost-6770980468784463872-v27o

that probably cost a hundred times as much to install as the car that's on it is worth. and that's not an exaggeration.

tomasrojo

I remember seeing one of the apartments opposite the War Memorial Gardens advertised and they made a point of mentioning having a car turntable.

AndrewJRenko

First Up wrote: »

Both at the same time?

In the context you mentioned, of not liking each other, then Yes, both at the same time.

Cyclists make better drivers than non cyclists, btw.

First Up

AndrewJRenko wrote:

In the context you mentioned, of not liking each other, then Yes, both at the same time.

So you accept that there are times when both are justified and necessary

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Cyclists make better drivers than non cyclists, btw.[/quote
Probably more aware of cyclists but still motorists.

The modern world is based on the fast movement of people, goods and services. Motorised transport contributes more to that bicycles notwithstanding the superiority complex of those using them.

Bicycles are a choice; cars, buses and trucks are a necessity. The best solutions include them all.

buffalo

First Up wrote: »

Bicycles are a choice; cars, buses and trucks are a necessity. The best solutions include them all.

What? What sort of nonsense is this? I don't own a car because it's too expensive and polluting, so my bike isn't needed? I can choose not to go to the shop to buy food?

First Up

buffalo wrote: »

What? What sort of nonsense is this? I don't own a car because it's too expensive and polluting, so my bike isn't needed? I can choose not to go to the shop to buy food?

You can walk, take a bus or get home delivery.

By the way, has it occurred to you how shops get their supplies so you can cycle there to buy them?

buffalo

First Up wrote: »

You can walk, take a bus or get home delivery.

By the way, has it occurred to you how shops get their supplies so you can cycle there to buy them?

I'm not arguing that in our current economy, motorised transport isn't necessary for some aspects, I'm wondering how you don't see bikes as necessary? If all the bikes were taken away tomorrow, how do you think our transport systems would cope?

And that's before we get to the air quality, carbon levels, etc.

First Up

buffalo wrote: »

I'm not arguing that in our current economy, motorised transport isn't necessary for some aspects, I'm wondering how you don't see bikes as necessary? If all the bikes were taken away tomorrow, how do you think our transport systems would cope?

And that's before we get to the air quality, carbon levels, etc.

OK; I'll try again:

All cyclists have other options available to them, at least around a city like Dublin. All they are transporting is themselves and maybe a small payload - child seat, rucksack etc.

Cars and trucks serve a different purpose. They can carry more people, more goods and travel further and faster.

A cyclist can choose to take a bus, walk or drive if the weather conditions or infirmity making cycling impossible or unattractive.

Car often don't have that choice and truck drivers never do.

buffalo

First Up wrote: »

OK; I'll try again:

All cyclists have other options available to them, at least around a city like Dublin. All they are transporting is themselves and maybe a small payload - child seat, rucksack etc.

Cars and trucks serve a different purpose. They can carry more people, more goods and travel further and faster.

A cyclist can choose to take a bus, walk or drive if the weather conditions or infirmity making cycling impossible or unattractive.

Car often don't have that choice and truck drivers never do.

Of course, people use use bikes can choose to walk (despite any disabilities), but people who use cars are doing important business that can't be done on foot. I understand now.

Bikes can only transport a tiny payload, like a single bag or small child. There's no way of transporting people or goods that doesn't involve a motor. It's all so clear. Thank you for opening my eyes!

Weepsie

First Up wrote: »

OK; I'll try again:

All cyclists have other options available to them, at least around a city like Dublin. All they are transporting is themselves and maybe a small payload - child seat, rucksack etc.

Cars and trucks serve a different purpose. They can carry more people, more goods and travel further and faster.

A cyclist can choose to take a bus, walk or drive if the weather conditions or infirmity making cycling impossible or unattractive.

Car often don't have that choice and truck drivers never do.

Ah here. You're making stuff up to suit .

Most car journeys are single occupancy ones not carrying anymore than I would on a bike, and not any more difficult to do so on a bike.

Majority of journeys are not long distance.

Everyone is very aware that there are journeys that need to be made in some form of vehicle, due to needs or payload, but most journeys are in fact single occupancy ones that are more than manageable by bike

First Up

Weepsie wrote:

Ah here. You're making stuff up to suit .

No, just using facts that you would prefer to ignore

Weepsie wrote:

Everyone is very aware that there are journeys that need to be made in some form of vehicle, due to needs or payload, but most journeys are in fact single occupancy ones that are more than manageable by bike

I'm talking about the ones that are not

breezy1985

Ah lads have ye still not learned to just not reply to this kind of crap

Weepsie

First Up wrote: »

No, just using facts that you would prefer to ignore



I'm talking about the ones that are not

And what percentage of journeys do they make up, because it's not as high as you think it is.

Like people who cycle. Most car journeys are taken by people with a choice to take them. These journeys need to be reduced, for the greater good of all

First Up

Weepsie wrote:

Like people who cycle. Most car journeys are taken by people with a choice to take them. These journeys need to be reduced, for the greater good of all

Every car and truck that used the Strand Rd to get to the Toll Bridge, Dublin Port or Port Tunnel will still have to make that journey. But they will now have to get there via the side roads of Sandymount. That will put them on roads less suitable and will cause congestion and a greater risk of accidents.

Yes, cyclists on Strand Rd will have their own path but the consequences are disproportionate. And all for the sake of a couple of hundred meters over the beach.

tomasrojo

First Up wrote: »

You can walk, take a bus or get home delivery.

This is precisely true of people who rely on cars too?

tomasrojo

First Up wrote: »

OK; I'll try again:

All cyclists have other options available to them, at least around a city like Dublin. All they are transporting is themselves and maybe a small payload - child seat, rucksack etc.

Cars and trucks serve a different purpose. They can carry more people, more goods and travel further and faster.

A cyclist can choose to take a bus, walk or drive if the weather conditions or infirmity making cycling impossible or unattractive.

Car often don't have that choice and truck drivers never do.

This is really silly. I carry two kids to school on my bike. People are using electric cargo bikes.

And your suggestion of getting a bus, home delivery, etc., works just as well for people who typically drive, if they work for people who cycle, since you're obviously thinking of a city context. They can even join GoCar or something for the much smaller number of journeys that require going a long distance or carrying something really heavy, which means they can get a van.

First Up

tomasrojo wrote:

This is precisely true of people who rely on cars too?

Cars can carry a lot of shopping. Bicycles can't.

Weepsie

First Up wrote: »

Cars can carry a lot of shopping. Bicycles can't.

Yes they can. And as you've noted before, there are delivery options too. It would be a far more efficient use of road space, and energy

Stop making stuff up

First Up

tomasrojo wrote:

And your suggestion of getting a bus, home delivery, etc., works just as well for people who typically drive, if they work for people who cycle, since you're obviously thinking of a city context. They can even join GoCar or something for the much smaller number of journeys that require going a long distance or carrying something really heavy, which means they can get a van.

Yes, let's reduce car usage.

Now back to Strand Rd.

tomasrojo

First Up wrote: »

Cars can carry a lot of shopping. Bicycles can't.

I can carry plenty. I frequently carry 50kg of shopping.

This is actually easier to carry by bike than car (*), though a van would be easier again, which I have access to anyway, via GoCar. All this saves me about ten thousand euro a year, so switching to a car (or a bus or home delivery) wouldn't make a lot of sense.



(*) Probably not, now I think about it, but it wasn't that much effort either.

First Up

tomasrojo wrote:

This is actually easier to carry by bike than car, though a van would be easier again, which I have access to anyway, via GoCar. All this saves me about ten thousand euro a year, so switching to a car would be pretty dumb, really.

Good for you, although I wouldn't expect many 60+ year olds to use one.

AndrewJRenko

First Up wrote: »

OK; I'll try again:

All cyclists have other options available to them, at least around a city like Dublin. All they are transporting is themselves and maybe a small payload - child seat, rucksack etc.

Cars and trucks serve a different purpose. They can carry more people, more goods and travel further and faster.

A cyclist can choose to take a bus, walk or drive if the weather conditions or infirmity making cycling impossible or unattractive.

Car often don't have that choice and truck drivers never do.

Car occupancy rates in Dublin were around 1.2 last time I looked. So that's four out of five cars driving round with four empty seats.

50% of journeys of <2km are driven by car. 69% of journeys of 2-4km are driven by car. That's a hell of a lot of cars on the road doing trips that are easily walked or cycled.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-than-half-of-travellers-use-cars-for-journeys-under-2km-1.2303451

I'm not sure if you've managed to work this out yet, but it is very much in the interest of motorists to reduce the number of cars on the road, so that the remaining motorists have some hope of completing their journey before they go grey.

AndrewJRenko

First Up wrote: »

OK; I'll try again:

All cyclists have other options available to them, at least around a city like Dublin. All they are transporting is themselves and maybe a small payload - child seat, rucksack etc.

Cars and trucks serve a different purpose. They can carry more people, more goods and travel further and faster.

A cyclist can choose to take a bus, walk or drive if the weather conditions or infirmity making cycling impossible or unattractive.

Car often don't have that choice and truck drivers never do.

Car occupancy rates in Dublin were around 1.2 last time I looked. So that's four out of five cars driving round with four empty seats.

50% of journeys of <2km are driven by car. 69% of journeys of 2-4km are driven by car. That's a hell of a lot of cars on the road doing trips that are easily walked or cycled.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-than-half-of-travellers-use-cars-for-journeys-under-2km-1.2303451

I'm not sure if you've managed to work this out yet, but it is very much in the interest of motorists to reduce the number of cars on the road, so that the remaining motorists have some hope of completing their journey before they go grey.