Limerick Northern Distributor Road Plan

zulutango

Cookiemunster wrote: »

I'm comparing apples with oranges am I? Remind me again which one of us brought up the comparison with the Netherlands? Clue. It wasnt me.

BTW you're not an expert on the Netherlands either yet you drone on as if you are.

I think it's time to go back to ignoring you again.

You always become personal and abusive when your arguments are exposed! My point about the Netherlands, which remains valid despite your insistence on muddying the waters with misleading facts, was to contradict Geotrig's point that well off societies will opt for private car transport more than alternatives. Netherlands has high car ownership, but low km's driven per capita, i.e. people are well off and they own cars, but they use public transport and bikes for a lot of their journeys (much, much more than we do).

Cookiemunster

zulutango wrote: »

You always become personal and abusive when your arguments are exposed! My point about the Netherlands, which remains valid despite your insistence on muddying the waters with misleading facts, was to contradict Geotrig's point that well off societies will opt for private car transport more than alternatives. Netherlands has high car ownership, but low km's driven per capita, i.e. people are well off and they own cars, but they use public transport and bikes for a lot of their journeys (much, much more than we do).

I've gotten neither abusive or personal. If you think I have then report me, as it's against the charter. You should read back some of the things you post. A reminder that only one of us has been carded on here and again it isn't me.

I disagree tbat you've exposed anything. You continually move goalposts when someone points out a deficiency in any of your arguments so it's impossible to discuss anything.

Anyways, as I said, I'm out

geotrig

Vanquished wrote: »

Alternatives? Hmmmm, we were told that the €600 million Limerick tunnel was the missing piece of the jigsaw when it came to pedestrianising parts of the city centre. Now it appears that some more roads are required.

Pedestrianising the city centre Is a different matter and could be done if a proper plan was implemented.
The tunnel while it hasn't met the figures they desired, due to people probably wanting to avoid the toll,has had huge impact on traffic in the city. Connell rd and the dock rd used to be at a stand still for hours now they are just busy and slow moving at best at peak. No road will eliminate all traffic but it can take a large chunk away from ares it doesn't need to be in.

geotrig

damowill wrote: »

After Hassetts Cross, where are these cars travelling to?

I would guess a lot to Shannon with some to raheen and beyond.

zulutango

Cookiemunster wrote:

I disagree tbat you've exposed anything. You continually move goalposts when someone points out a deficiency in any of your arguments so it's impossible to discuss anything.

The only person moving goalposts here is yourself and you well know it.

zulutango

geotrig wrote:

Pedestrianising the city centre Is a different matter and could be done if a proper plan was implemented. The tunnel while it hasn't met the figures they desired, due to people probably wanting to avoid the toll,has had huge impact on traffic in the city. Connell rd and the dock rd used to be at a stand still for hours now they are just busy and slow moving at best at peak. No road will eliminate all traffic but it can take a large chunk away from ares it doesn't need to be in.

What the tunnel has done is made peripheral development much more feasible. Just as the LNDR will do. If that's the level of our ambition for Limerick then it's very disappointing. We'll have similar mobility issues as Galway within a few years and we'll be looking for another ring road to alleviate congestion.

Cookiemunster

zulutango wrote: »

The only person moving goalposts here is yourself and you well know it.

Yawn.

MarkR

Take the handbags to personal messages. We're not interested.

topper75

mdmix wrote: »

amazing that most cities around the world have prioritized public and alternative transport instead of extra roads. and no sign of a plague. alternate/public transport in cities = faster transport in cities

I don't know a single city that is not building relief roads as part of its strategy but hey that might just be the limitations of my knowledge.
Your argument re: LImerick seems to run outside reality and ignores constraints such as budget constraints and given constraints about where people currently live/work/shop.

But I may be wrong. Let's give this alternative/public utopian idea a rattle and test it. Detail to at least some extent how you would re-channel a budget akin to that required for an LNDR and what would you create in Limerick; carte blanche?

It would be required to relieve stress in peoples' lives currently endured in traffic jam pain points such as Dock Road, Tipp Road, Corbally, Annacotty etc.

NOTE: People are currently not barred from cycling in Limerick! Whoever wants to can. All major suburbs of the city are currently served by a reasonably frequent bus service and all the main arteries currently already have bus corridors.

Mc Love

topper75 wrote: »

I don't know a single city that is not building relief roads as part of its strategy but hey that might just be the limitations of my knowledge.
Your argument re: LImerick seems to run outside reality and ignores constraints such as budget constraints and given constraints about where people currently live/work/shop.

But I may be wrong. Let's give this alternative/public utopian idea a rattle and test it. Detail to at least some extent how you would re-channel a budget akin to that required for an LNDR and what would you create in Limerick; carte blanche?

It would be required to relieve stress in peoples' lives currently endured in traffic jam pain points such as Dock Road, Tipp Road, Corbally, Annacotty etc.

NOTE: People are currently not barred from cycling in Limerick! Whoever wants to can. All major suburbs of the city are currently served by a reasonably frequent bus service and all the main arteries currently already have bus corridors.

Where are these magical bus corridors? They are only part corridor until the pinch points. More people arent cycling because there's not any safe infrastructure, many dont feel safe riding in traffic.

The following link is showing cities that are car-free or are going car-free: https://www.businessinsider.com/cities-going-car-free-ban-2017-8?r=US&IR=T

New York are introducing a congestion charge

Its not a utopian image, its the way forward by going back to bicycles

phog

Mc Love wrote: »

Where are these magical bus corridors? They are only part corridor until the pinch points. More people arent cycling because there's not any safe infrastructure, many dont feel safe riding in traffic.

The following link is showing cities that are car-free or are going car-free: https://www.businessinsider.com/cities-going-car-free-ban-2017-8?r=US&IR=T

New York are introducing a congestion charge

Its not a utopian image, its the way forward by going back to bicycles

Have any of those cities a circular road to allow cars get from A to B without going through the city?

Cookiemunster

phog wrote: »

Have any of those cities a circular road to allow cars get from A to B without going through the city?

A quick glance at the European cities shows they do. Those countries all already have their road infrastructure in place, while Ireland is still playing catch up. But apparently it has to be a binary decision between cars and public transport/cycling. There can't be a need for both.

phog

Cookiemunster wrote: »

A quick glance at the European cities shows they do. Those countries all already have their road infrastructure in place, while Ireland is still playing catch up. But apparently it has to be a binary decision between cars and public transport/cycling. There can't be a need for both.

How many of those cities also have an underground rail system or something like the LUAS/DART?

Mc Love

Another capital city embracing the way of the bicycle! https://www.newstalk.com/news/plans-unveiled-fully-segregated-liffey-cycle-route-dublin-844292

Thing is they do have a ring road, but you know what? Thats backlogged from private vehicles. So they're thinking of building another one, absolutely no joined up thinking. Same thing will eventually happen the LNDR and guess what will be suggested? Another ring road!

What's that you say? Yes they do have a LUAS and a DART!

Cookiemunster

Mc Love wrote: »

Another capital city embracing the way of the bicycle! https://www.newstalk.com/news/plans-unveiled-fully-segregated-liffey-cycle-route-dublin-844292

Thing is they do have a ring road, but you know what? Thats backlogged from private vehicles. So they're thinking of building another one, absolutely no joined up thinking. Same thing will eventually happen the LNDR and guess what will be suggested? Another ring road!

What's that you say? Yes they do have a LUAS and a DART!

Dublins PT is pathetic and is nowhere near the level of the European cities or even New York. When / if they get the bus connects network and metro running then we can talk about them having proper public transport which will entice people out of their cars.

And another motorway outside the M50 (which isn't a ring road BTW because it only goes 2/3 of the way around the city) is not being talked about by anyone in TII or government, so quit with the red herrings.

phog

Mc Love wrote: »

Another capital city embracing the way of the bicycle! https://www.newstalk.com/news/plans-unveiled-fully-segregated-liffey-cycle-route-dublin-844292

Thing is they do have a ring road, but you know what? Thats backlogged from private vehicles. So they're thinking of building another one, absolutely no joined up thinking. Same thing will eventually happen the LNDR and guess what will be suggested? Another ring road!

What's that you say? Yes they do have a LUAS and a DART!

Genuinely, I've no idea of what point you're trying to make

Mc Love

phog wrote: »

Genuinely, I've no idea of what point you're trying to make

More roads = More motor traffic

More safe cycle infrastructure = Less Motor Traffic

It's quite simple, really.

Cookiemunster

Mc Love wrote: »

More roads = More motor traffic

More safe cycle infrastructure = Less Motor Traffic

It's quite simple, really.

Absolutely nobody on here is arguing against more or better PT/cycling facilities. However Ireland is still has a deficit in roads compared to most developed nations.

The article you posted yesterday listed cities with complete road networks AND proper public transport.

It's pretty easy to remove vehicles from city centers when there's viable ways to cross the cities that don't require you to drive through them.

Mc Love

But we need to create them CM - there's plans afaik at a few sites outside the SRR for P&R facilities which is a great initiative to see. If they could link those P&R up to the rail lines that terminate at Colbert, and introduce measures like congestion charges, surely more people will find it easier to P&R, seeing as people list cost as a deterrent for not using the tunnel.

Cookiemunster

P&R is a great idea, but I'm not sure about congestion charges for somewhere as small as Limerick. The city center itself isn't really that congested, more places like the Dock Rd, Plassey and Raheen/Dooradoyle. The plethora of unsynced traffic lights are what slow down the traffic in the city center.

geotrig

A congestion charge would be the new "parking" if introduced and somewhat take from the city , you could end up with driving ,excuse the pun, people away from the city. I dont think we are at a place where introducing one would benefit anyone.

phog

Mc Love wrote: »

Another capital city embracing the way of the bicycle! https://www.newstalk.com/news/plans-unveiled-fully-segregated-liffey-cycle-route-dublin-844292

Thing is they do have a ring road, but you know what? Thats backlogged from private vehicles. So they're thinking of building another one, absolutely no joined up thinking. Same thing will eventually happen the LNDR and guess what will be suggested? Another ring road!

What's that you say? Yes they do have a LUAS and a DART!

Mc Love wrote: »

More roads = More motor traffic

More safe cycle infrastructure = Less Motor Traffic

It's quite simple, really.

Do you think providing cycling lanes along the Liffey will significantly reduce traffic on the M50?

zulutango

phog wrote: »

Do you think providing cycling lanes along the Liffey will significantly reduce traffic on the M50?

It will lead to a lot of people switching from cars to bikes. If you build infrastructure for bikes, then people will cycle. If you build infrastructure for cars, then people will drive.

Phileas Frog

zulutango wrote: »

It will lead to a lot of people switching from cars to bikes. If you build infrastructure for bikes, then people will cycle. If you build infrastructure for cars, then people will drive.

What evidence do you have to support this assertion?

keane2097

In fairness, even as someone who doesn't particularly care whether the road gets built or not (in favour of it on balance I think, with some reservations) I think the statement 'if you build infrastructure for bikes, then people will cycle. If you build infrastructure for cars, then people will drive'
is fairly simple to verify for anyone with access to Google and the slightest bit of good faith interest in the topic.

phog

zulutango wrote: »

It will lead to a lot of people switching from cars to bikes. If you build infrastructure for bikes, then people will cycle. If you build infrastructure for cars, then people will drive.

How many people currently using the M50 will cycle along the Liffey?

zulutango

phog wrote: »

How many people currently using the M50 will cycle along the Liffey?

I didn't know straw men could cycle.

phog

zulutango wrote: »

I didn't know straw men could cycle.

So the assertion that providing cycle lanes along the Quays will reduce cars on the M50 was just waffle

Mc Love

phog wrote: »

So the assertion that providing cycle lanes along the Quays will reduce cars on the M50 was just waffle

Who came up with said assertion? :rolleyes:

Not indirectly but lets say a cycle lane was installed on every route connecting to the roads connecting to the M50 - I'm sure a lot more people would cycle. It should reduce the traffic on the quays and encourage motorists to swap 4 wheels for 2.

zulutango

phog wrote: »

So the assertion that providing cycle lanes along the Quays will reduce cars on the M50 was just waffle

Who made the assertion? Providing good cycle infrastructure will lead to more people cycling, which will lead to proportionately fewer people driving. You agree with that, surely?