Cities around the world that are reducing car access

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The rate at which cars can be towed is very low considering the time required to hook up the car, bring it to a suitable location and unhook it. You'd need a large number of tow vehicles in operation which would be a significant cost. There is also the issue that some vehicles can't be towed like HGVs. Simply ticketing vehicles would enable maximum productivity from enforcement staff which will see a far greater proportion of offenders punished. You could cut the cost of clamps, and potentially clamping vehicles too, allowing more staff within the same budget. The greater the chance of being caught, the less people who will park illegally.

We should be looking at ways of collecting fines from those who won't pay themselves, getting Revenue involved is probably the most effective way. Id also look at preventing people from taxing the car if there is an outstanding fine, thereby creating more trouble and greater cost and punishment for the offender would also help. I suggested photos of the offending car as a method of preventing frivolous appeals from the offender.

Overstaying parking limits, ticket, fine.

But obstructing a footpath, cycle lane, bus lane, bus stop loading bay etc. - towing is the best option, to remove the obstruction ASAP.

Heavy fines needed even for ticketing IMO. Currently it's something pathetic like 40 euro for blocking a cycle lane. Ridiculous.

I once had a driver tell me, absolutely delighted with himself, that he parks in bike lanes as it works out cheaper as he's very rarely caught anyway, and had them thrown out in court.

Curb Your Enthusiasm wrote: »

Overstaying parking limits, ticket, fine.

But obstructing a footpath, cycle lane, bus lane, bus stop loading bay etc. - towing is the best option, to remove the obstruction ASAP.

Heavy fines needed even for ticketing IMO. Currently it's something pathetic like 40 euro for blocking a cycle lane. Ridiculous.

I once had a driver tell me, absolutely delighted with himself, that he parks in bike lanes as it works out cheaper as he's very rarely caught anyway, and had them thrown out in court.

Towing doesn't remove the obstruction ASAP, it takes a long time to hitch up the car, move to a suitable location (if that is a centralised location it is probably out of the city taking time to get to and back, if it is dumping the car in a proper parking space then time is spent looking for one), then removing the car and getting back into city centre to look for another victim. Can't see a tow truck doing any more than two cars per hour. How many do you need in operation for it to be effect? In many cases, issuing a fine and the driver then moving the vehicle will be quicker than a tow truck hooking it up and moving it. The heavier vehicles wont be suitable for towing anyway and they cause a lot of the disruption.

The last part of your post shows why ticketing is better. Towing and clamping are inefficient and as such the chances of getting caught are low - many drivers will accept getting caught once or twice a year due to the savings they make by not paying for parking. Ticketing is far more efficient, it only takes a couple of minutes to upload the fine so many vehicles can be hit every hour. It also has lower overheads (no clamps, tow truck, they don't even need a van) so could possibly have more staff at same cost. If the chances of getting fined increase significantly, less people will take the risk. That is how you change behavour. Get clamped/towed once in a blue moon is not enough of a deterrent for many people.

You are right about fines being pitifully low. A good hefty fine along with an effective system of extracting the money is needed. I'm sure there a lots of ways of doing it. Penalty points for repeat offenders is

MJohnston wrote: »

Towing, clamping, penalty points...no need.

What we need is a legion of traffic wardens that can blanket the city with parking tickets constantly. Ruthless punishment, with a constant, predictably widespread presence.

Yip, only if ignorant drivers think there is a parking enforcement person in camouflage hiding up every tree, behind every bin and under every dog turd ready to pounce will they think twice about causing an obstruction.

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't think you even need to go that far. it's the fear of the chance of getting caught, rather than the fear of the certainty of getting caught, which is enough.
i.e. you can abandon your car at will in dublin without fear at the moment, but if you had a reasonable fear you might be caught, it'd put most people off straight away, and that doesn't need an army.

That, and a far larger fine. Especially for cycle lane and footpath parking. Current amounts are paltry.

To be honest, the scheme around Grafton Street is one that could work well in the long term, given that car park access is maintained.

Similar hours to Grafton Street, ensuring that deliveries are facilitated should be possible.

I’ve always felt that with a little compromise, an acceptable solution could be found.

The extended pavement at the bus stops on College Green is much better than before, and should probably continue up to the last bus stop before Sth. Great George’s St.

As a bus passenger, I have to say that the wands along Rathmines Road heading south are a dream come true, with the nightly post 7pm car parking now consigned to history. It was a nightmare for buses and cyclists. The wands at Rathgar Village also make a big difference.

I’m not so sure about some of the measures in the suburbs - Malahide certainly seems to be very divisive locally, and I have serious misgivings about the revised bus routes in Dundrum, which seem to have been designed on the back of an envelope to fit around the proposed one way system, without any consideration for connectivity, integration and (in the case of the 14) the potential impact on journey times along the rest of the route.

magicbastarder wrote: »

i've found a couple of times that the anti side are usually way more vocal than the pro side on any issue like this, and having been out there twice since the change (after 6pm both times) it seemed to be working well.
jimmy guerin has jumped ship to the 'pro' side, interestingly. and it certainly seems the opposition was not split 50/50 against those for it.

https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/prominent-independent-councillor-jimmy-guerin-18660468

Well I was just making the point that opinion was divided in Malahide which that article seems to back up, but I'll refrain from speculating on the margin of division as I'm not close enough to the area.

I suspect though that it is the daytime period that is causing the division more than anything else.

Hyperbole, OTT reactions, and frankly abuse, from both sides unfortunately tend to dominate social media and the news outlets on any project (just look at BusConnects infrastructure for example), and I try to ignore it, looking for more reasoned arguments on either side. That can be difficult!!

The Grafton Street area trials have been extended to the end of the month, due to "extremely positive feedback".

Kinda depressing reading that article. I was in town the other day, and although it's lovely around Grafton St and the area where they trialed pedestrianisation - Dame St, O'Connell, the quays, pretty much all of the northside are just not very hospitable to people. Traffic everywhere and clutter all over the place. If you compare it to European cities it's like chalk and cheese. They should at least try and turn the Grafton St area into a car free more relaxed zone, as a start. And grow it from there. I wont hold my breath though. It doesn't help that it's completely unaffordable to live in or around the city centre for most people.

Bus connects just perpetuates the urban sprawl.

CMATS is essentially an American style road building program with some lip service to new buses and light rail, the plan it's self doesn't propose doing anything at all for PT in Cork until about 2028. That was a joint effort between Jacobs and Systra (an SNCF subsidiary). Jacobs are one of the more regressive companies, they don't allow their staff to cycle during working hours (e.g. to meetings).

bk wrote: »

Ok, that is mad!

I can't speak for Limerick, but for Cork, I have to say it is realistic for Cork. Public transport is almost non existent in Cork, still of a very poor quality and most people down in Cork simply have no interest in public transport unfortunately.

Growing up in Cork, but live in Dublin now and it is simply a very different world. Buses aren't reliable at all in Cork, basically they are seen as only useful for elderly and students. On the other hand traffic congestion is nowhere near as bad as Dublin, overall pretty decent, so most people see the car as preferable.

Honestly, I'm not sure what needs to be done to change that. You could spend Billions on public transport and I don't think you would change most peoples minds down there unfortunately.

The solution to public transport being poor and people being over relient on the car is not just spending loads of money on new roads, that will certainly worsen the situation as we have seen the world over.

Just stepping in to say there is a huge appetite for sustainable transport in Cork, if meetings between business groups and the NTA are anything to go by.

It's very much a case of the NTA sticking their fingers in their ears rather than a lack of local interest. Some of the reasons they come up with for not investing in Cork sustainable transport infrastructure beggar belief.

So the sandymount strand cycle infra has been cancelled even though it was a majority in favour. And the 30kmh scrapped. Dublin is hopeless, the dinosaurs will always prevail.

It was another example though, like the scheme in Dundrum, of users of the bus service being penalised, in this case by having to walk up to 700m to/from an alternative bus stop.

There's nothing "temporary" about these schemes, and why should public transport users be penalised in the long term?

Somehow there needs to be some joined up thinking that gives the cyclists the safe and well designed cycle lanes, but also does not penalise public transport users unnecessarily.