Cars to be banned from key Dublin City Centre streets; priority to walking, buses etc

hardCopy

cgcsb wrote: »

Indeed what are you supposed to do when every bus is full, your area, like most of Dublin, has no rail provision at all and a long distance cycle would likely cause death or injury.

In what area would a cycle "likely cause death or injury"?

cgcsb

lxflyer wrote: »

I wouldn't bet on that.

Strong rumours that this may finally change.

I would hope so too, but I'll believe it when I see it. Also keeping taxis out of College Green will be a challenge. Most taxis currently use contra flow bus lanes despite not being permitted to do so.

schemingbohemia

cgcsb wrote: »

Indeed what are you supposed to do when every bus is full, your area, like most of Dublin, has no rail provision at all and a long distance cycle would likely cause death or injury.

Are you high?

cgcsb

hardCopy wrote: »

In what area would a cycle "likely cause death or injury"?

Obviously I'm exaggerating. But you must admit cycling in Dublin is quite the challenge. Overall the provision of cycle lanes is poor and they're generally used as parking/loading areas anyway.

mcsean2163

cgcsb wrote: »

Obviously I'm exaggerating. But you must admit cycling in Dublin is quite the challenge. Overall the provision of cycle lanes is poor and they're generally used as parking/loading areas anyway.

Agree

loyatemu

cgcsb wrote: »

Obviously I'm exaggerating. But you must admit cycling in Dublin is quite the challenge. Overall the provision of cycle lanes is poor and they're generally used as parking/loading areas anyway.

and yet thousands cycle around the city every day without coming to any harm.

(I'm not denying it's statistically more dangerous than driving, but from your description cycling in Dublin is an extreme sport akin to free-climbing or wingsuit flying).

LXFlyer

cgcsb wrote: »

Indeed what are you supposed to do when every bus is full, your area, like most of Dublin, has no rail provision at all and a long distance cycle would likely cause death or injury.

Well as the bus fleet continues to expand and additional services added, hopefully that won't be so much of an issue.

bk

lxflyer wrote: »

Well as the bus fleet continues to expand and additional services added, hopefully that won't be so much of an issue.

Also remember if the buses suffer from less congestion, then their journey times drop, which means the same bus can be turned around and used again quicker, thus improving frequency and capacity, with no extra drivers or buses needed.

Hopefully there will also be greater use of the double doors and move to flat fare + cashless buses which all should reduce dwell times and thus also increase the number of journeys made by each bus, thus increasing capacity with no new buses required.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

Also remember if the buses suffer from less congestion, then their journey times drop, which means the same bus can be turned around and used again quicker, thus improving frequency and capacity, with no extra drivers or buses needed.

Hopefully there will also be greater use of the double doors and move to flat fare + cashless buses which all should reduce dwell times and thus also increase the number of journeys made by each bus, thus increasing capacity with no new buses required.

To be fair that tends to have an impact as the day progresses.

To increase morning peak frequency generally requires an increase in the PVR (peak vehicle requirement), usually through 12 hour spread-over duties that see the buses out in the am and pm peaks.

cdebru

lxflyer wrote: »

I wouldn't bet on that.

Strong rumours that this may finally change.

More than a rumour I believe starting with a couple of core cross city routes going to 24 hour operation, the NTA want it, and what they want usually happens.

cdebru

bk wrote: »

Also remember if the buses suffer from less congestion, then their journey times drop, which means the same bus can be turned around and used again quicker, thus improving frequency and capacity, with no extra drivers or buses needed.

Hopefully there will also be greater use of the double doors and move to flat fare + cashless buses which all should reduce dwell times and thus also increase the number of journeys made by each bus, thus increasing capacity with no new buses required.

Extra journeys only really kick in later in the day after rush hour, you would still need to increase the PVR

cdebru

I wonder could a fly under be built at the bachelor's walk O'Connell bridge junction, starting around swifts row and reemerging past the Rosie Hackett somewhere, leaving the surface road for Public transport ?

cgcsb

loyatemu wrote: »

and yet thousands cycle around the city every day without coming to any harm.

(I'm not denying it's statistically more dangerous than driving, but from your description cycling in Dublin is an extreme sport akin to free-climbing or wingsuit flying).

Again it was a tongue and cheek comment. I say it because I know pleanty of people who probably arent that able on a bike who just wouldn't cycle because of the perceived danger. Although there aren't many accidents the site of a double decker cutting in and out of cycle lanes would put the fear up one. And then you have tax drivers trying to kill you into the bargain.

ThisRegard

loyatemu wrote: »

(I'm not denying it's statistically more dangerous than driving,

Is it?

cgcsb

cdebru wrote: »

I wonder could a fly under be built at the bachelor's walk O'Connell bridge junction, starting around swifts row and reemerging past the Rosie Hackett somewhere, leaving the surface road for Public transport ?

as long as we're still scraping a few quid together for DART underground, I doubt it.

Aard

Not to drag things off topic, but it is statistically safer to cycle than to drive. A UK study showed driving as 11 times more dangerous than cycling in terms of deaths. Interested in Irish numbers showing cycling as more dangerous if anybody knows of any studies.

MJohnston

Imo cycling in Dublin doesn't feel that dangerous if you're aware, attentive, and keep yourself visible. Unfortunately not true for a large number of my fellow cyclists, I suspect.

_Kaiser_

PLL wrote: »

The 'After' photos make it look so much more like a modern European city.

Feck but I hate this reasoning whenever changes are proposed - let's do it because other places do it and aren't we big boys and girls and the equal of any other place?

This proposal is ridiculous without addressing the means by which people get to the City Centre in the first place which is still significantly by car and why they go there. Do people think such people want to spend a fortune on parking every or stuck in traffic every morning/evening? No, but they do so because they have no other realistic alternative to get to and from work - something that is going to get worse again as people are pushed out into the surrounding counties again thanks to the housing shortage and spiraling (rental) prices in Dublin (it's like it's 2005 all over again! :rolleyes:)

Where shopping is concerned, all this will do is benefit the suburban retail parks even more like Blanch, Liffey Valley etc - because trying to lug a week's shopping with the kids on a bus/LUAS is lots of fun! Longer term I can see businesses being affected and relocating as well if staff find it even harder than it is now to get to work.

Still, I suppose it'll make it easier for the junkies to get around the city centre so that's good(!!) I can see people just avoiding the City Centre for their shopping/socialising needs instead.

Here's a better idea.. start building affordable, decent-sized accommodation in the City Centre so people don't have to commute in the first place! Support that by having AGS do a massive and ongoing clean-up of the area, and ensure the transport links to suburban areas (and beyond) are high quality and of sufficient capacity to handle the demand from customers who can't just relocate to within D1/D2 and immediate surrounds.

Aard

A third of people access the city centre by car. A smaller fraction again would access the CBD by car.

A lot of people from the inner suburbs (Dublin 4 / 6 distance) access by car who could easily switch to less space-consuming modes.

A lot of people live along high frequency transport routes who could easily switch to Luas / Dart / 46a etc.

People living beyond the M50 are unlikely to change their transport habits too much. It's the closer-in people who will. This will create space at the same time that it's being taken away, being a net zero.

I'd also be interested in knowing if all the naysayers have read the entire documents, or just looked at the headlines and colourful pictures.

end of the road

i'm in to minds about removing the connolly luas stop. personally i'd rather the operator was forced to go back to operating trams to it for all the hours trains run. it can be every second tram. but maybe if this walkway can happen i'd certainly use it unless the phoenix park tunnel train happens which i might use that instead. i think consideration should be given to more multi-story car parks which will have busses running from them into the city centre or maybe even specially designed busses to the shopping areas so people won't have to be hauling shopping on normal busses meaning the loss of being able to bring the car near might be negated in some way.

hardCopy

cgcsb wrote: »

Again it was a tongue and cheek comment. I say it because I know pleanty of people who probably arent that able on a bike who just wouldn't cycle because of the perceived danger. Although there aren't many accidents the site of a double decker cutting in and out of cycle lanes would put the fear up one. And then you have tax drivers trying to kill you into the bargain.

Perceived danger is exactly what it is. I don't know any frequent cyclists who would say they feel in danger every morning on their bike. I know plenty who would have thought it was dangerous before they started.

The hard part is convincing people to just give it a go in the beginning, car free streets and dedicated cycle lanes go a long way toward convincing people it will be safe.

Dyr

One thing I've noticed about the city centre is just how awkward it is to get across the city as a pedestrian, you are running into traffic lights and road works every second minute, having to take long detours to cross roads and junctions, this might address some of that

would absolutely needs enforcement of the cycling restrictions.

Aard

Bambi wrote: »

would absolutely needs enforcement of the cycling restrictions.

I think some of the cycling restrictions are unnecessary.

Suffolk St is wide enough for a 3.5m two-way cycle track down the middle. It's also a pinch-point in the city centre street network. And would keep bikes away from the future Luas tracks going around Trinity.

Blocking off Stephen's Green North is an opportunity lost. When the future Luas gets green lights to go around the corner, you could have a two-way cycle track using the same green lights.

Bike routes around Grafton Street are very limited and this plan makes it even more difficult. Kind of ridiculous when elsewhere in the document there is a goal to get cycling mode share up to 15%.

dfx-

MGWR wrote: »

As for "dilute", that needs context.

reducing the area covered, reducing the particular streets covered or yes to these street, no to that street, reducing the hours it happens as with the bus gate.

Subpopulus wrote: »

Much of this Scheme is made up of other smaller schemes, which have been pulled together in a coherent fashion so that they're not all tripping over each others toes. This includes LUAS CrossCity, the BRT systems, the Greater Dublin Cycle network etc. etc. Surprisingly the synergy of all these parts has come together quite nicely, without any major bodges. They've also been developed over the past few years, so there's a fairly weighty body of work behind them now. There's now a very large case that this scheme has been thought through, and that this can work.

Some of the proposals of the scheme are already happening in various ways - such as Suffolk Street being pedestrianised, and the reduction in the number of bus routes terminating in the city centre. Also, when the LUAS starts running across the city centre then something will have to be done - the status quo won't work really any more.

So in what order are these supposed to happen or all at once? In what timeframe?

I'm all in favour of removing cars from the city centre, but not as the transport network is at the moment.

Spanish Eyes

I read that the timeframe for all the changes is up to 2023, yikes!

But then again that gives time to roll out the changes very slowly. Too slowly if you ask me though.

Anyway, for car users, this is going to happen I think. And by the time a few years have passed and LUAS cross city is running, it will be imperative I think.

Pedestrians, PT commuters and cyclists will be pleased about this vision. I am one of them.

Definitely coaches and private buses need their own space/bus station. The number of them on Bachelor's Walk every day is just unreal. I wonder will the proposals affect the myriad of tour buses that park on Nassau Street beside the College?

Car drivers who use the city to get around will not like it much. The negativity has already started. Who knew? But I am sure car drivers have legitimate concerns that will hopefully be addressed.

It won't please everyone, that's for sure, no matter what lobby you belong to.

cdebru

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Feck but I hate this reasoning whenever changes are proposed - let's do it because other places do it and aren't we big boys and girls and the equal of any other place?

This proposal is ridiculous without addressing the means by which people get to the City Centre in the first place which is still significantly by car and why they go there. Do people think such people want to spend a fortune on parking every or stuck in traffic every morning/evening? No, but they do so because they have no other realistic alternative to get to and from work - something that is going to get worse again as people are pushed out into the surrounding counties again thanks to the housing shortage and spiraling (rental) prices in Dublin (it's like it's 2005 all over again! :rolleyes:)

Where shopping is concerned, all this will do is benefit the suburban retail parks even more like Blanch, Liffey Valley etc - because trying to lug a week's shopping with the kids on a bus/LUAS is lots of fun! Longer term I can see businesses being affected and relocating as well if staff find it even harder than it is now to get to work.

Still, I suppose it'll make it easier for the junkies to get around the city centre so that's good(!!) I can see people just avoiding the City Centre for their shopping/socialising needs instead.

Here's a better idea.. start building affordable, decent-sized accommodation in the City Centre so people don't have to commute in the first place! Support that by having AGS do a massive and ongoing clean-up of the area, and ensure the transport links to suburban areas (and beyond) are high quality and of sufficient capacity to handle the demand from customers who can't just relocate to within D1/D2 and immediate surrounds.

How many people drive into the city to do their weekly grocery shopping ? How many people driving through bachelors walk or Westmoreland street/ Dolier Street have any actual business to attend to in those areas ?

seamus

Aard wrote: »

A lot of people from the inner suburbs (Dublin 4 / 6 distance) access by car who could easily switch to less space-consuming modes.

A lot of people live along high frequency transport routes who could easily switch to Luas / Dart / 46a etc.

So I worked in a company with two Dublin offices, with a LUAS line going right past the front door of both.

They had an external company come in and do a travel survey as part of a whole healthy living buzz. They found that the people most likely to take public transport were those who lived > 10km from the city centre and those most likely to drive lived < 10km from the city centre. In other words, the wealthier employees. Those who had the most access to different forms of transport, were the least likely to avail of them and drive instead. Because they could afford to.

As much as people would like to pretend otherwise, there is still a snobbery issue in relation to transport, and being able to say you drove into work rather than took the bus or cycled is seen as a badge of honour by many.

cdebru

hardCopy wrote: »

Perceived danger is exactly what it is. I don't know any frequent cyclists who would say they feel in danger every morning on their bike. I know plenty who would have thought it was dangerous before they started.

The hard part is convincing people to just give it a go in the beginning, car free streets and dedicated cycle lanes go a long way toward convincing people it will be safe.

The weather argument is the exact same, people perceive the weather to be much worse than it actually is, if you actually ask people who cycle how often it rains on their commute it is much lower than the people who dont cycle perceive it to be.

Dyr

Aard wrote: »

I think some of the cycling restrictions are unnecessary.

Suffolk St is wide enough for a 3.5m two-way cycle track down the middle. It's also a pinch-point in the city centre street network. And would keep bikes away from the future Luas tracks going around Trinity.

Blocking off Stephen's Green North is an opportunity lost. When the future Luas gets green lights to go around the corner, you could have a two-way cycle track using the same green lights.

Bike routes around Grafton Street are very limited and this plan makes it even more difficult. Kind of ridiculous when elsewhere in the document there is a goal to get cycling mode share up to 15%.

On the whole, irish cyclists are not capable of sharing space with pedestrians, by definition a plaza or pedestrian zone needs to exclude cyclists

Aard

seamus wrote: »

As much as people would like to pretend otherwise, there is still a snobbery issue in relation to transport, and being able to say you drove into work rather than took the bus or cycled is seen as a badge of honour by many.

That is very interesting. Do you know if the external company initiated anything in the way of encouraging use of PT/bike/walking? Or was it more of a baseline survey situation?

These "workplace travel plans" can be very effective. It's interesting your observation wrt car being the mode of choice for those with more money. Of course, parking in the city centre is at a premium and private spaces will be offered to employees very selectively. Some spaces in the Earlsfort Centre changed hands for eye-watering sums recently.