Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

tomasrojo

breezy1985 wrote: »

And driving to the airport or a gig is a leisure drive

Yeah, good point! If it's not shopping or commuting it's leisure. Them's the rules.

Fighting Tao

First Up wrote: »

So the East Link Bridge is effectively redundant going north?

No. You can still go there if you are so obsessed. I just did the route with the better roads and no tolls. The route from Timbuktu to the North Pole vis the East Link put me off tolls.

If you are driving to the 3Arena, having lived in the area for years, I’d recommend parking in Ringsend rather than spending over an hour in traffic waiting to cross the East Link, but you may be happy to be traffic for so long.

silverharp

The Roslyn Park site has been flooded once or twice with freak tides so extending the promenade would come with lots of side benefits but while from an engineering perspective looks as simple as you can get, wont be seeing it in the 5 years anyway.

AndrewJRenko

First Up wrote: »

It is able to handle private cars, minibuses, tradesmen in white vans - even oil delivery trucks. All of which would have to go somewhere else.

That's not the question that I asked you though.

yascaoimhin

First Up wrote: »

A boardwalk would be lovely and well within engineering capability.

Building a boardwalk into a protected UNESCO biosphere would require full planning permission. An additional hurdle to overcome to have permission granted to build into a biosphere is an admission that you have exhausted all other alternatives.

The on-road cycle track is an alternative. It must be considered first and proven to be unworkable for the boardwalk to be considered.

A small increase in existing traffic levels as the traffic study pointed has already out would not be reason enough to have the project be considered unworkable.

Especially when one considers that the cycle lane will have the impact of reducing traffic to a degree.

The original consideration and plan for the boardwalk predates the designation of all of Dublin Bay as a biosphere.

Trudee

DCC and NTA ran the Eastern Regional Model with Strand Road reduced to one lane and Merrion Gates no entry - and to quote from this ERM modelled change “The increases are shown to be unsurprisingly on Merrion Road where city bound traffic in general will now use along with vehicles wanting to access the East Link”

Fighting Tao

Trudee wrote: »

DCC and NTA ran the Eastern Regional Model with Strand Road reduced to one lane and Merrion Gates no entry - and to quote from this ERM modelled change “The increases are shown to be unsurprisingly on Merrion Road where city bound traffic in general will now use along with vehicles wanting to access the East Link”

Seeing that the Merrion Road will take them quite far inland, do you not think many will opt to use the Samuel Beckett bridge instead?

Trudee

Not from the predicted increases in Sandymount Avenue, Sandymount Road, Park Avenue, Serpentine Ave also from same same study. Some may use Samuel Beckett bridge but the predicted increases on surrounding roads would suggest a lot won’t.

First Up

AndrewJRenko wrote:

That's not the question that I asked you though.

What was your question?

Heavy commercial traffic doesn't use Strand Rd anyway but lots of other vehicles do. The vehicles currently using Strand Rd are big and numerous enough to create problems on all alternative routes to the East Link.

First Up

breezy1985 wrote:

And driving to the airport or a gig is a leisure drive

Not for everyone.

Fighting Tao

First Up wrote: »

What was your question?

Heavy commercial traffic doesn't use Strand Rd anyway but lots of other vehicles do. The vehicles currently using Strand Rd are big and numerous enough to create problems on all alternative routes to the East Link.

Stop with the lies. There are lots of 5 axle trucks using Strand Road.

AndrewJRenko

First Up wrote: »

What was your question?

Heavy commercial traffic doesn't use Strand Rd anyway but lots of other vehicles do. The vehicles currently using Strand Rd are big and numerous enough to create problems on all alternative routes to the East Link.

Are you the same poster that was telling me at length about all the heavy commercial traffic using Strand Road and heading to the port?

My question was about whether Strand Road was designed and suitable for heavy traffic. You were complaining about the local roads not being designed and suitable for heavy traffic, so I asked you the same question about Strand Road.

Larbre34

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Stop with the lies. There are lots of 5 axle trucks using Strand Road.

There aren't. There really are not. Head down there and do a morning and evening count for yourself.

Also, any HGV with business in the area, such as delivering construction materials or supplying a business, are perfectly entitled to go where they like. You would have to have the data to subtract those vehicles to get a net extraneous traffic figure.

CramCycle

First Up wrote: »

It is able to handle private cars, minibuses, tradesmen in white vans - even oil delivery trucks. All of which would have to go somewhere else.

Again, they actually don't in one direction and in the other direction DEPENDENT ON THEIR FINAL DESTINATION, there are several other options with little or no time penalties.

First Up wrote: »

So through Ballsbridge, down Shelbourne Rd in as far as Pearse Street and then down through the narrow streets of Ringsend. Which of us is going around in circles?

Again this proves you don't live there as most locals would not use that route, you would cross the Liffey further up, most locals do anyway as with traffic at commuter times, it is the same time to do that without the risk of some muppet stalling or not having change at the toll.

A boardwalk would be lovely and well within engineering capability. You didn't say why you don't want one but some Strand Rd residents might prefer it to going around in circles.

Protected Biosphere, if you think it would be easy? I suspect more likely that you know its not but don't care. As I also said before, I don't care about the cycle lane, restricting the Strand Road to one way is a good idea fundamentally.

First Up wrote: »

Heavy commercial traffic doesn't use Strand Rd anyway but lots of other vehicles do. The vehicles currently using Strand Rd are big and numerous enough to create problems on all alternative routes to the East Link.

You were the one asking where heavy vehicles would go earlier so which one is it? You mentioned trucks being forced through the village (not what will happen), you mentioned commercial transport using the road, you repeatedly mention trucks using the Strand Road. Stop changing the goal posts.

First Up wrote: »

So now we can add evaporation to repurposed. Keep 'em coming.

This is a legitimate theory in traffic management. How can you keep talking with such certainty when you don't even understand the basics of wat you are talking about. Go onto google and read up on it before posting as it actually hurts to listen to someone who can't even listen to valid, researched points. Most posters have listened to yours and come up with points that either agree or counter yours. Please engage properly in the discussion going forward.

Peregrine

First Up wrote: »

the roads around Sandymount and Lansdowne Rd that lead to the East Link are not designed or suitable for heavy commercial traffic. You don't care but if DCC are taking away the Strand Rd option you would like to think they have thought about the consequences.

First Up wrote: »

Heavy commercial traffic doesn't use Strand Rd anyway but lots of other vehicles do.

You're now arguing against yourself.

First Up

The distance between the existing promenade and the park at Irishtown is about 250 meters. That would be the length of a boardwalk over the beach, if that option was pursued.

Another way to safely accommodate cyclists would be a 300 meter single lane section on that part of the road with traffic lights controlling alternate flows. It takes a couple of minutes at most to cycle 300 meters. Motorists wait their turn and so do cyclists.

Cheap to install, no planning permission, no risk to the biosphere; some delays to traffic but much better than closing off a key route to East Link and Dublin Port.

I'll let the howls of outrage from MAMILS subside before advising Mr Keegan how to keep (nearly) everyone happy.

Fighting Tao

Larbre34 wrote: »

There aren't. There really are not. Head down there and do a morning and evening count for yourself.

Also, any HGV with business in the area, such as delivering construction materials or supplying a business, are perfectly entitled to go where they like. You would have to have the data to subtract those vehicles to get a net extraneous traffic figure.

I have used that road 1000’s of times. There are a lot of 5 axle trucks using it. Go there yourself and you’ll see that they use the road as a through way.

First Up

AndrewJRenko wrote:

My question was about whether Strand Road was designed and suitable for heavy traffic. You were complaining about the local roads not being designed and suitable for heavy traffic, so I asked you the same question about Strand Road.

I am talking about the volume of traffic, not just big trucks.

Fighting Tao

First Up wrote: »

I am talking about the volume of traffic, not just big trucks.

Your argument has changed so many times that I’m not sure you even know what it is.

First Up

Fighting Tao wrote:

I have used that road 1000’s of times. There are a lot of 5 axle trucks using it. Go there yourself and you’ll see that they use the road as a through way.

Then even more disruption if they are forced to use alternative routes. Or do you think HGVs could be replaced by cyclists?

Weepsie

First Up wrote: »

I am talking about the volume of traffic, not just big trucks.

Then why the obsession with heavy commercial traffic.

You're contradicting yourself and tieing yourself up in knots.

Now with my mod hat on, I'm going to have to ask you to properly engage with some evidence, and research. People have engaged with your (mostly nonsense) points and you've found a new angle every time and then revisited it when the heat dies down and goalposts get too heavy to carry anymore.

I wholeheartedly disagreed with some posters earlier in the thread, but they had some semblance of a clue of what they were talking about. I am starting to believe that you are doing some fairly low level trolling and it's tiresome

PaulieC

First Up wrote: »

The distance between the existing promenade and the park at Irishtown is about 250 meters. That would be the length of a boardwalk over the beach, if that option was pursued.

Another way to safely accommodate cyclists would be a 300 meter single lane section on that part of the road with traffic lights controlling alternate flows. It takes a couple of minutes at most to cycle 300 meters. Motorists wait their turn and so do cyclists.

Cheap to install, no planning permission, no risk to the biosphere; some delays to traffic but much better than closing off a key route to East Link and Dublin Port.

I'll let the howls of outrage from MAMILS subside before advising Mr Keegan how to keep (nearly) everyone happy.

800 metres, but you seem to like alternative facts.

Fighting Tao

First Up wrote: »

Then even more disruption if they are forced to use alternative routes. Or do you think HGVs could be replaced by cyclists?

5 axle ban!!!! You know this. So they will use the port tunnel and m50 and they don’t all be going to the one location so there are no local roads overloaded with them.

Peregrine

First Up wrote: »

The distance between the existing promenade and the park at Irishtown is about 250 meters. That would be the length of a boardwalk over the beach, if that option was pursued.

Another way to safely accommodate cyclists would be a 300 meter single lane section on that part of the road with traffic lights controlling alternate flows. It takes a couple of minutes at most to cycle 300 meters. Motorists wait their turn and so do cyclists.

Cheap to install, no planning permission, no risk to the biosphere; some delays to traffic but much better than closing off a key route to East Link and Dublin Port.

I'll let the howls of outrage from MAMILS subside before advising Mr Keegan how to keep (nearly) everyone happy.

Expert transport advice for the CEO of Dublin City from a guy who can't measure distance between two points properly.

AndrewJRenko

First Up wrote: »

I am talking about the volume of traffic, not just big trucks.

You said;

"I know the area well enough to know that the roads around Sandymount and Lansdowne Rd that lead to the East Link are not designed or suitable for heavy commercial traffic."

My logical, follow-up question is whether Strand Road is designed or suitable for heavy commercial traffic, in your opinion.

Trudee

Strand Road is a designated entry and exit route to the HGV cordon for those HGVswho have obtained permits to load/ unload within the cordon area. The 24 hour ban will not now come into effect as Strand Road Cycle Trial 'stayed'

buffalo

First Up wrote: »

Another way to safely accommodate cyclists would be a 300 meter single lane section on that part of the road with traffic lights controlling alternate flows. It takes a couple of minutes at most to cycle 300 meters. Motorists wait their turn and so do cyclists.

Again, showing your ignorance here. DCC investigated this already and included their findings in the update on the Strand Road Cycle route:

Cumulative unsatisfied travel demand to cumulative travel demand is approximately 34% in each hour for northbound traffic rising to 43% for southbound traffic.
The number of vehicles unable to get through the shuttle quickly builds up
The queue length on Strand Rd by 9am will exceed the length of Strand Rd itself
There will be a queue of vehicles on Strand Rd all day long
A vehicle joining the back of the queue at 1pm would not clear the shuttle till almost 6pm
This will result in a large amount of vehicles diverting through Sandymount in both directions

The result of this measure is extremely severe

Trudee

Whether or not Strand Road is suitable for 5 axle vehicles is another matter entirely - currently if you have a permit you can travel on Strand Road and yes there is app to check status of 5 axle vehicles license but doubtful anybody is of the mind to stand 24 hrs a day monitoring

First Up

Fighting Tao wrote:

Your argument has changed so many times that I’m not sure you even know what it is.

Just different parts of it. I am pointing out consequences and implications that obviously hadn't occurred to you.

Weepsie

First Up wrote: »

Just different parts of it. I am pointing out consequences and implications that obviously hadn't occurred to you.

You're making stuff up