Pedestrians to have priority over cars in new Dublin plan

AngryLips

http://www.thejournal.ie/pedestrians-to-have-priority-over-cars-in-new-dublin-plan-319620-Jan2012/

DUBLIN IS TO become a “pedestrian-friendly” capital – with cars only a secondary priority as developments are planned, according to a draft proposal for the city’s future.


Planners foresee that the “predominant movement pattern in the city centre will be on foot”, the document states, while cars passing through the city centre en route to other destinations will be “pro-actively discouraged”.


Dublin City Council is inviting submissions to its Your City, Your Space plan, which was published in draft form last year.


It states that increasing congestion in the city centre makes it essential to prioritise pedestrians and public transport over cars, and calls for the creation of a “pedestrian-friendly city with a world class public domain.” The report states:


On foot, by bicycle or by public transport will be the main modes of access and through-traffic will be pro-actively discouraged. While economic needs require private car and service vehicle access for business and shopping trips, the predominant movement pattern in the city centre will be on foot.

The draft report also urges efforts to preserve the historic and local character of specific neighbourhoods, such as the Georgian squares.
It sets out a plan for development which divides the city into zones, including the “Liffey Corridor and Civic Spine” – the quays, O’Connell Street, Westmoreland Street and Dame Street – and the “primary” shopping areas of Grafton Street and Henry Street.


There is also a call for increased focus on public spaces, including Barnardo Square between Dublin Castle and the City Hall; Beresford Place behind the Customs House; and the Fish Market space in Smithfield.


City manager John Tierney told the Irish Times that the report is not designed to produce major upheavals or large redevelopments in years to come, but provide a better framework for carrying out everyday public works.


Submissions are open until January 25.

...about time.

Cicero

I'd be interested to see statistics relating to pedestrian accidents with cars in relation to the areas around Dublin where the 30kph speed limit has been introduced.

On a personal level, what I have noticed is that while the car speeds have indeed reduced downwards in these areas, the number of people taking risks when crossing the road (especially around O' Connell Bridge and the Halpenny Bridge) have increased significantly- pedestrians are simply walking out in front of moving traffic on the road against a pedestrian red light purely because they see traffic is going slower.

In France, there are many areas of Paris that have high levels of pedestrians crossing roads but firm, permanent barriers seperating path from road, make it difficult for pedestrians to cross the road on areas other than approved traffic light controlled zones.
The traffic speeds are considerably higher than that in Dublin leaving the pedestrian no alternative but to wait for the appropriate green light, before venturing accross the road.
My point is: While reducing the speed of cars does protect pedestrians in built up areas, there needs to be a greater enforcement and controls put in place to limit the instances of pedestrians crossing roads at unapproved points. There is only so much a driver can do and it's near impossible to allow for some of the pedestrian behaviour I have seen in recent times.

bk

First cars should be the fourth priority, not the second:

1) Pedestrians
2) Cyclists
3) Public Transport
4) Car

Second they aren't saying they are going to do anything major, in which case it is just lip service.

Dublin City Council gets a large percentage of it's income from parking, so the reality is this will always take their priority.

Will DCC remove parking spaces from around the city to make more room for bus stops, wider footpaths and cycle lanes?

Will they pedestrianise more streets, necessitating the closer of certain car parks? (e.g. the narrow streets around South William St, which should really be pedestrianised and would make for a very nice pedestrian quarter, competitive with Temple Bar).

If they were really serious, then two things should be done.

1) Build Metro North with the O'Connell Street stop having a pedestrian concourse under the river liffey and O'Connel bridge.

2) Build a road under College Green and turn College Green into a nice square.

Having spent the past week in the Poland Tri-City area (Gdansk-Sopot-Gydnia) it is frankly embarrassing to see how far ahead they are of us.

- Most busy motorways have pedestrian underpasses, which are wide, brightly lighted and seem very safe. These underpasses seem to be everywhere.
- All buses are three door single decors or 4 door bendi buses. Very quick dwell times.
- Many if not most of the buses are trolley buses, which run off overhead power lines and therefore cheaper to run more environmentally friendly.
- In Sopot where the lovely main street was separated from it's lovely seaside peer by a busy road, they have now buried the road and created a very nice square, with cool pubs, clubs and restaurants surrounding the square and making a very nice continuous pedestrian area and turning it into a very pleasant city.

Will we do any of these things here in Dublin?

Dublin in some ways is a great city with a great night life and people, but it is plagued by cars and buses and it isn't a very pleasant place by day time.

AngryLips

Cicero wrote: »

My point is: While reducing the speed of cars does protect pedestrians in built up areas, there needs to be a greater enforcement and controls put in place to limit the instances of pedestrians crossing roads at unapproved points. There is only so much a driver can do and it's near impossible to allow for some of the pedestrian behaviour I have seen in recent times.

Firstly, there is no law against jaywalking in this country. What's more, I think the law should be proportionate to the risk posed by the road user with vehicular traffic posing the greatest risk. The reduction in speed limit is, itself, an attempt to address the risk of pedestrians veering onto road space but design and planning pay another role in that effort.

expectationlost

5) lorries?

Cicero

AngryLips wrote: »

Firstly, there is no law against jaywalking in this country. QUOTE]

maybe there should be...

AngryLips wrote: »

but design and planning pay another role in that effort.

as does changing all behaviours...including pedestrian behaviour....

seamus

AngryLips wrote: »

Firstly, there is no law against jaywalking in this country.

There's some minor legislation which makes it illegal to cross the road within a certain distance of a pedestrian crossing. I can never remember the figure, I think it's 5, 10 or 15 metres.
However outside of that it's not specifically illegal to cross the road at any point.

The problem is not really jaywalking. We're particularly bad for not obeying pedestrian traffic signals, but planners also need to recognise that a place where jaywalking occurs a lot is therefore a high-capacity route or pinchpoint. They then need to change the layout to accomodate this or install lights if none exist.
The Halfpenny bridge crossings on both sides of the liffey would be the most obvious example of where the current set up, just doesn't work.

n97 mini

expectationlost wrote: »

5) lorries?

Saw an interesting sign on the back of such a vehicle in the UK a year or two ago:

Without lorries you'd get nothing.

dublinman1990

Quote from bk

1) Build Metro North with the O'Connell Street stop having a pedestrian concourse under the river liffey and O'Connel bridge.

2) Build a road under College Green and turn College Green into a nice square.


Why would you place and build a suitable road under an area like College Green? The point is that if you two the projects through there such as LUAS BXD, or MN (if approved), You may not have the required space to build a road in the first instance. You need both a starting and finishing point for this new road if you propose to build it.

According to this map link below, MN is meant to be built under College Green anyway, and if you draw or picture LUAS BXD in as well, That is meant to be nearly right over the line before the Luas turns right into Pearse Street and left into Hawkins Street.

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/MN_Map_Feb_2011.pdf

As for the DART U, It is meant to turn into the southend of St Stephen's Green leaving MN to have some space for the platforms and floor space etc.

If all these projects are being built at the same time, the decibel levels for these parts of the city, including the new proposed road, would go through the roof for years until it's ended.

bk

Burying the road would be a simple cut and cover job. Metro North would be much deeper.

Neither are going to happen anyway, I just wish we had the balls to do things like this.

monument

bk wrote: »

Burying the road would be a simple cut and cover job. Metro North would be much deeper.

Neither are going to happen anyway, I just wish we had the balls to do things like this.

Ah... had to remove my 'thanks' / approval of your last post after you edited in the bit about this.

Cut and cover in a built up and sensitive area like College Green would likely to be expensive and hugely disruptive (more disruption than BXD, metro and Dart Underground combined, and then some more).

Worst still there is no reason for a tunnel, cut and cover or otherwise. College Green is mostly public transport and if the goal is to pedestrianise it, then you can divert bus traffic around it.

monument

Cicero wrote: »

The traffic speeds are considerably higher than that in Dublin leaving the pedestrian no alternative but to wait for the appropriate green light, before venturing accross the road.

Higher traffic speeds are not desirable or achievable in the city centre.

Cicero wrote: »

My point is: While reducing the speed of cars does protect pedestrians in built up areas, there needs to be a greater enforcement and controls put in place to limit the instances of pedestrians crossing roads at unapproved points. There is only so much a driver can do and it's near impossible to allow for some of the pedestrian behaviour I have seen in recent times.

You have not proven your point. There is no such need for greater controls on pedestrians. In fact pedestrian barriers have been proven to be a danger to pedestrians and cyclists, their led to increased road speed and increased accidents.

We should however enforce current laws on pedestrians about waiting for a green man to cross and not crossing close to but away from a ped crossing. And maybe we should along with this removing unrealistic waiting times for pedestrians at controlled crossings.

But also we should enforce current laws on drivers who think they have the right to keep travelling / increase their speed when they see somebody crossing the road -- they don't. The law is clear -- motorists must yield to pedestrians who have started to cross the road even where there is no controlled crossing.

expectationlost

n97 mini wrote: »

Saw an interesting sign on the back of such a vehicle in the UK a year or two ago:

i said nothing about disintegrating all lorries on earth.

bk

monument wrote: »

Worst still there is no reason for a tunnel, cut and cover or otherwise. College Green is mostly public transport and if the goal is to pedestrianise it, then you can divert bus traffic around it.

Actually I agree, College Green should be pedestrianised today by directing traffic (mostly buses) around it.

To be honest I posted the original post after just coming off a flight from Poland and being really pissed off at seeing how good some of their infrastructure is and thinking we should do the same.

Stepping back now, I still want us to improve our infrastructure and create a really pleasant and pedestrian friendly city centre. However as you say there maybe more practical ways to achieve the same without underpasses, etc.

I need to go off and think about what my ideal solution would be, not that anyone will listen.

AngryLips

bk wrote: »

2) Build a road under College Green and turn College Green into a nice square.

This section is already heavily restricted to cross-city traffic. I don't think it would require an underground tunnel to pedestrianise it further.

ClovenHoof

This is just like Transport 21 - more 'go nowhere' wibblings from individuals who don't use public transport and don't care about it.

Another piece of theatre to keep newspaper jounalists from becoming unemployed bloggers.

Forget about it, this is more of the same old nothing.

bk

Ok, so I'm the new benevolent dictator of Ireland and here is my sweeping plan

1) Pedestrianise College Green from Westmoreland St down as far as Grafton St (yes including Suffolk St and a little of Nassau St) and west as far as Georges St.

2) Pedestrianise all the little streets between Dawson Street and Georges St. including Drury St, Clarendon St, Wicklow St., etc.

3) Close and pedestrianise the road between Stephens Green and Grafton St, turning it into another square.

You now basically have a lovely large pedestrianised zone on the south side of the city from Temple Bar down as far as Stephens Green, with a number of nice squares and civil areas. Open a lot of nice restaurants, galleries etc. to operate in these squares.

4) Use Marlborough and Capel St for North and South bound buses. With the new Macken St bridge.

5) Build a new bridge between Fishamble St and Arran St to handle more North/South traffic.

6) Greatly widen the footpaths on Westmoreland St and D'Olier St.

Now the next bit I'm not sure about, but I'd love to bury the east and west bound quay traffic under a under pass at O'Connell Bridge and perhaps even pedestrianise O'Connell St.

But Perhaps that would be a step too far even for my dictatorial ways

Of course this would piss off some drivers, car parks and make some North South bus journeys a little longer. But you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

BTW perhaps a more manageable but much less ambitious plan can be seen here:
http://www.dublin2walk.com

Aard

If DCC rely so much on revenue from on-street parking, could they not build a multistorey and then remove a corresponding number of spaces from the streets? Or just begin removing spaces gradually without replacing them...

In Copenhagen, they reduce the number of parking spaces by 2% every year. So there's no huge impact day-to-day, but over time people are discouraged to park in the inner city. For example, in a street with 10 spaces running down it, they might remove one of them and put in a bike rack instead. (In fact, I'm pretty sure I've seen this happen on Drury St already.)

Del2005

Yet there's toll on the supposed relief road, with plans to add more. It is proven by the huge use of our tolled interurbans that Irish people are willing to spend time not money.

Make the M50 free and a lot of the traffic will disappear from the city streets.

dublinman1990

bk wrote: »

Ok, so I'm the new benevolent dictator of Ireland and here ib my sweeping plan

1) Pedestrianise College Green from Westmoreland St down as far as Grafton St (yes including Suffolk St and a little of Nassau St) and west as far as Georges St.

2) Pedestrianise all the little streets between Dawson Street and Georges St. including Drury St, Clarendon St, Wicklow St., etc.

3) Close and pedestrianise the road between Stephens Green and Grafton St, turning it into another square.

You know basically have a lovely large pedestrianised zone on the south side of the city from Temple Bar down as far as Stephens Green, with a number of nice squares and civil areas. Open a lot of nice restaurants, galleries etc. to operate in these squares.

4) Use Marlborough and Capel St for North and South bound buses. With the new Macken St bridge.

5) Build a new bridge between Fishamble St and Arran St to handle more North/South traffic.

6) Greatly widen the footpaths on Westmoreland St and D'Olier St.

Now the next bit I'm not sure about, but I'd love to bury the east and west bound quay traffic under a under pass at O'Connell Bridge and perhaps even pedestrianise O'Connell St.

But Perhaps that would be a step too far even for my dictatorial ways

Of course this would piss off some drivers, car parks and make some North South bus journeys a little longer. But you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

BTW perhaps a more manageable but much less ambitious plan can be seen here:
http://www.dublin2walk.com

bk, you may have to relook at some points referred to your post there. I understand that if you zoom in on the previous MN Map link again, You would have found that the RPA is already proposing to build a extra new Luas line at College Green called LUAS Liberties. So, this will sort of development would give great indication Suffolk Street being predestrianised in the future.

Also, if you looked more closely that MN is meant to be built in the Clarendon Street area. Even, the Luas Green line extension would be built on Dawson Street as well. That would cover the lower end of Grafton Street leading into College Green.

There is a distinct possibility that this extension could leave very little road space in Dawson Street, which could leave bus services going up and down Kildare Street and Westland Row. Which then in turn can redevelop and resurface other places such as Nassau Street and Clare Street. Other places for consideration are Hume Street, Ely Place and Merrion Row.

Another point is that both Drury Street and Wicklow Street are very narrow streets IMO. Both of them are only one way streets. Let's say if MN was built now, The Construction Crews may have difficulty in accessing Clarendon Street from Georges Street when building it.

I've been through Georges Street myself about over a year ago, this being pre network direct. The amount of traffic accounting for buses and cars would be huge. Major bus Routes like the 9 and 83 go through there nowadays, Although it used to be the 19, 19a and 83.

Any other places, I would leave that to anyone else.:D

fly_agaric

DCC wrote:

Your City - Your Space

Our City, paid for by the ratepayers - you plebs just live in it:D

monument

fly_agaric wrote: »

Our City, paid for by the ratepayers - you plebs just live in it:D

Now also paid for by property tax and second home tax, as well as rents of tenants of different types, parking fees etc.

monument

bk wrote: »

Of course this would piss off some drivers, car parks and make some North South bus journeys a little longer. But you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

Changing anything pisses off drivers. Taking cars off Grafton Street and other streets pissed off drivers, and traders etc, but it was worth it in the long run

And it's not strictly true that it would have to lead to longer (time-wise) bus journeys. Having a network of high-quality bus rapid transport like routes in and around the core would speed buses up.

You could have the four or more routes the NTA selects for BRT (hopefully BRT proper) and also have BRT quality lanes in the centre where QBCs and/or many routes converge.

CIE

So...if they pedestrianise College Green, where is all the traffic going to go? You've just cut off the main route into St. Stephen's Green. There are no other streets, unless you widen Fleet Street west of Westmoreland Street and Anglesea Street; and doing that is going to make your bus trip even longer (and of course your bike trip, for the few that will be riding bikes).

Saying that it's not "desirable" to drive at a decent speed around Dublin city is not facing up to reality. Going at 30 km/h means that you radiator is getting hotter and your motor is going to wear out faster. Dublin Bus just consolidated a number of bus routes, so there are fewer buses to choose from. Waiting for Metro North to be built will be a wait for eternity—and if they actually do build it, then duplicating it with a Luas Green Line extension should be automatically off the table, with an eye to running the Metro onto the Green Line instead.

And yes, pedestrians "jay-walking" is a big problem. Closing off roads to pedestrianise them means that the roads that the traffic gets diverted onto become more dangerous; in order to actually get in and out of the city, pedestrians have to access these roads therefore, to reach their car or their bus route or even their train or tram.

fly_agaric

monument wrote: »

Now also paid for by property tax and second home tax, as well as rents of tenants of different types, parking fees etc.

true. Just thought the idea of the council talking about "Your City" in that context was funny.
In my cynicism I think they listen to the Central Govt. first, then the biggest ratepayers a close second + sometimes (if we're very very lucky!) the rest.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

Ok, so I'm the new benevolent dictator of Ireland and here is my sweeping plan

1) Pedestrianise College Green from Westmoreland St down as far as Grafton St (yes including Suffolk St and a little of Nassau St) and west as far as Georges St.

2) Pedestrianise all the little streets between Dawson Street and Georges St. including Drury St, Clarendon St, Wicklow St., etc.

3) Close and pedestrianise the road between Stephens Green and Grafton St, turning it into another square.

You now basically have a lovely large pedestrianised zone on the south side of the city from Temple Bar down as far as Stephens Green, with a number of nice squares and civil areas. Open a lot of nice restaurants, galleries etc. to operate in these squares.

4) Use Marlborough and Capel St for North and South bound buses. With the new Macken St bridge.

5) Build a new bridge between Fishamble St and Arran St to handle more North/South traffic.

6) Greatly widen the footpaths on Westmoreland St and D'Olier St.

Now the next bit I'm not sure about, but I'd love to bury the east and west bound quay traffic under a under pass at O'Connell Bridge and perhaps even pedestrianise O'Connell St.

But Perhaps that would be a step too far even for my dictatorial ways

Of course this would piss off some drivers, car parks and make some North South bus journeys a little longer. But you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

BTW perhaps a more manageable but much less ambitious plan can be seen here:
http://www.dublin2walk.com

Wonderful ideas, but frankly it means that:
1) Southbound buses currently using Nassau Street will have to use D'Olier Street, Townsend Street, Westland Row and Merrion Square and Merrion Street southbound to get to St Stephen's Green

2) Northbound buses would have to follow the current 44 route from Dawson Street, via Nassau Street, Westland Row, Pearse Street, Tara Street and Burgh Quay.

3) Anything operating along Dame Street will have to use the Quays, Parliament Street and then double back on Dame Street to get onto Georges Street, and in the opposite direction go via Winetavern Street or Fishamble Street.

That means longer journeys on every bus route, and no matter what way you dress it up, routes 4, 7, 11, 14, 15/a/b, 46a, 140, 145 in particular would have minimum useful city centre stopping locations southbound. Anyone wanting to travel from Nassau Street would have to walk to Merrion Square or St Stephen's Green. And that is inconvenient no matter what way you dress it up.

None of the alternative routes are suitable for any more traffic than they already have.

seamus

bk wrote: »

Now the next bit I'm not sure about, but I'd love to bury the east and west bound quay traffic under a under pass at O'Connell Bridge and perhaps even pedestrianise O'Connell St.

There are a number of spots I would love traffic to free-flow on the quays and either have cars go under or pedestrians go over, but I think the two biggest issues there are the proximity to the river and the architectural concerns.

To bring peds over the road, you need to start removing old buildings and other structures, which takes away from the city.
If you go down and build a tunnel with 3m of a river, then you risk a major problem if the river rises above the quay walls. It's a once-every-ten-years occurrence, but you don't need a flooded tunnel at any stage.

CIE wrote: »

So...if they pedestrianise College Green, where is all the traffic going to go? You've just cut off the main route into St. Stephen's Green.

Well to be fair, traffic will always get around, the problem is eliminating the bottlenecks when you reroute. Busses can be rerouted around the far side of Trinity - so down D'Olier Street, left onto Pearse Street (alter the layout there) and then right onto Westland Row.
You could change Lincoln Place so that it's two-way and busses only and force all other traffic down Clare St.
When you consider that North->Southbound busses already have to go around Trinity to Kildare St, making them go the opposite direction wouldn't actually have much of an effect.

The main issue as far as I can see it is that it may be quite hard to get busses to "hug" the pedestrianised area, like they do now. Though you could make Nassau St two-way and bus-only and force all other traffic down Kildare st.

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

None of the alternative routes are suitable for any more traffic than they already have.

Then change those routes. The first road ring in and around the pedestrianised area could include high-quality two-way BRT.

There would be very little traffic crossing it in and out of the zone so it could have very high priority.

CIE wrote: »

So...if they pedestrianise College Green, where is all the traffic going to go? You've just cut off the main route into St. Stephen's Green. There are no other streets, unless you widen Fleet Street west of Westmoreland Street and Anglesea Street; and doing that is going to make your bus trip even longer (and of course your bike trip, for the few that will be riding bikes).

Through traffic goes around. If drivers, taxis or cyclists want to access the central zone there would still be small access roads to car parks etc. If they want to go somewhere on the other size of the central zone they go around.

Putting in BRT in and around the central zone keeps buses moving and could improve them.

CIE wrote: »

Saying that it's not "desirable" to drive at a decent speed around Dublin city is not facing up to reality. Going at 30 km/h means that you radiator is getting hotter and your motor is going to wear out faster. Dublin Bus just consolidated a number of bus routes, so there are fewer buses to choose from. Waiting for Metro North to be built will be a wait for eternity—and if they actually do build it, then duplicating it with a Luas Green Line extension should be automatically off the table, with an eye to running the Metro onto the Green Line instead.

All of this has been discussed to death elsewhere. These are non-issues.

I was going to reply but it's would bring us off topic.

CIE wrote: »

And yes, pedestrians "jay-walking" is a big problem. Closing off roads to pedestrianise them means that the roads that the traffic gets diverted onto become more dangerous; in order to actually get in and out of the city, pedestrians have to access these roads therefore, to reach their car or their bus route or even their train or tram.

Yet this has not been a issue elsewhere. Or even here in the streets around our current pedestrian streets. The international experience suggests that the streets around pedestrian, traffic calmed, and lower speed limit zones also benefit from greater safety.

bk

lxflyer I agree that my ideas might have some negative impact on buses, but I believe the benefits far outweighs the disadvantage.

Also as others have said above, the issues could be minimised with bus only roads and bridges and other re-alignments.

Obviously this would be much easier to do if we had MN and DU and were therefore less reliant on buses, but I think it could still be done.

LXFlyer

monument wrote: »

Then change those routes. The first road ring in and around the pedestrianised area could include high-quality two-way BRT.

There would be very little traffic crossing it in and out of the zone so it could have very high priority.

Through traffic goes around. If drivers, taxis or cyclists want to access the central zone there would still be small access roads to car parks etc. If they want to go somewhere on the other size of the central zone they go around.

Putting in BRT in and around the central zone keeps buses moving and could improve them.

All of this has been discussed to death elsewhere. These are non-issues.

I was going to reply but it's would bring us off topic.

Yet this has not been a issue elsewhere. Or even here in the streets around our current pedestrian streets. The international experience suggests that the streets around pedestrian, traffic calmed, and lower speed limit zones also benefit from greater safety.

With the greatest of respect it is NOT a non-issue.

You have not addressed the fact that the main routes to much of south Dublin will have minimal useful stops in the city centre.

By your thought process both Pearse Street and Westland Row would have to become bus only. Where would all the traffic on Pearse Street go?

There is only the bridge at Macken Street and East Link - the former is already blocked up?

For any plan such as this you cannot merely say that where the traffic needs to go is a minor matter - it is an integral part of any such plan.

Similarly where buses go needs to be clearly stated and needs to be relevant to where people want to go and not be a considerable walk from current stops.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

lxflyer I agree that my ideas might have some negative impact on buses, but I believe the benefits far outweighs the disadvantage.

Also as others have said above, the issues could be minimised with bus only roads and bridges and other re-alignments.

Obviously this would be much easier to do if we had MN and DU and were therefore less reliant on buses, but I think it could still be done.

I would suggest that forcing passengers to walk to either Merrion Square, St Stephen's Green or Townsend Street/D'Olier Street instead of getting a bus on Nassau Street is more than a minor inconvenience.

Buses, as the major form of public transport in Dublin need to be relevant to where people need to go and not just at the periphery.