![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/irishcycle.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/image-36.png?quality=80&ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\nComment & Analysis: Just the other day, a concerned resident in Cork City posted a comment on this website\u2019s Facebook page \u2014 it was a dreadful story about how residents in the city are having their car parking stolen for cycle lanes. A similar picture is emerging around the country. The only thing is that it\u2019s untrue. <\/p>\n
This is what they posted: <\/p>\n
\u201cThe waste of money on bike lanes is a disgrace in cork city we have a problem with them being forced on people and robbing their parking spaces outside their homes that they own people are protesting against this for the past three months and being forced to wash their neighbourhood being destroyed removing trees that are there for decades and not one of our representatives standing with them the money being wasted is shameful and could have been used to build homes for the homeless.\u201d<\/p>\n
And this is the problem: To many councillors and people around the country, this sounds dreadful. But, like too many things this website has to deal with these days, it\u2019s not a clear reflection of reality. And that\u2019s putting it nicely. <\/p>\n
The neighbourhood is actually getting much-needed new crossings, new footpaths and a fully resurfaced roadway, new water mains, and better public spaces outside community centres, etc. Hardly what many people would call \u201cdestroyed\u201d.<\/p>\n
If you were not familiar with the details of the Knockpogue Avenue and Knockfree Avenue active travel project, the lack of clarity in the comment and the mention of the car parking spaces being \u201crobbed\u201d might lead you to think that people\u2019s front yards were being compulsorily purchased for the cycle lanes. <\/p>\n
But we\u2019re talking about a public road with parking outside homes and elsewhere. There\u2019s not a single private space on people\u2019s land that is to be taken away. <\/p>\n
What\u2019s worse, looking at the updated plans provided by Cork City Council, there doesn\u2019t seem to be any parking lost in front of homes at all. <\/p>\n
And in most cases where parking was to be lost at other locations away from homes, it has been added back as part of the revised designs or in one place, drop-off bays are being provided, or provision is being made to share off-street parking outside of community facilities. In any case, the council cannot \u201crob\u201d the space it owns on the streets. <\/p>\n
To be clear: The project was democratically approved by councillors, and they recently stood by their decision.<\/p>\n
The main reason more trees are being chopped down is not for the cycle lanes, but for the above-mentioned extra car parking to be retained. My guess is that overall, the council might end up formally marking more parking spaces that were previously informally used on the streets. <\/p>\n
Even if there are some locations where reparking might be in higher demand, those, I think, generally correspond to where there are side streets where there\u2019s a good deal of space. <\/p>\n
And, while it is unfortunate that any trees have to be cut down, the number of trees being planted \u2014 including semi-mature trees \u2014 will far outnumber those being cut down.<\/p>\n
And, no, money being used to revamp a street and replace water mains cannot be used for housing. It especially cannot be reallocated after construction starts.<\/p>\n
More money would be wasted trying to change the plans after construction has started \u2014 post- construction changes were the main reason for issues with the children\u2019s hospital. That seems to be why councillors said no to more changes at this stage.<\/p>\n
But while this commenter claimed in a follow-up comment that there was \u201cnothing wrong\u201d with the way the street was, this is disputed by other residents who agree with some of the changes. They say there were safety concerns, especially around the old roundabouts on the route. The cycle lane part of the project has been used against the whole project.<\/p>\n
In all likelihood, while it may be useful for some short trips, the route won\u2019t likely attract tons of people cycling because it will remain disconnected for some time until other routes are built. While the route\u2019s gradient isn\u2019t too bad, the residents are correct in saying it is a very hilly area overall \u2014 it\u2019s not where I would start if I were just focusing on building a cycle lane network.<\/p>\n
However, the project isn\u2019t just about cycle lanes. It improves not just safety, but also pedestrian accessibility and adds bus stops. It\u2019s also a basic street renewal and updating project.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s a populist idea that a significant project under construction for months can be changed again in a fundamental way without huge cost implications. After a long process and democratic agreement, the council entered into an agreement with the National Transport Authority that it would spend money on the whole package of measures, including the cycle lanes, and then set about having a contractor build the project using the agreed design. <\/p>\n
You cannot complain about money being wasted, and also want construction stopped and more money wasted because people have been wound up over plans not only long agreed to by councillors, but which have already started construction. <\/p>\n
And, yes, \u201ccycle lanes\u201d are being used as a lightning rod here \u2014 at least some of the main people objecting won\u2019t stop at the cycle lanes.<\/p>\n
The renamed Facebook page against the project, \u2018Voices for Knockfree, Knockpogue & surrounding areas\u2019, prominently includes the claim that \u201cNarrowed roads are a mortal danger to the young and elderly residents\u201d \u2014 a claim that has no basis in fact.<\/p>\n
It goes against a huge amount of research, as well as national and international examples showing that excessively wide roads, of the type that Knockpogue Ave was, increase speeding and pose a danger to all road users. The proven remedy is to adjust road sizes. <\/p>\n
And, no, nobody is saying the project is perfect. The cycle lanes are probably the part of the project in most need of improvement. But the project was approved by councillors, subject to the condition that more parking would be provided, which led to the loss of some trees. <\/p>\n
It\u2019s unclear, but some of the anger going around seems to be exaggerated claims about the extent of the parking changes and the loss of trees, with the use of phrases like \u201ccomplete removal\u201d and vagueness about trees being felled. <\/p>\n
And an increase in the number of buses on a route is apparently a reason against a safer streets project. <\/p>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n