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

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

See how he sprung his trap to seed a piece of fancy..."Capacity" mentioned in thread and looking for a follow up post to give an excuse to post a flight of fancy presented as hard facts not lived anywhere outside of Utopia.

I mention roads, intelligent traffic management solutions/traffic lights and poster suggests I am talking only about cars as though buses, shared cars, mopeds, bikes don't get benefit from them. If you want a shared car you go to an underground car park where I live. buses get priority on roads through traffic management systems and controlled lights.

I'm being lectured to a lot by people who don't seem to have seen much of the world and alternate stategies used elsewhere.

Deleted User wrote: »

You are somewhat correct but you have missed the point. You are thinking of capacity in terms of cars only. You need to adjust your thinking to look at capacity in terms of the number of people.

There is a finite capacity of a thoroughfare for each mode of transport, which is well illustrated through the following graphic

Now a capacity of 2k for cars only works fine when you have a small population, however as your population increases the capacity is reached and maintained for longer and longer periods (rush hours).

So how do you achieve the maximum throughput on an hourly basis.

You recommend buses sharing the same space as cars, however even back as far as the 1990's we knew that didnt work and bus only lanes started to be rolled out as buses were not an attractive option prior. So a bus lane is needed in each direction to achieve additional capacity gains

Next looking at cycling, e-scooters etc, you also need safe & protected infrastructure for those too, so we're at adding additional capacity through installing the right kind of infrastructure for these modes too. Without this infrastructure you can only expect the most brave and fearless to use these modes as they would have to mix with motor traffic.

Now continue along this thoroughfare towards the city center. As you get closer and closer, the space becomes more and more limited. How do you increase capacity on routes where it is not possible to expand either side? The answer is you begin to remove the least efficient mode or at the very least you drastically reduce its priority and access to make other modes more attractive.

This is nothing new and has been and is being done in cities and towns all over the world.

This change is best illustrated below and is driven by efficiency, cost & sustainability. On the flip side, the argument for unrestricted car access is driven by emotion only. There is no logical argument to be made, which stands up to scrutiny, for continued unrestricted access for the car in our towns and cities.

Interesting. They do be drawing some pretty graphs. Works well on paper I suppose.

Deleted User wrote: »

I do. There is a finite capacity on every pipe/road/wire where factors remain fixed at specific values but when alternate strategies are employed then the capacity can increase to a certain extent or environment is changed so that capacity is not reached due to demand being reduced e.g. a re-routing of a bus service, placement of shared bike locations or even eliminating the need for stations, introduction of elektroscooters and legislation for same, mopeds having basically near zero running costs due to no tax and insurance costing only 40 euro per year, resurfacing of shared pavement, tactically positioned new car parks, intelligent traffic lights and road management systems, establishing new roads through gardens, tunnels where previously there were none, etc... all of which I can point to in the locality to ensure that the city keeps moving, remains vibrant and is viewed as a place people actually want to live in and visit.

You are somewhat correct but you have missed the point. You are thinking of capacity in terms of cars only. You need to adjust your thinking to look at capacity in terms of the number of people.

There is a finite capacity of a thoroughfare for each mode of transport, which is well illustrated through the following graphic

Now a capacity of 2k for cars only works fine when you have a small population, however as your population increases the capacity is reached and maintained for longer and longer periods (rush hours).

So how do you achieve the maximum throughput on an hourly basis.

You recommend buses sharing the same space as cars, however even back as far as the 1990's we knew that didnt work and bus only lanes started to be rolled out as buses were not an attractive option prior. So a bus lane is needed in each direction to achieve additional capacity gains

Next looking at cycling, e-scooters etc, you also need safe & protected infrastructure for those too, so we're at adding additional capacity through installing the right kind of infrastructure for these modes too. Without this infrastructure you can only expect the most brave and fearless to use these modes as they would have to mix with motor traffic.

Now continue along this thoroughfare towards the city center. As you get closer and closer, the space becomes more and more limited. How do you increase capacity on routes where it is not possible to expand either side? The answer is you begin to remove the least efficient mode or at the very least you drastically reduce its priority and access to make other modes more attractive.

This is nothing new and has been and is being done in cities and towns all over the world.

This change is best illustrated below and is driven by efficiency, cost & sustainability. On the flip side, the argument for unrestricted car access is driven by emotion only. There is no logical argument to be made, which stands up to scrutiny, for continued unrestricted access for the car in our towns and cities.

MJohnston wrote: »

Anyway, fresh page, fresh start? Interesting to note that basically all of the likely winners in Dublin Bay South are in favour of increasing pedestrian and cycling provision in the city:
https://www.dublincommuters.ie/post/2021-dublin-bay-south-by-election-candidate-survey

Geoghegan didn't respond to the survey, but he's at least paid lip-service to the idea with his "15 minute city" lark

Nobody but the most fringe these days is officially 'against' more walking and cycling provision, the devil is very much in the detail. Geoghegan, Conroy, even Mannix 'Anti-Cycling' Flynn, all claim to be in favour of increased pedestrianisation and cycling. but it has to be done 'in the right way' with 'proper' consultation (With what that means being wildly different from the standard process for anything else and far beyond any reasonable consultative process)

As a rule of thumb if they aren't in favour of the strand road trial, but instead the original 'boardwalk' concept, then they are effectively anti-cycling, as councillors they should know that that would take at least 4 years to go through planning and require an EIS in a protected biosphere, which will ask if they have tried all other options before they try this, which would require them to run something like the strand road trial anyway...

Deleted User wrote: »

easy to say that from a distance. Germans are not as passive as Irish and would hang a Bürgermeister who made their daily lives intolerable.

Most germans are urban dwellers and want safe cycling and walking.

Deleted User wrote: »

concrete movable barriers, temporary traffic lights and yellow tape markings are not permanent fixtures so I don't see that bike lane being permanent in its current form. having cycled that route before the barriers were introduced that the pavement while adequate for walking along was not satisfactory for cyclists although cyclists were expected to share it with pedestrians.

Missing my point, things you are seeing as 'fine' to provide cyclists with which, according to you 'don't impact on motorists' are here seen as an absolute assault on motorists, we have just witnessed a judicial hearing over a TRIAL cycle lane that received two public consultations and a public forum before implementation, even though legally the council could have simply put it down on the road without any consultations whatsoever same as relining the road or anything.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure you understand the word "capacity"

I do. There is a finite capacity on every pipe/road/wire where factors remain fixed at specific values but when alternate strategies are employed then the capacity can increase to a certain extent or environment is changed so that capacity is not reached due to demand being reduced e.g. a re-routing of a bus service, placement of shared bike locations or even eliminating the need for stations, introduction of elektroscooters and legislation for same, mopeds having basically near zero running costs due to no tax and insurance costing only 40 euro per year, resurfacing of shared pavement, tactically positioned new car parks, intelligent traffic lights and road management systems, establishing new roads through gardens, tunnels where previously there were none, etc... all of which I can point to in the locality to ensure that the city keeps moving, remains vibrant and is viewed as a place people actually want to live in and visit.

Anyway, fresh page, fresh start? Interesting to note that basically all of the likely winners in Dublin Bay South are in favour of increasing pedestrian and cycling provision in the city:
https://www.dublincommuters.ie/post/2021-dublin-bay-south-by-election-candidate-survey

Geoghegan didn't respond to the survey, but he's at least paid lip-service to the idea with his "15 minute city" lark

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Capacity isn't reached because in addition to easing access with private transportation other transport solutions are avaiable while not being at the expense of access such as a well run public bike schemes, privately owned bikes, blanket saturation of e-scooters, public buses sharing the same road space as cars, trams sharing some of the road space with cars and an integrated transport system which means that many people in edge case scenarios don't need to consider acquiring a car...all done without banning cars in the city and much higher population densities than seen in most of D1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,etc..

I'm not sure you understand the word "capacity"

riddlinrussell wrote: »

You seem to have a total disconnect between the things you are saying are good for the city, eg you don't seem to have an issue with this cycle lane becoming permanent, while also thinking that it being added wouldn't be 'at the expense of motorists' that may be the way things are considered in Germany, but in Ireland taking a lane from private cars to give to cyclists would be seen as exactly that.

concrete movable barriers, temporary traffic lights and yellow tape markings are not permanent fixtures so I don't see that bike lane being permanent in its current form. having cycled that route before the barriers were introduced that the pavement while adequate for walking along was not satisfactory for cyclists although cyclists were expected to share it with pedestrians.

cgcsb wrote: »

There are a significant network of cycle lanes in Munich, Nurnburg and Stuttgart and those cities are now following a policy, similar to Dublin in replacing space for cars with sustainable modes. Sorry if you don't like that, but that's what way those cities are going.

easy to say that from a distance. Germans are not as passive as Irish and would hang a Bürgermeister who made their daily lives intolerable.

Deleted User wrote: »

I retracted nothing. Bus and Cycle lanes are few and far between. Cyclists generally share broad pavements with pedestrians. They've closed a lane to make a temporary 4km bike lane out to a suburb here but that is a temporary measure to see if they can induce some bike traffic but if it does work they'll put in something more permanent which isn't at the expense of motorists. Frankly I don't see it being a success as on that route any cyclist would put their bike on the commuter train and travel in at 100kmph then cycle from one of the city stations.
If cyclists want to venture on to the roads they can and if motorists don't give them the 2 metres distance they are allowed the motorist picks up a fine. If the cyclist doesn't obey the rules of the road they'll be picking up fines too.
You apply the laws that are there before you ban a vital element of the transport system which is the privately owned vehicle.

You seem to have a total disconnect between the things you are saying are good for the city, eg you don't seem to have an issue with this cycle lane becoming permanent, while also thinking that it being added wouldn't be 'at the expense of motorists' that may be the way things are considered in Germany, but in Ireland taking a lane from private cars to give to cyclists would be seen as exactly that.

You also get to enjoy the German police force actually applying the laws around traffic. The reason we are looking for alternative 'hard' solutions is because the Gardai are at best ineffective and at worst actively harmful in applying traffic laws, so much so that the National Transport Authority has spent at least 10 years begging to be given permission to introduce traffic cameras, as the only authorised body has absolutely abdicated its responsibility in that regard. The fact is that's not going to change any time soon, so you cant apply the same criteria you would in an efficiently policed German city.

Deleted User wrote: »

I retracted nothing. Bus and Cycle lanes are few and far between. Cyclists generally share broad pavements with pedestrians. They've closed a lane to make a temporary 4km bike lane out to a suburb here but that is a temporary measure to see if they can induce some bike traffic but if it does work they'll put in something more permanent which isn't at the expense of motorists. Frankly I don't see it being a success as on that route any cyclist would put their bike on the commuter train and travel in at 100kmph then cycle from one of the city stations.
If cyclists want to venture on to the roads they can and if motorists don't give them the 2 metres distance they are allowed the motorist picks up a fine. If the cyclist doesn't obey the rules of the road they'll be picking up fines too.
You apply the laws that are there before you ban a vital element of the transport system which is the privately owned vehicle.

There are a significant network of cycle lanes in Munich, Nurnburg and Stuttgart and those cities are now following a policy, similar to Dublin in replacing space for cars with sustainable modes. Sorry if you don't like that, but that's what way those cities are going.

cgcsb wrote: »

I'm glad you retracted your statement about buses and bikes simply sharing space with cars, which is not the case in Nurnberg, Munich or Stuttgart. All of which have networks of bus and cycle lanes.

I retracted nothing. Bus and Cycle lanes are few and far between. Cyclists generally share broad pavements with pedestrians. They've closed a lane to make a temporary 4km bike lane out to a suburb here but that is a temporary measure to see if they can induce some bike traffic but if it does work they'll put in something more permanent which isn't at the expense of motorists. Frankly I don't see it being a success as on that route any cyclist would put their bike on the commuter train and travel in at 100kmph then cycle from one of the city stations.
If cyclists want to venture on to the roads they can and if motorists don't give them the 2 metres distance they are allowed the motorist picks up a fine. If the cyclist doesn't obey the rules of the road they'll be picking up fines too.
You apply the laws that are there before you ban a vital element of the transport system which is the privately owned vehicle.

Cars are allowed park partially on footpaths overnight but it is policied as with every other element of German life.

Deleted User wrote: »

My city in southern Germany is considerably older and more tightly packed than Dublin but very progressive with regard to implementation of solutions to transportation than Dublin.

Yeah I seen this in Nurnberg, they've the car parks on the edge of a completely pedestrianised core and there's some car parks around the inner ring road, which we don't really have an equivalent of here and never will.

West Germany had the Marshal plan in the mid 20th century. The USA paid them to build big roads around the cities. This never happened in Ireland although we did have a good stab at doing same to a few of our city centre streets, destroying much of them in the process. Thankfully this Americanisation policy was abandoned by the 1990s.

I'm glad you retracted your statement about buses and bikes simply sharing space with cars, which is not the case in Nurnberg, Munich or Stuttgart. All of which have networks of bus and cycle lanes.

In Dublin's case improving transport means a re-allocation of road space from car to sustainable mode and this is continuing apace as we've seen recently on the South quays. The removal of multi lane roads is the future.

Thelonious Monk

Deleted User wrote: »

My city in southern Germany is considerably older and more tightly packed than Dublin but very progressive with regard to implementation of solutions to transportation than Dublin.

You're in Germany, different kettle of fish. Every footpath in Dublin is covered in illegally parked cars that often push the old and disabled out onto the road among traffic, it is endemic.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did the bus lanes and tram lanes come out of thin air?

They didn't come out of the activism of vested interest groups with a pathological hatred of private transport.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But he could cycle fast enough for you to be worried about his speed?

keep up to date. Last week is more than just saturday and with a 20% gradient gaining speed is not the problem.

cgcsb wrote: »

But in Dublin's case that space generally isn't available so our only option is to re-allocate space from cars(the least efficient road user) to public transport (a much more efficient road user) and pedestrians and cyclists, who are even mroe efficient again.

Where is this city you are talking about anyway?

My city in southern Germany is considerably older and more tightly packed than Dublin but very progressive with regard to implementation of solutions to transportation than Dublin.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Would you like me to produce details of all the many studies showing the health benefits of cycling?

And as for injuries, wait till you hear about cars. Vastly more people are killed and injured in cars than on bikes.

Vastly more, pro-rated?? How current are your statistics. It is very hard to kill yourself in a modern car.

Please show me the sections in those studies where they dealt with injuries from falling off bikes. e-bikes have filled the emergency rooms in recent years with old people who can't stay upright on them. This neighbour also messed up his wrist last year.

Deleted User wrote: »

The bus lanes and tram lines are not there at the expense of other road users which is the recurring theme throughout this thread; ban those nasty cars.

But in Dublin's case that space generally isn't available so our only option is to re-allocate space from cars(the least efficient road user) to public transport (a much more efficient road user) and pedestrians and cyclists, who are even mroe efficient again.

Where is this city you are talking about anyway?

Deleted User wrote: »

On Saturday he could barely put one foot in front of the other.

But he could cycle fast enough for you to be worried about his speed?

Deleted User wrote: »

The bus lanes and tram lines are not there at the expense of other road users which is the recurring theme throughout this thread; ban those nasty cars.

Did the bus lanes and tram lanes come out of thin air?

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know about that but where I am the cars stay off the pavements and pedestrianized streets.

I take it you're not in Dublin then?

https://twitter.com/dublinblockers/media

or in Dublin 14?

https://twitter.com/Dub14Blockers/media

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

You can walk and cycle with a pacemaker.

On Saturday he could barely put one foot in front of the other.

Deleted User wrote: »

How little you know. Just last week I had to warn his wife that I encountered him on the hill leading from his house and if he didn't slow down he'd kill himself when he falls off his bike at speed. If he had fallen off there where I met him he'd probably have come to a half somewhere close to the memorial for another cyclist who split his head open after coming off his bike racing down that slope.
Bikes are great until they're not so great.

Would you like me to produce details of all the many studies showing the health benefits of cycling?

And as for injuries, wait till you hear about cars. Vastly more people are killed and injured in cars than on bikes.

cgcsb wrote: »

Right, so not what you said at all.

The bus lanes and tram lines are not there at the expense of other road users which is the recurring theme throughout this thread; ban those nasty cars.

Podge_irl wrote: »

Its significantly harder for older and disabled people to navigate a city when it is full of cars.

I don't know about that but where I am the cars stay off the pavements and pedestrianized streets.

Deleted User wrote: »

No bus lanes around my way except for one which runs in the middle of the road and changes direction of travel based on rush hour traffic flows or other tram lines which are shared with buses but not cars.

Right, so not what you said at all, in fact you have a high quality, near BRT standard system with centre road running.