Why #3 is the best of the Liffey Cycle Route options — but it needs some reworking

COMMENT & ANALYSIS: Dublin City Council yesterday released draft detailed drawings showing the four options for a Liffey Cycle Route, our view is that option three is the most balanced. But it needs some notable reworking without shared use.

We recently detailed 12 reasons why the Liffey Cycle Route should be supported — if you have not read and are still unsure why the quays route is needed, read that article first.

Option three isn’t perfect, but it’s the most balanced of the four options currently on the table.

Hello... sorry to interrupt you: IrishCycle.com is reader-funded journalism supported by just over 250 readers like you -- they have subscribed for €5 per month or more. If you can, please join them and subscribe today. If you have already subscribed -- thank you! Now, back to the article...

Option one, which includes boardwalks, which mix people walking and cycling at key junction points and has very narrow sections of two-way path which would be overloaded on day one of opening. Option two is most of option three, but with less bus priority as buses would have to take an extra sharp turn. Option four is only just about a step up from the current layout, it does not help with current left turn conflicts, and it’s in ways worse because of some restricted widths on segregated sections which have little to no scope to be made wider.

On to option three: It needs work. This includes:

The layout for cycling around the Frank Sherwin Bridge needs to allow people on bicycles to cycle — without using the Luas tracks or shared footpaths — to Heuston Station, Heuston South Quarter, the Irish Museum of Modern Art, the HSE HQ etc. Both cycle lanes in the plans for the bridge are currently northbound:

Frank Sherwin Bridge

Similar issues arise on Parkgate Street at the entrance to the Phoenix Park: How do you get to the eastbound cycle lane in the park (which we’ve crudely marked with an blue X) and the two-way cycle path on the south of Parkgate Street (marked with a red X):

connections

 

There’s also shared use (areas shaded in blue) in locations which have more than enough space for segregation:

Shared use

More to follow.

Hello Reader... IrishCycle.com 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 IrishCycle.com, it just needs enough people like you to believe!

Monthly subscriptions will give IrishCycle.com's journalism a dependable base of support. But please don't take free access for granted. Last year IrishCycle.com 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 February, 210 readers have kindly become monthly subscribers -- thank you very much to all that have!

But currently, it's only around 1.3% of readers who subscribe. So, if you can, please join them and subscribe today via ko-fi.com/irishcycle/tiers

Cian Ginty
Editor, IrishCycle.com

7 comments

  1. I done their consultation survey on their site , but you cannot make suggestions other than ticking off the little circles, so I chose option 3. I would prefer no Traffic on both Quays at all or at least none on one side the nth Quays save for Bicycles and Pedestrians only.

    They still seem to want to pander to motorists use if they can. By right they should put a priority for Cyclists to get from the Bike Lane in the Phoenix Pk on to the New proposed two way Cycle track .I absolutely hate shared use it is unfair to have Cyclists and pedestrians competing for space on a Track.

    Reply
  2. The City needs a clean Lung where people can breathe clean air without pollution of motor Traffic. So I would prefer no motorised Traffic at all on the Quays save for Cyclists and pedestrians.

    We could do with Traffic free Sundays in Dublin , is it too much to ask I dont think so.

    Reply
  3. I am a cyclist and commute 50% of time by bike and 50% by bus. I really don’t think it is realistic or sustainable to ask public transport to play second fiddle to cycling. I don’t think the public will accept it. I feel this because quite a number of commuters travel from distances which are not possible by bicycle, so even if the wanted to switch to bike they couldn’t. I could not support rerouting buses to facilitate this.

    This is why I would choose option 1.

    Reply
  4. Wil, option three doesn’t in my view put cycling ahead of public transport. The proposed rerouting does increase the length of the bus route slightly, but it also creates a dedicated public transport corridor that is close to a proper BRT in terms of segregation. This could improve the reliability of journey times. It also offers passengers better opportunities for changeover across the Luas and Dublin Bikes.
    My issues with the drawings are:
    1. The bus lane (option 3) on the section between Lincoln Lane and the junction with Church Street (Hammond Lane) – the traffic flow on this section is inverted. This would need to be very clearly marked. This lane would also have to be widened according to these drawings.
    2. The alignment of the cycle lane from Church St southbound also looks a bit dodgy for those travelling onto Fr Mathew Bridge.
    3. I’d share your concerns Cian regarding the crazy shared space southbound access to Heuston.
    4. The access to the Phoenix Park also hasn’t been thought through, although that appears to be part of a separate Chapelizod to Heuston scheme.
    5. The drawings don’t seem to indicate much of an improvement in the number of signalised pedestrian crossings. There are marked crossings at the main junctions, but there’s no indication as to whether they’re signalised. The scheme should’ve been billed as a walking and cycling route.
    On the whole though, it’s a good plan and I hope it goes ahead.

    Reply
  5. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE; insist on option 3 with NO LOSS OF TREES on the river. Felling of these plane trees on Arran Quay etc would be a devastating loss to the visual amenity and air quality of the city centre. We allowed the destruction of all the old plane trees which used to occupy O’Connell Street; trees that purified our air since the establishment of the Free State and gave our principle street dignity and an improved air quality. The “shrubs on sticks” that were planted in their place dont compensate for the loss. This cannot be allowed to happen again.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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