Car park wins. Car ban on Bachelors Walk reversed. Bikes on Benburb st too.

cgcsb · 01-06-2016 9:34am

The original plan could have worked for buses if (and it's a big if). There was traffic light priority where it hit Church St. Last time we had traffic light priority it was deliberately dismantled in favour of more car traffic. Given the importance of Church St to Car commuters, this would probably happen again.

Also the apartment block poses an issue that could only really be solved by CPOing the back of Frank Ryan's pub and building a bus lane through Coke Lane.

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 9:46am

cgcsb wrote: »

The original plan could have worked for buses if (and it's a big if). There was traffic light priority where it hit Church St. Last time we had traffic light priority it was deliberately dismantled in favour of more car traffic. Given the importance of Church St to Car commuters, this would probably happen again.

Also the apartment block poses an issue that could only really be solved by CPOing the back of Frank Ryan's pub and building a bus lane through Coke Lane.

That "if" is massive - it would be dependent on cars keeping a massive yellow box clear through two junctions and the space between, and not blocking the turning circle of the bus as it turns into the Quays.

How anyone can tell me that this would reliably improve bus travel times over a straight bus lane is beyond me.

Add to that, from a passenger comfort perspective right angle turns -v- straight line travel do not improve the overall travel experience.

Anyway moving back to the eastern end of the Quays and Parliament St, Grafton St and College Green - we will have to wait and see what plans DCC come up with. The devil will be in the detail of those plans.

I have to admit - I think Cllr Mannix Flynn has a point in asking for an EIS on all of the proposed changes - problem is time is moving on rapidly.

cgcsb · 01-06-2016 9:58am

Yeah, any ideas when Houdini will be revealing the detailed plans? I suppose it wasn't all set out during the luas design process.

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 10:20am

cgcsb wrote: »

Yeah, any ideas when Houdini will be revealing the detailed plans? I suppose it wasn't all set out during the luas design process.

Of course it wasn't - that's the issue here. None of this featured in that process.

Well the council officials have to revert to the transport committee at the next meeting (at the end of June) and from that will then go away and either have to do an EIS or come up with detailed plans for all of this (College Green, City Centre, Quays, etc.) for approval.

I would imagine it'll be Autumn before we see anything.

cgcsb · 01-06-2016 10:25am

Meanwhile rapid progress is being made on luas BXD. I wouldn't be surprised if we seen the line open in 2017.

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 10:35am

cgcsb wrote: »

Meanwhile rapid progress is being made on luas BXD. I wouldn't be surprised if we seen the line open in 2017.

Oh it'll happen but you'll probably see all of the traffic measures finalised at the last minute.

monument · 01-06-2016 10:59am

lxflyer wrote: »

Monument - the bus is already faster than the tram. The "messed up bus stop" has been removed from use. There were no fewer bus stops on the proposed diversion.

Please stop wasting your time trying to tell me that pushing the buses away from the Quays and into an eventual right/left turn combination that involved massive potential for cars blocking the route would be faster. You are never going to convince me otherwise.

That battle is over now.

Move on.

You're not the only one reading this -- expect replies when you state something people disagree with.

As far as I'm concerned the battle isn't over until the part 8 is approved.

cgcsb wrote: »

Also the apartment block poses an issue that could only really be solved by CPOing the back of Frank Ryan's pub and building a bus lane through Coke Lane.

With buses they could be sent back to the quays using Queen Street -- combing options 1 and 3.

lxflyer wrote: »

That "if" is massive - it would be dependent on cars keeping a massive yellow box clear through two junctions and the space between, and not blocking the turning circle of the bus as it turns into the Quays.

How anyone can tell me that this would reliably improve bus travel times over a straight bus lane is beyond me.

Three words: Red light cameras.

Get caught in the junction after the lights are red and get finned.

I wouldn't say reliably improve, I'd say around the same if not slightly better than mixing it with cyclists.

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 11:02am

monument wrote: »

You're not the only one reading this -- expect replies when you state something people disagree with.

With respect in regard to that part of the cycle route you're flogging a dead horse - it's not just me. DCC have rejected your view on it.

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 11:08am

Monument - the buses don't get held up between Heuston and Inns Quay as it is - that's the damn point that you just are completely blind to.

The problems happen further in.

Sending them around a route that would require two turns versus that is just daft.

You can try to tell me that it will work till you're blue in the face but it is not going to convince me.

Experience in Dublin as a bus user and pedestrian just tells me you are wrong.

monument · 01-06-2016 11:50am

lxflyer wrote: »

With respect in regard to that part of the cycle route you're flogging a dead horse - it's not just me. DCC have rejected your view on it.

The same part of DCC which missed an apartment block? On land they sold and approval given by the traffic department as part of the planning permission.

Maybe it's too late now, but I'm not finished trying.

If I'm wrong on this there's no way the College Green detour via Parliament Street could work -- how many extra turns is that... 3 or 4? Quays would only be 2 in the same sequence.

trellheim · 01-06-2016 11:54am

As far as I'm concerned the battle isn't over until the part 8 is approved.

Monument what do you mean by that, please ? what is a part 8 in this context.

EISing only one bit wont solve anything - this whole thing - plaza, cycle route , reroute onto Parliament St all must be a single "thing" for it all to work

I personally don't think an offroad is needed that far out but thats just me , I see where they are going with it. but an elevated river cycleway might yet be the answer !!! Houdini to the rescue again

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 12:06pm

monument wrote: »

The same part of DCC which missed an apartment block? On land they sold and approval given by the traffic department as part of the planning permission.

Maybe it's too late now, but I'm not finished trying.

If I'm wrong on this there's no way the College Green detour via Parliament Street could work -- how many extra turns is that... 3 or 4? Quays would only be 2 in the same sequence.

I entirely agree on the final paragraph - it's crazy.

Three extra turns and at least two, possibly three extra sets of lights. I imagine extra lights at the Jervis St junction will be required along with a bus gate.

I don't believe those plans can work either.

Dyr · 01-06-2016 12:10pm

monument wrote: »

Three words: Red light cameras.

Get caught in the junction after the lights are red and get finned.

I wouldn't say reliably improve, I'd say around the same if not slightly better than mixing it with cyclists.

Would the gardai approve? When they're not blocking most of pearse street the gardai tend to be jealously protecting their traffic law enforcement role.

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 12:23pm

trellheim wrote: »

EISing only one bit wont solve anything - this whole thing - plaza, cycle route , reroute onto Parliament St all must be a single "thing" for it all to work

This was recognised by councillors last week - the disjointed process is ludicrous.

How any of these plans can be looked at in isolation is beyond me. Yet that's the approach taken to date.

Carawaystick · 01-06-2016 12:39pm

trellheim wrote: »

I personally don't think an offroad is needed that far out but thats just me , I see where they are going with it.

The thing about an offroad cycle route is that its a pleasant experience for irregular cyclists, families etc to cycle and allows people see cycling is better.

Mrs C cycled around Vienna and loved it, after not being on a bike for 20 years or so.

hardCopy · 01-06-2016 12:58pm

I suspect casual/slow/beginner/tourist cyclists will use the dedicated cycleway even if it goes the Benburb route, if it does the more confident 'hardcore' cycle commuters will be happy to continue mixing it with buses on the quays if it's quicker, so the roue wouldn't be a complete waste.

It's a shame that this whole project has boiled down to a choice between discommoding cyclists or bus commuters for the benefit of car commuters and a handful of carpark owners.

Roadhawk · 01-06-2016 1:38pm

hardCopy wrote: »

I suspect casual/slow/beginner/tourist cyclists will use the dedicated cycleway even if it goes the Benburb route, if it does the more confident 'hardcore' cycle commuters will be happy to continue mixing it with buses on the quays if it's quicker, so the roue wouldn't be a complete waste.

It's a shame that this whole project has boiled down to a choice between discommoding cyclists or bus commuters for the benefit of car commuters and a handful of carpark owners.

I dont see the current proposal as being discommoded for cyclists or buses. I feel that some people see this development as a creation of a perfect environment for particular road users resulting in ideal travel times with complete convenience. I dont see this being achieved without tearing apart half of Dublin which is unrealistic. It looks like expectations are to high.

MJohnston · 01-06-2016 1:59pm

It definitely has discommoded buses from the perspective of the original plans.

cgcsb · 01-06-2016 2:02pm

I don't think that cycling via Benburb St and turning at the quays will be too much hassle. The lower end of Church st needs to be re-organised anyway and the Bridge is way too narrow for 4 lanes of traffic, it needs to be repainted as 2 lanes + 2 cycle lanes either side.

trellheim · 01-06-2016 2:13pm

Father Matthew Bridge, is it you mean ? ( had to look up what that one was called )

cgcsb · 01-06-2016 2:17pm

trellheim wrote: »

Father Matthew Bridge, is it you mean ? ( had to look up what that one was called )

Yes that's the one, you often find discarded broken wing mirrors on it.

trellheim · 01-06-2016 2:20pm

Thats as narrow as anything how on earth do you fit all the bits in there ?

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 2:27pm

trellheim wrote: »

Thats as narrow as anything how on earth do you fit all the bits in there ?

Houdini may need some help from The Great Suprendo!

MJohnston · 01-06-2016 2:30pm

Another aspect to all this - how outrageous is it that Aecom got paid again for the Liffey Cycle Route project after having generated four original options without ever once noticing the giant apartment block that was in their way? Am I misguided and it wasn't up to Aecom to know this?

cgcsb · 01-06-2016 2:43pm

MJohnston wrote: »

Another aspect to all this - how outrageous is it that Aecom got paid again for the Liffey Cycle Route project after having generated four original options without ever once noticing the giant apartment block that was in their way? Am I misguided and it wasn't up to Aecom to know this?

In fairness if I were a private consultancy and the land in question was owned by the client (who is also the planning authority in this case). You would kind of take it as a given that the client isn't going to sell and give permission for a development on a patch of land being considered for the scheme. That's sort of page one ladybird stuff really.

hmmm · 01-06-2016 4:59pm

hardCopy wrote: »

I suspect casual/slow/beginner/tourist cyclists will use the dedicated cycleway even if it goes the Benburb route, if it does the more confident 'hardcore' cycle commuters will be happy to continue mixing it with buses on the quays if it's quicker, so the roue wouldn't be a complete waste.

Absolutely. The presence of dedicated cycle routes, even if slightly off the direct route, should attract people who otherwise would not choose to cycle at all. It doesn't have to be the route chosen by the majority of cycle commuters to still be a successful initiative.

monument · 01-06-2016 6:21pm

lxflyer wrote: »

I entirely agree on the final paragraph - it's crazy.

Three extra turns and at least two, possibly three extra sets of lights. I imagine extra lights at the Jervis St junction will be required along with a bus gate.

I don't believe those plans can work either.

My point is the city traffic section claim the Queen Street option won't work, but they also say their more complicated College Green diversions will work.

Bambi wrote: »

Would the gardai approve? When they're not blocking most of pearse street the gardai tend to be jealously protecting their traffic law enforcement role.

There's already one in operation down the road at Blackhall Place:

http://www.dublincity.ie/ireland%E2%80%99s-first-automated-red-light-camera-system-launched

Roadhawk wrote: »

I dont see the current proposal as being discommoded for cyclists or buses. I feel that some people see this development as a creation of a perfect environment for particular road users resulting in ideal travel times with complete convenience. I dont see this being achieved without tearing apart half of Dublin which is unrealistic. It looks like expectations are to high.

Err... "some people see this development as a creation of a perfect environment for particular road users" -- that shows a real lack of understanding of where this project started at.

The original suggestion was to change the flow the south quays to two-way and have only buses, cycling and walking on most of the north quays -- I agree that that would have involved changing "half of Dublin" (city centre), but no other suggestion comes close to allowing those kind of phrases.

No option or suggested option is the "perfect environment" for any road user. All options include relatively high compromises for cycling -- for example any fully quayside route includes diverting those with southside start or end points. But the latest official suggestion diverts them too far north of the south quays.

cgcsb wrote: »

I don't think that cycling via Benburb St and turning at the quays will be too much hassle. The lower end of Church st needs to be re-organised anyway and the Bridge is way too narrow for 4 lanes of traffic, it needs to be repainted as 2 lanes + 2 cycle lanes either side.

I'd be just copying and pasting most of this to reply, so:

http://irishcycle.com/2016/05/23/10-reasons-why-the-liffey-cycle-route-backstreet-detour-should-be-rejected/

cgcsb wrote: »

In fairness if I were a private consultancy and the land in question was owned by the client (who is also the planning authority in this case). You would kind of take it as a given that the client isn't going to sell and give permission for a development on a patch of land being considered for the scheme. That's sort of page one ladybird stuff really.

Agreed. It's the transport section who approved their part of the planning conditions too.

hmmm wrote: »

Absolutely. The presence of dedicated cycle routes, even if slightly off the direct route, should attract people who otherwise would not choose to cycle at all. It doesn't have to be the route chosen by the majority of cycle commuters to still be a successful initiative.

East of Church Street it would help a lot if the majority of cycle commuters used it but getting them to make any kind of movement like this would represent a significant delay:

LXFlyer · 01-06-2016 6:58pm

monument wrote: »

My point is the city traffic section claim the Queen Street option won't work, but they also say their more complicated College Green diversions will work.

I don't believe that either would work.

At Queen St the reality is that you have two junctions, and then 60m between them which would be shared with other traffic, all of which would have to be kept clear for an extended period to allow buses through, and also the turning circle of the buses and coaches kept clear for the turn left back onto the quays.

You could put all the cameras you want in but that is a MASSIVE ask and I just do not think that would remotely work in practice even allowing for the extended light sequences that it would entail.

Add to that the sheer volume of vehicles you're asking to put through that space - it's not just Dublin Bus, but Bus Eireann and every private operator from the west of the city.

I know that you are well intentioned about this, but just for once sit down and think about it. Take your cyclist hat off and go down and count the number of buses and coaches one morning during the morning peak - unfortunately any count you do now will have to be inflated as some college extras will no longer be running.

And there is no way that route is going to compete with existing journey times - I'm sorry but if you believe that it will you're deluding yourself.

And it certainly wouldn't be a more pleasant journey for the multiples of more bus passengers having to endure a rather uncomfortable right/left turn combination rather than the smooth journey they have currently along the Quays.

Spanish Eyes · 01-06-2016 9:57pm

I think dedicated and experienced cyclists will still use the buslane along the Quays.

Benburb Street cycleway will turn into tumbleweed except for tourists and novices really.

After all a straight run down the Quays is a no brainer for those who have been doing that for ages.

It's a mess. IMO.

monument · 01-06-2016 10:32pm

lxflyer wrote: »

I don't believe that either would work.

At Queen St the reality is that you have two junctions, and then 60m between them which would be shared with other traffic, all of which would have to be kept clear for an extended period to allow buses through, and also the turning circle of the buses and coaches kept clear for the turn left back onto the quays.

You could put all the cameras you want in but that is a MASSIVE ask and I just do not think that would remotely work in practice even allowing for the extended light sequences that it would entail.

Add to that the sheer volume of vehicles you're asking to put through that space - it's not just Dublin Bus, but Bus Eireann and every private operator from the west of the city.

I know that you are well intentioned about this, but just for once sit down and think about it. Take your cyclist hat off and go down and count the number of buses and coaches one morning during the morning peak - unfortunately any count you do now will have to be inflated as some college extras will no longer be running.

And there is no way that route is going to compete with existing journey times - I'm sorry but if you believe that it will you're deluding yourself.

And it certainly wouldn't be a more pleasant journey for the multiples of more bus passengers having to endure a rather uncomfortable right/left turn combination rather than the smooth journey they have currently along the Quays.

My thought process on this has included a truck load of self doubt. After first suggesting the Queen Street route back to the quays I added alternatives in case options did not work. After the council claimed that the turn back onto the quays was unworkable, I was in contact with a few transport engineers who thought otherwise.

They rulled out one of my suggestions, but I was told the following two sketched designs would likely work (detailed testing would be needed to be sure):

(where I sketched the build out I was told that shape would have to be changed -- which is fine, it's only a quick sketch)

This is a mix of the two of the above and advice, so it is even more likely to work:

Car park wins. Car ban on Bachelors Walk reversed. Bikes on Benburb st too.

Comments