Traffic-free city centres for Ireland?

Raam

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/traffic-free-city-centres-for-ireland-19005

The Irish Government wants 150,000 commuters to abandon their cars and get on their bicycles by 2020 to ease the county’s congestion woes and help alleviate global warming.

Department of Transport officials are finalising a scheme that could see motorists banned from entering several major city centers, including Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway. The plan puts forward several cyclist-friendly measures to encourage low carbon commuting. The aim is to ensure that 10% of all trips are made on a bicycle.

The Sustainable Travel and Transport Action Plan (STTAP) proposes the exclusion of cars and trucks from parts of the city centers in daylight hours and the conversion of many central thoroughfares into cycle and pedestrian zones. It will need cabinet approval, but a government source said: “Over the next few years, key streets in Dublin city centre will be severely disrupted by [the] construction of major public transport works. When that disruption is over, the streets are unlikely to be handed back to cars in the same way.”

David Maher of the Dublin Cycling Campaign (DCC) extended the plan a guarded welcome: “I would say 10% is completely achievable, but we’ve found in the past that there is no follow-through from policy to reality on the ground. You can make all the cycle tracks you want, but if the gardai [police] are going to allow people to park all over them, they’re more of a hazard than a help.”

Chips Lovell

They probably got that from Stephen O'Brien's story in the Sunday Times today.

Chips Lovell

Can't see them taking buses and taxis out of the city centre though.

xz

Great idea, but will it come to fruition???

The follow on logistics behind such a scheme would be immense too.
Companies having to provide changing/showering facilities for those who cycled.
The provision of secure "parking" of bikes etc etc...............

But it would be nice:)

estebancambias

eh parts of dublin city are basically car free for christ sake.....cycling in the city is grand as it is. the way people were talking on here i thought i would be out of my depth but cycled in on friday and it was grand.

Hagar

Great idea! 150,000 commuters off the road. Wow!

Let's see, 150,000 people not buying €50 of fuel per week is a loss of €390,000,000 in sales per annum. At a wild guess I'd say the duty, tax and VAT loss on that is about 66.66% or €260,000,000. I hope the cycling keeps everyone healthy because all the hospitals will be closed due to lack of funding. I'd factor in the contributions from the cyclists that will offset this but they don't pay any. Yet.

De Deraco

why would every work place need showers if your reasonably fit and cycle at a leisurely pace 15-25 kpm yu shouldnt be sweating any more than you would waking to work

Húrin

So the Metro will be the most expensive pro-cycling scheme in world history then. Great.

De Deraco

we wouldnt need as much money as with the air quality improvments ashtma would sufferers would be lowered and there would be less road damag caused by cars not to mention th fewer serious car accidents.

Hagar wrote: »

Great idea! 150,000 commuters off the road. Wow!

Let's see, 150,000 people not buying €50 of fuel per week is a loss of €390,000,000 in sales per annum. At a wild guess I'd say the duty, tax and VAT loss on that is about 66.66% or €260,000,000. I hope the cycling keeps everyone healthy because all the hospitals will be closed due to lack of funding. I'd factor in the contributions from the cyclists that will offset this but they don't pay any. Yet.

Raam

It would certainly make the city center a much more pleasurable place than it is now.

xz

De Deraco wrote: »

why would every work place need showers if your reasonably fit and cycle at a leisurely pace 15-25 kpm yu shouldnt be sweating any more than you would waking to work

Don't know about you, but I normally SHOWER shortly after I awake to go to work:D

It would be for the NEW cyclists that the scheme would produce, you are assuming that every one who cycles is already fit, and if you are not fit 25kmh is NOT a leisurely pace, whereas, yes 15kmh, is:)

estebancambias

no it wouldn't.

DirkVoodoo

Cycling does promote better health. There are plenty of stories on boards to back this up. How much money is lost from sick days? I'd wager its quite a bit.

From the VHI:

Furthermore, international studies say that the cost of occupational stress in Ireland could be as higfh as 10 percent of the Gross National Product (GNP).

72hundred

I think this is overkill.

A better cycling infrastructure in city centres with a reduction in cars (not banning), would be ideal. That way everyone is accommodated. The cyclist is better off and the motorist can use the city centre although he/she knows it won't be that convenient.

estebancambias

De Deraco wrote: »

why would every work place need showers if your reasonably fit and cycle at a leisurely pace 15-25 kpm yu shouldnt be sweating any more than you would waking to work

LOL. Sweat has nothing to do with being fit. I am pretty damn fit and would probably sweat if I was cycling uphill at any time.

Raam

estebancambias wrote: »

no it wouldn't.

Sure it would. Think about it: less noise pollution, less air pollution.

72hundred

De Deraco wrote: »

why would every work place need showers if your reasonably fit and cycle at a leisurely pace 15-25 kpm yu shouldnt be sweating any more than you would waking to work

Everyone sweats to varying degrees. Showers are always needed. I doubt the majority of commuting cyclists could remain completely sweat free and change into formal work attire comfortably (not to mention any odour) after a 10km cycle, which would be pretty average.

EDIT: Also if its raining heavily a shower is welcome at work!

DirkVoodoo

I don't think to many companies would be too put out. They can convert some of the car parking space, use money saved from company car/ fuel purchase. Reduced sick days (barring the "Alpine Flu").

I'm sure some dragon's den person would come up with some great idea to provide bike-parking/changing facilities in the city if employers are not willing to.

Húrin

estebancambias wrote: »

eh parts of dublin city are basically car free for christ sake.....cycling in the city is grand as it is. the way people were talking on here i thought i would be out of my depth but cycled in on friday and it was grand.

Cycling in Dublin centre is not dangerous or disastrous but nobody can claim that Dublin is yet the great cycling city it deserves to be. The sheer number of cars and the roads designed to cater to their needs only make cycling harder than it should be.

Dublin is small enough and flat enough to be another Copenhagen or Amsterdam (in terms of cycling, that is), so why not?

petethedrummer

Húrin wrote: »

Dublin is small enough and flat enough to be another Copenhagen or Amsterdam (in terms of cycling, that is), so why not?

I'll tell you why not, cos it's in Ireland and will suffer from the usual irish fudged solutions, short-term thinking, poor planning, lobby groups etc...

Kinetic^

Hopefully they bring in a similar system like they have in London for charging cars that enter the centre.

Lumen

Hagar wrote: »

Great idea! 150,000 commuters off the road. Wow!

Let's see, 150,000 people not buying €50 of fuel per week is a loss of €390,000,000 in sales per annum. At a wild guess I'd say the duty, tax and VAT loss on that is about 66.66% or €260,000,000. I hope the cycling keeps everyone healthy because all the hospitals will be closed due to lack of funding. I'd factor in the contributions from the cyclists that will offset this but they don't pay any. Yet.

A normal (diesel) will do at least 12km/litre urban. €50 at €1.25 a litre would indicate that those 150,000 people have an average daily round-trip of 100km.

If that's true, I can't see them cycling to work every day.

When a Government introduces an incentive for something designed to destroy tax revenues, it's because they don't expect many people to take it up.

DirkVoodoo

Even 12L/100km is extremely pessimistic for a diesel engine. An X5 3.0 Diesel (big engine, heavy car) will consume around 10.5L/100km. On the other side of the scale a Fiat Panda 1.3 Multijet Diesel will consume 5.4L/100km in all urban driving.

I guess they might lose that much money from people not commuting into the city centre if we all drove Aston DB9s.

Lumen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Even 12L/100km is extremely pessimistic for a diesel engine.

Indeed. That's why I suggested 12km/litre, not 12L/100km.

DirkVoodoo

D'oh! Apologies sir.

faceman

these initiatives are great for people who have the luxury of being in a position to cycle to work. But what about people living in Clonee who commute to Ballsbridge? Or people who live in Rathfarnham who commute to Santry? Or people who live in Newbridge and commute to Fairview? Or people who live in Balbriggan who commute to Sandyford?

Taking cars off the road isn't the answer when the majority of employers are based in town centres.

DirkVoodoo

According to google maps, Rathfarnham to Santry is 13km, Clonee to Ballsbridge is 22km, Balbriggan to Sandyford is 45km and Newbridge to Fairview is a whopping 64km.

2 of the 4 you listed are quite doable by bike and sub-hour commutes (admittedly I don't know the routes or the roads that well). That would be half as many commuters ditching cars.

I'm sure these measures would have been proposed as a park and ride scheme similar to what people currently do with luas/bus.

cyclopath2001

faceman wrote: »

Taking cars off the road isn't the answer when the majority of employers are based in town centres.

Santry, Ballsbridge, Fairview and Sandyford are not in in central Dublin. All are near very substantial residential areas and are very convenient work locations for people who live near them or along the many public transport routes serving them.

tunney

estebancambias wrote: »

LOL. Sweat has nothing to do with being fit. I am pretty damn fit and would probably sweat if I was cycling uphill at any time.

Fitness does affect sweating. The fitter you are the faster you go before you start working and sweating.

tunney

faceman wrote: »

these initiatives are great for people who have the luxury of being in a position to cycle to work. But what about people living in Clonee who commute to Ballsbridge? Or people who live in Rathfarnham who commute to Santry? Or people who live in Newbridge and commute to Fairview? Or people who live in Balbriggan who commute to Sandyford?

Taking cars off the road isn't the answer when the majority of employers are based in town centres.

Emmm I used to do Terenure to Santry, if I drove it took 1:20 or more. If I bused it took longer still. Cycling was 40 minutes.

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

Fitness does affect sweating. The fitter you are the faster you go before you start working and sweating.

Are you sure?

I thought sweating was a response to metabolic heat generated in muscle, which is related to power output not perceived effort.

I presume that fitter people shunt heat to the skin more effectively, and can therefore maintain lower core temperature for a given power output, but I don't know that this necessarily results in significantly less sweat. In very cold conditions, exercise still generates sweat.

Fat people probably look sweatier because it takes more muscle power to move their larger mass.

blorg

My own experience would bear this out, I have got a lot fitter and sweat a hell of a lot less now than I used to, while doing the same courses significantly faster. Definitely temperature related too, I would sweat very little in the winter or even for that matter an Irish summer. Transplant me to a Spanish summer and I would be running pretty freely.

blorg

faceman wrote: »

these initiatives are great for people who have the luxury of being in a position to cycle to work. But what about people living in Clonee who commute to Ballsbridge? Or people who live in Rathfarnham who commute to Santry? Or people who live in Newbridge and commute to Fairview? Or people who live in Balbriggan who commute to Sandyford?

Taking cars off the road isn't the answer when the majority of employers are based in town centres.

I know one poster on this forum that commutes Clonee-Sandyford each day, but that is beside the point. The majority of commutes are actually under 9km, so while there are people who can't there are also a hell of a lot of people who can, but don't.

Anyway what is being discussed here is removing cars from just the city centre, which is best served by public transport anyway. If you are coming from somewhere ill-served parking at a Luas park and ride would be a good idea.

seamus

Hagar wrote: »

Let's see, 150,000 people not buying €50 of fuel per week is a loss of €390,000,000 in sales per annum.

My car gets 640 km on a €50 tank. To require a refill every week, I'd need to do roughly 100 km/day (leaving lots of room for driving at the weekend). That would be a trip from my parent's house near Baltinglass to the IFSC every day. Which as pointed out before, you absolutely wouldn't cycle.

As a better example, take someone with a trip that's within the county - Firhouse to the IFSC. We'll say 12km each way for simplicity. That's 120km per week. Or 540 km in a month. So we'll say (for simplicity) that each cyclist will fill up 12 times less per year. So €600 per new cyclist. That's around €90m, or around €60m in lost duty by your sums. Since it's very likely that most commutes won't be 12km, but closer to 8 or 9, then this figure is an overestimation.

Can you quantify the benefit to the exchequer and the economy of having 150,000 workers who are in better health, less stressed and have a much lower sickness rate?

I'd factor in the contributions from the cyclists that will offset this but they don't pay any. Yet.

Except the VAT we pay like everyone else, and the tax we already pay on the vehicles we have at home.

My primary concern about "banning" cars from the city centre is that it would make pedestrians even dumber. Ironically less traffic could be more dangerous for cyclists.

Karma

if the train services allowed bikes on them(1) or if there was a working intergated travel ticket(bus, luas, dart, suburban rail and provencial bus services)(2)

these would improve peoples choices and hopefully some change would come about.
better "Working" bike corridors might help, as cycling in dublin is dangerous.(3)

if the NRA did their job and spend their time and our/your money on what they are meant to do instead of thier pr excuses.
btw the Dept of Transport is 69/71 st. stephens green if you need to write to them.

what about park and cycle? eg i used to park in cornelscourt or stillorgan sc and cycle in to city centre when i lived in wicklow.

to allow carshare cars in bus lanes in certin areas or all.
to remove taxis with no customer in it from the bus lane.
Buses to carry cameras (like London) to catch cars in the bus lane.-buses to yield to left hand turning traffic, instead of the undertaking Iceberg impersonation they favour.
to get rid of 24hour bus lanes, really why are they there?
make bus lanes practical, 7-10 am and 4-7pm. while there are many who commute, there are many who also work/deliver travel during the regular working hours so loosen up the rule during the lull.

who brings their bike with them when they travel?(snow bound destinations are not included:) eg London, Barcelona... great places to ride and see the difference.

ride safe.
dotc

Hagar

My figures were very rough and ready, I'll admit that, nevertheless if 150,000 people permanently dramatically cut their motoring spend it will have a significant effect on the exchequer. How will it be made up?

seamus

Hagar wrote: »

My figures were very rough and ready, I'll admit that, nevertheless if 150,000 people permanently dramatically cut their motoring spend it will have a significant effect on the exchequer. How will it be made up?

€60m? If we just fired 100 civil servants we'd get that back with change

But seriously, as I point out, can you quantify the benefit to the exchequer? Not really. I'm definitely healthier cycling to work. I'm more awake when I get to work (so more productive), I get sick far less often (and when I do, I recover much quicker), and the ride in/out gets rid of the stress of the day.

In addition, if traffic in the city centre is lessened overall, how much will the economy and the exchequer benefit from faster delivery times, less employee lateness, improved bus services, etc?

It's very easy to say, "This will cost us X", but at the moment we have absolutely no idea how much money we're losing by having the city choking with traffic in the first place.

Besides, we could very easily make that €60m back if we wanted to. Charge every private vehicle €5 to enter/leave the city (cross either canal) between 7am and 7pm every day. We'd only need 12 million people to drive into the city in a year. For reasons I outlined above, I wouldn't be crazy about completely eliminating vehicles, but strongly discouraging private vehicle use is the way to go.

faceman

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

2 of the 4 you listed are quite doable by bike and sub-hour commutes (admittedly I don't know the routes or the roads that well). That would be half as many commuters ditching cars.

I'm sure these measures would have been proposed as a park and ride scheme similar to what people currently do with luas/bus.

Doable - perhaps, feasible - not necessarily.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Santry, Ballsbridge, Fairview and Sandyford are not in in central Dublin. All are near very substantial residential areas and are very convenient work locations for people who live near them or along the many public transport routes serving them.

Fairview kinda is. What route aside from the M50 or through town can commuters take to reach those locations?

blorg wrote: »

I know one poster on this forum that commutes Clonee-Sandyford each day, but that is beside the point. The majority of commutes are actually under 9km, so while there are people who can't there are also a hell of a lot of people who can, but don't.

Anyway what is being discussed here is removing cars from just the city centre, which is best served by public transport anyway. If you are coming from somewhere ill-served parking at a Luas park and ride would be a good idea.

This is the problem though. The luas and Dart doesnt service all of Dublin. There are feck all park and ride facilities for them and none at all for Dublin bus.

blorg

faceman wrote: »

This is the problem though. The luas and Dart doesnt service all of Dublin. There are feck all park and ride facilities for them and none at all for Dublin bus.

It services the city centre, which is the point here.

The 58% of urban dwellers with sub 9km commutes would all be straight doable on a bike with no park and ride etc at all. Chop a chunk out of that for people who genuinely couldn't do it (disabled, etc.) and it is still a hell of a lot of people.

In any case the proposed reduction on cars is for the city centre only and will benefit all people visiting the centre, not just cyclists, and make the city centre generally a more pleasant place.

faceman

blorg wrote: »

It services the city centre, which is the point here.

The 58% of urban dwellers with sub 9km commutes would all be straight doable on a bike with no park and ride etc at all. Chop a chunk out of that for people who genuinely couldn't do it (disabled, etc.) and it is still a hell of a lot of people.

In any case the proposed reduction on cars is for the city centre only and will benefit all people visiting the centre, not just cyclists, and make the city centre generally a more pleasant place.

I take your point. My issue is with penalizing the other 42% if no other viable public alternative is available

niceonetom

leaving aside issues of excise, sweat and luas provision i have to ask, do we think that a pedestrianised city centre would actually be any easier to traverse by bike than one with cars et al?

the threat of being flattened by a 49a or whitevanman is the only thing that keeps the average ipodestrian walking in anything approaching a straight line, and keeps lemming-like instincts to a tolerable minimum. the thought of trying to get from, say, parnell square to st. stephen's green when these wandering, meandering and utterly oblivious beasts are given the entire width of all these roads is not appealing.

luckily it'll never happen.

Raam

niceonetom wrote: »

leaving aside issues of excise, sweat and luas provision i have to ask, do we think that a pedestrianised city centre would actually be any easier to traverse by bike than one with cars et al?

the threat of being flattened by a 49a or whitevanman is the only thing that keeps the average ipodestrian walking in anything approaching a straight line, and keeps lemming-like instincts to a tolerable minimum. the thought of trying to get from, say, parnell square to st. stephen's green when these wandering, meandering and utterly oblivious beasts are given the entire width of all these roads is not appealing.

luckily it'll never happen.

If taxis and buses are still permitted access, which I would hope would be the case, then it may not be so bad.

Gavin

Well if the place does become pedestrianised, all the 'would cycle but it's too dangerous' folks might start cycling.

Hordes of people cycling through the city center will soon educate people to be far more aware of cyclists than they are now.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Raam wrote: »

If taxis and buses are still permitted access, which I would hope would be the case, then it may not be so bad.

Taxi drivers are hardly on great terms with cyclists...

Ban everything with an engine I say:p

Raam

Sean_K wrote: »

Taxi drivers are hardly on great terms with cyclists...

Ban everything with an engine I say:p

I'll need 'em when I fall out of the pub!

DirkVoodoo

The problem at the moment is that cyclists are a traffic minority. If (When!) they finally outnumber buses, taxis and joe the plumber in his white van, we may see an attitude shift.

Taxis wont be as aggressive when they have to contend with 20 or 30 cyclists in a bunch and a steady stream of bike traffic down O'Connell street would have the same effect on pedestrians as a row of cars speeding past. I would like to think that a measure of equilibrium sets in to a system like this, so for all the cries of lost taxation from fuel and lemming pedestrians, people will adapt and we will be better for it in the long run. I would refer you to my vietnam video from another thread: everyone on 2 wheels and no problems.

Yes, pedestrian/cyclist collisions will invariably increase, but I for one would prefer to be hit by a bike rather than a lorry (well, preferably not be hit at all).

L'Enfer du Nord

Hagar wrote: »

My figures were very rough and ready, I'll admit that, nevertheless if 150,000 people permanently dramatically cut their motoring spend it will have a significant effect on the exchequer. How will it be made up?

I suspect it would be made up by a congestion charge on the rest, who stay in their cars. I would love to see our city centres car free, however If the government are seriously considering this I'd say it is just a fig leaf for congestion charges. With buses, diliveries etc. I don't think you could make Dublin city centre car free anyway. Galway might as well be car-free, not particularly bicycle friendly at the moment though

faceman

I could never see an massive increase in cyclists on the road. I also feel with the current cycle infrastructure, if anything increasing the number of cyclists on the road will only increase the risk of casualties even hire. More cyclists means more breaking red lights, more overtaking and lane manuovers without checking over your shoulder and of course all the above in the dark with no lights.

Gavin

I disagree. More cyclists means that cyclists become more important, for want of a better word. Research has shown that more cyclists means less risk for cyclists. Gardai will be forced to pay more attention to cyclists, enforcing road traffic laws. More money allocated for better infrastructure. General awareness of cycling increases and cyclists will be forced by legal and social pressures to conform to more rigorous rules for cycling. Just as in Holland.

Now as to if there will be a concerted effort to change policy and actually increase cycling numbers.. I'm dubious of that.

Climate Expert

Cycling to work: uncomfortable when wet, sweaty, extremely dangerous over the long term. Just a massive pain in the hole.

Its just not a realistic proposition for most people.

blorg

Climate Expert wrote: »

Its just not a realistic proposition for most people.

But yet it is in other countries with similar or worse weather than Ireland (compare Dublin to Amsterdam or Copenhagen for example.)

As Verb says, increased numbers leads to increased safety.