Simple solution to Dublin traffic problem

mrbike

More people commute into Dublin city centre by bike than the Luas. The Luas cost about 800 million euro to build.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/cyclists-set-to-outnumber-luas-commuters-1.1773080

There has been pretty much zero investment in cycling infrastructure in Dublin. The infrastructure that has been built is generally not fit for purpose. In spite of this, 8% of journeys into the city are made by bike. 18% of people walk. (These are from the 2013 DCC canal cordon trends, which excludes the Luas).
http://irishcycle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Canal_Cordon_Trends_2006-2013.pdf

Of the 8% that cycle, unfortunately because of either the real or perceived dangers involved, the majority of these are young males. Women are the minority, there few older people and children are non-existent.

Walking and cycling are just not seen as forms of transport that need to be catered for. It does seem like the penny has dropped and planners are finally beginning to realise catering for pedestrians and cyclists in city centres is a good idea. It’s hard to ignore the positives - less congestion, less pollution, less noise, a healthier population and more pleasant city centre.

For 50 years, this country has prioritised one form of transport to the detriment of all others. These two photos are from a town in the UK, but could just as equally apply to Ireland. The first is from 1944, and the other from today. I think it aptly sums up the price of car-centric urban design.

https://plus.google.com/photos/101049728232065299842/albums/6023393773130289585

beauf

mrbike wrote: »

.....These two photos are from a town in the UK, but could just as equally apply to Ireland. The first is from 1944, and the other from today. I think it aptly sums up the price of car-centric urban design.

https://plus.google.com/photos/101049728232065299842/albums/6023393773130289585

I'm not sure you really looked at those photos.

The 1944 shows a tonne of explosives & ammunition stacked in the middle of village in WWII.

Spanish Eyes

Thank god I dont live on a bus route that includes any schools.

No I take that back. Thank god I bought a house on such a route! I do not have sprogs, so I wanted it that way.

And it works!

Anyone take the 25a or B (or the various Xs) from Liffey Valley and points
East to city centre?

Bus lane all the way.

A bit of a jam (tiny) at SCR and also coming into city at Bachelors walk.

Otherwise.....swoooooop in there! Love it.

sdanseo

steveblack wrote: »

The schools are starting to close for the summer and the traffic problems are also starting to lessen.
The way to keep it like this all year round is to make a law that children must attend a school within a certain distance of there house. Within walking distance, do the children some good to walk to and from school.
I am a dublin bus driver and i see first hand some children travel from one side of the city to the other to go to school. City center children travel to the suburbs and vice versa.
I'd say at least twice the number are driven by parents to school.
This is what causes the terrible traffic we endure mon-fri every week the schools are open.
Some of you are going to say you cant do this , its a parents right to send there children to whatever school they want. Well just remember this post over the summer when your commute time is greatly reduced and then in september when the time drastically increases.

Better idea - kids are spoilt rotten with all these lifts to school. Force all able-bodied kids who do live within a mile or so of school to walk or cycle there.

It would cut about 50% of school traffic instantly.

It'd also help keep kids healthy, no more complaints about exercise, and might actually begin to justify expenditure on lollipop ladies who in recent years have been doing nothing but press buttons on pedestrian crossings.

mrbike

beauf wrote: »

I'm not sure you really looked at those photos.

The 1944 shows a tonne of explosives & ammunition stacked in the middle of village in WWII.

Good point, but I'm pretty sure they were all gone the following day, leaving a very nice village square.

beauf

Thats why its called "gone powder" ....

Cookie_Monster

A very simple experiment would be to make all the outlying P&R facilities free to park in. The green line has a couple of barely used parks as the cost is prohibitive once you combine parking and luas fare.

Auckland Council are considering making P&R paid for, it's free currently. There's been a huge backlash and a lot of concern that the move will substantially increase traffic in the CC as a result, rather than reduce it.

Macy0161

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

A very simple experiment would be to make all the outlying P&R facilities free to park in. The green line has a couple of barely used parks as the cost is prohibitive once you combine parking and luas fare.

Auckland Council are considering making P&R paid for, it's free currently. There's been a huge backlash and a lot of concern that the move will substantially increase traffic in the CC as a result, rather than reduce it.

I think it would make a big difference, as currently the cost of parking at Luas and dart stations negates the savings even with a yearly taxsaver ticket compared to driving. And although it's minor in the scheme of things, arsing around getting a ticket every day/ having change/ not losing a weekly ticket all impacts on peoples choices.

Maybe a compromise would be to allow carparking to be bundled in with the travel ticket for taxsaver purposes?

hfallada

One way to reduce traffic is to get rid of civil servant car spaces in town. Very few private offices in town have any car spaces for their employees, but most civil servants I know have a car space right in the city center. There is no reason why then to have a free car space to add to the cities congestion, just because they dont want to take the bus

LXFlyer

Macy0161 wrote: »

I think it would make a big difference, as currently the cost of parking at Luas and dart stations negates the savings even with a yearly taxsaver ticket compared to driving. And although it's minor in the scheme of things, arsing around getting a ticket every day/ having change/ not losing a weekly ticket all impacts on peoples choices.

Maybe a compromise would be to allow carparking to be bundled in with the travel ticket for taxsaver purposes?

I'm pretty sure that's already available for Irish Rail.

Macy0161

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that's already available for Irish Rail.

I think they had (maybe have) an annual car park pass, but I don't think it counts for the taxsaver (or can even be deducted with the taxsaver ticket).

Muahahaha

MGWR wrote: »

That's what socialists always say. They usually say it in order to grab more power after failing to enforce laws related to the alleged "unbriding".

So do you think taxi deregulation has been a success? I don't, it has gone way to far to the po it that empty taxis are now part of the Dublin traffic problem.

It's ironic that you criticise socialists for being wary of unbridled capitalism, especially when we're here discussing how to solve Dublins traffic problems. If Ireland had a bit more regulation of its brand of capitalism during the boom years then we might be here discussing Metro North or West instead. But the economy is in the tank because of unbridled capitalism and the Metro isn't getting built for a long while yet.

Godge

hfallada wrote: »

One way to reduce traffic is to get rid of civil servant car spaces in town. Very few private offices in town have any car spaces for their employees, but most civil servants I know have a car space right in the city center. There is no reason why then to have a free car space to add to the cities congestion, just because they dont want to take the bus

The private sector office building I work in has plenty of car parking for private sector employees. Do you have any figures to back up what you are saying?

GTE

This is an uneducated thought and is more in theory than practice, but what is stopping buses and coaches bound for the general O'Connell street area from using the Luas track as an express bus lane?

I was wondering what could be done to free up the quays or add capacity as I have recently needed to do some rush hour driving on it. All buses and coaches on the Luas line could mean getting rid of the bus lane, but of course that is unworkable for Dublin Bus routes which use parts of the quays where BE could get away with it - maybe benefit.

That said, I am sure there are good reasons why they can not double up, but I am wondering what they are.

beauf

I would doubt the luas line has the capacity to handle buses on it and trams.

Losty Dublin

hfallada wrote: »

One way to reduce traffic is to get rid of civil servant car spaces in town. Very few private offices in town have any car spaces for their employees, but most civil servants I know have a car space right in the city center. There is no reason why then to have a free car space to add to the cities congestion, just because they dont want to take the bus

Having worked in the civil service in 3 departments since 2000, I can assure you that those of us who have use of assured city centre parking spaces are very much in the minority. Even our Secretary General hasn't such a luxury.

beauf

You then have to factor the cost in time and fares if they are travelling to meetings. You might be saving with one hand to spend it with the other.

GTE

beauf wrote: »

I would doubt the luas line has the capacity to handle buses on it and trams.

I'd have thought the BE coaches could get through without causing trouble as they do not need to stop except for near O'Connell street, where they could use Abbey street.

AlekSmart

mikemac1 wrote: »

I waiting for my 79 on Aston Quay on Friday. The bus couldn't reach our stop as a taximan was hanging around outside Supervalu. He had dropped a girl off and she was inside.

The bus driver flashed the taxi and got no response and then beeped the horn and the taximan ignored him

Then our heroic bus driver got out of the bus and got in a shouting match with the taximan. Arms were waved and fingers were pointed with great gusto. Was great entertainment for us all at the stop :pac:

The girl returned and the taximan moved off. Our bus was delayed but only by 2 minutes or so, no big deal

The crazily skewed manner in which Taxis are allowed to be a contributor to the problem rather than part of it's solution is underlined by the most recent numbers....since 2007 The Country's Taxi fleet has Declined from 25,695 to 21,900 a drop of 14.8%.

What is perhaps more notable is how in spite of substantial encouragement the total Wheelchair Accessible SPSV fleet dropped from 1,600 to 898,a drop of 43%.

With every single one of approx 18,000 Taxidrivers apparently wanting to descend upon Dublin City Centre on Thurs/Friday/Saturday night,what hope has the City of remaining functional...?

monument

Godge wrote: »

There are a multitude of reasons ranging from climate (I know the rainfall stats but they are not the complete story, there is also the temperature stats, as well as the frequency and intensity of different weather), urban planning issues (where schools, homes and workplaces are located), topography (Dublin is a bowl) and cycling infrastructure/safety that mean we won't get it to 40% but yes, we should be higher than 5%.


In addition to the reasons above, there are plenty more for parents to consider.

Most responsible parents wish to ensure that primary schoolchildren get to school. That requires a parent to at least see them to the school gate. Giving timings and distances from school, that does not make cycling an option for the vast majority, especially when the one-parent-working family is disappearing and the person leaving the child to the school-gate has to get somewhere else in a hurry and the childminder collecting three children from the school hasn't the logisitics to deal with cycling kids. A does of reality would help the discussion.

At second-level, there are other issues relating to distance, safety and size/weight of schoolbags that don't always make cycling feasible.

Re this and your other post in the same vain:

You claim knee and hip problems are a notable barrier to mass cycling but while the Dutch and Danish medical systems are good, they have not magicked away all knee and hip problems.

You seem to think that there no schools in Denmark or the Netherlands. Also: No parents dropping children off and going to work, no children collected by child minders, no children cycling comparable distances to what most Irish children are bused or driven, etc, or no children who use other means to get to school.

You talk about temperature and climate differences but not only do you not back up your claims here -- you remain so vague it's hard to respond. It's far, far colder and extreme in Denmark in the winter, so, it must not be the cold that you're talking about.

Re urban planning issues and placement of workplaces, homes, etc: This can be an issue but it's overplayed with something like 200,000 commuters in Dublin driving under 5km.

Re "topography (Dublin is a bowl)" -- that's overblown / simplified to the last. Dublin is nowhere near a bowl. And there's more people cycling long distances across along more bowl-like topography, than there is cycling short commutes (which are been driven) on almost flat sections of Dublin.

Godge wrote: »

and cycling infrastructure/safety

This is about your only point where there's a major difference between here and the Netherlands and Denmark.

So we're mainly left with lack of infrastructure and, besides that, a load of excuses.

popolive wrote: »

Most of that problem is diet. You cannot outrun or outexercise your diet. The level of harmful crap in childrens' diets is alarming to say the least but not only that- I would speculate that many of them have never seen an avocado etc up close in their lives.

It's actually a mix of diet and inactivity, both are interlinked and tackling both shows best results.

_Kaiser_

Interesting report on Irish attitudes to public transport that ties in nicely with some of the points here:

First off:

27% of Irish respondents travel by public transport at least once a week, below the EU average of 32%.

So - while I'm actually surprised at the EU numbers given as we're told their models are the way forward! - why is that then? Well...

9% of Irish respondents are very satisfied with the price of public transport, 31% are fairly satisfied, while 44% are dissatisfied.

Don't think anyone can argue with that. Fares continue to rise despite falling usage, curtailments and realignments of services etc

And...

Ireland came bottom of the table for proximity to transport services. Only 62% replied that it takes less than 10 minutes to get to the nearest bus, train or tram station, compared to 90% in Luxembourg, 89% in the Netherlands, and 86% in Sweden.

Almost a third of Irish respondents reported public transport services to be from 10 to 30 minutes away from home, and 4% were more than 30 minutes to one hour away from public transport services.

I assume most of these respondents are outside Dublin then, where you're lucky to even have a service at all never mind a convenient one.

So there you have it. It's expensive, time-consuming and awkward to use!

Trying to shoehorn more modes of transport into the Dublin area (LUAS BXD, DART Underground, Metro, BRTs etc) at massive cost and disruption just so we can "keep up" with our EU neighbours won't fix that either. Property prices aside this isn't actually London!

Aard

That's a comparison of countries rather than cities, and as such it isn't entirely useful for drawing conclusions on Dublin transport. The Netherlands and Sweden are much more urbanised than Ireland, so it's no surprise that more of their population is served by decent public transport.

Carawaystick

AlekSmart wrote: »

With every single one of approx 18,000 Taxidrivers apparently wanting to descend upon Dublin City Centre on Thurs/Friday/Saturday night,what hope has the City of remaining functional...?

If only there was some large public transport vehicle that could be used to bring people where they want to go after 11:30pm
.....


The on-street parking in Aungier st/Sth Great Georges st hardly helps either.

steveblack

If only the public, who are happy to pay €6 for one drink in temple bar, would pay €5 for a late night bus.

Pawwed Rig

steveblack wrote: »

If only the public, who are happy to pay €6 for one drink in temple bar, would pay €5 for a late night bus.

Late night buses were a nightmare in my day. They used to only go once an hour. You were also forced to wait in fairly hairy parts of the city (Westmoreland Street in my case), smoking, drinking, shouting and fighting were common on the buses where there was no security/enforcement of laws. The extra for a taxi was money well spent (if you could find a taxi:D).

Carawaystick

steveblack wrote: »

If only the public, who are happy to pay €6 for one drink in temple bar, would pay €5 for a late night bus.

I'd happily pay a fiver to get a bus from Ranelagh to Glasnevin,
or from Christchurch to Ballsbridge
or from place not in the city centre to city centre
etc

If only I didn't have to wait up to 2 hours for the next bus...

markpb

steveblack wrote: »

If only the public, who are happy to pay €6 for one drink in temple bar, would pay €5 for a late night bus.

Have a look at the scenic route the Nightlink takes to get from the city centre to most suburban locations and then maybe you'll realise why people don't take it. My last trip from the city centre to Dundrum started in darkness and ended in daylight and had covered most of south east Dublin before dropping me somewhere near home. That's before you mention the delay waiting for the bus and the fact that I didn't know the route since it isn't a normal DB route so it had to keep an eye out for any recognisable landmarks that might tell me where to get off.

DB Nightlink was only ever a viable product when there was no alternative. Now that there is, people have abandoned it in their droves.

_Kaiser_

Aard wrote: »

That's a comparison of countries rather than cities, and as such it isn't entirely useful for drawing conclusions on Dublin transport. The Netherlands and Sweden are much more urbanised than Ireland, so it's no surprise that more of their population is served by decent public transport.

It's valid though in terms of the attitudes to public transport in this city/country and the issues that need to be addressed if it's to be made attractive to those currently not using it.

There's nothing there that couldn't be addressed with the existing resources/infrastructure:

- Cost: Simplify the fare structure. Introduce incentives/offers to encourage people to take the bus/train more regularly. Stop raising prices to the point where it makes more sense to just get a car
(or to put it another way - look at how renting is often seen as "dead money" compared to buying, especially as the cost of doing so in Dublin is often far in excess of a monthly mortgage)

- Service: Well that's easy. Start running the CIE group as a public transport company there to serve the travelling public rather than an employment scheme. Stop scrapping/selling off perfectly good buses and curtailing services and then complaining about costs/lack of usage. Get serious and proactive about dealing with the antisocial element on many routes etc

- Location: Create routes and routings that people WANT/need, not what suits the operators. The obsession with "An Lar" is a good example of this.
It shouldn't be necessary for private operators to have to step in to do this

But, as I said above, I'm actually surprised that the EU average is so low considering they DO do many of the above right, DO have segregated infrastructure, DO offer services beyond 11:30 at night, DO prioritise public transport on roadspace etc.

But maybe people just don't WANT to spend good parts of their day squeezed in together anymore now that cars are far more affordable and reliable (compared to previous decades) and decent roads and motorways are commonplace. Society has rapidly changed in the past 40 years from where people "made do" to where they expect more for themselves.

monument

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

It's valid though in terms of the attitudes to public transport in this city/country and the issues that need to be addressed if it's to be made attractive to those currently not using it.

There's nothing there that couldn't be addressed with the existing resources/infrastructure:

- Cost: Simplify the fare structure. Introduce incentives/offers to encourage people to take the bus/train more regularly. Stop raising prices to the point where it makes more sense to just get a car
(or to put it another way - look at how renting is often seen as "dead money" compared to buying, especially as the cost of doing so in Dublin is often far in excess of a monthly mortgage)

- Service: Well that's easy. Start running the CIE group as a public transport company there to serve the travelling public rather than an employment scheme. Stop scrapping/selling off perfectly good buses and curtailing services and then complaining about costs/lack of usage. Get serious and proactive about dealing with the antisocial element on many routes etc

- Location: Create routes and routings that people WANT/need, not what suits the operators. The obsession with "An Lar" is a good example of this.
It shouldn't be necessary for private operators to have to step in to do this

But, as I said above, I'm actually surprised that the EU average is so low considering they DO do many of the above right, DO have segregated infrastructure, DO offer services beyond 11:30 at night, DO prioritise public transport on roadspace etc.

But maybe people just don't WANT to spend good parts of their day squeezed in together anymore now that cars are far more affordable and reliable (compared to previous decades) and decent roads and motorways are commonplace. Society has rapidly changed in the past 40 years from where people "made do" to where they expect more for themselves.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

...
Trying to shoehorn more modes of transport into the Dublin area (LUAS BXD, DART Underground, Metro, BRTs etc) at massive cost and disruption just so we can "keep up" with our EU neighbours won't fix that either. Property prices aside this isn't actually London!

The problem is that you're using Europe-wide national stat to come to conclusions about cities

Nobody is planning such projects to "keep up" with our EU neighbours -- the "nearly every other country in Europe etc" argument is only used when claims of "that's impossible" or "Dublin is too small/spread out etc" are trotted out.

Similar "we have to follow the rest of Europe" arguments were used for the motorway network.

Your comment about "Property prices aside this isn't actually London" is the usually nonsince which has to be countered by European cities simular to Dublin have far better networks.

But the central case for such projects is far more detailed and usually has already been made and published.

_Kaiser_

monument wrote: »

The problem is that you're using Europe-wide national stat to come to conclusions about cities

Nobody is planning such projects to "keep up" with our EU neighbours -- the "nearly every other country in Europe etc" argument is only used when claims of "that's impossible" or "Dublin is too small/spread out etc" are trotted out.

Similar "we have to follow the rest of Europe" arguments were used for the motorway network.

Your comment about "Property prices aside this isn't actually London" is the usually nonsince which has to be countered by European cities simular to Dublin have far better networks.

But the central case for such projects is far more detailed and usually has already been made and published.

None of that addresses the core point though.

Who are these additional expensive and disruptive projects actually benefiting that it's worth the investment? Existing users? Fair enough, but those numbers have been falling for a while now & I can't imagine these new services will come cheap either which will further discourage take-up by those with alternative means.

The reality is that in poorer countries with a lack of road infrastructure, where car ownership is beyond the means of many, then projects like this make sense (think Europe or even Ireland in the 70s and 80s) but nowadays car ownership is so viable - and desirable! - that even teenagers have access to them.

But in a "modern first world country" which we like to think we are, people have higher expectations and less tolerance for the poor unreliable services offered by the CIE group for decades and now they have the means to do something about it.

South Dublin has possibly the best public transport infrastructure in the country what with LUAS, DART and high-frequency bus routes like the 46A. Yet I wonder how many of the people living in those areas are actually using it because it certainly seems to me that every driveway/apartment has a car (or more than one) sitting outside it.

Unless the plan is to ban the private car from the city centre entirely in which case people will just go elsewhere for their shopping, socialising etc especially when you have the likes of Blanch, Liffey Valley and Dundrum less than 30 mins away. Workers I grant you may find it harder, but it'd still have a massively negative impact on the inner city economy (as they keep telling us themselves when any sort of disruption to traffic flow arises) and that in turn will no dopubt affect job prospects anyway! Then there's the aforementioned antisocial element in the city centre/public transport options.

Ultimately I think public transport as a primary means of travel and indeed preferred choice has had its day in a modern country and spending millions on services that won't be used (or wanted) just doesn't make sense in the face of a country dealing with a disastrous health service, poor local services generally etc etc - especially when, property bubbles aside, most of the couintry is still on its knees and borrowing to keep the lights on

In short, we have a lot more pressing concerns and things that need money spent on them right now than vanity projects like BRT and especially when we can't even get the services we have already working properly!

bk

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Ultimately I think public transport as a primary means of travel and indeed preferred choice has had its day in a modern country and spending millions on services that won't be used (or wanted) just doesn't make sense in the face of a country dealing with a disastrous health service, poor local services generally etc etc - especially when, property bubbles aside, most of the couintry is still on its knees and borrowing to keep the lights on

That is laughable in the face of the evidence of the success of the Luas and Dublin Bikes.

These two projects have shown that there is massive demand for quality public transport and cycling infrastructure in Dublin.

monument

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

None of that addresses the core point though.

Who are these additional expensive and disruptive projects actually benefiting that it's worth the investment? Existing users? Fair enough, but those numbers have been falling for a while now & I can't imagine these new services will come cheap either which will further discourage take-up by those with alternative means.

The reality is that in poorer countries with a lack of road infrastructure, where car ownership is beyond the means of many, then projects like this make sense (think Europe or even Ireland in the 70s and 80s) but nowadays car ownership is so viable - and desirable! - that even teenagers have access to them.

But in a "modern first world country" which we like to think we are, people have higher expectations and less tolerance for the poor unreliable services offered by the CIE group for decades and now they have the means to do something about it.

South Dublin has possibly the best public transport infrastructure in the country what with LUAS, DART and high-frequency bus routes like the 46A. Yet I wonder how many of the people living in those areas are actually using it because it certainly seems to me that every driveway/apartment has a car (or more than one) sitting outside it.

Unless the plan is to ban the private car from the city centre entirely in which case people will just go elsewhere for their shopping, socialising etc especially when you have the likes of Blanch, Liffey Valley and Dundrum less than 30 mins away. Workers I grant you may find it harder, but it'd still have a massively negative impact on the inner city economy (as they keep telling us themselves when any sort of disruption to traffic flow arises) and that in turn will no dopubt affect job prospects anyway! Then there's the aforementioned antisocial element in the city centre/public transport options.

Ultimately I think public transport as a primary means of travel and indeed preferred choice has had its day in a modern country and spending millions on services that won't be used (or wanted) just doesn't make sense in the face of a country dealing with a disastrous health service, poor local services generally etc etc - especially when, property bubbles aside, most of the couintry is still on its knees and borrowing to keep the lights on

In short, we have a lot more pressing concerns and things that need money spent on them right now than vanity projects like BRT and especially when we can't even get the services we have already working properly!

Dublin has a growing population and growing workforce. The city can hardly support the current level of motor traffic, so it's clear private cars are not the way forward that you seem to be claiming.

As for high car ownership -- it's delinked from very high car usage in parts of Dublin and in richer cities than ours. Dutch, Danish, German, etc cities, which continue to invest the likes of metros, BRT and trams, are not in poorer countries.

You included BXD in your list, but Luas has already shown be highly popular. On the other end of rail, Dart Underground is a large project but when it's broken down it's basically improving the current rail lines and systems that we have.

The BRT project seems to be very much so BRT lite -- ie firming up the current bus lane network -- so I'm left in the dark at how that could be classed as a vanity project.

The trend world wide, including in developed countries, is more public transport, more walking and more cycling. I don't know where you're getting the idea that public transport has had its day.

LXFlyer

The impression is probably down to the fact that his/her personal journey is faster by car than by public transport.

It would be interesting to know what that trip is - I'm suspecting it's an orbital one.

_Kaiser_

lxflyer wrote: »

The impression is probably down to the fact that his/her personal journey is faster by car than by public transport.

It would be interesting to know what that trip is - I'm suspecting it's an orbital one.

Actually it's a very quick run within the D18 area and there is a bus < 30 seconds walk away that would leave me right outside the door of the office.

BUT...

- It's not all that frequent.. 25 minute gaps at the times I'd be leaving the house. The return trip is even worse @ 30-45 minute gaps. I could be there and back 2/3 times by then!
At weekends that gap increases to an hour.

- It takes almost double the time to travel pretty much the same route as it does me by car what with all the stops along the way

- It would leave me without a car during the day in work and be useless if I needed to travel off-site for meetings, wanted to stop off at the shops on the way home etc

- I'm paying for the car anyway as I am out of town a lot at weekends so wouldn't be giving it up in any case. Add on the cost of bus tickets and I might as well drive.

My previous commute was from Cavan - Fairview. Approx 80 mins by car most days. Can you imagine how long that would take via Bus Eireann? Not cheap either!

But ultimately, I would be pretty confident that if you give car owners in Ireland the choice of driving vs taking public transport, the car will win every time - mostly because of the above reasons but also because public transport just isn't valued in this country by the users, the planners, the government - or even (arguably) the main operator itself.

So while you can build all the fancy options, it doesn't mean that people will use it unless (as I say) the intent would be to try and force people out of their cars rather than entice them out by offering a decent reliable service, that goes where people want to go, and is noticeably more cost-effective than the private alternative.

markpb

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

noticeably more cost-effective than the private alternative.

You can buy an annual taxsaver ticket for all Dublin Bus services for under €600 per year. If you already own, tax and insure a very small, very efficient car, have free parking and live quite near work, there's a chance you could drive to work for less than that. That's ignoring the costs (both actual and depreciative) that the extra mileage costs you. And if you want to drive a bigger car at the weekends or if you have to pay for parking, those economics quickly drift in DBs favour.

Public transport may be quicker or slower, that will depend on individual trips. Some people (like you) will be faster driving to work and are happy to pay for it. Others may be faster by public transport. Others may be marginal and in those cases, the cost of the trip may be the deciding factor. Or maybe they like to read or work on their way so public transport is a better option.

Your opinion, and you're entitled to it, is that driving is good and public transport (in Ireland) is bad but don't mistake that for a fact, it is ultimately just an opinion. Luas does extremely well. Dart does quite well. Suburban trains are very busy. DB carry a lot of people every year. Bikes make up a decent percentage of commuters. It takes all sorts to make a city. Not everyone wants to drive and not everyone could drive - it wouldn't be possible to build a road network to handle that.

LXFlyer

I'm assuming that's the 47 or 63?

With the best will in the world, routes such as those two will never be more frequent or more direct. That being said I've certainly noticed reasonable numbers using the 47 between Ringsend/Sandymount and Stillorgan/Sandyford for example, a trip not possible before.

You can put high frequency onto the radial routes where there is high demand all day all along the route, but with the orbitals or local routes it simply isn't there, due to everyone making different individual trips, many of which would require a walk to/from the bus.

As I posted before, such routes are designed to serve the major traffic generators so as to maximise the numbers.

There are always going to be people for whom public transport isn't the best option, due to where they live or work, the type of job they do, hours worked, etc.

However, it is and can be relevant along the radial corridors in and out of the city.

While total numbers using Dublin Bus did fall in 2013 -v- 2012, the rate of decline slowed. It's also true to say that the increased numbers of cross-city routes would have impacted on overall passenger numbers with more people being able to make their journey on a single bus.

_Kaiser_

markpb wrote: »

You can buy an annual taxsaver ticket for all Dublin Bus services for under €600 per year. If you already own, tax and insure a very small, very efficient car, have free parking and live quite near work, there's a chance you could drive to work for less than that. That's ignoring the costs (both actual and depreciative) that the extra mileage costs you. And if you want to drive a bigger car at the weekends or if you have to pay for parking, those economics quickly drift in DBs favour.

Public transport may be quicker or slower, that will depend on individual trips. Some people (like you) will be faster driving to work and are happy to pay for it. Others may be faster by public transport. Others may be marginal and in those cases, the cost of the trip may be the deciding factor. Or maybe they like to read or work on their way so public transport is a better option.

Your opinion, and you're entitled to it, is that driving is good and public transport (in Ireland) is bad but don't mistake that for a fact, it is ultimately just an opinion. Luas does extremely well. Dart does quite well. Suburban trains are very busy. DB carry a lot of people every year. Bikes make up a decent percentage of commuters. It takes all sorts to make a city. Not everyone wants to drive and not everyone could drive - it wouldn't be possible to build a road network to handle that.

I'm not saying that public transport doesn't have its place but that where an alternative exists, Irish people will choose that instead every time.

I used buses, trains and DARTs for years and I'd say I've lost weeks of my life waiting around on them to show, the extra time spent sitting on them waiting for them to finally get where I was going, the discomfort of spending an hour jammed against a railing with people shoving their way past every 30 seconds as the bus lurches from stop to stop but the driver keeps packing em in anyway and so on...

At one point I was getting a Commuter train, DART and Shuttle Bus to and from work and more often than not I'd be left stranded in Pearse St Station because the DART was late/didn't show and I'd missed the connection. It was that nonsense that finally drove me to a car.

So even though running the car isn't cheap (that's by choice though as I have a big-engined one on the old tax system), it's still worth every cent if it means I don't have to face that sort of messing again and reading this forum and the various threads about all the modes above hasn't convinced me that things ave changed much!

Life is just too short to be putting up with that when you have an alternative

markpb

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

I'm not saying that public transport doesn't have its place but that where an alternative exists, Irish people will choose that instead every time.

I agree with everything else you said but not this. *You* will choose driving every time. But the hundreds of thousands of people taking public transport in Dublin today did *not* choose driving.

In any event, public transport has improved measurably over the last few years and will hopefully continue to improve. Perhaps not for your trip or not enough to seduce you away for your car but that's okay because it will improve for other people.

I too drive a 2l car taxed on the old system and pay handsomely for the privilege but I rarely use it to drive to work. I prefer to walk where I can and take the Luas where I can't. I do use the car for trips but only where public transport is less attractive.

Calina

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

I'm not saying that public transport doesn't have its place but that where an alternative exists, Irish people will choose that instead every time.

Right now, they only do that because the existing transport system has gaps in terms of supporting the city. The indirect cost is gridlock and hours wasted in traffic jams.

Investing in a decent coherent multimodal system makes this problem go away. It is also valuable in the longer term.

Most of your posts have ranted on how things are today. You might not realise this but we need to plan for the future as well and that's a lot more than just what you face today.

Pawwed Rig

Prague would be the most appropriate city that Dublin could model itself on. Underground and trams make getting around the city simples. Communists weren't all bad . Unfortunately it would cost an absolute fortune now but the powers that be decided against the trams in favour of buses way back. We are about 60-70 years behind alot of cities at the level of Dublin.

Chris_5339762

lxflyer wrote: »

The impression is probably down to the fact that his/her personal journey is faster by car than by public transport.

It would be interesting to know what that trip is - I'm suspecting it's an orbital one.

It is. By an order of magnitude.

10 minute walk to the nearest bus stop, probably a 10 minute wait for the bus, bus to the city center (45 minutes to an hour probably) and a 10 minute Luas ride. Even with a Leap card thats pricey.

As I go swimming or for a walk before work, and generally have breakfast in the canteen there, I'm in early before the traffic so it is precisely a 17 minute drive and it is more direct so the petrol costs less than the fare would (insurance/tax notwithstanding).

For traffic home in the evening I know the ratruns and can do it in 25 minutes of standard traffic, 30 - 35 in heavy traffic.

No bus can beat that, sadly.

Edit: Taxsaver tickets aren't an option for me as the employer reserves the right to move me to any of three places in Dublin with little notice. Two of those places aren't really served by public transport.

Muahahaha

Whatever the solution to Dublins traffic problems I really feel that cycling has serious potential to be a decent part of it. And I think that for a relatively small investment in proper cycle lanes and infrastructure we can actually relieve car numbers by a good 10% by encouraging more people to cycle and improving the safety for them.

If you had of asked me three months ago I wouldn't have held that opinion. I live 9km from town and I'd always dismissed cycling as a means to get there on the basis of the distance and also that there was one long hill out of a valley on my way home. But I bought a bike a few months ago, mainly for pleasure riding out the country near where I live. I was desperately unfit and overweight and my first ever cycle in 20 years was an awful experience, huffing and puffing it took me almost 40 minutes to cover a measly 9km of relatively flat roads in the countryside, my muscles just weren't up to the task. Roll on eight weeks and I'm covering 25km in just over an hour on a pretty regular basis. Now the 9km to town and 9km back seems like nothing to me whereas when I first began cycling it seems impossible. That long hill I used as an excuse not to cycle is now a challenge that I love tackling, I've power back in my legs now so I just boom up it.

What's more is that I can cover the 9km journey to town in 24-26 minutes which is also more or less what my bus route takes to get to town, the 140 from Charlestown. Driving in rush hour would take around 40 minutes, approx 30 at other times. If I got a road bike I could probably get up to average speeds of 25-30kph and could get to town in 20 minutes, a fair bit quicker than the bus.

I'd really challenge anyone living and commuting inside the m50 to buy a bike and give it a bash. What seemed impossible to me is now very possible and I'm just beginning to plan longer 50km cycles around the Hill of Howth and back. I've lost almost ten kilos since I started this odyssey, feel much better and stronger inside and less lethargic. For me cycling really is a win, win, win, I think it could be the same for a lot more people out there but they just haven't realised it yet.

Aard

I don't understand why people are giving such specific anecdotal evidence. In Dublin, the percentage of people commuting by car was 47.6% at the last census. So obviously around half of people will say that it's easier for them to get to work by car.

Not all of the city will be suitable for a "car free" life. And definitely not all workplaces are suitable for getting to without a car. Nonetheless, if you're lucky enough or have planned well enough, you might live in an area where not only is public transport a viable option, but that it trumps the car. Without getting too finnicky, the general area bounded by Dun Laoghaire, Sandyford, Terenure, Heuston, Drumcondra, and Marino is probably the most accessible in Dublin. If you live and work within here, public transport should be relatively OK. I'm sure there are a few other corridors, especially Northside, that I'm unfamiliar with that could be included too.

Anyway, my point is that not all of the city is equally accessible. Also, not everybody can drive. Maybe they're not old enough (i.e. anybody under 17), maybe they don't have the money (the poor -- for example Ballymun and Jobstown have a disproportionate amount of no-car households, and it's not because they're all tree-hugging public transport lovers), maybe they don't have the ability (the disabled, the elderly), maybe they simply don't have the inclination. It would be unfortunate if we ever got to the state where it is necessary to own a car in order to participate in society, like it is in many medium-sized US cities. Thankfully, we're not near that in Dublin.

Qualitymark

One of the problems with public transport is cars, especially in winter. A trip to the GPO from the ring of suburbs just outside the canals, for instance, takes

• 15 minutes by bicycle
• half an hour by bus
• three-quarters of an hour by car (including parking and walking back to the GPO).

The bus trip would be a lot faster if there weren't so many cars sitting in the way, in long traffic jams with one person in each car. Sure, the bus lanes make bus journeys faster, but they are intermittent - look at the journey of the 15 from Rathmines, say: bus lanes all down Rathmines, then a bottleneck at the bridge, another at Camden Street, then bus lanes again through George's Street. Not well thought out.

Quite a big reason people drive in winter, I think, is that if you take the bus you're going to be sitting there for half an hour with a sneezing, infective cargo of germ-laden people with colds. If the journey was shorter and faster, you'd have less time to get infected! And if the buses had a clearer run through the city, there'd be less miserable time standing at shelterless bus stops freezing and wet.

MGWR

Qualitymark wrote: »

One of the problems with public transport is cars, especially in winter. A trip to the GPO from the ring of suburbs just outside the canals, for instance, takes

• 15 minutes by bicycle
• half an hour by bus
• three-quarters of an hour by car (including parking and walking back to the GPO).

The bus trip would be a lot faster if there weren't so many cars sitting in the way, in long traffic jams with one person in each car. Sure, the bus lanes make bus journeys faster, but they are intermittent - look at the journey of the 15 from Rathmines, say: bus lanes all down Rathmines, then a bottleneck at the bridge, another at Camden Street, then bus lanes again through George's Street. Not well thought out.

Quite a big reason people drive in winter, I think, is that if you take the bus you're going to be sitting there for half an hour with a sneezing, infective cargo of germ-laden people with colds. If the journey was shorter and faster, you'd have less time to get infected! And if the buses had a clearer run through the city, there'd be less miserable time standing at shelterless bus stops freezing and wet.

15 minutes by bicycle from anywhere south of the Grand Canal means a bicycle travelling at an average (not top) speed of 11 mph. Not possible without violating traffic signals, and without having a racing bike operated by a very fit rider.

I also have a very hard time believing that even with moderate traffic, a bus journey is going to have an average speed of a mere 5.6 mph; if this still applies in heavy traffic, then the bus lane status quo is fatally flawed (where you force all traffic into a single lane for example, actually causing the heavy traffic).

If buses are unattractive to car drivers, it's all due to policy from the top, what with the stranglehold that the government still maintains with respect to public transport. Network "Direct" resulted in fewer bus route choices, hence bus stops further away from people's homes, as well as certain bus routes made into local routes only connecting to other city-bound routes or to rail lines (one-seat rides are more attractive than two-seat); also longer routes resulting in less reliability (route 15 is one example, travelling between Clongriffin on the north side and Ballycullen on the south side).

Qualitymark

MGWR wrote: »

15 minutes by bicycle from anywhere south of the Grand Canal means a bicycle travelling at an average (not top) speed of 11 mph. Not possible without violating traffic signals, and without having a racing bike operated by a very fit rider.

I also have a very hard time believing that even with moderate traffic, a bus journey is going to have an average speed of a mere 5.6 mph; if this still applies in heavy traffic, then the bus lane status quo is fatally flawed (where you force all traffic into a single lane for example, actually causing the heavy traffic).

I base the times on my own experience; used to work beside the GPO and cycle or bus there daily at around 4pm, and the cycle took exactly 15 minutes, the bus journey half an hour. And the bus was very often late or cancelled; it was impossible to rely on it.

I'm not a particularly fast cyclist; 15mph is average cycling speed.

monument

Qualitymark wrote: »

I'm not a particularly fast cyclist; 15mph is average cycling speed.

In fairness, according to the 2006 Census, the adverage speed for cycling is 14km/h within the M50 and 12km/h within the canals.

http://irishcycle.com/myths/myths-speed/

Qualitymark

monument wrote: »

In fairness, according to the 2006 Census, the adverage speed for cycling is 14km/h within the M50 and 12km/h within the canals.

http://irishcycle.com/myths/myths-speed/

Really? The census lists cycling speed? Where?

My route is probably pretty fast - straight down Clanbrassil Street, down Dame Street, Westmoreland Street, O'Connell Street, whoosh to a stop. 15 minutes flat. Every time. Try it.

monument

Qualitymark wrote: »

Really? The census lists cycling speed? Where?

My route is probably pretty fast - straight down Clanbrassil Street, down Dame Street, Westmoreland Street, O'Connell Street, whoosh to a stop. 15 minutes flat. Every time. Try it.

Back in 2006 it asked people their travel distance and travel time.

It no longer does this. As it now asks for work location. This loses some quick info on distances, but it should allow officials to extract some very useful data on commuting patterns, it already has but we should see even more of this.

Your commute is likely helped by being a priority route for buses, but I'm nearly sure the census data isn't far off adverage given elsewhere around the work.

Qualitymark

monument wrote: »

Back in 2006 it asked people their travel distance and travel time.

It no longer does this. As it now asks for work location. This loses some quick info on distances, but it should allow officials to extract some very useful data on commuting patterns, it already has but we should see even more of this.

Your commute is likely helped by being a priority route for buses, but I'm nearly sure the census data isn't far off adverage given elsewhere around the work.

I'm sure you're right. Even 11km/h would be a nice fast commute, though.

Odd thing is that in the 1900s labour management advice was to hire people who lived within three miles of the workplace. Still good advice; ridiculous that it's difficult now.