No cars in Dublin CC....?

the_syco

http://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/national/another-move-to-phase-out-cars-in-city-centre-as-extra-bus-lanes-to-be-introduced/ar-AAnabj5?ocid=News

My favourite quote;

As a result, DCC is planning to ban private cars from travelling from Bachelors Walk onto Eden Quay or turning right onto O'Connell Bridge.

Cars will be allowed to turn left onto O'Connell St to access car parks and allow deliveries.

Because that's where all the cars want to go. They're really just don't want to keep going straight. Jaysus

Arthur Daley

It's been going this way for 20 years. They just want cars out of the city. But they love the taxes they bring in, and haven't been spending enough of the funds that did come in from the EU and develooment, on building comprehensive public transport infrastructure.

There should be a happy medium somewhere.

bk

It is very simple, cars are the least efficient form of transport for a core city center and there is simply no room for them.

The traffic counts on the quays quite clearly show that. Today, buses carry 10 times as many people as the cars in the lane beside them. In fact most shockingly, there are almost as many cyclists on this road as there are cars! And that is with almost zero cycling infrastructure in place.

With this road dedicated mostly to bus, trams and cyclists, it should be able to carry vastly more people then the cars on the same road ever could.

DCC/NTA originally wanted to ban all cars from this corridor. However the car park owners are too powerful, thus they have to leave access to the car parks in place for now. However all other car traffic will be rightfully heavily restricted.

Victor

bk wrote: »

It is very simple, cars are the least efficient form of transport for a core city center and there is simply no room for them.

Agreed.

If you take a look at the canal cordon count published last week, cars are about 69% of traffic (measured in PCUs), but carry only about 32% of the people. https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Canal_Cordon_Report_2016.pdf

There is a problem that too many people think the only way across the city is via O'Connell Bridge.



(Images mine)

newacc2015

Victor wrote: »

Agreed.

If you take a look at the canal cordon count published last week, cars are about 69% of traffic (measured in PCUs), but carry only about 32% of the people. https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Canal_Cordon_Report_2016.pdf

There is a problem that too many people think the only way across the city is via O'Connell Bridge.

There are some amount of Dubs, who despite living in Dublin either life dont know shortcuts around the city. I know some people who can do a journey from the surburbs into town in 15 mins, when it takes others 30 mins. People only take the main wide roads in and out of the City. Never the side streets or less congested roads. If you take the awkward side streets in between the canal, you can half your journey

Peregrine

The number of people in the county has increased by around 50% since the 70s. The satellite towns in the GDA experienced dizzying population increases.

Yes, cars have to go. There's no room. And I include taxis in that. Investment in public transport (especially rail) and cycling should go in hand with banning private cars though. It shouldn't be just a case of pushing cars out, sitting back, admiring your handywork and calling it a job well done.

I've said it so many times but build DART Underground and Metro North.

Victor

Peregrine wrote: »

It shouldn't be just a case of pushing cars out, sitting back, admiring your handywork and calling it a job well done.

Note that bus improvements aren't just about moving passengers more quickly. It is also about letting the vehicle move more quickly, allowing many buses to make a second or third journey during the peak, increasing bus capacity by 30-50% for no extra buses or staff.

dublinman1990

I would agree with banning cars from Dublin City Centre.

It should be the norm in most european countries where favourable & reliable PT is seen as a priority for the city's inhabitants.

Dublin, in particular around O'Connell Street, should cope much better without cars as traffic levels will be at a more manageable level for that part of the city with LUAS CC going through it. It will also count as a positive as it will cause less pollution for the area overall.

The bigger difference in alleviating traffic levels though would be to build the original DU & MN for Dublin.

The only reason for not building them is stupid laziness & lack of common sense from the NTA & government to say no to them because of high cost.

bk

dublinman1990 wrote: »

The bigger difference in alleviating traffic levels though would be to build the original DU & MN for Dublin.

Yes, though it is worth pointing out that even if these went ahead, you would still want to go ahead with reducing cars in the city.

For instance look at London, it has the fantastic and comprehensive London Underground network. Yes despite how good it is, London Bus still carries twice as many passengers as LU does every day. Which is why they have congestion charging and similar bus priorities gates and routes, to keep these buses moving.

I only mention that, because sometimes I see people saying we should build MN and DU, because in the back of their heads they are thinking, we get all the "poor" people on public transport underground and I can continue to drive right into the heart of the city every day.

dublinman1990 wrote: »

The only reason for not building them is stupid laziness & lack of common sense from the NTA & government to say no to them because of high cost.

In fairness to the NTA, everything I've seen and heard from them makes me think they really do want to build MN and DU. Any of the plans I've ever read from them make perfect sense and bring in international public transport best practice.

The issue is the government who won't sign off on it as they are more interested in filling pot holes back in their rural villages.

Middle Man

bk wrote: »

It is very simple, cars are the least efficient form of transport for a core city center and there is simply no room for them.

The traffic counts on the quays quite clearly show that. Today, buses carry 10 times as many people as the cars in the lane beside them. In fact most shockingly, there are almost as many cyclists on this road as there are cars! And that is with almost zero cycling infrastructure in place.

With this road dedicated mostly to bus, trams and cyclists, it should be able to carry vastly more people then the cars on the same road ever could.

DCC/NTA originally wanted to ban all cars from this corridor. However the car park owners are too powerful, thus they have to leave access to the car parks in place for now. However all other car traffic will be rightfully heavily restricted.

I'd have cyclists banned from any major pedestrian thoroughfare or plaza!

Keep off our Footpaths!

Middle Man

Arthur Daley wrote: »

It's been going this way for 20 years. They just want cars out of the city. But they love the taxes they bring in, and haven't been spending enough of the funds that did come in from the EU and develooment, on building comprehensive public transport infrastructure.

There should be a happy medium somewhere.

You've got it in one mate!

They want to rip off motorists and yet force people from their cars without providing adequate alternatives. For a start...

DART Interconnector...
Now!

If they had large park and ride facilities at the the major M50 intersections and a good bus service into and out of the city centre along with a bus service along the M50, it might encourage people to use the public transport.
Am sure people don't really want to have to sit in traffic for hours each day, however they in most cases have no alternative.

Middle Man

Deleted User wrote: »

If they had large park and ride facilities at the the major M50 intersections and a good bus service into and out of the city centre along with a bus service along the M50, it might encourage people to use the public transport.
Am sure people don't really want to have to sit in traffic for hours each day, however they in most cases have no alternative.

+1

Luas and P+R (just before the M50 intersections) would certainly do it!

Sam Russell

Mod:

@ MiddleMan

Please stop using large texts in posts. It is not helpful, is unpleasant to look at, and your choice of colour suggests you should see an Eye specialist, and not only that, it will get you banned.

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

Such a flawed logic every time you have your little dig at cyclists. Back it up with some facts why don't you?

Every well managed City in Europe has a large emphasis on cycling as part of the transport network. You are blinded by your dislike for cyclists. It's bizarre

Facts? If you work in the city, just look around you when walking the streets - cyclists on footpaths, on designated tram lanes, breaking red lights etc. I'm sure you'll see plenty of examples...

ED E

Middle Man wrote: »

Facts? If you work in the city, just look around you when walking the streets - cyclists on footpaths, on designated tram lanes, breaking red lights etc. I'm sure you'll see plenty of examples...

Anecdotes != facts....

Spanish Eyes

I hope banning of cars includes the often times predatory taxis in the bus lanes and hopping in front of the Aircoaches for the airport. I could go on....

Yeah right. But everyone is afraid of them and they will reign on the new College Green set up too.

Just saying.

Middle Man

Is this how you want Dublin's civic spaces to look?

To me, it's plain ugly - pedestrianisation and trams look far better IMO!

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

Ya of the 12000+ cyclists in Dublin every day I am sure the vast majority cycle on footpaths & dedicated tram lines. The ones who break red lights should be fined of course. It's still an irrational position to take on cycling from someone who clearly has a desire to improve transport in Dublin.

You see, the thing about cycling is that it's just another form of private transport - merely a condensed version of "cars, cars and more cars". I'm very concerned as a pedestrian I have to say!

cnocbui

So to all the ban-niks. What do you propose all the people from well outside Dublin do when they drive to Dublin and need access to entities in the city center?

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

Too many cyclists sounds a lot better than too many private cars. And all the space the take up and damage they cause.

Pedestrians should of course be priority No.1 but until you reduce the space taken up by private cars pedestrians are getting a raw deal.

Check out the footpath opposite the AIB on baggot street. Barely wide enough to walk single file yet space for two extra wide lanes of cars.

Well with a comprehensive transit system and decent footpaths, you wouldn't need to drive or cycle much at all - for example, I had a look at Limerick City and found that it was possible to put in two light rail lines and have much of the city within 500m of a station - again with decent footpaths, not much need for cars or bicycles to get around that city then, is there?

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

Sure!

The image for the cars is zoomed in did you notice?
Also, did I not say 'condensed' in my statement?
BTW, what scored best - you guessed it: Public Transport!

Spanish Eyes

cnocbui wrote: »

So to all the ban-niks. What do you propose all the people from well outside Dublin do when they drive to Dublin and need access to entities in the city center?

In a few years NO ONE will be driving in the city. As it is it's a nightmare.

And that applies to boggers and natives alike. But most people know this already.

The only nice time to drive to Dublin city is before 10am on a Sunday morning.

ED E

Middle Man wrote: »

Well with a comprehensive transit system and decent footpaths, you wouldn't need to drive or cycle much at all - for example, I had a look at Limerick City and found that it was possible to put in two light rail lines and have much of the city within 500m of a station - again with decent footpaths, not much need for cars or bicycles to get around that city then, is there?

That post just shows how clueless you are.


A right lay "X" shall we say will get everyone to the centre, it wont serve as the shortest path between other points. Cities with great metro systems (London, Paris, Barcelona) all still see significant levels of cycling. Have a little think on that.

Middle Man

cnocbui wrote: »

So to all the ban-niks. What do you propose all the people from well outside Dublin do when they drive to Dublin and need access to entities in the city center?

Park and Ride!

We need more sites like the Red Cow P+R...
More Luas lines too!

Middle Man

ED E wrote: »

That post just shows how clueless you are.


A right lay "X" shall we say will get everyone to the centre, it wont serve as the shortest path between other points. Cities with great metro systems (London, Paris, Barcelona) all still see significant levels of cycling. Have a little think on that.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3815343/You-stop-s-LAW-Angry-pedestrian-blocks-cyclist-gives-earful-tries-speed-zebra-crossing.html

Yeah! :rolleyes:

cnocbui

Deedsie wrote: »

Park and ride, park and dublin bikes, get the bus/train from where you live, fly to Dublin airport and get the bus to town.

So ridiculously expensive, and far longer journey times are offered as practical solutions. Rather what I thought.

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

Ah he is unable to think rationally on it. I'd swear he thinks cars are a better option than cycling. It makes zero sense.

Well yeah, in the sense that cycling comes last - Luas is the best solution for getting around town along with walking!

Middle Man

Final word - the future will probably see cycle tracks being dug up as an ever expanding network of tram tracks along with high quality footways take their place!

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

So you are saying cars are a better option than cycling for Dublin? That's what we should do, ban cycling and encourage more private cars in the city centre?

Also Dublin Bus is far more important than the Luas.

So anyone that's against cycling is all for cars over everything else??? :rolleyes:
Well then, why the hell do I want more trams, trains and quality footways?

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

Ah he is unable to think rationally on it. I'd swear he thinks cars are a better option than cycling. It makes zero sense.

Well, you seem so fanatically anti-car...

How come you're thinking rationally and I'm not????

Double standards it seems!

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

My comment, "I'd swear he thinks cars are a better option than cycling"

Your response, "Well yeah..."

What else could someone take from that. It's gibberish but we have to try knock some coherence out of it.

I said 'cars are better than cycling' - not 'cars are best'...

Can you comprehend that???

Middle Man

Deedsie wrote: »

I'm anti car in urban centres. I love my car doesn't mean I feel the need to drive into town all the time. Cars are great for getting from the outskirts of A to the outskirts of B. Walk, run, cycle, bus, train etc the rest of the way to the town or city centre.

You are bizzarely anti cycling in all and any environment with zero sound reasoning. Give us some rational reasons why cycling shouldn't be encouraged?

...because pedestrians and public transport need the space - even without a single car in the city centre. Trams and motor transport (cars (as of now), buses etc) travel at more or less the same velocity in the city - pedestrians travel at a slower pace. Now, the city can just about handle this. With cycling, you're adding a third velocity of travel into the mix as cyclists are too fast for the footpath and too slow for the road (buses and trams) - there isn't the space for infrastructure that can properly handle three separate velocities of movement - just look and the number of pedestrians and buses in the city centre - add in trams to the mix - is there really any room for cycling - consider that many footpaths require urgent widening.

Victor

Middle Man wrote: »

Is this how you want Dublin's civic spaces to look?

To me, it's plain ugly - pedestrianisation and trams look far better IMO!

But imagine the same number of cars instead of bikes!

You can fit 8-9 bikes in the space of one car. You can also fit bike parking in places you can't put car parking.

cnocbui

Deedsie wrote: »

In no way are private cars are a better option than cycling in an urban environment. There is not enough space for thousands of single occupant private cars to block up space in our city centres every day.

Babies, children, strollers, shopping, some of the most miserable weather on the planet. Yeah, bikes are the so practical - if you are young, fit, male and don't mind yourself and everything you are carrying getting soaked.

cruizer101

While I do agree that cars need to be reduced in the city I don't agree with an outright ban, sometimes public transport just won't do. E.g. going to hospital.
A congestion charge would make more sense.

And also as many have said there is no point in banning cars when the alternatives aren't there

cnocbui

Deedsie wrote: »

Fairly sexist if you dont mind me saying. I see plenty of women cycling in Dublin every morning. Also plenty of space on trains and buses for strollers etc.

Entitlement again. "Why should I ever have to walk anywhere?"

I do mind you saying.

Have a good look in the mirror, sunshine, because I didn't mention or suggest women, it's your own sexist attitude that thought I did.

Sam Russell

Mod: Can you raise the standard of debate. This is about infrastructure, not a cyclist vs motorist forum - save that for somewhere else.

Sam Russell

Mod:

@Deedsie - Do not discuss mod decisions on thread - PM if you want to discuss them.

This is a warning.

spuddy

cruizer101 wrote: »

...And also as many have said there is no point in banning cars when the alternatives aren't there

I think you've hit the nail on the head. What's very clear, as witnessed by recent decisions, is that the powers-that-be have decided that painting lines on the road is the solution to our PT deficit. Much cheaper than than serious investment (a la MU and DU).

bk

spuddy wrote: »

I think you've hit the nail on the head. What's very clear, as witnessed by recent decisions, is that the powers-that-be have decided that painting lines on the road is the solution to our PT deficit. Much cheaper than than serious investment (a la MU and DU).

A reminder that 80% of people who shop in Dublin City Center got there by walking, cycling and public transport. Only 19% got their by car.

So clearly the alternatives are already there for the vast majority of people.

It is a chicken and egg problem. People won't take public transport unless it is improved, but public transport can't be improved unless more space and priority is given over to it.

This plan will allow the buses and trams to travel even faster into town and thus improve public transport for everyone.

Of course I'd like to see MN and DU built too, but that will take many years, if not decades and even when they are built, Dublin Bus will still carry the majority of people and such bus priority measures will still be needed.

LXFlyer

spuddy wrote: »

I think you've hit the nail on the head. What's very clear, as witnessed by recent decisions, is that the powers-that-be have decided that painting lines on the road is the solution to our PT deficit. Much cheaper than than serious investment (a la MU and DU).

I agree about your point about the lack of proper investment in public transport in the forms of MN and DU - absolutely 100%.

However the fact remains that DCC are faced with dealing with the very simple problem that the Green Line LUAS will be operating through the heart of the city centre every 3 minutes in both directions later this year.

They also have to deal with the practical issue that the length of the trams dictate that they have to have a clear run every 3 minutes from the Westmoreland Street / O'Connell Street junction to the stop opposite Easons on O'Connell Street northbound and from the Marlborough Street/Lower Abbey Street junction to Hawkins Street - otherwise they will block the junctions.

At the same time, roughly a dozen cross-city bus routes are going to be re-routed onto the North and South Quays between Capel Street and O'Connell Bridge due to the new plaza proposed on College Green. That is an awful lot of buses added into the mix.

With the best will in the world when you combine the LUAS frequency, the clearance that trams will need every 3 minutes, and the massive increase in the number of buses operating along the Quays, it doesn't take rocket science to realise that purely from a practical perspective something has to give.

At the same time I recognise that people should still be able to drive to the car parks and make deliveries - that is also recognised by DCC. And that can still happen.

However from a purely practical perspective, for the reasons outlined above, there are going to have to be compromises on the part of those drivers in the form of adjusted routes (which will be slightly longer) to allow for the public transport services to actually function - it simply won't work otherwise. But access will be maintained.

The main focus has to be on discouraging through traffic from the city centre and on to alternative routes. That's what these proposals attempt to do - there simply won't be room for that traffic any more when the LUAS starts operations - that's a practical issue - not one driven by ideology.

If the measures are not put in place, the bus service, which will remain the work horse of our public transport network until high capacity rail alternatives are put in place, will grind to a standstill.

Chivito550

cnocbui wrote: »

Babies, children, strollers, shopping, some of the most miserable weather on the planet. Yeah, bikes are the so practical - if you are young, fit, male and don't mind yourself and everything you are carrying getting soaked.

What the fupp does being male have to do with cycling?

cnocbui

Chivito550 wrote: »

What the fupp does being male have to do with cycling?

Most cyclists are male. Couldn't find the Irish statistic but for the UK it's 70%.

There was a good article on how in the UK, female cyclists are prone to being killed by trucks, with almost all female cyclist fatalities in the last few years involving them. I have anecdotally noticed the same here.

Chivito550

cnocbui wrote: »

Most cyclists are male. Couldn't find the Irish statistic but for the UK it's 70%.

There was a good article on how in the UK, female cyclists are prone to being killed by trucks, with almost all female cyclist fatalities in the last few years involving them. I have anecdotally noticed the same here.

Go to Amsterdam and you see old women on bikes. I don't mean middle aged. I mean proper old, carrying bags of shopping, in the rain, and they are women too. Pretty much rubbishes your whole post in one fell swoop.

cnocbui

Deedsie wrote: »

That kinda BS is what stops females in Ireland participating in active exercise after the age of 13. Anecdotal nonsense. I cycle every day and every day I see plenty of female cyclists. More men sure but its nonsense to suggest there is only a small number of female cyclists out there.

Well apart from your anecdotal input, do you have any reliable statistics from an unbiased source for this country? I rather doubt it.

I suggested 30% of cyclists were likely female.

At 2:35 you will see the number of female members of Cycling Ireland in 2012 was 15% with 6% taking part in competition. Now extrapolating to commuting would perhaps not be hugely accurate but any way you look at it there is no evidence i can find that would even hint at there being anything other than a very substantialy greater proportion of male cyclists.

And by the way. For the 12 years of my primary and secondary education, I cycled to and from school every day. I also was employed as a professional cyclist for 3 months, delivering telegrams, which enabled me to earn most of the price of my first car. Cycling is innately hazardous, is unsuited to this climate, and isn't for everyone.

I love Sean nos

the_syco wrote: »

Because that's where all the cars want to go. They're really just don't want to keep going straight.

Has anyone asked the drivers where they want to go?

cnocbui

Chivito550 wrote: »

Go to Amsterdam and you see old women on bikes. I don't mean middle aged. I mean proper old, carrying bags of shopping, in the rain, and they are women too. Pretty much rubbishes your whole post in one fell swoop.

Dublin isn't Amsterdam. My mother had two knee and one hip joint replaced and could no longer ride a bike afterwards, with shopping or in the rain. She had a disability sticker for her car and drove everywhere. Pretty much rubbishes your counter argument.

You picked one of the most bike friendly locations of the planet and used that to leverage your argument. That's tilting the pinball machine.

MJohnston

Oh god, not another thread ruined by the anti-cycling lot.

Back in topic, this is precisely why the Cross City extension should have Park and Ride facilities at or near Broombridge. Preferably the line would have gone another couple of km out towards the N3/M50 junction, and out one there, but even one at Broombridge would be a massive help. It'd add a lot of people from Cabra and Finglas, and the N3 corridor, who aren't currently close to one of the new stations, into the mix.

As it is, does anyone know if Dublin Bus might adjust their routes slightly to connect with the Luas? Has this happened with lines previously opened?

El Tarangu

cnocbui wrote: »

Dublin isn't Amsterdam. My mother had two knee and one hip joint replaced and could no longer ride a bike afterwards, with shopping or in the rain. She had a disability sticker for her car and drove everywhere. Pretty much rubbishes your counter argument.

You picked one of the most bike friendly locations of the planet and used that to leverage your argument. That's tilting the pinball machine.

Why is Amsterdam one of the most bike-friendly locations on the planet?

- because they made the decision to structure their city in this way, and invested loads in their cycling infrastructure.

For one accusing others of "tilting the pinball machine", your example is very specific; I doubt that many of the thousands upon thousands of people who drive into the city centre every day do so because of a disability.

cnocbui

Deedsie wrote: »

Unsuited to this climate. 12000+ cyclists in Dublin everyday. Nonsense argument. It is only dangerous because appropriate infrastructure for cyclists has not been provided due to the tiny amount of the transport budget afforded to cycling projects.

Of course it's not for everyone, nor is continuing to allow drivers and their sense of entitlement to park and drive everywhere regardless of the limitited urban roadspace.

Traffic congestion has ruined our town and city centres. It's time to reclaim our cities and town centres from single occupant private cars. Satellite car parks within walking distance of town/city centres and an upgraded pedestrian network has to be county councils approach in the future.

You really are an unbalanced fanatic. A whole 1.08% of the urban population cycle and you think that 'proves' the climate is appropriate?

98.02% of the urban population of Dublin don't cycle - that more strongly tends to suggest the climate is unsuitable than your fatuous claim.