London's mayor Ken Livingstone hopes making drivers pay to enter the city centre will cut traffic by at least 10%.
- Old Master
- Posts: 5417
- Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 12:00 am
- Location: Monaghan
Even doubling the public transport provision in this city will not eliminate congestion since the numbers of people driving cars is steadily rising.
Such measures are necessary in order to make people change their habits and use public transport.
I acknowledge that for some people the daily trek by car into town is an unavoidable reality. The measures proposed by Mr. livingstone (I presume!)envisage a falloff of 10 to 20% in the amount of cars entering the designated area - just enough to make things more comfortable for the motorist. It is not a definitive solution but it's a step in the right direction
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: Dublin
1) our inadeqate public transort system
2) our environmentally unsustainable planning system
3) and our corrupt and / or ignorant local politicians abuse of that system.
Dublin aspirations to European standards in the city centre (and has been to some degree successful in recent years) are largely negated by it continuing urban sprawl.
This is to the detriment of the city, its citizens, the countryside and the environment more generally.
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: London
Build low density housing in an urban sprawl, every one with a handkerchief sized garden, but in such a manner it is inherently inefficient to ever be served by any form of public transport.
Ignore various reports etc going back to the 1960's pointing out this is a bad thing.
Talk for many years about LUAS,route etc but do nothing.
Introduce bus lanes with gaps, and 24hr /7 day bus lanes with no buses (at night, Sunday morning until 10 or after)and wonder why the car is popular.
Consider that congestion charging will, on optimistic forecasts for London , knock out 10% of traffic while car sales have, in most recent years,increased by more than this per year.
Go back to step one.
(Author, a bus user by choice, spent from 08.30 to 09.05 waiting for any bus this morning, on a route with allegedly c10 min frequencies.)
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2000 12:00 am
- Location: dublin, ireland
I have travelled widely and am yet to find one.
From an enforced cyclist whose brief foray into bus use nearly led to an onset of pneumonia on Friday evening while waiting for a bus that never arrived
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:00 pm
- Location: Dublin, Ireland
In theory at least, the high-density apartment complex refused planning permission in the city centre will end up being built on a greenfield site in the country because of objections from so-called conscientious pressure groups e.g. An Taisce. In my book this is much worse, the city centre is being protected from development e.g. high-rise, high-density projects, often even though they may be well-designed, at the expense of the countryside. This needs to be remedied soon. What are peoples opinions?
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: Ireland
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 11:00 pm
- Location: cork
I presume your talking about the 'Residential Density Guidlines, 1999' by the Dept. of Environment. I had to do a bit of research on densities myself & i can tell you that some county councils etc. especially in the country, did not seem to see them as relevant to them, some did not really seem to be farmiliar with them & one planner told me (from a more rural council) that they pretty had much binned the guidelines & went on as before (i'm not sure that this was by their choice though). Some councils i.e. Dublin region ones, would be a lot more familiar with them & at try to a least have regard for them. On the 'other side'... Developers and architects etc. will sometimes quote parts of the guidlines to support their proposals. Some professionals are unaware of the document.
As to the effect the guidelines are having... I think maybe they brought the possibllity of higher densities into the development arena but seeing as bog-standard, cul-de-sac, semi-d/ detached housing estates are still the residential developments of choice (of developers & pretty much the public too - the quiet cul-de-sac suburban ideal - which isn't so bad as long as you have a car) notmuch has really changed. Still, there seem to be more duplexes about!
One planner lamented to me twice during a conversation about higher densities that they were 'still wating for the design' i.e. good design, that are required for higher densities and this is mentioned specifically in the guidelines.
I had thought myself that this question might be worthy of starting a new topic - do people thing that standards of design have improved in higher density developments since the guidelines came out???
- DARA H
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 12:00 am
- Location: IRELAND