The City of Dublin

42 Comments

• Frances Letiza Posted on April 26, 2011

  Sorry I can't make the meeting but I would join in the people who are proposing #3. I believe this to be the safest alternative to bikers and pedestrians.

• Denise Franz King Posted on April 26, 2011

  Please provide more information on the proposed alignments for Option 1 and 2. Option 3 is overkill. To what extent would Options 1 & 2 use only the city's road right of way? To what extent would they require purchasing property from township or city residents? Would it make sense, given the need to avoid the North Fork of Indian Run, for the path to cross the road at some safe place? As an advocate for public safety and fitness, I agree an east west bikepath in that area is warranted. Having lived near public paths, I know they increase property values.

• Ling Zhao Posted on April 26, 2011

  I would join in the people who are proposing #3

• Mark Montana Posted on April 27, 2011

  Option 3 seems to make the most sense from a safety perspective. In my view the mullti-use paths are safer for the recreational bike rider and child bike rider as they are off road. However, people choose not to use the off road paths and as such a side road bike lane would be safer for those riders who chose to ride on the road and for traffic flow, especially during commuting hours. Thus, option 3 provides the best safety for all riders. If 3 is prohibitive from a cost and right-of-way acquisiton persepctive then option 2 would likley make the most sense as this would probably cost the least and I assume the city has a right-of-way adjacent to the roadbed. I am a resident of Bristol Commons and use the paths in the area and would like to at a minimum have a bike lane or path completed from the firehouse to the tunnel near Bristol Parkway as this would make it eaiser for area residents to access western bike paths including Galcier Ridge Metro Park, if compelting a path for the whole of Brand Rd. is not feasible.

• Michael Blackwell Posted on April 27, 2011

  I just rode on Brand this past Sunday, and anything of these options would be better than what we have now. :-) I would prefer #3, but if it is cost-prohibitive, I would prefer # 1. Seasoned riders can continue to ride on the road itself, but families and less experienced riders would be better served by a dedicated path.

• Jason Herr Posted on April 28, 2011

  I think given the way things are going, that option 3 is best. It meets everyones needs. The single bike lane will most likely be accommodated in the existing right-of-way while the bike path can be designed around existing trees and natural features. This would require only easements it seems. I'm glad the city is looking at alternatives that cater to different users.

• John Alford Posted on April 28, 2011

  Option 3 is nice - a dedicated, separate path for families with children, plus a bike lane along the road for faster riders looking to safely get out to the country and ride on empty roads. But it also seems like overkill. Option 1 is my choice - it maximizes safety for families and has to be less expensive than Option 3. Option 1 is consistent with the design of all other bike paths in Dublin that I'm aware of.

• Susan Swyt Posted on May 01, 2011

  I was unable to attend meet. I agree with Mark Montana on, "at a minimum have a bike lane or path completed from the firehouse to the tunnel near Bristol Parkway". This is not just a "want", but a serious safety issue. I invite residents, staff and Council to try riding here at night. Even with a high-tech bike lights, it is very dark and dangerous with cars far in excess of the speed limit, and the safer alternative route takes you meandering along multi-use paths and a route intended for recreation, not transportation. I'm in favor of #3. Multiuse paths can be blocked with slower traffic, strollers and walkers/joggers in warmer weather.

• David Chrestay Posted on May 01, 2011

  If Dublin is serious about becoming a more bicycle friendly community, then dedicated bike lanes need to be incorporated into the existing network of roadways as much as possible. Multi-use paths are great for kids, dog walkers, joggers, families, bird watchers, etc. However, these low speed users make MUP's hazardous for cyclists. The speed differential is too great and there are no common "rules of the road". I would prefer option 2 or 3.

• Derek Ochs Posted on May 01, 2011

  As a resident of Hemingway I'm excited about this trail. I like options #1 and #3. I wouldn't want my kids riding on a shared road lane like #2. Option #1 seems similar to Dublin's current paths which I love.

• Kristen Scott Posted on May 04, 2011

  I think Option #3 is the best option. Bikers will continue to use the roadway even if a bike path is provided. The road is too narrow and is dangerous for both drivers and bikers to be sharing the road. I am surprised that there are not more accidents invloving bakers and vehicles in the current cramped conditions. Additionally, being a resident of Brandon, it would be wonderful to be able to walk my children down a bike path along Brand Road. It seems like the safest option long term in regards to safety and usability.

• Sean Scott Posted on May 04, 2011

  Option #3 would be the best option. I am a resident of Brandon and would love to be able to use a walking path on Brand road. I currently worry about the saftey of bikers on the narrow, heavily traveled road. I think that adding a bike lane and the walking trail are both much needed on this road.

• Bob Posted on May 06, 2011

  Bikes do no not belong on the road with cars. It is not safe. At night it is even more dangerous.

• Rich Weirich Posted on May 09, 2011

  As mentioned and discussed at the 4/26/11 public meeting, a variation on Option 1 hereafter called Option 1A, would include a 8' multi-use path on the north side of Brand Road from Earlington Parkway / Brandonway east to State Route 745. This would allow connection with the existing muli-use path at Earlington Parkway which connects to Muirfield Drive by way of the multi-use path on Dublinshire. This solution seems far less intrusive on Brand Road property owners yet it provides for a safe route from State Route 745 to Muirfield Drive for pedestrians, joggers and bicyclists of all ages. Such a multi-use path would provide for bicycle and pedestrian travel to schools, Perimeter shopping, downtown Dublin restaurants and businesses as well as the library. It would be far less expensive than other options and is already funded under Ordinance 29-10 in the 2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program. (ET1004). Construction in 2011 is recommended. Drainage improvement (covered drainage) along Brand Road could be performed at the same time for added vehicular safety. Proceeding with the above, would be in accordance with the desires of 1,473 homeowners as conveyed by 6 Homeowners Associations and submitted to City Council on or about 8/30/2010. Construction needs to begin and conclude in 2011.

• Jennifer Posted on May 09, 2011

  Option #3 is my vote.

• Sally Rader Posted on May 10, 2011

  I ride my bike on Brand Road and would love to see it widened with or without designated bike lanes. I think the bike paths would be a nice addition for children and recreational riders. My vote would be for Option 3 if the budget allows. If not then option 2 would be my second choice. While they are acquiring land etc for this project I think it would be a good time to consider adding a round-about at the intersections of Brand Rd & Brandonway / Earlington Pkwy & also at the intersection of Brand Rd and Coffman Rd. It is extemely difficult and dangerous to make a left from either of these intersections--in a car---at times of heavy use such as 7am to 9am and 4:30 pm - 6:30 pm.

• Bob Hosken Posted on May 10, 2011

  I would prefer that we have the safest option that we can afford. I think option 3 is the safest and option 1 the second safest. Option 2 is least safe in this era of distracted driving. A second of inattention and a driver could drift into the bike lane.

• Betsy Cutie Posted on May 11, 2011

  I have to agree with Mr. Weirich's post. An option "1A" that includes a 8' multi-use path on the north side of Brand Road from Earlington Parkway / Brandonway east to State Route 745 and connects with the existing muli-use path at Earlington Parkway which connects to Muirfield Drive by way of the multi-use path on Dublinshire. That would be my preference. It would provide connectivity for the majority of Dublin residents (walkers, joggers, recreational bicyclists etc.). In addition, I would love to see a multi-use path extended north of the Muirfield/Brand roundabout to connect with the Muirfield Village path system.

• Tom Oleksa Posted on May 11, 2011

  While I agree with both Ms. Cutie and Mr. Weirich, I feel a strong sentiment toward providing lanes for "serious" riders. Therefore #3 should also be considered. As Ms. Cutie recommended, any Brand Rd. bike path/lane(s), should be connected to Muirfield Village.

• Barry Halpern Posted on May 11, 2011

  Option 3 would be the safest and provide services to the broad cross-section of cyclists who would use Brand as a means of getting around their community, both families and more serious commuters. If money became a limiting factor, then Option 1 would be my 2nd choice as I would not want to see children under the age of 12 using the bike lane on such a busy street.

• Ken Jacobsen Posted on May 12, 2011

  Option 3 would be safest and assures our city as being proactive in our saftey for all cyclists and pedistrian of all ages.

• Glenn Aidt Posted on May 16, 2011

  I like option #3. As a daily ten mile rider of the bike paths in Dublin, I spend 90% of my riding time on bike paths and 10% on roads. Option #3 will handle bike commuter needs and bike path users needs. We need more east/west bike paths thru Dublin.

• Donna Posted on May 18, 2011

  Option #3 is best, option#1 at the minimum. I wish I had it when I lived in donegal cliffs and my son had to ride his bike to Coffman going the "very long out of the way" route. I wish we could enforce bikers to use bike paths. It is so dangerous in Dublin with some of the roads. I feel they are risking their lives.

• Neal Hahn Posted on May 18, 2011

  This would be a dangerous situation for any bike rider on Brand Rd. 7000 cars a day use it plus the fire trucks and emergency vehicles. How will the residents exit and enter their driveways safely with bikes and cars going on both sides of the road? The bike paths can be placed elsewhere and leave Brand Rd a scenic ,rural road. The speed limit is 35 but who goes that ? A wider road means cars will go faster and on the curves ,can they see ahead enough to avoid the riders.? Think if this was your front yard. Would you want all your trees removed AND A SUPER HIGHWAY INSTALLED ? lOSS OF PRIVACY AND PROPERTY VALUE!

• Dave Posted on May 19, 2011

  I have lived on Brand Road for nearly 35 years and can personally attest that bike lanes would be too dangerous for both people riding bikes and those driving cars. Brand Rd. is a major east-west route in Dublin, with more than 7,000 vehicles traveling per day right now. This traffic will only increase with future development of the northwest section of the city. The 35 MPH speed limit is not obeyed, mailboxes are constantly being knocked down, and I have even had cars slide through my fence, located 12-15 feet away from the road as it currenlty exists. There is a fire station on Brand, two busy traffic circles, deer and other wildlife crossing the road, curves, and blind spots...all of which would contribue to the danger of adding more bike traffic on Brand Rd. Just last week, an accident involving a biker and vehicle occured on Brand. Bike lanes - for the safety and enjoyment of all Dublin residents - belong in neighborhoods, not major roads. I am opposed to all three options being proposed.

• Lori Grant Posted on May 20, 2011

  I am also opposed to all 3 options. However, I have no doubt that one will be chosen, but only because Dublin has so much money that the city doesn't know what to do with it. I lived on Brand Rd. for 17 years and as a mother of a young child, I would never let her walk or cycle on a path adjacent to that dangerous road. The potential for an accident is too great. The posted speed limit is 35 mph, but cars barrel down that road at 45-50 mph. Add in a speeding fire truck making an emergency run and you have a recipe for disaster. Furthermore, it's easy to submit an opinion without thinking of the impact on the daily lives of Brand Rd. homeowners who will have their trees stolen and their privacy obliterated. In regard to Denise Franz King's comment about how a public path increases property values, I'd like to know if she still held that opinion once half of her front yard was eliminated by a bulldozer. When the natural beauty of an area has been destroyed, it can never be replaced. Dublin has more than enough miles of bike paths without ruining this scenic roadway.

• John George Posted on May 20, 2011

  Option 3. The multipurpose trails are very difficult to bike any significant distance b/c it's difficult to maintain any speed and intersections are downright dangerous. At the same time, the bike lanes are of little use for walking, running or children.

• Steve Rand Posted on May 20, 2011

  Our home, built around the time of the Civil War, is the “cute cottage” sitting just east of the Muirfield Village entrance. It is most noted for the bright blue flowers covering our white picket fence in the fall. Because of the proposed bike lane, we are getting bids to build a dirt mound topped with evergreens to create a privacy wall. Most likely we will have to take down the picket fence. Our home would no longer be visible to motorists on Brand Road. Why does the city want to destroy the scenic setting of Dublin's historic homes? Build the path/lanes on a road that is not designated as a scenic road. Is it worth losing the beauty of homes like ours?

• Chris Rettew Posted on May 23, 2011

  As several people have noted, Option #3 offers the strongest benefits, but would appear to have the greatest cost and impact on neighboors and corridor.. Given that Option #1 has been the standard across the balance of the city, and it performs well, I think it is an acceptable concept with best value.

• Chris Brown Posted on May 23, 2011

  Option #1 is the most practical and a multi-purpose path is needed on the Brand Rd. corridor. I would suggest working closely with each homeowner to see if widening the public right of way is preferable to taking mature trees down. The City seems to put too much emphasis on existing right of ways instead of negotiating new ones where practical.

• Colleen White Posted on May 24, 2011

  I prefer Option #3 if we are serious about creating an environment where bicycles can be used for both pleasure riding and commuting.

• Kris Seitz Posted on May 24, 2011

  We are residents of Hemingway and are very excited about this project and would love to have the paths along Coffman Road actually connect to the paths on Dublin Road. Options 3 or 1 (or 1A) seem the safest to us.

• Laura Watson Posted on May 24, 2011

  I don't see an option for doing none of the above. I grew up on Brand Rd and now live in an adjacent neighborhood. I can tell you from experience I would NEVER allow my children to ride their bikes in the bike lanes. There are many dips and curves and the cars speed down this road all of the time. My parent, who still live on Brand Rd., lose their mailbox yearly and have had cars run into their fence more than once due to the blind spot and narrowness of the road by their home. It is also extremely difficult to pull out of their driveway due to the traffic and blind spot they have. Adding a bike lane would add to the danger for both parties, more traffic for them to worry about and a danger for bikers crossing driveways with limited vision. Bike paths are great in neighborhoods and in areas where they are a safe distance from traffic. Brand Rd does not fit in either of these categories.

• Teri Kirk Posted on May 26, 2011

  Brand Road has been designated a scenic road - bike lanes and paths would destroy this meaningful designation. While development and progress is always a good thing, the city of Dublin needs to also respect and value the importance of preserving it's more natural settings, which seem to be quickly disappearing. The city has done a terrific job in joining the neighborhoods of Dublin through bike paths, and I applaud these efforts. However, Brand Road should not be considered as an option in one of these final connections -- bike paths should be kept to neighborhoods, and there are several alternatives for doing just this without destroying Brand Road. Finally, I agree with prior comments that -- bottom line -- this is just too dangerous. Bikes do NOT belong on Brand Road with the speeding traffic, curves, fire station, traffic circles, etc. I question the judgement of anyone who would actually encourage bikers to travel this route -- endangering both themselves and all drivers on the road. I am opposed to all three options.

• Lee Ann Jenkins Posted on May 26, 2011

  Dublin currently has more than 88 miles of bike paths throughout the community, providing residents a generous amount of riding options; therefore, I'm confused as to why a bike lane and/or path on Brand Road is necessary? Building the proposed bike lane would be time-consuming, costly, and completely disruptive to the nearly 10,000 vehicles that travel this route daily. More importantly, add in the danger quotient of the many challenges already existing on Brand Road, and you have a disaster in the making. If the city deems a bike lane - the first of its kind - a necessity, surely there are other less costly and safer options for this "test case." A few east-west corridor alternatives could include Post Road, with a connection to Emerald Parkway, Memorial Drive or Glick Road, all of which provide a pathway between Muirfield Drive and Dublin Road. They are wider, less traveled, and would not have to be re-routed to accommodate bike lanes. Additionally, the proposed bike paths on Brand Road would be disruptive to private property owners and will diminish homeowner value. If you drive throughout Dublin, you will notice that some of the existing paths are in need of repair. I suggest investing more in the upkeep and maintenance of the current paths before building new ones. I am opposed to all proposed options.

• Art Byrd Posted on May 29, 2011

  I think alternative #1 would be preferable. It provides a bike/walway with the least impact on the trees and stream along Brand Road.

• Kathy Gatto Posted on May 30, 2011

  I am a recreational bike rider and I use the current bike paths 3 or 4 times per week. I would love to see a bike lane on Brand Rd. I think Option #1 would be the best choice.

• Christine Benadum Posted on June 05, 2011

  I've lived in the Brandon subdivision for 10 years and think this bike path is way over due. I'm wondering if Lee Ann Jenkins who posted above that it wasn't needed ever tried to get down this stretch of Brand Road? There's really such a small area of road that needs to be developed to connect current paths and make traveling by foot or bike so much safer. Option #2 doesn't look safe to me since you'd be traveling so closely to the busy Brand Road traffic. Option #1 looks like the best choice. I'm looking forward to this new development - Dublin is an awesome place in which to live!

• katie Posted on June 09, 2011

  i like opton 1 because it seems safe and has the dublin bike path look to it

• Mitchell H Grant Posted on June 09, 2011

  Option 1A from old Dublin Rd. to Earlington Dr. on the north side is the only doable option and even that option is filled with complexity. Storm sewage, drainage, creeks all need to be taken into account. The other options are ridiculous. Plans to place any kind of path on the south side of Brand Rd. from Earlington to Muirfield Dr should be struck down. This project is driven by a narrow minded agenda to make Dublin a cool "green" ,Bicycle Friendly city. The Dublin Bike Task Force has proposed to Council over 10M of supposed road "improvements" that will disrupt traffic, damage personal property and cost taxpayers unnecessary dollars in a period of tight budgets for homeowners and schools. Bike path NO!

• Valerie Ujvari Posted on July 09, 2011

  Living along Brand Road, I know how dangerous and narrow the road is for bicyclists and pedestrians as well. Option 3 is a necessity to allow the safety of serious riders and our children. The road needs to be widened and a bike lane added. In addition, a leisurely trail needs to be added for the safety of our children.

• Gary Talbott Posted on May 04, 2012

  Option 1