College Green Plaza -- public consultation open

Carawaystick wrote: »

The RSA say ( and they are often wrong) that cyclists can only use contra flow bus lanes if there is a sign permitting this.

I think you're really getting bogged down in this - for once please just stop getting immersed in legislation.

I would make the assumption that the street is going to be a normal two-way street but restricted to buses, cyclists and possibly taxis (assuming it is the same as Fleet St is between Westmoreland St and D'Olier St.).

The reference to contra-flow in the report I would read as meaning that the street will permit traffic flow in both directions, rather than being a one way street as at present.

Koptain Liverpool wrote: »

Creating a large central plaza is in theory a great idea. It would be important, however, that a vibrant space is created rather than a barren lifeless space. In none of the artists impressions I've seen have there been any fountains, seating areas, kiosks etc

AFAIK the design for street furniture will be looked after in phase 2. This phase is about getting the shape of the plaza and traffic movement agreed on, fountains, seating etc will come in phase 2.

Deedsie wrote: »

Possible cycle lane route through the plaza... What would people think of this type of route for cyclists? It would leave the majority of the plaza area free for people to stroll without worrying about cyclists. I think there should possibly be signs that cyclists should be obliged to travel through the plaza slowly and with due care and respect. Same for pedestrians standing in the cycle lanes obstructing cyclists. Any cyclist not using the lanes should be fined by AGS.

It won't matter where it goes, it'll be chock full of pedestrians, especially in this part of the city. That's fine as it goes, just don't expect cyclists to adhere to the indicated paths though!

Deedsie wrote: »

Unfortunately I agree, but it will be more convenient for AGS to say "there is a cycle lane provided and you went through a pedestrian area. Pay your fine at Pearse Street Garda Station"

If you're not going to police and punish the pedestrians breaking rules, it's really unfair to target cyclists. Especially when the actions of pedestrians often give cyclists no other recourse but to do something illegal.

The problem is, you can't legislate for common sense, which most pedestrians and cyclists (not to mention drivers) in this city lack.

Koptain Liverpool wrote: »

Creating a large central plaza is in theory a great idea. It would be important, however, that a vibrant space is created rather than a barren lifeless space. In none of the artists impressions I've seen have there been any fountains, seating areas, kiosks etc

There is a 0% chance of college green being barren, there's no space to stand as it is. Are you arguing that footfall would decrease post-pedestrianisation? that's contrary to experience of many Cities around the world.

Deedsie wrote: »

Respectfully, I don't really agree. I think we need to have black and white rules when it comes to motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. Follow the rules and you have nothing to worry about.

This plaza could be great but it will only be great if it is managed well and users use it properly and respect each other's space. If a cycle lane is provided have the manners to use it. If there is a cycle lane in an area have the manners and consideration not to stand in it. A member of AGS patrolling the area could just say to a group of people in a friendly manner to step out of the cycle lanes.

As I said, most pedestrians will NOT have consideration or manners, and will invade any cycle lane that isn't properly constructed (see: all of North Wall Quay and most of SJR Quay).

Your approach is perfect is everyone acts predictably, and with consideration, and if there is Gardai enforcement. Unfortunately the reality is that'll never happen. Even if you got all the Dubliners to follow the rules, Dublin is so popular with pedestrian tourists that there is a constant influx of people who have grown up with a completely different set of rules.

I'll repeat again, under no realistic circumstances do I see a cycle path or lane working correctly on a plaza like this.

Assuming there'll be no stops on Parliament St. Currently the morning rush hour sees queues of buses from the Fourcourts to O'Connell Bridge. Routing via Parliament St and then North Quays will likely result in further tailbacks. Perhaps Bachelor's walks should be a double bus lane similar to Pearse Street.

Surely the turnback loop on the eastern side of CG will be for buses (and perhaps taxis) only? If this is the case, there is no need to allow general traffic onto Church Lane. That traffic will only clog up the turnback area. Wouldn't it be better to just leave traffic travel the current direction on Trinity Street and loop back onto Georges Street? Is there any benefit in the proposed arrangement? Pedestrianise Church Lane and Andrew Street from there to the junction with Trinity Street. (ideally Trinity Street would be pedestrianised too but the car park would have to be bought out). Church Lane and Suffolk Street could then be used to provide cycle lanes to/from Nassau Street.

that is a hell of a lot of traffic to push down a single lane on parliament street , and remember that street is southbound only currently and if we put in a reverse lane where on earth is all the traffic from Capel St going to go

Deedsie wrote: »

Ya it's not ideal but I think it better to have the cyclists and pedestrians separate where possible. If it is anything like cyclists on Grafton street currently, that is far from ideal for pedestrians.

Grafton Street is very different though, with the shop accesses and bi-directional flow. I'd say this plaza will be more comparable to Grand Canal Dock's plaza only bigger and more filled with pedestrians. Bicycles and Pedestrians seem to mix just fine in that place.

monument wrote: »

I see where you're coming from because those were my first thought too, but: The benefit is that access traffic flows with the buses and taxis.

If a left turning lane on Dame Street was retained for Trinity Street, then you have more turning conflicts and less space on Dame Street for cycling/walking etc.

I presume you mean a right turning lane for traffic heading east of Dame Street to turn onto Trinity Street (a left turn doesnt need its own lane)? There is such a lane there at present with two lanes in each direction either side. If, under the new plan, the right turn lane remained but with only one lane in each direction either side, footpaths could still be widened by the width of one lane on each side of the street. Plus pedestrians would gain Church Lane, including Suffolk Street this would create a full pedestrian route from St Stephens Green to College Green.

TherapyBoy wrote: »

It looked to me that the turn back loop onto Church Lane would be available to all traffic, it would be useful to provide access to to the carparks in that area. Just off the top of my head you have Trinity Street, Brown Thomas, Drury Street & St Stephens green/RCoS.

With the current situation of having Suffolk Street closed off, would pedestrianising Church Lane and the northern part of Andrews Street make any difference to accessing those cars parks than is currently the case?

TherapyBoy wrote: »

Having Suffolk Street open or closed off makes no impact at all on the traffic to those carparks. The only traffic that could use Suffolk Street were taxis & buses turning left at the bottom of Dawson Street if I recall correctly. A turn that was not open to normal traffic.

Anyways, I was talking about myself driving from the northside into the city to park in one of these carparks. It looked like they were changing the access to them through the loop-thing & up Church Lane.

In an ideal world (where the lobby driven by the car park owners wasn't so strong) I'd say **** it - people coming from the northside can either use one of the many northside MSCPs, or they can take the long way around (Patrick Street > Kevin Street > Stephen's Green West > York Street or South Circular Rd to the same area), and vice versa for the rare southsider coming to the northside.

Now you can pedestrianise Trinity and St Andrews Streets, prevent private traffic from using Dame Street eastbound from Parliament Street, and essentially make life much easier for PT.

MJohnston wrote: »

In an ideal world (where the lobby driven by the car park owners wasn't so strong) I'd say **** it - people coming from the northside can either use one of the many northside MSCPs, or they can take the long way around (Patrick Street > Kevin Street > Stephen's Green West > York Street or South Circular Rd to the same area), and vice versa for the rare southsider coming to the northside.

Now you can pedestrianise Trinity and St Andrews Streets, prevent private traffic from using Dame Street eastbound from Parliament Street, and essentially make life much easier for PT.

I remain to be convinced routing a bunch of buses down the quays and through Parliament Street makes life easier for people on affected bus routes.