is reader-funded journalism. To keep it going and free-to-view, it takes people like you to act now and subscribe today for €5, €10, or €20 per month.

Cyclist group welcomes rejection of Tralee to Dingle road upgrade

Img_8756Cyclists yesterday welcomed the rejection of the planned Tralee to Dingle road upgrade using a new design of segregated cycling path.

Unlike the Great Western Greenway in Co Mayo (a road-side section pictured, right) which is mostly away from the main road, the Co Kerry project would have included the cycle path directly alongside the N86 road for 28km., the national cycling lobby, said that An Bord Pleanala’s rejection of planning permission for the N86 upgrade means the pilot design which is planned for use on other road schemes should be reviewed.

The cycling body said that the designers missed the fact that an off-road cycle route would be “a tourist attraction in itself” and be more attractive than a design which puts cyclists meters from high-speed traffic for the full length of the road. It said a possible route using the abandoned Tralee-Dingle Railway alignment and adjacent minor roads should have been looked at.

Recreational cyclists are “not just looking for a strip of tarmac that is ‘free’ of cars” but for a “experience” away from the disturbances of high-speed traffic said.

They said: “Similar pilot schemes based on the same design for the N56 in Donegal and the N59 in Galway should now be halted and reviewed by Government. The points made by the Board also reaffirm’s established concerns over other NRA-inspired schemes such as hard-shoulder conversions on the R448 in Carlow/Kilkenny, the R420 (former N80) in Offaly, the former N6 in Roscommon and Tramore to Waterford.”

N56 and the N59 are similar schemes in scenic areas, although it is unclear how the hard-shoulder conversions related to the rejection of the Co Kerry design, which was due to “excessive intervention into the landscape.”

National Roads Authority and Kerry County Council told The Irish Times last week of their surprise and confusion for the rejection of their scheme. An Bord Pleanala, however outlined its “serious concerns” about the cycling elements of the project last November in a letter to the council. It also detailed these concerns — again, mainly related to the affect on the scenic landscape — in its published decision to reject planning permission last week.

An Bord Pleanala said: “The Board considered that the road improvement scheme, as proposed, would represent an excessive intervention into the landscape, not commensurate with the single carriageway route being delivered, would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the visual amenities and landscape character of the area, and would seriously detract from the tourism value and amenities of the area. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

You're read this much of the article... So, if you value our journalism, please subscribe today for €5, €10, or €20 per month.

An Bord Pleanala requested information on alternatives, such as a cycling route using a former railway line, and the board noted that the challenges associated with potential alternative routes as outlined by the council were considered in its decision. But regardless of these challenges in building alternatives it said:

“The Board concluded that the proposed design including cycleways contributed significantly to the width of the proposed road alignment and the associated landscape impacts. The Board was not satisfied that the cycleway justification was sufficient to overcome the landscape concerns as set out in the refusal reason.”

It was reported that the NRA said that it is not possible under new standards to design a road that could be narrower and include provision for cyclists — however, there is no evidence in the planning documents that the planning authority suggested the idea of cyclist provision on a narrower road. is reader-funded journalism. That means it's funded by readers like you.

Subscription drive update: reached its target of 270 subscribers by the end of August -- thank you to all who have helped! Our new target is to have 300 subscribers by the end of 2022 -- originally this was hoped to be exceeded by the first year of running the site full time (end of October).

If you can help push above 300 subscribers, please subscribe today for €5 or more. If you have already done so -- thank you!

Please remember, every month there's a natural drop-off in subscriptions due to people getting new cards, cards stolen, Revolut not topped up etc.

*** is a reader-funded journalism publication. Effectively it's an online newspaper covering news and analyses of cycling and related issues, including cycle route designs, legal changes, and pollical and cultural issues.

There are examples, big and small, which show that the reader-funded or listener-funding model can work to support journalism -- from the Dublin Inquirer and The Guardian to many podcasts. To make it work for, it just needs enough people like you to believe!

Monthly subscriptions will give's journalism a dependable base of support. But please don't take free access for granted. Last year had an average of 15,800 readers per month and we know our readers include people who cycle and those who don't, politicians, officials and campaigners.

I know only a small percentage of readers will see the value of keeping this open enough to subscribe, that's the reality of the reader-funded model. But more support is needed to keep this show on the road.

The funding drive was started in November 2021 and, as of the start of June 2022, 250 readers have kindly become monthly subscribers -- thank you very much to all that have!

But currently, it's only around 1.6% of readers who subscribe. So, if you can, please join them and subscribe today via

Cian Ginty

1 comment

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.