No paywall and let's keep it that way. Support reader-funded journalism, subscribe today.

Liffey Cycle Route: New plan includes cycle paths on both quays

— Route to switch from building side to quay side around the Four Courts.

— Drawings included at end of article, more to follow…

A new plan for the Liffey Cycle Route will include segregated cycle paths on both sides of Dublin’s quays, according to the Ireland edition of The Times.

The project is to be discussed at the Dublin City Council transport committee at 3pm today — the meeting can be watched from 3pm here.

Cllr Ciarán Cuffe, chairman of the committee, said: “”I’m delighted that we now have a new plan for the Liffey Cycle Route linking the Phoenix Park and Dublin Bay.  The scheme isn’t perfect, and has had to make compromises, but I’m hoping that it will get the green light from councillors so that we can move towards construction.”

The project aims toe provide “safe, continuous cycle facilities in both directions between the Phoenix Park and Heuston Station and the Tom Clarke East Link Bridge”. The route will be at least 8 years in planning before it is built.

An outline of the new plan includes:

  • Docklands: Point Village to Customs House:
    Two-way cycle paths on both sides of the river on the quayside.
  • Core city centre: Customs House to the Four Courts:
    Unidirectional cycle paths on the quaysides.
  • Western: Four Courts to Phoenix Park
    Unidirectional cycle paths on the building side.

There there are boardwalks planned for around the south side of the central section, but these are for pedestrians. Unlikely one previous plan, cycling will remain inside the walls of the quays.

The unidirectional cycle paths are expected to be 2 metres wide with narrower sections at pinch points — this is below standards set out in the Greater Dublin Area Cycle Network Plan which states that primary cycle paths should aim for 2.5 metres.

While 2.5 metres may not be achievable everywhere, it is possible along most of the route.

The Dublin Cycling Campaign is expected to welcome the route. Following holding Liffey Cycle protests, the campaign is planning a family-friendly cycle to celebrate the progress on the route on Sunday April 14, meeting on Grand Canal Square at 11am.

Project drawings: is reader-funded journalism. That means it's funded by readers like you.

September subscription drive update: has 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), but this is unlikely and so the new target is the end of the year.

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. I think I like it….they seem to have sorted out most of the bus conflicts – keeping the cycle lane on the river side closer in to the city means that bus stops aren’t a problem, and they seem to be using bus-stop islands further out when the cycle lane switches to the other side.

    Remains to be seen how it will work though – I wonder how long it will actually take for a cyclist to switch from one side of the road to the other if all the lights are obeyed.

    I think I’ll need to look at higher res maps to fully appreciate what they’ve done for most of the side-roads – I think there’s a few short “murder strips” in there (e.g. left hand turn from Arran Quay to church Street).

    And God knows how much wailing there’s going to be about interfering with the Ha’penny Bridge…..

  2. Anything is better than what we have now, so finally something might happen.

    However 2m wide isn’t enough. It just isn’t. There will be loads of people using this. Having lived in NL for a few years and seeing what sort of width you need for routes with lots of people = 2m isn’t enough. :/

  3. I like it, the bus bypasses look good. It would be a huge improvement if it was built as is.

    The main part I didn’t like is the few left slip murder strips. What’s the recommended way to avoid these?

  4. There’s a lack of attention to detail and safety throughout this plan. Look at the first map at the Conyngham bus depot-
    the segregated bike track is gone, to allow busses cut across and turn in
    The section AA on the map shows the north side is to be salmon coloured segregated track, but the elevation shows the two sides to be red on road track

    the legend doesn’t have any key for the brown for pedestrian crossings, and has different treatments for the infirmary road junction. The north side has cycle lane directly either side of the east pedestrian crossing, the south side has gaps with no cycling infrastructure either side of the crossing.

    This is just on the first map…

  5. I hope that they add a traffic light priority at any junctions where both cyclists and drivers are managed. A slight delay in releasing the car traffic will enable the cyclist to cross the road to a side road, or switch from building side to riverside.

  6. I like this design. I was worried about the route running on both sides of the river, but I understand the need for some compromise. At this stage I’m glad to have a decent solution on the table.

  7. And nothing will be done on the ground for eight years!! The Brown Thomas car park might be a cycle parking area in that time.

  8. switching sides wont work…so if green for traffic are 1000 cyclists to cross diagonally in front of rush hour traffic…?? So that means that when green for traffic on quay, either the motorised traffic has to abruptly stop when green, or the cyclists do, backing up a 1.75 m lane??

    Crossing on red when cross traffic is a non runner…

    so only option is a separate light for cyclists which means a complete tailback in lane.



Leave a Reply

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