Velib like bicycle rental kiosks are being constructed in Dublin

kona wrote: »

give me one point how the people of DCC will benefit more.

well thats simple
1) the bikes are in DCC's area, so clearly they stand to benefit more than people who don't have bikes in their area.


Whether it was value for money or not is beside the point.....

Jawgap wrote: »

Fewer cars on the road (a small amount anyway), few more seats available on DARTS, LUAS's and buses, easier to move around town (using the bikes).......and more people to race against on your bike:)

Have you read how the thing works? No chance is this going to reduce Traffic on DARTs, Busses or cars.

If anything these **** bikes will turn people off cycling.

Stark wrote: »

Considering the bikes are currently evenly dispersed between North and South of the Liffey, I think what you're arguing for is having all the bikes on the southside, yet keeping the bike stands where they are.

I dont understand?

S.side has 10% more bike stands;)

Jawgap wrote: »

I've read it and I can see people using them for short hops around the city as potential alternatives to taxis or walking or even the LUAS or DART. I don't think the effect will be huge but there will be an effect.

Aslo, I think they'll encourage cycling. More bikes mean more visibility mean people may perceive cycling as being safer. Although I would concede that if a tourists cycles under a LUAS all that good work may be undone.

The main problem with getting people to cycle in dublin is safety. Its said to me everyday by people.

While the idea is theoretically good, in practice i really dont think it will work.

Trust me this is going to go like paris.

kona wrote: »

Rubbish, Its dublin city centre, Everybody is going to benefit.

Everybody? thats the lovely view the rest of the country loves! :rolleyes:

If it was exclusive to DCC residents then you could claim its benefitial to DCC residents.

Thats like saying we shouldn't be allowed use the tube in london because we arn't from london? you make absolutely no sense....

No mate value for money IS the point.

No thats an entirely seperate debate ,if should have been done at all or how much space they got. This one, which you've been ranting about is to do with the distribution of the sign's and bikes.

TinyExplosions wrote: »

Fine really, the bike stands are where they'll be used the most, the ads are where they'll be seen the most, that's just life.

I don't think there's any conspiracy with respect to NS and SS, except in your head (or possibly cos you live near an advertising sign)

I dont think its a conspiracy but, You have to admit, its much nicer to cycle and drive on the S.side, and that DCC has been ripped. Given the choice would you rather

1)velib

2) Selling the ad space, getting millions and reinvesting it into cycling infrastructure and education?


I have to say I think number 2 is more benefitial, to DCC residents.

kona wrote: »

You have to admit, its much nicer to cycle and drive on the S.side

Now now, remember S. side , N. Side, Left Side, just not the middle. North side is really fingal or somewhere...all DCC is the middle. And its much nicer to cycle anywhere than a city centre normally?

kona wrote: »

I dont think its a conspiracy but, You have to admit, its much nicer to cycle and drive on the S.side, and that DCC has been ripped. Given the choice would you rather

1)velib

2) Selling the ad space, getting millions and reinvesting it into cycling infrastructure and education?


I have to say I think number 2 is more benefitial, to DCC residents.

I live on the SS, but spend more time cycling NS (in the DCC area anyway).

The choices you suggest are an entirely different argument, that I don't think anyone would really argue with, but that's not what you've been arguing up until now. You've been cribbing about the placement of the bike racks and advertising hoardings and how it's terribly unfair and descriminatory to N.Siders, and we've been saying that it's not as unbalanced as you claim.

2 very different arguments mate. We've got the system we have, and there's nothing we can do about it

kona wrote: »

because the majority of users will be the people of dublin. Thats my argument, the ads should be spread out evenly.

Um just as much as the majority of users will be from lenister, your picking arbitary lines as to who should have to contribute. Plenty of people commute into the city from as far away as portlaoise.... Dublin was split into a few seperate regions which act independently. To regroup them and even presume its the fairest grouping for these purposes seems flawed...........

Maybe if you did a study of commuter habbits to determine who makes the majority of inner city users and then decided those should be the people who see the signs. But then you'll need a way for them to all see the signs so better put them the one place you know they'll all be, the city centre!

kona wrote: »

Its for dublin, hence when i say everybody it refers to dublin, becasue thats what the scheme is for.

No its for users of the city centre, urban sprawl means dublin for those purposes is largely meaningless...

London tube was built by the Victorians For the people of London? correct?
Did they go to say manchester and sell assets there which would cause people to get pissed off for the benefit of London?

Huh? it was built for the people of london to use, much as DCC isn't putting those bikes in for the people of sligo.



Ive ranted about alot of aspects:p the distributions is just where the thread has gone.[/QUOTE]

Nietzschean wrote: »

Um just as much as the majority of users will be from lenister, your picking arbitary lines as to who should have to contribute. Plenty of people commute into the city from as far away as portlaoise.... Dublin was split into a few seperate regions which act independently. To regroup them and even presume its the fairest grouping for these purposes seems flawed...........

Maybe if you did a study of commuter habbits to determine who makes the majority of inner city users and then decided those should be the people who see the signs. But then you'll need a way for them to all see the signs so better put them the one place you know they'll all be, the city centre!

Okay your talking ****, leinster? where the hell did that come from,

IM TALKING ABOUT DUBLIN

---

>Im shouting:pac::P

All the signs are not in the city centre.

kona wrote: »

2) Selling the ad space, getting millions and reinvesting it into cycling infrastructure and education?

I would actually tend to agree that this would seem to make more sense all right, don't see any particular reason the two should be connected (I know it is so in most other cities.) Why not sell the ad space at market rates and then put out a tender for someone to run the bike scheme? But we have what we have and the bike part will be a success.

I don't care. I just want to know what he wants us to do about it?

I despise the advertising but don't give a **** about the location or any geographical bias. I am interested in lending him a hand if he wants to do something about it. I'm just wondering what.