[Article] Dublin parking bays at residents' expense

Victor

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0213/parking.html

Dublin parking bays at residents' expense
Wednesday, 13 February 2008 19:27

Dublin residents may have to pay €1,250 each to create parking bays on city streets.

A report by the city council says in some areas there is not enough parking available because of a big increase in car ownership.

The city council says there are now more than 500,000 cars in Dublin, an increase of over 40% since 1997. This is putting pressure on street parking space, especially on strategic routes which have bus lanes or other parking restrictions.

Other streets are too narrow and residents feel they have no choice but to park on the footpath.

The council says when they clamp such illegally parked vehicles it causes enormous resentment.

The report suggests creating indented parking spaces where the footpath is wide enough.

Residents on such streets would pay an extra €125 a year on their residential parking permit for ten years.

This is due to be considered by the council transport committee tomorrow.

OTK

I thought we'd progressed beyond the idea that we should build more parking to meet demand. If people are parking illegally then why not collect money from them in clamping fines? Otherwise add some metal bollards to the pavements they park on. I thought the idea that anyone in the city centre can expect free on street parking was now dead. If you're lucky enough to have both a city centre dwelling and a car then you can either park some way from your house or rent a lockup. That's what I did when I lived in the city centre.

Offering up pedestrian pavement space for car parking is regressive. Either we want to encourage people to drive around the city centre or we don't.

If there aren't enough parking spaces due to an increase in car ownership then the answer is simple: raise the price of parking.

AlekSmart

Tis interesting that DCC`s interest in Regression Therapy is buried away in the dealings of a Traffic Subcomittee and an "Independent" report commissioned by them.

The Professional Grandee`s of the Council,including the City Manager,the Director of Traffic (:p ) and the QBN manager can thus stride amongst their adoring populace without a worry.
If the theory causes undue furore,the "Professionals" can then wag a disapproving finger and say No,whereas if the Car owning nuveau riche are pleased,our Professionals can bask better than any shark known to man.

The fact that ANY modern allegedly first-world Urban Authority as much as bothered to retain a Consultancy Firm (Which one and What Cost ?) to carry out any "Research" into this topic just beggars belief.

What it DOES do however is firmly underline the committment which DCC has to the concept of facilitating Private Car Ownership WITHIN it`s own area.

This committment is at direct variance with its PR packaged committment to Public Transport under such media friendly schemes as T21.
This variance can best be illustrated by the difficulties which Bus Atha Cliath faces in securing on-street Bus Stop of Terminal space without incurring a frenzy which would do justice to the FAI.

Bus Atha Cliath in common with all other Public Transport service providers on Land,Sea or Air MUST have somewhere to layover and marshall the vehicles used on these services,not all of which can spend their time in Garages tucked away from public gaze lest they cause offence.

NO major EU Capital is without it`s locations where Metro/LRT,Heavy Rail,Bus or HGV reside.
Sure,you don`t see these locations on the Postcard views of London,Paris,Rome,Berlin or Madrid but they EXIST and the availibility of this space ensures that these cities have Public Transport systems which FUNCTION.

Once again however ,in our little corner of the Republic,we must watch in stupified amazement as yet more Consultants pocket a wodge of money after telling the Emperor that his willy is`nt showing at all,in spite of the population rolling around in mirth at the quite obvious reality that Emperor DCC is without a screed of clothes,but at least he`ll have a space to park the Lexus :mad:

_Kaiser_

OTK wrote: »

I thought we'd progressed beyond the idea that we should build more parking to meet demand. If people are parking illegally then why not collect money from them in clamping fines? Otherwise add some metal bollards to the pavements they park on. I thought the idea that anyone in the city centre can expect free on street parking was now dead. If you're lucky enough to have both a city centre dwelling and a car then you can either park some way from your house or rent a lockup. That's what I did when I lived in the city centre.

Offering up pedestrian pavement space for car parking is regressive. Either we want to encourage people to drive around the city centre or we don't.

If there aren't enough parking spaces due to an increase in car ownership then the answer is simple: raise the price of parking.

Umm, now I may be wrong here, but my impression from reading the OP is that the article refers to residential parking (in the suburbs), rather than in the city centre. Assuming this to be the case, I can understand why people would feel aggrieved if they can't park outside their own home - particularly in cases where (for example) they may live close to a DART/rail station and commuters are leaving their cars in the surrounding estates.

More generally, as usual with the pro-public transport lobby on this board, you assume that public transport is a VIABLE (key word here) option for these people you all are so quick to condemn for having the audacity to own a private motor car in this eco-friendly PC paradise we all live in :rolleyes:

The REALITY is that Public Transport in many parts of this city (never mind country!) doesn't work to the ideal you (and in fairness, I'm sure most people) wish it did. It's overcrowded, dirty, unreliable, staffed by too many individuals who are mere jobsworths and for whom the term "customer service" has no meaning, and in many cases, doesn't go where the travelling public wants to go (we all are aware of CIE's fixation on "An Lar" as a destination point for the majority of services).

In most cases people buy and use cars because they have no other choice! They have jobs they have to get to on time (an employer isn't interested in "the bus didn't show up/was late" - even though it may very well be true!), kids to get to school (although I do believe that kids should be made walk where feasible to do so), and even shopping (particularly in rural areas) can be a major hassle without a car.

Until Public Transport becomes a reliable, clean, efficent service with more than enough capacity to serve the commuting masses, you'll just have to accept that people will use cars. Until this investment happens you're just living in a fantasy I'm afraid.

Gavin

Get a bicycle.

OTK

The scheme to build more parking was approved
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0214/parking.html

Providing more infrastructure for parking and driving encourages more people to switch from public transport and buy cars and drive to work.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Until Public Transport becomes a reliable, clean, efficent service with more than enough capacity to serve the commuting masses, you'll just have to accept that people will use cars. Until this investment happens you're just living in a fantasy I'm afraid.

Nobody is arguing that public transport in Dublin is perfect, but it is not going to be improved by building more parking for private cars.

dewsbury

OTK wrote: »

The scheme to build more parking was approved
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0214/parking.html

Providing more infrastructure for parking and driving encourages more people to switch from public transport and buy cars and drive to work.

..on the contrary..

Providing parking spaces in a WORKPLACE may encourage driving to work.
However, providing parking spaces at HOME does not.

Neither my wife not I drive to work - we use public transport.

However, we do own a car and need somewhere to park it during the day.
The new proposals could save us a lot of hassle and parking tickets that we get from parking outside our own house - which incidentally is on a quiet road with unneccessary double yellow lines. (But that is an entirely different thread).

Victor

dewsbury wrote: »

However, providing parking spaces at HOME does not.

Providing parking spaces enables car ownership.

The finest example of this is Hannaville Park in Terenure and when I was on the committee there was pressure to redefine part of the footway* as roadway. The residents would park both sides or a narrow road (wide enough for two vehicles) with narrow footpaths, causing all sorts of complications. However, not only did many of these house have rear access or front gardens big enough for a parking space, they also have garages that have been converted to other uses. Of course, neighbouring streets have Pay & Display and none of these problems.

I think some of the footpaths have been reworked since.

I suppose this scheme means they can charge if this happens.


* Under the Road Traffic Act 1961 "footway" means that portion of any road which is provided primarily for the use of pedestrians; "roadway" means that portion of a road which is provided primarily for the use of vehicles.

AlekSmart

Another location where Victors observations can be borne out each day is the short stretch of Clonskeagh Road between Whitebeam and Whitethorn Roads.

A particularly interesting short stretch which has for over 12 months now,featured Sierra Construction a virtual base camp around a set of Pedestrian Lights which to date they have failed to make functional for more than 48 hours at a time.

However,that`s a digression as my point concerns the amount of Grassed "Walkway" between the two roads.
As any Clonskeagh Road commuter will attest,the morning peak flow comes to a complete standstill here as the vast majority of inbound traffic stalls at the Beaver Row right turn.
The lesser Ranelagh bound flow,including Buses, which COULD be facilitated to filter through on the inside are precluded from doing so by the presence of a large amount of Grassed area (Including a mucky dei-facto ROADway strip which frustrated car drivers have laid down).

However it`s not the Grassy Knoll which causes me wakeful nights,but the constant presence thereon of TWO private cars,parked crossways outside two of the finest residences in the area complete with extensive gardens,driveways and garage.

When Sierra began their excavations there I was hopeful that they would relocate the Traffic Signal control cabinet by a metre or so to allow a similar amount of ROADway to be freed up for Public Transport and Ranelagh bound traffic....Not a Chance.....
As with many such jobs,they took EXTREME care to excavate and reinstate the site to the EXACT pre-existing boundary,even removing the old cabinet and pole and replacing with shiny new ones .

It would appear that under DCC`s new wheeze,no doubt to be equally enthusiastically embraced by DLRCC and SDCC, the intrepid Clonskeagh Road Home Owners will be able to OFFICIALLY lay claim to their unofficial on-street parking space by simply stumping up €1250 over 10 years.

Such munificence on the part of the Local Authorities will doubtlessly add greatly to the value of properties such as the above.

As for Public Transport Users...Oh well....let them eat cake I should imagine,....a bit of an oul wait won`t kill them.....:rolleyes: