How we think and talk about reducing car use in cities

LeChienMefiant

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So you buy a car for 10k this year and sell it next year for 10k? I must try that one out

No, but is that car going to disintegrate after 2.5 years?

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Everyone forgets that little nugget. You lose at least 4k per year even if you never drive it

magicbastarder

i would genuinely love to see the source for their estimate that the *average* for garage, parking and 'miscellaneous' expenses is over €4k per year.

troyzer

Depreciation works on an inverse log basis. LeChienMefiant isn't wrong, the older the car you buy, the cheaper it is and the less it's going to depreciate.

I bought my car last year for two grand, obviously it can't lose five grand in value. I'd probably get €1,500 for it now.

So if we spread the cost and depcreciation over this year and last year, it's costing me about €1,250 a year. I spend about €30 a week on petrol, so another €1,500 a year. And my insurance is quite high at €2,000 third party.

So a very rough guesstimate is that my car costs around €4,750 a year. Yes, this was a particularly cheap car. But next year my car insurance will be much cheaper. I'll have crossed the 25 year old mark, take off the N plates and have one year's NCB (hopefully). The cost of the car and the depreciation only gets cheaper on an annualised basis the longer I keep it as well.

But to be fair, I do have to NCT it annually which I also get the car serviced in advance for. I've had one mechanical error so far (yesterday actually) and it cost €50 to fix. So call it €250 for NCT and maintenance. We're at pretty much bang on €5,000 a year and other than the ocassional toll, that's pretty much all of the cost of my car. Throw in an extra €80 or so a year I spend on the AA.

Absolutely nowhere near €10k and these are really, really conservative figures. In reality, this depreciation isn't actually costing me money,

cgcsb

troyzer wrote: »

It's slightly quicker going into the city centre than out. But yeah, it's about 35-40 depending on traffic coming back out again. If a bus can match it, I'll go for it. But it can't at the moment. It takes twice as long. Which is why I'm not going to use it.

A C-B bus journey this time next year may well get you there in under 40 and certainly will after the infrastructure improvements are done. The coming North Quays car ban will certainly knock considerable time off that bus journey.

troyzer wrote: »

You have to do both at once. You can't just ban cars or put a tax on them without providing an alternative.

I certainly wouldn't be advocating a car ban as far out as Ballsbridge, or even Lucan any time in the foreseeable

troyzer wrote: »

The elephant in the room here is that urban sprawl and lack of high rise buildings makes Dublin worse than most cities and the population density isn't high enough to support a metro throughout the city.

While sprawl is a problem due to corruption, it's actually an Irish Times myth that Dublin lacks density. Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Oslo are not more Densely populated than Dublin. Dublin doesn't have a metro because of our parochial society and years of government that followed DeValera's ruralisation policy. We also have a cultural hang up whereby we can only make comparisons between ourselves and the UK (where PT is a disaster). Things are changing though FAST.

no.8

dr.fuzzenstein wrote:

If I go to Bargaintown, can I bring a bed, a wardrobe and three piece suite on the bus with me?

Pathetic

no.8

JayZeus wrote:

If there were candidates running on a specifically pro-motorist manifesto, they’d already win my vote each and every election.

Sorry but that parish-pump mentality is ridiculously outdated. How about you just make your own mind up and go with that, rather than raise the pitch fork.

troyzer

cgcsb wrote: »

A C-B bus journey this time next year may well get you there in under 40 and certainly will after the infrastructure improvements are done. The coming North Quays car ban will certainly knock considerable time off that bus journey.


I certainly wouldn't be advocating a car ban as far out as Ballsbridge, or even Lucan any time in the foreseeable




While sprawl is a problem due to corruption, it's actually an Irish Times myth that Dublin lacks density. Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Oslo are not more Densely populated than Dublin. Dublin doesn't have a metro because of our parochial society and years of government that followed DeValera's ruralisation policy. We also have a cultural hang up whereby we can only make comparisons between ourselves and the UK (where PT is a disaster). Things are changing though FAST.

If it can get me there in under 40 minutes, sign me up. It would suit me better anyway. I miss good public transport like I had in Australia, I had so much time to just read, listen to music and get ready for the day. I hate sitting in traffic and getting annoyed but I'd rather do that then lose an extra two hours a day to commuting.

If you ban cars in the city centre then they'll be forced onto the canals and south circular road which would blow up my commute and be just as bad as a ban for me as well.

Fair point on the population density. I suppose it isn't really fair to compare Dublin's density to a city like Paris or Brussels. Oslo is probably a better model because it's actually significantly less densely populated than Dublin. My girlfriend just got back, she said it was class. Especially the "Luas".

*Apparentely Amsterdam's metro area is nearly four times as densely populated as Dublin's. I think the issue isn't the city centre itself but rather how quickly the city transitions into suburbs. People commute from as far as Navan, Drogheda, Athy and Arklow into Dublin and have to be taken into account when calculating the true population density.

cgcsb

troyzer wrote: »

If you ban cars in the city centre then they'll be forced onto the canals and south circular road which would blow up my commute and be just as bad as a ban for me as well.

It doesn't work that way, people will go with the most convenient option, a car ban from the north quays for example won't just move those cars to the canal, it'll mean those people trying to get to the East of the city centre can now do so faster by bus.

no.8

Agreed. Once very good additional example is Basel. Small-ish, but busy and complex city geographically with a fantastic road system (roads sunk under Street level). Still has congestion issues mind you, but removing all those cars from main streets has cleared up roads for an extensive tram network and safe and busy cycling lanes.

It seems like our town planers are afraid to go underground here (unless there is a river facing us and they have serious obligations to do so - port tunnel). E.g. No basements for storage rooms in apartment blocks, few underpasses, underground car parks for residential areas being rare enough. This 2D mentally is not helping.

*PS im not advocating new roads top supplement the M50, rather roads which could allow the ones on surface level to be significantly relieved from congestion or blocked to private cars. Same goes for Cork and Galway. It is expensive yes, but so is the unsung cost of congestion

troyzer

cgcsb wrote: »

It doesn't work that way, people will go with the most convenient option, a car ban from the north quays for example won't just move those cars to the canal, it'll mean those people trying to get to the East of the city centre can now do so faster by bus.

A lot of them will but are you saying my commute would be completely unaffected by a ban on city centre traffic? Come on. It'll definitely be affected.

cgcsb

troyzer wrote: »

A lot of them will but are you saying my commute would be completely unaffected by a ban on city centre traffic? Come on. It'll definitely be affected.

Your commute by car maybe negatively affected but the buses carrying many more people will move a lot faster, and your commute along the canal to Ballsbridge will probably be replaced by a faster B-C bus journey

Bray Head

no.8 wrote: »

It seems like our town planers are afraid to go underground here (unless there is a river facing us and they have serious obligations to do so - port tunnel). E.g. No basements for storage rooms in apartment blocks, few underpasses, underground car parks for residential areas being rare enough. This 2D mentally is not helping.

Agreed. Some kind of north-south road tunnel (Say Drumcondra to Donnybrook) would cater for a lot of cross-city traffic and would be complementary to putting a congestion charge in place.

troyzer

cgcsb wrote: »

Your commute by car maybe negatively affected but the buses carrying many more people will move a lot faster, and your commute along the canal to Ballsbridge will probably be replaced by a faster B-C bus journey

And as I've said, if it is replaced by a bus I'd be happy to use it. But until it is, I remain sceptical.

*Yeah, just took a look there. The C bus gets me into Grand Canal which is about a ten minute walk to work. How can you tell how long the C bus will actually take though? That's the kicker. At least in this scenario the bus looks like it'll be more frequent and I won't have to change buses like I do currently. That's where all of the time is lost.

monument

troyzer wrote: »

And as I've said, if it is replaced by a bus I'd be happy to use it. But until it is, I remain sceptical.

*Yeah, just took a look there. The C bus gets me into Grand Canal which is about a ten minute walk to work. How can you tell how long the C bus will actually take though? That's the kicker. At least in this scenario the bus looks like it'll be more frequent and I won't have to change buses like I do currently. That's where all of the time is lost.

Remember if you like elements of bus connects, it's a good idea to reply to the consultation in a positive way.

It won't succeed if people in support of the project don't reply to the consultation.

FYI Dublin has slightly higher population density as Amsterdam and most other EU cities around the million to two million mark.

Stephen15

troyzer wrote: »

And as I've said, if it is replaced by a bus I'd be happy to use it. But until it is, I remain sceptical.

*Yeah, just took a look there. The C bus gets me into Grand Canal which is about a ten minute walk to work. How can you tell how long the C bus will actually take though? That's the kicker. At least in this scenario the bus looks like it'll be more frequent and I won't have to change buses like I do currently. That's where all of the time is lost.

Would you not consider taking the 25a/b to Merrion Sqaure and then hopping on a Dublin Bike to get to Ballsbridge or even getting a fold up bike and taking it on the bus.

LeChienMefiant

no.8 wrote: »

*PS im not advocating new roads top supplement the M50, rather roads which could allow the ones on surface level to be significantly relieved from congestion or blocked to private cars. Same goes for Cork and Galway. It is expensive yes, but so is the unsung cost of congestion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig

monument

no.8 wrote: »

Agreed. Once very good additional example is Basel. Small-ish, but busy and complex city geographically with a fantastic road system (roads sunk under Street level). Still has congestion issues mind you, but removing all those cars from main streets has cleared up roads for an extensive tram network and safe and busy cycling lanes.

It seems like our town planers are afraid to go underground here (unless there is a river facing us and they have serious obligations to do so - port tunnel). E.g. No basements for storage rooms in apartment blocks, few underpasses, underground car parks for residential areas being rare enough. This 2D mentally is not helping.

*PS im not advocating new roads top supplement the M50, rather roads which could allow the ones on surface level to be significantly relieved from congestion or blocked to private cars. Same goes for Cork and Galway. It is expensive yes, but so is the unsung cost of congestion

What city of a simular size to Dublin is sinking roads in its confined city centre?

Bray Head wrote: »

Agreed. Some kind of north-south road tunnel (Say Drumcondra to Donnybrook) would cater for a lot of cross-city traffic and would be complementary to putting a congestion charge in place.

Some people say: look that those people taking about "car free", that's so unrealistic.

But here we have people suggesting a 5-6km tunnel in a city centre for cars to provide for a shrinking amount of cross-city traffic.

monument

troyzer wrote: »

If it can get me there in under 40 minutes, sign me up. It would suit me better anyway. I miss good public transport like I had in Australia, I had so much time to just read, listen to music and get ready for the day. I hate sitting in traffic and getting annoyed but I'd rather do that then lose an extra two hours a day to commuting.

If you ban cars in the city centre then they'll be forced onto the canals and south circular road which would blow up my commute and be just as bad as a ban for me as well.

Fair point on the population density. I suppose it isn't really fair to compare Dublin's density to a city like Paris or Brussels. Oslo is probably a better model because it's actually significantly less densely populated than Dublin. My girlfriend just got back, she said it was class. Especially the "Luas".

*Apparentely Amsterdam's metro area is nearly four times as densely populated as Dublin's. I think the issue isn't the city centre itself but rather how quickly the city transitions into suburbs. People commute from as far as Navan, Drogheda, Athy and Arklow into Dublin and have to be taken into account when calculating the true population density.

Dublin has a higher population density in its continuous urban area than Amsterdam does -- continuous urban area is the UN agreed standard for what a city is, not based on historic city and county boundaries:

http://irishcycle.com/2015/11/03/is-dublin-a-low-density-city/

troyzer

monument wrote: »

Remember if you like elements of bus connects, it's a good idea to reply to the consultation in a positive way.

It won't succeed if people in support of the project don't reply to the consultation.

FYI Dublin has slightly higher population density as Amsterdam and most other EU cities around the million to two million mark.

Not according to wikipedia it doesn't. The inner core is the same but maybe Dublin is weird in how far people commute from. I don't know about Amsterdam, I've never been there but do they really commute the equivalent distance as Mullingar to Dublin? I know people who do this.

When you count these people into Dublin's population (which you really should as they make up the daytime population) there is absolutely no way our population density is the same as Amsterdam.

Stephen15 wrote: »

Would you not consider taking the 25a/b to Merrion Sqaure and then hopping on a Dublin Bike to get to Ballsbridge or even getting a fold up bike and taking it on the bus.

I looked at doing this early on but I'd have to leave an hour earlier to make it in for 7:00. And even then I'd be waiting from around 6:40 for the building to open.

monument wrote: »

Dublin has a higher population density in its continuous urban area than Amsterdam does -- continuous urban area is the UN agreed standard for what a city is, not based on historic city and county boundaries:

http://irishcycle.com/2015/11/03/is-dublin-a-low-density-city/

As I've said above, Dublin is not a low density city at its core. But we do have an enormous commuter belt. This article is from today:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/commuter-belt-widens-to-100km-with-wexford-and-laois-becoming-prime-spots-for-workers-in-dublin-36509834.html

If Amsterdam also has a 100km commuter belt I'll stand corrected.

monument

troyzer wrote: »

Not according to wikipedia it doesn't. The inner core is the same but maybe Dublin is weird in how far people commute from. I don't know about Amsterdam, I've never been there but do they really commute the equivalent distance as Mullingar to Dublin? I know people who do this.

When you count these people into Dublin's population (which you really should as they make up the daytime population) there is absolutely no way our population density is the same as Amsterdam.



I looked at doing this early on but I'd have to leave an hour earlier to make it in for 7:00. And even then I'd be waiting from around 6:40 for the building to open.



As I've said above, Dublin is not a low density city at its core. But we do have an enormous commuter belt. This article is from today:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/commuter-belt-widens-to-100km-with-wexford-and-laois-becoming-prime-spots-for-workers-in-dublin-36509834.html

If Amsterdam also has a 100km commuter belt I'll stand corrected.

You're confusing two issues -- density has nothing to do with commuting from Mullingar etc.

The regional areas of Amsterdam and Dublin are not comparable -- Dublin's is based on county borders.

The best measure of density is the continuous urban area -- that includes what the CSO calls Dublin City and Suburbs. Dublin has a slightly higher density for the continuous urban area (Amsterdam has higher density in the core city centre, i.e. Within the canals, but that's another story).

People commute into Amsterdam from all over the Netherlands and beyond -- 100km and well over that.

PlaneSpeeking

Really very difficult to raise an objection to a point raised by a Moderator but please remember not everyone is physically able to cycle. To have this as a solution to all queries is not 100% helpful.

There are people who have no other option but to use their car.

The area in the Midlands I commute from is fortunately (currently) a walkable distance (but as my illness progresses it may not be - at the moment I must get a taxi in the morning. A time will likely come when it is both ways). I'm lucky I'm only a little over a mile away from station - and have (since LCC) a decent connection to my workplace.

To suggest cycling to the station, and then getting a Dublin Bike the other end would be impossible for me and I imagine for many others.

There are solutions needed and I understand the vested interest many have but cycling is not always the solution to congestion issues.

troyzer

monument wrote: »

You're confusing two issues -- density has nothing to do with commuting from Mullingar etc.

The regional areas of Amsterdam and Dublin are not comparable -- Dublin's is based on county borders.

The best measure of density is the continuous urban area -- that includes what the CSO calls Dublin City and Suburbs. Dublin has a slightly higher density for the continuous urban area (Amsterdam has higher density in the core city centre, i.e. Within the canals, but that's another story).

People commute into Amsterdam from all over the Netherlands and beyond -- 100km and well over that.

I'm not disputing the traditional definition of urban density. What I'm saying is that if you look at the daytime population of Dublin and try to serve it via metro, it'll never work. You'll just end up with the current situation where you have the Luas and DART only serving the easiest areas and leaving the rest of us in the cold.

Lucan is hardly in the sticks and we have only got the bus. The lads in Mullingar have nothing. Good luck trying to get a proper mass transit system out that far.

I can't find anything off hand that proves or disproves that Dublin's 100km commuter belt is normal. But Amsterdam definitely has better commuter rail than Dublin does so this alleviates the number of cars coming in. We don't really have that.

monument

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Really very difficult to raise an objection to a point raised by a Moderator

The best thing to do it not mention moderation at all. Or you can feel free to PM me or another moderator if you have any issue with my posts.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

but please remember not everyone is physically able to cycle. To have this as a solution to all queries is not 100% helpful.

Have you read the thread? Maybe you're taking what people are saying up wrong? Because I can't see where myself or anybody else has suggested that everyone should cycle.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

There are people who have no other option but to use their car.

Yes, and the best thing for those people would be is for those who can use alternatives to get out of their cars.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

The area in the Midlands I commute from is fortunately (currently) a walkable distance (but as my illness progresses it may not be - at the moment I must get a taxi in the morning. A time will likely come when it is both ways). I'm lucky I'm only a little over a mile away from station - and have (since LCC) a decent connection to my workplace.

To suggest cycling to the station, and then getting a Dublin Bike the other end would be impossible for me and I imagine for many others.

Why do you think people are expecting you to cycle?

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

There are solutions needed and I understand the vested interest many have but cycling is not always the solution to congestion issues.

Just because it's not the solution for you and others doesn't mean it's not a big part of the solution.

You'll see that in my posts -- I've said people will use a mix, including just driving.

PlaneSpeeking

troyzer wrote: »

I'm not disputing the traditional definition of urban density. What I'm saying is that if you look at the daytime population of Dublin and try to serve it via metro, it'll never work. You'll just end up with the current situation where you have the Luas and DART only serving the easiest areas and leaving the rest of us in the cold.

Lucan is hardly in the sticks and we have only got the bus. The lads in Mullingar have nothing. Good luck trying to get a proper mass transit system out that far.

I can't find anything off hand that proves or disproves that Dublin's 100km commuter belt is normal. But Amsterdam definitely has better commuter rail than Dublin does so this alleviates the number of cars coming in. We don't really have that.

Silly question perhaps but is there a possibilty of linking the outskirts of Dublin (airport etc) via Metro to an interchange similar to the Red Cow ?

PlaneSpeeking

monument wrote: »

The best thing to do it not mention moderation at all. Or you can feel free to PM me or another moderator if you have any issue with my posts.




Have you read the thread? Maybe you're taking what people are saying up wrong? Because I can't see where myself or anybody else has suggested that everyone should cycle.



Yes, and the best thing for those people would be is for those who can use alternatives to get out of their cars.



Why do you think people are expecting you to cycle?




Just because it's not the solution for you and others doesn't mean it's not a big part of the solution.

You'll see that in my posts -- I've said people will use a mix, including just driving.

Reading the posts on here - there seems to be no consideration of others' circumstances, just "cars are bad". No, they're not always.

And yes several times I have been told that Dublin Bikes are the only way to go. And they may well be a boon to some people, but because an individual is in favour of a transport method - it may not be the best solution. Perhaps a mix is needed ?

LeChienMefiant

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Really very difficult to raise an objection to a point raised by a Moderator but please remember not everyone is physically able to cycle. To have this as a solution to all queries is not 100% helpful.

No reasonable person is going to suggest a restriction that is going to negatively impact on people with mobility issues. If there is less congestion from those who have no such needs then surely that serves the interests of those that do?

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

There are solutions needed and I understand the vested interest many have but cycling is not always the solution to congestion issues.

This is what I was referring to earlier about seeking to find where interests are aligned. Are there not a lot of instances where your interests are aligned with responsible cyclists?

cgcsb

monument wrote: »

What city of a simular size to Dublin is sinking roads in its confined city centre?



Some people say: look that those people taking about "car free", that's so unrealistic.

But here we have people suggesting a 5-6km tunnel in a city centre for cars to provide for a shrinking amount of cross-city traffic.

Adding more capacity for cars only increases the number of cars in urban situations. Boston, or anywhere on that continent, is not a model for sustainable development.

cgcsb

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Really very difficult to raise an objection to a point raised by a Moderator but please remember not everyone is physically able to cycle. To have this as a solution to all queries is not 100% helpful.

There are people who have no other option but to use their car.

The area in the Midlands I commute from is fortunately (currently) a walkable distance (but as my illness progresses it may not be - at the moment I must get a taxi in the morning. A time will likely come when it is both ways). I'm lucky I'm only a little over a mile away from station - and have (since LCC) a decent connection to my workplace.

To suggest cycling to the station, and then getting a Dublin Bike the other end would be impossible for me and I imagine for many others.

There are solutions needed and I understand the vested interest many have but cycling is not always the solution to congestion issues.

Well good. Nobody anywhere said that a City's commuting needs can be 100% met by cycling. Getting 33% cycling for their commute is a realistic goal though. This can be achieved through a dramatic improvement to cycling infrastructure and for gods sake some actual funding for the Dublin bikes scheme.

cgcsb

troyzer wrote: »

I'm not disputing the traditional definition of urban density. What I'm saying is that if you look at the daytime population of Dublin and try to serve it via metro, it'll never work. You'll just end up with the current situation where you have the Luas and DART only serving the easiest areas and leaving the rest of us in the cold.

Lucan is hardly in the sticks and we have only got the bus. The lads in Mullingar have nothing. Good luck trying to get a proper mass transit system out that far.

I can't find anything off hand that proves or disproves that Dublin's 100km commuter belt is normal. But Amsterdam definitely has better commuter rail than Dublin does so this alleviates the number of cars coming in. We don't really have that.

Mullingar has a rail connection to Dublin and once Metrolink is built, and DART expansion is complete commuters for Mullingar will have excellent interchange options to get them all over the Greater Dublin Area in a jiffy.

cgcsb

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Perhaps a mix is needed ?

well yeah