Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Phoenix Park - Prepare for 3 months of gridlock!

Options
1…457910

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    spooky donkey wrote: »
    been to the park many times and mainly only ever went to placess off that long straight road.
    When I turned at farmleigh I thought perhaps that road went on around but then i rememberd last time I tried to go near that fort that the road was blocked at the bendy bit.
    I just did not want the hassell of driving around a ring road to find it also blocked off.

    If you stayed on the same road that brought you to Farmleigh you would also have arrived at the cross. Or if you had gone via the north road you could have gone by the entrance to the visitors centre to get there via the Aras and American ambassadors residence.


  • Options
    #183
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    Stark wrote: »
    Letting the kids play freely without worrying that they're going to be run over by cars doing 80km/hr I guess.

    The park is 1,750 acres in size. How much space to they need to run freely?


  • Options
    #184
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    BostonB wrote: »
    If its a road to nowhere how have we been using it for the last 6 months when the main road was closed for resurfacing...If you consider that, you could claim its even been trialled already. :D

    I was talking about a better link between the castleknock rd and the north road at ashtown losing a negligible amount of the parkland. Not the hyperbole highway. ;)

    The main issue still stands: Any upgrade of North Road or "better link" built for cars would be wasted given the continuing permanent capacity loss in the city centre. :)

    jack presley wrote: »
    Stark wrote: »
    Letting the kids play freely without worrying that they're going to be run over by cars doing 80km/hr I guess.

    The park is 1,750 acres in size. How much space to they need to run freely?

    It's a park, not somewhere for cars to be travelling at 70km/h.

    If anybody wants to drive fast on their way between D15 and town, I'd suggest the Westlink and former N4.


  • Options
    #185
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    monument wrote: »
    It's a park, not somewhere for cars to be travelling at 70km/h.

    While I would agree that there would be a high percentage of cars that don't stick to the 50kmph limit, I doubt there are many that go at 70kmph or the 80kmph that was thrown out earlier by someone.


  • Options
    #186
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Don't underestimate the amount of morons on our roads.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    ThisRegard wrote: »
    Don't underestimate the amount of morons on our roads.

    Yeah, that's true. But during the day when the park is busy, even most of the morons wouldn't be doing Formula 1 impressions.


  • Options
    #188
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    monument wrote: »
    But private car capacity in the city centre is to be reduced -- Luas BXD, pedistrain priority, improved QBC to BRT, cycling lanes etc.

    .

    And when will any of these be in place? Not that the Luas extension will impact traffic coming in the N3 anyway.


  • Options
    #189
    donaghs
    Registered Users Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭donaghs


    monument wrote: »
    Where exactly do you live? How can the weekend closure affect both trips to the Zoo and Farmleigh?
    I'd answer that directly, except will wait first to see how impassioned people on this thread get!:)
    Obviously I'm normally travelling from one direction, but have also come from the other side of the city when I lived over there. And by your leave, I reserve the right to continue to use various gates as both an entrance and exit (unless one-way).
    But its not just about me. People in other parts of Dublin/Ireland are also trying to get to various parts of the park etc.


    monument wrote: »
    It's a park. Use of the park has to come before your preference of a direct route in picking somebody up from a train station etc.
    If Chesterfield Avenue was being kept open for me to occassionally drop/collect relatives from Heuston I'd have to agree with you. But, again (as you already knew before you posted), its not just about me.



    monument wrote: »
    Ramps are usually put in because some people can't behave while driving. Blame "NIMBY's" (sic) all you like but they are not the reason for ramps having to be put in.
    Not always, there are plenty of examples of ramps going up on unsuitable roads simply because residents want to reduce the volume of traffic outside theirs houses. Nutley Lane in Donnybrook is a great example of this. An important road connecting the Stillorgan Dual-Carriageway with the Merrion Road, with buses and a shopping centre located on it, they still put ramps there. Even the fact that ambulances had to get in an out of Vincents Hospital over the ramps wasnt enough to stop them.


  • Options
    #190
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    You're still failing to see that your 'right' to use the various gates, while not actually a right, still exists with this small closure, nor are you prevented accessing different parts of the park.


  • Options
    #191
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    monument wrote: »
    The main issue still stands: Any upgrade of North Road or "better link" built for cars would be wasted given the continuing permanent capacity loss in the city centre. :)....

    Its not an upgrade of capacity its simply moving the same volume of traffic from the middle of the park to the edge of it.

    Unless the suggestion is that moving the majority traffic out of the centre of the park is a waste. Because interestingly that's the effect of the recent main road closures.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    donaghs wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    Where exactly do you live? How can the weekend closure affect both trips to the Zoo and Farmleigh?
    I'd answer that directly, except will wait first to see how impassioned people on this thread get!:)
    Obviously I'm normally travelling from one direction, but have also come from the other side of the city when I lived over there. And by your leave, I reserve the right to continue to use various gates as both an entrance and exit (unless one-way).
    But its not just about me. People in other parts of Dublin/Ireland are also trying to get to various parts of the park etc.

    Nobody is stopping them from getting to these places.

    But it's also worth nothing that there are no rights of way to drive anywhere in the park.

    donaghs wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    It's a park. Use of the park has to come before your preference of a direct route in picking somebody up from a train station etc.
    If Chesterfield Avenue was being kept open for me to occassionally drop/collect relatives from Heuston I'd have to agree with you. But, again (as you already knew before you posted), its not just about me.

    I'll rephrase:

    It's a park. Use of the park has to come before people's preference of a direct route in picking somebody up from a train station etc

    donaghs wrote: »
    Not always, there are plenty of examples of ramps going up on unsuitable roads simply because residents want to reduce the volume of traffic outside theirs houses. Nutley Lane in Donnybrook is a great example of this. An important road connecting the Stillorgan Dual-Carriageway with the Merrion Road, with buses and a shopping centre located on it, they still put ramps there. Even the fact that ambulances had to get in an out of Vincents Hospital over the ramps wasnt enough to stop them.

    Bringing ambulances into a discussion about traffic calming is about the same as bringing Nazi into a discussion about politics.
    BostonB wrote: »
    Its not an upgrade of capacity its simply moving the same volume of traffic from the middle of the park to the edge of it.

    Unless the suggestion is that moving the majority traffic out of the centre of the park is a waste. Because interestingly that's the effect of the recent main road closures.

    It would be an unneeded upgrade of North Road. Creating such an upgraded road within the park would seem to run counter to everything in then management plan for the park. But not only that -- it's just not needed: there is no major problems around the park when the small section is closed at weekends.

    And the majority of the traffic (ie peak traffic) is not there at tge same time as the small section is closed.


    jack presley wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    But private car capacity in the city centre is to be reduced -- Luas BXD, pedistrain priority, improved QBC to BRT, cycling lanes etc.

    .

    And when will any of these be in place? Not that the Luas extension will impact traffic coming in the N3 anyway.

    The space within the city centre can have an affect on all routes, and BXD takes up a lot of central road space.

    Within the canals new bus lanes came on stream in the last year and more are due or are in planning. A report on BRT is also due soon.

    BXD depends on An Bord Peanala if it is approved it will likely have an impact overall on private car capacity. The College Green bus gate would highly likely to be made 24 hour, the Luas will require a level of proirty at junctions and take up space between the green and Broadstone.

    Btw there is no longer an N3 inside the M50. It was declassified along with most n-roads within the M50.

    The public realm report, including pedestrian priority within the canals, is currently out for consultation.


  • Options
    #193
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    monument wrote: »

    BXD depends on An Bord Peanala if it is approved it will likely have an impact overall on private car capacity. The College Green bus gate would highly likely to be made 24 hour, the Luas will require a level of proirty at junctions and take up space between the green and Broadstone.

    The public realm report, including pedestrian priority within the canals, is currently out for consultation.

    Have you anything that definitely's gonna happen (or happen in the near future)? Wer're great at planning things in this country but putting them into action is a different matter. I'm surprised you didn't include the turning College Green into a pedestrian area plan in as well!


  • Options
    #194
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    jack presley wrote: »
    monument wrote: »

    BXD depends on An Bord Peanala if it is approved it will likely have an impact overall on private car capacity. The College Green bus gate would highly likely to be made 24 hour, the Luas will require a level of proirty at junctions and take up space between the green and Broadstone.

    The public realm report, including pedestrian priority within the canals, is currently out for consultation.

    Have you anything that definitely's gonna happen (or happen in the near future)? Wer're great at planning things in this country but putting them into action is a different matter. I'm surprised you didn't include the turning College Green into a pedestrian area plan in as well!

    Even if not a single meter of space or a singe second of priority was take away from car capacity by design, the fact remains that city centre car capacity is still near peak capacity at rush hour. Add that to the fact that the population is growing both in the city, and in commuter land. It's simple: The city centre will not be able to handle many extra cars.


  • Options
    #195
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    monument wrote: »
    Even if not a single meter of space or a singe second of priority was take away from car capacity by design, the fact remains that city centre car capacity is still near peak capacity at rush hour. Add that to the fact that the population is growing both in the city, and in commuter land. It's simple: The city centre will not be able to handle many extra cars.

    That post would have made more sense in 2007 or so. Although Dublin's streets aren't set up for the volumes of traffic it has to take, they are no way near as busy as they were back in the boom. My journey in and out of the city takes considerably less time than it did 4-5 years ago. There are definitely less cars and commercial vehicles on the road and I don't think they're all suddenly taking buses or cycling! So if we're at peak capacity now, God only knows what we are at during the Celtic Tiger years.

    As for the population growth, we only have 2011 census figures to go by but I doubt in 2012 the commuter land's population is still growing, well the amount of people that travel into Dublin certainly isn't anyway.


  • Options
    #196
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    jack presley wrote: »
    That post would have made more sense in 2007 or so. Although Dublin's streets aren't set up for the volumes of traffic it has to take, they are no way near as busy as they were back in the boom. My journey in and out of the city takes considerably less time than it did 4-5 years ago. There are definitely less cars and commercial vehicles on the road and I don't think they're all suddenly taking buses or cycling! So if we're at peak capacity now, God only knows what we are at during the Celtic Tiger years.

    As for the population growth, we only have 2011 census figures to go by but I doubt in 2012 the commuter land's population is still growing, well the amount of people that travel into Dublin certainly isn't anyway.

    You're thinking a bit too much short-term.

    Firstly, last I've read about it, the baby boom which has been in progress over the last few years was still ongoing -- and even if the baby boom has stopped and even if we were only to get small economic growth over the next 20 year, cars just won't do it for demand in Dublin city centre.

    I did not say we're at peak capacity now, we're near it overall. Although, at the same time, some roads/routes in the city are already at peak a lot of the time, but not all of the time. According to the city council, traffic levels have appeared to have dropped a lot more than the actual drop because a small swing in traffic levels one way or another is the difference between being over capacity and just under it.

    It's why on many routes some days just a small bit of extra traffic can lead to gridlock or near gridlock conditions.

    And what do you mean "we only have the 2011 census to go by"? It's a very recent census and shows large population growth.

    Also, it's worth noting that the amount of people cycling past canal bridges etc into the city centre has actually increased by 45% since 2006 -- and that does not include all of those on Dublin Bikes inside the canals.


  • Options
    #197
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    monument wrote: »
    ...
    It would be an unneeded upgrade of North Road. Creating such an upgraded road within the park would seem to run counter to everything in then management plan for the park.

    You roll that line in about the plan line only where it suits you tbh. They have already upgraded the main road in the park, also counter to the plan. Also when the main road was closed. The North Rd was used instead. It wasn't upgraded then. In fact my suggestion follows their plan better than their own actions. Removes traffic from the centre of the park, to the edge of it, away from the majority of the recreational users of the park. Which is exactly what the plan is aimed at. Improving the quality of the park for park users.

    Its not about improving the city center. Well not at this point.
    monument wrote: »
    ...But not only that -- it's just not needed: there is no major problems around the park when the small section is closed at weekends. And the majority of the traffic (ie peak traffic) is not there at tge same time as the small section is closed.....

    Yeah thats a different issue. Theres no need to create confusion by mixing the two issues up.


  • Options
    #198
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    ...
    It would be an unneeded upgrade of North Road. Creating such an upgraded road within the park would seem to run counter to everything in then management plan for the park.

    You roll that line in about the plan line only where it suits you tbh. They have already upgraded the main road in the park, also counter to the plan.

    The road needed to be fixed one-way or another, and fixing it is not counter to the plan as the plan includes allowing peak rush hour traffic and when the road is closed it's far more useable now than a pothole road would have been.


    BostonB wrote: »
    Also when the main road was closed. The North Rd was used instead. It wasn't upgraded then. In fact my suggestion follows their plan better than their own actions. Removes traffic from the centre of the park, to the edge of it, away from the majority of the recreational users of the park. Which is exactly what the plan is aimed at. Improving the quality of the park for park users.

    You're still talking about upgrading North Road, right? Or what exactly are you talking about?

    BostonB wrote: »
    Its not about improving the city center. Well not at this point.

    I was not saying it was, but just that it's pointless upgrading North Road for cars when there's so little room for cars on the city side.

    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    ...But not only that -- it's just not needed: there is no major problems around the park when the small section is closed at weekends. And the majority of the traffic (ie peak traffic) is not there at tge same time as the small section is closed.....

    Yeah thats a different issue. Theres no need to create confusion by mixing the two issues up.

    There's no two issues. It's all about ways to manage the park.


  • Options
    #199
    spooky donkey
    Registered Users Posts: 5,042 ✭✭✭spooky donkey


    ThisRegard wrote: »
    If you stayed on the same road that brought you to Farmleigh you would also have arrived at the cross. Or if you had gone via the north road you could have gone by the entrance to the visitors centre to get there via the Aras and American ambassadors residence.

    well I did not know that last saturday. IM going again this weekend so Ill see how I get on .


  • Options
    #200
    donaghs
    Registered Users Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭donaghs


    spooky donkey wrote: »
    well I did not know that last saturday. IM going again this weekend so Ill see how I get on .

    The back roads of the park can take a bit of getting used to. If your arranging to meet someone and its your first time driving there, give yourself a few extra minutes. Also worth bearing in mind that some of the alternative routes that can be used during the weekend closures are themselves closed during week days. All part of the fun:)


  • Options
    #201
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    monument wrote: »
    The road needed to be fixed one-way or another, and fixing it is not counter to the plan as the plan includes allowing peak rush hour traffic and when the road is closed it's far more useable now than a pothole road would have been.

    The plan is to improve the park for people using the park and to reduce through traffic the bulk of which is commuting traffic on the main road. Improving the main road simply facilitates this traffic, and arguably increases its capacity as it doesn't have slow down for the craters now.
    monument wrote: »
    I was not saying it was, but just that it's pointless upgrading North Road for cars when there's so little room for cars on the city side.

    Except it doesn't need upgrading. Thats more hyperbole. As for no room in the city center for all this traffic. The park takes 25k cars a day primarily through traffic which is something similar to one lane of the M50 bridge. Obviously theres room for those cars or they wouldn't use that route. So saying there's no where for this traffic to go, is pure fiction.
    monument wrote: »
    There's no two issues. It's all about ways to manage the park.

    Course there is. Commuter traffic and weekend traffic. Which is why they close the section at the weekends only.

    You seem to have only one stance on this. That all traffic in the park and the city has to simply stop. That there's no where for it to go. While a nice idea, its not true and not realistic IMO. Its very different to compare this situation to a large City in another country where there's a lot of other options.

    D.15 is quite poorly served with road connections to the city center. Theres a lot of scope for public transport and alternatives to be improved. One example the cycle infrastructure into the park, from D.15 or from the Quays is very poor.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    The road needed to be fixed one-way or another, and fixing it is not counter to the plan as the plan includes allowing peak rush hour traffic and when the road is closed it's far more useable now than a pothole road would have been.

    The plan is to improve the park for people using the park and to reduce through traffic the bulk of which is commuting traffic on the main road. Improving the main road simply facilitates this traffic, and arguably increases its capacity as it doesn't have slow down for the craters now.

    But there's no plan to stop commuter traffic, you seem to think there is.

    I think the plan to only stop off peak traffic is a reasonable one.
    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    I was not saying it was, but just that it's pointless upgrading North Road for cars when there's so little room for cars on the city side.

    Except it doesn't need upgrading. Thats more hyperbole. As for no room in the city center for all this traffic. The park takes 25k cars a day primarily through traffic which is something similar to one lane of the M50 bridge. Obviously theres room for those cars or they wouldn't use that route. So saying there's no where for this traffic to go, is pure fiction.

    You're the one who mentioned upgrading North Road, are you now back tracking?

    BostonB wrote: »
    You seem to have only one stance on this. That all traffic in the park and the city has to simply stop. That there's no where for it to go. While a nice idea, its not true and not realistic IMO. Its very different to compare this situation to a large City in another country where there's a lot of other options.

    Where have I said that all traffic in the city or the park has to stop? You're reading 2+2 and somehow comming up with 10.

    But there are lots of other options in this case too.

    BostonB wrote: »
    D.15 is quite poorly served with road connections to the city center. Theres a lot of scope for public transport and alternatives to be improved. One example the cycle infrastructure into the park, from D.15 or from the Quays is very poor.

    Anybody who wants a fast driving route to the quays has it if they are willing pay the toll.

    These is scope for those things, but on the point of road connections -- most road connections into the city centre are overall poor because the traffic demand is too great and the roads narrow at some point or another coming up to the city centre.


  • Options
    #203
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    monument wrote: »
    But there's no plan to stop commuter traffic, you seem to think there is.

    I think the plan to only stop off peak traffic is a reasonable one.

    The clearly stated aim is to reduce through traffic.

    They have closed roads to commuter traffic many times. Often with very little justification. The Blackhorse Ave roadworks were a classic example of that. Even the upgrade of the main road. They could have done that it two stages rather than closing the whole thing.
    monument wrote: »
    You're the one who mentioned upgrading North Road, are you now back tracking?

    Except I simply meant improving it so its not a 4x4 track. Not increasing the throughput of the park which is your exaggeration.

    Taking your logic to its conclusion they've upgraded the capacity of the main road. Which is entirely pointless as according to you there's nowhere for all the extra traffic on it to go.
    monument wrote: »
    Where have I said that all traffic in the city or the park has to stop? You're reading 2+2 and somehow comming up with 10.

    Here....
    monument wrote: »
    ... With a growing population the car just won't work in the city centre.

    monument wrote: »
    But there are lots of other options in this case too.

    Anybody who wants a fast driving route to the quays has it if they are willing pay the toll.

    Whats the alternative "fast" route for peak traffic using a toll? The N4?

    Maybe at 5am not at 5pm.


  • Options
    #204
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    But there's no plan to stop commuter traffic, you seem to think there is.

    I think the plan to only stop off peak traffic is a reasonable one.

    The clearly stated aim is to reduce through traffic.

    Yes! Reduce through traffic, not stop it!

    One-offs for IMPROVING the road surface does not cut it -- and in any case they changed the whole flow of the park to ease traffic when the main avenue was closed in the middle.

    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    You're the one who mentioned upgrading North Road, are you now back tracking?

    Except I simply meant improving it so its not a 4x4 track. Not increasing the throughput of the park which is your exaggeration.

    It's not an exaggeration!

    Improving North Road will increase the capacity and there's no need for it given the main avenue can handle peak traffic and it was just resurfaced at some cost.

    BostonB wrote: »
    Taking your logic to its conclusion they've upgraded the capacity of the main road. Which is entirely pointless as according to you there's nowhere for all the extra traffic on it to go.

    That would be only true if the main avenue was resurfaced just for commuter traffic -- it was not..
    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    Where have I said that all traffic in the city or the park has to stop? You're reading 2+2 and somehow comming up with 10.

    Here....
    monument wrote: »
    ... With a growing population the car just won't work in the city centre.

    As in, it won't work to serve the growing , and as already mentioned space and priority will be taken from cars. Not that there will be zero car use.

    Reading within the given context helps. :)
    BostonB wrote: »
    monument wrote: »
    But there are lots of other options in this case too.

    Anybody who wants a fast driving route to the quays has it if they are willing pay the toll.

    Whats the alternative "fast" route for peak traffic using a toll? The N4?

    Maybe at 5am not at 5pm.

    Again, some context please?

    My reply was in responce to dissusion of those who want to travel in the park at more than 50km/h.


  • Options
    #205
    nudger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,449 ✭✭✭nudger


    I was in the park yesterday and today around 1pm, walked the closed off stretch expecting skaters , bikers, etc to be having the craic, people crossing to the other side of the main road without the hassle of all the traffic,:confused: and expected to see more people out enjoying the park.

    The only change that I could see was the setting up of the Bloom festival in a few weeks time.

    As someone who has grown up having the park as their back garden for more than 40 years, walked it, ran it, drank in it, and other things in it, can honestly say that the closure of the stretch of the main road makes no sense.

    If you have an idea for a cycling/sports event, great, close it for the day.

    On both days there were no more people around the area, trust me I'm a local not a blow in.

    The thread has turned into an argument "Prepare for 3 months of gridlock!" has run it's course.

    Close the thread please, it's becoming boring.


  • Options
    #206
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Couldn't agree more. Close it for some event great. Close it for no logical reason and it make no sense, and you lose the goodwill of the local population. But that has certain been the pattern to many of the closures in the park over the years. If the best defence of these actions come down to arguing over semantics. I'm afraid Elvis left the building a long time ago.


  • Options
    #207
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    nudger wrote: »
    I was in the park yesterday and today around 1pm, walked the closed off stretch expecting skaters , bikers, etc to be having the craic, people crossing to the other side of the main road without the hassle of all the traffic,:confused: and expected to see more people out enjoying the park.

    The only change that I could see was the setting up of the Bloom festival in a few weeks time...

    On both days there were no more people around the area, trust me I'm a local not a blow in.

    It's one small part of many things which are planned to make the park more attractive. Honestly now, are you a fan of rhetoric or did you really expect closing one fairly small section on the less busy side of the park would bring 1,000s of extra people each hour or something? :confused:

    Was on the way down to Farmleigh late in the afternoon on a Sunday the last week and there was a good few people on that section, and on the road there was a toddler, a few people walking and a few cyclists. But those off the road also benefit from less traffic around. It was around the same minus the toddler and plus a speeding motorbike the week before that.

    nudger wrote: »
    As someone who has grown up having the park as their back garden for more than 40 years, walked it, ran it, drank in it, and other things in it, can honestly say that the closure of the stretch of the main road makes no sense...

    On both days there were no more people around the area, trust me I'm a local not a blow in.

    A local park for the local people? No to outsiders, sorry, blow ins and their fancy ideas! :)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meF7NmfnXZ0



    nudger wrote: »
    Close the thread please, it's becoming boring.

    Seriously: If you were following the thread, what's stopping you from just unfollowing the thread?

    6034073

    BostonB wrote: »
    Couldn't agree more. Close it for some event great. Close it for no logical reason and it make no sense, and you lose the goodwill of the local population. But that has certain been the pattern to many of the closures in the park over the years. If the best defence of these actions come down to arguing over semantics. I'm afraid Elvis left the building a long time ago.

    If the OPW are anyway true to their word, or more so their policy, Elvis has indeed left the building a long time ago.

    It got to the stage of "semantics" because you were ranting against single lines of my posts without looking at anything else (ie context), and you can't deal with simple facts like upgrading the road would increase the capacity and realities like there being no plan to cut the main avenue off to commuter traffic. Blue sky thinking like your idea of upgrading North Road can be great, but when you're putting forward such ideas on boards.ie, don't get annoyed when they get pulled apart. :)

    As for "no logical reason and it make no sense" -- this is clearly a matter of opinion. You can disagree, there's no harm in that, but different people will find different things logical.

    The OPW's logic is "To reduce the environmental impact of traffic travelling through The Phoenix Park". Here's bits of the OPW's reasoning behind restrictions, as put forward in their management document:
    • "Ten internal Park roads and a vehicular gate have been closed to through traffic, which has resulted in a significant reduction in road accidents and a more tranquil and safer Park environment."
    • Traffic "diminish{s} the character of the Park as a historic landscape"
    • So much traffic has led to "significant levels of conflict with dedicated users of the Park’s facilities"
    • "The unacceptably high levels of commuter parking, restricting access for Park users and having a negative impact on the visual amenities within the Park."

    I don't care that much for the "historic landscape" bit, and you don't seem to care for any of it. So, no logical reason or no sense in making a park more tranquil, and safer? :)


  • Options
    #208
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    The problem is you don't pull them apart you apply illogic to them.

    Its an increase in capacity to a motorway if you improve the north road. But its simply a repair if its the main road and no increase to capacity.

    Its crazy to divert all the main road traffic down the north rd. Yet that exactly what the OPW did for the past 6 months or so.

    Etc.


  • Options
    #209
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    BostonB wrote: »
    Its an increase in capacity to a motorway if you improve the north road. But its simply a repair if its the main road and no increase to capacity.

    Its crazy to divert all the main road traffic down the north rd. Yet that exactly what the OPW did for the past 6 months or so

    Motorway was my hyperbole. You said so, and I agreed and rephrased to make you happier (but apparently you've been dwelling on it since?).

    But forget my hyperbole and deal with reality:
    1. In the short to mid term there is no money to upgrade North Road -- and it would be a very hard sell to get such funding given the main avenue was upgraded so recently.
    2. In the mid term there is no need to upgrade North Road, the main avenue is opened to peak traffic and there are no plans to change this any time soon.
    3. In the longer term, there is no need to the capacity of an upgraded North Road, because traffic using the park should be reduced slowly (a) by measures the OPW has planned the park and, in any case, (b) by the reduced capacity in the city centre.


  • Options
    #210
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Considering they used it without doing anything to it when the main road was closed. Suggesting that it needs an upgrade of capacity to be used now, is simply ridiculous.

    There less demand everywhere. Regardless of the park, or the city centre.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    BostonB wrote: »
    Considering they used it without doing anything to it when the main road was closed. Suggesting that it needs an upgrade of capacity to be used now, is simply ridiculous.

    There less demand everywhere. Regardless of the park, or the city centre.

    What exactly are you suggesting?


Advertisement