Cyclists Stranded Again


Last night.

Dublin City Council voted against the Sandymount cycle path trial [along Sandymount strand, Dublin 4] Due to residents’ concerns about displacement of traffic into Sandymount village.

Ragamuffin writes:

The decision is now postponed until January, but looking less likely it will ever happen.

As a resident of Sandymount I was very much in favour of the plan.

Strand Road is a popular route for cyclists, yet is quite dangerous due to a lack of provision for them.

There is a major problem on Strand Rd with on-street parking on the inbound side between the martello tower (St Johns Rd) and Newgrove Ave (Roslyn Park College).

The road is simply not wide enough for 2 lanes of traffic and parking, which results in cars parking up on the kerb. These cars create a blockage for pedestrians on the path (particularly wheelchair users and those pushing buggies), and also pushes cyclists further out into the busy road.

I would argue that if Dublin City Council are going to postpone their segregated cycle lane, then a good interim measure would be removing the hazard of these parked cars by installing double yellow along the length of Strand Road in both directions.

This will free up approximately 1 meter from the road and 1 meter from the path for use by cyclists and pedestrians.

In DCC’s consultation document they describe this parking as ‘informal’, which suggests they take no responsibility for it. There seems to be no signage or ticketing in operation, even though I would have assumed there’s a bylaw against parking on the path in this manner.

If residents on Strand Rd are so desperate to park immediately outside their houses, then they should consider converting their front gardens to parking spaces.

A car is a private piece of property, why should anyone have the right to leave it (for free, in this case) on public land, obstructing a public road and path?

DCC make the valid point that the solution put forward by residents to build boardwalks over the beach and separate cycle lanes, would take years of planning and costly infrastructure as it’s a marine protection area.

DCC’s plan creatively solved these issues by re-purposing our existing resources, but unfortunately it is now put on a back-burner.

Everyone is in agreement that cycling infrastructure in this area, which is very popular with cyclists, needs improvement.

So why not make this small change, which will not completely fix the problem, but would hopefully reduce the risk for cyclists and pedestrians?

The consultation documents (now over) can be found here for anyone interested.


Pics: Google

Sponsored Link

20 thoughts on “Cyclists Stranded Again

    1. george

      The car is not the only option. Cycling is an option which is why it is being facilitated. If everyone drives there’ll be nothing but congestion.

      1. LuvinLunch

        Also, this is a list of people who can’t drive:
        Everyone under 17
        People who can’t afford €600 to pass the test
        People with disabilities that preclude driving e.g. those with visual, auditory, intellectual disabilities
        People who can’t afford to run a car: average cost €10k per annum

      2. Col

        Motor tax no longer pays for road maintenance.
        But cars take up the most space per passenger and cause damage which requires repair more than cyclists and pedestrians.

      3. Rob_G

        “Maybe cyclists should pay road tax and this is used to build the proper infrastructure”

        next sentence:

        “I live in rural Ireland ”

        Don’t worry, your taxes don’t pay for any infrastructure in Dublin – we pay for it all (plus a large proportion of yours, to boot).

        So maybe the people who are paying for the roads should get to decide how they are apportioned, eh?

    2. Rob_G

      30% of all journeys in Dublin city are for distances of less than 3km, with 85% less than 10km.

      For the vast majority of these journeys, a car is not required.

  1. Col

    That road is difficult to drive along, a one-way system would be ideal.
    I understand residents’ concerns about increased traffic on other residential roads, but would a proper one-way system make roads safer for kids (more space, segregated lanes etc.)?

  2. george

    This was supposed to be a trial. If the residents concerns were borne out and could not be resolved then their point would be proven and it could be scrapped. Postponing a trial because some people worry that it might not work out doesn’t make sense. There were more submissions in favour than against.

  3. delacaravanio

    This was a bad idea. So long as the docks are where they are traffic will need to get to them. Thankfully, the port tunnel has diverted most of the traffic going west away from the quays, allowing for the five axle truck ban, new cycle lanes, wider footpaths, However, plenty of trucks still go/come from the south, Wicklow, etc. and Sandymount Rd is how they do it. This plan ignored that.

  4. Joe

    The Covid cycling changes in most areas are pathetic, especially dangerous for pedestrians and the less abled and will increase all commuter congestion whenever “normality” returns.

    Only a selfish idiot would favour a one way system on that road. Direct action should be taken by road users and residents if any attempt was made on it.There is more than enough space to facilitate a safe two way cycling lane built along the strand side of the wall if the council used a modicum of intelligence.

  5. george

    How are the cycling changes dangerous?

    Only a selfish idiot would oppose a temporary trial of a cycle that will allow children to cycle to school safely.

    What’s that blue thing on the other side of the wall in the second photo?

  6. Bruncvik

    When I looked into this about a year ago, I could find no provision for parking on footpaths. Various EU countries have some provisions (such as a car having to leave at least 1.5 metre of space on the footpath), but Ireland seems to have nothing. So, everyone who parks on a footpath is fair game for being clamped.

    1. Ragamuffin

      Thanks for info Bruncvik, very interesting.

      I see from DCC website:
      “Other parking restrictions
      It is illegal to park in a way which interferes with traffic flow or obstructs or endangers other road users, for example:

      No parking opposite a continuous white line.
      No parking on a footpath (either partly or wholly).
      No parking within 5 metres of a junction.”

      So multiple violations on Strand Rd daily (particularly when weather is nice and beach car parks are full). And as far as I can see zero enforcement with clamping/tickets etc. I wonder why?

  7. Dermot Lacey

    You should read the actual report that Councillors agreed and not the Twitter reports.

    Work on the project continues – except people with knowledge and concerns about impact will be involved.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link