Velib like bicycle rental kiosks are being constructed in Dublin

kenmc

Nietzschean wrote: »

Huh? it was built for the people of london to use,

Actually I think it would be more accurately described as being for people in London to use, no matter where in the world they come from - Londoners, British, European, Humans all alike; when you are in London you can use the tube. Bear in mind that there is an awful lot of advertising in the Tube stations too.

Same with the velib bikes in Dublin; when somebody is in the catchment area of these bikes, and pays their money, they can use them.

Nietzschean

kona wrote: »

Okay your talking ****, leinster? where the hell did that come from,

Provinces? next level up from counties?

IM TALKING ABOUT DUBLIN

---

>Im shouting:pac::P

But Dublin for the purposes of population/income/usage of facilities is a more or less meaningless term now. It only makes sense for sport. Just think of it as 4 counties not one. How you group those and the other ones around it is rather arbitary.

All the signs are not in the city centre.

As far as most of the country is concerned pretty much all of DCC could be called the city centre. beyond that its just arbitary lines

TinyExplosions

kona wrote: »

All the signs are not in the city centre.

What signs are outside the DCC area? If there are some, you may have a point, if not, you don't

petethedrummer

kona wrote: »

wtf? how can you do anything about it, its a discussion, If i want somthing done i talk to the appropriate people, who are aware of my complaints.

Well you can't do anything with a defeatist attitude.

kona wrote: »

Im just putting forward a opinion, couldnt give a **** who agrees or not

Grand so. I'll leave you to it.

kona

blorg wrote: »

I would actually tend to agree that this would seem to make more sense all right, don't see any particular reason the two should be connected (I know it is so in most other cities.) Why not sell the ad space at market rates and then put out a tender for someone to run the bike scheme? But we have what we have and the bike part will be a success.

Thats what should have been done. I think sombody should be held accoutable because IMO there are vested intrests involved.

Your right we have what we have and thats it, but There was potential for so much more, which is so frustrating.

while JCdecaux makes a absoloute mint, I still have to cycle the same crap roads populated with glass and every other bit of crap,while trying to not get killed by the drivers who are totally uneducated as to deal with cyclists as another equal road user.

I believe If 4-5 million was invested correctley in the right areas(input from commuters and recreational cyclists actually sought and listened to) There would be a great chance for cycling to be a viable alternative to driving and public transport.

Chips Lovell

If we are talking about selling ad space, then the deal has actually reduced the amount of space available in Dublin. As part of it, JC Decaux removed 100 large format billboards from around the city (which was mostly on private property and so yielded nothing from DCC). In exchange, they got to apply for planning on 120 of these panel ads and only got planning permission for around 70 of that 120 in the end.

kona

TinyExplosions wrote: »

What signs are outside the DCC area? If there are some, you may have a point, if not, you don't

Darndale isnt in the city centre, yet its a DCC.

Jawgap

TinyExplosions wrote: »

Also, ain't Phoenix Park north side....

Yes, but it really wants to be on the south side

blorg wrote: »

I would actually tend to agree that this would seem to make more sense all right, don't see any particular reason the two should be connected (I know it is so in most other cities.) Why not sell the ad space at market rates and then put out a tender for someone to run the bike scheme? But we have what we have and the bike part will be a success.

I'd agree, but I suspect if they sold the ad space the money would've disappeared into the central pot. They don't generally ring fence funds, but the idea of tendering out the scheme would be a good one.

I think there is a lot of potential in the scheme and it will have all kinds of positive unintended consequences.

As I've said, I think it may run into trouble if people are injured and sue the Council or the bikes get wrecked and are not replaced, which raises one point I've not been able to get an aswer to:

Who's responsible for replacing damaged or missing bikes?

Do JCD just say "there's your bikes, good luck to ye" or does the contract specify a minimum level of service that they must maintain - or put it another way was the contract to supply bikes or to supply a service.

If it's just to supply bikes, this is probably not going to end well......

Gavin

This is ridiculous.

petethedrummer

el tonto wrote: »

If we are talking about selling ad space, then the deal has actually reduced the amount of space available in Dublin. As part of it, JC Decaux removed 100 large format billboards from around the city (which was mostly on private property and so yielded nothing from DCC). In exchange, they got to apply for planning on 120 of these panel ads and only got planning permission for around 70 of that 120 in the end.

I was not aware of this. Hooray for these ads.

kona

Jawgap wrote: »

Yes, but it really wants to be on the south side



I'd agree, but I suspect if they sold the ad space the money would've disappeared into the central pot. They don't generally ring fence funds, but the idea of tendering out the scheme would be a good one.

I think there is a lot of potential in the scheme and it will have all kinds of positive unintended consequences.

As I've said, I think it may run into trouble if people are injured and sue the Council or the bikes get wrecked and are not replaced, which raises one point I've not been able to get an aswer to:

Who's responsible for replacing damaged or missing bikes?

Do JCD just say "there's your bikes, good luck to ye" or does the contract specify a minimum level of service that they must maintain - or put it another way was the contract to supply bikes or to supply a service.

If it's just to supply bikes, this is probably not going to end well......

Look at paris, It will answer the questions.

Get ready for a disaster.

kona

can we beat the brakes thread?

trinewbie

Gavin wrote: »

This is ridiculous.

I agree...Its a shame that certain people have to use such a derogatory and condescending tone when trying to put forward their opinion. Chill out, there is no need to be so aggressive.

niceonetom

Velib and JC Decaux aside, I'd just like to congratulate kona on a triumphant return to form. This thread is a master-class in how to hijack a thread, dictate the tone of the argument, state personal opinion as fact, move the goal posts when shown to be wrong, appear both aggressive and victimized at the same time, over use the smilies (especially this one :rolleyes:), ignore valid counterarguments, and how to be taken seriously people who should really know better by now. It's amazing.

Chips Lovell

niceonetom wrote: »

...and how to be taken seriously people who should really know better by now.

Nail on head.:D:D:D:D:D:D:pac:

kona

niceonetom wrote: »

Velib and JC Decaux aside, I'd just like to congratulate kona on a triumphant return to form. This thread is a master-class in how to hijack a thread, dictate the tone of the argument, state personal opinion as fact, move the goal posts when shown to be wrong, appear both aggressive and victimized at the same time, over use the smilies (especially this one :rolleyes:), ignore valid counterarguments, and how to be taken seriously people who should really know better by now. It's amazing.

:pac::D;):rolleyes::):p:o:eek::cool::P:confused::mad::o

Its terrible, Ive a ad board in my front garden.


Please sift through all the ****e and present me with the "counter arguments"


I couldnt give a **** who takes me serious, it the internet you know:P

Jawgap

kona wrote: »

Look at paris, It will answer the questions.

Get ready for a disaster.

Those cheese eating surrender monkeys - I'm sure it'll be different here.

kona

Jawgap wrote: »

Those cheese eating surrender monkeys - I'm sure it'll be different here.

Our skangers are underestimated, the demise will be quicker.

Ha i can see these bikes getting puncture and then just being abandoned.

Also a quick release seatpost, what genius thought of that one:rolleyes:

450 seatposts in the liffey by next year.

kona

Elaine is here! please enlighten me! am I talking ****e?

Chips Lovell

I'm surprised Elaine from DCC would ever come back after that one.

DCC_Cycling (Elaine)

Hi there, just a quick response to a couple of questions that were raised...

Jawgap, we expect losses with the scheme. In Barcelona they lose about 10% of their bikes per year and we understand the number of bikes lost is higher in Paris.

Dónal, Yes, there'll be a 1.7:1 ratio of stands to bikes. The service contract involves the continuous redistribution of bikes around the network.

Also, the bikes can be taken out until 12.30am and returned anytime.

kona

el tonto wrote: »

I'm surprised Elaine from DCC would ever come back after that one.

Suppose usual DCC , Ignore it and it will go away:rolleyes:

blorg

Jawgap wrote: »

Who's responsible for replacing damaged or missing bikes?

It is a contract to "run" a bike scheme, not just "provide bikes" so maintenance etc. would be the responsibility of the organiser. Paris started with bike replacement being the sole responsibility of JC Decaux but I believe they have renegotiated so that the council has agreed to share the cost on this (as it is a public order issue.)

Jawgap

kona wrote: »

Our skangers are underestimated, the demise will be quicker.

Ha i can see these bikes getting puncture and then just being abandoned.

Also a quick release seatpost, what genius thought of that one:rolleyes:

450 seatposts in the liffey by next year.

Actually, you might have a point on the seatposts - maybe they don't come out all the way so they can't be separated from the bike.

DCC_Cycling (Elaine) wrote: »

Hi there, just a quick response to a couple of questions that were raised...

Jawgap, we expect losses with the scheme. In Barcelona they lose about 10% of their bikes per year and we understand the number of bikes lost is higher in Paris.

Dónal, Yes, there'll be a 1.7:1 ratio of stands to bikes. The service contract involves the continuous redistribution of bikes around the network.

Also, the bikes can be taken out until 12.30am and returned anytime.

Just curious, but do you want to put a figure on our prospective losses, or do you just want to wait and see - I sense a poll coming on.........

On a related note, I'm kind of surprised they weren't installed and up and runnin for the elections - I'm sure the Lord Mayor will be lamenting the opportunity of a photo op on one as she heads off to vote!:)

NeilMcEoigheann

i hope they have worked out the fact that more people want to go from one place to another and not visa versa, so what happens when you arrive at a bike station and their is no space to put your bike, (have they worked out that if 10 bikes are at each station that they might need more than 10 bike locking poles......... i can almost guarantee that this will end in a shambles

BeerNut

One of the new signs is right outside Crumlin Children's Hospital. Honorary northside, I suppose

Chips Lovell

NeilMcEoigheann wrote: »

i hope they have worked out the fact that more people want to go from one place to another and not visa versa, so what happens when you arrive at a bike station and their is no space to put your bike, (have they worked out that if 10 bikes are at each station that they might need more than 10 bike locking poles......... i can almost guarantee that this will end in a shambles

Part of the deal is to redistribute the bikes throughout the day.

niceonetom

NeilMcEoigheann wrote: »

i hope they have worked out the fact that more people want to go from one place to another and not visa versa, so what happens when you arrive at a bike station and their is no space to put your bike, (have they worked out that if 10 bikes are at each station that they might need more than 10 bike locking poles......... i can almost guarantee that this will end in a shambles

They'll have thought of this and should move bikes by van to empty ranks from fuller ones. Paris had this problem - it was observed that bikes, like water, tend to settle in the lower areas of the city. People like to go down hills, and not up them. The ranks at the Sacré Coeur were always empty .

Whether they actually do this is another issue.

blorg

kona wrote: »

Our skangers are underestimated, the demise will be quicker.

Ha i can see these bikes getting puncture and then just being abandoned.

Also a quick release seatpost, what genius thought of that one:rolleyes:

450 seatposts in the liffey by next year.

Ah yes, the banlieues, where idealistic and socially-minded youths smoke Galouises and pontificate about political philosophy? If you read Elaine's first post you would see that if you get a puncture you just wheel it to the nearest station and check it back in, the scheme will look after it. The quick release seatpost is so the height can be quickly adjusted to people of varying heights; AFAIK you cannot actually take it out all the way.

Well done to Elaine for actually coming back to this thread

seamus

NeilMcEoigheann wrote: »

i hope they have worked out the fact that more people want to go from one place to another and not visa versa, so what happens when you arrive at a bike station and their is no space to put your bike, (have they worked out that if 10 bikes are at each station that they might need more than 10 bike locking poles......... i can almost guarantee that this will end in a shambles

My personal suspicion is that the kind of people who will use this scheme will use it for trips both ways, which will create a certain amount of natural redistribution.