Q11: Image question on cycle lanes which double as parking

For the Cycling in Dublin newspaper, we surveyed Dublin’s TDs and councillors to get an overview of politicians’ opinions on cycling; here we publish extra details with analysis by Cian Ginty and Colm Moore. Results should be read in the context set out across the following pages:

Q11: Image question on cycle lanes which double as parking SUR parking

FULL TEXT: 11. Cyclists often complain about cycle lanes which double as parking — pictured above is an example of this. Which one of the below options best fits your view of this design?

  • It’s an unacceptable practice which should be phased out as soon as possible
  • It’s an unacceptable practice which should be phased out slowly
  • It’s a good balance between the need for parking and cycle lanes
  • No opinion

An open-ended response field was also included (see below).

Results Q11bOpen-ended comments

Of the respondents to this question, 6.4% left open-ended comments. These are unedited as follows:

  • Indenting the footpath to accommodate both could be explored or an off-road cycle path.
  • I note on the sign the different times of forbidden parking and obviously weaving in and out of cars is a danger at times and a nuisance and the interruption of a cycleway renders the cycleway defective. Continuity is essential. However, there may be an argument on off peak times and Sundays to allow parking (e.g. beside churches etc)
  • “This is slightly ambiguous – I am not sure if phasing out “”the practice”” means that current policy on this should change (ie no more of these should be put in place), or that current paths of this nature should change, (ie paths or spaces like this already in place should be removed) which is a different proposition.
  • While this is a flawed policy, I do not think it is in the long-term interests of inner city residents that issues be pitched as cyclists versus car owners, since many residents are either both themselves, or sympathetic to both. We need to tackle this without fomenting further antagonism, so I support ensuring that further lanes of this nature are not put in place, while regarding current paths/spaces I would be more conservative.”
  • It is important that the city works for all – pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Perhaps the local authorities could restrict parking during peak traffic in favour of cyclists.
  • I don’t cycle but this looks like a crazy idea.
  • The two are important and should not contradict each other
  • It is possible to have cycle lanes and on street parking in many instances. The problem with this design is that the bicycle lane stops abruptly to make way for shared use with parking. There should be a high quality cycle lane and dedicated on street parking
  • I don’t know. It’s very difficult to strip every route of parking. I actually favour a compromise position: in Blackrock, we had to put a contra-flow cycle lane on Newtown Avenue. We put the contra-flow lane inside a line of parked cars, but I acknowledge that that may now always be desirable or possible. I suppose it’s a matter of balancing rights and needs.
  • It should be phased out ASAP but you will have a battle with Councils that don’t want to lose the parking revenue!
  • In areas with limited off street parking a balance needs to be struck between all road users.
  • Confused message, either we have cycle way or not – should phase out parking in favor of cycling
  • I would have liked other choices with this question. I don’t like the design, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say it is unacceptable.

Leave a Reply

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