Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Thelonious Monk

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/mar/12/europe-cycling-post-covid-recovery-plans

Covid has inspired bike networks to be ramped up all over Europe. I wonder how they deal with the anti-everything people in other cities?

First Up

Thelonious Monk wrote:

Covid has inspired bike networks to be ramped up all over Europe. I wonder how they deal with the anti-everything people in other cities?

Some cities are run by people smart enough to be pro-everything.

Larbre34

Fighting Tao wrote: »

P.S. I don’t believe a word of your post above. It looks like another case of grasping at straws, and will be filed under my BS list. :pac:

And yet here we are, its the 12th of March, there's no cycletrack, no prospect of a cycletrack, two-way traffic passing serenely along the coast road, schools beginning to return, prospect of life returning to normal a few months hence.

But maybe I'm just full of BS (insert daft emoji of your choice here)

Peregrine

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yeah I know....

Show me the exec order from DCC and we'll talk. The Garda RPU can take months to respond to those things, DCC have offered no evidence of the their order. Lets see what happens with actual enforcement or is it just more bull from the frustrated executive at DCC

No. You didn't know. You've gone from claiming they need to pass bye-laws with a statutory consultation period to saying "Gardaí take ages to reply". You hadn't a clue what you were talking about and you were wrong.

Larbre34 wrote: »

Enforceable speed limits need a new bye-law, even road works limits. That requires a minimum consultation period. Putting up signs is just that.

Fighting Tao

Larbre34 wrote: »

And yet here we are, its the 12th of March, there's no cycletrack, no prospect of a cycletrack, two-way traffic passing serenely along the coast road, schools beginning to return, prospect of life returning to normal a few months hence.

But maybe I'm just full of BS (insert daft emoji of your choice here)

I am not going back through your posts, but there is a heap of BS. Peregrine has highlighted your most recent. Another notable one was that you were taking a 9 week sabbatical from this thread, and also the one about you being a citizen just concerned about public expenditure. You let your mask slip multiple times. :pac:

The cycle track is only held up temporarily. Judges will see through the made up excuses from your team, and people will enjoy a safer way to access the strand, and to travel through the area. This change is very important for Dublin especially if things go back to the way they were pre-covid, as it will provide a safer infrastructure than currently exists.

Larbre34

Funnily enough, this afternoon I drove the full length of it, north to south, saw the signs up and things. I drove a steady 50 and the Garda patrol car in front of me was pulling away into the distance, they don't give a monkeys.

Its fair to say there is no reason left behind from the roadworks to reduce that road to 30. The mini roundabouts are operating, the pedestrian barriers are replaced at the school. The 30 limit is just more sh1thousery from Owen Keegan.

Grassey

Larbre34 wrote:

Funnily enough, this afternoon I drove the full length of it, north to south, saw the signs up and things. I drove a steady 50 and the Garda patrol car in front of me was pulling away into the distance, they don't give a monkeys.

Maybe because the reduction comes into effect on the 15th... Surprised that fine detail passed you by, given the extensive critique and knowledge you've shown us all on various sections and subsections of bye-law and planning laws to date.

Peregrine

Larbre34 wrote: »

The bloody Council should make good their works instead of looking to duck responsibility.

Larbre34 wrote: »

Its fair to say there is no reason left behind from the roadworks to reduce that road to 30. The mini roundabouts are operating, the pedestrian barriers are replaced at the school. The 30 limit is just more sh1thousery from Owen Keegan.

Which is it?

Did the council leave the road in a bad shape and put in the speed limit to avoid responsibility or is the road perfectly fine and Owen Keegan is just trolling Sandymount residents? It can't be both.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

Funnily enough, this afternoon I drove the full length of it, north to south, saw the signs up and things. I drove a steady 50 and the Garda patrol car in front of me was pulling away into the distance, they don't give a monkeys.

Its fair to say there is no reason left behind from the roadworks to reduce that road to 30. The mini roundabouts are operating, the pedestrian barriers are replaced at the school. The 30 limit is just more sh1thousery from Owen Keegan.

I thought you claimed you be a planner!!
Surely you’d know it’s safer for cars to drive slower and that traffic flows better at lower speeds as it prevents bottlenecks from forming.

Larbre34

ted1 wrote: »

I thought you claimed you be a planner!!
Surely you’d know it’s safer for cars to drive slower and that traffic flows better at lower speeds as it prevents bottlenecks from forming.

Not on multipurpose roads, not with traffic well below capacity and not in isolation.

Its why you only hear talk about traffic metering and variable speed limits on the M50.

Larbre34

Peregrine wrote: »

Which is it?

Did the council leave the road in a bad shape and put in the speed limit to avoid responsibility or is the road perfectly fine and Owen Keegan is just trolling Sandymount residents? It can't be both.

When I first saw the announcement of the reduced limit posted on here I assumed it was the former.

When I travelled the route today, it became obvious that its most definitely the latter.

CramCycle

Larbre34 wrote: »

When I first saw the announcement of the reduced limit posted on here I assumed it was the former.

When I travelled the route today, it became obvious that its most definitely the latter.

Can you give one legitimate reason why a 30km speed limit is trolling. Both as a former resident and as someone who frequently travels in the area by various modes of transport.

Larbre34

CramCycle wrote: »

Can you give one legitimate reason why a 30km speed limit is trolling. Both as a former resident and as someone who frequently travels in the area by various modes of transport.

Its entirely superfluous and will needlessly penalise motorists if enforced with penalties, because there are no material reasons left along the length of the route to justify it being introduced.

Think a wee word will have to be had with the Assistant Commissioner for Roads Policing about the Council abusing road works speed limits.

markpb

Larbre34 wrote: »

Think a wee word will have to be had with the Assistant Commissioner for Roads Policing about the Council abusing road works speed limits.

Is there no limit to your knowledge, influence and power? Truly I sit here in awe before you.

CramCycle

Larbre34 wrote: »

Its entirely superfluous and will needlessly penalise motorists if enforced with penalties, because there are no material reasons left along the length of the route to justify it being introduced.

Its a built up area with alot of housing, wide age demographic etc. It's pretty much the poster boy for a 30kmph area. At commuting times it doesn't penalise anyone as you would know, and outside of peak times it (in theory) will slow people to a safer speed.

Think a wee word will have to be had with the Assistant Commissioner for Roads Policing about the Council abusing road works speed limits.

I really hope you do, please record it and post it here. Gardai can have a tough time and it would be uplifting to see one laughing heartily. Abusing?!? I can barely hold back the laughter myself.

magicbastarder

the theoretical minimum time you can drive the length of beach road to merrion gates is 3m15s, if you stayed at a constant 50km/h.

it'd cost an extra two minutes to do it at 30km/h. and with the merrion gates themselves, i suspect a lot of those motorists who maintain the 50km/h till they hit the merrion gates will end up averaging less than 30km/h regardless.

silverharp

Larbre34 wrote: »

Its entirely superfluous and will needlessly penalise motorists if enforced with penalties, because there are no material reasons left along the length of the route to justify it being introduced.

Think a wee word will have to be had with the Assistant Commissioner for Roads Policing about the Council abusing road works speed limits.

if you see the amount of people walking at the weekend and people paranoid to walk past each other , there certainly is a good reason at the moment

Fighting Tao

Larbre34 wrote: »

Its entirely superfluous and will needlessly penalise motorists if enforced with penalties, because there are no material reasons left along the length of the route to justify it being introduced.

Think a wee word will have to be had with the Assistant Commissioner for Roads Policing about the Council abusing road works speed limits.

Such a self centred opinion just because it may add a minute to get to your house in the area. Would you get your friendly assistant commissioner for roads policing to help you if you killed someone because of your selfishness? A drop of 20kph is nothing when it comes to saving lives, and lower speeds reduce the risk of death hugely when a pedestrian is hit by a motorist.

Your mask is slipping further.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

Not on multipurpose roads, not with traffic well below capacity and not in isolation.

Its why you only hear talk about traffic metering and variable speed limits on the M50.

Have you not being banging on about schools returning and things going back to normal.?

The Merrion gate is a bottle neck.

It’s 4km from the Merrion Gates to East link
At 30km it would you take 8 minutes to make the journey at 50km it would take 5 minutes.
That’s going at speed and not slowing for junctions , pedestrian crossings etc.
So realistically the difference is less tryst 2 minutes. However the survival rate of anyone hit by a car increases significantly.


https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-019-8139-5

https://www.transportenvironment.org/docs/Fact-sheets,%20responses,%20etc/11-00%20Lower%20%20urban%20speed%20limits.htm

First Up

I'd happily take a 30kph speed limit on Strand Rd instead of the back streets of Sandymount and Ballsbridge. So would most others I suspect.

Knowing Keegan's style, I'd say DCC is imposing the limit more out of spite than anything else but it's no big deal. He can have his tantrum.

CramCycle

First Up wrote: »

Some cities are run by people smart enough to be pro-everything.

100% agree, which is what the strand road would have been had the change went ahead. It would have been pro pedestrian, cyclist, and motorist. It would have benefited everyone.

Weepsie

First Up wrote: »

I'd happily take a 30kph speed limit on Strand Rd instead of the back streets of Sandymount and Ballsbridge. So would most others I suspect.

Knowing Keegan's style, I'd say DCC is imposing the limit more out of spite than anything else but it's no big deal. He can have his tantrum.

Why though. Plans were made last may to make strand road 30kmph. There were notices put in loads of public places. I had a huge poster and map in work hanging for people to see the various roads that were changing to 30kmph.

This is not a spite. This is not all that sudden. This something, again like many other things that has been planned for for some time. Yet people with some sort of personal.agenda (and you are attempting to make it so) are objecting for no actual valid reason

First Up

Weepsie wrote:

This is not a spite. This is not all that sudden. This something, again like many other things that has been planned for for some time. Yet people with some sort of personal.agenda (and you are attempting to make it so) are objecting for no actual valid reason

I'm not objecting.

First Up

CramCycle wrote:

100% agree, which is what the strand road would have been had the change went ahead. It would have been pro pedestrian, cyclist, and motorist. It would have benefited everyone.

Except residents of the streets taking the traffic trying to get to Sean Moore Rd and East Link.

ted1

First Up wrote: »

Except residents of the streets taking the traffic trying to get to Sean Moore Rd and East Link.

Might be a great thing if the council increased the price of the toll to just above the M50 price. Could really reduce traffic

CramCycle

First Up wrote: »

Except residents of the streets taking the traffic trying to get to Sean Moore Rd and East Link.

First of all, as has been pointed out repeatedly, no one is going to the east link bridge, they are going somewhere else and alternative routes are miniscule in their time differences at peak times. Secondly, for the very few local residents who would be driving the short distance from Strand Road to Sean Moore Road, it will add 2 or 3 minutes, often less, for the majority of residents who take this very short trip, and at peak times, nothing of note.
If they closed the Merrion gates completely it would speed up their journey in both directions.
So now that we are agreed and that the changes will benefit pretty much everyone, particularly this minority group you have cherry picked who will have less noise pollution, air pollution, safer journeys and many may in fact switch to walking or cycling, although, and lets call a spade a spade, how many people do you think drive specifically with a start point on the strand road and a finish point on the Sean Moore road.

tomasrojo

markpb wrote: »

Is there no limit to your knowledge, influence and power? Truly I sit here in awe before you.

We'll be hearing shortly that Joe Biden has put in a call to Mannix Flynn and Dermot Lacey; he's not happy, and he wants everyone to remember that you can't carry a fridge on a bicycle.

First Up

CramCycle wrote: »

First of all, as has been pointed out repeatedly, no one is going to the east link bridge, they are going somewhere else and alternative routes are miniscule in their time differences at peak times. Secondly, for the very few local residents who would be driving the short distance from Strand Road to Sean Moore Road, it will add 2 or 3 minutes, often less, for the majority of residents who take this very short trip, and at peak times, nothing of note.
If they closed the Merrion gates completely it would speed up their journey in both directions.
So now that we are agreed and that the changes will benefit pretty much everyone, particularly this minority group you have cherry picked who will have less noise pollution, air pollution, safer journeys and many may in fact switch to walking or cycling, although, and lets call a spade a spade, how many people do you think drive specifically with a start point on the strand road and a finish point on the Sean Moore road.

So to get a cycle lane on Strand Rd we need the effective closure of the East Link bridge as a way to get to Dublin Port, The Port Tunnel and points beyond.

I suspect there might be a few contrary opinions on that.

ted1

First Up wrote: »

Except residents of the streets taking the traffic trying to get to Sean Moore Rd and East Link.

Might be a great thing if the council increased the price of the toll to just above the M50 price. Could really reduce traffic

CramCycle

First Up wrote: »

So to get a cycle lane on Strand Rd we need the effective closure of the East Link bridge as a way to get to Dublin Port, The Port Tunnel and points beyond.

I suspect there might be a few contrary opinions on that.

Again, your missing my point, hopefully not intentionally. Forget the cycle lane. A one way road there is good for locals, regardless of transport mode, it is good for noise and air pollution reduction. The bike lane is a nice addition at the same time but really incidental. It doesn't close the bridge, it doesn't stop access to the port, but you already know this.