Dun Laoghaire Traffic & Commuting Chat

Mav11

Larbre34 wrote: »

The full report on the submissions received is on the Council website now.

In terms on the 70% approval, there are a whole heap of box ticking approvers in the list, whereas the 30% disapproval contains detailed submissions, many from businesses in the town, pleading that this not proceed and precise reasons why. I think anyone who is blindly in favour of this experiment would do well to read the report, it's sobering.

I find it hard to understand why the Council is so intent on going against the wishes of local businesses, just at the moment they are trying to return from the worst challenge to their existence in their history.

A wonderful new public plaza is now open adjacent to George's Street, closing the street itself to public transport etc is punitive and redundant.

Hang on a second now, if you approve of a proposal you approve of it because it is correct in your opinion and you agree with it. You don't need to issue volumes stating why you agree. If you disagree with a proposal you give reasons for your disapproval. In other words you make your argument against. So less of your "whole heap of box ticking approvers" rubbish, please.

These people have taken the time to consider the proposal and democratically indicate their approval. You may not be a big fan of the democratic process when it doesn't suit your views, but you'll just have to learn to live with it.

frash

Larbre34 wrote: »

The full report on the submissions received is on the Council website now.

Would you mind posting a link to it please?
I can't seem to find it
Thanks

Larbre34

I can't on the touch site, but if you go to the DLR Council summer streets we page or to their facebook there are links

Larbre34

ted1 wrote: »

No it wouldn’t. It’d be a farce snd dangerous. A half arsed attempt. What a stupid suggestion.
Do you think taxes should be allowed down Grafton street too?

You need to relax a small bit Ted.

1. Even as we speak, there is traffic going down it. Reducing it to buses and taxis to improve the ambience wouldnt be dangerous or stupid, it would just reduce the frequency a bit and make the existing outdoor seating on the street more pleasant.

2. No of course I don't think taxis should be allowed down Grafton Street, because when that was pedestrianised 40 years ago, suitable alternative routes were designated.

Your argument is a bit like what's going on in Sandymount - the locals object to the main Strand Road being reduced to one lane, but are largely in agreement with pedestrianising one side of the Sandymount green.

Then the cycling lobby comes out and says, 'hypocrites!!' - when in fact the two proposals are unalike in a hundred different respects. Apparently one is no longer allowed to be in favour of some changes to streets and public spaces, but not all. You must, evidently, become a card carrying anti combustion engine zealot in all respects or you are exiled from the right to be in favour of balance and compromise.

wowy

Mav11 wrote: »

Hang on a second now, if you approve of a proposal you approve of it because it is correct in your opinion and you agree with it. You don't need to issue volumes stating why you agree. If you disagree with a proposal you give reasons for your disapproval. In other words you make your argument against. So less of your "whole heap of box ticking approvers" rubbish, please.

These people have taken the time to consider the proposal and democratically indicate their approval. You may not be a big fan of the democratic process when it doesn't suit your views, but you'll just have to learn to live with it.

I don't know enough about this scheme and its knock-on effects yet to comment on the pros/cons, but I will say that road closures & traffic changes aren't supposed to be put to a simple majority democratic vote - proposals are put out for public consultation and the feedback is fed into the final design. If the Council are using 70% support as a justification for simply pushing ahead with their pre-determined scheme without taking into account the detailed submissions of the 30%, that would appear to be a problem.

qb123

Here's the link. Have only skimmed it, but looks to answer issues such as those raised by Larbre. For example:

We have noted the concerns related to the proposed bus diversions, in particular the potential
impacts on the elderly, those with buggies or carry heavy shopping. DLRCC are looking at ways to
use adapted cycles such as piloted trishaws to facilitate short trips that link the coast and
George’s St. These services would be focused on connecting to bus stops, car parks and other key
locations around the town.


https://www.dlrcoco.ie/sites/default/files/atoms/files/dun_laoghaire_summer_streets_submissions_report_main_report_final_24-06-21.pdf

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

You need to relax a small bit Ted.

1. Even as we speak, there is traffic going down it. Reducing it to buses and taxis to improve the ambience wouldnt be dangerous or stupid, it would just reduce the frequency a bit and make the existing outdoor seating on the street more pleasant.

It would greatly remove the safety and feeling of a pedestrian street. Mother’s would still have to hold to the kids. Visually impaired users couldn’t walk on the street.
The main thoroughfare couldn’t be used. Many European cities allow cafes etc to put tables in the middle so as to avoid shadows beside the building.

As I says it’s be a half arsed effort.

Like Grafton street did, public transport can adopt.

Mav11

wowy wrote: »

I don't know enough about this scheme and its knock-on effects yet to comment on the pros/cons, but I will say that road closures & traffic changes aren't supposed to be put to a simple majority democratic vote - proposals are put out for public consultation and the feedback is fed into the final design. If the Council are using 70% support as a justification for simply pushing ahead with their pre-determined scheme without taking into account the detailed submissions of the 30%, that would appear to be a problem.

Do you have some information to suggest that the council failed to consider the objections?

Seaswimmer

wowy wrote: »

I don't know enough about this scheme and its knock-on effects yet to comment on the pros/cons, but I will say that road closures & traffic changes aren't supposed to be put to a simple majority democratic vote - proposals are put out for public consultation and the feedback is fed into the final design. If the Council are using 70% support as a justification for simply pushing ahead with their pre-determined scheme without taking into account the detailed submissions of the 30%, that would appear to be a problem.

Too often in Ireland submissions are considered as a referendum rather than input. For example, near where I live they are proposing a trial for 6 months of making Deansgrange Road one way. All the local residents groups are saying " what is the point of objecting if they don't listen to you"

So it would seem the general opinion is that if you object you should get your own way.

Georges Street pedestrianisation is only for a few weeks. Personally I think the more trials the better. If it works keep it. If not revert back to where you were. It is the best of both worlds.

Mav11

Interesting and relevant.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/resident-takes-high-court-challenge-to-councils-decision-to-pedestrianise-part-of-malahide-village-40589777.html

Larbre34

With the anger I'm hearing reported from some local businesses in DL, I wouldnt be too shocked to hear of a similar action in that regard, or at least some intervention at Council level.

Mav11

This might be a key difference.

“The street had been pedestrianised between June and November 2020, which it is claimed the council deemed a failure”

L1011

Claimed by the person looking to have it overturned, fairly sure I've never seen that claimed anywhere else.

Mav11

L1011 wrote: »

Claimed by the person looking to have it overturned, fairly sure I've never seen that claimed anywhere else.

The courts will test the veracity of that claim.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

With the anger I'm hearing reported from some local businesses in DL, I wouldnt be too shocked to hear of a similar action in that regard, or at least some intervention at Council level.

What local businesses. ? Perhaps they should use Google to see how other places got in with predestination, lots of case studies from businesses who opposed change but in have changed their opinion based on the uptake in their business since

JayRoc

Larbre34 wrote: »

With the anger I'm hearing reported from some local businesses in DL, I wouldnt be too shocked to hear of a similar action in that regard, or at least some intervention at Council level.

I'm genuinely surprised to hear that. Until fairly recently I owned a business at the lower georges street end, and I cannot imagine how pedestrianisation could do anything but improve things. It would undoubtedly have done so in my case.

Larbre34

Take a look at some of the submissions from various businesses in the report.

I don't know what business you were in, but non-hospitality businesses are evidently not impressed.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

Take a look at some of the submissions from various businesses in the report.

I don't know what business you were in, but non-hospitality businesses are evidently not impressed.

Sostrene and green, Penney’s , Shaws are non hospitality they’ll benefit greatly.

Larbre34

I'm not debating it, I'm saying there are non-hosp businesses objecting in the report.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

I'm not debating it, I'm saying there are non-hosp businesses objecting in the report.

Some people simply fear change. That’s fine, they’ll get a nice surprise.

Mav11

Just read the report and submissions, some great ideas in the overwhelmingly positive submissions for enhancing the initiative even further, lighting, book stalls etc. I hope the council give these some consideration. Just one small query, would the traffic circulation have been better moved to the west side of Myrtle Sq. to allow for increased dining outside Dunphys?

Larbre34

Probably didn't pass muster with the Cinema people.

RosieJoe

A little bit on the new art work around the town

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0630/1232250-street-art-dun-laoghaire/

Here is a good way to see where all the murals are and who the artists are:
https://www.dlrcoco.ie/en/dlanseo

AndrewJRenko

Thoughts and prayers for Ann urgently please;

https://twitter.com/OConnorOisin/status/1410498025642938371

Tabnabs

Interesting the timing of this as access to the sea is a key feature of the newly published National Marine Planning Framework. The closest public transport from the 40 Foot is 500m away and the closest public car-park is 1km away. It's all well and good shouting down the opinions of people who you disagree with, but a wider debate on public access to marine recreational areas is absolutely necessary and, for some, vehicular access is necessary. Access to the sea for recreational use is not the preserve of the lucky few who live within sight of it.

Mav11

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Thoughts and prayers for Ann urgently please;

https://twitter.com/OConnorOisin/status/1410498025642938371

I read that letter in the IT and thought it was in jest. But maybe not!

markpb

Tabnabs wrote: »

Interesting the timing of this as access to the sea is a key feature of the newly published National Marine Planning Framework. The closest public transport from the 40 Foot is 500m away and the closest public car-park is 1km away.

Fortyfoot is not the only sea though. There's plenty of parking right beside the sea at other nearby locations like Poolbeg, Sandymount, Blackrock, DL Harbour and Bray. Removing a few parking spaces at one part of the coastline does not prevent anyone from accessing the sea. Most of those have decent public transport options as well.

I would have thought it's the other way round. The CMR has opened access to Dun Laoghaire to more people, especially for the last year when public transport capacity was limited and the demand for parking was greater than usual. All those people cycling from nearby locations are saving parking spaces for people from Naas.

AndrewJRenko

Tabnabs wrote: »

Interesting the timing of this as access to the sea is a key feature of the newly published National Marine Planning Framework. The closest public transport from the 40 Foot is 500m away and the closest public car-park is 1km away. It's all well and good shouting down the opinions of people who you disagree with, but a wider debate on public access to marine recreational areas is absolutely necessary and, for some, vehicular access is necessary. Access to the sea for recreational use is not the preserve of the lucky few who live within sight of it.

There are 4,500 parking spaces in DL.

Cyrus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Thoughts and prayers for Ann urgently please;

https://twitter.com/OConnorOisin/status/1410498025642938371

Fab

loyatemu

Tabnabs wrote: »

the closest public car-park is 1km away

1km? so 10 minutes walk?