“Fundamental changes” to cycle path questioned as report with apparent evidence still only being drafted

— Children cycling to schools will need to cross road twice in a short distance.
— Protecting trees “belatedly suggested” as reason, but car parking was original issue.

A councillor has questioned Dublin City Council officials as to why “fundamental changes” were made to the planned Gracefield Road to Vernon Avenue Active Travel project, which is a route between Artane and Clontarf.

At the council’s recent monthly meeting, Cllr Paddy Monahan (Social Democrats) said it’s great work being done by the active travel program, but speaking time is tight, so, he “unfortunately has to get to the negative stuff”.

The changes relate to the cycle route switching from a unidirectional to a two-way cycle path and back again to a unidirectional path in around 700 metres. At one crossover point, people cycling the route will be expected to stop at three or four sets of traffic lights to travel straight along the route at the Howth Road junction.

The cycle route also includes sub-standardly narrow cycle tracks and shared areas between people walking and cycling.

Cllr Monahan said his issue is “specific, but it also relates to broad issues around accountability in the decision-making process around active travel.”

“Fundamental changes were made by [the council’s Active Travel] office to the Sybil Hill Road section of the Gracefield Road to Vernon Avenue cycle route they were not made in the interest of active travel, but in response to complaints about the loss of car parking spots at St Anne,” he said.

Cllr Monahan said: “It’s going to require many teenagers who cycle to St Paul’s School to cross the road twice now to get to the school in the space of 200 metres — what was planned to run one way on either side of the road with traffic was changed so that both cycle lanes are now on one side of the road for a short but highly inconvenient section.”

He said that it will particularly affect children who “frankly aren’t going to use it”.

IMAGE: One of the cross-over points from unidirectional to a two-way cycle path at the Howth Road junction.

Cllr Monahan said that he tabled a motion at the local North Central Area committee to overturn the changes. However, the Active Travel Office contacted him in advance of the meeting to request that he defer the motion. He did so because he was promised further information about the reasoning behind the decision.

“It was belatedly suggested that protecting trees might have been the issue behind the change, so I agreed to defer my motion on the basis that I’d be provided with evidence, for example, an arborist report on which upon which the decision to make the change was made,” he said.

He said the Active Travel office was to organise a meeting with North Central councillors in early November, but it also did not happen,n and no new data has been provided yet.

After Victor Coe, a senior engineer in the Active Travel Office, answered questions from different councillors, Cllr Monahan took issue with his question not being answered and that it was “just repeated that you’re awaiting an arborist’s report.”

IMAGE: The second crossover point.

Cllr Monahan asked about the rescheduling of the meeting and said that given that there is no arborist’s report yet, he questioned how trees were being raised as the issue for the change in the cycle lane.

He said: “First of all it was your office said that it was parking issues was the reason for the change in the cycle lane. Belatedly, trees were raised.”

Cllr Monahan said that he assumed there must be evidence, such as an arborous report, but that now it appears the report has yet to be finished, so, he asked: “Why were the changes made to the cycle lane?”

Coe said: “I don’t have the answer to that councillor. But if the office wants to organise a meeting with your area committee, that’s the best way to discuss the issue of the designs.”

He added: “That’s where we’re at with the project at the moment, so the office will arrange another meeting with you.”

ALSO READ: A cycle track from Artane to Clontarf is planned to be too narrow, but is there a way to fix it?

5 thoughts on ““Fundamental changes” to cycle path questioned as report with apparent evidence still only being drafted”

  1. This reminds me of the north quay in Dublin where you have to cross two lines of traffic to connect to the next section of the bike lane!

    Reply
    • Yup, utterly unintuitive. Imagine asking a motorist to flick across two lanes of traffic to get to the correct lane for turning right, for example, and giving them the width of a junction to do so. It would be chaos! Is there even a large sign to advise to get ready to move across, or road marking in a bike box? I don’t think there is any sign from recollection.

      Reply
  2. Same logic applies to schools beside Rossmore Road in Templeogue, where children have to cross the road twice to get to school. Parking facilitated again.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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