Dun Laoghaire Traffic & Commuting Chat

JayRoc wrote: »

It'e illegal to drink alchohol in public places in DLRCC.

Someone needs to tell all the middle-aged lads and lassies on the grass at Sandycove about this startling news.

ted1

JayRoc wrote: »

It'e illegal to drink alchohol in public places in DLRCC. That included any of the new amenities like the increased public seating etc.

However if a licensed premises has been given permission to, say, put extra tables outside their establishment where there has been more space deliberately allocated by the council for them to trade, it is considered a part of the licensed premises and perfectly legal for people to have a pint at one of their tables.

TLDR-

Pint at at table outside a pub: grand. Cans sitting on a bench on the street: not grand.

its only byelaw....

also it not "licensed premises" it simply not a public place..

Zaney

ted1 wrote: »

its only byelaw....

also it not "licensed premises" it simply not a public place..

Thanks all, makes sense.

But these are currently roads / public spaces. How can they be changed on the grounds of “temporary” measures with no planning permission? What powers to the council have to hand over roads/public spaces to select private businesses. In Blackrock it’s just public benches that are provided, not allocated street dining, so I assume the bye laws apply (even if not enforced)

ted1 wrote: »

its only byelaw....
.

Yes, fair enough, but breaking the bye-law results in fine/prosecution (theoretically obvs).

Personally I don't have any objection to people enjoying a takeaway pint at a picnic table on a busy main street and I imagine the gardai take a pragmatic approach to it.

We've all been told to "THINK OUTDOORS THIS SUMMER" and a common sense approach to enforcement is probably a good thing, once no one is causing trouble or making a mess.

Zaney wrote: »

What powers to the council have to hand over roads/public spaces to select private businesses.

Sure it all belongs to the council, doesn't it? What extra powers would they need to allocate council property in any way they see fit?

Zaney wrote: »

In Blackrock it’s just public benches that are provided, not allocated street dining, so I assume the bye laws apply (even if not enforced)

Correct. However there will be several businesses who will be allowed to have outdoor seating outside their premises, on and near the main street. This will be considered an "extension" of their premises. (Afaik they will have had to update their insurance etc to reflect this)

ted1

Zaney wrote: »

Thanks all, makes sense.

But these are currently roads / public spaces. How can they be changed on the grounds of “temporary” measures with no planning permission? What powers to the council have to hand over roads/public spaces to select private businesses. In Blackrock it’s just public benches that are provided, not allocated street dining, so I assume the bye laws apply (even if not enforced)

Businesses (rate payers) lease the space, same as sports clubs renting pitches or families renting social housing.

josip

JayRoc wrote: »

It'e illegal to drink alchohol in public places in DLRCC. That included any of the new amenities like the increased public seating etc.

However if a licensed premises has been given permission to, say, put extra tables outside their establishment where there has been more space deliberately allocated by the council for them to trade, it is considered a part of the licensed premises and perfectly legal for people to have a pint at one of their tables.

TLDR-

Pint at at table outside a pub: grand. Cans sitting on a bench on the street: not grand.

So why weren't take-away Covid pints being drunk across the roads from pubs being policed by the Gardai?

josip wrote: »

So why weren't take-away Covid pints being drunk across the roads from pubs being policed by the Gardai?

As I said above: the gardai are using their discretion ie choosing to not enforce the bye-laws.

I can tell you from my own eyes there have been fines handed down in some cases though. It just depends what mood the gardai are in on a given day or what instructions they seem to be given by their superiors.

Cyrus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Someone needs to tell all the middle-aged lads and lassies on the grass at Sandycove about this startling news.

or ban this take away pints nonsense.

Cyrus wrote: »

or ban this take away pints nonsense.

Bah humbug

Zaney

Mav11 wrote: »

Bah humbug

Would you say that if you were a resident on the street where it’s happening? Or a parent who when walking home with young kids has to navigate around groups of people drinking on the footpath.

We are not the continent, we do not behave like the continent in terms of orderly outdoor dining - an outdoor pub is what we converge to and that is something very different.

Zaney

ted1 wrote: »

Businesses (rate payers) lease the space, same as sports clubs renting pitches or families renting social housing.

Didn’t know that so thanks.

I assume pitches and houses need planning and it wouldn’t be a change of use to lease them - as in when they are built there is an expectation that they can be leased out.

When planning is granted for parking there wouldn’t be the same expectation that it will be leased out for outdoor dining?

I still can’t see how the council should be allowed to change a car parking space to outdoor dining without permission. The council have a vested interest in business as they rely heavily on rates. There should surely be some oversight from a more independent authority like An Board Pleanála? Maybe there isn’t, but it just seems wrong to me that the Council can do what they please with public assets in the interest of a select group from which they directly profit.

Zaney wrote: »

Would you say that if you were a resident on the street where it’s happening? Or a parent who when walking home with young kids has to navigate around groups of people drinking on the footpath.

We are not the continent, we do not behave like the continent in terms of orderly outdoor dining - an outdoor pub is what we converge to and that is something very different.

Oh dear!!

All very good points raised.

It would be correct to say that in the normal course of events, the Council cannot simply allocate street space as they see fit.

Who does the street belong to? The answer is, it belongs to the State, on behalf of everyone. The Council is, quite literally, the local authority of the State and their obligations about how they maintain and manage public streets and open spaces for and on behalf of everyone, is very clearly set down in a whole raft of legislation.

Normally, when the Council wants to change something significantly in the public realm (everything from a cycle track to a new park to building social housing), they make a proposal and hold a public consultation process, and then depending on the scale of the project a determination is made by either the Council members in that area or by another State agency or Govt department (Bord Pleanála, Housing Agency etc)

Within that, and long before Covid, a premises could apply for outdoor drinking and dining including temporary structures like awnings, lights, furniture. If approved, the Council would grant a licence under the relevant Planning or Traffic legislation and the business would abide by any conditions.

What we do have now, even though the Councils are informally coordinating it, is a free for all,no planning, no licencing and what concerns me beyond that is, is there any risk assessments, safety statements and insurance coverage? If so, whose?

I think the Govt and the Councils would be well advised to put a set of regulations in place to cover this stuff. It needn't take long, the cuckoo funds measures were agreed in less than a week.

However, if they do not and as I mentioned before, the first scheme challenged in Court could bring the whole house down.

Zaney wrote: »

Didn’t know that so thanks.

I assume pitches and houses need planning and it wouldn’t be a change of use to lease them - as in when they are built there is an expectation that they can be leased out.

When planning is granted for parking there wouldn’t be the same expectation that it will be leased out for outdoor dining?

I still can’t see how the council should be allowed to change a car parking space to outdoor dining without permission. The council have a vested interest in business as they rely heavily on rates. There should surely be some oversight from a more independent authority like An Board Pleanála? Maybe there isn’t, but it just seems wrong to me that the Council can do what they please with public assets in the interest of a select group from which they directly profit.

Well now, to be fair, Ted1's reference to "leasing the space" implies that money is being exchanged... which isn't the case.

At least not in Blackrock Main Street which is the example I gave.

As far as I can see, the land belongs to the council, and they (albeit with public oversight but really it's civil servants who make the decisions here as we well know) can decide to do what they like with it.

Larbre34 wrote: »

I think the Govt and the Councils would be well advised to put a set of regulations in place to cover this stuff.

https://www.gov.ie/en/circular/b41c5-circular-pl-062021-takeaway-and-outdoor-dining-planning-amendments/#

There has been some legislation introduced, I haven't had a proper reading of it but I would imagine it covers at least some of the points raised. It seems to transfer (some) issues previously covered by the planning process to a licensing system that will, presumably, be simpler, and quicker to administer.

On Dun Laoghaire itself, it is now proposed to pedestrianise Lower George's Street for the summer

https://www.dlrcoco.ie/en/road-schemes/summer-streets

Seems to cover it, so good enough.

I do question the logic of fully pedestrianising Lower George's Street 24/7 and further restricting traffic in Monkstown when the coastal cycleway already limits the alternative routes for vehicular traffic.

Like it or not, people want to drive to these places to shop and enjoy leisure time. If they make it inaccessible or tie up the wider area with congestion, it will backfire.

Larbre34 wrote: »

Like it or not, people want to drive to these places to shop and enjoy leisure time. If they make it inaccessible or tie up the wider area with congestion, it will backfire.

What places can people not drive to?

Tea drinker

JayRoc wrote: »

That's my point though (and I totally understand what you're saying in terms of perception); there are the same amount of parking spaces in the area as far as I know, I am positive that there has not been a loss of a single handicapped parking space in all of the village, and the foot traffic is the best it could be given the pandemic.

If someone has driven to Blackrock and wants to visit a shop or business they will simply have to walk from wherever they park their car and so far, it seems, that is working out fine.

Blackrock has great parking facilities, both sides of the N31 and also Dart station, you really don't have to walk far to go about your business in Blackrock as it's small. Which is the second thing, because it's small it doesn't have much of a catchment of it's own, well at least as much as Dundrum has IMHO.
In Dundrum shopping centre, to get from one car park to the far side of the centre you will probably walk further than most journeys in Blackrock.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What places can people not drive to?

They can not drive to places close to home.

Dun Laoghaire is a day out on summer weekends. Someone living in Cabinteely or Ballinteer is going to pack the family into the car and walk the pier and have a Teddy's ice cream.

Yes, some will cycle and hopefully Public Transport capacity will be closer to normal. But discouraging cars altogether is foolish and damaging.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

Seems to cover it, so good enough.

I do question the logic of fully pedestrianising Lower George's Street 24/7 and further restricting traffic in Monkstown when the coastal cycleway already limits the alternative routes for vehicular traffic.

Like it or not, people want to drive to these places to shop and enjoy leisure time. If they make it inaccessible or tie up the wider area with congestion, it will backfire.

As a supporter of the CMR. I fail to see the logic of not having it the same direction.
Far to much Criss crossing

Larbre34 wrote: »

They can not drive to places close to home.

Dun Laoghaire is a day out on summer weekends. Someone living in Cabinteely or Ballinteer is going to pack the family into the car and walk the pier and have a Teddy's ice cream.

Yes, some will cycle and hopefully Public Transport capacity will be closer to normal. But discouraging cars altogether is foolish and damaging.

They're not stopped from driving to walk the pier.

Larbre34 wrote: »

They can not drive to places close to home.

Dun Laoghaire is a day out on summer weekends. Someone living in Cabinteely or Ballinteer is going to pack the family into the car and walk the pier and have a Teddy's ice cream.

Yes, some will cycle and hopefully Public Transport capacity will be closer to normal. But discouraging cars altogether is foolish and damaging.

They're not stopped from driving to walk the pier.

Article in this morning's IT

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/d%C3%BAn-laoghaire-pedestrianisation-not-without-its-challenges-1.4571834

Seems like a great idea to me. Potential for anti social behaviour aside, it should tie in very well with the new Myrtle Sq.

GT89

Mav11 wrote: »

Article in this morning's IT

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/d%C3%BAn-laoghaire-pedestrianisation-not-without-its-challenges-1.4571834

Seems like a great idea to me. Potential for anti social behaviour aside, it should tie in very well with the new Myrtle Sq.

So I'm guessing bus routes will have to be diverted

GT89 wrote: »

So I'm guessing bus routes will have to be diverted

Indeed, the article mentions the 46a and 75.

GT89

Mav11 wrote: »

Indeed, the article mentions the 46a and 75.

Forgets to mention the 7/a and the 63 potential issues for access to St.Michaels hospitals for people using buses. I'm guessing buses will use Harbour Road to turn around now.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

They're not stopped from driving to walk the pier.

No, but they are restricted, delayed, limited, frustrated. One experience like that and the punters won't choose to come back.

The Tivoli Road residents have put it well. If all the other parallel routes are slowly cut off, it will funnel traffic along their entirely unsuitable route.

If they're creating a Square in time for the Summer outside Bloomfields, why do they need to pedestrianise from Patrick Street to the hospital? Its overkill.

Not to mention, those bus routes serve the max catchment and activity demand by routing along Georges Street. Removing them is detrimental to public transport and connectivity.

coylemj

Mav11 wrote: »

Article in this morning's IT

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/d%C3%BAn-laoghaire-pedestrianisation-not-without-its-challenges-1.4571834

Seems like a great idea to me. Potential for anti social behaviour aside, it should tie in very well with the new Myrtle Sq.

A three month 'trial' in the middle of summer (when it's bright until almost 11 p.m.) is all very well.

But IIRC the problem that arose the last time they did this was that on winter evenings with no passing cars or buses, Georges St. was deserted and the centre of DL was a ghost town after dark because a lot of people (esp. lone women) didn't feel safe walking on empty streets.