At our area committee meeting on 25th April, I had a motion in relation to the junction.  In response, the Transportation Department showed us a redesign which involves removing one of the 3 eastbound lanes entering the junction in order to give more space to westbound traffic.  It is an improvement, but there are some elements which still worry me.  I have written a follow-up letter, below.  I would welcome any comments or feedback.

Dear Peter,

Thank you for showing us the proposed redesign of the junction last week.

In relation to the design, I have the following comments.

I welcome the removal of one of the 3 eastbound lanes coming into the junction, to give more room for westbound traffic.

I am concerned at the design including cycle lanes within an existing
lane. By the design shown, it is not possible for a car or truck to use
this lane without travelling in the cycle lane.  This seems to be the
case northbound entering the junction on the industrial estate road and
eastbound entering the junction on grange road.  It seems to me that
these could have 3 undesirable effects

1.    They are likely to encourage cyclists to stay left at the
junction.  In fact, safe cycling requires that a cyclist travelling
straight on should not stay to the left of the lane as to do so would
risk a car or truck turning left across them.  Safe cyclists will
occupy the centre of the straight ahead lane.
2.    They may encourage cyclists to travel up on the inside of trucks,
which puts cyclists in a particularly dangerous position.
3.    They may encourage motor vehicles to pass cyclists without moving fully into the adjacent lane.

If there is a good reason for this design I would like to hear of it.

I am also concerned at the width of the cycle lane over the bridge. 
The previous situation was a good wide hard shoulder.  The new
situation should not lead to any reduction in safety for cyclists. 
There is a tendency for a motor vehicle user to assume that it is safe
to pass a cyclist on a cycle lane as long as each road user remains in
their lane.  This, of course, is not the case, but it is a consequence
of cycle lane design.  Narrow cycle lanes (especially if associated
with other narrow lanes and markings such as central hatching) can
encourage motor vehicle users to pass closer than they would otherwise
have done.   In this case, we are talking about a road with high levels
of HGVs, making safe passing even more important for cyclists’ safety
and cyclists’ perceptions of safety. The width of the lane was not
marked on the plan.  However, there is a tendency for road engineers to
incorrectly assume that a width of 1.5m is standard.  In this case, a
width of at least 2m would be appropriate

Is mise, le meas,

David Healy