Pedestrianise College Green for 2016

FreudianSlippers

I think it reflects a good, inexpensive compromise between increased pedestrian access and the need for public transport to use the area

leshamry

It's hardly radical but it is welcome.

danotroy

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Car/Bus transport is a fact of life. It's what get's the city moving. Walking is for short journeys. .

In most cities around the world walking is the primary mode that people use to get around the city followed by public transport.

chewed

It's not looking good for the plan!

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/traffic-plan-for-dublin-may-not-see-light-of-day-says-council-1.1525841

crushproof

chewed wrote: »

It's not looking good for the plan!

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/traffic-plan-for-dublin-may-not-see-light-of-day-says-council-1.1525841

For the love of god, the lack of foresight is shocking! It's evident in cities around the world that the opening up of large plazas and walkways improves the overall quality of life for the citizens.

The only issue I have is the continued use of that entire corridor between College Green and O'Connell Street being used for high volumes ofbuses and bus stops, it would be much better if the buses were somehow re routed or a large city centre terminus built somewhere (I admit that I have no idea where or how these issues would be realised).

On the plus side the best thing about the artists impressions is the taking away of the central trees on College Tree, I'll no longer need to whip out the chain saw at 3am on Christmas morning! :rolleyes:

A Disgrace

With a bit if imagination, they could route some of the bus traffic behind Trinity (via Westland Row and Pearse St) - they could still even operate to/from Westmoreland St with this route (albeit with an increase in journey times) but the prospect of totally removing bus traffic from College green is nil (without wholesale demolition and/or tunnelling)

bk

A Disgrace wrote: »

With a bit if imagination, they could route some of the bus traffic behind Trinity (via Westland Row and Pearse St) - they could still even operate to/from Westmoreland St with this route (albeit with an increase in journey times) but the prospect of totally removing bus traffic from College green is nil (without wholesale demolition and/or tunnelling)

In fairness, cut and cover tunnelling isn't that crazy or expensive to do.

They seem to do it all over Poland with no problems.

For instance in Sopot (Northern Polish City) a major road separated the promenade/beach from the main town street. They cut and covered the road crating a massive lovely square which now lets you walk from the town center to the beach with not a car in sight. Awesome result and attracts lots of tourists.

A Disgrace

bk wrote: »

In fairness, cut and cover tunnelling isn't that crazy or expensive to do.

They seem to do it all over Poland with no problems.

For instance in Sopot (Northern Polish City) a major road separated the promenade/beach from the main town street. They cut and covered the road crating a massive lovely square which now lets you walk from the town center to the beach with not a car in sight. Awesome result and attracts lots of tourists.

Yeah, and there's a fair few underpasses/tunnels in Budapest too - you could technically lower into one along Dame St and rise again on Westmoreland st I suppose although a lot of the land around here is reclaimed so not sure of the implications of that

monument

A Disgrace wrote: »

With a bit if imagination, they could route some of the bus traffic behind Trinity (via Westland Row and Pearse St) - they could still even operate to/from Westmoreland St with this route (albeit with an increase in journey times) but the prospect of totally removing bus traffic from College green is nil (without wholesale demolition and/or tunnelling)

From what was reported, putting a lot of routes via Westland Row is part of the NTA plan for the city centre...

Sorry... I mean NTA discussion document.

bk wrote: »

In fairness, cut and cover tunnelling isn't that crazy or expensive to do.

They seem to do it all over Poland with no problems.

For instance in Sopot (Northern Polish City) a major road separated the promenade/beach from the main town street. They cut and covered the road crating a massive lovely square which now lets you walk from the town center to the beach with not a car in sight. Awesome result and attracts lots of tourists.

Cut and cover on College Green can be almost ruled out for the following reasons:

- There'd likely be far more disruption compared the planned MN station boxes, likely too much disruption and cost for so little benefit: going down to two traffic lanes on College Green, or diverting all buses would likely rank better
- A Luas line is been built in the very near future
- Filling in basements is one thing, but digging from ground level to below basement level in such an historic setting would be problematic

lucernarian

bk wrote: »

In fairness, cut and cover tunnelling isn't that crazy or expensive to do.

They seem to do it all over Poland with no problems.

For instance in Sopot (Northern Polish City) a major road separated the promenade/beach from the main town street. They cut and covered the road crating a massive lovely square which now lets you walk from the town center to the beach with not a car in sight. Awesome result and attracts lots of tourists.

Wow, when I walked around Sopot a couple of years ago, I never even realised there was a cut-and-cover tunnel nearby! It's a very impressive result so.

Also, as someone who had to cross Westland Row routinely for work and college and going to and from my home, I would be very concerned about even more traffic ending up on that congested street (where pedestrians come last for the traffic light signalling pattern). Such changes would need to happen as part of a far more comprehensive approach to Dublin city traffic, a bit like what the NTA are talking about. I don't agree with a few aspects of the NTA document, but at least it's comprehensive enough to take into account the diverse requirements that such changes would encounter.

AngryLips

Why would DCC need to approve this? I thought that traffic management now falls under the NTA's remit?

monument

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

Wow, when I walked around Sopot a couple of years ago, I never even realised there was a cut-and-cover tunnel nearby! It's a very impressive result so.

Also, as someone who had to cross Westland Row routinely for work and college and going to and from my home, I would be very concerned about even more traffic ending up on that congested street (where pedestrians come last for the traffic light signalling pattern). Such changes would need to happen as part of a far more comprehensive approach to Dublin city traffic, a bit like what the NTA are talking about. I don't agree with a few aspects of the NTA document, but at least it's comprehensive enough to take into account the diverse requirements that such changes would encounter.

The idea the NTA are looking at is bus only traffic on Westland Row.

lucernarian

monument wrote: »

The idea the NTA are looking at is bus only traffic on Westland Row.

That area is a pain, all the streets further east are quite residential in nature (except Sandwith St. and with its height restriction too). The measures need to effectively take people out of cars rather than pushing cars out in an expanding circle of congestion around the inner city. It's a complex issue to predict the impact of any one measure or even a set of changes involving new one way systems or two-way traffic down old one way streets.

monument

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

That area is a pain, all the streets further east are quite residential in nature (except Sandwith St. and with its height restriction too). The measures need to effectively take people out of cars rather than pushing cars out in an expanding circle of congestion around the inner city. It's a complex issue to predict the impact of any one measure or even a set of changes involving new one way systems or two-way traffic down old one way streets.

Macken Street is less "quite residential" than the majority of main radial routes -- it's flanked by some houses but mainly by a mix of set back flats, the TCD enterprise centre, the NTMA/NAMA building, a few set back houses, and even a tiny bit of retail.

But that's besides the point, prioritising walking, cycling and public transport is exactly the "measures need to effectively take people out of cars".

lucernarian

monument wrote: »

Macken Street is less "quite residential" than the majority of main radial routes -- it's flanked by some houses but mainly by a mix of set back flats, the TCD enterprise centre, the NTMA/NAMA building, a few set back houses, and even a tiny bit of retail.

But that's besides the point, prioritising walking, cycling and public transport is exactly the "measures need to effectively take people out of cars".

My question was about the proportion of people who will drive elsewhere when existing routes are cut off vs those who will use the public transport etc. opened up by the restrictions.

Also, the likes of Macken St was never part of any major transport corridor into or out of Dublin, unlike the Dorset Streets or Mount Streets of this world. At least people living off Dorset nowadays would know what they were getting into if they moved there any time in the last 30 years or more.

My last post touched on a specific instance (part of the topic of this thread) of the prioritisation you refer to and I'm interested in the most appropriate way to achieve this.

monument

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

My question was about the proportion of people who will drive elsewhere when existing routes are cut off vs those who will use the public transport etc. opened up by the restrictions.

Also, the likes of Macken St was never part of any major transport corridor into or out of Dublin, unlike the Dorset Streets or Mount Streets of this world. At least people living off Dorset nowadays would know what they were getting into if they moved there any time in the last 30 years or more.

My last post touched on a specific instance (part of the topic of this thread) of the prioritisation you refer to and I'm interested in the most appropriate way to achieve this.

Macken St will never be a "major transport corridor into or out of Dublin" , it however seems like a prime candidate to be a (minor) part of a parking route around the city centre.

Why? It's adjoining streets has a big part to play in it -- the Becket bridge and it making up part if a north-south route from the bridge, two large car parks just off that axes and more of them just north of the river.

It's a good route for local access but it won't be a major route anywhere as current congested traffic conditions makes more western or eastern routes more attractive for that.

SeanW

monument wrote: »

The largest in Europe? That's some claim. Are you sure you're correct?

Don't know about the largest, but it is very wide with - with good reason - most of it being given to pedestrians.

We can do the same with our large bus network backed by Luas, Dart and Commuter rail.... And yes! Also with cycling and walking!

Luas Red Line (Heuston-CC mostly) Northern Green line, much of the DART and many of the Commuter lines are oversubscribed as it is - in some cases quite seriously. Buses rarely attract people onto public transport the way trains and trams do.

It seems to be the suggestion that taking stuff away from motorists is the only solution, without reference to the need for better publiuc transport as an integral part of any plan. This really requires the suspension of disbelief IMO.

monument

SeanW wrote: »

Don't know about the largest, but it is very wide with - with good reason - most of it being given to pedestrians.

Sean, as I made clear in that reply to another poster, I was playing devil's advocate.

SeanW wrote: »

Luas Red Line (Heuston-CC mostly) Northern Green line, much of the DART and many of the Commuter lines are oversubscribed as it is - in some cases quite seriously. Buses rarely attract people onto public transport the way trains and trams do.

A mix is always best.

Luas Liberties (Line F2) adds capacity to the red ling. Dart and the Dublin rail network in general will have extra capacity soon enough once resignalling is done.... a lot more if they get around to Dart Underground etc.

SeanW wrote: »

It seems to be the suggestion that taking stuff away from motorists is the only solution, without reference to the need for better publiuc transport as an integral part of any plan. This really requires the suspension of disbelief IMO.

It really, really, really requires the suspension of disbelief that somebody could read this thread and miss the mention of Luas Cross City and of bus priority.

SeanW

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

Wow, when I walked around Sopot a couple of years ago, I never even realised there was a cut-and-cover tunnel nearby! It's a very impressive result so.

There's something similar in Rovaniemi (sp?) Finland. Their main street (Koskikatu) runs over a C&C tunnel of the main Route 4, which is actually a dual carriageway! But with the town main street and two shopping centres over it, the impact of the DC on the town centre is seriously limited.

monument wrote: »

A mix is always best.

Not sure what you mean by this?

It really, really, really requires the suspension of disbelief that somebody could read this thread and miss the mention of Luas Cross City and of bus priority.

My bad, I was thinking of this post at the time.

Aard wrote: »

More roads leads to more traffic. If there's a concern about "far too much traffic", then the trick is to remove road space.

So, if traffic is bad:
1) Remove road space from cars
2) The traffic all melts away
3) Win.

That ... plan ... appears to have some missing elements.

nowecant

Aard wrote: »

There's always the option of leaving a lane or two open for busses only. Like a 24-hour bus gate. The southern side of College Green could be made two-way (where the sun would shine least), allowing the northern side by Bank of Ireland to be turned over to pedestrian use. Even by removing the two northern lanes from College Green, a huge amount of public space could be created. Currently the only space available to pedestrians is on the footpaths and the central median, neither of which are useful for anything other than getting in-'n-out as quick as possible.

I think that keeping College Green open for busses only would be the best thing to do at the moment. Obviously with a reconfiguration of the carriageways. WARNING! MS Paint Crayoning ahead, don't take too literally! Below is how it could be done.

• All streets leading to College Green are now two-way, much safer for pedestrians and cyclists than the current F1-style turn radii in places.
• It also takes busses out of Church Lane, which is a horrible little street atm.
• Traffic is kept to the southern side of College Green, leaving the sunnier side for public use.
• An easy connection is made from Trinity to Temple Bar, where currently you'd have to cross THREE carriageways iirc.
• Bus traffic is taken off Suffolk Street, allowing people to keep walking north from Grafton Street much more easily.

It looks like they have taken your advice http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/cars-to-be-banned-from-one-side-of-college-green-in-trial-run-1.2016416

College green is to be reduced to two lanes for a series of trial runs.

Its a start I suppose

Pete_Cavan

Looks like a good first step. It would also help if they integrated the space inside the BOI railings to have some activity here, it is a bit of a wasted space right now. Hopefully the taxis will be removed from Foster Place, it could be a nice area for cafes and outdoor seating.

The next step should be to remove the taxi rank and central island and have the traffic lanes in this space and extend the footpaths into the existing road space. There should be at least 5m gained for pedestrians either side and it would make life easier by only having one road to cross (instead of crossing, waiting on the island and having to cross again). With H&M now opening there, the additional pedestrian space is needed.

The ultimate goal should be full pedestrianisation from BOI to A&F facades although this is a long way off.

omicron

Would Suffolk St be pedestrianised in this situation also?

AngryLips

omicron wrote: »

Would Suffolk St be pedestrianised in this situation also?

I imagine that once Luas BXD opens it would make more sense for busses to continue on the same route as Luas instead of diverting via Suffolk St because it would cause more conflict with Luas services if there are bus routes that are leaving and rejoining the Luas line where it meanders around Trinity.

LXFlyer

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The ultimate goal should be full pedestrianisation from BOI to A&F facades although this is a long way off.

That is not going to happen in my opinion. Dame Street is much too critical an artery for public transport - there's no other way for all the cross-city routes that use it to/from George's Street to go.

I think you could end up with just a lane each way for public transport on the south side, but that's as far as you could possibly go.

Aard

Yeah the only other nearby route would be Parliament St then the quays, which might constitute too much of a detour for many to stomach. Also means capacity for non-bus at Parliament St is halved, which mightn't be the worst compromise come to think of it. Either way, I don't see a huge problem with College Green being bus-only. Were that to happen, CG would become a safe and more pleasant transport hub for the city centre meaning that it would remain busy with people at all times. Buses would be able to make considerable time savings too.

cgcsb

I would be concerned that this would have a damaging effect on Dublin Bus services that'll be sharing one lane, each way with general traffic. IMO, it should be bus only with a separated two way cycle track on the south side of the green.

Carawaystick

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Looks like a good first step. It would also help if they integrated the space inside the BOI railings to have some activity here, it is a bit of a wasted space right now.

but where would the court of boi park then? Surely not in a public car park with mere plebians?

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The ultimate goal should be full pedestrianisation from BOI to A&F facades although this is a long way off.

There is simply too much public transport and cycling traffic through here to close it off.

Telchak

Using the Luas BXD planning documents as a base, I made this mockup this morning of how the plaza would conform to tracks as currently planned.

(Click for full size)


Can't see BoI removing their wall as the cover would be too much of a target for the homeless

A Disgrace

Telchak wrote: »

Can't see BoI removing their wall as the cover would be too much of a target for the homeless

I think the wall and railings are protected structures.

The first thing that needs to be done at College Green is the removal of the trees, this will instantly open up the space

It’s just a shame that the Luas will cut Trinity off from whatever future space there may be – the college opening out on to a plaza would have been ideal

I would have preferred the Luas to run down Nassau St, Westland Row and Pearse st to Westmoreland st, and then carried on from there – a bit of a round-about way, but worth it in the long run

monument

Telchak wrote: »

Using the Luas BXD planning documents as a base, I made this mockup this morning of how the plaza would conform to tracks as currently planned.

(Click for full size)


Can't see BoI removing their wall as the cover would be too much of a target for the homeless

I raise you a mockup with a two-way cycle path on the plaza side and wide pedestrian crossings:



Linking into the cycle paths shown in the BRT plans (which strangely ends two-way leading onto College Green into the tram tracks?):



BTW: DCC looking at possibility of removing BOI railings for plaza.

EDIT: I've rotated the BRT image so it's more readable with the College Green drawing.