College Green Plaza -- public consultation open

Devilman40k · 12-04-2016 8:48am

prinzeugen wrote: »

Well if this idiotic plan goes ahead then they may as well scrap the 83 route as it will be totally useless to the majority of people that use it.

Or re-route it away from Georges St - I had a feeling this was going to happen (in a previous post I had reservations on what would happen with the 83)

Carawaystick · 12-04-2016 9:16am

It's unclear what the option for cycling from O'Connell Bridge to Grafton street or vice versa is. Will this be shared running along tram tracks with busses?

BOHSBOHS · 12-04-2016 10:40am

the amount of traffic being shoved up parliment st !
they do know its a single lane each way ?
westmoreland and d'olier have like 4 lanes each.

i thought this plan was a joke when i heard it first:eek:

Devilman40k · 12-04-2016 10:43am

BOHSBOHS wrote: »

the amount of traffic being shoved up parliment st !
they do know its a single lane each way ?
westmoreland and d'olier have like 4 lanes each.

i thought this plan was a joke when i heard it first:eek:

It looks like bus only on Parliament St.

Introduction of bus only lane and a contraflow bus lane on Parliament St are mentioned in the document

cgcsb · 12-04-2016 11:20am

I wonder with such a large volume of car traffic displaced what the effect will be in other areas. At the minute the area around Church st/Bridge st/King St/Bolton st/Christchuch/Patrick st etc. is choca-bloc with cars avoiding the most central parts of town, the result is basically a no go for pedestrians and cyclists. Try walking from Ormond Quay to Ushers Quay at rush hour, it's carnage.

Ultimately what we need is high capacity public transport to deal with this.

Muahahaha · 12-04-2016 11:53am

I wonder how the tram, bus and taxi shared space is going to work through College Green. They say it is on a trial basis but its not hard to imagine a northbound tram coming from SSG going very slowly round the 90 degree turn at the bottom of Dawson onto Nassau St and then slowly again around the next 90 degree turn from Nassau to Grafton St. Then theres going to be some sort of lights outside Trinity to facilitate the cycle lanes and all the pedestrians crossing. So its not difficult to see how a tram, several Dublin Buses and a bunch of the many thousands of taxis in Dublin would clog up the route pretty easily. I just can't see how the trial for taxis can work on this stretch, we already have taxis fighting each other for fares by being in a race to pull in for someone, what'll happen when they jam the brakes to pick someone up while they're on the tram tracks with a tram and a bunch of buses coming behind them? This being Ireland we know they will stop if flagged, stick on the old hazard lights, it'll be grand.

Friday and Saturday nights already see chaos on the streets with taxis, allowing them to follow the tram tracks at College Green seems like a recipe for even more chaos.

Carawaystick · 12-04-2016 11:59am

Devilman40k wrote: »

It looks like bus only on Parliament St.

Introduction of bus only lane and a contraflow bus lane on Parliament St are mentioned in the document

It's hard to figure out which lane is contraflow, if you've 2 lanes and busses going in opposite directions on them...

If this is bus only, how will Cyclists get from Capel st to South William st or St Gt Georges st? Down the Liffey and back?

LXFlyer · 12-04-2016 12:00pm

Carawaystick wrote: »

It's hard to figure out which lane is contraflow, if you've 2 lanes and busses going in opposite directions on them...

If this is bus only, how will Cyclists get from Capel st to South William st or St Gt Georges st? Down the Liffey and back?

Cyclists can use bus lanes and contra-flow bus lanes.

I would imagine that what they mean is that Parliament St will become a two-way street for buses only (with the proviso that cyclists can use it as well).

Carawaystick · 12-04-2016 12:53pm

lxflyer wrote: »

Cyclists can use bus lanes and contra-flow bus lanes.

I would imagine that what they mean is that Parliament St will become a two-way street for buses only (with the proviso that cyclists can use it as well).

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

Koptain Liverpool · 12-04-2016 12:59pm

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

LXFlyer · 12-04-2016 1:00pm

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.

MJohnston · 12-04-2016 1:04pm

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.

Most of the bus lane signs do have a bicycle symbol on them, but no specific "Bicycles permitted" sign (like this http://i0.wp.com/farm8.staticflickr.com/7152/6454609701_0210b62468.jpg?resize=500%2C375) there. I tend to assume that most bus lanes are fair game for cyclists, sure they seem to be for private cars and taxis anyway :rolleyes:

Muahahaha · 12-04-2016 1:10pm

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.

MJohnston · 12-04-2016 1:16pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

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.

This needs to be emphasised more. I can imagine 90% of the public submissions will be "the plaza looks rubbish".

MJohnston · 12-04-2016 1:22pm

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!

toddunctious · 12-04-2016 1:44pm

Does anyone know if they will widen the path at the bottom of grafton street where lush is?
I'm hoping its in the design as I've noticed pedestrians walking on the street to get by this pinch point.

MJohnston · 12-04-2016 1:44pm

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.

MJohnston · 12-04-2016 2:00pm

Deedsie wrote: »

I'm a cyclist, I cycle in Dublin everyday. I'd happily advocate for pedestrian fines but in this situation I am hoping this will be a tourist area. I'm hoping the area will be heavily policed. Anyone breaking the law, drinking on the street, littering or causing a nuisance of themselves should be moved on, fined or arrested.

It should be a family friendly area for everyone

I agree, but at the same time, if a cyclist is taking due care and attention, and cycling slowly through a spacious, pedestrianised plaza, I don't think we should be legislating against that. A lot of the cycling laws seem like they're far less flexible on a case-by-case basis than they need to be.

cgcsb · 12-04-2016 2:00pm

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.

cgcsb · 12-04-2016 2:06pm

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.

I don't see how you're going to get a double bike lane down upper Grafton St.

MJohnston · 12-04-2016 2:16pm

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.

cgcsb · 12-04-2016 2:19pm

Deedsie wrote: »

Suffolk street is to be pedestrianised so no cyclists there. Slightly reduce the footpath on Grafton Street to allow two cycle lanes and encourage people to use Suffolk street as well as Grafton street to access College Green?

I just don't see how that'll work, when the cycle lane reaches the Grafton St/Nassau St junct, what then? there is no room on Nassau St. I'd imagine it'll just be an east/west cycle route. With Grafton St/Nassau St for Trams and a reduced number of bus routes. Taxis will probably be banned fairly quickly after someone is severely injured by sudden breaking.

It'd be easier to put in better cycling provision on Church Lane and Trinity St. You could remove the existing footpath by the walls of Trinity from the main gate to the Dawson St Junction and replace it with a cycle lane but this would require cyclists to cross the tracks, perhaps in some sort of Pelican style arrangement.

RainyDay · 12-04-2016 4:34pm

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.

Your suggested path might be workable all right, but I think the design of the path and the manner of segregation is going to be more important than the route of the path. There needs to be clear separation from paths and plaza area, perhaps using planters, small trees, raised kerbs, maybe even seating/fountains/other furniture to create a barrier. We can't be relying on AGS being around 24/7 to make this work.

trellheim · 12-04-2016 5:11pm

i can't see that volume of traffic fitting down Parliament st

cgcsb · 12-04-2016 5:17pm

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.

LXFlyer · 12-04-2016 5:28pm

cgcsb wrote: »

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.

I doubt even that will cope with the proposed number of routes.

Pete_Cavan · 12-04-2016 6:44pm

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.

monument · 13-04-2016 7:54am

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

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.

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.

trellheim · 13-04-2016 9:50am

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

Devilman40k · 13-04-2016 10:01am

trellheim wrote: »

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

From the document it's 2-way bus only traffic on Parliament St. All other traffic will have to travel down the south quays

› Introduction of a bus only lane on Parliament Street;

› Introduction of a contra-flow bus lane on Parliament Street;

TherapyBoy · 13-04-2016 10:15am

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

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.

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.

schemingbohemia · 13-04-2016 10:28am

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.

Not sure that would work, or even be desirable.

It doesn't follow the "desire line" type of design and forces a longer journey for most cyclists. Also having a lane in the middle of a pedestrianized area would just cause hassle for all. Better to leave it to individuals to just not act the muppet and cycle and walk carefully, and for everyone to be aware that it will be a shared space, so everyone needs to keep an eye out.

MJohnston · 13-04-2016 11:17am

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.

hardCopy · 13-04-2016 12:03pm

Deedsie wrote: »

Oh totally, but I do think there should be a regular AGS patrol presence here. I have thought about it a good bit and I think it would work well as a cycle route from all directions. That's my suggestion anyway would love to hear/see a few others.

It'll need to be permanent post rather than just regular patrols. Two Gardaí minimum who's role is to cover the plaza and not respond to calls elsewhere.

Otherwise it'll just be another boardwalk. A central spot for junkies and benzo dealers to hang out with some complimentary seating.

Pete_Cavan · 13-04-2016 12:39pm

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 · 13-04-2016 2:04pm

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.

MJohnston · 13-04-2016 2:29pm

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.

TherapyBoy · 13-04-2016 3:00pm

I completely agree. Don't get me wrong, even as an avid motorist who loves his car & drives everywhere I'd be perfectly happy to see the city centre pedestrianised from Parnell street to St Stephens green & from Capel Street to the IFSC. But if there are carparks there I'd like to be able to access them.

Calina · 13-04-2016 3:20pm

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.

loyatemu · 13-04-2016 3:24pm

I don't see the problem with moving the city centre bus stops to the edge of the CC - Connolly, Tara St and Pearse aren't particularly central either yet plenty of people still use the Dart to get into the city centre.

MJohnston · 13-04-2016 3:30pm

Calina wrote: »

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.

First of all, I was referring not to this College Green plan in entirety, but what could be added on top of it in order to reduce the pain for PT users. This proceeds from the assumption that the pedestrianization itself is rather inevitable. So in that previous post I wasn't saying that life would be easier for PT compared to *now*, I was saying it might be easier than how it will be in the proposed plan.

Secondly, unfortunately for some bus users, the College Green Plaza will have other benefits that might indeed outweigh the pain that it will cause to PT.

To be honest, the plaza seems increasingly inevitable, and I wonder if it in conjunction with the opening of the cross city Luas shouldn't prompt a wholescale revision of bus routes that pass through this part of the city centre.

Pete_Cavan · 13-04-2016 3:46pm

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.

Right, that’s my point. The current situation works so wouldn’t it be better for everyone if the current traffic direction of Trinity Street was kept? Otherwise buses, taxis and general traffic, etc. all have to use (part of) the loop which could get very congested. Isn't it better for everyone if general traffic turned onto Trinity Street as now and Church Lane gets pedestrianised? If a driver does miss the turn off for Trinity Street they just use the loop to swing around and turn down Trinity Street or continue straight back Dame Street. Perhaps there is something I am missing?

loyatemu · 13-04-2016 4:10pm

I think people (including the council) may be underestimating the issue of cyclists. Whilst in general I'm against over-regulation of cycling and don't have any objection to mixing cyclists and pedestrians in certain circumstances; this is going to be quite a busy plaza and Dame St->Westmoreland St is a major cycling artery. If they just leave cyclists to find their own way across the plaza, there's quite a high potential for conflict; but if they put in a defined cycle lane they'll have to make some provision for pedestrians crossing that lane (particularly the visually impaired).

This might seem wacky but what about a tunnel? - if it's just to accommodate cyclists it doesn't need to be huge or deep, it could be cut and covered as part of the overall plaza development. The roof could be semi opaque so it's lit by daylight during the day, could be a nice feature?

Spanish Eyes · 13-04-2016 5:38pm

hardCopy wrote: »

It'll need to be permanent post rather than just regular patrols. Two Gardaí minimum who's role is to cover the plaza and not respond to calls elsewhere.

Otherwise it'll just be another boardwalk. A central spot for junkies and benzo dealers to hang out with some complimentary seating.

Ha, I doubt it will happen if it hasn't for the Boardwalk.

But whilst I know they pay mega rates already, could there be an option of private security (alongside backup from the Gardai), provided by the likes of Bank of Ireland, Trinity, and other entities who will benefit from this initiative?

I await the tsunami of ridicule here. lol.

schemingbohemia · 13-04-2016 5:56pm

loyatemu wrote: »

I think people (including the council) may be underestimating the issue of cyclists. Whilst in general I'm against over-regulation of cycling and don't have any objection to mixing cyclists and pedestrians in certain circumstances; this is going to be quite a busy plaza and Dame St->Westmoreland St is a major cycling artery. If they just leave cyclists to find their own way across the plaza, there's quite a high potential for conflict; but if they put in a defined cycle lane they'll have to make some provision for pedestrians crossing that lane (particularly the visually impaired).

This might seem wacky but what about a tunnel? - if it's just to accommodate cyclists it doesn't need to be huge or deep, it could be cut and covered as part of the overall plaza development. The roof could be semi opaque so it's lit by daylight during the day, could be a nice feature?

It is wacky and wouldn't work, wouldn't be used.

I'm a cyclist, just put in a few Garda in the first few weeks and give a fixed charge penalty notice to any cyclists acting the ar$e, sorry I mean "cycling without due care and attention". Seriously, any lanes that make the journey longer will be ignored and cannot be designed to not have pedestrians walking across them.

hardCopy · 13-04-2016 6:12pm

loyatemu wrote: »

I think people (including the council) may be underestimating the issue of cyclists. Whilst in general I'm against over-regulation of cycling and don't have any objection to mixing cyclists and pedestrians in certain circumstances; this is going to be quite a busy plaza and Dame St->Westmoreland St is a major cycling artery. If they just leave cyclists to find their own way across the plaza, there's quite a high potential for conflict; but if they put in a defined cycle lane they'll have to make some provision for pedestrians crossing that lane (particularly the visually impaired).

This might seem wacky but what about a tunnel? - if it's just to accommodate cyclists it doesn't need to be huge or deep, it could be cut and covered as part of the overall plaza development. The roof could be semi opaque so it's lit by daylight during the day, could be a nice feature?

TBH a tunnel sounds like another junkie nest, with a skylight.

Spanish Eyes · 13-04-2016 6:27pm

Deedsie wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great to live in an Ireland where we could plan for ambitious nice things and not have to worry about them being ruined. I wonder if we built a few state of the art injection centres on outside the canals would that reduce the problem?

There are no supervised injection centres in the city right now AFAIK.
So I doubt local residents outside the city will welcome this kind of initiative with open arms either. Objection yer Honour and all that!

Aodhan O'Riordan formerly of the last Government's parish was all for this, but it would have been in the city centre AFAIS. the Merchant and the other centres, right beside the tourist enclaves.

Anyway. Let's see what will happen.

The plan for the plaza should not be dismissed just yet.

The follow up maybe though!

loyatemu · 14-04-2016 10:15am

schemingbohemia wrote: »

It is wacky and wouldn't work, wouldn't be used.

I'm a cyclist, just put in a few Garda in the first few weeks and give a fixed charge penalty notice to any cyclists acting the ar$e, sorry I mean "cycling without due care and attention". Seriously, any lanes that make the journey longer will be ignored and cannot be designed to not have pedestrians walking across them.

I don't see why it wouldn't be used, I'm sure they have similar in Holland going under roads. We're not talking the port tunnel here, and it wouldn't be easily accessible for junkies etc if it was designed to connect directly into the adjoining cycle lanes.

Currently you can cycle from Dame Street to Westmoreland Street, & assuming you don't get stopped by the pedestrian lights you can cycle fast and a lot of cyclists use that route. If this plaza is in the way and it's covered in pedestrians who have right of way at all times it'll become very difficult to cycle from Dame to Westmoreland. "Acting the ar$e" is a vague descriptions - my fear is the council and the guards will take the easy option and just put up a load of signs saying "Cyclists Dismount".

I suppose the other option is to direct cyclists down Parliament St and onto the north quays cycle lane, but that's still in planning.

schemingbohemia · 14-04-2016 10:31am

They're not going to dig up college green again (especially so soon after the LUAS works), the amount of services that run underneath the surface would just cause an absolute nightmare. It's a solution to a non-existent problem. Yes, cyclists will have to go slower or find an alternative route, that's not exactly unsurmountable and certainly doesn't require a massively expensive tunnel!

Never seen anything similar in the Netherlands.

cgcsb · 14-04-2016 10:43am

I was just thinking today, while more car bans and indeed taxi bans are required, e.g. Bachelor's Walk, George's st etc.
What does one do when the buses cease at 11:20? People are still working, socializing etc. and they'll have no means of getting around. The only option is the 2 night per week, 1990s style, 'nitelink' service. Which is so expensive people living within the M50 could get a taxi more economically. The 'nitelink' also does not come with any online route information, real time etc. it is outbound only and doesn't pick up anywhere on the way between Westmoreland st and the burbs.

College Green Plaza -- public consultation open

Comments