Samuel Beckett Bridge under construction in Holland

BrianD

robd wrote: »

€60 and 1 penalty point of caught. Hardly a deterrent if you have the money.

€60 each every time? There's a camera on that turn. If people thought that speed traps were money makers, this one will be a veritable mint.

GSPfan

BrianD wrote: »

That's disgraceful behaviour and hopefully the law will catch up with your selfish action. If the new bridge does not suit your routing then use your old one but do not use it to justify bad driving that at worst will cause a road accident or a best delay other motorists who can use the bridge as part of their routing. It is people like you that cause traffic delays in Dublin!

Why would the Law catch up with me when I'm not doing anything illegal?
The new bridge suits my route cause I make it suit my route.
Doing U-turns to head an opposite direction is not bad driving. Are you imagining me pulling hand brakers in the middle of the road or something?
I will be taking my van out of the traffic jam and onto a route with little to no traffic so I am again puzzled.

Great post. Thanks for that.

KC61

Well the bridge is getting some bus traffic from this weekend afterall:

http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/News-Centre/Travel-News/74-and-74a/

Route 74 and 74a diversions
Friday, December 18, 2009

Dublin Bus wishes to advise customers that due to traffic congestion at Britain Quay the following diversions will be in place from Saturday 19th December 2009 until further notice.

Routes 74 and 74a from Britain Quay Monday to Friday
Buses will operate from Britain Quay via Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Lombard Street, Sandwith Street, Pearse Street and back on to normal route. The following early morning departures will operate from Ringsend Garage via Pearse Street and back on to normal route, Route 74, 06:05 and 06:40, Route 74a, 05:55, 06:25 and 07:00.

Routes 74 and 74a towards Britain Quay Monday to Friday
Buses will operate as normal to Townsend Street then via Tara Street, Butt Bridge, Custom House Quay, Samuel Beckett Bridge, Sir John Rogerson’s Quay to Britain Quay.

Routes 74 and 74a from Britain Quay Saturday and Sunday
Buses will operate from Ringsend Garage via Pearse Street and back on to normal route.

Routes 74 and 74a towards Britain Quay Saturday and Sunday
Buses will operate as normal to Townsend Street then via Tara Street, Butt Bridge, Custom House Quay, Samuel Beckett Bridge, Macken Street, Pearse Street to Ringsend.

Dublin Bus apologises for any inconvenience caused.

BrianD

GSPfan wrote: »

Why would the Law catch up with me when I'm not doing anything illegal?
The new bridge suits my route cause I make it suit my route.
Doing U-turns to head an opposite direction is not bad driving. Are you imagining me pulling hand brakers in the middle of the road or something?
I will be taking my van out of the traffic jam and onto a route with little to no traffic so I am again puzzled.

Great post. Thanks for that.

What you are doing is a classic sample with poor driving skills and complete disregard for other road users. You are also unnecessarily endangering other road users and delaying traffic just to please yourself. I know the route well. I fail to see how you and any other idiot adopting your strategy can do so safely and what out inconveniencing other road users.

Stark

Saw loads of people doing this yesterday evening. Thankfully I was cycling as opposed to driving (as I knew in advance that the idiots would be out in force in the buildup to Christmas) so I wasn't delayed personally but loads of drivers were held up by idiots blocking the road. I'd get past a long tailback, then have a kilometre or two of empty road before coming across the next idiot trying to do a three point u-turn in the middle of busy traffic.

AlekSmart

Didn't somebody mention that to make this left is to conflict with pedestrians on a green phase? This could merit a stiffer penalty.

True,but nobody appears to have mentioned it to the constant stream of ninnies and Taxidrivers who willfully drive through legally crossing pedestrians at the O Connell St/Eden Quay No-Left-Turn restriction.

What makes matters worse here is the apparent disinterest in the offence by the numerous Gardai who walk-on-by even as the braver pedestrians deliver a good sharp wallop to the car door (Well Done to that Lady with the O2 Brolly )

Its more than obvious now that rather than locating ALL of these new fangled "Safety" Cameras in Speed related locations at least some of them should be monitoring "Pig Headed Ignorance Black-Spots" such as the above ?

Lollymcd

Would it not be easier to turn right off North Wall Quay at Price Waterhouse Coopers, left at the lights at the Luas junction, over the canal bridge and then left again onto Guild Street so that you are facing the bridge and "allowed" to drive over it?

bmaxi

AlekSmart wrote: »

What makes matters worse here is the apparent disinterest in the offence by the numerous Gardai who walk-on-by even as the braver pedestrians deliver a good sharp wallop to the car door (Well Done to that Lady with the O2 Brolly )

Could it be that they are negotiating a "Doing what I'm f*cking paid for" allowance?

WindSock

I've seen loads of cars turn left from the north quays onto the bridge, including taxis. Is there now an unwritten rule to break the no left turn rule?

Cookie_Monster

WindSock wrote: »

I've seen loads of cars turn left from the north quays onto the bridge, including taxis. Is there now an unwritten rule to break the no left turn rule?

Probably

"sure ya know it convenient, saves me 3 minuts it does"

:rolleyes:

gurramok

Windsock wrote:

I've seen loads of cars turn left from the north quays onto the bridge, including taxis. Is there now an unwritten rule to break the no left turn rule?

Camera's all over the place at that turn, do they be used for law enforcement?

Cookie Monster wrote:

Probably

"sure ya know it convenient, saves me 3 minuts it does"

More like 13min+ at peak time if heading South-East hence the temptation of drivers to do it.

They have removed the right filter turn light from Portland Row onto Amiens st at the Five Lamps resulting in tailbacks at peak hour.(a sign up says its removed only for evening peak hours)

Is this an attempt to divert southbound traffic onto the new bridge?

Also, they'd want to synchronise all the sets of traffic lights from the Five Lamps down over to Macken st, its a nightmare creating severe congestion in the area.

mysterious

Id you want to turn left and right you can

**** the government as far as I'm concerneed. common sense should be put ahead of forciing traffic away from the bridge.

I'm so sick of this corruption. My paitence is running so low, If I catch sight of Brian Cowen or Noel Dempsey in person. They will never forget me.

Why in hell are they trying to prevent people from turning at the bridge. i don't want to hear the excuse of forcing people to use the tollbridge.

If this is the reason why open the bridge at all.

This is just not acceptable. If I had a car I have enough brains and balls to turn left and right on that bridge as I please. There is no one in this city has the right over me to tell me that I can't use this bridge.

So yeah I said it.

What ya gonna do.:p

Press charges I'd liike to see you try. You will end up backing down in the end.

Rant over;)

mysterious

If everyone just used the bridge and ignored the law enforcements the governmetn cant really do anything.

Traffic is still congested at OConnell, Matt Talbot and Eastlink, so if your gonna open a bridge let people use it.

So who is with me on this one. We are the government now. Oh ya I said that too.

Cookie_Monster

mysterious wrote: »

If everyone just used the bridge and ignored the law enforcements the governmetn cant really do anything.

Traffic is still congested at OConnell, Matt Talbot and Eastlink, so if your gonna open a bridge let people use it.

So who is with me on this one. We are the government now. Oh ya I said that too.

Camera to pick up regs for fines is all the need to thwart you, useful revenue stream too

mysterious

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Camera to pick up regs for fines is all the need to thwart you, useful revenue stream too

I wont pay a fine.

You honestly think I should pay greedy corrupt loons money for not running Dublins traffic on common sense.

Why are they stopping all movments on the bridge?

Because they want people to pay the toll on the Eastlink. If that is going on why bother opening the bridge.

No I wont be paying a fine and neither should you. Dublin city council have a responsibility in keeping traffic moving. The other bridges are congested.

This bridge has not eased traffic up. I'm not saying your a fool, but one would be a fool to obey this corrupt law.........


No way. No way Cowen, No way Fianna fail and no way Dublin city council.

Ya can shove it. Where you know where.

Cookie_Monster

mysterious wrote: »

I wont pay a fine.

You honestly think I should pay greedy corrupt loons money for not running Dublins traffic on common sense.

Why are they stopping all movments on the bridge?

Because they want people to pay the toll on the Eastlink. If that is going on why bother opening the bridge.

No I wont be paying a fine and neither should you. Dublin city council have a responsibility in keeping traffic moving. The other bridges are congested.

This bridge has not eased traffic up. I'm not saying your a fool, but one would be a fool to obey this corrupt law.........


No way. No way Cowen, No way Fianna fail and no way Dublin city council.

Ya can shove it. Where you know where.

Grow up.

Just because you don't like the laws that are there doesn't mean you can flout them to suit yourself to the detriment of others.

How about writing to your local TDs / DCC campaigning for it to be changed

mysterious

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Grow up.

Just because you don't like the laws that are there doesn't mean you can flout them to suit yourself to the detriment of others.

How about writing to your local TDs / DCC campaigning for it to be changed

Don't patronise me.

The law is a scam. And only enforced to not attract more traffic to the new bridge and keep the congested traffic on the Eastlink and already provided bridges.

Can I ask a question and its a smart one. Do you live in Dublin by any chance?

So if there is a law to scan people naked at Airports why would Brian Cowen and Prince Charles get exempt from it. In other words you grow up and see the real world in its true colours. People make up laws to suit themselves, your a fool if you think that you are here to follow every law made known to man..

Seriouosly re think about your post. You might discover a flaw or two.

Cookie_Monster

mysterious wrote: »

Don't patronise me.

The law is a scam. And only enforced to not attract more traffic to the new bridge and keep the congested traffic on the Eastlink and already provided bridges.

Can I ask a question and its a smart one. Do you live in Dublin by any chance?

Seriously re think about your post. You might discover a flaw or two.

I don't think I'd find anything wrong with my post. Do you even know the reason why there is no turn there in the first place? I doubt it, and "its a scam" is not the answer. Why would they spend all that money on the bridge so as not to let people use it? Surely if they wanted to protect the revenue of the east link it wouldn't have gone in, in the first place. But thats probably to obvious a point for you to understand.

I do live in Dublin btw.

mysterious

mysterious wrote: »

If everyone just used the bridge and ignored the law enforcements the governmetn cant really do anything.

Traffic is still congested at OConnell, Matt Talbot and Eastlink, so if your gonna open a bridge let people use it.

So who is with me on this one. We are the government now. Oh ya I said that too.

Might have been you I saw* taking a left onto the bridge from the east side yesterday

*Yes, I saw someone in a car take a left shortly before I took a left on a bike myself.

Heart

Dónal wrote: »

Yes, I saw someone in a car take a left shortly before I took a left on a bike myself.

I didn't think there were any cycle lanes on the East Link bridge, and if so, than cyclists should be excluded from this left turn ban at the Samuel Beckett Bridge.

H

Cookie_Monster

Heart wrote: »

I didn't think there were any cycle lanes on the East Link bridge, and if so, than cyclists should be excluded from this left turn ban at the Samuel Beckett Bridge.

H

So what if there are/aren't cycle lanes on the eastlink. Cyclist can use the road regardless

Heart

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

So what if there are/aren't cycle lanes on the eastlink. Cyclist can use the road regardless

It'd be safer for cyclists to be separate from the main traffic lane...

Why ban the left turn for cyclists from the Quays over the Samuel Beckeet Bridge, they don't pay a toll on the Eastlink anyway, so no loss of revenue, and better cycle route options in the city.

H

FlameoftheWest

What happened the Luas tracks on the bridge?

Live Drive

The restrictions on Samuel Beckett Bridge wee put in place because the Environmental Impact Study said they were required and An Bord Pleanála made them a condition of granting the planning permission. This is the statement we got from Dublin City Council:

http://z7.invisionfree.com/DCAL_FM/index.php?showtopic=4061

scudzilla

I use the bridge to get over to the South side for work (Barrow Street)

I come through the Port Tunnel and then down the quays, at the Beckett Bridge i turn right, quick u-turn in the road and jobs a good 'un ;)

Heart

Heart wrote: »

It'd be safer for cyclists to be separate from the main traffic lane...

Why ban the left turn for cyclists from the Quays over the Samuel Beckeet Bridge, they don't pay a toll on the Eastlink anyway, so no loss of revenue, and better cycle route options in the city.

H

I use the bus lane when on the bridge. Officially there's a 'cycleway' which is shared between pedestrians and cyclists (and therefore pointless) and quite dangerous in terms of how you enter an exit it. The bus lane is great though though again it's apparently a bus-only lane, instead of being bus+bike+taxi as normal.

Most points regarding the suitability of the bridge for cyclists have probably already been made on this thread or elsewhere.

Saw a few cars take the left from the east onto the bridge today so it appears that more are ignoring the 'no left' turn signs up.

gurramok

It was severely congested southbound this evening. Would of been quicker going over by the Customs House instead, it defeats the purpose of the bridge if DCC can't even synchronise the lights to get traffic flow properly.

Regarding u-turns, one fella swung a dangerous u-turn in front of me northbound on Mayor st in that i had to slam on the brakes and beep the horn. Its getting ridiculous at this point.

Cookie_Monster

Live Drive wrote: »

The restrictions on Samuel Beckett Bridge wee put in place because the Environmental Impact Study said they were required and An Bord Pleanála made them a condition of granting the planning permission. This is the statement we got from Dublin City Council:

http://z7.invisionfree.com/DCAL_FM/index.php?showtopic=4061

Good reason though

The Swordsman

Live Drive wrote: »

The restrictions on Samuel Beckett Bridge wee put in place because the Environmental Impact Study said they were required and An Bord Pleanála made them a condition of granting the planning permission. This is the statement we got from Dublin City Council:

http://z7.invisionfree.com/DCAL_FM/index.php?showtopic=4061

I can understand why there shouldn’t be right turns off coming off the bridge, but the explanation as to why commuters shouldn’t take a left turn from the North Quays concerns me.

It was never intended that traffic which uses the Eastlink daily, travelling from North to South of the Liffey, would divert onto the Bridge.

I can only see two reasons why this should happen:
1. Using the new bridge would mean a shorter journey time.
2. Commuters wish to avoid paying the toll.

I don’t use the East Link much, so I’m not sure how much time you could possibly save by turning right at the O2 and using the BB to get to the Southside (why would someone be at the O2 in the first place if they didn’t wish to use the East Link?). But, I doubt you would save any time at all. But if you could you should be allowed. It is very unfair to be forced to make a longer journey AND to pay for the privilege.

Anyway, I think the main reason for the No Left Turn is that the powers that be are afraid that its revenue stream from the East Link will be affected as commuters divert to avoid paying the charge. Since the new bridge has been built, the East Link Toll has become (more of) an unfair charge. The bridge is not isolated any more.

So abolish the toll. This will ensure that commuters will continue to use the East Link. It may also encourage extra commuters who would usually use the Beckett and Matt Talbot Bridges to use it too and therefore take more pressure off City Centre traffic.

This would increase the volume of traffic in the South East Inner City and have an adverse effect on residents there considerably.

Where exactly in the South East Inner City are they talking about? Macken Street area? If it was, it hasn’t worked – the place was chock a block this morning.

AlekSmart

Interestingly,it appears from today`s Pat Kenny programme that the redoubtably Senator Prof.David Norris has taken an interest in matters Beckett.

The Senator (Who,along with Shane Ross represents two VERY compelling reasons for retaining an Upper Chamber) has decided,it seems,to enquire as to whether our Government has some form of gentlemans agreement with certain well known folks in the oul Toll Collection business.......

Expect much craw thumping and doleful expressions when DCC spokespersons waffle on about "Commercial Confidentiality" and associated nonsense.

This State is mired deep in a swamp of corruption and deceit,the revealing of which will be resisted fiercely by the Ruling Parties,both Nationally and Locally.

The Beckett Bridge saga is but one shining beacon of this sadly typically Irish mentality.

So abolish the toll. This will ensure that commuters will continue to use the East Link. It may also encourage extra commuters who would usually use the Beckett and Matt Talbot Bridges to use it too and therefore take more pressure off City Centre traffic.

Pretty commonsense suggestion one might think...however there will be the little matter of "Compensating" the Toll Bridge operators who of course represent the very best of our national interests.....

I`m not so certain that eventually we may be looking to the demises of the Shah of Iran and Nicolae Ceauceascu as being the models for Irish rebirth.....and yes,it may well be THAT bad :mad:

bg07

When is NTR's control of the Eastllink up? It cant be that long now. Another year or 2?

Stark

2015 I think.

Snickers Man

AlekSmart wrote: »

Interestingly,it appears from today`s Pat Kenny programme that the redoubtably Senator Prof.David Norris has taken an interest in matters Beckett.

Good old David Norris. A national treasure!

Having used the bridge a few times now I think a few things have to happen.

1) Parking restrictions have to come into place in front of the hotel on Cardiff Lane. Any time I go down there, there have been taxis double parked outside the hotel which causes serious congestion. There is no need for onstreet parking there. There are only apartment blocks and businesses in that section of the street with their own car parks. The street outside the hotel should be temporary parking for taxis only.

2) The turning restrictions on to and off the north side of the bridge should go. The environmental impact study was done 10 years ago and on conditions which no longer exist. Macken St/CArdiff LAne are not residential areas to all intents and purposes. They can take the extra traffic. So can the north quays between the bridge and the Point/O2.

3) People (especially taxi drivers) flout the no left and no right turns in the area with gay abandon. I have seen several taxis turn left on to the bridge from the quays and also turn left from Sherrif St on to the northern approach to the bridge (Guild St) which is also illegal.

The simple fact is that if you want to use the bridge to get to the tunnel or to Sherrif St, which I do, you can do perfectly legally wiith a little jiggery pokery and patience. So you are not really deterring determined short cut takers from the area. Why not just be sensible and let them use the easiest and least disruptive route, ie the quays?

The only alternative is to create such a maze of ridiculous turning restrictions in the area that it will become impassable to everyone, including the residents.

Is there any point in building such a marvellous bridge and then saying "Ah now here, just because it's there doesn't mean that any Tom, Dick or Harry can use it whenever they want"?

antoinolachtnai

Snickers Man wrote: »

2) The turning restrictions on to and off the north side of the bridge should go. The environmental impact study was done 10 years ago and on conditions which no longer exist. Macken St/CArdiff LAne are not residential areas to all intents and purposes. They can take the extra traffic. So can the north quays between the bridge and the Point/O2.

Macken Street is almost entirely residential. There are more people living in the Macken St/Cardiff Lane area than 10 years ago, because of new development.

gurramok

And yesterday, it took 20minutes to travel from the Maldron Hotel on Cardiff Lane to all the way up to the Five Lamps via Seville Place. Each light was red, thats just ridiculous.

It would be quicker to go the old way down Amiens st, that defeats the purpose of the new bridge due to bad lights synchronisation.

Coming back southbound, its a disaster more so on Macken st. Its not looking good at all to make the bridge useful.

AlekSmart

Macken Street is almost entirely residential. There are more people living in the Macken St/Cardiff Lane area than 10 years ago, because of new development.

I am minded of the late Noel Carroll`s quote on the amount of givin out the Corpo was getting about flooding along the River Tolka....."Well if yiz live beside a river,yiz`ll have to expect a bit of floodin` every now and then"

Pure true,Urban living,particularly in a dockside environment brings with it all the sights,sounds and smells of a populated City....if one values the peaceful tranquility of the countryside,then there are vast amounts of empty properties going a-begging in Leitrim,Sligo,Roscommon and Donegal to mention but a few...just give NAMA a ring and make an offer....plenty of tranquility available for those that need it.

This bridge has to be viewed as a piece of FUNCTIONAL Traffic Management infrastructure integral with the Citys Traffic Management Plan as a WHOLE.

Currently it appears to have little status other than as a localized €65 Million piece of modernistic steelwork with which to adorn the "rejuvenated" quays.

The Swordsman

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Macken Street is almost entirely residential. There are more people living in the Macken St/Cardiff Lane area than 10 years ago, because of new development.

Isn't it funny how nobody worried about the impact on Macken Street/Cardiff Lane when there was block upon block of apartments, offices and hotels being built in the area.

Snickers Man

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Macken Street is almost entirely residential. There are more people living in the Macken St/Cardiff Lane area than 10 years ago, because of new development.

I cannot recall seeing a single residence fronting on to Cardiff Lane. There are a handfull (maybe two or three) at the Pearse St end of Macken St itself.

The residents of Cardiff Lane are in newly built apartment blocks which, presumably, as I believe it is a condition of getting planning permission for such edifices in Dublin city, have their own built in car parks. Therefore there is no need for on-street parking for their residents.

Having that street permanently blocked by Double Parked taxis flashing their hazards while they await their fare coming from the hotel is just ridiculous.

gurramok

This morning like the previous mornings, the right turn from Pearse st onto Macken st was a nightmare. The filter light only lasts for maybe at most 10 seconds hence about 20 cars were backed up to over the bridge blocking city bound traffic and forcing them onto the bus lane.

I gave up this morning turning right(there were others who gave up too) and decided to go the old route down Pearse st and over up by Gardiner st. It was actually slightly quicker than using the new bridge.

Also the filter light in the evenings for right turning traffic from Guild st onto the North quays was a similar nightmare in that I had seen cars and vans doing U-turns and heading back westwards towards the city in order to get to the south quays westbound.

So on the traffic lights front including what I highlighted in my previous post on the journey to the Five Lamps, the bridge is fast losing its purpose at alleviating city bound traffic imho.

expectationlost

beckett-bridge-shut-for-safety-check

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/beckett-bridge-shut-for-safety-checks-2076984.html

CountingCrows

Was walking by bridge last night. They had a number of "teeth" opened up out of the bridge on either side. Anyone know what there purpose is?

Cookie_Monster

CountingCrows wrote: »

Was walking by bridge last night. They had a number of "teeth" opened up out of the bridge on either side. Anyone know what there purpose is?

did they have a large white brush with them?

monument

CountingCrows wrote: »

Was walking by bridge last night. They had a number of "teeth" opened up out of the bridge on either side. Anyone know what there purpose is?

they block cars from driving on the bridge when it is closed, or about to turn etc

Aran

I have written to two local politicians regarding NOT having access to the bridge if you are from East Wall....

No joy yet.....

It's really not fair.... there is a fabulous new piece of infrastructure that a whole community is excluded from using.

At the moment many are taking right turns from Guild street illegally which risks 2 penalty points and an 80 Euro fine...

Surely there must be somebody out there who can sort this out!!!

Does anybody have access to the right person in DCC???

markpb

Aran wrote: »

I have written to two local politicians regarding NOT having access to the bridge if you are from East Wall.... [...] Does anybody have access to the right person in DCC???

Did you contact TDs or councilors?

If I remember correctly, the EIS and planning permission (from ABP) for the bridge stipulated the turning restrictions so it's not up to DCC to overturn them.

Aran

Claire O'Regan (Labour cllr.) - who in fairness tried to be very helpful but could not make any changes

And a chap called Pascal who I know very little about but caught one of his leaflet distributors last night outside my house and gave a written note to pass on.

AlekSmart

I have written to two local politicians regarding NOT having access to the bridge if you are from East Wall....

No joy yet.....

It's really not fair.... there is a fabulous new piece of infrastructure that a whole community is excluded from using.

Aran,It is sadly symptomatic of where this country stands that you and many others have to resort to posts such as this.

It now appears that this structure was primarily intended as a Civic Artistic Feature rather than a piece of functional traffic infrastructure.

I`m uncertain as to whether EU assistance was availed of for the project but if so,perhaps some wider pressure could be applied to whomever is in actual control of the thing to make it available for its intended traffic purposes.

If not then the best option would appear to be setting the bridge to permanently open which would at least remove the entrapment feature whereby motorists are lured into a law-breaking situation.

As Markpb points out....

If I remember correctly, the EIS and planning permission (from ABP) for the bridge stipulated the turning restrictions so it's not up to DCC to overturn them.

.....we are already in classic Irish Administrative mode of having a plethora of rersponsible agencies with nobody actually having any functional control at all.........a bit like the Country as a whole really... :mad:

Son of Stupido

Its to do with the eastlink. no-one would use it if they could turn onto the new bridge and cross south. It is crazy but there must have been some lobbying from NTR or whoever owns the bloody thing.

I am getting good at U turns on Sherrif street!

Aran

I'm getting good at those Sherrif Street U turns too....

Not ideal is it???

Has there been yet another brown envelope so that people continue to be forced into using the Toll bridge??

Maybe we should ask the Gards if they agree with the madness and would turn a blind eye to people using the bridge with illegal turns??

bmaxi

I saw a bus turning left onto the bridge last night. I don't think it was in service but is there an exception for PSVs as I've seen quite a few taxis do it and a Garda car. Maybe it's just those who can get away with it.