nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

How we think and talk about reducing car use in cities

monument

A few things in recent threads and discussions off boards has got me thinking...

Most of the time when we talk about “restrictions on cars” we’re actually talking about “improvements for others” or reallocating priority and space to others.

For anybody who supports a more liveable and sustainable city, it’s far more constructive to look at it from the perspective of providing a reallocation of priority and space.

And I’m not just saying that from a perception perspective — as CF from the AA says, you can put up road blocks and the city won’t be any better. I actually think he’s half right. For the road blocks to be a positive, you need to be planning to improve walking, cycling, and public transport, not just disproving car access.

But in other cities of a similar size to Dublin, the link between provision of public transport, “restrictions on cars”, and use of cars is at best weak or mixed or not as strange forward as people think.

Amsterdam and Copenhagen put in significant relocation of space before having metro lines in place and Amsterdam has just used the opening of its new North-South metro line as an excuse to block east-west car movements — the link there is tenuous.

In Dublin the volume of cars looks large but the numbers of people they are carrying is low compared to the numbers carred in bus lanes, tram lanes and narrow cycle lanes. Often you’re only taking about a few hundred people in cars per hour on many routes — easily transferred to other modes.

Even in larger cities like Paris or London — with far greater public transport — they still get opposition to surface improvements on the bases that motorists will lose out, be they for buses or trams or decent cycle paths.

Another thing is that Dublin already has around 10% cycling modal share and even if some of the planned major routes are built, that modal share will grow. Dutch cities have up to 50%+ but the NTA in Dublin has low enough targets for cycling.

Also we have to look at modal shift as not as strange forward as most people think of it as.

For example, one car driver might in reaction to a change in road layouts change to a different route and it might be any other driver on that route who switches to walking, cycling or public transport.

If someone from far out switches to the bus, some guy who used to commute on the same route but living closer to the city centre might then switch from the bus to walking or cycling.

Or some people already combine driving with cycling once they get near the city centre or get a lift to the edge of the city centre and then cycle etc.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

cgcsb

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The government has 2 options. A straight out ban of all cars in city centre as I posted above.

Or a congestion charge, personally I would go with 20 euro per day. Shutting down on street parking as much as possible as well. Make driving into city centre an absolute nightmare for people....

There are more than those two options actually. Over the next year we are likely to see the following traffic limiting measures:

-College Green pedestrianisation
-Quays car ban
-George's St car ban
-One way systems in Terenure, Stoneybatter and Rathmines.

These measures alone will dissuade thousands of drivers from their cars. Then we can face more difficult issues, closing Drury st/Brown Thomas car parks and pedestrianizing the entire area or make it bike only for example.

[Deleted User]

Shefwedfan wrote: »

If they don't want to cycle then that is their choice, but then dont bitch and moan about no public transport....it's 15km, hardly a stage on Tour de France

Again I make reference to my original point. Go from Castleknock and draw a big circle. Did I mention Wicklow?

Their is people who will have valid reasons why they need to drive a car but in reality they are in the minority. THe majority could use public transport and have no decent reason why they couldn't.

Have you tried getting on the Luas green between 7 and 9 in the morning?

Cars have to disappear for ecology, even so called zero cars like electric - all they do is make the pollution remote to the rich. There is nothing unharmful in the manufacter of cars. How to get rid of cars? Make everything available locally. Jobs from home or kiosks. Manufactering done by automaton. Virtual shops where you order and get delivery.

Make no reason to have a car. Public transport can never be enough capacity, even in the cities we praise for infra structure, there are many cars.

The achievable is to have no cars in city centres, anything else is sky pie!

cgcsb

troyzer wrote: »

The masses will change when public transport is more convienent. Making driving less convenient is an awful way of forcing people onto public transport which is over capacity, expensive and inefficient.

You can't have one without the other in practice. Improved public transport = more road space for buses = less roadspace for cars.

Stephen15

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Luas and Ryanair are both run by companies that want to make money

Anything in Ireland that is propped up by the government is a disaster....it needs to be run by a company that can drive a profit

Comparing the Luas to Ryanair is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Transdev are subcontracted by the government to run the Luas at a fixed fee. TII a government own the track and the NTA own the rolling stock and keep the fares. It is a PSO service like Dublin Bus, Irish Rail or Bus Eireann albeit not operated by a semi state body. Go-Ahead will operating on that model too.

Podge_irl

No public transportation system will cater for everyone but focusing on some hard cases is missing the point. When people talk about reducing car use in the city they generally are not talking about people driving into work at 6am. They are not impacting anyone. It is the people driving up the quays at 8am who are complaining about "traffic chaos" when the road was turned into two bus lanes that are the problem. It was a public transportation initiative which improved commuting times for the 90% of people using them and yet somehow the focus was on the 10% of people who were stuck in their wildly inefficient cars, still taking up 33% of the space, that were the focus of pretty much everyone.

And yes, some of those people will have utterly legitimate reasons to be driving. But they should neither demand nor expect to be the focus of transport planners.

orangerhyme

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Luas and Ryanair are both run by companies that want to make money

Anything in Ireland that is propped up by the government is a disaster....it needs to be run by a company that can drive a profit

PT could offer the best service in the World tomorrow,....you would still not get Irish people to use it because the root of the problem is most people are lazy. It is easier to walk out the door and jump into a car then walk 5 mins up the road and get onto a bus.......you even have an app now which tell you exactly when the bus will arrive to stop so you dont have to stand around and still people dont use it....

The only way to move people onto PT is to hit their pockets. Simple as that, otherwise we will be having this discussion in 30 years time and nothing will have changed.

People use metros and undergrounds; people will use buses if they're frequent and fast enough.
That's why the busconnects and road widening projects are so important.

One big issue I see is when autonomous electric taxis come in. These will be very cost competitive without the cost of petrol or drivers wages.
Very difficult for a bus to compete with.

Stephen15

orangerhyme wrote: »

One big issue I see is when autonomous electric taxis come in. These will be very cost competitive without the cost of petrol or drivers wages.
Very difficult for a bus to compete with.

I think if such things were to come into existence they should be limited to a certain number the prevent a free for all.

Dravokivich

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Less than 15km.....you would have cycled that in less

Also double bonus as you would be healthier and also get rid of all those alcohol toxins

:-)

I did say in my post to take a red marker from Castleknock and draw circle, both locations are outside of that circle.

Cycling ain't an option. Too many hazards. And wouldn't be much use getting the kid to creche, with a school run coming up this year.

Anyhow castelknock is a bad example on your part. A lot of the congestion comes from it's own area. With the exception of a rat run to the N3 from Phoenix park.

Shefwedfan

Dravokivich wrote: »

Cycling ain't an option. Too many hazards. And wouldn't be much use getting the kid to creche, with a school run coming up this year.

Anyhow castelknock is a bad example on your part. A lot of the congestion comes from it's own area. With the exception of a rat run to the N3 from Phoenix park.

You said Friday night, I would have expected you picked up Saturday!!

I used Castleknock because of gates to park.....the park should be closed ASAP to all traffic apart from PT

monument

Dravokivich wrote: »

Cycling ain't an option. Too many hazards. And wouldn't be much use getting the kid to creche, with a school run coming up this year.

Anyhow castelknock is a bad example on your part. A lot of the congestion comes from it's own area. With the exception of a rat run to the N3 from Phoenix park.

This is the point of the thread -- not current conditions alone but how we think of the move away from current conditions.

But even in the current condition a growing number of people cycle with their children to creche or school. With improved conditions more and more people will accept the option.

FYI I'm not making any recommendations for you personally -- I'm looking at the wider picture.

Stephen15

I do see people with these large child carriers on their bikes which can two to four children. That kind of thing is well in and good in the Netherlands or Denmark where there is good cycling infrastructure which don't get me wrong I'm all in for but I have to say I think here in Ireland they leave the children very vulnerable on our narrow roads with cars, buses and trucks all competing for road space.

LeChienMefiant

Is it completely unrealistic to live within walking distance of creche or school? I.e. 15 to 20 minute walk? When kids are older then can skoot. Seems crazy that kids need to be driven. With both partners working it seems impractical for creche/school to be too far from home. Maybe I'm just lucky.

Cuddlesworth

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is this really a significant factor in our parking issues? The total number of spaces for civil servants are relatively modest, given the overall number of staff 37k nationwide. DCC have something like 400-500 spaces at Wood Quay, and over 10k staff, so it doesn't like a huge problem to me.

http://www.thejournal.ie/parking-levy-department-of-finance-budget-public-service-opw-427408-Apr2012/

I'm a bit curious about the wording of the article. They are very clear that they "lease" 3,291 spaces in Dublin. Then there is the tidbit that spaces included in the building lease are not included in the above. And I guess that parking spaces in government owned non-leased buildings are again not included.

That is very misleading.

Dravokivich

Shefwedfan wrote: »

You said Friday night, I would have expected you picked up Saturday!!

I used Castleknock because of gates to park.....the park should be closed ASAP to all traffic apart from PT

I lived in the area from 2008 to 2015. Closing those gates will not address the congestion generated by locals.

Shefwedfan

Dravokivich wrote: »

I lived in the area from 2008 to 2015. Closing those gates will not address the congestion generated by locals.

I love the Irish people's "can do" attitude....

Dravokivich

monument wrote: »

This is the point of the thread -- not current conditions alone but how we think of the move away from current conditions.

But even in the current condition a growing number of people cycle with their children to creche or school. With improved conditions more and more people will accept the option.

FYI I'm not making any recommendations for you personally -- I'm looking at the wider picture.

Whenever I've mentioned it, I've always accepted my commute is an obscure one. I've never expected things to be changed for me. But I'll always reference my obscure commute here because too often people who comment on these threads forget that some don't genuinely have alternatives and act like they've never been considered. I've only been driving a year. I know all too well how unsuitable the public transport options are for a large number of commuters. And I find it a bit annoying when some can see someones "need" to drive as a hinderence because of some illthought opinion that we should not be driving at all, especially within the M50.

Dravokivich

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I love the Irish people's "can do" attitude....

The issue isn't can do. You want it, go seek it out with your council. They'll survey and find most of it goes from the Phoenix park, towards castelknock village, but turns off before hand towards the n3. Everything else is local traffic and congestion. So what will closing the gates fix?

Dravokivich

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

Is it completely unrealistic to live within walking distance of creche or school? I.e. 15 to 20 minute walk? When kids are older then can skoot. Seems crazy that kids need to be driven. With both partners working it seems impractical for creche/school to be too far from home. Maybe I'm just lucky.

You're asking a question about a different issue there. We commute from where we can live. And there's a lot of moving around when it comes to renting. You can try to stay in the same area, but when school/creche and work are in different directions, you aren't going to lose time by walking.

Shefwedfan

Dravokivich wrote: »

Whenever I've mentioned it, I've always accepted my commute is an obscure one. I've never expected things to be changed for me. But I'll always reference my obscure commute here because too often people who comment on these threads forget that some don't genuinely have alternatives and act like they've never been considered. I've only been driving a year. I know all too well how unsuitable the public transport options are for a large number of commuters. And I find it a bit annoying when some can see someones "need" to drive as a hinderence because of some illthought opinion that we should not be driving at all, especially within the M50.

Just out of interest, what are the hazards?

Dravokivich

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Just out of interest, what are the hazards?

Small roads, poorly lit, blind corners with short visibility ahead of you. And people have a tendency to speed excessively on those roads too.

prinzeugen

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Majority of the task's listed above do not require a car. Are you really telling me that if a city centre is blocked off that no trademan in Ireland would ever go near it again?

Please explain why lawyers need a car? also a doctor going to a hospital needs a car for what reason? maybe an emergency GP but they would travel under emergency service banner. Also seriously a hairdresser? :P

I won't even ask why a debt collector needs a car? also how you would come up with that as a job that needs to be considered for a public transport discussion. Does he/she need to carry their work tools?

For the few that might require a car then zero emission would be a requirement.

Cars are not evil. It is the people driving them that are just lazy. It is easier to walk out the door and jump into a car, then moan rest of day about the traffic.

It is harder to use imagination and say I can get to work/etc via bus/train/and God help us all a bicycle.

If you really can think of a zillion other things and are a public transport advocate as you claim, think of those zillion things and write beside them why it can't be done on public transport? I bet I could give a zillion simple solutions to majority of them

You must not have seen the post from a plumber a good while back about how his company is no longer doing jobs in the city centre. Its costing them huge amounts of money in wasted time.

There are regulations on how certain items can be transported. Pesticides, medicine etc must be kept in secure storage. How can someone do that on PT or a bike?

Hairdressers do visit multiple elderly clients all over the city. Car lets them do more than PT ever could.

Its very easy to say these jobs could be done from a push bike (this is a thinly veiled pro cycling thread), but the reality is these jobs cant be done without a car/van.

Laws/regulations would not allow it in some cases and it would mean people/business would pay more or would be unable to get the service.

Stephen15

prinzeugen wrote: »

You must not have seen the post from a plumber a good while back about how his company is no longer doing jobs in the city centre. Its costing them huge amounts of money in wasted time.

One man's loss would be another man's gain if one plumber won't do CC another one can and if he's the only one who will he can inflate his prices. How do you think Amsterdam, Copenhagen or as an extremely exaggerated example Venice manage for plumbers. Do they all have no water in their taps?

There are regulations on how certain items can be transported. Pesticides, medicine etc must be kept in secure storage. How can someone do that on PT or a bike?

These deliveries could be done by night or with special permission.

Hairdressers do visit multiple elderly clients all over the city. Car lets them do more than PT ever could.

Again how is this managed in the cities I have mentioned. I know someone who actually is a hairdresser who does home visits. She carries an easily transportable bag. There isin't really a whole lot of equipment apart from water spray gun, scissors, rollars (in some cases) and colour/lotions/hairspray (vary by client). All easily transportable in a relatively small bag or backpack

Its very easy to say these jobs could be done from a push bike (this is a thinly veiled pro cycling thread), but the reality is these jobs cant be done without a car/van.

Again don't think anyone is suggesting all deliveries should be all done by bike but they can be done at quieter times or at weekends etc. Also they could be limited to certain times.

Laws/regulations would not allow it in some cases and it would mean people/business would pay more or would be unable to get the service.

Tbh in most cities the prices in the city centre are higher than in the suburbs that can be already here in Dublin look at a rent as a prime example it gets cheaper the further away from the city centre.

troyzer

cgcsb wrote: »

Your return journey by car from Ballsbridge to Lucan at circa 15:00 certainly takes you more than half an hour. Actually it's quite likely that with bus connects fully implemented, a C and B bus will get you there in under 40 mins.

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.

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Luas and Ryanair are both run by companies that want to make money

Anything in Ireland that is propped up by the government is a disaster....it needs to be run by a company that can drive a profit

PT could offer the best service in the World tomorrow,....you would still not get Irish people to use it because the root of the problem is most people are lazy. It is easier to walk out the door and jump into a car then walk 5 mins up the road and get onto a bus.......you even have an app now which tell you exactly when the bus will arrive to stop so you dont have to stand around and still people dont use it....

The only way to move people onto PT is to hit their pockets. Simple as that, otherwise we will be having this discussion in 30 years time and nothing will have changed.

The Luas is publicly owned with government set fares. It may be privately operated but it's closer to Dublin Bus than Ryanair. My point was that building a Luas to a place like Dundrum did far more to get people out of their cars then for example if they had turned the all of the roads from Dundrum into single lane.

There will always be lazy people, you're right. And in that case, I'm not opposed to a congestion charge. But London has one of the best public transport systems in the world, ours is awful. It's not really the same thing. You don't really have any excuse not to use PT in London.

cgcsb wrote: »

You can't have one without the other in practice. Improved public transport = more road space for buses = less roadspace for cars.

You have to do both at once. You can't just ban cars or put a tax on them without providing an alternative. I'm not saying you can't have a delay. People are reasonable, they'll accept a few years of inconvinience if it means public transport improvements like when the City Centre was a building site to get the Luas cross city up and running. But to tell someone like me with no DART, Luas, train station or any plans to provide these that from now on I'm banned from using my car is ridiculously unfair. Quid pro quo Clarice.

I actually agree with you that the end goal is to get all of the cars off the road. This would be amazing. But until you have viable alternatives, it's not possible. Most cities don't have public transport systems almost entirely reliant on roads either. So while less cars = more roadspace for buses is undoubtedly true, it shouldn't be the be all and end all of public transport. We shouldn't be so heavily reliant on buses which in any other city I've been in have acted mostly as feeders or orbitals for the primary transportation which is always some type of light or heavy rail.

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.

The J Stands for Jay

orangerhyme wrote: »

It costs approximately 10,000 a year to own a car.

Where are you getting these numbers from? I only paid 10k for my car.

Nonsense figures from the AA. No sign of the €200 tax band, ridiculously high insurance costs...Nonsense figures from the AA. No sign of the €200 tax band, ridiculously high insurance costs, cost of capital should be less than 0.5% based on current interest rates.

LeChienMefiant

prinzeugen wrote: »

Its very easy to say these jobs could be done from a push bike (this is a thinly veiled pro cycling thread), but the reality is these jobs cant be done without a car/van.

It's also a pro-city living thread for those that work and/or live in the city. Not everyone that wants to reduce private car traffic in the city is pro bicycle. Although if people concentrated more on their shared interests than the issues that divide them then maybe cyclists and others could achieve a lot more.

Car sharing schemes have huge potential to change the nature of car ownership and usage. It would be much more efficient for the hairdresser or whoever doing a house call to use a shared car. Some of the larger estate agencies have their own shared/pool cars now for staff to attend viewings.

McGaggs wrote: »

Where are you getting these numbers from? I only paid 10k for my car.

Nonsense figures from the AA. No sign of the €200 tax band, ridiculously high insurance costs...Nonsense figures from the AA. No sign of the €200 tax band, ridiculously high insurance costs, cost of capital should be less than 0.5% based on current interest rates.

€10k would quickly be run up between capital cost, servicing, tolls, parking, fuel, tax, insurance, tyres, NCT, etc. Would you say you're low, medium or high on the scale of expenditure?

Shefwedfan

prinzeugen wrote: »

You must not have seen the post from a plumber a good while back about how his company is no longer doing jobs in the city centre. Its costing them huge amounts of money in wasted time.

There are regulations on how certain items can be transported. Pesticides, medicine etc must be kept in secure storage. How can someone do that on PT or a bike?

Hairdressers do visit multiple elderly clients all over the city. Car lets them do more than PT ever could.

Its very easy to say these jobs could be done from a push bike (this is a thinly veiled pro cycling thread), but the reality is these jobs cant be done without a car/van.

Laws/regulations would not allow it in some cases and it would mean people/business would pay more or would be unable to get the service.

So your trying to say a plumber now is using pesticides? If one plumber wont service the city centre I know the next guy will buy an electric van and make a killing covering that area.

As already mentioned the medicines would be under emergency services. Also you do realize a lot of medicines are transferred using motorbikes for speed?

Hairdressers can bring everything in a small carry bag. Next you will be trying to tell me they have to carry around a hair dressers chair

This has nothing to do with bicycle. It is public transport. Bicycle/train/taxi/bux/luas etc etc etc

Please tell me the laws/regulations that would stop people using public transport?

You can dig and dig and yes you will find some requirements for vehicles to travel into city centre.....

You can buy an electric van/car/motorbikes today....some of the Dublin city councils have purchased them and use them now.

Shefwedfan

McGaggs wrote: »

Where are you getting these numbers from? I only paid 10k for my car.

Nonsense figures from the AA. No sign of the €200 tax band, ridiculously high insurance costs...Nonsense figures from the AA. No sign of the €200 tax band, ridiculously high insurance costs, cost of capital should be less than 0.5% based on current interest rates.

Depreciation

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

LeChienMefiant

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Depreciation

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

Not if he/she paid 10k for the car, most of the depreciation will have been taken by the prior owners. To buy a car for 10k you're reliant on the used car market. Most of the depreciation has already happened. Hence I would expect such an owner to be on the lower end of the expenditure scale.

Shefwedfan

Dravokivich wrote: »

Small roads, poorly lit, blind corners with short visibility ahead of you. And people have a tendency to speed excessively on those roads too.

I live in area with no street lights :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Ever heard of a bicycle light?

Also every part of Dublin people tend to speed excessively. In the middle of housing estates you see gobsh*ts doing 100km an hour

Shefwedfan

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

Not if he/she paid 10k for the car, most of the depreciation will have been taken by the prior owners. To buy a car for 10k you're reliant on the used car market. Most of the depreciation has already happened. Hence I would expect such an owner to be on the lower end of the expenditure scale.

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