Kieran Dennisons motion and Corduff parking issue

Hilly Bill

elfy4eva wrote: »

Don't get me wrong I do agree that it is very annoying for residents, I'm more opposed to the IT charging students for parking in the first place.

But if you were a broke student faced with either paying for a parking permit on the campus or parking on a public road for free close by. Which from what has been posted seems that they are well within their rights to do then you'll probably go with the free option.

However if somebody is parked unsafely in the estate then surely it can be reported to the Gards.

Broke student? No money for parking but enough to go on the lash at the weekends and run a car.
I agree that its wrong for the students to be charged for parking at their own college but taking it out on the residents of Corduff isnt the answer.
I cant see the insurance crowd being too sympathetic when the claims go in about any damage that may occur after a student tells them that they had abandoned the car in an housing estate whilst they went to college.
Its strange that Dennison only has a go at Sinn Fein and not the college also this talk of scaremongering is a bit silly as well.

Justin10

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Nothing wrong with that.

Never said there was, just stating how much it was.

elfy4eva

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Broke student? No money for parking but enough to go on the lash at the weekends and run a car.

I'm sure paying for the parking could be afforded. My point was that when money is tight and when there's a free and legal alternative way to park they will of course opt for that.

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I agree that its wrong for the students to be charged for parking at their own college but taking it out on the residents of Corduff isnt the answer.

Nobody is taking it out on the residents of Corduff, I can guarantee it is not being done maliciously. Students are reacting to the new charges in front of them and opting for a free option.

Hilly Bill wrote: »

also this talk of scaremongering is a bit silly as well.

Well you may be right here, I cannot speak for the reasoning Sinn Fein has for erecting no parking posters with their party logo on it. Personally I would definitely be put off parking anywhere if I saw one for risk of running into one of the party's more unsavoury supporters. Anyway whatever the reason they're still illegal posters.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

elfy4eva wrote: »

I'm sure paying for the parking could be afforded. My point was that when money is tight and when there's a free and legal alternative way to park they will of course opt for that.
Nobody is taking it out on the residents of Corduff, I can guarantee it is not being done maliciously. Students are reacting to the new charges in front of them and opting for a free option.

I get what you're saying here but you can't just opt for "a free option" when it affects other people. Some public toilets charge an entrance fee, can I just pee on the ground outside because it's a free option? Bit of an extreme example, I know, but the point remains.

Well you may be right here, I cannot speak for the reasoning Sinn Fein has for erecting no parking posters with their party logo on it. Personally I would definitely be put off parking anywhere if I saw one for risk of running into one of the party's more unsavoury supporters. Anyway whatever the reason they're still illegal posters.

I agree that Sinn Fein's method of dealing with this is a typical Sinn Fein stunt. If they, or any other party want to assist the residents of Corduff in getting this issue sorted they should be discussing it with the IT and trying to come to a solution that helps everyone. Not threatening people, or attempting to take the law into their own hands. Like I said, it's typical Sinn Fein.

elfy4eva

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I get what you're saying here but you can't just opt for "a free option" when it affects other people. Some public toilets charge an entrance fee, can I just pee on the ground outside because it's a free option? Bit of an extreme example, I know, but the point remains.

You can't just pee on the ground because that's illegal. In this situation however parking on a public road (when done safely) is not illegal. And if it's not done safely it can be reported to the Gards. I totally accept that it's a **** deal for the members of the Corduff community and that's why I would direct my distaste towards ITB, as the government aren't going to change the law in public parking over this one situation.

So it's going to need to be dealt with in a more tactful way.
I feel that way is through a unified protest to the ITB management.

Polar101

While it's odd that there's no free parking at ITB, 80€ a year is hardly expensive - if a student can afford to run a car then affording the parking fee should be possible too. 25 cents a day doesn't make a big change in a car budget, I'd think?

I'd personally pay the fee, rather than risk my car getting damaged by someone who doesn't want non-residents to park in Corduff.

triple-M

just buy a load of yellow paint and paint double yellow lines all around corduff and throw in a few pay and display parking areas and bobs your uncle problem solved,works well in portersgate(as far as I know)

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

triple-M wrote: »

just buy a load of yellow paint and paint double yellow lines all around corduff and throw in a few pay and display parking areas and bobs your uncle problem solved,works well in portersgate(as far as I know)

Doesn't really solve the problem as there isn't any real areas for cars to park, outside of the actual car park at the shops. They'd still all be on the road, which is the problem.

Luttrell1975

Two stunts for the price of one. I can't make my mind up about which one is more cynical.

#1 A cheap pole-climbing picture opportunity for a person who was on the Council for the area and should know that the strip of pavement outside a private house is public land. The ONLY case where you have a complaint is when your drive is blocked.

#2 An carefully worded, and deviously crafted time-bomb by the hippocrite who supported similar nonsense at Porterstown. This is just elbow grease for the local papers.

The real issues are why there is an inadequate bus service to ITB, and in knowing that student numbers would rise the college authority kept a small car park and allowed a private company to charge the earth....

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Luttrell1975 wrote: »

The real issues are why there is an inadequate bus service to ITB, and in knowing that student numbers would rise the college authority kept a small car park and allowed a private company to charge the earth....

There is an inadequate bus service to and from Corduff and has been for years. You'd have thought the IT being there would have made things better not worse. They spent ages putting in bus lanes on the Snugborough Rd past the Aquatic centre and on the road past the IT and for what? The 17a only recently started coming this way, I'm not sure which ones, if any, use the bus lanes on the other road.

Oh, I forgot, the 38 sometimes uses the bus lanes on the Snugborough Rd. during those times of the day that it decides not to come through Corduff. Which is ridiculous in itself. It's the one route that is specifically there to serve Corduff and it doesn't even manage to do that.

Luttrell1975

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

There is an inadequate bus service to and from Corduff and has been for years. You'd have thought the IT being there would have made things better not worse. They spent ages putting in bus lanes on the Snugborough Rd past the Aquatic centre and on the road past the IT and for what? The 17a only recently started coming this way, I'm not sure which ones, if any, use the bus lanes on the other road.

Oh, I forgot, the 38 sometimes uses the bus lanes on the Snugborough Rd. during those times of the day that it decides not to come through Corduff. Which is ridiculous in itself. It's the one route that is specifically there to serve Corduff and it doesn't even manage to do that.

Yes, still not a lot of options in that 17a.

There is a service by the way which would have been perfect for me if it had existed when I went there. The frequency sucks though...... https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=202181593896128403632.0004ab511a35d3350227b&doflg=ptk&ie=UTF8&ll=53.413011,-6.390438&spn=0.059344,0.154324&z=13&vpsrc=6

I think that Dublin Bus ran into trouble, but they were planning routes for the approaches to the college.

Luttrell1975

Polar101 wrote: »

While it's odd that there's no free parking at ITB, 80€ a year is hardly expensive - if a student can afford to run a car then affording the parking fee should be possible too. 25 cents a day doesn't make a big change in a car budget, I'd think?

I'd personally pay the fee, rather than risk my car getting damaged by someone who doesn't want non-residents to park in Corduff.

The fee isn't the only issue. Sometimes you just can't find a place and you end up driving out again. I did twice!

Hilly Bill

Rochey18 wrote: »

Never said there was, just stating how much it was.

I wasnt suggesting that you did. Sorry.

chucknorris

Just having a read of the thread this morning.

Telling people they cannot park, when they can, is not on.

SF are obviously not a paramilitary organisation so I'm sure Dennison is simply trying to stir it a little.

I know a good bit about this issue and almost all local representatives have been on this issue for quite some time, but as allot on here have mentioned, the solution is with the ITB and they need to sort it. There is a shuttle service from the NAC to the ITB for students who want to park for free, but students are not really taking up the option.

Gardi will and have removed cars parked badly or on corners etc.
Cars parked in Corduff have been largely unaffected by vandalism with the exception of two incidents I'm aware of.

Sinn Fein have no elected representative on the council in D15 and should never have pulled this stunt, but they are anxious to get a local seat in 2013 and are looking for issues to jump on at every opportunity.
This such opportunity was badly thought out. Sinn Fein have their core support, but anyone else they have been trying to garner support from will treat this stunt with cynicism.

Arciphel

chucknorris wrote: »

Sinn Fein have their core support, but anyone else they have been trying to garner support from will treat this stunt with cynicism.

I know someone who will be looking for their transfers in the next election though, and vice versa I would assume.

Luttrell1975

chucknorris wrote: »

Just having a read of the thread this morning.

Telling people they cannot park, when they can, is not on.

SF are obviously not a paramilitary organisation so I'm sure Dennison is simply trying to stir it a little.

I know a good bit about this issue and almost all local representatives have been on this issue for quite some time, but as allot on here have mentioned, the solution is with the ITB and they need to sort it. There is a shuttle service from the NAC to the ITB for students who want to park for free, but students are not really taking up the option.

Gardi will and have removed cars parked badly or on corners etc.
Cars parked in Corduff have been largely unaffected by vandalism with the exception of two incidents I'm aware of.

Sinn Fein have no elected representative on the council in D15 and should never have pulled this stunt, but they are anxious to get a local seat in 2013 and are looking for issues to jump on at every opportunity.
This such opportunity was badly thought out. Sinn Fein have their core support, but anyone else they have been trying to garner support from will treat this stunt with cynicism.

Spot on, especially your first couple of comments.

I've had opportunities to meet most of the Councillors for the area and for the most part they all seem like normal intelligent people. Dennison seems smarmy and false to me. But the only person I can think of that I would trust less is the individual pulling the stunt in the photo.

I was talking to a friend in Porters gate and they have a nightmare whenever anyone visits them in a car. I always walk over. But then I walk everywhere.

daymobrew

Luttrell1975 wrote: »

The real issues are why there is an inadequate bus service to ITB, and in knowing that student numbers would rise the college authority kept a small car park and allowed a private company to charge the earth....

There is an hourly suttle bus from close to Coolmine train station to ITB via Blanch Centre and NAC.

I am not sure if it is free or 5 euro a week.

Larbre34

Luttrell1975 wrote: »

Spot on, especially your first couple of comments.

I've had opportunities to meet most of the Councillors for the area and for the most part they all seem like normal intelligent people. Dennison seems smarmy and false to me. But the only person I can think of that I would trust less is the individual pulling the stunt in the photo.

I was talking to a friend in Porters gate and they have a nightmare whenever anyone visits them in a car. I always walk over. But then I walk everywhere.

Because of the parking restrictions or because of no parking restrictions?

Knine

Try going to the shops during college hours and you will see how much of a problem the cars dumped everywhere causes. It means I simple can't go to the shops as I have a passenger who has limited mobility so many times I can't walk there. It is a nightmare if you are unfortunate to live in the area where these people simply seem to abandon their cars. One tried to do it outside my house blocking my access to my driveway and they were very quickly sent on their way.

I would hate to have an emergency and need an ambulance the way some of the cars are parked. Why should the residents have to put up with it so some student can get out of paying 80 euro a year.

chucknorris

Knine wrote: »

Try going to the shops during college hours and you will see how much of a problem the cars dumped everywhere causes. It means I simple can't go to the shops as I have a passenger who has limited mobility so many times I can't walk there. It is a nightmare if you are unfortunate to live in the area where these people simply seem to abandon their cars. One tried to do it outside my house blocking my access to my driveway and they were very quickly sent on their way.

I would hate to have an emergency and need an ambulance the way some of the cars are parked. Why should the residents have to put up with it so some student can get out of paying 80 euro a year.

OK, we all understand the points above, but you are pulling the most extreme examples.

How would you propose resolving it for residents, apart from having the ITB make a change to their parking policy?

Would you go with permit parking, or yellow lines etc?

Tell me how you would allow relatives, say on confirmation day to park all over your road with the say yellow lines, permits needed etc?
This is not an easy option to sort out. I would propose the ITB add €20 to everyone's fee at the start of the term, even if they do not drive and open up the car park to all.

Not a perfect solution, but it's an effort.

Knine

It is not an extreme example. It is everyday life for me and my family and many other locals.

How would I suggest the problem is resolved? Clampers. If the students can afford a car, they can pay for the parking. It is up to the College to sort this issue out not the residents. If they returned to a couple of clamped cars they would soon start getting the bus.

Many people do use the bus as I see them getting off and walking up to the college. When I was a student I could not afford a car.

chucknorris

Knine wrote: »

It is not an extreme example. It is everyday life for me and my family and many other locals.

How would I suggest the problem is resolved? Clampers. If the students can afford a car, they can pay for the parking. It is up to the College to sort this issue out not the residents. If they returned to a couple of clamped cars they would soon start getting the bus.

Many people do use the bus as I see them getting off and walking up to the college. When I was a student I could not afford a car.

OK, and how would you identify cars that can be clamped, and identify cars that cannot be clamped?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

chucknorris wrote: »

OK, and how would you identify cars that can be clamped, and identify cars that cannot be clamped?

Up until the IT changed the parking policy there were no cars parked where they are parked now. It's kind of obvious which cars are students. Personally I have no issue with them filling up the shop car park, at least it is an actual car park. The ones abandoned on the road around Sheephill are obviously students.

Push comes to shove local residents get a sticker for their car windows to say they're local, get a few extra ones for anyone that visits regularly. Any car between 9-5 Mon -Fri parked without one of these stickers gets clamped. Easy.

chucknorris

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Up until the IT changed the parking policy there were no cars parked where they are parked now. It's kind of obvious which cars are students. Personally I have no issue with them filling up the shop car park, at least it is an actual car park. The ones abandoned on the road around Sheephill are obviously students.

Push comes to shove local residents get a sticker for their car windows to say they're local, get a few extra ones for anyone that visits regularly. Any car between 9-5 Mon -Fri parked without one of these stickers gets clamped. Easy.

Are you joking me?

No it is not that obvious. I can park anywhere I like in Sheephill park, as long as it's safely parked. If a car is clamped because it has no sticker, made up by residents, you would be breaking the law.

Now say you go down that road, and it's as easy as you say, and for arguments sake, there is a funeral in Corduff church, and a line of cars park up Sheephill park on say a Monday, at 11am - do you clamp them because they don't have a sticker, or do you turn a blind eye?

If a student claims they are not a student, who are they to prove that too and under who's authority? Yours?

Who would tender, choose and allow clamping to happen? Who will take the choice to make the roads in question, in places like Sheephill to now be private roads?

Fingal county council are not going to allow you do any of the above, but i'd be interested to know what you policy would be for a funeral, in respect of Sheephill park, Sheephill Avenue and Corduff grove.

Hopefully 'Knine' also gives a reply.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Well obviously I'm not suggesting that the residents just make their own stickers. I'm not a ****ing moron and I resent your implication that I'm suggesting residents take this matter into their own hands.

There are certain areas where I have never in my life seen a car parked until recently. It's not that hard to see that it's a result of the college parking situation.

As for funerals and confirmations etc. If the car park at the shops wasn't full of students cars there'd be very little need for people to line up in Sheephill or along the main road. Also, assuming clamping was in operation it wouldn't be that hard to contact the company doing it, legally, and inform them that there's something on so don't bother clamping.

The residents up near the train station got sick of people parking in their estates and they were listened to. I suppose it's just coincidence that the residents of Corduff are just having to put up with it?

Justin10

Even if all them students that park in corduff bought a permit, there isn't enough room in the ITB car park in the mornings.

elfy4eva

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Well obviously I'm not suggesting that the residents just make their own stickers. I'm not a ****ing moron and I resent your implication that I'm suggesting residents take this matter into their own hands.

There are certain areas where I have never in my life seen a car parked until recently. It's not that hard to see that it's a result of the college parking situation.

As for funerals and confirmations etc. If the car park at the shops wasn't full of students cars there'd be very little need for people to line up in Sheephill or along the main road. Also, assuming clamping was in operation it wouldn't be that hard to contact the company doing it, legally, and inform them that there's something on so don't bother clamping.

The residents up near the train station got sick of people parking in their estates and they were listened to. I suppose it's just coincidence that the residents of Corduff are just having to put up with it?

We could argue to the death about pipe dreams of a clamping estate but it's not going to happen at the end of the day while they may be in your housing estate they're still public roads that we all own and have rights to. The only good solution where both sides come away happy is for ITB to open up free parking to their students again. That's what should be worked towards.

chucknorris

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Well obviously I'm not suggesting that the residents just make their own stickers. I'm not a ****ing moron and I resent your implication that I'm suggesting residents take this matter into their own hands.

There are certain areas where I have never in my life seen a car parked until recently. It's not that hard to see that it's a result of the college parking situation.

As for funerals and confirmations etc. If the car park at the shops wasn't full of students cars there'd be very little need for people to line up in Sheephill or along the main road. Also, assuming clamping was in operation it wouldn't be that hard to contact the company doing it, legally, and inform them that there's something on so don't bother clamping.

The residents up near the train station got sick of people parking in their estates and they were listened to. I suppose it's just coincidence that the residents of Corduff are just having to put up with it?

Windamere, Aldemere and Portersgate are private estates. Corduff is not.

Cars are regularly parked in those roads when a very large funeral takes place, you know this.

You haven't really tried to explain your idea with great detail. The obstacles against what you're thinking are too great.

The ITB need to be guided to a solution that encourages more people to park in the ITB, but the previous poster is correct, there are not enough slots up there so the ITB have the students by the cajones and it's affecting Corduff, but legally the students are doing what I would do if I were looking to park around say Croke park for a match - if it's allowed, i'll do it, and if it's free, even better.

Put yourself in students shoes also. It's not ideal, but they are the realities.

Knine

There has never been a problem with funerals etc as its not that often and would normally be locals. A funeral lasts an hour. These students are there most of the day.

However the car park at the church is also there for residents to collect their children from school. Not for tight fisted students most of whom could get the bus.

They won't park outside my house again any time soon.

elfy4eva

Knine wrote: »

There has never been a problem with funerals etc as its not that often and would normally be locals. A funeral lasts an hour. These students are there most of the day.

However the car park at the church is also there for residents to collect their children from school. Not for tight fisted students most of whom could get the bus.

They won't park outside my house again any time soon.

Why won't they?