All, there was a meeting today to review a DTO draft document Review of cycle strategy / facilities 4 year plan 2003-2006 . This is a important meeting asMessage 1 of 21 , Feb 20, 2003View SourceAll,
there was a meeting today to review a DTO draft document " Review of cycle strategy / facilities 4 year plan 2003-2006". This is a important meeting as it will set strategy for the next 4 years in with the 4 local Authourity areas.
Damien on behalf on the DCC has made no fewer than 3 previous submissions to the forum over the past 16 months, but few of our views seemed to have made it into the final document.
Anyway with between Dermot, Damien and myself we made a final submission on proposed changes to the document. Damien and Eamon Ryan attended the meeting today on behalf of the DCC.
With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
All I usually observe with interest this list but there times when comment is required. Shane I was at the meeting too Though from your description I would notMessage 1 of 21 , Feb 21, 2003View SourceAll
I usually observe with interest this list but there times when comment is
I was at the meeting too
Though from your description I would not recognise it
If you had a major problem with either the process or what was agreed I did
not hear you express it at the time
The 'visioning thing' that you comment on was suggested but did not happen
What did happen was that 26-28 people who were interested enough to give up
a Saturday turned up and had their say
They agreed having had a general discussion & small group discussion what
the priorities were and what people were prepared to work on
There was a democratic process in which every single person present picked
their priority item
The top three are to be acted on
There was no dissent or rows
There was agreement that the new entity was loose co-ordinating body which
would work on the items agreed
There was no mention that I can recall of HGV's by anyone
That was an omission which all of us present share whatever blame or
responsibility is appropriate
As one on the seven people who actually committed to doing something
(lobbying to have the mandatory use of cycle lanes ended)
I have sent details of the work done to date on the issue to your colleague
in the GCC on 11 Feb without reply to date
I note you also committed to acting on roundabout design
This is not a perfect world. The ICC is not perfect either. It was agreed
that the functioning would be ad-hoc
If we wait for perfection we will wait forever. I suggest that we face the
world we live in and make that best of it
Chris O Neill
* ** *** ** * ** *** ** * ** *** ** *
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily
represent those of ESB.
If you have received this email in error please notify the sender.
Although ESB scans e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee
that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained
as a result of viruses.
* ** *** ** * ** *** ** * ** *** ** *
hi, i haven t been active in the DCC for a long time for a few reasons. so ignore this if you like. however, i would like to support shane foran andMessage 1 of 21 , Feb 21, 2003View Sourcehi,
i haven't been active in the DCC for a long time for a few reasons. so
ignore this if you like. however, i would like to support shane foran and
cyclopath's opinions on approaches to campaigning and activism.
we can see in the current Iraq invasion debate that both the national media
and the government have not pursued intelligent rational debate about the
real issues. the primary way the anti-war movement has grown is outside the
bounds of mainstream media/government entities.
it's not hard to explain why and how the media and government do this: read
'understanding power' by noam chomsky.
i think our approach to cycling campaign issues should take these issues
into account. it should recognise as a fundamental fact that the national
media serves its own interests and we should be wary of depending on, or
even trusting, it. it should recognise that the government has many agendas
that counteract directly the aims of cycling campaigns, and has no need to
really listen to the will of the populace.
with this in mind, a cycling campaign should at all times be highly wary of
any institution (governmental or other) or institutional process that
distracts us from our real aims.
all the best,
>> Shane Foran Galway Cycling Campaign proposals Portarlington 8/2/03
> Shane, I think your 'revolutionary' thinking is much more progressive
> than any policy of collaboration with the current regime.
> In addition, I think that the need for change in government and local
> authorities needs to be recognised and tackled.
> Money has been wasted, schemes have not been constructed to
> specification, facities are allowed to decay, targets are being fudged
> and false statistics are being given.
> Without organisational change, nothing will ever be permanently
I too,support the ideas proposed by Shane Foran and his supporters,there clearly is an agenda pursued by these government/organisations and the needs of theMessage 1 of 21 , Feb 21, 2003View SourceI too,support the ideas proposed by Shane Foran and his supporters,there
is an agenda pursued by these government/organisations and the needs of the
general public especially the cyclists is not being served at all.
The DCC seems to be tip toeing around some of these bodies and
i would think more radical campaigning and activism is needed,
their present approach would not be endorsed by me.
I'm a student who is very shortly to be an engineer (hopefully in 2 months!)
and well,i can see myself going into the transport engineering
sector in Ireland but i feel dissillusioned by the vast amount of schemes at
present like the 'construction of a strategic cycling network' that are clearly
wasting millions of euros to absolutely no avail.
Change is needed and i for one would like to think i can make a difference.
If and when i do enter one of these institutions hopefully i can begin some
slow changes that do improve the transport infrastructure for all.
That day will be a good day.
Some more ideas from Rory-future radical 'environmental transport engineer'.
At 15:25 21/02/2003 +0000, john clifford wrote:
>i haven't been active in the DCC for a long time for a few reasons. so
>ignore this if you like. however, i would like to support shane foran and
>cyclopath's opinions on approaches to campaigning and activism.
Hi Chris O’Neil has taken issue with several points I raised with regards to what happened at the Portarlington meeting. Before I address these I mustMessage 1 of 21 , Feb 24, 2003View SourceHi
Chris ONeil has taken issue with several points I
raised with regards to what happened at the
Portarlington meeting. Before I address these I must
acknowledge that it was largely due to Chris that
anything got clearly agreed on the day.
> If you had a major problem with either the processChris may not have heard us, but both myself and
> or what was agreed I did
> not hear you express it at the time
Miriam both objected to this procedure when it was
suggested, on the grounds that it would be a waste of
> What did happen was that 26-28 people who were<snip>
> interested enough to give up
> a Saturday turned up and had their say
> There was a democratic process in which every singleI would ask to what end? For what purpose?
> person present picked their priority item
Consultation and inclusiveness are not ends in
themselves, they are merely stages in a process aimed
at identifying the right issues and best solutions.
In this case, the issues have been painstakingly
analysed and identified for many years by generations
of cycling activists. Galway came with a prepared
position paper, Cork also has established positions on
various matters. So was this process of individual
consultation likely to throw up some surprising new
issue that would be a priority for a national cycle
campaign? My answer would be no. Did this process
actually throw up surprising new issues that were
identified as a priority for the new group? No it did
>This is precisely the point, a significant number, in
> As one on the seven people who actually committed to
> doing something
> (lobbying to have the mandatory use of cycle lanes
> I have sent details of the work done to date on the
fact by my calculation a majority, of those present
were prepared to consume time raising various issues
that they were not prepared to work on. Instead,
those of us who were there to work, were put in the
position of having to compete with those who were not
there to work, in order to get what are standard,
basic, "bread and butter" cycling promotion issues
onto the agenda. This is not a question of
"perfection" or "rocket science" but of basic long
established principles that any group of educated
cycling activists should have been able to agree on.
I am aware that I share responsibility for the
situation. Prior to the meeting I specifically
flagged my concern that bringing in non-cycle
campaigners/ non-activists would distract from the
work that needed to be done. So clearly if I was that
concerned I should have been more robust on the day.
However, we were also conscious of being present in
the enemy camp as it were and nobody was too sure
what was going to happen. Be that as it may I am
raising these issues now, the longer we go on without
a clear, integrated, global vision the worse it will
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
All, I attach, with David Maher s endorsement, a paste of the Dublin Cycling Campaign s submission sent to the DTO Cycling Forum, 20/2/03. A number of draftsMessage 1 of 21 , Feb 24, 2003View SourceAll,
I attach, with David Maher's endorsement, a paste of
the Dublin Cycling Campaign's submission sent to the
DTO Cycling Forum, 20/2/03.
A number of drafts have previously been receieved and
comment returned to the DTO. The document below
between '**' gives a flavour of the issues.
Well worth a read.
I can paste on the draft document it was referring to
individually if required. (pasting of large
attachemnts is not possible on the message board.)
--- david maher <maherd70@...> wrote: >
> Michael and Helena,**************************************************************************************************************
> please find attached the submission
> from the Dublin Cycling Campaign. I hope that the
> forum is successful.
> I really must express my frustration that our
> various submissions to the forum have been ignored.
> Numberous submissions that we sent relating to
> 20mph, non mandatory use of cycle lanes, specific
> garda tickets for parking on cycle lanes are not
> mentioned in your proposed text. The focus on
> segragated cycle lanes is very worrying as these
> have proved a disaster in the past, and when we draw
> your attention and that of the Local Authourities to
> extremely dangerous designs such as Dundrum -
> absolutely nothing happens -people just sit back and
> wait for cyclists to be killed at these insane
> If the forum is to be a success - it is vital that
> you take on board the views of the DCC - who at
> the end of the day are your customers and the ones
> who will decide on the success of your plans, both
> in terms of cycling numbers but also in terms of
> accident and death statistics.
> I hope you know from experience that I (on behalf of
> the DCC) do not usually put my views in such blunt
> terms, but I am extremely concerned by the way our
> past submissions have not been incorporated in to
> the document.
> So please take our submission on these forum
Dublin Cycling Campaign
12 Millmount Grove, Windy Arbour, Dublin 14.
A Member of the European Cycling Federation
Net. www.connect.ie/dcc Email dcc@...
Voicemail 087 6261627
A Submisison from the Dublin Cycling Campaign on the
DTO Cycle Forum Report Version February 2003
Dear Helena and Michael,
We contacted our members and our response to the Cycle
Forum Document follows.
ONE: Segregated Facilities (- See also 5.2 below)
We do not like the emphasis on segregated cycle
facilities. This type of facility is a disaster for
the following reasons;
(1) Inexperienced cyclists do not learn how to cope
(2) Vehicular drivers begin to expect cyclists to be
off the road everywhere, and no longer tolerate
cyclists even where no cycle facilities are provided.
Vehicular speeds and overtaking distances assume no
cyclist will ever be on the road.
(3) They cannot be cleaned of debris by normal road
(4) They generally suffer from poor priority at
junctions leading to an increase in accidents.
Vehicular drivers consider cyclists on such off road
tracks as "pedestrians", and will not yield
appropriate "rights of way" at junctions.
(5) Off road facilities intrinsically suffer more
conflicts at bus stops.
(6) I won't mention roundabouts, except that they are
still rampantly being constructed all around the
country to the detriment of future cyclists. Off road
facilities don't cope at roundabouts either.
The section on "Quality Segregared Facilities" has not
previously appeared on the draft documents. It is now
being presented as the AGREED position of the cycle
forum. As usual the 'safety' agenda is being used as
the justification. Also there is mention of
segregatrating cyclists and HGV's. It is our belief
that the DTO will attempt to do this by banning
cyclists from the quays, the port area, and on-road
use of distributor roads and QBC's. The reference to
'quality' facilities seems to be more lip service.
There is no evidence that the DTO has any record or
interest in providing quality facilites. If one takes
the view that the primary purpose of 'segregated cycle
facilities' is to provide a pretext for exclusion of
cyclists from many rights of way, then this objective
does not require any management of quality. This
hypothesis fits the facts we see on the ground. This
also raises the question of Compulsory Use. It is felt
by many that this was not an incidental, or
accidental, piece of legislation.
The combination of the compulsary use statutory
instrument and the proposal for "quality segregated
facilities" means that the right to choose one's own
safe path on the road is removed. The possibility of
having accidents with left turning vehicles
(especially HGVs) is if anything even higher this is
particularly so for inexperienced cyclists.
It seems to the Dublin Cycling Campaign that the
thinking behind the new section is to take cyclists
out of the way of motor traffic so that (maximum)
speeds can be kept high. In keeping with this there
is no mention of 20mph speed limits as there was in
previous versions. To put it another way the new
approach puts the flows of motor traffic above the
safety of cyclists. The Dublin Cycling Campaign will
be publicly making this point from now on that road
capacity is more important than the safety of those on
TWO: Relationship between the Design Guidelines Manual
and the NRA Design Manual?
How is a stand alone manual on the design of cycling
infrastructure expected to function independently of
the National road design manuals which are
administered by the NRA? Cyclists are an intrinsic
part of road traffic, and the National road design
manuals should reflect this by taking cognisance of
cyclists' needs and prohibiting designs proved to be
dangerous for cyclists. Cycling is not just a Dublin
THREE: Responses to other individual points
Response to section 3.1. (Cycle Numbers) point (v)
How do you know that numbers have increased on these
routes - which routes have they specific data for?
Response to section 3.1. (Cycle Numbers) point (vi)
Again can we see the figures - cycling numbers for
the last 10 years - we are really in the dark on the
way trends are going, did the number of cyclists drop
and does this explain the drop in injuries ?
Response to section 3.2. (Cycling Obstacles and
requirements) - add in (xi) no fixed cleaning of cycle
paths - to remove glass, leaves or snow. This has just
gone on for years and nothing happens. Endless talk
but the Local Auth. have done zero on this front
(xii) Excessive traffic volumes in the city centre.
What ever happened to reducing the number of car
parking spaces by 5% per year. We have the highest
percentage of workers entering city centre by car of
any capital city in Europe.
(xiii). Law enforcement is a joke. 4 active speed
cameras in the whole republic. Britain is planning to
increase its number of cameras to 4,500 in the coming
2 years. Average motorist gets a speeding ticket every
8 years - this despite NRA survey showing over 90%
non-compliance in urban areas. Also drink driving is
rampant. Average time interval to be breathalayzed is
110 years in Ireland, while in Victoria (Aus.) it is
every 20 months.
(xiv) No specific ticket for cars parked on bicycle
lanes - only can enforce by way of a summons - which
means not a finger is lifted by gardai.
(xv) removal of compulsary use of cycle tracks.
(xvi) Crazy car focused junction design such as
Response to Section 4.3 Outer suburbs -add in
1. No new housing/ business estates that do not
contain 'shortest route' - pedestrian and cyclists
2. Road calming should never use pinch point type
3. No more slip road desgns
Response to Section 4.3.1 Current non city center
employment - add to 3 year actions
1. Employeer leaflet check list of what to do - racks,
showers, loans etc
2. Localised "Cycle time to work" posters for each
area of the city.
Response to Section 5.1 Policy of cycle facilities
provision - add in
1. Review process for all existing cycle routes and
procedure for cyclists to have design/enforcement
issues dealt with - some one within each local Auth.
Response to Section 5.2. N.B Segregated facilities
1. Only off road if there is no junction e.g. (along
by the sea front).
2. Design should NEVER include get off your bike and
walk across the road.
Response to Section 5.3 Cycle parking - add in
1. Demand all CIE companies adopt a policy of
"Integrated sustainable transport"
2. Racks should be conveniently located, secure, easy
to use, adequately lit, covered by CCTV , be well sign
posted and as close to the entrance as possible.
Response to Section 5.7 Monitoring
1. Spell out how, when and where this monitoring is
going to take place.
Response to Section 5.8 Promotion
1. Give a detailed benefit/risk analysis with all the
medical survey references
Response to Section 5.10 Priority work
Change point 1 - to say that bad cycle tracks should
be upgraded or "REMOVED".
Summary - point 5 Enforcement
Big picture speeding, drink driving etc.
Also never covered
1. Appointment of Cycling officer in each local
2. Need for once a year engineer traffic engineers
from each local authority to sit down with the DCC and
DTO to discuss progress in their area and plans for
3. HGV ban in the city centre, both accessing the port
and delivering - i.e. a limit on truck sizes
4. Introduction of 20mph limits in the city centre
5. Any driver education programme included?
Public Relations Officer
Dublin Cycling Campaign
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts