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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

No left turn allowed?

Options
  • 15-06-2016 9:39pm
    #1
    bisounours
    Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭


    Genuinely curious - coming in from the port tunnel, running west down North Wall Quay and a no left turn sign onto the Harp Bridge. I see cars/taxis/trucks turn left anyway but what's the logic behind that no left turn?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    ongarboy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,201 ✭✭✭ongarboy


    Im guessing it is to ensure optimal free flow on the north quays going westbound towards the city. If traffic was allowed to freely turn left and you had situations with the bridge was already congested, subsequent traffic from the quay intending to turn left would start to queue on the singular north quay lane which would also block the traffic behind it intending to go straight (ie westbound on the quays). There is a Victorian overhead crane type structure just before the bridge that prevents two lanes. (ie a dedicated left turn lane).

    There could be another reason but that's my take on it. As you say, I always see motorists ignoring this restriction too but have seen the odd car stopped by cops when passing on my way to/fro work.


  • Options
    #3
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    The cynic in me suspects this has to do with protecting from an influx of current East Link users. This is probably one of the least obeyed signs in the city however.


  • Options
    #4
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    Literally stupid. Just turn right then do a u turn back around adds about 2/3 mins to journey


  • Options
    #5
    steve-o
    Registered Users Posts: 903 ✭✭✭steve-o


    There are now 4 "no left turn" signs at that junction. Maybe a 5th one will do the trick to help the many motorists who remain uncertain :D


  • Options
    #6
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Just go up by the convention centre and legally cross the bridge


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    Stheno wrote: »
    Just go up by the convention centre and legally cross the bridge

    That's not actually legal for part of the day, as there's time restrictions on the left turn onto Mayor Street Upper!


  • Options
    #8
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    It was part of the planning restrictions imposed by ABP when the bridge was built to avoid the Macken St area becoming completely congested, following representations particularly from local residents' groups.

    There is some logic to it - if a lot of the Eastlink traffic did move it would result in total gridlock. Traffic in the area is bad enough as it is.


  • Options
    #9
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,050 ✭✭✭buffalo


    I'm on that bridge often enough, and I never knew there was no left turn. I rarely approach it from the Point direction so I've never seen the signs, but I'd there's a car or two every sequence who makes that turn.


  • Options
    #10
    atilladehun
    Registered Users Posts: 1,564 ✭✭✭atilladehun


    If they allow a right turn but not a left its nothing to do with flow down the quays. Macken street is a mess the other direction but I can see their point. East link needs to be barrier free.

    Especially if they plan to build 3000 houses in the glassworks


  • Options
    #11
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    atilladehun wrote: »
    If they allow a right turn but not a left its nothing to do with flow down the quays. Macken street is a mess the other direction but I can see their point. East link needs to be barrier free.

    Especially if they plan to build 3000 houses in the glassworks

    As I posted above - it was an ABP planning condition for the bridge to minimise traffic along Macken St.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    Heh, meanwhile Macken Street itself is so badly laid out in terms of traffic lights that it causes its own massive amount of traffic.


  • Options
    #13
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    lxflyer wrote: »
    As I posted above - it was an ABP planning condition for the bridge to minimise traffic along Macken St.

    When ABP said there had to be a cycle lane on both sides of the Rosie Hacket bridge, but the corpo ignored that condition.

    There are no toll dodging cyclists.


  • Options
    #14
    tabbey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    I understand that the toll operator at East Link had a contractual right to prevent losing their revenue, and so right and left turns were deliberately prevented anywhere that such a turn would attract traffic.
    When it (Beckett bridge) opened, people going north, could not turn right onto North Wall, nor Upper Sheriff St, or North Strand, it was only useful for motorists heading to Drumcondra or beyond.
    Since then some of the unreasonable prohibitions have been relaxed, and people have become aware of available ratruns, so it is of some use. However the crazy overuse of traffic lights has persisted in preventing this route being used to it's potential.
    DCC traffic planners should be retrained in Berlin or some such city, and the city would come back to life.


  • Options
    #15
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    tabbey wrote: »
    I understand that the toll operator at East Link had a contractual right to prevent losing their revenue, and so right and left turns were deliberately prevented anywhere that such a turn would attract traffic.
    When it (Beckett bridge) opened, people going north, could not turn right onto North Wall, nor Upper Sheriff St, or North Strand, it was only useful for motorists heading to Drumcondra or beyond.
    Since then some of the unreasonable prohibitions have been relaxed, and people have become aware of available ratruns, so it is of some use. However the crazy overuse of traffic lights has persisted in preventing this route being used to it's potential.
    DCC traffic planners should be retrained in Berlin or some such city, and the city would come back to life.

    Again though at the ABP hearings there was a deliberate decision in response to concerns from residents in the Macken St and Pearse St areas to keep traffic levels on that route to a lower volume - people seem to ignoring this aspect.


  • Options
    #16
    tabbey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Again though at the ABP hearings there was a deliberate decision in response to concerns from residents in the Macken St and Pearse St areas to keep traffic levels on that route to a lower volume - people seem to ignoring this aspect.

    We are not ignoring this aspect, we are merely drawing attention to the dysfunctional practices which prevail in relation to this expensive piece of infrastructure.

    People need to collectively make up their minds whether they want parish pump issues to rule, or to have infrastructure support a viable metropolis.


  • Options
    #17
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    tabbey wrote: »
    We are not ignoring this aspect, we are merely drawing attention to the dysfunctional practices which prevail in relation to this expensive piece of infrastructure.

    People need to collectively make up their minds whether they want parish pump issues to rule, or to have infrastructure support a viable metropolis.

    Well to be honest ABP took the view that resident's concerns did have a value - hence they imposed the restrictions.

    We're now seeing similar views being expressed in respect of the proposals for Parliament St.

    There's a balance to be struck here.


  • Options
    #18
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    They should at least allow the Aircoach (and other buses) turn at the Beckett bridge as it adds about 5 mins to its route having to turn right and drive around the convention centre via Mayor St. But the real solution would be to make the East Link free.


  • Options
    #19
    tabbey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    They should at least allow the Aircoach (and other buses) turn at the Beckett bridge as it adds about 5 mins to its route having to turn right and drive around the convention centre via Mayor St. But the real solution would be to make the East Link free.

    The problem with making East Link free, is that it does not have the capacity for the volume of traffic which would use it. If it was duplicated, the East Wall Road, as well as Sandymount, would be gridlocked.
    Like it or loathe it, a toll is necessary for East Link and West Link, indeed, a congestion charge for vehicles entering the inner city, is probably also needed.


  • Options
    #20
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Ah Dublin, the city that tolls routes at the periphery, and has free routes through the city...


  • Options
    #21
    aliveandkicking
    Registered Users Posts: 961 ✭✭✭aliveandkicking


    tabbey wrote: »
    I understand that the toll operator at East Link had a contractual right to prevent losing their revenue, and so right and left turns were deliberately prevented anywhere that such a turn would attract traffic.
    When it (Beckett bridge) opened, people going north, could not turn right onto North Wall, nor Upper Sheriff St, or North Strand, it was only useful for motorists heading to Drumcondra or beyond.
    Since then some of the unreasonable prohibitions have been relaxed, and people have become aware of available ratruns, so it is of some use. However the crazy overuse of traffic lights has persisted in preventing this route being used to it's potential.
    DCC traffic planners should be retrained in Berlin or some such city, and the city would come back to life.

    The toll contract for the East Link expired at the end of 2015 with ownership reverting to DCC. If any such contractural stipulation existed in the toll contract regarding right and left turns (unlikely anyway since the original east link toll contract long predates planning and design of Beckett Bridge) it no longer applies. DCC councillors voted to retain the toll to discourage an increase in traffic using the bridge and also to part fund DCC's maintence budget.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    Ah Dublin, the city that tolls routes at the periphery, and has free routes through the city...

    Which funds the upkeep of the bridge plus local groups.


  • Options
    #23
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    monument wrote: »
    Which funds the upkeep of the bridge plus local groups.

    Why not toll bridges closer in in the city, and incentivise traffic to stay further out of the city on peripheral routes?


Advertisement