Are Congestion Charges Appropriate for Dublin Traffic Chaos?

c0y0te

So - what do yez all think... will congestion charges make a difference, should they be introduced here? Vote and have your say in the matter.

c0y0te

ando

no they should not. I drive in and out of town, averaging 3 times a day each way. To be honest I don't see traffic being that bad. Course its heavier during rush hour but its not at a standstill, unless there's floods :rolleyes:

Johnmb

I think the best way to sort Dublin's traffic problems would be to hire a competent director of trafic, and sack the idiot who currently has the job. Get someone who actually drives, and who can come up with ideas to keep trafic moving rather than just trying to make driving so hard in the hopes that people will give up trying. So, no I would not support (nor pay) charges to drive into my own home city.

silverside

yes.

The plastic bag tax worked - encouraging people not to create unnecessary rubbish.
The London congestion charge worked.
The closing off of O'Connell St southbound has made the city a nicer place to walk/cycle/get the bus.

People will change their behaviour when it hits them in the pocket. Some people need to be in the city for business, many could get the bus as easily. At the moment road space is limited, hence it is rationed by whoever is willing to queue in traffic. A better way to ration it is by who is willing to pay for it.

I think your comments re the director of traffic are uncalled for. With a limited amount of road space, there is *no* magic way to 'get traffic flowing' without a shift in passenger numbers from cars to pubic transport.

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
I think the best way to sort Dublin's traffic problems would be to hire a competent director of trafic, and sack the idiot who currently has the job. Get someone who actually drives, and who can come up with ideas to keep trafic moving rather than just trying to make driving so hard in the hopes that people will give up trying. So, no I would not support (nor pay) charges to drive into my own home city.

How about you doing the job then? John for DOT!

Honestly, having met him, he gets bashed by everyone, because they are all running their own agenda (usually aggressively will little consideration for others). If you have ideas then make a submission If you want me to pass that submission to him, then I can (I will be sitting on the Transport and Traffic Strategic Planning Committee).

If you want to judge the performance of his policies, look at the QBCs and how they have taken cars off the road (bus traffic through Donnybrook was up 232% over 3 years), the fact you can now get parking in the city and that while in 1996 53 people died on the city streets, this was down to 14 in 2001.

And why should it be someone who drives? When maybe about a third of the people in the city drive?

If motorists had it all their own way, there would be a few hundred extra dead people in the city.

Johnmb

First a responce to silverside re. his comment:

I think your comments re the director of traffic are uncalled for. With a limited amount of road space, there is *no* magic way to 'get traffic flowing' without a shift in passenger numbers from cars to pubic transport.

B/S. There are not that many cars on the roads of Dublin when compared to other world cities. The problems with trafic here are due to bad road management, not numbers. Those who say that the problems are due to the amount of cars are simply making excuses (or being taken in by them).

Now, Victor raised a few points, so here goes

How about you doing the job then?

Well, I couldn't do much worse than the present guy, could I.

Honestly, having met him, he gets bashed by everyone, because they are all running their own agenda (usually aggressively will little consideration for others).

I really don't care. His agenda is supposed to be managing trafic, not pandering to others. If he is more worried about making friends or future possible promotions (i.e. he is afraid to upset someone else's agenda), then he shouldn't be in the job.

And why should it be someone who drives?

Because someone who drives would have a much better idea as to how to keep trafic flowing, and not to make the same stupid time/money wasting errors that have been made.

If motorists had it all their own way, there would be a few hundred extra dead people in the city.

B/S. Only the ignorant trying to make excuses for a lack of a trafic policy come out with these things IMO.

If you have ideas then make a submission

Here's an idea, he should start using some common sense if he isn't going to quit and let someone competent do the job. Here's a few examples:

A couple of months ago they decided to block the right turn from Terenure Place to the Rathfarnham Road. Any driver could have told him that it was impractical (how else were they to get onto the Rathfarnham Road without having to cut through housing estates that simply don't have the capacity to handle the trafic), unworkable (unless a Garda was there permenently, people would still turn right), and outright dangerous (the right turn lane is directly in line with oncoming trafic from the other side of the road, giving about 3-5 yards in which the two lanes would have to merge without causing a major accident). This was eventually cancelled due to objections from local businesses, residents and Dublin Bus. Anybody with half a working brain would have gotten that feedback BEFORE making the decision, thus saving the money on the signs that had been put up telling people there was no longer a right turn there.

Another example, on Terenure Road West (which is one of the main arteries). At the junction with Greenlea Road, the lights are set up to change the minute a car approaches on Greenlea Road. As a result, you are often lucky to see three cars get through those lights at a time on the Terenure Road (that's assuming the third car breaks the lights by ignoring the amber). What genius came up with that idea? Greenlea is a secondary road, let them wait a couple of minutes. The Terenure Road should have the priority as that is the road that the trafic gets backed up on as a result of those lights outside of rush hour.

Another example of money wasting needed? How about the cycle lanes on the road heading up to Whitechapel? For those who don't know the road, it is wide enough for two cars to pass each other, just. There simply isn't enough room for the cycle lanes, so they have to be ignored (either that or drive in the middle of the road with half your car on the wrong side). They are completely pointless, they don't give the cyclists any extra room, they just wasted a lot of money putting them there and caused a lot of hassle to both drivers and cyclists when they were being put in. It doesn't take a genius to work out when a road simply isn't wide enough for cycle lanes to serve any purpose.

I could go on, but this post is long enough and I'm sure there are many more examples that others can think of.

c0y0te

I decided to wait until others had posted before I threw in my opinions, since I was the one who started the poll... so here goes.

1) I am opposed to paying to drive through the city as I do feel it is just another form of revenue generation / double taxation (just like toll bridges that go on costing us money long after they have passed their profit threshold).

2) I believe the last few years have seen a 'penalise the motorist' strategy in play, rather than actually trying to come up with creative and realistic solutions to the traffic problems in this city. It is far too simplistic to think that by making life worse for motorists, the traffic problem will simply cease to be a problem. Try addressing the cause, rather than the symptom!!

3) I've travelled a lot around this planet of ours, and seen some very good and solid solutions to deal with traffic, all of which take into account a very good (and cost effective / high quality) public infrastructure and transport system, which of course we don't have.

As for the competence or effectiveness of the current 'management'... you only have to look at some of the decisions lately to see how out of touch they are:-

1) Traffic Signs (Incomprehensible, costly, and now back on the roads with a new look!)
2) Port Tunnel (Don't get me started on that one!)
3) LUAS - Yeah, lets kill 50% of road space and spend years constructing what amounts to a tourist tram, instead of building a useful metro or monorail or even trying to fix the issues with the current light rail services.
4) Every Toll Bridge (Pure profit after usually 10 months to 1 year) and yet we the motorists continue to pay, and queue, and pay endlessly, and needlessly.
5) Every Motorway Construction Project - Delayed, Run over budget, badly managed and costing the tax payer even more than pledged in the first place, not to mention the grief experienced for months and years as the roads are jammed with the construction works.

This isn't sour grapes, this is just years of pointless expense grinding me down, while I sit in ever increasing traffic jams.

c0y0te

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
I could go on, but this post is long enough

Can you delete some of the blank space in your post?

Originally posted by Johnmb
The problems with trafic here are due to bad road management, not numbers. Those who say that the problems are due to the amount of cars are simply making excuses (or being taken in by them).

There is a multitude of problems from a road network laid out on historical lines (all too often triangles not rectangles) and designed in an era before the car. People don’t obey the law and all too often people are more interested in what suits them as opposed to what is best for everyone. The low density of the city and corresponding urban sprawl is a problem that has developed over more than 50 years - you can’t expect anyone to solve it magically overnight. Then you have school runs, a religious 9-5 work attitude …. the list goes on.

I’m not making excuses, I am reading the situation as I see it.

Originally posted by Johnmb
The problems with trafic here are due to bad road management, not numbers.

Actually numbers is a big part of the problem, we have a car culture and many car users are of the belief that they must use their car for every journey. Look at say Brussels or Cologne which have similar populations to Dublin - a different transport and planning culture means few people need or use their cars in central areas.

Originally posted by Johnmb
Well, I couldn't do much worse than the present guy, could I.

I wonder if you would, you seem to be more interested in either getting angry and / or saying "me, me, me" than solving problems.

Originally posted by Johnmb
I really don't care. His agenda is supposed to be managing trafic, not pandering to others. If he is more worried about making friends or future possible promotions (i.e. he is afraid to upset someone else's agenda), then he shouldn't be in the job.

From the couple of hours I spent with him, he doesn’t pander to people. Who are you suggesting he is pandering to? Who says he has any interests in “making friends or future possible promotions”? The objective is engagement, not confrontation. Engagement is very different to pandering. This engagement (councillors, NRA, Irish Wheelchair Association, Dublin Cycling Campaign and others) allows him to devise, drive and implement a positive agenda.

Originally posted by Johnmb
Because someone who drives would have a much better idea as to how to keep trafic flowing, and not to make the same stupid time/money wasting errors that have been made.

Really? Then how come there are so many fúckwits on the road if they have IQs of 130, degrees in Economics and Traffic Management, certificates in advanced driving, combined with the gift of 20/20 foresight?

Originally posted by Johnmb
B/S. Only the ignorant trying to make excuses for a lack of a trafic policy come out with these things IMO.

What are you trying to say here?

Originally posted by Johnmb
Here's an idea, he should start using some common sense if he isn't going to quit and let someone competent do the job.

How about dealing with the issues and not the personalities?

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
A couple of months ago they decided to block the right turn from Terenure Place to the Rathfarnham Road. Any driver could have told him that it was impractical … unworkable … and outright dangerous.

I haven’t used this junction in quite a while, but even 5 years ago it was a trouble spot. For those of you who don’t know it, there is a double junction, one with 3 routes, the other with 4 about 50 metres apart (map attached). Looking at it I would also ban that turn (circa 135 degrees), virtually no traffic “has to” turn right at this junction (follow the yellow bits on the map). As regards unworkable, what is the problem with obeying the rules of the road? And dangerous? Surely stopping people obstructing traffic as they turn right is safe, not dangerous?

Originally posted by Johnmb
This was eventually cancelled due to objections from local businesses, residents and Dublin Bus

Which shows they are willing to listen to people.

Originally posted by Johnmb
Anybody with half a working brain would have gotten that feedback BEFORE making the decision, thus saving the money on the signs that had been put up telling people there was no longer a right turn there.

You can’t ask everyone before you put up every sign, if they did they would be accused of being ineffectual and cumbersome and a “No right turn” sign can be re-used.

Originally posted by Johnmb
Another example, on Terenure Road West (which is one of the main arteries).

Actually it is a minor (it is quite narrow) circumferential route rather than major radial route.

Originally posted by Johnmb
At the junction with Greenlea Road, the lights are set up to change the minute a car approaches on Greenlea Road.

Possibly an error in the programming of that one set of lights, why don’t you phone / write and tell tehm about it.

Originally posted by Johnmb
How about the cycle lanes on the road heading up to Whitechapel

Where is Whitechapel? Which road? Do you the Whitechapel Estate in Blanchardstown? If this is what you are talking about, the Director of Traffic has no influence on them as they are outside the city.

Originally posted by Johnmb
For those who don't know the road, it is wide enough for two cars to pass each other, just. There simply isn't enough room for the cycle lanes, so they have to be ignored

Are these mandatory cycle lanes (solid white lines)? If so, I would query it. If the line is broken, it merely gives the cyclist priority.

Victor

Just remember that any possible Congestion Zones in Dublin are likely to be along the lines of the attached map and that several new bridges will be provided to allow more alternatives.

Originally posted by c0y0te
1) I am opposed to paying to drive through the city as I do feel it is just another form of revenue generation / double taxation (just like toll bridges that go on costing us money long after they have passed their profit threshold).

How is it double taxation? It's a user charge. Would you consider a bus fare double taxation or paying you ESB bill double taxation? Also it is almost completely avoidable. The objective is not revenue generation, but traffic reduction. Why don't you just take a different route if you do not want to drive through the congestion area?

Many toll contracts (a) contribute to general government income (b) reduce the toll operator’s fee once a certain level of traffic has been reached.

Originally posted by c0y0te
2) I believe the last few years have seen a 'penalise the motorist' strategy in play, rather than actually trying to come up with creative and realistic solutions to the traffic problems in this city. It is far too simplistic to think that by making life worse for motorists, the traffic problem will simply cease to be a problem. Try addressing the cause, rather than the symptom!!

Cars (and car users problems) are much of the cause. And substantial imagination is being used (Luas, Metro, QBCs, etc.). One of the objectives is to make car users pay the full cost of using their car (remember work place parking isn't taxed / paid for, petrol is cheaper here than most of Europe and if Irish road space was actually priced, it would have a capital value in the order of €100bn). It isn't 'penalise the motorist', it is make the motorist pay the true cost of motoring.

Originally posted by c0y0te
3) I've travelled a lot around this planet of ours, and seen some very good and solid solutions to deal with traffic, all of which take into account a very good (and cost effective / high quality) public infrastructure and transport system, which of course we don't have.

And which is being worked on. But given you attachment to your car, will you use public transport as it is improved?

Originally posted by c0y0te
As for the competence or effectiveness of the current 'management'... you only have to look at some of the decisions lately to see how out of touch they are:-

Which management? Luas, the Director of Traffic, the NRA are all separate organisations and none is to blame for the other’s operations. Maybe write to Seamus Brennan the minister.

Originally posted by c0y0te
1) Traffic Signs (Incomprehensible, costly, and now back on the roads with a new look!)

Then kindly learn how to read a road sign in conjunction with a map. The sign cost something like €20,000 out of government expenditure of something like €30,000,000,000.

Originally posted by c0y0te
2) Port Tunnel (Don't get me started on that one!)

Why not? Are you afraid of not winning the argument?

Originally posted by c0y0te
3) LUAS - Yeah, lets kill 50% of road space and spend years constructing what amounts to a tourist tram, instead of building a useful metro or monorail or even trying to fix the issues with the current light rail services.

Out of something like 92,000km or roads, Luas will be on-street for approximately 5km, most on side streets. And how is it a tourist tram if it will take a lot of traffic off it’s routes?

Originally posted by c0y0te
4) Every Toll Bridge (Pure profit after usually 10 months to 1 year) and yet we the motorists continue to pay, and queue, and pay endlessly, and needlessly.

Then why doesn’t the AA buy the bridges?

Originally posted by c0y0te
5) Every Motorway Construction Project - Delayed, Run over budget, badly managed and costing the tax payer even more than pledged in the first place, not to mention the grief experienced for months and years as the roads are jammed with the construction works.

These pledges (I think the word you use is overstated) were political and ambiguous. Part of the problem is the political pressure (from grassroots up) is to build huge amounts of motorway excessively fast (does Carlow town really need a motorway?), this is why there are mistakes, revisions and excessive inflation. If you think you are so wonderful, why don’t you manage the works?

Originally posted by c0y0te
This isn't sour grapes, this is just years of pointless expense grinding me down, while I sit in ever increasing traffic jams.

Then become part of the solution, not the problem.

Johnmb

Can you delete some of the blank space in your post?

I tried to delete the line spaces after the quote, but it doesn't seem to have made much difference.
{Edit: I tried again and it seemed to make a difference, learn something new every day}

.... - you can’t expect anyone to solve it magically overnight.

Nobody expects him to do that, what I expect is for him to use some common sense. Before doing stupid things (like the Terenure right turn), check to see if it makes sense. Before removing roads from route A to B, ensure that you have alternative routes already set up and ready to go. A classic example was a few years ago when Luas work caused all Airport traffic to be diverted from the Four Courts/North King Street area to O'Connell Street. At the SAME time the capacity of O'Connell Street Northbound was haved by a widened path at the GPO and preliminary work on the Spike. Does it really take a genius to postpone such things until you are no longer diverting traffic up that street?

Actually numbers is a big part of the problem, we have a car culture and many car users are of the belief that they must use their car for every journey.

That's because most have to. Give them a viable alternative and they'll stop. The viable alternative should be provided first, not penalising stupidity trying to force the cars off the roads before any viable alternative exists.

I wonder if you would, you seem to be more interested in either getting angry and / or saying "me, me, me" than solving problems.

I'm not angry, and where have I said "me, me, me"? I've gone on about the Director of Traffic's stupidity, most of the examples I gave don't effect me personally.

This engagement (councillors, NRA, Irish Wheelchair Association, Dublin Cycling Campaign and others) allows him to devise, drive and implement a positive agenda.

If it allows him to do this, then why hasn't he?

Really? Then how come there are so many fúckwits on the road if they have IQs of 130, degrees in Economics and Traffic Management, certificates in advanced driving, combined with the gift of 20/20 foresight?

I didn't say everyone who drove was more qualified, but there are many people who would equal his other qualification, and they actually drive, so they would have an idea as to what will work and what won't. Going to the Terenure example again, all it would have taken was for someone to drive around the area and they'd have known it wasn't workable.

What are you trying to say here?

I thought it was quite clear. Only people trying to detract from the fact that the Director of Traffic can't do his job and instead wants to force people off the roads to make up for it say such things as you had previously said.

How about dealing with the issues and not the personalities?

I did, how about leaving out the soundbites and dealing with them?

I haven’t used this junction in quite a while, but even 5 years ago it was a trouble spot. For those of you who don’t know it, there is a double junction, one with 3 routes, the other with 4 about 50 metres apart (map attached). Looking at it I would also ban that turn (circa 135 degrees),

You are looking at the wrong junction, it is a 90 degree right turn from the green Terenure Place onto the unnamed white Rathfarnham Road, NOT onto the Templeogue road (which has never been allowed).

virtually no traffic “has to” turn right at this junction (follow the yellow bits on the map).

Yep, there's a good idea, let's divert even more traffic through a housing estate that already has more traffic than it can handle. Are you sure you're not actually the Director of Traffic and not just someone who knows him as claimed?

And dangerous? Surely stopping people obstructing traffic as they turn right is safe, not dangerous?

I thought you said you'd used the junction before? If that were true then you'd know that the right turning cars don't obstruct traffic as they have their own lane and feeder light. Making that lane go straight ahead into the oncoming traffic from Terenure Road East would be dangerous.

Which shows they are willing to listen to people. You can’t ask everyone before you put up every sign, if they did they would be accused of being ineffectual and cumbersome and a “No right turn” sign can be re-used.

You can gage reactions, you can wait until after the likes of Dublin Bus report back with possible alternative bus routes BEFORE annoncing the changes. As for the signs being reused, they'd have to be changed first (dates etc.), and the poles they were mounted on are still in the ground. They were a waste of money, money that could have been spent on something usefull.

Actually it is a minor (it is quite narrow) circumferential route rather than major radial route.

It is one of the main roads linking the Naas Road with Terenure, Rathgar and Rathmines (amoung other places).

Where is Whitechapel? Which road?

I can't remember the name of the road, it is the small road next to the Yellow House in Rathfarnham that you'd take towards Larch Hill etc.

Are these mandatory cycle lanes (solid white lines)? If so, I would query it. If the line is broken, it merely gives the cyclist priority.

It was a waste of money. The cyclist has priority in any case. Ripping up the sides of the road to put down the fancy red tar for the cycle lane caused obstruction and was totally pointless as it provided not one inch of extra space for the cyclists.

It isn't 'penalise the motorist', it is make the motorist pay the true cost of motoring.

B/S. The motorist pays more in taxes (road tax, fuel duty, VRT, VAT, etc.) than is ever spent on Irish roads. We already subsidise other areas of government spending, why should we have to further subsidise them? We pay more than our fare share fore the use we get of the roads, and the Director of Traffic should be concentrating on getting traffic flow moving and providing alternatives to cars BEFORE he starts trying to price cars off the road.

Seth Brundle

if they got rid of many of the right turns around the city it would improve traffic flow!

Silent Bob

Originally posted by Victor
And why should it be someone who drives? When maybe about a third of the people in the city drive?

The guy refuses to even meet with people concerning the use of bus lanes by motorbikes, despite lobbying from the Gardaí!

If he really wanted to remove cars from the road imagine the effectiveness of telling people that not only can they filter through traffic if they get a powered two wheeler, but they can also use the bus lanes while everybody else is sitting in traffic.

IMHO that would entice far more people to commute by PTW , which are more environmentally friendly as well as taking up far less road space than a car.

Imagine how much nicer it would be if half the people currently in cars took bikes to work. At that stage you probably wouldn't even need to go in a bus lane and the bus service would improve for those of us who live in areas unserviced by qbc's

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
It is one of the main roads linking the Naas Road with Terenure, Rathgar and Rathmines (amoung other places).

You wouldn't be turning right then would you?

Do you want to go to and do a diagram? See attached.

Johnmb

You wouldn't be turning right then would you?

You seem to be getting confused. We are discussing two different issues. One is the lights at the junction of Terenure Road West and Greenlea Road, the other is the right turn from Terenure Place onto the Rathfarnham Road. The map you provided is wrong, as Terenure Place is not at such an angle to Terenure Road North and Rathfarnham Road, nor is it as straight onto Templeogue Road. For that matter, Terenure Roads(TR) North and West are not at that angle to each other either, they at almost a perfect 90 degrees, and the Rathfarnham Road is a straight continuation of TR North, and TPlace is more or less straight on to TR West, thus meaning that the right turn in question is approximately 90 degrees. That is actually a very poor map that is attached, you'd be better off sticking with an OSI map, or take a drive up that way and see for yourself. Although, I think your method of judging the roads is probably the exact same as the director of traffics, thus all his incredibly bad decisions, and proof that a driver would be better for the job as he/she would drive up to the areas to see what they actually look like and judge what impact any proposed changes will have.

Victor

Want to look at the satellite photo?

From http://www.mapflow.ie/webdemo/demomap.asp?click=zoomin&map=transform&x=MzE0NDIz&y=MjMwMTcx&z=MTE=&hnme=&hadd=VEVSRU5VUkUgUExBQ0UsIFRFUkVOVVJFLCBEVUJMSU4=&hclss=

Johnmb

There is something very strange about that angle. I have turned left from Terenure Road North onto Terenure Road East hundreds of times, and it has never appeared to be such a sharp turn at ground level. It is an old photo, and there are currently a lot of man-made islands at the junction which may be the reason for the difference in appearance of angles at ground level when compared to the photo, although the one thing that it does show fairly well is that if the traffic in the right turn lane on Terenure Place (where the bus is) was to continue straight out into the junction, it would indeed cause a head on collision with the traffic travelling in the opposite direction from Terenure Road East. So for all the aerial photos and maps, it still requires someone to actually drive down to the area and look, thus supporting my earlier opinion that the current director should be sacked and someone else given an opportunity (preferably a driver).

Hyzepher

I am a driver and I use that junction a lot - not for turning right tough!

I have to say that the right turn should be banned - there is no reason for anyone to use that right turn to go down towards Rathfarnham. If they are coming from the KCR then there are better alternative routes that dont require access through an estate. For the most part drivers turning right at that junction have made bad route planning.

The cars electing to turn right completely block the flow of traffic as it only takes 4 or 5 cars to back up to the previous lights.

Hyzepher

Johnmb

The cars electing to turn right completely block the flow of traffic as it only takes 4 or 5 cars to back up to the previous lights.

It takes a bit more traffic than that to back up to the next set of lights, and those cars turning right are in there own lane. I go through that junction every morning (straight onto Terenure Road East) and have never been held up by cars wanting to turn right onto the Rathfarnham Road. I have however had a few close calls with some idiots who were in the right lane and decided to go straight ahead. As for other ways to get to Rathfarnham without going through an estate, it is impossible from the KCR(without taking a major detour). You'd have to go along Wainsfort Road (which is in an estate), and that road already has about as much traffic as it can handle due to people going to Tallaght and the shopping centre end of Rathfarnham. The Terenure Place to Rathfarnham Road is the handiest way to get to Nutgrove, Yellow House areas, as well as areas on the Terenure side of the Dodder.

Johnmb

I've just been thinking about the right turn issue, and realised that it has gone off the topic that originally raised it. It doesn't matter if some people feel it should be banned as the majority of residents and businesses in the area, and Dublin Bus, agreed with me about it being unworkable. The reason I originally brought it up was as an example of the Director of Traffic needlessly wasting money. There were three or four signs put up on Terenure Road West telling people that the turn would be banned on 01/02/03, and I assume the same again on the Templeogue Road. Those signs had to be made, then someone had to be paid to dig several holes and cement in some poles to put them on. Then someone had to be paid to go back to them and change the date to 10/02/03. Then finally, due to all the negative feedback, someone had to be paid to go and take the signs back down. My original point was that anybody with some common sense would have got the feedback first, thereby saving the money involved in making, erecting, and then removing the signs.

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
I can't remember the name of the road, it is the small road next to the Yellow House in Rathfarnham that you'd take towards Larch Hill etc.

Willbrook Road? This is not in the city council area and the Director of Traffic has no influence (although in some areas the central traffic control will control traffic light sequences out to the M50)

silverside

please tell us what are the alternative routes if the right turn you mention were banned?

Coming from walkinstown via KCR to rathfarnham/dundrum/etc, the logical route takes that right turn in terenure. I've never seen it holding up traffic, then again I would only be driving that way at evenings and weekends.

Victor

Look at the first map I posted with the alternative routes in yellow (?)

Johnmb

Look at the first map I posted with the alternative routes in yellow (?)

Geez, you really do fit in with the Director of traffic. You exercise no common sense, AND ignore people when they point things out to you. Like the fact that those great alternative routes in yellow of yours go through housing estates that are already overcrowded with traffic. You had the cheek to say "If motorists had it all their own way, there would be a few hundred extra dead people in the city" earlier on, yet it is you who seems to have no regard for the safety of children making their way to school or out playing by wanting to encourange even more traffic to go through their housing estates rather than by trying to encourage the bulk of cars to stick to the main routes. But by your other comments, such as:
"And dangerous? Surely stopping people obstructing traffic as they turn right is safe, not dangerous?" regarding the Terenure Place junction, and:
"Actually it is a minor (it is quite narrow) circumferential route rather than major radial route" regarding Terenure Road West, so it is quite clear that your great pronouncements seem to be based on map reading rather than any ground work. As a result, I have to re-evaluate my assessment of the Director of Traffic. Not only do I now feel that he should be replaced, but if you are a typical member of the Transport and Traffic Strategic Planning Committee, that body needs to be replaced too as they are no better than the Director.

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
You had the cheek to say "If motorists had it all their own way, there would be a few hundred extra dead people in the city" earlier on, yet it is you who seems to have no regard for the safety of children making their way to school or out playing by wanting to encourange even more traffic to go through their housing estates rather than by trying to encourage the bulk of cars to stick to the main routes.

Wainsfort / Fortfield Road is as wide as Terenure Road West and has better visibility as it has grass verges that TRW doesn't. It is a main road from Harold's Cross to Spawell via KCR.

Johnmb

Wainsfort / Fortfield Road is as wide as Terenure Road West and has better visibility as it has grass verges that TRW doesn't. It is a main road from Harold's Cross to Spawell via KCR.

It is a wide road going through a housing estate that is already overloaded with Tallaght bound traffic. Also, in order to get back to the Rathfarnham Road from it, you must turn left at the roundabout at the top of Wainsfort and drive down by a local primary school route. Again, along an already busy road for traffic heading to the shopping centre side of Rathfarnham. So, how do you justify sending all that extra traffic through a housing estate and along a school run? As for the grass verges, they don't do pedestrians much good when they are crossing the roads, or don't you care about them?

Victor

I don't agree with the tone of this article, especially the bit that implies that everyone in the DLRCC area (only) will be affected by it and that this group of above average earners should rise up against unfair taxation. :rolleyes:

Johnmb

I would tend to agree with the basic underlying premise of the article. If you want to cut down on the number of cars, then provide an alternative. Trying to price people off the roads will not work, and will cost the council a lot of money in legal fees (I for one will never pay to drive into my own city along public highways). It also points out one other major flaw in Dublin's traffic planning, one you first pointed out to me regarding the cycles lanes up by the Yellow House, i.e. the Dublin Director of Traffic is not really the Dublin director, he is just a director of a small part of Dublin. Dublin needs an overall department that will deal with traffic as a whole in the county, as closing down routes through the centre will effect traffic on the outskirts.

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
Another example, on Terenure Road West (which is one of the main arteries). At the junction with Greenlea Road, the lights are set up to change the minute a car approaches on Greenlea Road. As a result, you are often lucky to see three cars get through those lights at a time on the Terenure Road (that's assuming the third car breaks the lights by ignoring the amber). What genius came up with that idea? Greenlea is a secondary road, let them wait a couple of minutes.

I spoke to someone and they said talk to Traffic Control.

Traffic FreePhone no.: 1800 29 39 49

Johnmb

I spoke to someone and they said talk to Traffic Control.

Traffic FreePhone no.: 1800 29 39 49

Thanks.

Victor

Originally posted by Johnmb
Thanks.

NP