If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Five Cities Demand Management Report (Congestion Charges, 15-min city, parking charge increases etc)

  • 26-11-2021 7:54pm

    This is the Five Cities Demand Management Research Report. You can read about it here

    And the actual report is available here

    A brief summary of the report is "a wide range of measures have been identified and assessed in terms of their impact in reducing emissions, tackling congestion, improving air quality, and improving the overall urban environment of the five cities. This includes measures such as, reallocating road space from cars to prioritise walking, cycling and public transport; delivering safer walking and cycling options; reducing parking provision; and introducing the concept of 15- minute neighbourhoods – where all the daily needs of a city’s population can be reached by a short walk, cycle or public transport journey."

    The proposals contained within the report aim to address the following

    • Decarbonisation
    • City air pollution
    • Congestion
    • Noise pollution
    • Loss of green spaces
    • RTI's
    • Inefficacies in current transport modes

    Regarding congestion charges, article here details how Cork & Dublin may have it by 2025. The initial proposals call for either a 10 eur flat daily fee, or 10 eur peak, 5 eur off peak fee.

    One example of congestion charging listed in the report, is from Milan, see below.

    There's loads more good stuff in it, recommend ye take a while to go through it

    Some additional items I pulled from my post on the Galway board

    It lists, among other things, the following proposals to address the above

    • Levy on work place parking. Galway will be the pilot city for this so this is 100% coming. Likely exemptions for small workplaces e.g. less than 10 spaces. Expect this to be 200-300 eur per parking space. A prior example of this in Nottingham showed employers passed this charge on to staff which encouraged modal shift. Note this charge would apply to spaces whether they are used or not so expect to see employers remove surplus parking. Expected modal shift for Galway detailed below
    • Congestion charging. Dublin & Cork to get this first, but once bus connects is up and running in Galway, expects this to come here too. Proposal is for a 10eur flat fee or a 10 eur peak/5 eur off-peak fee.
    • LEZ/ULEZ/CAZ zoning also being looked at for Dublin & Cork
    • Diesel fuel duty is going to see an increase to bring parity with petrol
    • No scrappage schemes anymore. The goal is to get people out of their cars, not into new ones
    • Tax Saver & Cycle to Work schemes are going to get overhauled. For CTW a replacement could be something as simple as removing VAT on bikes or grants for ebikes
    • Next gen ticketing. Basically drive up to the train station, park, get train, at destination get your bike share and get to your destination. All done under one payment/card/app/whatever who knows how this might go, they don't have good form with this type of stuff
    • Update planning standards to change from minimum parking space requirement to maximum parking space allowance. Numbers ranging from zero to 1 space per unit are given as examples from other locations.
    • Extended rollout of 30kmh limit
    • Park & Rides being further rolled out. Likely will tie in with the work place levy on parking for somewhere like Galway.

    Parking in particular, is being targeted heavily to make it more expensive, more awkward and more rare

    • Restrictions on the permitted duration of parking.
    • Longer hours of operation of parking controls.
    • Proactive enforcement to reduce incidents of inconsiderate parking (for example on pavements and cycle lanes) in order to safeguard road space for vulnerable and active travel users.
    • Targeted removal of on-street public parking.
    • Reduced on-street residential parking permit entitlements in certain situations.
    • Integration of EV charging strategies with parking policy.
    • Consideration of emissions-based parking charging, in particular as a targeted measure to improve Air Quality.
    • Specific measures to facilitate Park & Stride to reduce school-gate congestion.
    • Tiered rates of parking charges with levels set to proactively manage demand.

    The proposed items for a rollout in Galway are



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 64,954 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011

    There's an element of this I'd like to see dropped. LEZ/ULEZ/CAZ setups just cause most affected owners to buy new ICE vehicles, scrapping working vehicles with life left in them. Might be good for local air quality, but if you're selling it on a planetary basis, it isn't. Even those that replace them with EVs are not actually helping congestion. They don't appear to cause much modal shift.

    There are perfectly working, sub 20 year old vehicles with long remaining service lifes being replaced in London due to the ULEZ extension - that won't reduce total emissions for that user at all.

    My own quite old car, bought after the CO2 tax emissions came in and it was cheaper annually for me to buy a higher emissions version of the same car (which is actually what I did, albeit not for that reason. Although that is what I told the Green candidate on the door in the 2009 Local Elections!) is likely compliant with most ULEZ setups so it doesn't affect me, I'm not saying this out of personal interest.

  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34

    All irrelevant.

    After the hollowing out of our City Centres by COVID, little or none of this stuff will get the necessary level of political support to be passed. The ratepayers lobby won't wear it, not for a very long time.

  • Registered Users Posts: 671 ✭✭✭Oscar Madison

    How will Covid impact on these plans?

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,791 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3

    Will need a serious crackdown in residential areas which have been turned into unregulated car parks by narcissistic motorists.

  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 21,844 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk

    "There are perfectly working, sub 20 year old vehicles with long remaining service lifes being replaced in London due to the ULEZ extension - that won't reduce total emissions for that user at all."

    That isn't as simple as you make out, it depends on your annual mileage. If you are low mileage, then sure it is true. But if you drive mid to high mileage then even taking into account the production of a new EV, it will lead to lower over all green house gas emissions.

    Also you certainly shouldn't just ignore the "local air quality", your old car is pumping cancer causing PM and NOX into the face of your neighbours. On it's own that is enough of a reason to switch to EV.

    Of course better to encourage people out of cars and into walking/cycling/public transport.

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,052 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer

    The BusConnects project was massively diluted from Walker's original designs because of local opposition (most of which was based on misguided nonsense).

    That's utter tosh.

    Actually BusConnects was changed from a fundamentally flawed initial plan, the design of which was framed by ludicrously idealistic parameters set by the NTA, to one that actually should represent an improved bus service in the second and final drafts. It also focussed far too much on new passengers, to the detriment of the people who already used the bus service.

    The NTA wanted to significantly reduce the number of buses coming into the city centre, and force people to change to LUAS or DART with many existing direct services switching to become feeder services into rail or LUAS. The problem with that was that the rail and LUAS were already jammed to capacity. That was never going to work.

    The first plan also cancelled many direct routes to/from the city and replaced them with infrequent connections at the outer sections. This meant there was the potential for waits of up to 30 or 60 minutes if the bus coming from the city ran late and missed the scheduled connection. Again, that wasn't acceptable.

    The NTA also failed to understand the importance of the bus service within local communities, particularly in what would traditionally have been council estates, many of which have a large older population, and force people to walk out onto the main roads, and that fundamentally got people's backs up. That was political suicide.

    In my own case, the area I live in would have lost one high frequency citybound route along with an orbital route, and certain direct connections would have been replaced by the need to take two buses and excessively large detours.

    It was idealism gone mad frankly.

    The final plan includes the two key principles of the concept, namely:

    • Key corridors being served by Spine routes with integrated timetables along the spines
    • A large increase in orbital and local routes to facilitate new journeys and potentially reduce cross-city centre transit

    But it also put in place radial routes where needed to maintain connectivity, and recognised the importance of community bus services serving housing estates (which could run at a reduced frequency) and linking them with hospitals and relevant public services.

    The changes certainly were not based on misguided nonsense, but rather balancing the needs of existing passengers, and also attracting new ones by providing a large number of new routes.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34

    I see Eamon Ryan on his way into his party conference in a Lansdowne Road phonebox, shyting out of him about lunatic fantasy solutions for the haulage and logistics sector.

    Little or none of what is being considered at the moment seems to address the realistic needs of society. They'll sleepwalk the Shinners into power at this rate due to the sheer incredulousness of the electorate.

  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 64,954 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011

    If your annual mileage is high, you simply aren't going to have an older vehicle with a long remaining service life though. Those inherently only exist for people with low annual mileage; once they are old they would fail within six months of heavy use.

    And my car has half the (actual) NOx of a new similar power diesel Golf, due to being petrol. But as I said, it meets even the strictest ULEZ rules I've seen as it was a very clean powertrain for its era.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,711 ✭✭✭Phil.x

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,941 ✭✭✭cgcsb

    Think they're going about it the wrong way. There is massive parking capacity in Dublin City Centre and that's mostly due to the multi storeys. The multi storey facilities have to go in order for more streets to be pedestrianised, its as simple as that. Even if the cost was 300% higher, the spaces will still be filled.

    If it were me I'd bull doze the multi storeys and build housing, change the planning regs so that apartments don't have to have a parking space. Then pedestrianse the streets that we couldn't before because the car parks 'needed' them. Liffey St, South william, Princes etc. Then start taking out street parking and replace it with footpaths and cycle lanes. Price raises are just a class barrier, nothing else, the folks driving the land rover into BT's are price insensitive. It doesn't matter if the parking is 3 times dearer.

  • Registered Users Posts: 671 ✭✭✭Oscar Madison

    How do they expect people to travel to & from work?

    Not everyone lives in an urban environment with adequate public transport but

    does the country have the necessary funds to pay for both buses & drivers?

    In the current pandemic is it sensible to overcrowd the public transport system?

    I agree though that something needs to be done but penalizing a driver because they

    have to drive to work is a little insane!

  • Unless your work is in the middle of nowhere, nobody should NEED to drive to work. Drive to a transport hub, maybe

  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 37,105 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle

    How many people who drive into the five cities actually "have" to drive in to work?

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,702 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762

    I do for instance. No WFH at my workplace following the cyberattack.

    Driving to the work carpark takes 35 minutes and a 15 minute walk to the office.

    Public transport I would have to drive 10 minutes to (live in the country), train then takes wait time (5 mins) plus 25 minutes, then a bus which takes a further 25 minutes, plus wait time.

    Thats about 70 minutes overall assuming everything runs properly which it NEVER does here. Bring in the necessity of staying late often enough, and poor public transport in the evenings and there is no way it is feasible to do anything other than drive.

    There are no cycle lanes at leaving where I live, and nor will there be without a €100 million road/cycleway/pedestrian project that simply is not going to happen anytime soon.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,702 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762

    But thats the trouble. Going in, it adds 20 minutes to my trip. Coming home, could be anywhere from 20 - 30 minutes, depending on timing. Thats a full hour out of my day and when I work 8 - 6 anyway, every minute counts and I have elderly parents to look after in the evening so driving will still be the preferable option, by a long way. Especially when I COULD WFH, but IT won't allow it.

    I can't cycle following an accident years ago, and would you really want to cycle along here? As part of your 30km cycle to work? -

    Proper/better alternatives need to be put in place before, or at the same time, as any of this. I understand everyone will have their own excuse, but they really need to make improvements to public transport. In the case of Cork for instance, have much, much, MUCH better links from Kent station to the rest of town. And build the Cork Luas like, now. Not in 20 or 30 years. Fast track the planning, get it opened in 5 years, or at least an ambitious timescale.

  • Registered Users Posts: 671 ✭✭✭Oscar Madison

    If you are living in a rural environment without a good public transport service I can only assume that you have to!

    We have urbanites that travel to the cities for work! That might seem a little strange to you but it does happen!

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭Stovepipe

    Most of the particulates from diesels come from trucks and buses. Cars tend to be Euro 6 compliant and have catalytic converters as standard.Petrol cars still emit toxic particles. Congestion zone charges favour the rich, as has been amply proved in London, as they couldnt care less about congestion charges.Ordinary punters are stung by congestion charges, as they are simply another tax. Anyone who lives in rural towns or outside cities are utterly dependent on their cars and cannot afford EVs and the charging system is pathetic.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭Stovepipe

    I live 40 miles from my job in Dublin Airport, in a rural village. House prices forced me there. I HAVE to drive as there is no way on earth I can be at my job on a normal early start at 6 am or when I am in on nights (half my roster is nights). I cannot cycle that far on a routine basis. In inclement weather,I have to have a car,no question. I occasionally need to transport tools and parts in my car. I can't do this on a bus or a bike. As an aircraft engineer, I obviously can't work from home. I am not on any public transport routes. I need to use my diesel car as petrol is grossly overpriced in this country, electric cars are also grossly overpriced and our electric charging infrastructure is pathetic. There are thousands like me, yet the only solution you can think of is to tax the **** out of people.

  • Most of the particulates from diesels come from trucks and buses.

    Emission standards are being updated to also include particulate matter i.e. brake and tire dust so no vehicle will escape a hit

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭Stovepipe

    So that will cover electric cars, too? they emit tyre dust and brake dust. Plenty of other emitters in cities and built up areas. Small businesses and workshops too. Going to have to tax them too.

  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 37,105 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle

    As I said, you choose to drive into the city. There are P&R options available but most of the single occupancy cars commuting into the city centre daily are choosing to do so. That should not be an easy choice and soon it won't be.

    So, you work in the airport and not in the city and therefore not relevant to the thread really (because you don't work in one of the five cities!)

    Also, I'm not proposing to tax anyone. I do however, favour a more sustainable approach to people's work/life balance which will have a better outcome for our environment but, hey, if you feel better by making stuff up about me, go for it!

  • Advertisement

  • Yes, EV's too.

    All sources of emissions are going to come under taxation/penalty pressures/bans to cut down/eliminate those emissions.

    For example, smoky coal bans coming soon (should have been in 2019 but there ya go), CAZ/LEZ's in towns and cities, air monitoring everywhere (massive expansion planned) which will allow for pinpointing of sources and follow up to address.