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

Cities around the world that are reducing car access

Options
1…2223252728…120

Comments

  • Options
    #722
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,510 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    The revised bus routes through the city under BusConnects do help significantly in developing this plan with far fewer significant detours for bus routes and no daft looping from O'Connell Street to the Quays via D'Olier Street, College Street and Westmoreland Street.

    Can someone point me to the proposed alternative routing for the A Spine in the city center?


  • Options
    #723
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,560 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    bk wrote: »
    Can someone point me to the proposed alternative routing for the A Spine in the city center?

    Wexford St - Cuffe St - SSG South - SSG East - SSG North - Dawson St (NB) / Kildare St (SB) - Nassau St - Grafton St - College Green - Westmoreland St (NB) / College St (SB) and then as per current plan

    (Same routing as the F Spine)


  • Options
    #724
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,255 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    https://twitter.com/dlrcycling/status/1324411406918320130

    Have to admit, I was surprised that they chose to go with the full trial after all the messing about that STC group.


  • Options
    #725
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I'm starting to feel that DCC have grown something resembling a spine when it comes to facing down 'local opposition' which never actually amounts to the actual community's thoughts but rather a few Karens with access to the internet.


  • Options
    #726
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,255 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I'm starting to feel that DCC have grown something resembling a spine when it comes to facing down 'local opposition' which never actually amounts to the actual community's thoughts but rather a few Karens with access to the internet.

    Yes, they've been talking a good game recently too. I think it was the pedestrianisation around the Ha'penny bridge where they were asked about a threatened legal action, and just basically said "we'll fight and win the battle", no equivocating.

    Might not have been that particular scheme, but it was good to hear.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #727
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 13,885 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I think if there were a competition then Merrion Row would have to win for reckless and senseless endangerment of pedestrians.

    The corner where the sushi place is, at lunchtime it's packed waiting for the green man, which takes f*cking ages, and people spill out all over the street as range rovers lash around the corner millimetres from killing people. I can't for the life of me understand why that area hasn't been sorted out for pedestrians.


  • Options
    #728
    Chiparus
    Registered Users Posts: 2,254 ✭✭✭Chiparus


    Dermot Lacey going full Trump on twitter.

    https://twitter.com/LaceyDermot/status/1324692060071485440?s=20


  • Options
    #729
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,255 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Chiparus wrote: »
    Dermot Lacey going full Trump on twitter.

    https://twitter.com/LaceyDermot/status/1324692060071485440?s=20

    Yes, very disappointing behaviour from him altogether. Disappointing that's the quality of Labour as well.

    His comment of "we should get transport experts to look at this", followed by the NTA saying it was dangerous and unworkable, followed by his "I don't have to listen to someone as unaccountable as the NTA" was really sad, quite frankly.


  • Options
    #730
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 13,885 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Had to block that counsellor on Twitter he's so annoying


  • Options
    #731
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,523 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    As a Social Dems member I often hear "why do they exist, they're just Labour" and people like Dermot Lacey are why I'll never accept that they're the same. They're a complete betrayal of the global Labour movement.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #732
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,856 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    CatInABox wrote: »
    Yes, very disappointing behaviour from him altogether. Disappointing that's the quality of Labour as well.

    His comment of "we should get transport experts to look at this", followed by the NTA saying it was dangerous and unworkable, followed by his "I don't have to listen to someone as unaccountable as the NTA" was really sad, quite frankly.

    There are few things more democratic than good cycling infrastructure (as well as quality PT).

    Makes commuting and other access more level for people regardless of income.

    A so-called party of the people opposing it?

    No wonder they're an irrelevance.


  • Options
    #733
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    The corner where the sushi place is, at lunchtime it's packed waiting for the green man, which takes f*cking ages, and people spill out all over the street as range rovers lash around the corner millimetres from killing people. I can't for the life of me understand why that area hasn't been sorted out for pedestrians.

    It's madness and sort of embarrassing when you consider the location. The road is allegedly 2 lanes but plenty of room for 3, and it sort of ends up being 3 lanes anyway. Should be bus and bike only with much larger footpaths.


  • Options
    #734
    donvito99
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    cgcsb wrote: »
    It's madness and sort of embarrassing when you consider the location. The road is allegedly 2 lanes but plenty of room for 3, and it sort of ends up being 3 lanes anyway. Should be bus and bike only with much larger footpaths.

    It's not quite 3 regulation lanes wide, but there's at least 2 metres at the junction with Merrion St that could be split between both corners.


  • Options
    #735
    JohnC.
    Registered Users Posts: 3,391 ✭✭✭JohnC.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/11/barcelona-launches-10-year-plan-to-reclaim-city-streets-from-cars

    Barcelona launches 10 year plan, costing €37.8m. They've already started creating "superblocks" which group together 9 city blocks, closes them to through traffic and creates cycle and pedestrian friendly zones. Cars aren't totally banned from them, but they are car-unfriendly. This system will be rolled out much more.

    A number of intersections will be turned into public squares or parks. They say nobody in the city centre will be more than 200m from a square or park.


  • Options
    #736
    riddlinrussell
    Registered Users Posts: 988 ✭✭✭riddlinrussell


    JohnC. wrote: »
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/11/barcelona-launches-10-year-plan-to-reclaim-city-streets-from-cars

    Barcelona launches 10 year plan, costing €37.8m. They've already started creating "superblocks" which group together 9 city blocks, closes them to through traffic and creates cycle and pedestrian friendly zones. Cars aren't totally banned from them, but they are car-unfriendly. This system will be rolled out much more.

    A number of intersections will be turned into public squares or parks. They say nobody in the city centre will be more than 200m from a square or park.

    Sounds idyllic, I would say Barcelona (And American cities funnily enough) would be well arranged for this style of intervention as you can just close off a block and allow traffic to circulate the new 'larger' block.

    With most Irish cities you'd have to figure out a winding route for your 'car' zones, and then due to awful estate designs you will have big permeability issues unless there is a concentrated campaign to fix these barriers to walking and cycling through an area.

    I'm not trying to dump water on the idea, just noting it wouldn't be as quick a job as in a blocked out city.


  • Options
    #737
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    JohnC. wrote: »
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/11/barcelona-launches-10-year-plan-to-reclaim-city-streets-from-cars

    Barcelona launches 10 year plan, costing €37.8m. They've already started creating "superblocks" which group together 9 city blocks, closes them to through traffic and creates cycle and pedestrian friendly zones. Cars aren't totally banned from them, but they are car-unfriendly. This system will be rolled out much more.

    A number of intersections will be turned into public squares or parks. They say nobody in the city centre will be more than 200m from a square or park.

    I love the simplicity of the Barcelona Extension. I think the early years of the free state should have adopted this model of development rather than building Cabra, Marino and Crumlin. Sad that the early governments wanted to play pretend that Cities didn't exist in Ireland.


  • Options
    #738
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    riddlinrussell wrote: »
    Sounds idyllic, I would say Barcelona (And American cities funnily enough) would be well arranged for this style of intervention as you can just close off a block and allow traffic to circulate the new 'larger' block.

    With most Irish cities you'd have to figure out a winding route for your 'car' zones, and then due to awful estate designs you will have big permeability issues unless there is a concentrated campaign to fix these barriers to walking and cycling through an area.

    I'm not trying to dump water on the idea, just noting it wouldn't be as quick a job as in a blocked out city.

    I think if the bus connects corridors are implemented as per the latest iteration you'll see a great reduction in car use overall, probably more so than the superblock model.


  • Options
    #739
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I think if the bus connects corridors are implemented as per the latest iteration you'll see a great reduction in car use overall, probably more so than the superblock model.

    Three things will accelerate this.

    1. The implementation of the 90 min fare, so that interchanges work, and allow low fares in general.

    2. The gradual removal of on street parking in the city centre, and provision of P&R out from the city centre. It has to be an incentive to be able to park easily and take the bus in, rather than trying to park in the city centre.

    3. Enforcement of bus lanes using cameras, and other means. Buses equipped with cameras would be a good and logical thing.

    Busconnect could be the game changer to reduce the gridlock.


  • Options
    #740
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,560 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Three things will accelerate this.

    1. The implementation of the 90 min fare, so that interchanges work, and allow low fares in general.

    2. The gradual removal of on street parking in the city centre, and provision of P&R out from the city centre. It has to be an incentive to be able to park easily and take the bus in, rather than trying to park in the city centre.

    3. Enforcement of bus lanes using cameras, and other means. Buses equipped with cameras would be a good and logical thing.

    Busconnect could be the game changer to reduce the gridlock.

    The removal of on-street parking will require alternative funding streams to local councils - that's a major part of their annual income, which is probably why very little has been done to remove spaces!


  • Options
    #741
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    cgcsb wrote: »
    Are they at least removing the parking on BOTH sides of SWS and reducing the carriageway width. I'm sure there are plenty of wheelchair users who would like to go to SWS but who have never been because an able bodied person cannot even walk straight down the footpath without turning sideways to avoid poles for car-user signage, parking metres etc. Even when the pedestrian trials were on you'd want some hiking boots to get through the gaping chasms that DCC calls 'potholes'.

    Sure you'll probably get a few trolls claiming that it's actually a car ban which would be stopping all the many severely disabled people who I'm sure travel all the way into South William Street by car for a coffee


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #742
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    wakka12 wrote: »
    Sure you'll probably get a few trolls claiming that it's actually a car ban which would be stopping all the many severely disabled people who I'm sure travel all the way into South William Street by car for a coffee

    This is what makes me laugh at all the illiterates on facebook moaning about their 'road tax', they usually point to disabled road users, like a person in a wheelchair is going to park their adapted car there and find they can't get out of said car because the footpath is 30cm wide. They're obviously not fussed about disabled road users.


  • Options
    #743
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    The removal of on-street parking will require alternative funding streams to local councils - that's a major part of their annual income, which is probably why very little has been done to remove spaces!

    Reduce on street parking by 10% and raise the charge by 15%, and do that for a few years. No reduction in income but significant reduction in parking.

    Enforcement of parking and bus lanes would be essential.

    What really gets me is White Van (wo)Man who parks on a double yellow line with the wheels blocking the pavement when a legal parking position is only metres away - often just the other side if the road. Any wheelchair user, or even a baby buggy, has to go to extreme efforts to get past. At least the Gardai are going after the disabled spaces that are used by those without the proper blue card.


  • Options
    #744
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,856 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    1. The implementation of the 90 min fare, so that interchanges work, and allow low fares in general.

    Needs to be a fair charge on switching between different modes too. People shouldn’t feel they’re being punished for switching from train to bus or whatever and that financially they need to keep on the one mode.


  • Options
    #745
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,845 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    People also object to any rationalisation of bus routes, bus stops etc with the same reason - but are actually objecting for themselves.

    Using those with disabilities as a front for your own objections is especially despicable.


  • Options
    #746
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Needs to be a fair charge on switching between different modes too. People shouldn’t feel they’re being punished for switching from train to bus or whatever and that financially they need to keep on the one mode.

    I would be in favour of a very low cost fare structure and high subsidy for PT. Remember that a huge percentage of people already have a FTP. It could be done as a temporary experiment to see what level of modal shift occurs. Maybe a €1 flat fare for a 90 min ticket for travel within the short hop zone.

    I am not sure that you would consider that a fair charge.


  • Options
    #747
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    The removal of on-street parking will require alternative funding streams to local councils - that's a major part of their annual income, which is probably why very little has been done to remove spaces!

    Therein lies so many transportation problems.

    A council responsible for the movement of people has little incentive to remove one of the greatest impediments to movement when that impediment forms part of their funding


  • Options
    #748
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,560 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Needs to be a fair charge on switching between different modes too. People shouldn’t feel they’re being punished for switching from train to bus or whatever and that financially they need to keep on the one mode.

    The whole point of the 90 minute fare is to offer seamless penalty-free travel when connecting.

    I would imagine that the fare is likely to be in the region of EUR 2.25-EUR 2.50 or so, combining the current top fare bands, and that will cover unlimited travel on all Dublin City Bus services, LUAS and DART no matter how many changes happen, provided the final tag on is within 90 minutes of the first.

    Clarification is still awaited with regard to Suburban Rail as the NTA did not include it initially in their plan.

    The fare determination reports for next year have not been published yet, but I'd expect that the fare will have to launch with the first phase of the revised network being implemented.


  • Options
    #749
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,510 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    The removal of on-street parking will require alternative funding streams to local councils - that's a major part of their annual income, which is probably why very little has been done to remove spaces!

    Sounds like an argument for congestion charging :D
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    I would be in favour of a very low cost fare structure and high subsidy for PT. Remember that a huge percentage of people already have a FTP. It could be done as a temporary experiment to see what level of modal shift occurs. Maybe a €1 flat fare for a 90 min ticket for travel within the short hop zone.

    In the long term I agree with you, however in the short to medium term the bigger issue public transport faces in Dublin is capacity, not demand.

    Obviously I'm talking outside of Covid19 times.

    A €1 fare or even free is not much use to you if three buses pass you full. I think most commuters would rather see extra funding being poured into extra capacity (more buses/trams/metro/darts etc.) then making it cheaper.

    Though perhaps the idea of a €1 charge for off peak travel to get more people to use off-peak makes sense.

    I think it would make a lot of sense to trial such an off-peak charge now during Covid-19 restrictions on public transport capacity, to try and help distribute the passenger load throughout the day.

    Interestingly the NTA are currently funding DB/GA/IR/Luas like it had a €1 fare at the moment due to the reduced numbers using public transport, they have massively increased the subsidies to these companies to support them. So we know it can be done.

    Again perhaps congestion charging could help fund such fares in future once the capacity is there.


  • Options
    #750
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 13,885 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    https://www.wired.co.uk/article/oslo-pedestrianisation

    Interesting article, pedestrian and cyclist deaths down to zero in Oslo.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #751
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,490 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Sam Russell wrote: »

    What really gets me is White Van (wo)Man who parks on a double yellow line with the wheels blocking the pavement when a legal parking position is only metres away - often just the other side if the road. Any wheelchair user, or even a baby buggy, has to go to extreme efforts to get past. At least the Gardai are going after the disabled spaces that are used by those without the proper blue card.

    I met your WVM today - if only there had been some vacant parking nearby that the DPD man could have used?

    535231.jpg
    535232.jpg


Advertisement