Comment & Analysis: When officials told councillors about a plan to speed up the delivery of cycle routes, councillors were lukewarm because, after many false starts, the elected reps were sceptical that the councils active travel team could even deliver, and some were (rightly) openly hostile to the idea of lowering standards further to deliver cycle routes faster.But one thing that sparked the interest of many councillors was the quiet streets approach, but what is it? At the very basic level, its the type of cycling infrastructure that does not generally include cycle paths or even lanes (although some sections may be needed along longer routes).When these kinds of routes are mentioned, some readers get even more sceptical than the councillors recently did, but its worth remembering that these kinds of routes make up the majority of the cycling networks in most Dutch cities. At the same time, mixed results in places like London are a clear warning that care is needed in designing the route. The key is that the routes must be traffic calming and genuinely low traffic, or make that way with interventions. Without any mention of quiet streets, Dublin City Councils Mobility and Public Realm committee meeting in May 2026 would have been even frostier for Active Travel officials. You can watch all that was discussed in this video:In a briefing document to councillors, officials said:From a preliminary study, AcTPrO [Active Travel office] has identified a number of routes suitable for delivery in part or in their entirety, using a Quiet Streets approach. As noted in Section 2, Quiet Streets are a method of adapting side streets through traffic calming and wayfinding to provide a suitable environment for cyclists to share space with vehicles due to their low speed and volume.The case study route provided is what is termed the St Stephens Green to Thomas St Active Travel Route, it is described as follows: Preliminary analysis undertaken of one of the Active Travel routes which could be delivered using a Quiet Streets approach is the St Stephens Green to Thomas St Active Travel route. This route is 1.6km in length and runs in an east-west direction, intersecting with three BusConnects Core Bus Corridors. It also immediately abuts the future DCC headquarters at Camden Yard along Camden Row to the south and Liberty Lane to the east. Further information is provided in Figure 3 below:IMAGE: Potential Quiet Street approach on St Stephens Green to Thomas Street route.Its routed via Liberty Lane, Camden Row, Montague Street, Long Lane, Malpas Street, Blackpits, Mill Street, Newmarket, Ardee Street, and Pimlico, where it would link to the unfinished Kilmainham to Thomas Street Active Travel Scheme.This is the IrishCycle.com trace of the councils map:Getting from the route to the most popular corner of St Stephens Green is straightforward: But the return is convoluted: First up, we have Montague Street and Camden Row:At the Harcourt Street entrance to Montague Street, all thats needed is the except cyclists sign and the associated signs and markings for allowing contra-flow cycling with no cycle track:Besides some markings and signs, nothing else seems to be needed on Montague Street:Given the constraints of the main street here at the crossing of Wexford Street / Camden Street, Im not sure what could be done here except for full signalisation, which seems unlikely for this type of project in Dublin City to date:Even the BusConnects plans for the project leave little or no scope for a non-signage solution:On Camden Row, markings and signs to allow legal two-way cycling here is mostly what is needed for this section (looking back towards Wexford St):Before going back to the other end of Camden Row (yellow, with the last section circled in green), its worth looking at Liberty Lane (circled in red):Liberty Lane unless its resurfaced at one level is not suitable for contra-flow cycling: The rest of Camden Row is the width of street, where if you suggest contra-flow cycling, people say itd be unsafe. But like many low-traffic streets of the same size, its already two-way for all traffic this part of the route onwards should also be a cycle street:At the Junction of Camden Street and Long Lane, the route crosses the north-south New Bride Street and Heytesbury Street.The north-south route this route crosses here is part of the Grangegorman to Portobello Active Travel Route, which is also a candidate on the councils list of routes for possible quicker action. The section of the route from the Grand Canal to near Christchurch and Dublin Castle used to be a primary cycle route and was mentioned to me as a priority to be built as far back as the Grand Canal Cycleways opening in 2010. Because of that, Ive looked at the route a few times over the years.Unlike some other candidate routes, the Werburgh St/Bride St/New Bride St/Heytesbury St corridor is relatively unrestrained especially since bus routes will be removed from the northern section as part of BusConnects. Both north-south and east-west routes should be considered together here, even if they are not being progressed together.One solution here is a modal filter area to the south of the junction, shown here in a green box this would benefit the (1) the north-south by reducing the through traffic on New Bride Street and Heytesbury and allowing them to become cycle streets, and (2) making the junction safer and more attractive for people cycling east-west.The east-west route should continue as a two-way cycle street on Long Lane although it is clearly narrower:To allow for two-way cycling here, there needs to be an area to pull in around the centre of the parking area:The next section of Long Lane is within the kind of width for the arrangement for contra-flow cycling without lanes that can be found throughout Europe, without any removal of parking, but care needs to be taken here to confirm the drainage channel and the buildouts at the trees are not issues:Before the route crosses New Street (Clanbrassil Street Lower / Patrick Street) is the first place where a contra-flow cycle track would be justified: It should be possible for the route to cross over into Malpas Street with the current traffic signals or with some small changes, such as advanced green lights for people cycling in both directions: On Malpas Street, traffic calming should be looked at:The same goes for Blackpits:Its the same for much of the area around Newmarket with junction treatments also key to making the route safe, attractive, and legible as a route: Unlike the first part of the route, the possibility of modal filters along the route could be looked at here. But this raises the question mentioned by some councillors of traffic management at the district level.With that, below is the area here bound by main roads, which should be looked at. Putting in a network of modal filters may be out of the scope of the route project, but some filters around the route could be looked at in a way that does not make things worse for the rest of the area:Ardee Street on both sides of Cork Street and Pimlico, where it would link to the unfinished Kilmainham to Thomas Street Active Travel Scheme, would also require additional traffic calming and route markings:But traffic calming can only do so much if routes are left open to through traffic. Because of that, a more northern route between Pimlico and St Stephens Green seems more logical to me longer sections of low-traffic streets.There would be some issues in need of overcoming some som parts of these options, including reworking short sections of Francis St and Meath St public realm projects to allow for contra-flow routes across the two streets, but these are interventions of the type the city should be doing systematically, regardless.Im not saying dont take the route the council is proposing, but if they are making it a quiet street route, it really needs to be quiet otherwise, people will quickly sour on the whole concept.Thats why I would like to see the New Bride St/Heytesbury St north-south, which the council also wants to do fast, rolled out first or at the same time. It would be a quiet street route as part of a wider route, with segregated cycle path/s on Bridge Street, etc. Finishing some form of a route between Grangegorman and Portobello is probably one of the fastest and most high-impact cross-city-centre routes the council could roll out without interfering too much in BusConnects routes or other city centre projects, etc. I know some people baulk at the idea of putting in routes that might be seen as a bit out of the way, like the Bride Street route is, but it would offer the first significant cross-city centre route (including using Capel Street, etc, shown in green), and the city council really needs to make progress on network building. At the moment, it seems to be running away from (delaying or abandoning) projects each time it hits some opposition or issues, such as another part of the city council or NTA saying no or not yet. This is from the councils own map, while the Grangegorman and Portobello options are highlighted in yellow: