Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
So Patrick street is bus only from Thursday 9th August
Options
Comments
-
TheChizler wrote: »Yet we have North Main St. traders calling into Neil today saying trade is down because of the restrictions... And Johnny Grace's posting this:
s.
This is getting predictable. Every time there is disquiet at non enforcement of ban the CBA sends out it's minions to change the narrative.
To replace "Should the ban be enforced?" to
"Should the ban be retained?"
If ban is not enforced then in my opinion it doesn't matter if there is a ban or not.0 -
-
That photo must have been taken at dawn never saw the street that empty agree though ban should be enforced or scrapped.0
-
TheChizler wrote: »What evidence do you have that this is what happened?
Don't go there. Myself and some other posters here have asked similar questions. Trust me, it's not worth it.0 -
That photo must have been taken at dawn never saw the street that empty agree though ban should be enforced or scrapped.
the strange scenario we have though is
Photo A says the street is dead and business is down - John O' Grace
Photo B shows Patrick street as if there is no traffic ban in place at all. Source - Cllr Tim Brosnan
Through out this thread there hasn't been any conclusively shown except for random photos ,a moment in time.
The only study that seems to have been done suggests the ban is overwhelmingly working in terms on compliance, just not 100% compliance.
We also cannot judge for that whether those people breaking the ban are accidentally or unaware so OR complete arseholes in every part of life.0 -
Advertisement
-
TheChizler wrote: »Yet we have North Main St. traders calling into Neil today saying trade is down because of the restrictions... And Johnny Grace's posting this:
https://twitter.com/grace_fried/status/1059509931722899462
Of course focus on the empty road (as it should be) and ignore the people walking on the footpaths.
Can't see why an empty road in the city centre should be the objective and if that's what the car ban has created then it's little wonder traders in the area are complaining. They depend on passing trade for earning a living so I can't see why they would be complaining unless the car ban is having a negative impact on their business.0 -
macraignil wrote: »Can't see why an empty road in the city centre should be the objective and if that's what the car ban has created then it's little wonder traders in the area are complaining. They depend on passing trade for earning a living
I believe "empty of private vehicles" is the objective.
If traders on this particular street are relying on motorists to drive directly to their shops, then rents will have to drop significantly, because there are very few parking spaces on the street.
The problem is that we don't know if the car ban is having a negative impact on their businesses. Perhaps they have done a survey of their regular customers: we haven't been given this information. Unfortunately the information we do have is anecdotal.macraignil wrote: »I can't see why they would be complaining unless the car ban is having a negative impact on their business.0 -
hans aus dtschl wrote: »I believe "empty of private vehicles" is the objective.
If traders on this particular street are relying on motorists to drive directly to their shops, then rents will have to drop significantly, because there are very few parking spaces on the street.
The problem is that we don't know if the car ban is having a negative impact on their businesses. Perhaps they have done a survey of their regular customers: we haven't been given this information. Unfortunately the information we do have is anecdotal.
Picture posted by John Graces looks relatively empty of all types of potential customer to me. To get fast food somebody does not necessarily need to park up and eat their meal but as I have done in the past collected the food and drove home to eat it while it's still warm, which is made much more difficult by the car ban for traders in the Patrick street area. The extra set down spaces the city council have talked about are not going to be much use to John Graces if the cars can't get near them to make the quick stop to collect their food.
I think it's ridiculous that anyone who mentions a negative impact of the car ban is labeled as just providing anecdotal information. I've mentioned being stuck in traffic on a bus before reaching Patrick street just a few pages back and a number of posters insisted it never happened even though it since then has emerged that short term parking at the Merchent's quay centre has increased since the car ban and this has had a clear impact on all traffic trying to enter the city centre from that side of the city. Seems to me a lot of posters on this thread only want to listen to news that suits their own agenda.0 -
macraignil wrote: »Picture posted by John Graces looks relatively empty of all types of potential customer to me. To get fast food somebody does not necessarily need to park up and eat their meal but as I have done in the past collected the food and drove home to eat it while it's still warm, which is made much more difficult by the car ban for traders in the Patrick street area. The extra set down spaces the city council have talked about are not going to be much use to John Graces if the cars can't get near them to make the quick stop to collect their food.
I think it's ridiculous that anyone who mentions a negative impact of the car ban is labeled as just providing anecdotal information. I've mentioned being stuck in traffic on a bus before reaching Patrick street just a few pages back and a number of posters insisted it never happened even though it since then has emerged that short term parking at the Merchent's quay centre has increased since the car ban and this has had a clear impact on all traffic trying to enter the city centre from that side of the city. Seems to me a lot of posters on this thread only want to listen to news that suits their own agenda.
The important thing here is that john graces conveniently show one picture that suits their agenda without any proof of the time of day the picture is taken.
It's easy to take a picture of Patrick Street empty at one point e.g early morning not so easy at peak times.0 -
macraignil wrote: »Picture posted by John Graces looks relatively empty of all types of potential customer to me. To get fast food somebody does not necessarily need to park up and eat their meal but as I have done in the past collected the food and drove home to eat it while it's still warm, which is made much more difficult by the car ban for traders in the Patrick street area. The extra set down spaces the city council have talked about are not going to be much use to John Graces if the cars can't get near them to make the quick stop to collect their food.
I think it's ridiculous that anyone who mentions a negative impact of the car ban is labeled as just providing anecdotal information. I've mentioned being stuck in traffic on a bus before reaching Patrick street just a few pages back and a number of posters insisted it never happened even though it since then has emerged that short term parking at the Merchent's quay centre has increased since the car ban and this has had a clear impact on all traffic trying to enter the city centre from that side of the city. Seems to me a lot of posters on this thread only want to listen to news that suits their own agenda.
While I agree with the car ban, overall, I see your sentiment too. There are many people who live in the city who forget that other viewpoints should also be listened to. I hear it a lot when carbon tax is talked about and if I raise a point about it costing commuters (who have been forced to commute because of the lack of any city housing that is affordable) I'm shouted down.0 -
Advertisement
-
Well I counted up to 37 pedestrians in the sliver of footpath included in the photo. Incredibly disingenuous to post a picture mostly taken up by something supposed to be empty (of private vehicles) and claim the whole area is empty based on that.macraignil wrote: »Picture posted by John Graces looks relatively empty of all types of potential customer to me.
If there were a comparable number of people in cars that section of street would have been packed, and how many of them would have been stopping realistically?0 -
TheChizler wrote: »Well I counted up to 37 pedestrians in the sliver of footpath included in the photo. Incredibly disingenuous to post a picture mostly taken up by something supposed to be empty (of private vehicles) and claim the whole area is empty based on that.
If there were a comparable number of people in cars that section of street would have been packed, and how many of them would have been stopping realistically?
Good eye sight to be able to spot that many. I can barely make out 10.
The comment from John Graces simply says "plenty of room for all". They do not say the whole area is empty as you claim, so to me it looks like you are the one being disingenuous. I think there point was just to show a picture of Patrick street when it is quiet and it does look quite to me.
I agree that that section of street would be packed with 37 cars but no idea realistically how many of them would be stopping. Depends how many guards are flagging them down to give them tickets for violating the ban I guess.0 -
That's what they're heavily implying, that you could fit a stadium of people as there's so much free space.macraignil wrote: »The comment from John Graces simply says "plenty of room for all". They do not say the whole area is empty as you claim, so to me it looks like you are the one being disingenuous. I think there point was just to show a picture of Patrick street when it is quiet and it does look quite to me.
Probably pointless speculating about how busy the street is, everyone's accustomed to seeing cars and take that into account when estimating I reckon. When there are no cars we feel like there's noone around. Hopefully some more cold hard stats come out.
When I'm wondering how many would be stopping it's to do with figuring out how much trade is generated from traffic on the street itself. Didn't the council have a figure of something like 90% is just passing traffic? So maybe 3-4 people at a guess would be getting something locally if the picture was jam packed with cars.0 -
TheChizler wrote: »Well I counted up to 37 pedestrians in the sliver of footpath included in the photo. Incredibly disingenuous to post a picture mostly taken up by something supposed to be empty (of private vehicles) and claim the whole area is empty based on that.
If there were a comparable number of people in cars that section of street would have been packed, and how many of them would have been stopping realistically?macraignil wrote: »Good eye sight to be able to spot that many. I can barely make out 10.
The comment from John Graces simply says "plenty of room for all". They do not say the whole area is empty as you claim, so to me it looks like you are the one being disingenuous. I think there point was just to show a picture of Patrick street when it is quiet and it does look quite to me.
I agree that that section of street would be packed with 37 cars but no idea realistically how many of them would be stopping. Depends how many guards are flagging them down to give them tickets for violating the ban I guess.
At maximum resolution I counted 31 people in that picture. Obviously not taking into account how many would be shopping/browsing in the shops.0 -
TheChizler wrote: »That's what they're heavily implying, that you could fit a stadium of people as there's so much free space.
Probably pointless speculating about how busy the street is, everyone's accustomed to seeing cars and take that into account when estimating I reckon. When there are no cars we feel like there's noone around. Hopefully some more cold hard stats come out.
When I'm wondering how many would be stopping it's to do with figuring out how much trade is generated from traffic on the street itself. Didn't the council have a figure of something like 90% is just passing traffic? So maybe 3-4 people at a guess would be getting something locally if the picture was jam packed with cars.
3-4 people getting something locally at the second the photo is taken could add up to a fairly big number of customers over a full week hypothetically.0 -
hans aus dtschl wrote: »How did they get on to the street?
I'm sorry if I'm overlooking something, but is there any viable method of a car being in a parking space after 1700 not breaking either parking rules or bus lane rules?
Could have parked in town Saturday night to go on the beer and not going to collect the car until after 6:30 on Sunday as it’s free parking all day and loading bays don’t apply.
Could also have parked any time on Sunday up to 3pm and once they don’t move until after 6:30 no rule is being broken.0 -
The day before cafe Velo were saying their trade was 10% up. There's thousands of office jobs coming on stream in the city centre and traders need to adapt as public transport needs to be prioritised.
All over the world people are prioritised in urban spaces. If a shop in town is depending on through traffic they need to get real, it reminds me of towns objecting to motorway bypasses 15 years ago. The city centre should be an end destination and has plenty of capacity in multistory car parks for those who choose to drive.0 -
I can't find it now, but read long before the ban came in that a survey had shown that something over 90% of cars going through Pana were not stopping there, simply using it to go somewhere else. Since the ban, Bus Éireann say that there's been a big increase in bus punctuality. The massive traffic jams at the start no longer happen too often, thanks in part to the abolition of the bus stop outside Larry Tompkins which had a complete lane being blocked almost continuously since 3 or 4 services used to stop there.
Car ban, I reckon, is here to stay, what we need now is more buses on the streets.0 -
Rayne Gigantic Pliers wrote: »Could have parked in town Saturday night to go on the beer and not going to collect the car until after 6:30 on Sunday as it’s free parking all day and loading bays don’t apply.
Could also have parked any time on Sunday up to 3pm and once they don’t move until after 6:30 no rule is being broken.
No parking rules on Sunday: is that true? I'll take it back if so.
You can tell that I didn't look very hard at the signage.0 -
macraignil wrote: »Picture posted by John Graces looks relatively empty of all types of potential customer to me. To get fast food somebody does not necessarily need to park up and eat their meal but as I have done in the past collected the food and drove home to eat it while it's still warm, which is made much more difficult by the car ban for traders in the Patrick street area. The extra set down spaces the city council have talked about are not going to be much use to John Graces if the cars can't get near them to make the quick stop to collect their food.
I think it's ridiculous that anyone who mentions a negative impact of the car ban is labeled as just providing anecdotal information. I've mentioned being stuck in traffic on a bus before reaching Patrick street just a few pages back and a number of posters insisted it never happened even though it since then has emerged that short term parking at the Merchent's quay centre has increased since the car ban and this has had a clear impact on all traffic trying to enter the city centre from that side of the city. Seems to me a lot of posters on this thread only want to listen to news that suits their own agenda.
I've had to deliver to Patrick's Street in the past and it's usually very hard to find a space. I agree with what you're saying - that short-term parking can be productive for the shops - the reality is that most people will "only be a minute" regardless how long they are and it's normally hard to find a space. One glance at the mess that is the airport "setdown only" area will show you how people abuse short term parking, and unfortunately everyone suffers as a result.
As others have said, only a small fraction of drivers on Patrick's Street had it as their end destination also, so retailers were effectively losing out because of the people hogging the bays and blocking up the street, but this is not something they focused on.
Giving a personal account of what you saw is literally the definition of anecdotal. It doesn't mean that you're not being believed, it just means that numerical evidence of any kind would be preferable. Of course there will be negative impacts to car bans, for instance the elderly or infirm can no longer be dropped near to the door of a shop. There are always going to be negative impacts, it's not all "good" just as it's not all "bad". But anecdotal information is anecdotal information.macraignil wrote: »I think it's ridiculous that anyone who mentions a negative impact of the car ban is labeled as just providing anecdotal information
This is true.macraignil wrote: »Seems to me a lot of posters on this thread only want to listen to news that suits their own agenda.0 -
Advertisement
-
The day before cafe Velo were saying their trade was 10% up. There's thousands of office jobs coming on stream in the city centre and traders need to adapt as public transport needs to be prioritised.
All over the world people are prioritised in urban spaces. If a shop in town is depending on through traffic they need to get real, it reminds me of towns objecting to motorway bypasses 15 years ago. The city centre should be an end destination and has plenty of capacity in multistory car parks for those who choose to drive.
I don't think the Cafe Velo statement has actually helped matters really, in reality their trade has the potential to increase because they are not directly affected by the closure. IF and that's a big if, people were driving to Patrick street for coffee, Cafe Velo would offer a location they could still drive to, but as I say, IF.
The price hike by Merchants Quay (up from €2.40 to €3.00 per hour or part thereof) is a disgrace especially coming up to Christmas and is another reason people aren't coming to town, with the car ban potentially getting the blame.
I've never really 'road' parked in town and always used Merchants, but refuse to do so now - before I realised the rise, 2hrs 10 cost me €9 !. That's my family of five not going to Patrick street as a result and maybe wrongfully included in the car ban casualities.0 -
macraignil wrote: »Can't see why an empty road in the city centre should be the objective and if that's what the car ban has created then it's little wonder traders in the area are complaining. They depend on passing trade for earning a living so I can't see why they would be complaining unless the car ban is having a negative impact on their business.
but as I have done in the past collected the food and drove home to eat it while it's still warm,
Just a pointer to add to the conversation_
There is no parking for cars on Patrick street at all. Passing trade would suggest pulling up for "2mins" and hopping out. That is illegal. It adds to gridlock.
However, I am curious to see how the ban on Patrick street effects the by streets, and therefore the willingness of customers to come to town through that gridlock. Even though I'd ideally like this to be a success - I am still out on what effect those areas are taking long term.macraignil wrote: »I think it's ridiculous that anyone who mentions a negative impact of the car ban is labeled as just providing anecdotal information. I've mentioned being stuck in traffic on a bus before reaching Patrick street just a few pages back and a number of posters insisted it never happened even though it since then has emerged that short term parking at the Merchent's quay centre has increased since the car ban and this has had a clear impact on all traffic trying to enter the city centre from that side of the city. Seems to me a lot of posters on this thread only want to listen to news that suits their own agenda.
No doubt there is defensiveness on both sides. To be clear - I personally believe the story.
however like the other poster, I'd like to see it repeated so we know its not a rare event. If you get to that point in convincing others then the conversation opens up.
Some tolerance on both sides wouldn't go astray. Just as long as either side doesn't fire up on emotional antidotal evidence and present it as if its Fact. That just get's the whole thread fired up.0 -
hans aus dtschl wrote: »Giving a personal account of what you saw is literally the definition of anecdotal. It doesn't mean that you're not being believed, it just means that numerical evidence of any kind would be preferable. .
I disagree. A number of anti-car posters on this thread have not alone said that they "[don't] mean that they [don't believe] traders' accounts", but have outright suggested that most/all evidence critical of the car ban is deliberate lies. Just on this very page, someone has suggested that John Grace's took their picture early in the morning and then pretended that they took it in the afternoon. Everyone has also glossed over the rest of the John Grace's Twitter thread - they've presented plenty of empirical data showing that their takings are down, analysed week by week, year by year etc.0 -
Padraig Mor wrote: »I disagree. A number of anti-car posters on this thread have not alone said that they "[don't] mean that they [don't believe] traders' accounts", but have outright suggested that most/all evidence critical of the car ban is deliberate lies. Just on this very page, someone has suggested that John Grace's took their picture early in the morning and then pretended that they took it in the afternoon. Everyone has also glossed over the rest of the John Grace's Twitter thread - they've presented plenty of empirical data showing that their takings are down, analysed week by week, year by year etc.
Again, you appear to mix coincidence and causality. I can believe it happened, but that it's anecdotal evidence. "Anecdotal" does not mean "not believed".
It's the same thing with "not believing traders accounts". I can believe John Grace's takings are down and that it coincides with the car ban. But I can also believe that it can coincide with an awful lot of other things and it doesn't prove correlation.
John Grace might be selling a product that's declining in popularity, might be suffering from increased competition, his customers might consist entirely of people driving on Patrick's Street, or may be dissuaded from visiting his shop because of ancillary knock-on effects of the ban. Or (just to include it) he could be suffering from a confirmation bias himself. How do you sift between all of these possibilities? Probably only by surveying the customers, and even that's not ideal because people are very susceptible to biases.
But here's another example of coincidence for you: most modern cities are trying to increase sustainable transport modal share because time after time, country after country, cities' ability to be financially viable has improved after private vehicles were removed from the thoroughfares.
As for glossing over the John Grace's twitter thread, I can only give my own account which is that I didn't read it because I don't go on twitter: I only read what was copied here.0 -
Padraig Mor wrote: »I disagree. A number of anti-car posters on this thread have not alone said that they "[don't] mean that they [don't believe] traders' accounts", but have outright suggested that most/all evidence critical of the car ban is deliberate lies. Just on this very page, someone has suggested that John Grace's took their picture early in the morning and then pretended that they took it in the afternoon. Everyone has also glossed over the rest of the John Grace's Twitter thread - they've presented plenty of empirical data showing that their takings are down, analysed week by week, year by year etc.
I'm glad you mentioned at the beginning "a number of" and not a blanket "others"
More and more discussions are based around boxing people in "you're either fully for or fully against attitude" and if you are unsure or finding your way that isn't acceptable.
Sorry for the segway. Just liked to directly thank you for doing that.0 -
hans aus dtschl wrote: »It's the same thing with "not believing traders accounts". I can believe John Grace's takings are down and that it coincides with the car ban. But I can also believe that it can coincide with an awful lot of other things and it doesn't prove correlation.
While I agree with you, be careful with your language. Smart words need to be understood before being used.
If something coincides, there is correlation. By definition. Nevertheless Correlation does not imply causation.0 -
While I agree with you, be careful with your language. Smart words need to be understood before being used.
If something coincides, there is correlation. By definition. Nevertheless Correlation does not imply causation.
Causation would be better than correlation, agreed, my english is letting me down, but I think the point is a reasonable one.
The city traders can be right about the car ban coinciding with bad trade for them, but we don't have a clear picture as to the cause. I'd argue that we don't have a clear picture of the benefits of the 3-hour car ban either, personally.0 -
beer enigma wrote: »I don't think the Cafe Velo statement has actually helped matters really, in reality their trade has the potential to increase because they are not directly affected by the closure. IF and that's a big if, people were driving to Patrick street for coffee, Cafe Velo would offer a location they could still drive to, but as I say, IF.
The price hike by Merchants Quay (up from €2.40 to €3.00 per hour or part thereof) is a disgrace especially coming up to Christmas and is another reason people aren't coming to town, with the car ban potentially getting the blame.
I've never really 'road' parked in town and always used Merchants, but refuse to do so now - before I realised the rise, 2hrs 10 cost me €9 !. That's my family of five not going to Patrick street as a result and maybe wrongfully included in the car ban casualities.
Sounds to me that if someone was actually making a count of customers now not going to Patrick street because of the car ban directly or indirectly your family of five should correctly be included as "casualties".
Not wanting to add another anecdote, but some people also in the past could get collected with goods purchased in the Patrick street area by a private car and this no longer being an option on Patrick street does present another group of so called "casualties" to the Patrick street car ban for the traders there.0 -
macraignil wrote: »Sounds to me that if someone was actually making a count of customers now not going to Patrick street because of the car ban directly or indirectly your family of five should correctly be included as "casualties".
Not wanting to add another anecdote, but some people also in the past could get collected with goods purchased in the Patrick street area by a private car and this no longer being an option on Patrick street does present another group of so called "casualties" to the Patrick street car ban for the traders there.
That's what I see as the biggest drawback of the car ban. Without big increases in the public transport effort, people will flat out avoid the city.
Here's another anecdote: over the jazz weekend, I was passed-by at a bus stop. The bus was 30 mins late and full, even though we were only two stops from the start of the line. 30 minutes wait for the next bus. So what did everyone at the stop do: private cars. There needs to be carrot and stick, otherwise the city will just send people to the out-of-city retail parks.0 -
Advertisement
-
macraignil wrote: »Sounds to me that if someone was actually making a count of customers now not going to Patrick street because of the car ban directly or indirectly your family of five should correctly be included as "casualties".
Not wanting to add another anecdote, but some people also in the past could get collected with goods purchased in the Patrick street area by a private car and this no longer being an option on Patrick street does present another group of so called "casualties" to the Patrick street car ban for the traders there.
Not sure I agree, even with the car ban I was still a weekly visitor to Patrick Street. The only thing that has stopped me going is the car park price increase.
I find Park and ride just hassle with three teens in tow and I never used Q Park because of the cost. Paul Street is hassle to get in and out of so Merchants Quay was my only destination. €3 / hour is just too much and I'm discovering Wilton and Midleton more so as a result. Its personal choice0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement