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.
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.havent been there in 20yrs. How would you get to Stephens green presently?. Can you drive down oconnell st and somehow get there?...
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?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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.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?
Whatever about Ryan....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.
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.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.
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.
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.
No. That's not what was said.Or, rewriting that comment slightly:
No. That's not what was said.
Of course. But that's not what I said.but that doesn't mean that the large majority of other people are in the same fortunate position.
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.It's very clear that there is an anti-car agenda
It's not.Perhaps not; but's its what you were thinking.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?