Dublin City Centre - Car Restrictions

[Itchy]

DUBLIN CITY CENTRE TRANSPORT PLAN​

Dublin City Council’s transport plan - the first draft of which was published in September - proposes a bus gate on Bachelors Walk close to O’Connell Bridge, only allowing access for public transport, taxis, cyclists and pedestrians. A similar plan is proposed for Aston Quay on the opposite side of the river, putting in a bus gate that would keep cars off the Liffey’s city centre quays, except for taxis.
Pearse Street, which is currently one way and has four lanes of traffic, would be changed to two-way traffic, with additional space given over to cycle lanes and pedestrian infrastructure. The left hand turn from Westland Row onto Pearse Street would become a bus only turn, reducing traffic on Pearse Street heading towards the city centre.
The changes to Pearse Street and Westland Row are expected to bring significantly reduced traffic to Pearse Street and Tara Street, “allowing reduction in traffic lanes providing scope for increased pedestrian space and safe cycling provision”.
The changes to traffic on the quays and Pearse Street will also lead to scope for major changes at Beresford Place and Customs House Quay, where possible public space and pedestrianisation elements will be explored for what are considered to be very scenic parts of the city centre, according to the draft plan.
College Green and Dame Street would be made “traffic free”, except for access and deliveries. The long touted College Green Plaza project is currently out for tender.
Parliament Street, which leads up to City Hall on one end and faces across the river at the now partially pedestrianised Capel Street, would be made traffic free, with a new cycle link across the river to Capel Street.
The council has compiled a report on the feedback gathered from the public consultation, which was due to be presented to the Traffic and Transport SPC on Wednesday, along with a final version of the strategy.

Restrictions on private car use in Dublin city centre to come into force from August

Among the proposed restrictions include the removal of car traffic on the quays, the pedestrianisation of Parliament Street and the removal of traffic from College Green

www.businesspost.ie

 

[odyssey06]

havent been there in 20yrs. How would you get to Stephens green presently?. Can you drive down oconnell st and somehow get there?...

No don't think you can use O'Connell Street with the College Green bus gate ... depending on where you are coming from on Northside.
Either across at IFSC and past Merrion Square and hook around to it.
Or across at Father Matthew Bridge and Kevin st.

 

[PGF2016]

If I go into Dublin city to shop I drive. There's no alternative unless I want to carry bags around all day. I usually do so before Christmas with the kids. We come from the South Side and park in Jervis as I prefer that side of the city and Arnott's is vastly superior to Brown Thomas as a department store. If we want to go to Grafton Street we walk, it's less than one kilometre and takes around 10 minutes. Public transport takes twice as long and involves a longer walk. Dublin City Centre is small and, in my opinion, the problem is that the main car parks are actually too close to the city centre.

So you drive as you don't want to carry bags all day. Does that mean every time you buy something you walk back to Jervis and put the bag in the car?

 

[PGF2016]

No, the questions about the impact of the changes are pointing out Ryan is being dishonest here pretending this wouldn't impact cars trying to get into the city to shop.
It is a lie saying it will just impact people "traversing" the city.

Hence the question, not mine:
"How exactly do you stop people driving across the city without messing with people driving into the city?"

So people should stop pretending it won't mess with people driving into the city, and trying to evade it with more questions or vagueness.

Messing is the wrong word to use but yes I think it would be highly likely that as routes will have to change driving a car to some destinations will take longer. I think that is the whole point. Slower by car. Faster by public transport or active travel.

 

[odyssey06]

Messing is the wrong word to use but yes I think it would be highly likely that as routes will have to change driving a car to some destinations will take longer. I think that is the whole point. Slower by car. Faster by public transport or active travel.

Inconveniencing and disrupting? Which will lead to less people travelling in by car and shopping... and we come back to the earlier points on the thread about businesses expressing concern about losing big spenders to out of town shopping centres. And out of Dublin City Council rates zones.

Ryan trying to spin it as only impacting people "traversing" the city is therefore dishonest. He should be clear about the impact and not try to spoof and fool people about the actual impact of roads and businesses. If he wins an honest argument \ debate that's one thing. But so far this is not it.

 

[time to plan]

So you drive as you don't want to carry bags all day. Does that mean every time you buy something you walk back to Jervis and put the bag in the car?

I plan things out so if I'm going to buy something heavy I either do it first if near Jervis, or last. But I can't remember the last I felt encumbered. Jerivs is good as the Shopping Centre car park (not the other Jervis St one) is a maximum of €13 per day. Compared to a QPark, you could always use the savings for a taxi back to Jervis if you felt really weighed down, but I've never needed to do this.

 

[Purple]

So you drive as you don't want to carry bags all day. Does that mean every time you buy something you walk back to Jervis and put the bag in the car?

Yes, that's right, because everything is binary and no rational or reasonable common sense should be applied.

 

[MrEarl]

Hello,

You know, it's amazing, just how silly some of the comments on this thread are.

Debates on the meaning of the word "woke", for example, when logic might suggest that we all simply agree to use an independent reliable source, such as the Oxford Dictionary

 

[MrEarl]

It's very clear that there is an anti-car agenda being imposed on Dublin City, albeit different views on whether it's a good, or a bad, thing.

Those who consider it a bad thing, raise what I see as a couple of very valid points:

1. There is no quality alternative transport option, for a large percentage of the population, who will be impacted. Bikes aren't suitable for all, promises of future increased numbers of buses, a new Metro line etc are not available, and won't be, in advance of proposed restrictions being imposed on motorists.

2. The argument that the DCC and Government are only trying to redirect motorists out of the city, when it's not their final destination, doesn't hold water - when alternative roads are not suitable. To elaborate, take examples such as the East Link and M50. There's gridlock on both, on a regular basis, before additional traffic is forced on these routes.

So, if DCC and Government are being honest, and mean what they say, then why not:

* remove the tolls on the East Link, and return the traffic lanes that they've been taking away, on roads on either side of the toll bridge, so as to allow more traffic move along this route?

* Provide the much talked about, additional public transportation, before trying to penalise motorists? It's one excuse after another, for the failure to invest properly in large fleets of buses, new tram lines, new train lines, new carriages etc. They order 20, when 400 units are needed. They finally agree a light rail link from city to airport, but defer it, time and time again. The spend almost 40 years talking about DART Underground, but never develop it. The list goes on....

 

[PGF2016]

Inconveniencing and disrupting? Which will lead to less people travelling in by car and shopping... and we come back to the earlier points on the thread about businesses expressing concern about losing big spenders to out of town shopping centres. And out of Dublin City Council rates zones.

Ryan trying to spin it as only impacting people "traversing" the city is therefore dishonest. He should be clear about the impact and not try to spoof and fool people about the actual impact of roads and businesses. If he wins an honest argument \ debate that's one thing. But so far this is not it.

Whatever about Ryan....

In answer to your first point yes - things will change. As has been said before some people will not be happy. Some businesses will lose out. Some people will be happy. Some businesses will do better.

I think this thread has run it's course for me. It's very depressing that Ireland is such a car dependent grid locked place.

Whatever about the merits or demerits of this initiative it's obvious that car is king and there is no such thing as a viable alternative if there is even a hint of inconvenience.

 

[PGF2016]

There is no quality alternative transport option, for a large percentage of the population, who will be impacted.

Last comment. I think this is not true. There are alternatives in many cases but people are not willing to take them if it inconveniences them in the slightest.

 

[MrEarl]

Last comment. I think this is not true. There are alternatives in many cases but people are not willing to take them if it inconveniences them in the slightest.

We could put a lot of time into arguing about this one, so why not agree to disagree?

Perhaps you are fortunite enough to live in a part of South Dublin that has good access to both Luas and Dart, or one of these services, plus several regular bus services?

Perhaps you don't need to commute long distances for work, or are in a position to walk or cycle to most of the places that you want to go to ?

- but that doesn't mean that the large majority of other people are in the same fortunate position.

@Gordon Gekko has taken a fair bit of stick for some of his comments on this thread, and despite a lot of silly "nit picking" from a few of the others here, who got hung up on some of what he said, everyone seems to have either missed, or ignored, one important comment that he made in one of his posts - to paraphrase, he said that he wouldn't be opposed to various restrictions, if there was a good Metro service here!

That really is the bottom line for a large majority of people, it's not able laziness, not wanting to do better for ESG etc. It's about being practical - we all need to be able to move freely, safely, and efficiently. At the moment, most of us can't, due to limited quality public transport alternatives.

 

[Marsupial]

Last comment. I think this is not true. There are alternatives in many cases but people are not willing to take them if it inconveniences them in the slightest.

Or, rewriting that comment slightly:

There aren't alternatives in some cases but I don't really give a hoot about the people in that situation. Let them eat cake.

 

[PGF2016]

Or, rewriting that comment slightly:

No. That's not what was said.

 

[Marsupial]

No. That's not what was said.

Perhaps not; but's its what you were thinking.

 

[PGF2016]

but that doesn't mean that the large majority of other people are in the same fortunate position.

Of course. But that's not what I said.

It's very clear that there is an anti-car agenda

Most of the people with the 'anti-car' agenda have and drive cars. They are anti grid lock, anti noise, anti pollution, anti car dependency, anti over use of cars etc. etc.

Perhaps not; but's its what you were thinking.

It's not.