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

13637394142118

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,228 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    I have enjoyed some of the ambition over the last year regarding cycling and pedestrianisation priority, but it's still not enough considering the special opportunity presented , it's a once in a life time opportunity and really what we got during COVID was more like stuff that should have always been going in the background in Dublin all along regardless of the special circumstances COVID caused. I'm getting nervous now as ths is the only time this could be quickly implemented without major backlash stopping it in it's tracks, it's slipping through our fingers quite quickly and not even action is happening, the pandemic will largely be over by early Autumn you'd imagine, so that's the deadline for much of this stuff happening with any kind of ease.

    Every cycling measure brought in under covid is a cheapo version of a project that was promised and then forgotten about a decade or so before hand. There's little new in the covid projects.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Consultation on proposals for Merrion Row which may disappoint some. It would appear that the Sunday Times got the wrong end of the stick somewhat

    https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/merrion-row-consultation/

    Summary:
    Ely Place & Hume Street - traffic flow reversed but all parking spaces retained
    No turn from SSG East to Merrion Row
    One traffic lane retained on Merrion Row for buses and traffic from Kildare Street but footpaths widened (The NTA not keen on re-routing buses).
    44 & 61 outbound re-routed from Merrion Street East via Baggot Street, Pembroke Street and Leeson Street to Earlsfort Terrace


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    LXFlyer beat me to it!

    Proposed changes;

    merrion-row-proposal-updated.jpg

    DCC say "At this time the NTA has advised that the removal of buses from Merrion Row is not feasible from an operational point of view and they have requested that one lane be kept open". Hopefully that means that the NTA will take steps to reroute buses allowing for full pedestrianisation in the near future.

    I thought it strange that DCC state "reduction in traffic volumes would allow the traffic lanes in Merrion Row to be reduced from three lanes to one lane", surely there are officially only two lanes on Merrion Row at present?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    DCC say "At this time the NTA has advised that the removal of buses from Merrion Row is not feasible from an operational point of view and they have requested that one lane be kept open". Hopefully that means that the NTA will take steps to reroute buses allowing for full pedestrianisation in the near future.

    I thought it strange that DCC state "reduction in traffic volumes would allow the traffic lanes in Merrion Row to be reduced from three lanes to one lane", surely there are officially only two lanes on Merrion Row at present?

    I do think that diverting the affected buses (38, 39 and 70 groups) away from Kildare Street to Merrion Square and Merrion Street would take them a bit too far away from existing stops, but I am baffled as to why they couldn't they turn onto SSG East, and then turn left onto Hume Street and Ely Place to access Baggot Street.

    The 44 and 61 diversion is unfortunate as it's a bit of a dog's dinner and takes them away from SSG - but if the parking was removed, a bus lane could surely be retained on Ely Place and Hume Street.

    I think that it is fair to say that any steps that the NTA will take to re-route buses, is the implementation of the Revised Network as part of BusConnects.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,460 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    This is a weird plan! I thought keeping one bus lane on Merrion Row would make sense because I didn't think they'd fully reverse the flow on Ely Place. Now that they are, as LXFlyer says, it doesn't really make any sense why the buses can't use Ely Place to avoid Merrion Row entirely.

    That said, I'd still be okay with one lane of buses on Merrion Row (although it will reduce the pleasantness drastically), but it appears they're allowing general traffic too? That's not acceptable imo.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    I do think that diverting the affected buses (38, 39 and 70 groups) away from Kildare Street to Merrion Square and Merrion Street would take them a bit too far away from existing stops, but I am baffled as to why they couldn't they turn onto SSG East, and then turn left onto Hume Street and Ely Place to access Baggot Street.

    The 44 and 61 diversion is unfortunate as it's a bit of a dog's dinner and takes them away from SSG - but if the parking was removed, a bus lane could surely be retained on Ely Place and Hume Street.

    I think that it is fair to say that any steps that the NTA will take to re-route buses, is the implementation of the Revised Network as part of BusConnects.

    Would rerouting those buses to Merrion Square and Merrion Street be that big a problem? People can get off at Nassau Street to get to SSG area. Having a bus gate eastbound on Clare Street could solve a lot of problems imo. Buses from Nassau Street could turn right onto Merrion Sq. Those going to Westland Row could turn left onto a new contraflow lane on Merrion Street Lower, thus avoiding the ****show on Lincon Place. General traffic from Nassau Street heading towards Mount Street could be routed around by Lincon Place instead. The ship has probably already sailed on that scale of change though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,228 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I think that's fair to be honest. There is basically 3 lanes as it is and delivery vans are still parking up on the sliver of footpath. I'd be happy with this as a permanent solution. Upper Merrion Street needs manners put on it. It's about 5 lanes wide, crap footpaths and no road markings, like something you'd see in India. A bit embarrassing for such a location in a capital.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    MJohnston wrote: »
    This is a weird plan! I thought keeping one bus lane on Merrion Row would make sense because I didn't think they'd fully reverse the flow on Ely Place. Now that they are, as LXFlyer says, it doesn't really make any sense why the buses can't use Ely Place to avoid Merrion Row entirely.

    That said, I'd still be okay with one lane of buses on Merrion Row (although it will reduce the pleasantness drastically), but it appears they're allowing general traffic too? That's not acceptable imo.

    Correct - The Sunday Times got the wrong end of the stick about the proposals.

    Owen Keegan said there were no plans to fully pedestrianise any or all of the three streets mentioned in the article.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,228 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    MJohnston wrote: »
    This is a weird plan! I thought keeping one bus lane on Merrion Row would make sense because I didn't think they'd fully reverse the flow on Ely Place. Now that they are, as LXFlyer says, it doesn't really make any sense why the buses can't use Ely Place to avoid Merrion Row entirely.

    That said, I'd still be okay with one lane of buses on Merrion Row (although it will reduce the pleasantness drastically), but it appears they're allowing general traffic too? That's not acceptable imo.

    There's no other way for general traffic to go coming from Kildare Street.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,228 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    Correct - The Sunday Times got the wrong end of the stick about the proposals.

    Owen Keegan said there were no plans to fully pedestrianise any or all of the three streets mentioned in the article.

    I gathered that it must have been wrong because it included Jervis Street. Pedestrianising any length of Jervis street would result in the closure of 2 multi storey car parks.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    MJohnston wrote: »
    This is a weird plan! I thought keeping one bus lane on Merrion Row would make sense because I didn't think they'd fully reverse the flow on Ely Place. Now that they are, as LXFlyer says, it doesn't really make any sense why the buses can't use Ely Place to avoid Merrion Row entirely.

    That said, I'd still be okay with one lane of buses on Merrion Row (although it will reduce the pleasantness drastically), but it appears they're allowing general traffic too? That's not acceptable imo.

    Yes, if you can still drive straight down Merrion Row, nobody will drive the other three sides of that block and deal with more junctions to get to the same point. In that case, you have bumper to bumper traffic in a single lane on Merrion Row and two under used lanes on Hume Street/Ely Place.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Would rerouting those buses to Merrion Square and Merrion Street be that big a problem? People can get off at Nassau Street to get to SSG area. Having a bus gate eastbound on Clare Street could solve a lot of problems imo. Buses from Nassau Street could turn right onto Merrion Sq. Those going to Westland Row could turn left onto a new contraflow lane on Merrion Street Lower, thus avoiding the ****show on Lincon Place. General traffic from Nassau Street heading towards Mount Street could be routed around by Lincon Place instead. The ship has probably already sailed on that scale of change though.

    I do think you would be movng them too far away to be honest. The stops on Kildare Street and Merrion Row are two busy stops for setting down (and also pick up on the 39a). Moving them further away isn't great.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Yes, if you can still drive straight down Merrion Row, nobody will drive the other three sides of that block and deal with more junctions to get to the same point. In that case, you have bumper to bumper traffic in a single lane on Merrion Row and two under used lanes on Hume Street/Ely Place.

    The traffic using Hume St/Ely Place would be coming from Cuffe Street and SSG North. This is the main traffic flow along Merrion Row currently.

    The traffic using Merrion Row would be coming from Kildare Street.

    Two different flows. I wouldn't see Hume St/Ely Place being particularly quiet at all.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,521 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    MJohnston wrote: »
    This is a weird plan! I thought keeping one bus lane on Merrion Row would make sense because I didn't think they'd fully reverse the flow on Ely Place. Now that they are, as LXFlyer says, it doesn't really make any sense why the buses can't use Ely Place to avoid Merrion Row entirely.

    That said, I'd still be okay with one lane of buses on Merrion Row (although it will reduce the pleasantness drastically), but it appears they're allowing general traffic too? That's not acceptable imo.

    Agreed, this is disappointing.

    Not sure why they can't run buses down Ely Place. Even then, if they insist on running buses down Merrion Row, at least force vehicular traffic from Stephen's Green North to turn right and use Ely Place? Then it will just be a single bus lane and NTA are placated?


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    The traffic using Hume St/Ely Place would be coming from Cuffe Street and SSG North. This is the main traffic flow along Merrion Row currently.

    The traffic using Merrion Row would be coming from Kildare Street.

    Two different flows. I wouldn't see Hume St/Ely Place being particularly quiet at all.

    Yes but there will be ample room on Hume St/Ely Place for the trafffic coming from Kildare Street too. As it would be a left turn onto Hume Street, you just have combined straight on/left turn lane and signal. If buses are remaining on Merrion Row, it could be with a bus gate and general traffic from Kildare Street sent round by Hume St/Ely Place.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,350 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    DCC say "At this time the NTA has advised that the removal of buses from Merrion Row is not feasible from an operational point of view and they have requested that one lane be kept open".

    Is it just me, but does this just sound like a convenient excuse.

    Looking at Ey Place and Hume Street, there is clearly plenty of space for three lanes, if not more. But they would need to remove some on-street parking.

    I've no proof, but it sounds to me like this is just a convenient excuse for DCC not to have to remove parking, which we wall know they hate doing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    bk wrote: »
    Is it just me, but does this just sound like a convenient excuse.

    Looking at Ey Place and Hume Street, there is clearly plenty of space for three lanes, if not more. But they would need to remove some on-street parking.

    I've no proof, but it sounds to me like this is just a convenient excuse for DCC not to have to remove parking, which we wall know they hate doing.

    Why would you even need three lanes on Hume St/Ely Pl? Merrion Row is one general traffic lane and a bus lane, I don't see what that wouldn't also suffice on the Hume St/Ely Pl route. Despite what the DCC consultation says, there are not three lanes on Merrion Row, it may be wide enough for three cars side by side but there was pretty much a vehicle constantly parked on one side at all times. I worked beside it for several years and prior to March last year was there every week day and never saw it functioning as three lanes of traffic. I don't see why the same general traffic lane + bus lane wouldn't also work on on Hume St/Ely Pl.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Why would you even need three lanes on Hume St/Ely Pl? Merrion Row is one general traffic lane and a bus lane, I don't see what that wouldn't also suffice on the Hume St/Ely Pl route. Despite what the DCC consultation says, there are not three lanes on Merrion Row, it may be wide enough for three cars side by side but there was pretty much a vehicle constantly parked on one side at all times. I worked beside it for several years and prior to March last year was there every week day and never saw it functioning as three lanes of traffic. I don't see why the same general traffic lane + bus lane wouldn't also work on on Hume St/Ely Pl.

    2 lanes in one direction and a contra-flow bus lane for the 44 & 61 outbound (and in the future the rather frequent BusConnects radials).


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    2 lanes in one direction and a contra-flow bus lane for the 44 & 61 outbound (and in the future the rather frequent BusConnects radials).

    You mean on SSG? I was talking about existing traffic which currently uses Merrion Row being rerouted via Hume St/Ely Pl. I don't see why a general traffic lane plus a bus lane wouldn't suffice as that is what currently exists on Merrion Row. The proposal is actually to increase to three general traffic lanes (one on Merrion Row and two on Hume St/Ely Pl) with no dedicated bus provision, basically the exact opposite of what we should be doing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    You mean on SSG? I was talking about existing traffic which currently uses Merrion Row being rerouted via Hume St/Ely Pl. I don't see why a general traffic lane plus a bus lane wouldn't suffice as that is what currently exists on Merrion Row. The proposal is actually to increase to three general traffic lanes (one on Merrion Row and two on Hume St/Ely Pl) with no dedicated bus provision, basically the exact opposite of what we should be doing.

    No I mean providing a contra-flow bus Lane on Ely Place and Hume Street (contra to the proposed two lane flow) so that the 44 and 61 can get from Merrion Street to St Stephen’s Green East as they do now.

    They plan proposes sending those two bus routes left onto Baggot Street, right onto Pembroke Street, and right onto Leeson St and then left onto Earlsfort Terrace which is a really daft diversion.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    No I mean providing a contra-flow bus Lane on Ely Place and Hume Street (contra to the proposed two lane flow) so that the 44 and 61 can get from Merrion Street to St Stephen’s Green East as they do now.

    They plan proposes sending those two bus routes left onto Baggot Street, right onto Pembroke Street, and right onto Leeson St and then left onto Earlsfort Terrace which is a really daft diversion.

    Okay, so you are suggesting the contra-flow. There might be space for three lanes if all parking on Hume Street was parallel and parking was removed from one side on Ely Place between Hume St and Merrion Row.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Okay, so you are suggesting the contra-flow. There might be space for three lanes if all parking on Hume Street was parallel and parking was removed from one side on Ely Place between Hume St and Merrion Row.

    Of course I mean removing some parking, as indeed I am pretty sure was bk.

    Removing or re-aligning some of the on-street parking on both streets leaves plenty of space to facilitate all of the traffic currently using Merrion Row to use Hume Street and Ely Place while retaining provision for outbound buses on the 44 and 61 to get from Merrion Street to St Stephen's Green East and use the contra-flow bus lane there too.

    Why prioritise on-street car parking while sending public transport further away?

    Remember that there are 7 radial routes at a reasonable frequency planned to route between SSG East and Merrion Street under BusConnects.


  • Registered Users Posts: 553 ✭✭✭iffandonlyif


    What is the value of rerouting traffic like this? Outdoor dining is something I'll believe when I see it; more likely are crowds of rowdy drinkers from the pubs along there. I know the footpaths along Merrion Row are dismally narrow, but it just seems to me a surprising project to prioritise. Footpaths could be widened as it is, especially after the junction.

    Reposting the picture from earlier in the thread. Pedestrianising down to Dawson Street really does look fantastic - a rare example of when I trust the projected image. And there are few worthier projects than allowing continuous pedestrian flow between Grafton Street and Stephen's Green. It's only prevented because of a stream of taxis and the surprising number of cars 'entitled' to local access.


    image.jpg
    roadmaster wrote: »
    If DCC really wanted to make a difference they could go all in before life returns to normal and see where the chips fall. By this i mean ban all cars from the quays and have the North & South Quays only for public transport and dedicated bicycle lanes. It would probably cause outrage but if there ever going to try stop cars coming in to the city now is the time when car travel is reduced.

    I don't think causing outrage is ever advisable. It would merely encourage indignant objectors in the future. I fully support the expansion of cycle infrastructure and curtailment of driving in towns, but I was pretty miffed by the rushed changes between Dun Laoghaire and Blackrock, and the patently false justification that it was to accommodate social distancing (this while leaving footpaths unchanged).
    LXFlyer wrote: »
    I do think you would be movng them too far away to be honest. The stops on Kildare Street and Merrion Row are two busy stops for setting down (and also pick up on the 39a). Moving them further away isn't great.

    Dart commuters have to walk ten minutes to get to the city centre, so I'm quite puzzled why bus commuters are privileged with stepping off beside the Spire or in College Green. Surely it's reasonable to demarcate a small, central zone into which all commuters must walk/cycle?
    cgcsb wrote: »
    Yes, the grave yard of projects that never happened because.... well they weren't bothered really.

    I remember when I was younger and a plan for some project would be released - the O'Connell Street park in the sky, the Carlisle Pier development - and I would think, Wow, this is actually going to happen! Years of disappointment (not that those projects excited me!) has shown me that a glossy brochure only means it moves from being 0% likely to about 10% likely.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,570 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    https://twitter.com/adamtranter/status/1385307613689171972

    Thought this was interesting, if we just keep building roads around cities they just keep getting full.


  • Registered Users Posts: 553 ✭✭✭iffandonlyif


    https://twitter.com/adamtranter/status/1385307613689171972

    Thought this was interesting, if we just keep building roads around cities they just keep getting full.


    I'm aware of the concept of generated demand, but is there proof that traffic volumes wouldn't have increased regardless?




  • https://twitter.com/adamtranter/status/1385307613689171972

    Thought this was interesting, if we just keep building roads around cities they just keep getting full.
    The laws of diminishing returns will always eventually win and that extra lane will eventually fix the issue, after just how many extra lanes is the question!


    Traffic issues are more to do with spacial planning of where the places of work are in relation to where their staff are expected to live than anything else.
    The concentration of industry/commercial in single locations is a major cause of congestion for example.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The laws of diminishing returns will always eventually win and that extra lane will eventually fix the issue, after just how many extra lanes is the question!


    Traffic issues are more to do with spacial planning of where the places of work are in relation to where their staff are expected to live than anything else.
    The concentration of industry/commercial in single locations is a major cause of congestion for example.

    Housing needs to be part of urban planning, and council housing is needed by about 30% of the population - that is low cost subsidised housing, managed by local authorities or not for profit housing charities. This housing needs to be in urban areas and well served by public transport - preferably rail based.

    I continue to be disappointed by the sale of the old Glass Bottle site for commercial housing with a small 'affordable' content. That should have been developed by the DCC, with one third of units for rent, one third of units for 'affordable' and one third of units as market price housing. The profit of the last group would help subsidise the other two groups.

    Until there is plentiful supply of housing where, or near where, people work then there will be traffic congestion. Until there is plentiful (rail based or rapid) public transport there will be congestion.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,194 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    I'm aware of the concept of generated demand, but is there proof that traffic volumes wouldn't have increased regardless?

    It's pretty well studied at this point, and yes, it's clearly proved that induced demand brings in more cars than would have been expected based upon population and economic growth.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,398 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    Last day to make a submission to the DCC default 30kph consultation. It's really easy to do.

    https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/30km-h-survey/


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,077 ✭✭✭gjim


    I continue to be disappointed by the sale of the old Glass Bottle site for commercial housing with a small 'affordable' content. That should have been developed by the DCC, with one third of units for rent, one third of units for 'affordable' and one third of units as market price housing. The profit of the last group would help subsidise the other two groups.
    25% is going to be social and affordable which isn't much less than a third you suggest would be better.

    DCC don't have infinite resources - the site itself would have cost them 250m and development at least a billion. To put that into context, DCCs entire budget is about 1B a year - even if financed largely by borrowing that's massive exposure for DCC for a single site given they're responsible for providing local services to more than half a million people.

    But the biggest questions would be around DCC's record and competence to actually manage a project of this size. They've been "working" on St Teresa's Gardens redevelopment for over 15 years with only a tiny fraction of the site developed. This one was to be half the size of the Irish Bottle site in terms of number of units and in the end they delivered almost nothing before the project was effectively taken away from them and handed to the LDA to complete.

    And even if the project was delivered, I've seen nothing to inspire confidence that DCC would be good at operating and managing huge public housing projects.


Advertisement