Dublin Bikes - expansion stalled?

trellheim · 10-11-2014 3:22pm

I'm wondering should charges rise for regular commuters on these things. Shouldn't the point of these be for adhoc trips, not your regular a-b ? perhaps free up to 4 times a week, 2€ each over say 4 times per week, then 4€ a hire over 8 times a week. If it is becoming demand saturated the price needs to rise until the problem goes away.

Sam Russell · 10-11-2014 3:32pm

Wouldn't regulars just get a second ticket?

beauf · 10-11-2014 3:45pm

trellheim wrote: »

I'm wondering should charges rise for regular commuters on these things. Shouldn't the point of these be for adhoc trips, not your regular a-b ? perhaps free up to 4 times a week, 2€ each over say 4 times per week, then 4€ a hire over 8 times a week. If it is becoming demand saturated the price needs to rise until the problem goes away.

Its not as bad as it used to be. Used to be a impossible to use some stands.

That said I don't use them as much as I used to. I generally have my own bike for commuting. So its only lunchtime trips around city centre.

trellheim · 10-11-2014 3:57pm

Wouldn't regulars just get a second ticket?

Yes they would, hadn't thought of that, stick it up to 100€ a year fee so.

but isn't the logical 2nd step if as OP said above that you'll buy a bike anyway for the consistent trip.

ok so what IS sucking up the bikes then ?

ArmaniJeanss · 10-11-2014 3:59pm

trellheim wrote: »

I'm wondering should charges rise for regular commuters on these things. Shouldn't the point of these be for adhoc trips, not your regular a-b ? perhaps free up to 4 times a week, 2€ each over say 4 times per week, then 4€ a hire over 8 times a week. If it is becoming demand saturated the price needs to rise until the problem goes away.

Quite strange that anyone would think of 'raise the price' as a solution to the demand issue.
Suggesting raising the price from €20 a year to €768* a year is even more fantastic.

* For someone who uses the system 10 times a week for 48 weeks a year

LeinsterDub · 10-11-2014 4:05pm

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Quite strange that anyone would think of 'raise the price' as a solution to the demand issue.
Suggesting raising the price from €20 a year to €768* a year is even more fantastic.

* For someone who uses the system 10 times a week for 48 weeks a year

That sort of logic would get someone a job in the NTA. Working on DB pricing

beauf · 10-11-2014 4:25pm

trellheim wrote: »

...ok so what IS sucking up the bikes then ?

People not walking 10mins to the next stand probably, and all doing it at the same peak time.

What stand are you talking about and at what times?

Sam Russell · 10-11-2014 6:24pm

Empty stands are bad, but full stands are just as bad - if not worse. Having got to your destination, you cannot park the bike.

trellheim · 10-11-2014 6:27pm

Quite strange that anyone would think of 'raise the price' as a solution to the demand issue.
Suggesting raising the price from €20 a year to €768* a year is even more fantastic.

Why. Seems simple. Increase price, less people use it. Demand dies down. Suggesting raising the price to such a level as to deter usage is obvious here but perhaps you don't want to see it that way.

This is how markets work, if we need to get that simplistic. There is limited resource here. "Fantastic" is a wonderful word but perhaps not applicable.

Beauf: I am not discussing any particular stand.

PS : the above refers to particular pricing to deter commuter models of use. non-commuter, ad-hoc usage should remain low charge as they perform a particularly useful function in that regard.

I

beauf · 10-11-2014 7:26pm

Kinda missing the point. Which is to get more people out of cars and more people cycling.

trellheim · 10-11-2014 10:50pm

Kinda missing the point. Which is to get more people out of cars and more people cycling.

I'm well aware of that. Without bicycles on the stands then this will not be possible, therefore we must be able to have on the stands at all times - i.e. discourage commuter usage, we want to see ad-hoc usage.

Aard · 10-11-2014 11:49pm

Discourage commuter usage? No way. The whole point is that the transportation network is saturated at peak hours. That's exactly the time that you want people to be using the bikes. Not just a few times a week, but for every commuting trip if possible. It means one less car or one less bum on a bus seat that might be occupied by somebody going further than the canal ring.

The problem with redistribution of bikes after 09:00 is entirely separate and to conflate them is to miss the point.

trellheim · 11-11-2014 12:57am

Apologies for the poor sentence. I meant "Discourage commuter use as primary use" . The bikes are there to offer a choice. Unless you can get on one, you won't select it as a means of transport. This is why the costs need to rise for commuter usage patterns . Have a think about that. If it gets a bloke off his bum for 3 trips a week then that should be prettty cheap, but 10 times a week ? put your hand in your pocket.

Have aread of the dublin bikes planning framework. They are there to encourage and to add choice.

Aard · 11-11-2014 1:26am

You seem to be hung up on who's paying for it. There's a combination of financing, the bulk of which comes from JC Decaux and Coca Cola. The fact that it costs the end user €20 doesn't mean that it doesn't pay for itself.

There really isn't a problem. I'm not sure what problem you're claiming is there.

beauf · 11-11-2014 1:54am

I don't get it. Is there a load of tourists at peak commuting times or something? Who like sight seeing at 8am or in the evening gridlock?I would assume the main people the commuters effect are other commuters. I would say people living near a stand get first choice and its the commuters coming in from further out who find the stands are empty until they balance the stands out later in the morning. So when the tourist look for them the bikes are all back. I would also guess its the outer stations that have problems will commuters emptying the stands at peak. The central ones would have a more balanced usage. That would vary if a stand is located on a major commuting route.

http://dublinbikes2go.com/stats

beauf · 11-11-2014 1:59am

The only time I had a problem with commuters emptying out the stands was when it interfered with my own usage. As a commuter

trellheim · 11-11-2014 1:12pm

who pays is a component but not the main point here. The idea is for demand-led pricing to ensure there is always a bike on a rack for the ad-hoc user NOT the commuter, thus enabling the choice for the user who would not have otherwise used it.

Assume there is a rack in front of Heuston with 10 bikes who all get taken by the first 10 people every day who sprint to get the bike and cycle to Stephens Green . The 11th person will always get the 145 or Luas+walk.

If there is a bike left for the 11th or 12th they might be tempted to get it and pedal down to the Green instead, thus enabling their choice and convincing them back onto a bike. But if there isn't one they never will and so a primary focus for dublinbikes is missed . This is the only way I can see of reliably ensuring there is a bike left ( on a consistent basis ) by demand pricing out the regulars .

beauf · 11-11-2014 1:38pm

So you want less people using the system. And people to use the system less.

trellheim · 11-11-2014 2:00pm

Really ? That what you think ? A second's thought would tell you that this is designed to get a wider cross section of the population using it, which is what dublinbikes is designed for, enabling choice.

Good for you on the soundbite though.

Sam Russell · 11-11-2014 2:39pm

What difference does it make who uses the bike?

However, in Paris, Montmartre is a problem as no-one wants to cycle up the hill and everyone is quite happy to coast down. They have some scheme to encourage the user to go up the hill, and deter those coming down.

beauf · 11-11-2014 3:05pm

trellheim wrote: »

Really ? That what you think ? A second's thought would tell you that this is designed to get a wider cross section of the population using it, which is what dublinbikes is designed for, enabling choice.

Good for you on the soundbite though.

A wider cross section but less bikes out on hire overall. If theres more bikes on stands theres less people using them.

trellheim wrote: »

...Have aread of the dublin bikes planning framework. They are there to encourage and to add choice.

For me trhat document has nothing about discouraging commuting. Rather the opposite. The normalisation of using bikes (and dublin bikes) for "regular" journeys. It embraces commuters and high usage.

It also ackowledges the radial nature of Dublin which means some stations have higher usage than others, (those in the hub) and some have natural bike distribution and other won't, (those on the outside). Making some stations bigger to facilitate this usage.

Carawaystick · 11-11-2014 3:16pm

When the db scheme started there was a lot of redistribution with vans moving bikes from full places to the empty ones.
This died away over the years, so when I used it last, you would regularily have full or empty stations first thing in the morning around 7am, so I don't think they were redistributed at the end of the night.

Aard · 11-11-2014 3:19pm

"always a bike on a rack for the ad-hoc user NOT the commuter"

So nobody is allowed to take the last bike, unless they're not a commuter? That "problem" only presents itself after rush hour and can easily be remedied by having bikes moved around by the redistribution trucks.

ArmaniJeanss · 11-11-2014 3:32pm

I don't see the problem with the commuter user anyway Trellheim.
We want to encourage people to consider a train from their suburb/commuter town to Hueston/Connolly and then a Dublin bike to officeland, rather than doing the whole trip by car.

Genuinely can't see any reason to financially penalise such use, or what would be gained.

loyatemu · 11-11-2014 4:00pm

Carawaystick wrote: »

When the db scheme started there was a lot of redistribution with vans moving bikes from full places to the empty ones.
This died away over the years, so when I used it last, you would regularily have full or empty stations first thing in the morning around 7am, so I don't think they were redistributed at the end of the night.

they still have the vans, and the problem of full or empty stations was there from the beginning. Having more stations was supposed to help with this, but I'm not sure if it has.

RichardoKhan · 11-11-2014 5:15pm

I know lets tax the bikes usage seems to work every time in Ireland ........I mean what could possibly go wrong.....

trellheim · 11-11-2014 5:17pm

So nobody is allowed to take the last bike, unless they're not a commuter?

If you actually read what I've written, that's not what I said; the regular ( more than 3/4 per week ) have to pay a higher amount for it, which discourages commuter usage style. If they want to pay the cash let them have it.

As for the point above about embracing commuting, its not taking the whole point onboard. without a dublin bike to use in the morning you will never select it as a transport mode. SInce there is a limited amount of bikes and a time delay on refreshing the stations ( and like it or not you cannot remove that part of the system from consideration ), it is necessary we still have dublinbikes for the ad-hoc user so we can give them a choice ( dublinbike instead of 145 or Luas to follow the example ) . Otherwise Joe or Jane new user will never have a bike to use and they will never make the choice and will stay on the Luas.

A simple one to implement and trial.

RichardoKhan · 11-11-2014 5:18pm

Or alternatively have the company running it do what it should & originally did which was to move Bikes back & re distribute them effectively but hey ho why spoil some jumped up shaker & movers bottom line saving eh?

L1011 · 11-11-2014 5:55pm

RichardoKhan wrote: »

Or alternatively have the company running it do what it should & originally did which was to move Bikes back & re distribute them effectively but hey ho why spoil some jumped up shaker & movers bottom line saving eh?

They still do this.

beauf · 11-11-2014 6:21pm

I've seen the DB trailers around at 9~10am moving bikes around. Its pretty unavoidable in the city centre where most transport goes through the city centre.

He not really made any case why he wants to discourages commuters and reduce the numbers of cyclists overall.

DB approach seems to be to increase capacity. As they make the point in their document, the oft quote experience that increasing numbers increases safety, and increasing number increases the numbers of cycling, and reduces car use.

Decreasing numbers has the opposite effect.

trellheim · 11-11-2014 6:47pm

He not really made any case why he wants to discourages commuters and reduce the numbers of cyclists overall.

DB approach seems to be to increase capacity. As they make the point in their document, the oft quote experience that increasing numbers increases safety, and increasing number increases the numbers of cycling, and reduces car use.

Good for you for misinterpreting ( again ). If you need it spelled out again the idea is to have a bicycle there for the ad-hoc user so that eventual widespread use can become common for the ad-hoc user, and thus enable a wider base of potential long term commuters on non-db, non-car modes. We can't do that without demand pricing. And harking back to the 11th user, he/she will use the bicycle so the number of cyclists in this context remains similar, we just end up with a different user base.

We thus enable choice and so fulfil a key DB requirement.

LeinsterDub · 11-11-2014 6:56pm

RichardoKhan wrote: »

Or alternatively have the company running it do what it should & originally did which was to move Bikes back & re distribute them effectively but hey ho why spoil some jumped up shaker & movers bottom line saving eh?

http://www.dublinbikes.ie/Magazine/News/dublinbikes-gets-double-decker-service

Aard · 11-11-2014 7:12pm

It's a redistribution problem.

beauf · 11-11-2014 7:24pm

trellheim wrote: »

Good for you for misinterpreting ( again ). If you need it spelled out again the idea is to have a bicycle there for the ad-hoc user so that eventual widespread use can become common for the ad-hoc user, and thus enable a wider base of potential long term commuters on non-db, non-car modes. We can't do that without demand pricing. And harking back to the 11th user, he/she will use the bicycle so the number of cyclists in this context remains similar, we just end up with a different user base.

We thus enable choice and so fulfil a key DB requirement.

Its a bikes sitting there used for people who use it least.
Its a cheaper price for using it less.

...and this will increase cycle journeys?

beauf · 11-11-2014 7:27pm

Aard wrote: »

It's a redistribution problem.

Which you can avoid by travelling off peak, and/or buying your own bicycle. That applies to the ad hoc as much as it does the commuter.

trellheim · 11-11-2014 8:36pm

1. An ad-hoc user just off the train or the Bus Eireann bus will not use it if the option is not there.

Sure: if you can solve the redist problem and have bikes back where they are needed in jig time then the problem goes away ( But there is an argument, especially in a town planning scenario where you are trying to get people to work in a more outer ring than the main centre, that the people living in the centre need the bikes to go the other way , so they need to stay there too, so the problem remainsto a certain extent) . But we are stuck with the current scenario

Aard · 11-11-2014 9:07pm

There are 185 bike stands around Heuston. Never has at least one bike not been free.

beauf · 11-11-2014 9:33pm

I could be wrong but I think if you look at the stats most of the bike stats are for short, between the canals. They are the big users of the DB. I would reckon a lot of the living in town with limited space at home/apartments, and at work for storing/securing a bicycle. For longer trips 20 mins + the popularity of cycling falls of dramatically. You can't mix public tranport trains, buses, Dart, Luas, as you're not allowed bring a regular bike on them. So for a lot of people the db works very well.

I think a lot of problems with capacity are down to specific stations and routes, at peak time. As when you go a different route you see some stations while busy always have a bike and a stand free. While other locations/routes always seem to be empty/full at the same time. The solutions are different for different routes/stations. The plan seems to be more stands and bikes at target stations based on demand and usage.

ForstalDave · 11-11-2014 10:26pm

beauf wrote: »

Which you can avoid by travelling off peak, and/or buying your own bicycle. That applies to the ad hoc as much as it does the commuter.

What happens when there id no room on the train because everyone is trying to bring there bile as it costs to much for the dublin one?

beauf · 11-11-2014 11:12pm

You quoted that out of context that wasn't about trains.

Since you've mentioned trains you might look at my earlier comment...

beauf wrote: »

...You can't mix public tranport trains, buses, Dart, Luas, as you're not allowed bring a regular bike on them. ...

You can only bring a folding bike on trains/dart, at peak. AFAIK You can't bring a folding bike on a Bus or Luas. Of course if its a bag, how would they know. The reality is, if your train is busy, or an intercity train, there is no space for anything other than a brompton, which are very expensive. If your train is less busy you'll get away with a bigger/cheaper folding bike.

The other thing is the folding bikes, aren't designed for much abuse or poor road surfaces.

LeinsterDub · 12-11-2014 10:32am

I see the regional bike schemes will support leap. Any sign of this for db?

keane2097 · 12-11-2014 3:24pm

The last bunch of posts have been an argument about an utterly backward solution to a non-existent problem. Good stuff.

beauf · 12-11-2014 3:25pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I see the regional bike schemes will support leap. Any sign of this for db?

Thats a good idea. Is anyone actually working on it?

LeinsterDub · 12-11-2014 4:01pm

beauf wrote: »

Thats a good idea. Is anyone actually working on it?

Bike city say they have it
https://www.bikeshare.ie/how-bikeshare-works
and are also that it's coming soon
https://www.bikeshare.ie/faq-info

I don't know

LeinsterDub · 03-03-2015 10:45am

A number of the new stations had stands that never opened any plans to fix /remove these?

stocktrader · 24-04-2015 1:05pm

Anyone interested in a station for ballsbridge or know of any who would like one please like the page https://www.facebook.com/dublinbikesballsbridge?fref=ts and leave a comment.

When we get over 1000 likes we will forward the page to dublin bikes and hopefully the voice will be heard.

Aard · 24-04-2015 1:29pm

There's a plan in place for the ordered expansion of the system. It's highly unlikely that any petition will change that. You'd be better off speaking to local councillors personally.

AngryLips · 24-04-2015 1:39pm

Aard wrote: »

There's a plan in place for the ordered expansion of the system. It's highly unlikely that any petition will change that. You'd be better off speaking to local councillors personally.

They're still expanding it? I thought the last phase of expansion was complete with no plans to go any further...

Aard · 24-04-2015 1:56pm

The last phase was completed last August/September. I don't know when the next phase is due to begin. Suffice it to say that there appears to be universal support for the scheme so I don't see why politicians wouldn't be keen to continue delivering on it.

LeinsterDub · 01-09-2015 9:51am

There are no definite timeframes in place for the delivery of the next expansion phases, and further expansion will be subject to funding, the spokesperson said.

http://www.independent.ie/life/city-cycling/dublin-bikes-full-and-empty-stations-are-a-characteristic-of-bike-share-schemes-31385146.html

Wasn't funding available during the planning phase and the reason we sold the advertising rights?

Dublin Bikes - expansion stalled?

Comments