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

Cities around the world that are reducing car access

MJohnston

I thought this would be an interesting thread to track the efforts of various cities to reduce the amount of car access, and thereby improve either the public realm, transport infrastructure, or just the local environment.

Today Paris won a court case which will allow them to proceed with banning cars from the banks of the Seine:

https://twitter.com/Anne_Hidalgo/status/1055442830892654594

https://phys.org/news/2016-09-paris-cars-river-seine.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Carawaystick

blanch152 wrote: »

Bicycles are different, they are not an all-year round option for commuting in Ireland. In winter, whether it is storms or snow, or just the darker mornings and nights, commuting by bicycle drops. For that reason, we shouldn't be working to facilitate bicycles in the same way as buses, Luas or trains.

But Busses and tram commuting drops in Snow too, whether it's busses not running in snow or luasanna being blocked by snowpeople built on tracks, and in the middle of the summer when it gets dark, no trams or busses run, whereas bikes work 24/7/365
even on xmas day

Carawaystick

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Lights sort the darker nights and mornings. Snow is indeed a problem, but an extremely rare one. Storms too.

Snow's not a problem, ice is a problem on a bike.

Del2005

Carawaystick wrote: »

Snow's not a problem, ice is a problem on a bike.

Snows a problem for cars never mind a bike

[Deleted User]

Carawaystick wrote: »

Snow's not a problem, ice is a problem on a bike.

Fair point. After the big snows in 2012 and 2013, my MTB with chunky tyres on the road (where most of the snow had been worn down by traffic) was much safer than walking on the impacted ice/slush on the paths.

blanch152 wrote: »

Don't disagree that this is true most of the time, the problem is that cycling stops for six or more weeks in the winter, and if commuting is built around cycling, that causes a massive problem.

Really? Is there a holiday period that I've not heard about? Sure, it's a bit colder and a bit darker, but it doesn't prevent cycling.

I agree that public transport needs more funding. I heard mentioned that there is no public transport infrastructure being developed this year or next year, which by comparison to road development, is fairly outrageous.

jimwallace197 wrote: »

Already there is huge mismanagement of our finances through sheer incompetence & corruption so why do you think that would change for this.

Is this one of those things that people say when they disagree with policy decisions? Is Ireland any different from most Western democracies in managing our finances?

CatInABox

Cork County Council urged to convert green areas to parking

I don't think I could facepalm more at this kind of thing.

markpb

blanch152 wrote: »

For me, I am not that interested in sorting the commuting cyclist infrastructure, I am much more interested in sorting the public transport infrastructure which should take priority over cycling.

Whatever your thoughts or preferences, cycling infrastructure can be built more quickly and more cheaply than transit infrastructure. It’ll be at least 2-3 years before any of the BusConnect infrastructure is built (and probably more because of the CPOs required) and it’ll be more than a decade before a metro is built (and probably more). Those are very worthwhile projects but we could build and open an awful lot of good cycling infrastructure while we’re waiting. That’s infrastructure that will have an immediate effect.

[Deleted User]

CatInABox wrote: »

Cork County Council urged to convert green areas to parking

I don't think I could facepalm more at this kind of thing.

What's the Council process if I need to take public space to store other kinds of private property? I'm really stuck for somewhere to put my drum kit, my butterfly collection and my lawnmower. Surely I must be able to claim some public space to store these?

CatInABox

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I agree that public transport needs more funding. I heard mentioned that there is no public transport infrastructure being developed this year or next year, which by comparison to road development, is fairly outrageous.

No big projects, but they are all in planning right now.

One of the major impediments to more public transport projects is that most of the easy stuff is already done, a point made by the NTA to the government committees. From now on, it's all public consultations, planning permission, political will. All that takes time, unfortunately.

cgcsb

CatInABox wrote: »

With College Green Plaza being rejected for incredibly old fashioned ideas, such as a misinterpretation of Traffic Evaporation and getting Induced Demand completely wrong, I wonder is there scope to appeal ABP decision, and if that's rejected, is there scope for bringing it into the courts system?

I mean seriously, rejecting it because there no plans for more "road space". I fell off my chair when I read that, and I'm still falling.

I view Ireland as being generally about 15 years behind Northern Europe for most social attitudes, although, we seem to have overtaken the UK and much of Germany in that respect. I view Spain as being exceptional in Southern Europe for it's attitude towards transport, energy and waste management.

It's perplexing that that our national planning authority doesn't understand modal shift, traffic evaporation etc. But like many institutions in Ireland, they are often stuffed with dinosaurs, hence my 15 year view. In the modern world 15 years = a lot of change. 100 years ago that was not the case. We rarely want to be the first country to so something 'radical'. We'll wait until Oslo, Copenhagen and Amsterdam are completely car-free before we'll put even modest restrictions on cars.

cgcsb

Patww79 wrote: »

The huggers need to accept that buses and bikes aren't always practical.

The petrol heads need to accept there is no space for them, and nobody wants to get cancer from your engine, thanks.

cgcsb

Patww79 wrote: »

some nonsense about pollution and the environment?

ya lost me there

cgcsb

blanch152 wrote: »

Public transport needs to be improved and facilitated, and if cars need to be banned to achieve that, I am all for it.

Bicycles are different, they are not an all-year round option for commuting in Ireland. In winter, whether it is storms or snow, or just the darker mornings and nights, commuting by bicycle drops. For that reason, we shouldn't be working to facilitate bicycles in the same way as buses, Luas or trains.

Maybe cycling wouldn't decrease in winter time if there was actual cycling infrastructure that made it safe in all conditions?

Go to Stockholm, where they have real winters, dark and snowy.

In Dublin cycling is mostly the preserve of Irish males in their 20s and 30s because everyone else is petrified. I cycle to work throughout winter, but If I was not in the above mentioned demographic, I doubt I would.

cgcsb

blanch152 wrote: »

#

Not a chance. Try getting a bus to Blanchardstown from Blackhall Place any evening. Watch them pass by, full up to the gills.

a capacity issue, which of course is solved by removing road space from cars and giving it to buses, you can't have one without the other.

cgcsb

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Lights sort the darker nights and mornings. Snow is indeed a problem, but an extremely rare one. Storms too.

Cycling is a very practical solution to commuting in Dublin all year round for many people.

It's ideal really, I've cycled in Bilbao/San Sebastian, considered to be the mild weathered part of Spain and was absolutely KILLED with the heat. Never again. Dublin has a close to ideal climate for it. Rain is rare and light, temperatures are moderate throughout the seasons, light breezes are always nice.

cgcsb

jimwallace197 wrote: »

I would have no problem in using public transport more if it was anyway suitable.

And as soon as road space is taken from cars and given to buses cyclists and pedestrians, that will change.

jimwallace197 wrote: »

We all know where the motortax goes in this country already so why would that change if they introduced congestion charges.

Already there is huge mismanagement of our finances through sheer incompetence & corruption so why do you think that would change for this.

Not sure where you're going with this??

cgcsb

blanch152 wrote: »

Don't disagree that this is true most of the time, the problem is that cycling stops for six or more weeks in the winter, and if commuting is built around cycling, that causes a massive problem.

It doesn't stop though, that's fiction. Numbers reduce. The reduction is largely due to the weather having a negative impact on crap infrastructure. Same problems don't come up in Stockholm where they have an actual winter.

Even if your point were true, having 40% or so cycling to work 46 weeks of the year would be a holy grail accomplishment.

blanch152 wrote: »

For me, I am not that interested in sorting the commuting cyclist infrastructure, I am much more interested in sorting the public transport infrastructure which should take priority over cycling.

You might not be, but given that the majority of commutes are under 10km, policy certainly is/should be.

[Deleted User]

cgcsb wrote: »

In Dublin cycling is mostly the preserve of Irish males in their 20s and 30s because everyone else is petrified.

While spending time 'on the line' with IBikeDublin over the past year, I was pleasantly surprised to see that was not generally the case. There was a very wide mix of gender, ages, ethnicity.

CatInABox wrote: »

No big projects, but they are all in planning right now.

Maybe, but surely this could have been predicted and avoided. There should be a pipeline of projects, with some 'shovel-ready' in any particular year.

pigtown

CatInABox wrote: »

With College Green Plaza being rejected for incredibly old fashioned ideas, such as a misinterpretation of Traffic Evaporation and getting Induced Demand completely wrong, I wonder is there scope to appeal ABP decision, and if that's rejected, is there scope for bringing it into the courts system?

I mean seriously, rejecting it because there no plans for more "road space". I fell off my chair when I read that, and I'm still falling.

I thought the major issue was the huge increase of people waiting at relocated busstops on the already narrow congested footpaths on the quays? That's a legitimate refusal issue in my opinion as it would greatly impact on pedestrian safety and thus cyclist and driver safety too.

If there was a plan to address this in tandem then I'm sure ABP would've had a different opinion.

CatInABox

pigtown wrote: »

I thought the major issue was the huge increase of people waiting at relocated busstops on the already narrow congested footpaths on the quays? That's a legitimate refusal issue in my opinion as it would greatly impact on pedestrian safety and thus cyclist and driver safety too.

If there was a plan to address this in tandem then I'm sure ABP would've had a different opinion.

It was the second of two main reasons mentioned, but the steps included to mitigate the increase in passengers were dismissed by ABP as "not assessed".

Of course, it seems like it wouldn't have mattered anyway, as the main reason that it was rejected was the traffic is would cause outside the college green area, with the report stating that "significant shortcomings have been identified with the modelling exercise". Of course, those "significant shortcomings" were identified by a taking a single trip and comparing it to the average built up over months of journeys used in the model. The underlying report, Traffic and Transportation Assessment, is chock full of errors like that, including some 1970s thinking around road space.

green shoots

The city centre is way too car orientated. I am regularly on lower baggot st during the day. The part around where Merrion St meets lower baggot st is barely 4 foot wide in parts and it leads to cramming on the footpath and buses and trucks turning corners while nearly crushing pedestrians. Meanwhile there are 2 lanes of traffic flying down in one direction.
Why can't pedestrians and bikes be prioritised here? One lane is surely enough, and the paths can be widened.

cgcsb

The baggot st situation is really grotesque. DCC needs to either widen the footpath there or close down those cafes/restaurants, it is not safe. One bus lane and one cycle lane is sufficient. Yet the whole thing is for cars and pedestrians have to dodge the trucks.

green shoots

cgcsb wrote: »

The baggot st situation is really grotesque. DCC needs to either widen the footpath there or close down those cafes/restaurants, it is not safe. One bus lane and one cycle lane is sufficient. Yet the whole thing is for cars and pedestrians have to dodge the trucks.

It's really bad. Having cars speeding through that street where people are dodging each other on the cramped footpath isn't going to end well. Dame St too. Way too small for pedestrians. This city and government are hopeless.

MJohnston

"Why walkable cities are good for the economy, according to a city planner"

"People spend more money when cities are less vehicle-oriented."

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/the-goods/2018/10/26/18025000/walkable-city-walk-score-economy?__twitter_impression=true

SeanW

cgcsb wrote: »

And as soon as road space is taken from cars and given to buses cyclists and pedestrians, that will change.

Not sure where you're going with this??

Isn't there a rule against making like 10 posts in a row or something? At any rate, you and green_shoots made a few of the same points so I will deal with them together.

green shoots wrote: »

The city centre is way too car orientated. I am regularly on lower baggot st during the day. The part around where Merrion St meets lower baggot st is barely 4 foot wide in parts and it leads to cramming on the footpath and buses and trucks turning corners while nearly crushing pedestrians. Meanwhile there are 2 lanes of traffic flying down in one direction.
Why can't pedestrians and bikes be prioritised here? One lane is surely enough, and the paths can be widened.

I take it you are both cyclists? Telling everyone to "get on your bike" isn't a solution to traffic problems and slow commutes. It never has been, anywhere and it never will be. Even in those uber-progressive cities referenced elsewhere, adding provisions for cyclists and removing car access is only part of the solution.

Dublin has been removing space from people who drive. Not, perhaps as much as some might like but it has been happening, yet continuously everything gets slower and everyone's commute gets longer. Why?

All of the point I've raised above are inter-related. Most European capital cities already have extensive rail-based public transport. In both Munich and Berlin for example, they have a central collector arteries for trains from all over the region to run through the city centre and continue out to suburbs on the other side of town. Berlin's version is overground, and Munich built the "Stammstrecke" in the 1970s and is now adding a second to compliment the first. London is building its city "Crossrail" line. Irish Rail proposed the Dart Underground to match, but that is not even on the agenda until at least 2028. That means we'll be lucky to see the Dublin Crossrail/Stammstrecke this side of 2040. All of the cities mentioned here already have extensive Metro systems and some also have an extensive network of trams. None, only Dublin, use trams for long distance travel (e.g Brides Glen to Broadstone or Tallaght to the city centre. Anywhere else, such flows would be accommodated by a rapid transit system with trams limited to the CC and inner urban core areas (e.g. inside the M50 only). Yet even the proposed Metro will basically be a tram in Swords ...

There is not just a deficit of public transport options, but also an accommodation crisis causing many people to have to commute longer from places where only cars are an option.

The person who drives is not the cause of any of this. Trying to "encourage" a person to leave the car at home won't help if there isn't for example a metro, regional rapid transit or fast bus to replace it. And that can't be fixed without capital expenditure.

Edit: Agreed about the Baggot St. mess, the one way part of it is lethal. It strikes me that the driving lanes are much wider than they need to be though ...

MJohnston

SeanW wrote: »

Dublin has been removing space from people who drive. Not, perhaps as much as some might like but it has been happening, yet continuously everything gets slower and everyone's commute gets longer. Why?

Because they half-assed it. They added a bus lane on the Quays, but they made it complex and didn't bother accounting for private vehicles turning across the bus lanes, nor for the fact that the previously existing bus lane was mostly used for stops, nor for the fact that the buses were still blocked by private vehicles on streets leading off of the Quays, nor for the fact that the Luas Cross City would be opening.

What needed to happen was what was originally proposed, and will continue to become more and more necessary. One big mistake DCC made was calling it the "Liffey Cycle Route" when it was far more important for buses.

[Deleted User]

SeanW wrote: »

Isn't there a rule against making like 10 posts in a row or something? At any rate, you and green_shoots made a few of the same points so I will deal with them together.

I take it you are both cyclists? Telling everyone to "get on your bike" isn't a solution to traffic problems and slow commutes. It never has been, anywhere and it never will be. Even in those uber-progressive cities referenced elsewhere, adding provisions for cyclists and removing car access is only part of the solution.

Dublin has been removing space from people who drive. Not, perhaps as much as some might like but it has been happening, yet continuously everything gets slower and everyone's commute gets longer. Why?

All of the point I've raised above are inter-related. Most European capital cities already have extensive rail-based public transport. In both Munich and Berlin for example, they have a central collector arteries for trains from all over the region to run through the city centre and continue out to suburbs on the other side of town. Berlin's version is overground, and Munich built the "Stammstrecke" in the 1970s and is now adding a second to compliment the first. London is building its city "Crossrail" line. Irish Rail proposed the Dart Underground to match, but that is not even on the agenda until at least 2028. That means we'll be lucky to see the Dublin Crossrail/Stammstrecke this side of 2040. All of the cities mentioned here already have extensive Metro systems and some also have an extensive network of trams. None, only Dublin, use trams for long distance travel (e.g Brides Glen to Broadstone or Tallaght to the city centre. Anywhere else, such flows would be accommodated by a rapid transit system with trams limited to the CC and inner urban core areas (e.g. inside the M50 only). Yet even the proposed Metro will basically be a tram in Swords ...

There is not just a deficit of public transport options, but also an accommodation crisis causing many people to have to commute longer from places where only cars are an option.

The person who drives is not the cause of any of this. Trying to "encourage" a person to leave the car at home won't help if there isn't for example a metro, regional rapid transit or fast bus to replace it. And that can't be fixed without capital expenditure.

Edit: Agreed about the Baggot St. mess, the one way part of it is lethal. It strikes me that the driving lanes are much wider than they need to be though ...

While there is some truth in some of what you say about transport demands, we are still, as a society, hopelessly addicted to car travel.

Half of travellers are using cars for journeys under 2km. You'd probably be quicker walking, and you'd definitely be quicker cycling.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-than-half-of-travellers-use-cars-for-journeys-under-2km-1.2303451

green shoots

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

While there is some truth in some of what you say about transport demands, we are still, as a society, hopelessly addicted to car travel.

Half of travellers are using cars for journeys under 2km. You'd probably be quicker walking, and you'd definitely be quicker cycling.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-than-half-of-travellers-use-cars-for-journeys-under-2km-1.2303451

And to make matters worse they're usually driving filthy polluting diesel Ford Transits and the likes.

P_1

SeanW wrote: »

Isn't there a rule against making like 10 posts in a row or something? At any rate, you and green_shoots made a few of the same points so I will deal with them together.

I take it you are both cyclists? Telling everyone to "get on your bike" isn't a solution to traffic problems and slow commutes. It never has been, anywhere and it never will be. Even in those uber-progressive cities referenced elsewhere, adding provisions for cyclists and removing car access is only part of the solution.

Dublin has been removing space from people who drive. Not, perhaps as much as some might like but it has been happening, yet continuously everything gets slower and everyone's commute gets longer. Why?

All of the point I've raised above are inter-related. Most European capital cities already have extensive rail-based public transport. In both Munich and Berlin for example, they have a central collector arteries for trains from all over the region to run through the city centre and continue out to suburbs on the other side of town. Berlin's version is overground, and Munich built the "Stammstrecke" in the 1970s and is now adding a second to compliment the first. London is building its city "Crossrail" line. Irish Rail proposed the Dart Underground to match, but that is not even on the agenda until at least 2028. That means we'll be lucky to see the Dublin Crossrail/Stammstrecke this side of 2040. All of the cities mentioned here already have extensive Metro systems and some also have an extensive network of trams. None, only Dublin, use trams for long distance travel (e.g Brides Glen to Broadstone or Tallaght to the city centre. Anywhere else, such flows would be accommodated by a rapid transit system with trams limited to the CC and inner urban core areas (e.g. inside the M50 only). Yet even the proposed Metro will basically be a tram in Swords ...

There is not just a deficit of public transport options, but also an accommodation crisis causing many people to have to commute longer from places where only cars are an option.

The person who drives is not the cause of any of this. Trying to "encourage" a person to leave the car at home won't help if there isn't for example a metro, regional rapid transit or fast bus to replace it. And that can't be fixed without capital expenditure.

Edit: Agreed about the Baggot St. mess, the one way part of it is lethal. It strikes me that the driving lanes are much wider than they need to be though ...

You fix this by building massive car parks near every M50 junction. Then you put a bus service in place where a bus leaves this carpark going to the city center at 5 minute frequencies. Every road going from the M50 to town has a bus lane so the journey into town from the carpark should take no more than 15 minutes Implement a toll for using using the quays at rush hour and ringfence all funds raised from this toll to be spent only on the bus infrastructure going from the car parks to the city center.

All busses go to the coach park beside Docklands train station and all busses leave from it in the evening rush hour.

SeanW

I can tell you from first hand experience that more re-configuration of the surface area will not work. If you have to commute by bus from anywhere North of the Liffey to the Southern City Centre, clearing the D'Olier/Westmoreland Street mess will add at least half an hour to your journey. And it has been getting worse over the years. This despite the fact that there is a "bus gate" and that cars are prohibited from key parts of the area in peak times.

Why might this be? Could it be that a new tram line (while welcome, but it should have been the Metro and underground) took up half the road space and left all the buses, cyclists etc. fighting over what was left?

Reconfiguring the surface streets without major capital expenditure will accomplish very little at this point. In fact, as it did around college green, it might make everything worse. The person who drives a car is not the problem here, or at the very least not the root problem. The lack of rapid transport infrastructure (DARTs, Metro etc) is.

P_1

SeanW wrote: »

I can tell you from first hand experience that more re-configuration of the surface area will not work. If you have to commute by bus from anywhere North of the Liffey to the Southern City Centre, clearing the D'Olier/Westmoreland Street mess will add at least half an hour to your journey. And it has been getting worse over the years. This despite the fact that there is a "bus gate" and that cars are prohibited from key parts of the area in peak times.

Why might this be? Could it be that a new tram line (while welcome, but it should have been the Metro and underground) took up half the road space and left all the buses, cyclists etc. fighting over what was left?

Reconfiguring the surface streets without major capital expenditure will accomplish very little at this point. In fact, as it did around college green, it might make everything worse. The person who drives a car is not the problem here, or at the very least not the root problem. The lack of rapid transport infrastructure (DARTs, Metro etc) is.

True. In hindsight the luas should either have gone through Trinity or underground