nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Dundrum Main St one way

Pythagorean

The Council have sprung this on us without much prior notice. Dundrum Main St is now one way city bound. Not only this, but it appears that traffic is now prohibited from going up the hill at the crossroads,( Stillorgan bound, past the Garda station). The Council claim that there is a bypass which can take the diverted traffic, but anyone familiar with the traffic situation at the roundabouts near the Dundrum Town Centre, particularly on wet weekends in the Winter, would avoid this area like the plague. The 14 bus will now have to follow a tortuous diversion route where before it was a straight run up the Main St. onto the Ballinteer road. The council claim this is in response to the Covid situation??? The logic of it eludes me, anyone else have an opinion on this ?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ted1

punisher5112 wrote: »

For a council that has come out to say they are struggling and they must charge the full property tax o find that laughable in itself but hell the mad man in power has hot his way....

They have messed with lights everywhere also so now it takes me much longer to get to and from work and when in work journey times are increasing for the worse all the time....

For something that is temporary for covid it's extremely permanent looking to me, roads cut and dug, new permanent paths and cycle lanes, solid poles etc ...

Maybe try making the journey without a car.

Viscount Aggro

ted1 wrote: »

Maybe try making the journey without a car.

Yeah, the traffic light sequences are changed across the city. Some lights only allow 2 or 3 cars through.

As to the last comment... Cars are needed to get around , in absence of proper integrated public transport.

And to correct above posters - the one way system in dundrum was pushed through against wishes of residents and businesses in dundrum. The pressure group called imagine dundrum were at forefront of this. Anne Colgan already canvassed all the councillors to vote it through. This stinks of corruption.

punisher5112

ted1 wrote: »

Maybe try making the journey without a car.

You do realise I'm a bus driver.... Very smart aren't you.

bb1234567

Viscount Aggro wrote: »

Yeah, the traffic light sequences are changed across the city. Some lights only allow 2 or 3 cars through.

As to the last comment... Cars are needed to get around , in absence of proper integrated public transport.

And to correct above posters - the one way system in dundrum was pushed through against wishes of residents and businesses in dundrum. The pressure group called imagine dundrum were at forefront of this. Anne Colgan already canvassed all the councillors to vote it through. This stinks of corruption.

Not surprised dirvers objected, any improvement to public realm in Dublin met with a lot of kicking and screaming by the car lobby. As for businesses, I find this a surprise, although similar to other parts of Ireland after the initial reluctance the disquiet will fade gradually and usually the effect on business from pedestrian priortisiration is shown to massively benefit business more than anything else.

Business in Dublin city centre already flourishing because of similar initiatives, I don't see how Dundrum main street which will always have the massive anchor of the shopping centre and luas proximity could do so badly from this

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0730/1156506-dublin-pedestrianisation/

I just read some of the objections by businesses and they are concerning but they are from August before the work was actually completed. It will be useful and interesting to see an updated opinion on economic activity and if it has seen improvment.

ted1

punisher5112 wrote: »

You do realise I'm a bus driver.... Very smart aren't you.

No I didn’t

Tea drinker

bb1234567 wrote: »

Not surprised dirvers objected, any improvement to public realm in Dublin met with a lot of kicking and screaming by the car lobby. As for businesses, I find this a surprise, although similar to other parts of Ireland after the initial reluctance the disquiet will fade gradually and usually the effect on business from pedestrian priortisiration is shown to massively benefit business more than anything else.

Business in Dublin city centre already flourishing because of similar initiatives, I don't see how Dundrum main street which will always have the massive anchor of the shopping centre and luas proximity could do so badly from this

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0730/1156506-dublin-pedestrianisation/

I just read some of the objections by businesses and they are concerning but they are from August before the work was actually completed. It will be useful and interesting to see an updated opinion on economic activity and if it has seen improvment.

Not everyone can cycle there are many older folk perfectly capable of driving but would have balance issues on a bike. There's plenty of people never learned to cycle either. Basically it's if you don't like it FO. We have issues in the city centre now because "there's too many cyclists and pedestrians" in some pinch spots. If car drivers can be told to leave streets then maybe pedestrians / cyclists should leave from these areas / junctions altogether?
You don't HAVE to cycle or walk down that street.

It's difficult to see many of the changes in a positive light, I think it makes it harder for non locals to access areas. I'm not fully informed on howth changes but on the face of it seems worse for non locals. Dundrum seems to be getting more awkward. Killiney hill is harder to access as all parking eliminated on East side. Car Parking on the hill was overflowed the whole way down the hill over the weekend.
Dun Laoghaire changes around harbour seem OK, not convinced of the changes to the approach roads.

bb1234567

Tea drinker wrote: »

Not everyone can cycle there are many older folk perfectly capable of driving but would have balance issues on a bike. There's plenty of people never learned to cycle either. Basically it's if you don't like it FO. We have issues in the city centre now because "there's too many cyclists and pedestrians" in some pinch spots. If car drivers can be told to leave streets then maybe pedestrians / cyclists should leave from these areas / junctions altogether?
You don't HAVE to cycle or walk down that street.
It's difficult to see many of the changes in a positive light, I think it makes it harder for non locals to access areas. I'm not fully informed on howth changes but on the face of it seems worse for non locals. Dundrum seems to be getting more awkward. Killiney hill is harder to access as all parking eliminated on East side. Car Parking on the hill was overflowed the whole way down the hill over the weekend.
Dun Laoghaire changes around harbour seem OK, not convinced of the changes to the approach roads.

Well we can't make allowances for people that simply ''never learned to cycle' because it's a very simply and useful skill that everyone should be obliged to know. There is still massive amounts of parking in Dundrum in the shopping centre,Dundrum probably has the highest ratio of parking to population per capita in all of Ireland. You use the luxury of driving around with an arm chair beside you and couch and storage to the back, don't expect cities with constrained road space to make allowance for that need of yours. Even if youre old or lesser abled. You need to pay for that luxury.

Anyway I always do wonder how the massive elderly populations of Spain and France and Italy and their many completely pedestrianised cities managed to survive these inhuman environments. Seems the quality of life of those seniors is very high even though they have no car access. Something just not built in the genes of the irish it would seem. Hardy folk over on the continent

Btw if theres too many pedestrians or cyclists at a pinch point it;s almost without exception because cars have been given too much room. The answer is not to curtail movement of pedestrians and cyclists(much more economical use of space), but to make allowance for it.

markpb

Tea drinker wrote: »

Not everyone can cycle there are many older folk perfectly capable of driving but would have balance issues on a bike.

That's a daft argument - there are plenty of people who perfectly capable of cycling but cannot drive. You seem to be saying we should build roads for the people can't cycle but we shouldn't build cycle lanes for the people who can't drive? In any case, there are bikes that are perfectly suitable for people with mobility or balance issues. There are no cars that are suitable for people with medical conditions or sight issues.

The old arrangement was dangerous for cyclists.
The new arrangement is slower for drivers.

Being inconvenienced because your journey takes a little longer is in the same league not the same as your journey being dangerous.

The only losers here are public transport users.

ted1

Tea drinker wrote: »

Killiney hill is harder to access as all parking eliminated on East side. Car Parking on the hill was overflowed the whole way down the hill over the weekend.

All the parking on the east side ? A bit dramatic. They removed about 20 spaces for n the vico which would have been used by people going to white rock or the ramps.

The car park regularly over flows. At the moment the issue is sheer number of people.
People are not travelling outside of Dublin, play centres are closed. Kids matches are cancelled. And people are avoiding shopping centres and the city centre.

It’s a numbed game. I live fairly close to the hill and would be up there often. It’s constantly busy, footpaths , coffee shop etc.

LXFlyer

markpb wrote: »

That's a daft argument - there are plenty of people who perfectly capable of cycling but cannot drive. You seem to be saying we should build roads for the people can't cycle but we shouldn't build cycle lanes for the people who can't drive? In any case, there are bikes that are perfectly suitable for people with mobility or balance issues. There are no cars that are suitable for people with medical conditions or sight issues.

The old arrangement was dangerous for cyclists.
The new arrangement is slower for drivers.

Being inconvenienced because your journey takes a little longer is in the same league not the same as your journey being dangerous.

The only losers here are public transport users.

Isn’t that a rather damning criticism of the scheme?

The fact that a scheme got implemented with serious and very obvious flaws from a public transport perspective is pretty woeful to be honest.

But then again buses aren’t sexy for politicians.

ted1

Tea drinker wrote: »

Not everyone can cycle there are many older folk perfectly capable of driving but would have balance issues on a bike.

And they make up the vast minority, that excuse is often wheeled out. If they were the only ones left driving, every 90 out of 100 cars would be off the road

ted1

LXFlyer wrote: »

Isn’t that a rather damning criticism of the scheme?

The fact that a scheme got implemented with serious and very obvious flaws from a public transport perspective is pretty woeful to be honest.

But then again buses aren’t sexy for politicians.

People are being told not to use public transport. So no the it’s not damming

GT89

ted1 wrote: »

People are being told not to use public transport. So no the it’s not damming

Temporary advice. Permanent measures.

LXFlyer

ted1 wrote: »

People are being told not to use public transport. So no the it’s not damming

Bizarrely enough, this may come as a surprise to you, but plenty of people do still have to use public transport, plenty of essential workers. As I outlined in an earlier post above these measures in Dundrum (which frankly are pretty permanent in nature) are actually making the bus service worse for those who do need to use it.

TexasTornado

I don't get why this has been done. The village worked perfectly well as a functional economy and transport route. Is it just the council trying to spend money they really should be spending fixing road surfaces?

markpb

TexasTornado wrote: »

I don't get why this has been done. The village worked perfectly well as a functional economy and transport route. Is it just the council trying to spend money they really should be spending fixing road surfaces?

If you think that we'll be living with Coronavirus for almost another year, the changes make more sense. People will continue to be encouraged to avoid public transport except where essential. People will be encouraged to not to drive to avoid congestion. These two things together make it more important than ever to convert short trips into walking or cycling and for people to socialise closer to home than they previously would. This is a huge opportunity for suburban villages to become focal centres for the community instead of satellites for the city centre.

Secondly, people will be encouraged to remain outdoors as much as possible, especially at cafes and restaurants. There was no space in Dundrum or other suburban villages in Dublin for that to happen. The only way to create that space and retain sufficiently wide footpaths was to reduce the amount of space made available to cars.

Thirdly, it's likely that a lot of people will be working from home for the foreseeable future. This means a change to the school run. Most primary school children in Dublin live within walking or cycling distance from school but a lot were driven because their parents were driving to work anyway or because of a perceived safety problem. With parents generally not driving to work, there's a great opportunity to get kids actively to school.

Before the changes, Dundrum did not function well for pedestrians. It was hard to cross the road which led to pedestrian queues at the main junction. It was hard for people with limited vision to walk through because of the constant illegally parked cars on the footpath. It was unpleasant to cycle through because of the illegally parked cars, the people accessing the on-street parking and off-street premises and the lack of segregation that makes cycling safer and more pleasant, especially for kids and novice cyclists. This is why you hardly ever saw people cycling through/to it and you never saw school kids cycling to school.

For bus passengers, the bus stops on the main street worked well but the bus stops outside DTC were on narrow footpaths. It wasn't possible to walk past without walking through the queue, something that people don't want to do in the middle of a pandemic.

The new changes won't suit everyone and it will take time for people to adjust but that doesn't make them bad changes. However, something definitely needs to be done for bus passengers.

ted1

TexasTornado wrote: »

I don't get why this has been done. The village worked perfectly well as a functional economy and transport route. Is it just the council trying to spend money they really should be spending fixing road surfaces?

A village shouldn’t be considered as a transport route. The money is from a fund that isn’t available for fixing surfaces

Tabnabs

ted1 wrote: »

A village shouldn’t be considered as a transport route. The money is from a fund that isn’t available for fixing surfaces

Dundrum village, not a transport route? :pac:

Tea drinker

ted1 wrote: »

And they make up the vast minority, that excuse is often wheeled out. If they were the only ones left driving, every 90 out of 100 cars would be off the road

Well not really, you would have to severely curtail peoples ability to travel any distance outside their area and make spaces only to suit the local people to get rid of 90% of the cars. Also the shift in employment or lack of is not fully explained. If you guys don't care about the people I know who can't and won't be cycling just say so, and TBH I think you are.

ted1

Tea drinker wrote: »

Well not really, you would have to severely curtail peoples ability to travel any distance outside their area and make spaces only to suit the local people to get rid of 90% of the cars. Also the shift in employment or lack of is not fully explained. If you guys don't care about the people I know who can't and won't be cycling just say so, and TBH I think you are.

There's a difference between can't and won't.

who do you think we don't care about people who can't? The fact is people who can't are still being facilitated. If they can operate a MPV safely, they are well able to take a slightly different route if needed. once in the village they'll appreciate the extra space and how much safer it is. Removing all the exhaust fumes from the village will really improve the air quality, less traffic etc

They made Rathfarnham village one way around 2000. and people still managed.

If you guys don't care about the people I know who can't and won't be driving just say so, and TBH I think you are.

bb1234567

And I suspect tea drinker that your main concern lies within maintaining convenient provisions for your own personal vehicular parking and ease of journey to and from dundrum rather than where a minority of 85 year old dears will park. But it sounds like a more noble cause than where will I park..
There is still ample parking withint he shopping centre, which you should have to pay for if you wish to drive,disabled or not, elderly or young, local or not. The days of expecting a city to cater to your desire to drive by sectioning off large tracts of liimited land that could be much better put to use to serve a much higher density of pedestrian and cyclists is long, long gone. And good riddance

Tea drinker

bb1234567 wrote: »

Anyway I always do wonder how the massive elderly populations of Spain and France and Italy and their many completely pedestrianised cities managed to survive these inhuman environments. Seems the quality of life of those seniors is very high even though they have no car access. Something just not built in the genes of the irish it would seem. Hardy folk over on the continent

Btw if theres too many pedestrians or cyclists at a pinch point it;s almost without exception because cars have been given too much room. The answer is not to curtail movement of pedestrians and cyclists(much more economical use of space), but to make allowance for it.

Outside of "The Bicycle Thieves" or Giro Di Italia I see very few cycling in Italy or in Spain. Plenty of OAP walking, but then they build communities different over there and walking to local shops / baker / butcher is practical.
And still have massive car infrastructure outside of that, either in highways, on street or underground.

Well my opinion is we are causing traffic disruption now because of too much space too cyclists., in some areas.

ted1 wrote: »

All the parking on the east side ? A bit dramatic. They removed about 20 spaces for n the vico which would have been used by people going to white rock or the ramps.

The car park regularly over flows. At the moment the issue is sheer number of people.
People are not travelling outside of Dublin, play centres are closed. Kids matches are cancelled. And people are avoiding shopping centres and the city centre.

It’s a numbed game. I live fairly close to the hill and would be up there often. It’s constantly busy, footpaths , coffee shop etc.

Grand, so they took a bad situation and made it worse, seems sensible.

ted1

Tabnabs wrote: »

Dundrum village, not a transport route? :pac:

wasn't in the village, was outside the village. the village/maiin street should be for the people and not MPVs.

how many cars do you think were driving through the village daily when it was in use? (before 1958)

bb1234567

Tea drinker wrote: »

Outside of "The Bicycle Thieves" or Giro Di Italia I see very few cycling in Italy or in Spain. Plenty of OAP walking, but then they build communities different over there and walking to local shops / baker / butcher is practical.
And still have massive car infrastructure outside of that, either in highways, on street or underground.

Well my opinion is we are causing traffic disruption now because of too much space too cyclists., in some areas.

How do you ever think we can build such communities with quality pedestrian prioritisation when people like you provide such resistance to that in the mean time, and continue to encourage car priority as a means of getting around.

You're saying we should maintain the status quo because it's the most convenient. How will our society ever move forward with that kind of mindset.

ted1

Tea drinker wrote: »

Grand, so they took a bad situation and made it worse, seems sensible.

No, its actually better. cars can pass on the Vico road now. It was never wide enough to have cars parking there. It's now much safer to walk and cycle there.

So they made it better.

punisher5112

Why wasn't the main Street then made bus only?

Awaaf

Tea drinker wrote: »

Outside of "The Bicycle Thieves" or Giro Di Italia I see very few cycling in Italy or in Spain. ......

I have been to a few Italian locations where cycling is a major transport mode. Pisa and other University cities spring to mind.

Tabnabs

ted1 wrote: »

wasn't in the village, was outside the village. the village/maiin street should be for the people and not MPVs.

how many cars do you think were driving through the village daily when it was in use? (before 1958)

Incorrect, the station is, literally, at the beginning of Main Street, Dundrum. The train station predates bicycle use in Dundrum.

Main street has always been an important bus route with the stops on main street crucial for workers, locals, school children etc. for 50+ years.

Public transport for the masses has been a crucial lifeblood for Dundrum for the last 160 years.

You can try to shift the goalposts by focusing on cars, but buses and taxis are valid public transport options and should not suffer or be inconvenienced by road closures.

GT89

punisher5112 wrote: »

Why wasn't the main Street then made bus only?

Probably because there's houses on the main street. Also entrances to carparks attached to the old shopping centre, the etb and Permanent TSB.

bb1234567

Awaaf wrote: »

I have been to a few Italian locations where cycling is a major transport mode. Pisa and other University cities spring to mind.

Well she is right, cycling is not particularly popular in the countries mentioned where there are large tracts of urban areas pedestrianised. I was surprised just how low level of cycling was in these countries, France ,Italy and Spain, it is similar to Ireland.

But that doesnt make it okayfor us be likewise as those Southern European make room for pedestrian movement to become the main mode of transport .

Ireland and UK value neither, just car transport. And it's not sustainable means of managing a city if you don't prioritise either walking or cycling provisions over car traffic and parking.