College Green - the post mortem

bk

Andrew,

Thank you for fighting for this very important issue.

I see the bus gate as being just the first step towards Dublin becoming a truly people friendly European style city.

The massive success of the Dublin Bike scheme shows that there is a very large appetite for change in the city and I thank you for representing the views of the silent majority of us who use buses every day and have seen a big improvement with the introduction of the bus gate.

Keep up the good work and thanks for engaging with us here on boards, it is very refreshing to see our representatives communicate with us in this way.

Heart

More use needs to be made of the Tandsport4Dublin website (http://www.transport4dublin.ie/)

This could be a great tool for offering advice on alternative routes into the city... There is a pdf map of car park routes but this is not publicised...

Put this map into the papers for a period and get people aware of the alternative routes... Its all about making people aware and helping them adapt to the new routes.

Also some links to the bus operators etc would be helpful? Is the city council running this site? What the aim of it? It really needs an update with proper info. on the bus gate, and FAQ section with its times of operation, alternative routes, alternative transport options etc...

H

monument

Nearly 1,000 people supporting the bus gate in just a few days on the facebook group.

AlekSmart

Antoin is again on the money here...

Knowing that there is a way to the car parks depends on understanding the orbital system. The advertising and signage for the orbital system is bizarre and impossible to understand, with lots of extraneous detail. The colourings used are completely non-standard. To that extent, I suppose you could say that the street signage is a big problem - practically all of it -. There was a big fuss about this signage when it went in, with people saying that it was unintelligible. The council ignored the issue, but the problem was still there. Were there any communications professionals involved in this at all? Why don't we redesign this signage now?

A "Big Fuss" is an understatement as Seamus Brennan exploded all over Dublin City Council and particularly Eoin Keegan when he first saw the signs on his return from holliers back in early part of the Century.

This turned out to be serious nose to nose stuff between Dublin City Council,The Minister for Transport and the Department of the Environment with the eventual winner being the wily Seamus who positioned himself as a champion of the poor oul befuddled Driver unable to make sense out of all them coloured lines.... :cool:

Some of the new signage was removed immediately,others fell down leaving only the tubular support poles in place,but quite a few remain standing today.

These few stand totally apart from all other signage in the City/State serving little purpose except to whet the appetite of a few forreners (Used to coloured lines n stuff).

There was sod-all wrong with the original DCC signage except the dreaded word Change...the tactic of numbering a junction,again pretty basic to a European was simply the stuff of ballistic science to those who voted for Seamus Brennan & Co,and they were having no truck with it full stop !!

One could argue that we have far Too MUCH extraneous road signage with every sign demanding a new pole when many could be accomodated on pre-existing supports.

Allied to this is pure nonsensical placement such as is evident to Southbound traffic at D`Olier St/College Green where a Large LED screen directs all Traffic ostensibly the wrong way down Pearse St across the grass median at the Garda Barracks....Thanks Seamus,for a long lasting legacy !!

armada104

AlekSmart wrote: »

Antoin is again on the money here...

A "Big Fuss" is an understatement as Seamus Brennan exploded all over Dublin City Council and particularly Eoin Keegan when he first saw the signs on his return from holliers back in early part of the Century.

This turned out to be serious nose to nose stuff between Dublin City Council,The Minister for Transport and the Department of the Environment with the eventual winner being the wily Seamus who positioned himself as a champion of the poor oul befuddled Driver unable to make sense out of all them coloured lines.... :cool:

Alek, I'm usually fan of your rants, but in this instance you've betrayed a lack of background knowledge and made me wonder whether I should take your posts with a pinch of salt in future.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Some of the new signage was removed immediately,others fell down leaving only the tubular support poles in place,but quite a few remain standing today.

Really? I haven't seen any. Is this what you mean?

AlekSmart wrote: »

These few stand totally apart from all other signage in the City/State serving little purpose except to whet the appetite of a few forreners (Used to coloured lines n stuff).

So you say they're inconsistent?

AlekSmart wrote: »

There was sod-all wrong with the original DCC signage except the dreaded word Change...the tactic of numbering a junction,again pretty basic to a European was simply the stuff of ballistic science to those who voted for Seamus Brennan & Co,and they were having no truck with it full stop !!

But there was nothing wrong with them?

I don't really understand what you're saying here. The original signs had little or no text, used a bizarre colour scheme and were totally at odds with existing standards for signage. I can't see how there was much political gain in it for the then minister in having them all taken down. Standardised road signage is hardly a vote winner. But he did it, avoiding the "sure it'll be grand" attitude that I'd usually expect you to be critical of.

AlekSmart wrote: »

One could argue that we have far Too MUCH extraneous road signage with every sign demanding a new pole when many could be accomodated on pre-existing supports.

Allied to this is pure nonsensical placement such as is evident to Southbound traffic at D`Olier St/College Green where a Large LED screen directs all Traffic ostensibly the wrong way down Pearse St across the grass median at the Garda Barracks....Thanks Seamus,for a long lasting legacy !!

None of this is really relevant to the orbital signs discussion.

AlekSmart

Alek, I'm usually fan of your rants, but in this instance you've betrayed a lack of background knowledge and made me wonder whether I should take your posts with a pinch of salt in future.

Fear not Armada 104,I`m not running for publick office and this IS a discussion board so you`re free to pick`n mix at will...no offence will be taken :P

Thats a lovely picture for sure,not one i`m familiar with but accurate enough of the type I refer to.
Most of the remaining one`s are largely Blue in colour and,from memory,they remain at Dorset St/North Frederick St......Leeeson St/Stephens Green and Aungier St..although their supporting poles can be seen far further out into the sticks.

I shall endeavour to get some more specific locations this coming week !

So you say they're inconsistent?

Do I ?

The sign in your picture appears reasonably logical to me,in that it combines regulatory (No Right Turn) and informative in a single plane although the colouring would appear to indicate it`s part of a major roadworks package ??

These signs are IMO inconsistent with the "traditional" one pictured behind the offending "new" type.
The use of italic typeface,terminology such as "The Southeast" and of course Irish translations coupled with the Ferryboat Graphic does little to promote the type of clarity required in a modern traffic situation.
It should be noted that the "New" signage would use ONLY the Irish place name where such was necessary in addition to road/junction numbers.

I would readily admit to admiring Seamus Brennan as a consumate Politician who over a long career practiced that art to its utmost.

I can't see how there was much political gain in it for the then minister in having them all taken down. Standardised road signage is hardly a vote winner. But he did it, avoiding the "sure it'll be grand" attitude that I'd usually expect you to be critical of.


[/QWe appear to be talking about August 2002 ..

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=61648UOTE]

Seamus quite astutely had noted the ongoing media-led campaign against DCC`s new signage,which it needs to be noted was part of a somewhat wider package of Traffic Changes,such as the Busification of North Frederick St and the banning of gereral traffic from O Connell St between Parnell St and Cathal Brugha St.

If memory serves me correctly,the exchanges between Seamus and the City Council,particularly Owen Keegan were a little testy but,again from memory,the compromise was for a thorough review of the City Centre signage and an agreed replacement standard to follow...as far as I am aware we are still awaiting that ?

None of this is really relevant to the orbital signs discussion.

Well again,I propose to differ here,as I consider much of these discussions need to get back-to-basics.

Take for example the proliferation of large informative signs informing us that the 5 Axle Commercial Vehicle ban begins on Feb 19th 2007.

These signs proliferate throughout the City and could no doubt be utilised to combine much of the co-existing signage usually acompanying them.
A very good example of this afforestation can be seen at Clonskeagh Road/Beaver Row junction along with an even newer apparition,a 50Kmph regulatory sign with an addendum below advising "Unless indicated otherwise"(?).

I shall get a photo asap to illustrate this new departure from the norm.

Apologies if my background knowledge appears further backgrounded now,but thats what daily exposure to this stuff does to ya.......makes one punch drunk

armada104

AlekSmart wrote: »

If memory serves me correctly,the exchanges between Seamus and the City Council,particularly Owen Keegan were a little testy but,again from memory,the compromise was for a thorough review of the City Centre signage and an agreed replacement standard to follow...as far as I am aware we are still awaiting that?

No, we're not. Forgive me for being a little haughty in my last post but this is what led to it. The signs currently in existence ARE the new ones. The image I posted above is of one of the originals, all of which were taken down. The originals used that orange colour, had "An Lár" only in Irish and had no destinations for regional routes. Whilst I'm sure a great deal of people have a basic idea of where Ns 1-11 go, a sign saying just R802 is entirely useless I'm sure you'll agree.

The newer versions use light blue for inner orbital, purple for outer and display destinations for regional routes, in both English and Irish. Your broader point about the state of road signage in the city is probably fair but you were completely off the mark on the history of these signs.

Regardless of whether it was politically convenient for him at the time, Brennan was right to have the signs removed. Local authorities can't go reinventing the wheel in terms of directional signage whenever they want without consulting the DoT.

AlekSmart

Forgive me for being a little haughty in my last post but this is what led to it.

Haughty ....!

You need forgiveness for Haughtiness..?

We need lots more of it my man,no apologies needed

I`m not an insider and so going on memory but you`ve put my mind at rest sure nuff

Local authorities can't go reinventing the wheel in terms of directional signage whenever they want without consulting the DoT.

This is all well and good,but would appear to indicate a degree of slippage withn the DoT on what should be the core of it`s remit,Overall Responsibility for Traffic and Transport Policy and it`s Implimentation ?

I`m suggesting that for the Capital City`s Administrative Authority to get to the point of erecting the hardware it has already gone through a variety of hoops including consultation,proofing and tendering for the associated works.

For this to happen the DoT and the Dept of the Environment had to have gone-to-lunch on this core responsibility of oversight,thus allowing Owen and his boy`s the necessary degree of freedom to go off on a solo run ?

However it would`nt be the first time....as the plinths for the toll-booths on the M50 Slip Roads bore witness to for so many years up until the re-invention !

armada104

AlekSmart wrote: »

I`m not an insider and so going on memory but you`ve put my mind at rest sure nuff

I'm also far from an insider - this is all in the public domain.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1024/dublin.html

http://dynamic.rte.ie/av/200-1242476-512-288.smil

antoinolachtnai

The core thing is that the orbital concept was and is basically a good working framework for traffic in Dublin and the College Green bus arrangements are the natural conclusion of it.

However, the communication of these plans is as important as the change itself. (I could now tell you what I think of the revamped signage and what I would have done to make the signage more intelligible, but that is just jumping the gun.)

What's important is an acceptance is that good, structured communication is critical to transforming the traffic management in our city.

AlekSmart

What's important is an acceptance is that good, structured communication is critical to transforming the traffic management in our city.

And this is what is 100% absent from ALL of the relevant agencies involved in Dublin Traffic plc !!!

Victor

Thoie wrote: »

Precisely. This thread has finally helped me find out what the signage means (here), and I'm staring at it aghast. While patently this leaflet was intended to help people, I've never seen it before, nor have I ever seen the explanations contained within it.

They put 80,000 paper copies of them in petrol stations and they are included on many maps.

Thoie

Victor wrote: »

They put 80,000 paper copies of them in petrol stations and they are included on many maps.

There's 4+ million people living in Ireland. In 2005 there were over 1.5 million private vehicles on the road and 2.3 million licensed drivers. I must have been one of the 96% who didn't get a paper copy.

Victor

Thoie wrote: »

There's 4+ million people living in Ireland. In 2005 there were over 1.5 million private vehicles on the road and 2.3 million licensed drivers. I must have been one of the 96% who didn't get a paper copy.

If it was free money, the 96% would find out.

D'Peoples Voice

AMontague wrote: »

The original vote for Bus Gate in the City Council was a very close run thing. We won that vote by 15 to 13 in May.

However, as we head into the vote in the Council meeting on Monday, I know that some councillors were looking to have the Bus Gate removed entirely. I
Cllr Andrew Montague

Interesting Andrew, so before the June Local elections,
the OLD city council voted through this plan,

and I know you probably can't say it publicly,
but my feelings would be the NEW city council has a different view/political leaning.

As a voter in the Dublin city constituency, does DCC publish publicly the votes taken by the various parties? I think it helps people like me decide who has the long-term interests of this city in mind and who is in it for short-term political gain from lobbyists!

bmaxi

I'm pretty sure the voting preferences of each councillor could be easily obtained. More transparency would accrue from councillors having to provide plausible reasons for their vote.
The public is sick of the brown envelope culture and those newly elected councillors would need to show they are not part of it, if they want a long career in politics.

crocro

Well done to Andrew Montague for being the only councillor to bother explaining himself to his electorate.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

However, the mistaken perception was allowed go out that the city was closed for cars after four o'clock.

The big problem with what was done has really been the communication. The communication to drivers was just awful. There was absolutely no excuse for it.

The failure to communicate properly about this is going to cost the City at least 5m euros by the end of the fiasco, between legal fees, bad debts on rates, loss of rates and loss of parking revenue.

I disagree with you here Antoin. The 'perception that the city was closed' was created by the high-end grafton street retailers and their PR companies and lawyers. They frightened away their own customers with their apocalyptic hysteria. They were always going to sell a smaller volume of luxury goods in a depression.

Their claim that the bus lane reduced business by 30% is ludicrous - only car traffic form the north east quadrant had to reroute to reach BT carpark. The busiest route to bt carpark from the southside via Leeson St, Cuffe St & Georges St was unchanged.

Retailers traditionally oppose all forms of public transport, whether it's bike lanes outside their shops, new luas lines or in this case a bus lane. And they oppose public transport even when it increases footfall and sales.

Shopkeepers are not strategic people. They are simple businessmen buying in bulk and selling at a profit. They have no more right to set council strategy than any other citizen. You don't get extra representation just because you pay more tax.

The city council is not obliged to mount a massive counter publicity campaign to refute Brown Thomas' claim that the city is closed. Where does your figure of at least 5m come from? I have seen no evidence of a drop in business caused by the bus gate. For all we know, business would have been even worse without the bus gate. I've been into the city centre more often since it was implemented.

The council is a representative democratic chamber. It represents the people who vote for it - not the businesses who pay rates. I think it's time to post the photos & names of councillors who put the needs of Brown Thomas and Louis Copeland ahead of the needs of their electorate.

AlekSmart

The city council is not obliged to mount a massive counter publicity campaign to refute Brown Thomas' claim that the city is closed. Where does your figure of at least 5m come from? I have seen no evidence of a drop in business caused by the bus gate. For all we know, business would have been even worse without the bus gate. I've been into the city centre more often since it was implemented.

The council is a representative democratic chamber. It represents the people who vote for it - not the businesses who pay rates. I think it's time to post the photos & names of councillors who put the needs of Brown Thomas and Louis Copeland ahead of the needs of their electorate.

Hear bloody Hear I say..well spoken that Croco person

It should be noted that Bus Atha Cliath did make a reasonable effort to publicise their 50c City Centre Fare,the only problem was that much of the Publicity Material was on-bus which reduced the target audience somewhat.

The 50c CC fare is slowly beginning to dawn on the consciousness of regular Bus Users now and I find myself issuing more and more each day.

However what IS inexplicable and definitely needs investigation is the reason/s for BAC making the issuing of the CC ticket so complex.

The actual CC Fare button is contained within a sub-menu on the Ticket Machine.
When a CC Fare is requested,a Busdriver must key out of the normal menu,enter a submenu,select and issue a CC ticket.
If a customer is entitled to a change ticket then the Busdriver must return to the main-menu to issue that before returning to the sub-menu for the next CC ticket.

A load of Cobblers surrounding what SHOULD be a simple single keystroke issue.

This insanity is worsened by the presence of an unused button on the ticket machine fascia in addition to the almost never-utilized Feeder-Ticket button.

This is an internal Bus Atha Cliath issue which IMO should NEVER have occured but it still does not excuse the total lack of integration from the CCBA people who are shouting the odds from Grafton Street.

IF these Shopkeepers were ACTUAL Businesspeople they would be looking upon all those 50c fares as potential new business for THEIR stores.

Instead what we are seeing is petulance and political point scoring of the type that underlines why the Irish will NEVER be truly European in outlook.

I really do hope Andrew Montague and his group stick-to-their -guns on this one as it`s one of the very few initiatives capable of making a REAL change for the better in our Capital.

MiniD

AMontague wrote: »

At the meeting on Monday, I will be looking for reassurances from the City Manager that the Gate will re-open fully in January. If I believe that the proposal is an attempt to quietly bury the Bus Gate, I won't support it.

I know many people will view my decision to back the compromise as the wrong way to go, but in my opinion it is the least risky way to ensure that we have Bus Gate in 2010.

Cllr Andrew Montague

Can I ask if you got that reassurance this evening for the return of a full time bus gate?

I must say I don't agree with your decision this evening. You're quoted as saying you would prefer to 'win the war rather than the battle' and get the full bus corridor back in January. Personally, I feel if you believe in something, you support it fully, not for the weeks that suit retailers. I hope the thousands of commuters in your constituency understand your reasons while they are stuck on the 4/4A/11/11A/11B/13/13A/16/16A/20B/27X for the next two months, all of which benefited from the bus gate.

To quote your blog from March this year...

I believe this proposal will increase trade to this area of town. We have learned over many years that where bus lanes have been introduced, footfall increases - even when cars are restricted. This makes sense. One bus can carry over a hundred passengers, whereas a car can only carry five. A typical bus lane will carry five thousand people per hour, while a typical car lane will transport one thousand per hour.

Does that not matter for the months of November and December?

With the bus gate being removed in the evening, is the court case is now being dropped by retailers?

AMontague

The motion we voted on this evening was explicit that the Bus Gate will return in January. It will not be the subject of another vote in January - it comes back automatically. And the decision that was taken tonight cannot be reversed for six months.

I'm disappointed that I had to support a compromise this evening and would much rather have kept the full Bus Gate. However, if you had been at the October meeting of the Council (and you can watch a video of the meeting), the prevailing mood was to abandon the Bus Gate altogether.

It was my judgement that we could have lost Bus Gate altogether, if the compromise wasn't on offer. I wasn't prepared to take that risk.

BrianD

I would support the Bus Gate and it's a pity that it's been watered down. I think that this will be the thin end of the wedge.

However, I believe that DCC were the authors of their own misfortune. The advance signage for the bus gate is simply disaster. A few badly placed VMS signs and those microscopic yellow and red signs. Useless! Mind you it is in keeping with the badly placed and tiny signs that already exist. This project should have VMS signage much further out - down the quays and indicating alternative routes to key parts of the city. It would asist traffic flows of both commuters and those trying to go in the CBD on business/shopping. I don;t know what its is about the Dublin City Council roads department but they seem to have an aversion to road signage. Go to London and you'll see road signs for major rail stations etc. You'd be hard pressed to see a sign for either rail terminii in Dublin. We should have big overhead signage in Dublin, not the sorry stuff that DCC like to erect.

Is any data available on on-street parking in the Dublin 2 area? Surely this would have been down as well as the off-street car parks.

AlekSmart

Yea,Brian D,a sorry day indeed for those with any belief in Dublin City Council as a body REPRESENTATIVE of the greater citizenry of Dublin.

Although....reading between the lines in the Evenin Herald`s puff-piece on the City Manager tonight it`s clear that the single greatest fear abroad in Civic Offices these days is exposure to Legal Challenges and resultant compensatory payments.

Basically what the City Council has decided tonight is that it represents the commercial rate payers first and the general populace a very poor 2nd.

There are for certain many thousands of commuters now whose daily commute is about to be significantly extended each evening,perhaps a group of such folk could club together and instruct the likes of Bill Shipsey SC to put the squeeze on the Council for a bit of compo ??

P_1

Has anybody got a list of the retailers who convinced the council to backtrack on the decision. I think a boycott should be arranged by all of us who will be affected by the decision to close the bus gate.

That will give them a reason to moan about falling sales.

howiya

AMontague wrote: »

I'm disappointed that I had to support a compromise this evening and would much rather have kept the full Bus Gate. However, if you had been at the October meeting of the Council (and you can watch a video of the meeting), the prevailing mood was to abandon the Bus Gate altogether.

It was my judgement that we could have lost Bus Gate altogether, if the compromise wasn't on offer. I wasn't prepared to take that risk.

Could you explain why you had to support a compromise? Why could you not convince your fellow councillors to support the bus gate?

According to the Irish Times report on the council meeting, you also voted to make over 1,000 on street parking spaces free of charge. I didn't realise the City Council was awash with money. How much will this measure cost and how will it be funded? Will council services be cut as a result?

bmaxi

When this comes up for debate again no doubt the argument will be that trade increased during the time the bus gate was suspended. Of course it did, it was Christmas FFS!
It only serves to reinforce the view, right or wrong, that politicians, of whatever hue, are in the pockets of big business.

antoinolachtnai

AlekSmart wrote: »

There are for certain many thousands of commuters now whose daily commute is about to be significantly extended each evening,perhaps a group of such folk could club together and instruct the likes of Bill Shipsey SC to put the squeeze on the Council for a bit of compo ??

It is very unlikely at this stage in his career that Mr Shipsey would stop taking instructions from DCC as he has done for many years in order to help pursue what would be a rather difficult claim! It is pretty much impossible to get such compensation in practice, since the Glencar ruling. The group of traders who brought the action were not expecting compensation as I understand it.

Everybody has to be a bit realistic here. The city actually is a business (although it has many other aspects). Its paying customers, whether we like it or not, are the ratepayers and people parking their cars. What they think does actually matter. A large proportion of the offices in the city (I am thinking of civil service offices) do not contribute to rates at all, and people who live in the city (as I do) don't contribute either. This is a big issue, bigger even than public transport.

bmaxi

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Everybody has to be a bit realistic here. The city actually is a business (although it has many other aspects). Its paying customers, whether we like it or not, are the ratepayers and people parking their cars. What they think does actually matter. A large proportion of the offices in the city (I am thinking of civil service offices) do not contribute to rates at all, and people who live in the city (as I do) don't contribute either. This is a big issue, bigger even than public transport.

Is not Joe Public, in the form of Central government, a major source of income for Dublin City?

Macha

pithater1 wrote: »

Has anybody got a list of the retailers who convinced the council to backtrack on the decision. I think a boycott should be arranged by all of us who will be affected by the decision to close the bus gate.

That will give them a reason to moan about falling sales.

Excellent idea.

I think there were 12 businesses:

1. Brown Thomas
2. Louis Copeland
3. Q-Park (Dawson St/Ilac/Clerys/Stephen's Green/Royal College of Surgeons, among other)
4. Fleet Street Car Park Ltd.

That's all I can find from going through the IT articles.

Also, Dublin City Business Association was instrumental in whipping up opposition among city centre traders.

Euro_Kraut

AMontague wrote: »

The motion we voted on this evening was explicit that the Bus Gate will return in January. It will not be the subject of another vote in January - it comes back automatically. And the decision that was taken tonight cannot be reversed for six months.

I'm disappointed that I had to support a compromise this evening and would much rather have kept the full Bus Gate. However, if you had been at the October meeting of the Council (and you can watch a video of the meeting), the prevailing mood was to abandon the Bus Gate altogether.

It was my judgement that we could have lost Bus Gate altogether, if the compromise wasn't on offer. I wasn't prepared to take that risk.

I think that is Spin Andrew. You were forced to tow a party line. I am shocked that the Labour party has decided to side with business interests ahead of public transport users, cyclists and pedestrians.

Its a sad day that your party - the largest on the council did not have the political muscle to face down Fine Gael. Labour along with the leftish Independent and SF had the numbers for vote this down. You choose not to. That’s a real shame.

howiya

taconnol wrote: »

Excellent idea.

I think there were 12 businesses:

1. Brown Thomas
2. Louis Copeland
3. Q-Park (Dawson St/Ilac/Clerys/Stephen's Green/Royal College of Surgeons, among other)
4. Fleet Street Car Park Ltd.

That's all I can find from going through the IT articles.

Also, Dublin City Business Association was instrumental in whipping up opposition among city centre traders.

Weirs was another listed in the IT