College Green Plaza -- public consultation open

Carawaystick

If the road was left as originally, 2 lanes south, 2 lanes north, with tramlines,
it would still be exceptionally dangerous for cyclists going to Dame street, with a high risk of getting wheels caught in the rails.
ABP should have insisted on a good design solution for this instead of mickey mouse stuff about a tram stop on Dawson st.
There's a similar issue coming from Pearse st to cross the tramlines, and going east to Fleet st.

There's a few fundamental issues, with Trinity and Temple Bar and the Liffey being roadblocks hindering transport links in Dublin, along with the majority of links being surface bus links.
Along with the city council wanting to add another roadblock to transport through the city here.

LXFlyer

Carawaystick wrote: »

If the road was left as originally, 2 lanes south, 2 lanes north, with tramlines,
it would still be exceptionally dangerous for cyclists going to Dame street, with a high risk of getting wheels caught in the rails.
ABP should have insisted on a good design solution for this instead of mickey mouse stuff about a tram stop on Dawson st.
There's a similar issue coming from Pearse st to cross the tramlines, and going east to Fleet st.

There's a few fundamental issues, with Trinity and Temple Bar and the Liffey being roadblocks hindering transport links in Dublin, along with the majority of links being surface bus links.
Along with the city council wanting to add another roadblock to transport through the city here.

I don't disagree with your point on the danger for cyclists - I think a proper safe alternative cycle route should be provided.

But the issue I have is that this proposal is not going to improve the flow of public transport through the city - it's going to do the exact opposite for the majority of public transport users.

MJohnston

lxflyer wrote: »

I appreciate the desire by DCC to have a plaza, but they are to a degree creating artificial reasons to push it - such as these conflicts which are in part caused by the reduction in traffic lanes from the existing four to what appears to be two. Were there four lanes retained that argument about conflicts would be greatly reduced.

How do you suggest retaining four lanes when the Luas goes through there? It's not artificial at all, the conflict is generated by the addition of the Luas, and while we can agree that this should have been considered during the planning of that particular project, it's built now, and will be going through there, so it has to be dealt with. I would say that you just simply can't have east-west movements when the Luas is passing through north-south.

And you simply can't have a decent civic space that is transected by buses and taxis.

LXFlyer

MJohnston wrote: »

How do you suggest retaining four lanes when the Luas goes through there? It's not artificial at all, the conflict is generated by the addition of the Luas, and while we can agree that this should have been considered during the planning of that particular project, it's built now, and will be going through there, so it has to be dealt with. I would say that you just simply can't have east-west movements when the Luas is passing through north-south.

And you simply can't have a decent civic space that is transected by buses and taxis.

It's perfectly possible to retain two shared lanes and two traffic lanes. One LUAS lane does not take up more space than a traffic lane.

As for the size of the civic space that is very much a choice that needs to be made - do we want to keep the city moving or create a bigger space and frankly a mess that will inevitably mean longer journey times.

I personally believe this is too high a price to pay.

AlekSmart

Deedsie wrote: »

I Personally would be happy with slightly longer commute times for a more pleasant city centre when I eventually do get there.

As would many others.....However,yet again we find the eternal flame of......Multi-Storey Car parks...

Access to car parks / Deliveries

Access to Dame Street for deliveries, local access and routes
to car parks and premises, will still be allowed, and to facilitate
these movements the proposal provides that traffic can safely
and conveniently turn back around prior to the pedestrian plaza.
Traffic inbound on Dame Street will be able to turn right on to
Church Lane and then use Andrew Street and Trinity Street to
both access the area and also to exit the area onto Dame Street
westbound. This will mean that the current direction of traffic on
Church Lane, Andrew Street and Trinity Street will be reversed
to allow these movements. In addition, taxis, delivery vehicles
and private cars accessing car parking routes will have access
to this area. There will also be revised access arrangements for
deliveries to Parliament Street

So after all is said and done..the compromise remains.

Calina

Deedsie wrote: »

I Personally would be happy with slightly longer commute times for a more pleasant city centre when I eventually do get there.

How long is your commute in the morning rush hour and what is an acceptable increase in journey time?

donvito99

lxflyer wrote: »

As for the size of the civic space that is very much a choice that needs to be made - do we want to keep the city moving or create a bigger space and frankly a mess that will inevitably mean longer journey times.

I personally believe this is too high a price to pay.

The City will still move. It'll do so elsewhere. College Green is in the middle of a pedestrian spine of the city, and they should take priority, given that they're choked out of it at the moment.

We pay too high a price already to facilitate people who expect to be dropped to the front of Penney's on a bus pass in the middle of a capital city.

LXFlyer

donvito99 wrote: »

The City will still move. It'll do so elsewhere. College Green is in the middle of a pedestrian spine of the city, and they should take priority, given that they're choked out of it at the moment.

We pay too high a price already to facilitate people who expect to be dropped to the front of Penney's on a bus pass in the middle of a capital city.

Looking at the detail of this I am not as certain as you are that things will keep moving.

A single lane for all traffic in Georges St northbound - that's a great improvement for buses over the bus lane that's there at present.

Can I ask do you use the bus service through the city centre? Frankly your last comment suggests that you don't as it's extremely patronising and demeaning of bus users and fails to recognise the importance that the bus service plays in the city.

This is about people's commute and the length of time it is going to take. Just because you may not be affected doesn't mean that the thousands of bus commuters who this will affect should pay the price being asked here.

ollaetta

Looking at the aerial view I see the Bank of Ireland car park is staying as it is. I presume it will no longer function as a car park (despite a van a and a car shown in the pic) but it's just not going to look right IMO.

The significant chunk of space that it excludes from the new plaza is going to look very odd and out of place. Instead, a full plaza design with quality paving sweeping up to the steps of the BOI would really open up and enhance the view of the building.

I realise that it's probably down to it being private ground but surely there's a way to get BOI onboard. Unless they've some mad notion to still use it as a car park..........

LXFlyer

Attached are photos (apologies for the quality) of the detailed plans that DCC have on display in Wood Quay, but which are inexplicably not included in the consultation document.

donvito99

lxflyer wrote: »

Looking at the detail of this I am not as certain as you are that things will keep moving.

A single lane for all traffic in Georges St northbound - that's a great improvement for buses over the bus lane that's there at present.

Can I ask do you use the bus service through the city centre? Frankly your last comment suggests that you don't as it's extremely patronising and demeaning of bus users and fails to recognise the importance that the bus service plays in the city.

This is about people's commute and the length of time it is going to take. Just because you may not be affected doesn't mean that the thousands of bus commuters who this will affect should pay the price being asked here.

At the minute I'm on the 16 route so I would technically be affected. But it's only a 10 minute walk to O'CS from Dame Street - which can be a nice 10 minute walk from George's St to O'CS via an improved CG unmolested by narrow footpaths, suffocating street furniture, marauding taxis and imposing convoys of buses all vying to charge towards blundering tourists, aimlessly blocking footpaths and impeding the hasty, huddled masses. Sorry to go all Ulysses here, but it would be nice for a change if we did something quite radical. Not just piecemeal, tokenistic hat tips towards civility of the city, but determined and decisive planning that excludes modes of transport that are noisy and dirty and exploitative of the particular corridor.

We've had the bus gate, it's now time we claimed the O'CS, CG, SSG corridor for the city and not for clamorous commuters who find a bit of a walk unappealing. And I cannot accept the argument that CG is absolutely necessary to the maintenance of an efficient bus network. Why must O'CS be the dump for all buses?

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

Attached are photos (apologies for the quality) of the detailed plans that DCC have on display in Wood Quay, but which are inexplicably not included in the consultation document.

I have not had time to post in detail but for the record:

Given the lack of detail in the consultation online and, maybe a little less so at Wood Quay, I'm now less confident than I was about the whole thing and how it will affect buses and how the bus/cycling interactions are a mix of vague or not up to scratch.

I'm now worried about the detail. When it comes down to it, I'm a details kind of person and the city council has a poor record on that front -- so, releasing only what they did is worrying.

cgcsb

lxflyer wrote: »

Attached are photos (apologies for the quality) of the detailed plans that DCC have on display in Wood Quay, but which are inexplicably not included in the consultation document.

I must go see this on the way home.

Provision for cycling looks a bit hairy on Dame St between George's St and Parliament St. I think there is an opportunity being missed here to widen the the dangerously narrow footpath on the north side of this section of Dame st. Certainly the westbound carriageway on this part of Dame St is way to wide, it's almost two lanes.

LXFlyer

donvito99 wrote: »

At the minute I'm on the 16 route so I would technically be affected. But it's only a 10 minute walk to O'CS from Dame Street - which can be a nice 10 minute walk from George's St to O'CS via an improved CG unmolested by narrow footpaths, suffocating street furniture, marauding taxis and imposing convoys of buses all vying to charge towards blundering tourists, aimlessly blocking footpaths and impeding the hasty, huddled masses. Sorry to go all Ulysses here, but it would be nice for a change if we did something quite radical. Not just piecemeal, tokenistic hat tips towards civility of the city, but determined and decisive planning that excludes modes of transport that are noisy and dirty and exploitative of the particular corridor.

We've had the bus gate, it's now time we claimed the O'CS, CG, SSG corridor for the city and not for clamorous commuters who find a bit of a walk unappealing. And I cannot accept the argument that CG is absolutely necessary to the maintenance of an efficient bus network. Why must O'CS be the dump for all buses?

Again I have to point out that the bus network is critical to the public transport system in Dublin.

Whether you view buses as dirty or noisy is a moot point.

The reality is that they carry over 2/3 of all public transport through the city. As such, like any other city, the public transport system should:
- Be convenient for customers - that means serving major retail and business areas
- Operate along direct routes
- Have significant bus priority measures en route

This scheme flies in the face of all of that.

It's all very well saying buses are dirty and noisy and should be moved, but without putting in place any realistic alternative such as Metro North and DART Underground that can move large numbers of people, you have to accept that the buses need to be where they are.

You're also taking a very simplistic view here focussing on people travelling to the city only. Many of the bus routes are cross-city. What about all the large number of cross-city passengers whose commuting journey time is going to be extended? Are you saying to hell with them as well?

It's all and well and good having these idealistic visions - but when the practical effect is to cause longer commutes for very large numbers of people then you have to call them into question.

One look at those designs I posted last night will tell you this will cause major problems for the operation of an effective public transport service in the city.

MJohnston

cgcsb wrote: »

I must go see this on the way home.

Provision for cycling looks a bit hairy on Dame St between George's St and Parliament St. I think there is an opportunity being missed here to widen the the dangerously narrow footpath on the north side of this section of Dame st. Certainly the westbound carriageway on this part of Dame St is way to wide, it's almost two lanes.

I hate the prevalence of these kinds of streets in Dublin - just wide enough to encourage impatient drivers/taxis to try and form two lanes, but then quickly narrows back down again, causing more congestion than if it had been a simple, clear one lane the whole time.

As for the plans, I would say that I don't think there's much in them to benefit cyclists at all. I think the other OCS oriented traffic proposal is much more important in that regard.

cgcsb

MJohnston wrote: »

I hate the prevalence of these kinds of streets in Dublin - just wide enough to encourage impatient drivers/taxis to try and form two lanes, but then quickly narrows back down again, causing more congestion than if it had been a simple, clear one lane the whole time.

OMG the 2 most annoying streets for this:

Winetavern St. Three lanes but the leftmost is very wide so cars usually form a fourth lane out of the bicycle lane and the extra bit of space. While the footpath is impassable for pedestrians going around the corner.

Fr Mathew Bridge has the opposite problem. Two lanes marked each way but no way to average cars can safely travel side by side. And of course the two north bound lanes must merge on the bridge because Church st is one lane anyway.

MJohnston

cgcsb wrote: »

OMG the 2 most annoying streets for this:

Winetavern St. Three lanes but the leftmost is very wide so cars usually form a fourth lane out of the bicycle lane and the extra bit of space. While the footpath is impassable for pedestrians going around the corner.

Fr Mathew Bridge has the opposite problem. Two lanes marked each way but no way to average cars can safely travel side by side. And of course the two north bound lanes must merge on the bridge because Church st is one lane anyway.

That whole stretch has a multitude of examples, but I should probably create another thread to complain about that!

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

Attached are photos (apologies for the quality) of the detailed plans that DCC have on display in Wood Quay, but which are inexplicably not included in the consultation document.

Via Twitter, I asked the council if they'd put the drawings online and they've responded saying their page will be updated next week with the drawings and extra info.

Pete_Cavan

For me, this images shows why Church Street must also be pedestrianised;

http://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/RoadsandTraffic/PublishingImages/Axo1.jpg

Large numbers of people making their way from fully pedestrianised Grafton St and Suffolk St meeting crowds from the plaza on the narrow footpaths of Church Lane is not good.

Carawaystick

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Large numbers of people making their way from fully pedestrianised Grafton St and Suffolk St meeting crowds from the plaza on the narrow footpaths of Church Lane is not good.

I'd presume the road would be narrowed to a single lane and the paths widened
Although Brown Thomas might object to this

cgcsb

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

For me, this images shows why Church Street must also be pedestrianised;

http://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/RoadsandTraffic/PublishingImages/Axo1.jpg

Large numbers of people making their way from fully pedestrianised Grafton St and Suffolk St meeting crowds from the plaza on the narrow footpaths of Church Lane is not good.

oh no I see bus stops on Grafton st. Disaster.

oh no

Icepick

It's a good start but taxis can't be allowed on Grafton St

trellheim

To me it looks like the following

Must happen/is happening

1: BXD Line - its a dreadful alignment but it is what it is but its never going to be a majority of public transport
2: I agree completely with LXFlyer - the buses are what drives public transport and absolutely must take priority - a majority will never cycle.
3: You will still require cars through the city centre- not as important as buses
4: Cycling through the city centre- including COllege Green - must be facilitated or you will never grow the mode

Nice to have

Public space in the centre of the city

This is one plan that looks to me that was dreamed up by people who do not use public transport to get THROUGH dublin city centre by bus or cycle

Spanish Eyes

cgcsb wrote: »

oh no I see bus stops on Grafton st. Disaster.

oh no

I asked upthread about the (more than likely) contention between buses stopping and the LUAS behind it waiting for boarding and exit from the buses. I was kindly informed that there would be no bus stops until Westmoreland Street. Whew I thought, that's good!

But is the photo a legitimate view of the plan? I dunno.

Bottom line is, if buses or taxis are allowed to stop/pick up/drop off on the Luas line there will be trouble ahead!.

Edit.... I've just looked again, and I suppose on a pragmatic basis, if the bus stops are indented fully, it might not be so bad. But still.....

strandroad

trellheim wrote: »

To me it looks like the following

Must happen/is happening

1: BXD Line - its a dreadful alignment but it is what it is but its never going to be a majority of public transport
2: I agree completely with LXFlyer - the buses are what drives public transport and absolutely must take priority - a majority will never cycle.
3: You will still require cars through the city centre- not as important as buses
4: Cycling through the city centre- including COllege Green - must be facilitated or you will never grow the mode

Nice to have

Public space in the centre of the city

This is one plan that looks to me that was dreamed up by people who do not use public transport to get THROUGH dublin city centre by bus or cycle

Many cities on the continent have large central spaces with no ground transport at all, just walking and cycling. If underground transport exists at all, it's usually one station so you still need to walk where you want to go. See the whole historic area of Cracow, Stroget in Copenhagen, Nieuwmarkt/Oude Kirk in Amsterdam, Gamla Stan in Stockholm. There are rickshaws for the genuinely infirm and everyone else just walks or cycles. It seems to be a Dublin phenomenon that people need to be dropped off right in front of where they want to be, and therefore buses need to be pushed through the centre itself and it's one thoroughfare to boot.
Dublin's proposed civic space is tiny in comparison with the above, just one square with a small number of short side streets, and it will have a tram running right through it, but it's still somehow impossible to accept?

trellheim

Missing my point there.

The proposed civic space blocks the main artery and tries to channel the flow of buses down places that are both not suitable for current levels, not suitable for increased levels, and aren't where people want to get to ( or through ). Its written without relevance to achievability, I suppose.

Krakow, to take your example - I've been there - has several wide streets to carry the flow away and around the centre

Bristol might be a better example but even then public transport got the priority IIRC

strandroad

Cracow's pedestrian area is huge though, the wide streets you mention are where Patrick St or Church St are in Dublin in relation to its main square, and they are similar in size and capacity. It's a solid walk from any of them to the centre. And there's no underground.

Calina

mhge wrote: »

Many cities on the continent have large central spaces with no ground transport at all, just walking and cycling. If underground transport exists at all, it's usually one station so you still need to walk where you want to go. See the whole historic area of Cracow, Stroget in Copenhagen, Nieuwmarkt/Oude Kirk in Amsterdam, Gamla Stan in Stockholm. There are rickshaws for the genuinely infirm and everyone else just walks or cycles. It seems to be a Dublin phenomenon that people need to be dropped off right in front of where they want to be, and therefore buses need to be pushed through the centre itself and it's one thoroughfare to boot.
Dublin's proposed civic space is tiny in comparison with the above, just one square with a small number of short side streets, and it will have a tram running right through it, but it's still somehow impossible to accept?

My experience is the contrary - the central areas are very well served by some element of mass transit be it overground or underground. Walking isn't usually a major problem. The thing is, the core mass transit systems in a lot of cities which have million plus populations in the metropolitan area tend to be rail based. Buses supplement. This isn't really the case in Dublin where the primary public transport system is still buses.

The problem I have with something like the above plans is that there's no coherent overview for how we want the city. Just this piece at this time.

Personally, I've always felt O'Connell Street would make a far greater plaza than College Green. Particularly on those days where it's been closed to traffic and a pedestrian zone it's felt great. But if we are going to do that, we need a far longer term view on mass transit, and given what happened with DART underground and Metro North last year, we just don't have that right now. There's a long finger element about those decisions. If we actually grasped the nettle of some underground transit systems and integrated the buses to a core transport plan rather than trying to do as little as we could get away with there might be scope then for making some of both the north and south quays bus only and feeding it into things like Tara and a central underground station and intersecting better with the tramlines. I can't see this happening for a couple of reasons, of which the carparks are obviously one and cyclist behaviour is another.

The problem I have with the College Green traffic management is that in some ways it's not structured that well and nor is it really informative. As I've noted before I think through journey times for a number of bus routes are going to be very badly impacted, particularly those who have to traipse along the quays. We can assume they will eventually be bus only but I don't think that's clearly stated anywhere. Access to two carparks are from a street off the quays between Capel Street and O'Connell Bridge on the northside so I have no idea what's going to happen there.

But the other problem is the benefits are written to imply that the number one most important point that they were considering when doing all this was cycling. Three of the first four benefits relate to cycling lanes and elsewhere, play is made of the fact that something like 6500 cyclists go through the area per day.

How many people are on the buses that go through that area each day? My guess is that in the morning, it's probably close to the number of cyclists that go through the day. How many of those are being displaced to facilitate the tram route and the the cyclists? College Green is a defacto buslane anyway given the corridor thing.

When I see this, I have an image of someone who is trying to keep a bunch of balloons under control using a patchwork of bags and some balloon keeps on trying to escape... I just wish that if this was part of a coherent whole plan for the city it was obvious. Maybe it is, but other features of it are not obvious to me. And part of it is a feeling of "we really should do N but N isn't going to happen because we either don't got the money or can't agree on the details to do it so we're just going to have to struggle on as best we can".

I'd like to live somewhere with a coherent public transport system. It would be a lot easier to evaluate the benefits of something like this if I knew how it fitted into a wider vision for the city. I personally reckon we could do something fantastic with this space and with O'Connell Street if we did some nettle grasping. But the nettle grasping that is necessary to make even this piece work probably isn't fully in place either. In the meantime, I do think planning like this needs to deal with moving people around the place and this does not really do this. It moves moving people out of the way from what I can see.

trellheim

Good post C.

Carawaystick

Calina wrote: »

Personally, I've always felt O'Connell Street would make a far greater plaza than College Green. Particularly on those days where it's been closed to traffic and a pedestrian zone it's felt great.

...

Calina wrote: »

If we actually grasped the nettle of some underground transit systems and integrated the buses to a core transport plan rather than trying to do as little as we could get away with there might be scope then for making some of both the north and south quays bus only and feeding it into things like Tara and a central underground station and intersecting better with the tramlines. I can't see this happening for a couple of reasons, of which the carparks are obviously one and cyclist behaviour is another.

Tara station gets closed when it's really busy...
I'm intrigued by your unelaborated impression of cyclist behaviour.

Calina wrote: »

But the other problem is the benefits are written to imply that the number one most important point that they were considering when doing all this was cycling. Three of the first four benefits relate to cycling lanes and elsewhere, play is made of the fact that something like 6500 cyclists go through the area per day.

How many people are on the buses that go through that area each day? My guess is that in the morning, it's probably close to the number of cyclists that go through the day. How many of those are being displaced to facilitate the tram route and the the cyclists? College Green is a defacto buslane anyway given the corridor thing.

The issue with the tram lines is that it will be dangerous to allow cyclists through, due to the real risk of wheels getting trapped in the rail. So something needs to be done to make it safe.
I'd have forced the tramline through the University, or forced a cycle route through it. The university built a nanotechnology research building around the heavy rail line at the Northeast corner

I'd also have routed both tram lines away from O'Connell st, either both on Marlboro, or west to Jervis/Capel st.

Calina wrote: »

I'd like to live somewhere with a coherent public transport system. It would be a lot easier to evaluate the benefits of something like this if I knew how it fitted into a wider vision for the city.