Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Dublin could have cycle lanes protected by rows of parked cars

Proposals could see miles of segregated routes around the south of the city

Dublin is considering plans to move cycle lanes, so that they are placed between the pavement and a line of parked cars, in an effort to protect cyclists from moving traffic.

The National Transport Authority (NTA) is commissioning a feasibility study to see whether bringing the proposals to the south of the city might make riding safer.

It’s thought that a new route, called the “Georgian Parkway”, could link the Grand Canal premium cycle route, to all the south Georgian squares.

The system of using parked cars as a safety barrier is already used by some cities, including Copenhagen and Montreal.

“The concept of ‘Parking Protected Cycle Lanes’ is that parked cars, instead of being the hazard to cyclists they now are, could be used to protect cyclists from traffic,” Fine Gael city councillor and doctor Paddy Smyth, who proposed the idea, told the Irish Times.

“It involves reconfiguring the road so that you put the cycle path directly adjacent to the footpath. You then have a buffer zone, just under three foot wide between the cars the and cyclists, then the parked cars, then the road.

“Given the negligible capital investment required and the massive potential increase in amenity to both bicycle commuters and tourists using the Dublin bike scheme, it really is a no-brainer. The only capital investment required for the this entire network is paint.”

There would be some parking spaces lost, but Dr Smyth called this ‘fractional’.

“If completed, a family will be able to cycle from Tallaght along the Dodder Greenway, which is currently being developed, to Grand Canal Dock, along the Grand Canal greenway to Mount Street Upper, and then all they way into Merrion Square, Stephen’s Green or even the Iveagh Gardens and never once have to cycle beside a moving car,” Dr Smyth said.

Dublin has seen its fair share of cycling concerns in recent weeks, with just this week a cyclist dying from his injuries after colliding with a pedestrian in Dublin’s Phoenix Park.

A 59-year-old man from Castleknock, was riding in the cycling lane of Chesterfield Avenue in the direction of the city at around 8.40pm on Monday. Between the Castleknock Gate and Áras an Uachtaráin he collided with a man in his 30s.

The cyclist was taken to Beaumont Hospital but died from his injuries on Wednesday night.

And while Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary can never be said to speak for all Dubliners, he was out and about this week making controversial remarks – his latest being a suggestion that cyclists should be taken out and shot.

The businessman made his comments in a keynote speech at the Creative Minds conference at the Aviva Stadium in Dublin this week.

At the event, organised by the US Embassy, he took aim at the city council’s ambitions to get more people cycling.

"That's all we need in Dublin is more blooming bicycles," he said. "In a country where it rains about 250 days a year, the way forward for Dublin is more bicycles.

“Let's just go back to walking altogether. Soon we'll be living in caves designed by Dublin City Council. Traffic won't work, there's nowhere to park the cars and yet this is a smarter way forward.

“We should take the cyclists out and shoot them."

 

Add new comment

6 comments

Avatar
antigee | 7 years ago
0 likes

Used to regularly ride a route with this type of cycle path here in Melbourne my experience is that works OK with parkland to the pavement side - you soon get used to people unloading kids, looking for change and standing chatting, you can see them from some distance - they are not a good facility for commuting cyclists but feel safer than on road lanes with too close passes - problem is how you deal with junctions - as you approach you are hidden behind the parked cars and then have limited space to mix it back into traffic.  In effect you give way twice at every junction - once to rejoin traffic and again at the junction.

If there are a lot of junctions / and or business premises with parking that exit across the cycle lane then they are simply dangerous - because of the parked vehicles traffic drivers turning in have poor visibility and drivers exiting car parks / junctions just drive to the traffic lane line ignoring cyclists and then blocking across the cycle lane while waiting to join traffic. I suspect in Copenhagen they work because drivers have a cultural as well as legal obligation to give way to cyclists, here the council just put signs up warning cyclists to beware exiting vehicles and instructing cyclists slow down.

Conclusion - can work but need very careful implementation and segregated on road lanes and no parking work a lot better

 

Avatar
Martin Kent | 7 years ago
0 likes

Noeleen McCool vs suicidal city slicker cyclists. The freewheeling family phenomenon on Mother's Day ? Velocitization terrorizes Dublin's streets. Come on RSA! McCool should consult the experts, instead of overseeing lawless streets!

 

 

 

 

 

Avatar
JimKillock | 7 years ago
0 likes

Isn’t it usually about the character of the cyclepath? If it looks like a road, separated by a kerb, then pedestrians tend to avoid it, but if it is part of the path, maybe separated by a strip of paint, then pedestrians assume it is actually for them.

These often work very well on the continent when I've used them.

Avatar
bikebot replied to JimKillock | 7 years ago
1 like

JimKillock wrote:

Isn’t it usually about the character of the cyclepath? If it looks like a road, separated by a kerb, then pedestrians tend to avoid it, but if it is part of the path, maybe separated by a strip of paint, then pedestrians assume it is actually for them.

It's a matter of character, and that they are actually used.  When you have quiet roads, pedestraisn will walk in them as well.

I know from experience of some local paths, that the problem of pedestrians has largely faded away as they became popular.  The only contentious parts are those where there are short sections of shared use where the planners gave up.

Avatar
brooksby replied to bikebot | 7 years ago
0 likes

bikebot wrote:

JimKillock wrote:

Isn’t it usually about the character of the cyclepath? If it looks like a road, separated by a kerb, then pedestrians tend to avoid it, but if it is part of the path, maybe separated by a strip of paint, then pedestrians assume it is actually for them.

It's a matter of character, and that they are actually used.  When you have quiet roads, pedestraisn will walk in them as well.

I know from experience of some local paths, that the problem of pedestrians has largely faded away as they became popular.  The only contentious parts are those where there are short sections of shared use where the planners gave up.

I know it's OT for the article, but Baldwin Street IS busy and is clearly a cycle path.

You have a standard paved city centre  footpath then a divider line (kerbstone flush with ground level) then the cycle path, then a normal kerb and then the road.

 The footpath is normal flagstones. The cycle path is smooth black Tarmac, smoother than the road!, with painted cycle markings and a centre line. Clearly not "footpath" and yet you still have to slalom around pedestrians while watching out for the oncoming bikes too.

Avatar
brooksby | 7 years ago
5 likes

Only problem with putting the cycle path directly adjacent to the footpath, IMO and based upon my experiences of Baldwin Street in Bristol, is that the cycle path ends up full of pedestrians.

(And, as we know, pedestrians are deadly and should be banned or at least made to wear hi-viz and be licenced and registered or something).

Latest Comments