Pedestrianise College Green for 2016

BoySnowie

If Dublin City Council announces that they will close off College Green for good, everything will change accordingly. Of course, people will protest and we will see demos etc - at least they ll have a nice big public square to do it in!

LXFlyer

richiek83 wrote: »

Totally agree Aquarius34, Pedestrianising College Green is a fantastic idea but Metro North and DART Underground would in my opinion be needed to ensure that viable Public Transport alternatives are available. It is the one unique Public space that is suitable to a Public Square/ Plaza in Dublin surrounded by great Georgian buildings. The recent New Years Eve concert and the visit of Obama show that the space is ripe for a Public Plaza and not the traffic that does choke it on a daily basis.

Whatever about NYE, but you must have had your eyes closed when Obama was here. There was gridlock on many of the arterial routes.

It is a nice idea, but as I've said before the negative impact that this would have on the city's bus service, the core element of the city's public transport, would be massive.

I agree - unless DART underground and Metro North existed I don't see how this could possibly work.

For public transport to work it needs to take people to where they want to go, and closing this area off would mean significant diversions and delays to the bus network.

bk

Would it be possible to cut and cover college green and move the roads underground?

I've seen that done very effectively in other countries like in Sopot in Poland, they buried a big road that was separating the main street from the beach, thus creating a beautiful town square.

seamus

I suspect a cut and cover would be quite expensive. There's an urban legend that the reason a metro was never built in Dublin was that the soil was too wet/loose to do it. But if they could build a tube under the Thames in the late 1800's, then we can overcome any alleged engineering difficulties in Dublin.

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

Whatever about NYE, but you must have had your eyes closed when Obama was here. There was gridlock on many of the arterial routes.

It is a nice idea, but as I've said before the negative impact that this would have on the city's bus service, the core element of the city's public transport, would be massive.

I agree - unless DART underground and Metro North existed I don't see how this could possibly work.

For public transport to work it needs to take people to where they want to go, and closing this area off would mean significant diversions and delays to the bus network.

Big diffrence between blocking a place off for an event and doing the detailed planning which would allow you to block it off for good.

Done even half right and the end user won't think there has been significant diversions.

It would be a large project which would change a lot -- but diverting traffic around the city core has been done in a large amount of cities across Europe -- sometimes without any metros in place.

Stonewolf

The main issue here, as I believe others have pointed out is that while East-West wouldn't be overly affected, North-South is a totally different matter.

East of there you'd have to go as far as Westland Row. West you'd have to go as far as Parliment Street/South Great Georges Street which doesn't really have sufficient capacity to handle the amount of traffic you'd be dumping on it in both directions so probably more like Clanbrassil Street.

I'm not against the idea, I think it's great but you'd have to tunnel something under there.

Aard

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.

monument

Stonewolf wrote: »

East of there you'd have to go as far as Westland Row.

It's only about 0.5km to 0.7km in the difference. Buses will also avoid the slower, smaller, and very busy streets on the current route -- northbound would be much faster going around to Tara.

There will be no completion from private motorists who would be pushed further out.

You end up with the best rail-bus connections in the city.

Stonewolf wrote: »

West you'd have to go as far as Parliment Street/South Great Georges Street which doesn't really have sufficient capacity to handle the amount of traffic you'd be dumping on it in both directions so probably more like Clanbrassil Street.

When reworking streets you can have a lot more capacity than is currently on the ground.

Going west does not matter for westbound services, and it might be good if a few northbound services skipped OCS.

Stonewolf

monument wrote: »

It's only about 0.5km to 0.7km in the difference. Buses will also avoid the slower, smaller, and very busy streets on the current route -- northbound would be much faster going around to Tara.

There will be no completion from private motorists who would be pushed further out.

You end up with the best rail-bus connections in the city.



When reworking streets you can have a lot more capacity than is currently on the ground.

Going west does not matter for westbound services, and it might be good if a few northbound services skipped OCS.

I wasn't really complaining about Westland Row, it's the Western side that really presents the problem.

As for forcing private traffic out of the centre ... private traffic is important to the centre as it includes a) commercial traffic and b) customers. Private through traffic in the city centre should be discouraged I agree but getting into and out of your destination in the city centre should be possible without being redirected around half the country on the way.

EDIT: Also I realise I used an incorrect street name in my previous post, the street I was thinking of was Nicholas St

Aquarius34

If you want to pedestrianize college green, you are going to have to sort not only the public transportation issue but motor traffic too. I am not sure if Dublin city council and the pot smoking pedestrianizing fanatics realise this importance part to our urban society.
In order for a city to function, live, work and breath, it must have a free moving motor and public transportation system so the city's dwellers can get around the city efficiently. It sounds like a strange fact I know, but it's true.

It seems to me that a lot of people are missing this point and it is not going to be a big "problem" to block this area off like it's just going to be the switch of changing a jumper. Hey it's "o.k." to block a major artery in the heart and think the heart will just beat fine. This road is practically main artery through the city centre for north and south commuters.

Cut and cover would not be that expensive as people think. Especially, if it’s going to be a small area. It's just going to be very disruptive. Cut and cover is quite common in many European cities. Paris has a quite a lot of them. Cut and cover seems like a great idea actually.
If was to be built, the road itself would just cater for cars and buses and sink at the top of Dame Street and rise up at Westmorland Street. That distance is about max 80 metres I suspect?? They have done something like this at Dun Laoghaire with the Dart. The only problem with Dame Street though is that the Dart cover plan didn't have to cut down because naturally the dart itself is already below ground level.
But then again, what is the excuse for our Irish engineers to not be ambitious in this country and build such things? Besides the Port Tunnel, I don't think we've ever done anything of a scale that could be said, "Whoa we built that".

The British engineers seemed to have built most of our transportation systems and fine buildings here.

To me it seems like a brilliant idea if it was integrated into the pedestrianization programme.

Aard

Cars seem to manage perfectly well during the hours the bus gate is in operation.

Closing off College Green to cars literally refers to only a few possible movements. A few other nearby streets could be modified in tandem with closing off the Green to private vehicles. I'm thinking Parliament Street (making it two-way) and Kildare Street. Maybe Stephens Green East.

Look at any major city in the Netherlands for how they MAJORLY restrict private vehicles in their centres. Gronigen has implemented this extensively.

Stonewolf

The main issue with cut and cover is the haphazard nature of our utilities, I think it can and should be done (not just at Dame Street but between Connelly and The Customs House is another fine spot for it). There is however more to it than showing up with a spade one morning and getting digging.

Aquarius34

Aard wrote: »

Cars seem to manage perfectly well during the hours the bus gate is in operation.

Closing off College Green to cars literally refers to only a few possible movements. A few other nearby streets could be modified in tandem with closing off the Green to private vehicles. I'm thinking Parliament Street (making it two-way) and Kildare Street. Maybe Stephens Green East.

Look at any major city in the Netherlands for how they MAJORLY restrict private vehicles in their centres. Gronigen has implemented this extensively.

You can't compare Netherlands transportation system with Ireland transport system. You just can't. It hurts my brain. Our transport system is pathetic and our Councillors are gobshiites.

We do everything, at the last minute, backwards and 100 years later when everything is a complete mess. If we ever do get anything right we hire someone foreign to sort it out.

Aquarius34

Stonewolf wrote: »

The main issue with cut and cover is the haphazard nature of our utilities, I think it can and should be done (not just at Dame Street but between Connelly and The Customs House is another fine spot for it). There is however more to it than showing up with a spade one morning and getting digging.

Another place would be where the new bridge was built and route a tunnel from there to Pearse street.

Aard

Aquarius34 wrote: »

You can't compare Netherlands transportation system with Ireland transport system. You just can't. It hurts my brain. Our transport system is pathetic and our Councillors are gobshiites.

We do everything, at the last minute, backwards and 100 years later when everything is a complete mess. If we ever do get anything right we hire someone foreign to sort it out.

That post is reactionary, and doesn't address my main point: College Green is one junction in the city.

Aquarius34

Aard wrote: »

That post is reactionary, and doesn't address my main point: College Green is one junction in the city.

It's one of the busiest main junctions in the city with the busiest bus route in the city.

How can one not react, when you miss that important aspect?

Aard

So would you be open to the idea of leaving it open to busses, but closing it off to private vehicles? As I said above, this is the situation at peak hours as-is.

Aquarius34

Aard wrote: »

So would you be open to the idea of leaving it open to busses, but closing it off to private vehicles? As I said above, this is the situation at peak hours as-is.

Nope, because it's a half arse Irish job that never ends.

Aard

How is it half-assed?

monument

Aard wrote: »

Look at any major city in the Netherlands for how they MAJORLY restrict private vehicles in their centres. Gronigen has implemented this extensively.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

You can't compare Netherlands transportation system with Ireland transport system. You just can't. It hurts my brain. Our transport system is pathetic and our Councillors are gobshiites.

We do everything, at the last minute, backwards and 100 years later when everything is a complete mess. If we ever do get anything right we hire someone foreign to sort it out.

Public transport in Gronigen counts of less than 10% of modal share (source).

In Amsterdam -- which is more comparable to Dublin size wise -- public transport is running at 22% of modal share (source) -- not including walking, so it's really less than 22%. The 22% applies to both inside and outside the inner ring road.

Dublin is 22% (source) and crossing the canals in Dublin public transport is running just a bit below 50% (source).

The Netherlands nationally is about 5% (source). The difference in the Netherlands is, of course, the humble bicycle -- not public transport.

Aard wrote: »

So would you be open to the idea of leaving it open to busses, but closing it off to private vehicles? As I said above, this is the situation at peak hours as-is.

BXD will push the 'bus gate' to or towards 24 hours operating anyway.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

How can one not react, when you miss that important aspect?

Nobody is missing that point.

But you don't seem to be able to accept that: Busy streets change in use around the world, they have done so in Dublin before, and change can happen in Dublin again -- it's not imposable.

Stonewolf wrote: »

I wasn't really complaining about Westland Row, it's the Western side that really presents the problem.

Did some measuring, working under the, already mentioned, idea that reworking the city centre would be part of the plan.

• George's Street - Capel Street (take out a line of parking or bus and access only and reverse flow) - Dorset Street is shorter than current route.
• George's Street - Church Street (bus and access only along the narrow section) - Doyle's Corner is also shorter than the current route.

Stonewolf wrote: »

As for forcing private traffic out of the centre ... private traffic is important to the centre as it includes a) commercial traffic and b) customers. Private through traffic in the city centre should be discouraged I agree but getting into and out of your destination in the city centre should be possible without being redirected around half the country on the way.

The vast bulk of customers driving into the city centre drive in an arterial route and park in a car park with close access to that arterial route. The idea of significant amounts of shoppers or other customers needing to drive from one half of the city centre to the other is a red heroin.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

In order for a city to function, live, work and breath, it must have a free moving motor and public transportation system so the city's dwellers can get around the city efficiently. It sounds like a strange fact I know, but it's true.

Dublin does not have free-moving motor or public transport, so that's not much of a fact. At best it's a misplaced opinion.

Aquarius34

monument wrote: »

Dublin does not have free-moving motor or public transport, so that's not much of a fact. At best it's a misplaced opinion.

You've obviously misunderstood what I said overall. We are talking about the busiest arterial route in the city and if that is closed, it is like closing a valve of the heart in a "do nothing scenario” Which Dublin city planners are stupid enough to go and follow on. "Ah sure it's grand like" Just as they were stupid enough to plan an 8 foot wall to block out Clontarf promenade and only stopped due to public outcry. if we don't have a proper transport system why the heck we would we open up the only city's artery to pedestrians??


Dublin's transport system is a joke. There is no public transport integration and car traffic is a nightmare. We don't have a full ring road around the city. We don't have an integrated rail system. We don't have a circular bus route system; we don't have any inner city motorways. Our only Dartline is congested at the loopline bridge. We have tolls on a bridge that should not be tolled. We don't have a proper luas system or a rail link to the airport. We have a 30kmh speed limit in the city. Oh the list is just endless at this stage.

We are a city of 1 million and it's is very badly managed.

Now we have some stupid notion to just close off the busiest junction on the busiest motor car and bus route in the city centre. The level of traffic and buses that uses this route cannot just be dumped onto other streets. Dublin's traffic problems needs to be addressed not dumped somewhere else.

That's a typical Irish way of dealing with matters.


The statement you made about Netherlands is farce. Are you trying to say the Netherlands public transport system is worse than ours or that according to your sources it's ok to just go ahead and pedestrianize college green because your sources stand for it? Now that's for the comedy forum. Our trains alone are probably the slowest on the planet and run on diesel for Gods sakes and pay fares equal to the UK.. Are you even serious? Our railway was built by the British. Our Dart system was built by the British, we just put Dart trains on it and electrified the lines We built a Luas mainly on brownfield site and on top of existing roads and forget to even connect the only two lines we have currently.


Amsterdam, has an integrated public transport and motorway system. It has a tram system we wish we could ream to have. It has many radial routes both in the city and some inner city motorways including a full circle ring road and an outer western bypass. Amsterdam is a city that can have many public squares pedestrianized because it has a transport to cater for it's people and get them around the city efficiently. Not only that it has a very good bike transport system and has huge park and ride spots so people can leave their cars behind and use public transport whilst working in the city.

Dublin is an embarrassment on every scale imaginable and we are city of similar size.

monument

Aquarius34 wrote: »

We are talking about the busiest arterial route in the city and if that is closed, it is like closing a valve of the heart in a "do nothing scenario” Which Dublin city planners are stupid enough to go and follow on.

It's not an "arterial route" -- it's a small section of city centre streets. The routes which use it can be redirected.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

"Ah sure it's grand like" Just as they were stupid enough to plan an 8 foot wall to block out Clontarf promenade and only stopped due to public outcry.

Is this coming from the same person who seems to be saying a lack of "inner city motorways" is a bad thing?

Aquarius34 wrote: »

why the heck we would we open up the only city's artery to pedestrians??

Open it to pedestrians?

A city is much more than about movement.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

There is no public transport integration

Yes, there is some, and more is coming soon (BXD, more function on Leap).

Aquarius34 wrote: »

We don't have a full ring road around the city.

Because there's a big bay to one side of the city.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

We don't have an integrated rail system.

You're the same poster to call the plan to have such as "horrible. Really really bad planning altogether".

Aquarius34 wrote: »

we don't have any inner city motorways.

The people rightly rejected them.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Our only Dartline is congested at the loopline bridge.

That will be fixed once the funding is in place.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

We have tolls on a bridge that should not be tolled.

In your unexplained view.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

We have a 30kmh speed limit in the city.

Sure, we do in a small part of the city centre. What's the problem? Many cities have them in their city centres and residential areas.

Most, if not all Dutch cities have far larger 30km/h zones. You'll find 30km/h zones in cities across Europe, from Barcelona to Berlin, even including a growing amount of 20mph zones in the UK.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Now we have some stupid notion to just close off the busiest junction on the busiest motor car and bus route in the city centre. The level of traffic and buses that uses this route cannot just be dumped onto other streets. Dublin's traffic problems needs to be addressed not dumped somewhere else.

Calling the 'notion' stupid does not help your case.

The level of private motor traffic on the route is low -- and as already said: All private motor traffic (besides deliveries) will likely be banned from College Green 24 hours, 7 days a week.

We're not walking about dumping buses elsewhere -- we're talking about moving them in a planned and structured way.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

The statement you made about Netherlands is farce. Are you trying to say the Netherlands public transport system is worse than ours or that according to your sources it's ok to just go ahead and pedestrianize college green because your sources stand for it?

Let's recap:

• Aard points out how cities in the Netherlands restrict private motorised traffic in their city centres. He uses Gronigen as an example.
• You make the unsupported claim that they are able to do this because their public transport systems are so much better than ours.
• I point out that public transport in Gronigen only has a 10% modal share. That the same figure in Amsterdam is 22% -- even in the city centre -- and nationally in the Netherlands it's around 5%. Meanwhile in Dublin is around on par with Amsterdam.

Draw your own conclusions about that. Or prove my apparent facts wrong, but please don't go on a rant.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Our trains alone are probably the slowest on the planet and run on diesel for Gods sakes and

Dublin's suburban and commuter trains -- the ones which really matter to this discussion -- are likely not the slowest in the world (problems are more about too few of them in too few places), and Darts don't carry fuel!

Aquarius34 wrote: »

pay fares equal to the UK..

Intercity fares are generally higher in the UK, there's more than a few threads on this over in the commuting and transport board.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Are you even serious? Our railway was built by the British. Our Dart system was built by the British, we just put Dart trains on it and electrified the lines We built a Luas mainly on brownfield site and on top of existing roads and forget to even connect the only two lines we have currently.

The Dart was not built by "the British", not even the railway under it was built by "the British". You'll find that William Dargan was Irish.

The Luas lines were mainly built along high to mid populated areas.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Amsterdam, has an integrated public transport and motorway system. It has a tram system we wish we could ream to have. It has many radial routes both in the city and some inner city motorways including a full circle ring road and an outer western bypass. Amsterdam is a city that can have many public squares pedestrianized because it has a transport to cater for it's people and get them around the city efficiently. Not only that it has a very good bike transport system and has huge park and ride spots so people can leave their cars behind and use public transport whilst working in the city.

When people on foot as excluded, inner Amsterdam has a modal share of 62% not for cars, trains, or trams, but for bicycles. Only a pitiful 22% are carried by public transport in the centre of Amsterdam and only 13% of people use cars.

I think you're only fooling your self by overplaying the importance of public transport and motorways in Amsterdam. The modal share figures show quite a different picture.

BoySnowie

After living 3 years in Amsterdam, there's a few facts about Amsterdam-Centrum.

1. It is often quicker to get from A to B by bike than it is by tram or car. Of course there's the metro that goes faster - BUT just 2 lines at the mo. The Govt wants to build more metro lines but Amsterdammers are against the idea.

2. connections between tram, train and bus in Holland is really amazing. Buses and trams always starts from the central railway station anywhere in Holland - they are building a big bus station behind Amsterdam CS and build a new metro station under Amsterdam CS...and building more direct bike paths (they are building a cool bike tunnel that will go under Amsterdam CS to the ferries for Amsterdam-Noord, cutting off 5 mins for cyclists who had to go thru awkward routes)

2a. let's say if you take a tram then a bus using your OV-Kaart (similiar to Leap) - without your OV-Kaart, you would pay 2.40 for the tram then another 1.60 for the bus...but with the card, you will pay 2.10 and then 30c for using the bus because it will be seen as a "single journey ticket" even if you change! The same thing applies for two trams or two buses. That is an incentive to encourage more people to leave their car at home.

3. They are constantly improving and researching how to make bike paths more direct, more fast and more easy for everyone - that is their priority. It is no national secret that many Dutch are healthy, reducing pollution and health risks, saving a lot of money for the Dutch Government on health care (now that's a good incentive for the HSE!)

4. car parking...very expensive in Amsterdam Centrum - my friends would park their car 10km from Amsterdam-Centrum and take the tram or train downtown - its cheaper. They have very efficient policemen who will fine people who don't pay their parking charges and go very hard on the thickos who dare to stop for a minute on the bike paths (yes, they get fined!)

5. for your car, if you don't have a garage, then you will have to apply for a resident's street parking permit - in Amsterdam, the waiting list is 4-8 years...yes, that long.

6. Amsterdam City Council has the targets of reducing car parking slots in the city centre - replace them with high quality bike paths - a lot of car parking slots are already taken away and more will be removed, making the streets more liveable and more pleasant to cycle and walk.

7. legalisation in the NL: companies are expected to pay travel expenses for their employees - only on public transport. Nothing for cars...not even petrol. My colleague lives in Antwerp

8. Our urban planners and civil engineers are pathetic continuing the failed philosophy of outdated pro-cars urban planning - we need to send them to Holland for a few years - to learn properly! :mad:

Aquarius34

I forgot to mention that Amsterdam has a metro.

Dublin still has none. The argument for pedestrianizing College green will not happen until Dublin's public transport is sorted. No excuses and washy washy make believe facts.

I had to laugh at the statement that car traffic is "Low" on college green. Now that is a pile of shiite.

Aquarius34

monument wrote: »

It's not an "arterial route" -- it's a small section of city centre streets. The routes which use it can be redirected.

Yes it is.

Is this coming from the same person who seems to be saying a lack of "inner city motorways" is a bad thing?

My point is, Dublin doesn't have any, grade separated, through roads, or motorway's in the city whatsoever, bar the Port tunnel, which is mainly used for truck traffic and has little effect on car and commuter traffic within the city. A lot of European cities have better through and radial routes to move traffic around the city. Dublin has a C ring road outside the city and is the only critical motor car route we have. If that road has a breakdown, the entire citiy traffic grinds to a halt, literally. We lack an integrated road transport system just as we lack a public transport system, so cars and buses choke our streets. So the point being is, our traffic system is severely overstrained. Now, we the next planning disaster, close a main arterial route within the city centre with "a do little scenario"

That's a typical way of how Dublin city council do things. That is a sign of just how much of a mess Dublin city councillors are.

Because there's a big bay to one side of the city.

There has been land reserved along Sandyford, a passage up to the N11 and a tunnel that was proposed to meet at Eastlink. It has been on the planning agenda for decades. The M50 is not finished. That's the point you seem to miss again. In Ireland nothing get's done or we patch things up. The point is, our city has a very bad transport system.

You're the same poster to call the plan to have such as "horrible. Really really bad planning altogether".

The idea is lovely. I am actually for the idea believe it or not, but not until proper transport management is in place. I will not accept the idea of "moving traffic elsewhere" or "just leave it open for buses or whatever".

The metro and other public transport schemes need to be put in places first. They are priorities. A pedestrian zed College Green is a luxury scheme, and in order for it to go ahead, we have to put or priorities right first.

The way Dublin city council is going about this is just a complete farce. Like everything else that is planned in this city. The city council never actually really plan anything right to begin with. We just constantly have the attitude "ah sure that'll do", ah sure we'll just stick that in there and "ah sure that will do too".. It's a patch up job and just brushes the dirt under the carpet and hope no one see's any cracks.

Later on, we have to go back to the drawing boards to start over again, sort out the mess we should have fixed or sorted out in the first place. Its baffles me how Dublin city council just think they can get away with messing up this city with this attitude. Then to top it all by constantly making excuses for it. They have been getting away with this kind of insanity for too long.

I don't even want to start going into examples. But I can tell you this much, if I was running the city. Every single high up Dublin city planner/councilor would be fired on the spot. It would be getting a complete overhaul!

That will be fixed once the funding is in place.

Don't even go there with term "funding". That's another cop out. Corruption is exactly why the majority of many "needed" scheme's never left the drawing board. Everything seems to get done in other countries. All other European cities seem to get things done when it comes to what needs to be done. The term funding is yet another excuse, for not getting around to just getting off one's ass and simply doing the job that needs to be done when it needs to be done. If we keep falling for this "funding" excuse, we all into another generation of "waiting" to build a metro, tram line or whatever.

Calling the 'notion' stupid does not help your case.

Oh I should apologise for such use of language. I won't be doing that, It' way beyond that at this stage. I don't know how else avoid using that word when I am witnessing absurdity and incongruity about these issues raised. Trust me, the term "stupid" is mild in comparison to what I really wish to say about Dublin city council and it's planners around the table.....

The level of private motor traffic on the route is low -- and as already said: All private motor traffic (besides deliveries) will likely be banned from College Green 24 hours, 7 days a week.

No it's not low. it's one of the busiest routes in the city with many roads feeding into it.

We're not walking about dumping buses elsewhere -- we're talking about moving them in a planned and structured way.

This needs to be moved to the comedy forum. Dublin city council should never EVER use that word until they actually know what the word means. Dublin city council and structure do not go in the same sentence on any subject.

Dublin's suburban and commuter trains -- the ones which really matter to this discussion -- are likely not the slowest in the world (problems are more about too few of them in too few places), and Darts don't carry fuel!

We are one of the slowest then. What point are you trying to make here? It's like you are trying to make a case, when it's just a complete failure to begin with. There is no case for Dublin's transport system been anywhere near the standard that it should be. For a capital city of European standards, we are decades behind everyone else. With all the wealth attained in our country in the last few years, we are still lagging behind. 80 percent of the schemes still have not even started yet after decades of "planning". Nothing get's done. To avoid sorting out our public transport system, we have a glorifying plan to build a public square at college green and sod all else the traffic problems.

That is the attitude that reeks all the time. I am not going to even attempt to let that slip off my radar on these issues.

When people on foot as excluded, inner Amsterdam has a modal share of 62% not for cars, trains, or trams, but for bicycles. Only a pitiful 22% are carried by public transport in the centre of Amsterdam and only 13% of people use cars.

I think you're only fooling your self by overplaying the importance of public transport and motorways in Amsterdam. The modal share figures show quite a different picture.

Amsterdam has an efficient public/motor transport system Dublin hasn't.

Those figures just don't add or stand for your case in this particular argument. The reason why I say that is because, as I said above. Amsterdam has a public transport system and it is very efficient. It is integrated with all other forms of transport including motor transport. You can get around the city without car transport very well. Dublin doesn't have this luxury. Dublin doesn't even have proper road or public transport system to any reasonable modern standard. Dublin is a nightmare to get from one side of the city to the other by car or even by bus in some cases. My point, again, if we are going to pedestrianize a major road artery in Dublin city centre, you must have an efficient public transport system in place. The public transport system should already be in place. It's not a question of "we should" have it. it should of been sorted out years ago. It hasn't been and that is not acceptable at all. Now we have Dublin’s planners craving the idea of a fanciful square, which is absolutely wonderful in theory. But here we are again, another planning disaster almost in fruition to reality.

Public transport (and replacing of motor traffic) must be sorted first, not later, not half done, or moved somewhere else. Simply moving it other other inner city streets is not good enough. The attitude alone, of sure we will will just move it somewhere else makes me feel like wanting to puke simply because I can't stand this constant behaviour in everything we do in this country. It may seem like I'm over reacting. I'm not, this is exactly why this country is a planning mess. We can't plan or build anything right in this country.


Anyway I think most people understand my point's, and to anyone who doesn't well I don't think they realise that common sense planning is lacking in our city .

monument

Aquarius34 wrote: »

My point is, Dublin doesn't have any, grade separated, through roads, or motorway's in the city whatsoever, bar the Port tunnel, which is mainly used for truck traffic and has little effect on car and commuter traffic within the city. A lot of European cities have better through and radial routes to move traffic around the city. Dublin has a C ring road outside the city and is the only critical motor car route we have.

And a large amount of cities are putting more and more restrictions on through traffic. You're living in a car-centric world.

It's not even true about critical motor car route. Inside the canal cordon is counted as city centre, and;

• The Port Tunnel -- which forms part of M50 -- is well within the city boundary and is less than 1.5km from the city centre boundary.
• The dualing of the former N11 starts 2km from the boundary.
• The dualing of the former N4 goes inside the boundary
• The dualing of the former N2 starts 1.3km from the boundary
• The dualing of the Nass road starts 2km from it.

It clearly isn't all motorway standard, but it still counts for "critical motor car routes". It does not have to be motorway standard to be critical.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

close a main arterial route within the city centre with "a do little scenario"

Redirect the bus traffic, not close it off. There's a big difference.

Traffic is not some kind of natural beast -- it's human made and can be managed and sorted.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

There has been land reserved along Sandyford, a passage up to the N11 and a tunnel that was proposed to meet at Eastlink. It has been on the planning agenda for decades. The M50 is not finished. That's the point you seem to miss again. In Ireland nothing get's done or we patch things up. The point is, our city has a very bad transport system.

No a tunnel was not. The NTA picked an overground option... If you think the residents disliked a flood "wall" (mostly a grassy mound), what do you think they'll make of your Eastern Bypass?!!




Images from the NRA's Dublin Eastern Bypass Feasibility Study Report!

:rolleyes:

Aquarius34 wrote: »

or "just leave it open for buses or whatever".

The bus gate is already in place banning private traffic for the most importnat part of the day when streets are most congested. Once Luas BXD brings on-streets tram tracks along College Green, it won't be long before the private traffic is extended.

So you better start getting used to the idea soon!

Aquarius34 wrote: »

The metro and other public transport schemes need to be put in places first. They are priorities. A pedestrian zed College Green is a luxury scheme, and in order for it to go ahead, we have to put or priorities right first.

Copenhagen's large-scale pedestrianisation: 1968-1992
Copenhagen Metro opens: 2003

Amsterdam got its metro early but the people rioted to stop planned motorway further inside the inner city.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

The way Dublin city council is going about this is just a complete farce. Like everything else that is planned in this city. The city council never actually really plan anything right to begin with. We just constantly have the attitude "ah sure that'll do", ah sure we'll just stick that in there and "ah sure that will do too".. It's a patch up job and just brushes the dirt under the carpet and hope no one see's any cracks.

You need to stay in the conspiracy theories board.

Stop making stuff up – Dublin City Council has no plans to close off College Green. Zero. They don’t support the idea!

Aquarius34 wrote: »

I don't even want to start going into examples. But I can tell you this much, if I was running the city. Every single high up Dublin city planner/councilor would be fired on the spot. It would be getting a complete overhaul!

You would not last long with so many unfair dismissals and trying to remove elected councillors.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Don't even go there with term "funding". That's another cop out. Corruption is exactly why the majority of many "needed" scheme's never left the drawing board. Everything seems to get done in other countries. All other European cities seem to get things done when it comes to what needs to be done. The term funding is yet another excuse, for not getting around to just getting off one's ass and simply doing the job that needs to be done when it needs to be done. If we keep falling for this "funding" excuse, we all into another generation of "waiting" to build a metro, tram line or whatever.

Again: Off to the conspiracy theories board.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

No it's not low. it's one of the busiest routes in the city with many roads feeding into it. .

It’s peak times which matter and at peak times private traffic is banned. Unless you want to count those breaking the law?

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Amsterdam has an efficient public/motor transport system Dublin hasn't.

Those figures just don't add or stand for your case in this particular argument. The reason why I say that is because, as I said above. Amsterdam has a public transport system and it is very efficient. It is integrated with all other forms of transport including motor transport. You can get around the city without car transport very well. Dublin doesn't have this luxury. Dublin doesn't even have proper road or public transport system to any reasonable modern standard. Dublin is a nightmare to get from one side of the city to the other by car or even by bus in some cases. My point, again, if we are going to pedestrianize a major road artery in Dublin city centre, you must have an efficient public transport system in place. The public transport system should already be in place. It's not a question of "we should" have it. it should of been sorted out years ago. It hasn't been and that is not acceptable at all. Now we have Dublin’s planners craving the idea of a fanciful square, which is absolutely wonderful in theory. But here we are again, another planning disaster almost in fruition to reality.

Public transport (and replacing of motor traffic) must be sorted first, not later, not half done, or moved somewhere else. Simply moving it other other inner city streets is not good enough. The attitude alone, of sure we will will just move it somewhere else makes me feel like wanting to puke simply because I can't stand this constant behaviour in everything we do in this country. It may seem like I'm over reacting. I'm not, this is exactly why this country is a planning mess. We can't plan or build anything right in this country.


Anyway I think most people understand my point's, and to anyone who doesn't well I don't think they realise that common sense planning is lacking in our city .

Why can’t you deal with the facts?

Amsterdam has a modal share of 62% for bicycles. Only a pitiful 22% are carried by public transport in the centre of Amsterdam and only 13% of people use cars.

Why are you trying to overplay the importance of public transport and motorways in Amsterdam when the vast bulk of city centre travel is by bicycle?

monument

I'm still not sure removing buses off College Green is a good idea at this point, but those set-in-stone against the idea are pulling me towards thinking that it could work.

As said already: The days of cars on the green are already numbered. It's only a matter of time before we see a 24 hour ban for cars.

BoySnowie

Aquarius34 wrote: »

I forgot to mention that Amsterdam has a metro.

We need to realise that Amsterdam Metro is not anything like London Underground or Paris Metro. Think of Amsterdam Metro more as our Dart here - not useful for most Amsterdammers.

Amsterdam City Council decided to build a massive housing estate right outside the city for people on low income etc in the 1960s - that is Bijlmer (Amsterdam-Zuidoost). They had to build the Metro to connect Bijlmer with Amsterdam proper. The Metro uses the existing railway lines to Utrecht anyway - just much like our Dart here.

In one sense, it's like building a Metro to Tallaght or even Ballymun - and it doesn't really address the travel needs of most Amsterdammers but they are building the new line going from North to South, which will cater for more Amsterdammers - so after all, Amsterdam will have a proper metro system! :pac:

Aquarius34

monument wrote: »

Why can’t you deal with the facts?

Amsterdam has a modal share of 62% for bicycles. Only a pitiful 22% are carried by public transport in the centre of Amsterdam and only 13% of people use cars.

Why are you trying to overplay the importance of public transport and motorways in Amsterdam when the vast bulk of city centre travel is by bicycle?

I want you to face reality.

BoySnowie

Aquarius34 wrote: »

I want you to face reality.

22% of 9 yo girls in Ireland are overweight - 8% being obese. 17% of boys the same age are overweight with the extra 5% being obese. That is mentioned in "Call Health in Ireland: Key Trends 2011" report by Department of Health on Ireland’s health and medical needs over the last ten years.

From Irish Times (4 Dec 2012): Obesity has been described as a global epidemic, one the developed world is struggling to contain without much success. Three decades ago, fewer than one in 10 people were obese. Since then the number has soared. In Ireland, one in four adults is obese, a similar rate to the UK but far higher than the European average. Obesity has a high financial cost for the taxpayer and – for some who are obese – a potentially lethal consequence. A report by Safefood, a State-funded health promotion group, put the annual direct cost of treating obesity at some €400 million. And a further €700 million is the estimated indirect cost from obesity- related illnesses, absenteeism and premature deaths.

Obesity is a big problem here in Ireland. Over reliance on cars is not the right way of addressing our national health issues. We are supposed to make Dublin a more healthier, liveable and living city yet you care more about where you can park your overpriced piece of junk and that you want to have an easy time going through the city centre, bothering pedestrians and cyclists, causing traffic and hitting the Luas again on O'Connell Street.

I think O'Connell Street should be 100% pedestrianised all the way from College Green to the Parnell Memorial.