Proposal to reduce traffic lanes and remove parking on Liffey quays

Jamie2k9

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/car-lanes-to-be-given-to-walkers-and-cyclists-on-dublin-s-quays-1.1589118

DCC better not reject the plans!

(I know there was a threat along the same lines recently but can't find it)

corktina

won't be popular but I'd support giving the streets back to People over Cars

hmmm

If they could create a separate cycle lane along the quays that would get me out on a bike. I'm not going to do it while playing with trucks, buses and other traffic.

In saying that I also drive and town is becoming impossible to park in.

Chris_5339762

Its a tough call really without Dart Underground and Metro North. This is taking one of the citys big throughfares without the utterly necessary increase in public transport.

And a pedestrian bridge should be built next to O'Connell bridge regardless of what happens.

LXFlyer

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Its a tough call really without Dart Underground and Metro North. This is taking one of the citys big throughfares without the utterly necessary increase in public transport.

And a pedestrian bridge should be built next to O'Connell bridge regardless of what happens.

Why?

There is a new bridge going in at Marlborough Street/Hawkins Street as it is!

TheBandicoot

The artist's impression doesn't seem to take account of Luas BXD.

rameire

TheBandicoot wrote: »

The artist's impression doesn't seem to take account of Luas BXD.

They dont have the rails or overhead lines but there is a three or four carriage luas on Westmorland street.

Cookie_Monster

The project, developed by urban planners and designers Fergus Browne and David Jordan, with the support of the council and the Dublin Civic Trust, seeks “re-orientating the public realm away from the car”, without completely eliminating traffic from the quays, by 2030.

not before time, the CC should be primarily for pedestrians and actually a nice place to want to be.

bk

DCC will probably reject this plan because of the removal of car park spaces.

Car parking spaces equals revenue for DCC!

Otherwise this looks to be an excellent plan. The changes to O'Connell Bridge are a no brainer.

I've always felt that there are far too many wide traffic lanes on O'Connell Bridge, that tend to lead to people speeding on the bridge, yet I almost never see any congestion on the bridge. Given the number of pedestrians who use the bridge, then it makes perfect sense to significantly widen the footpaths. Also the criss cross crossings make sense as it is what many people do already anyway.

The only issue I'd have with the artist impression is that it doesn't show any cycle lanes.

bambergbike

bk wrote: »

The only issue I'd have with the artist impression is that it doesn't show any cycle lanes.

Or cyclists! It's as if they simply don't exist.

Patrickheg

bk wrote: »

park spaces.
tend to lead to people speeding on the bridge, yet I almost never see any congestion on the bridge. Given the number of pedestrians who use the bridge, then it makes perfect sense to significantly widen the footpaths. Also the criss cross crossings make sense as it is what many people do already anyway.

The only issue I'd have with the artist impression is that it doesn't show any cycle lanes.

Only problem with o Connell bridge is the queue of people trying to cross at either end and a wider pedestrian path will do nothing to solve this

As for cars speeding on o Connell bridge, given the length of it and the fact that there are traffic lights either end really!!!!!!!!!!

SeanW

lxflyer wrote: »

Why?

There is a new bridge going in at Marlborough Street/Hawkins Street as it is!

The pedestrian traffic on O'Connell bridge has totally overwhelmed the ability of the pedestrian infrastructure in the area to handle it in my experience.

But it could effectively be remedied by taking only one lane of traffic away from cars to add to the pedestrian footpath, leaving 3 for cars.

patrickbrophy18

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Its a tough call really without Dart Underground and Metro North. This is taking one of the citys big throughfares without the utterly necessary increase in public transport.

I agree with this completely. This plan is sort of like the cart before the horse. If, indeed, we do come up with plans to reduce car journeys through the city center, we need to provide proper incentives. At the moment, projects which aim to make Dublin City predominantly car free don't seem to account for the fact that our public transport system is badly coordinated. Most bus routes which are bound for Dublin City still take well over an hour at peak times from places that are only 10 miles out. Systems like the DART show how trips of similar lengths can take half an hour. I've said it once and I'll say it again, speed is a crucial factor in making public transport an attractive alternative to the car.

Bus routes heading for Dublin City should behave more like rapid transit systems and less like a chauffeur service for people who couldn't be bothered walking 5-10 minutes to the nearest main road bus stop. Many people who opt for the car instead of public transport to get to work will invariably cite the indirect and unpunctual nature of public transport as their reason for driving. Cycling is often also a faster, healthier and sustainable way of getting into town as well. However, I can't see many people opting for it by virtue of the fact that Ireland's mostly wet weather makes cycling unpleasant. To make matters worse, rain is often accompanied by strong gusts of wind blowing cyclists out of it. Perhaps, enclosed cycle lanes could remedy this. In other words, the cycle lane would be inside a tube which would shelter cyclists completely from mother nature. This could be used for cycle lanes and footpaths and would put an end the undesired parking of cars on cycle lanes.

Aard

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Most bus routes which are bound for Dublin City still take well over an hour at peak times from places that are only 10 miles out.

They take that long because the busses are held up by cars also going to the city centre. If the cars weren't going to the city centre, then busses would nip and out of town in no time. My bus journey used to be ~55 minutes at peak, then ~25 minutes off peak. All because there were no cars in the way.

ballooba

Aard wrote: »

They take that long because the busses are held up by cars also going to the city centre. If the cars weren't going to the city centre, then busses would nip and out of town in no time. My bus journey used to be ~55 minutes at peak, then ~25 minutes off peak. All because there were no cars in the way.

Nothing to do with all the fumbling for change and having a chat with the bus driver? Peak traffic is also peak passengers.

Cookie_Monster

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Cycling is often also a faster, healthier and sustainable way of getting into town as well. However, I can't see many people opting for it by virtue of the fact that Ireland's mostly wet weather makes cycling unpleasant. To make matters worse, rain is often accompanied by strong gusts of wind blowing cyclists out of it.

Dublin doesn't really have a wet climate and isdrier than Amsterdam for instance

Perhaps, enclosed cycle lanes could remedy this. In other words, the cycle lane would be inside a tube which would shelter cyclists completely from mother nature. This could be used for cycle lanes and footpaths and would put an end the undesired parking of cars on cycle lanes.

:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

spank_inferno

Aard wrote: »

They take that long because the busses are held up by cars also going to the city centre. If the cars weren't going to the city centre, then busses would nip and out of town in no time. My bus journey used to be ~55 minutes at peak, then ~25 minutes off peak. All because there were no cars in the way.

Perhaps.

Though cash payments, too many stops inadequate bus overtaking spaces seem to add a lot to journey time.

Aard

spank_inferno wrote: »

Perhaps.

Though cash payments, too many stops inadequate bus overtaking spaces seem to add a lot to journey time.

True, but I've taken peak-hour with few passengers and it barely reduces the travel time. I think the two issues tend to compound each other.

bk

Patrickheg wrote: »

Only problem with o Connell bridge is the queue of people trying to cross at either end and a wider pedestrian path will do nothing to solve this

Not only, often the footpath on the bridge is so busy that I end up stepping onto the road to overtake slower walkers.

Patrickheg wrote: »

As for cars speeding on o Connell bridge, given the length of it and the fact that there are traffic lights either end really!!!!!!!!!!

Really!! It is mad, these cars might not actually be speeding, but you often see cars heavily accelerate on this stretch as they try to beat the traffic lights and they break suddenly again when they don't make it.

A very dangerous manoeuvre in such a busy city center street and it shows the very bad traffic design of the street. Which should be slow but steady progress in the city center.

ballooba

Aard wrote: »

True, but I've taken peak-hour with few passengers and it barely reduces the travel time. I think the two issues tend to compound each other.

Assuming your talking about a route with bus lanes, were the other buses in the bus lane also quiet?

_Kaiser_

All that'll happen here is more people avoiding the city centre than already do.

Why do people go into town? To shop and socialise. The former can be done a lot easier at the suburban outlets, and many people are now choosing not to go out at all than pay for the overpriced options in the city.

Face it.. regardless of how many cycle lanes or footpaths they build, we don't have a culture where the majority of people WANT to use those means of transport. Public transport and cycling etc is still seen as the "poor man's choice" vs owning a car (which along with a house is seen as a sign that you're "doing well") never mind it being impractical if you had a few kids with you or any kind of shopping.

They might as well just ban cars from the city centre entirely and be done with it, because it's obvious that's where it's heading. Still, it'll make it easy for the junkies and antisocial types to get around I suppose (this plan make no mention of how that problem will be dealt with which is another big issue in the city centre as it is).

bk

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

All that'll happen here is more people avoiding the city centre than already do.

Why do people go into town? To shop and socialise. The former can be done a lot easier at the suburban outlets, and many people are now choosing not to go out at all than pay for the overpriced options in the city.

And you would be very wrong. The majority of people who enter the city center already do so by public transport, walking and cycling, more then 60% in fact:

http://6311664e1a241bd4b58f-3999d26af054d711e4557be72bd8ff23.r3.cf3.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Canal-Cordon-Count-2006-to-2012.pdf

Also you can see from the above report that while the number of cars entering the city has decreased, the number of people entering the city has actually increased, so you are wrong on that point too.

Interestingly another report shows that of actual shoppers, only 10% got there by car! While cyclists represented 9% of shoppers:

http://irishcycle.com/2013/10/28/dublin-city-council-and-the-car/

Given that 36% of commuters enter the city by car, it is clear that the majority of them are only using it as a rat run from one side of the city to the other and are of little benefit to retailers.

International best standards through out Europe has shown that when you take cars out of a city center, the number of people who use the city center actually increases significantly.

There isn't a single example of pedestrianisation in Europe that has failed to increase utilisation of a city center.

There are however plenty of examples of the opposite, of increasing road infrastructure in cities killing cities (e.g. most US cities when they dug up tram lines, Amsterdam before the 70's, etc.).

The fight with suburban retail parks is over and lost. There was no way the city or any city can compete with surburban retail parks for big box shopping by car.

Instead the key to increasing the number of people using the city center is by making it a more pleasant place to live, stay, shop, educate and socialise. And you do that by radically reducing the number of cars and increasing pedestrianisation, cycle facilities, public transport, etc.

ballooba

Has anyone else noticed that it is now quicker to go directly through the city centre then around it on the eastern side? A lot of this is down to the traffic lights on the grand canal with the new dedicated sequence for bikes it seems. Seems a little daft to be going down Dawson St to get from south side to north side with no business in the city centre.

patrickbrophy18

Aard wrote: »

They take that long because the busses are held up by cars also going to the city centre. If the cars weren't going to the city centre, then busses would nip and out of town in no time. My bus journey used to be ~55 minutes at peak, then ~25 minutes off peak. All because there were no cars in the way.

Saying this is all well and good. However, the somewhat depleted bus network has resulted in a modal switch from buses back to cars. In spite of this, projects to inconvenience cars are still being introduced. Many of these schemes also have a negative effect on bus journeys. The various state run public transport "providers:rolleyes:" adopt a "use it or loose it" policy which is quite a hostile attitude to would-be commuters. That's akin to telling someone in a shop to buy something or get out. In order to win back customers, the likes of Irish Rail and Dublin Bus need to start listening to them. Otherwise, potential customers will switch back to the car.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Dublin doesn't really have a wet climate and is drier than Amsterdam for instance

I believe the recent rain storms and flash floods along with frequent heavy downpours beg to differ. There have been numerous times in the last year where I've been in town where I get caught in heavy rain and I end up soaked within minutes. As such, I remain skeptical that any moderate pedestrianization schemes will improve the situation for me. While many people may argue that I could be equipped with rain gear, I'd look pretty daft in it if there were clear skies earlier on in the day. The unpredictable weather makes this type of situation very hard to plan in advance.

Unlike Dublin, cities like London and Paris which are implementing similar schemes are well equipped with frequent, fast, punctual, extensive and sophisticated public transport networks. Sadly, this backup is lacking in Dublin.

bk

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

I believe the recent rain storms and flash floods along with frequent heavy downpours beg to differ. There have been numerous times in the last year where I've been in town where I get caught in heavy rain and I end up soaked within minutes. As such, I remain skeptical that any moderate pedestrianization schemes will improve the situation for me. While many people may argue that I could be equipped with rain gear, I'd look pretty daft in it if there were clear skies earlier on in the day. The unpredictable weather makes this type of situation very hard to plan in advance.

Annual Rain Fall:
Amsterdam: 915 millimetres (36 in)
Dublin: 714 mm (28 in)

As for rain gear, have you never heard of something called a bag :rolleyes:

patrickbrophy18

bk wrote: »

Annual Rain Fall:
Amsterdam: 915 millimetres (36 in)
Dublin: 714 mm (28 in)

While I appreciate the comparison, rain is problematic regardless of it's quantity or where it occurs. Perhaps, it's even pleasant and badly needed in dryer, warmer climates like the Mediterranean, Caribbean and countless others. Granted that Amsterdam has roughly 28 percent more rain fall than ourselves which is significantly higher, I still prefer being in a cozy vessel like a bus, train or car when it arises.

bk wrote: »

As for rain gear, have you never heard of something called a bag

As a matter of fact, I have. They're brilliant yokes!;) However, I, like many others wouldn't be bothered carrying around a bag full of gear for rain that may or may not occur. It's too much hassle as I may end up with even more baggage on account of me buying clothes in one of towns many shops.

Either-way, Dublin is ill equipped to deal with the "Proposal to reduce traffic lanes and remove parking on Liffey quays" as public transport, in general, still leaves a lot to be desired.

Aard

It's kind of amazing. Go most places in northern Europe (Brussels, Oslo, Berlin) and people will be always dressed appropriately for the weather. In summer they'll carry an umbrella in case it rains, and in winter they'll be wrapped up in scarves and gloves and boots. In Ireland people seem to wear the same thing year round no matter what, then complain that the weather doesn't mould itself to their personal wardrobe.

Cookie_Monster

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Otherwise, potential customers will switch back to the car.

not if they don't have the easy option of driving into work and parking close by.

I believe the recent rain storms and flash floods along with frequent heavy downpours beg to differ.

freak heavy rain can happen anywhere, any time and should not be a reason to base anything on.

There have been numerous times in the last year where I've been in town where I get caught in heavy rain and I end up soaked within minutes. As such, I remain skeptical that any moderate pedestrianization schemes will improve the situation for me.

an umbrella would improve things for you, it's not hard to judge what the day is likely to hold either by looking outside or checking the forecast. Little reason to be so frequently caught out and ultimately what does it matter if you are driving or PT or cycling home, you'll still be wet...

Unlike Dublin, cities like London and Paris which are implementing similar schemes are well equipped with frequent, fast, punctual, extensive and sophisticated public transport networks. Sadly, this backup is lacking in Dublin.

Dublin is not as bad as you make out to be fair. There are a number of high frequency bus corridors, DART and Luas which work pretty well. And as has been pointed out the more cars taken off the roads the better they become as traffic reduces and usage and income rises.

PT is not such an issue in removing car space from the CC anyway, the main goal is to make it more liveable for people who already live & stay there, not just those who commute in and out.

beauf

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

...Cycling is often also a faster, healthier and sustainable way of getting into town as well. However, I can't see many people opting for it by virtue of the fact that Ireland's mostly wet weather makes cycling unpleasant. To make matters worse, rain is often accompanied by strong gusts of wind blowing cyclists out of it. ....

One of the first thing you notice when you start cycling to work is that it rains a lot less than you think it does. In fact you rarely get that wet. Even on a wet day you can usually wait 10 mins and the rain will pass giving you a window to get home. Its not that windy most of the time. Its only really an issue is you more more than 20~30 mins to cycle and most people won't be cycling further than that.

The hardest part of cycling is getting out the door.

beauf

On some routes the buses and trains take a lot longer than the car and are overcrowded and unpleasant. With shrinking resources it may be difficult to fix that.

bk

beauf wrote: »

On some routes the buses and trains take a lot longer than the car and are overcrowded and unpleasant. With shrinking resources it may be difficult to fix that.

Remove the cars and the buses will be quicker.

The more people use buses, the more buses can be put on.

patrickbrophy18 I think you missed the point. Amsterdam has more extreme weather then Dublin (colder, snow and more rain). Yet 40% of people cycle to work everyday.

So the weather excuse for not cycling is just that, an excuse for being too lazy to get out and cycle.