How we think and talk about reducing car use in cities

defrule

People will only use public transport if it is more convenient to do so but the PT would need higher usage in order to justify service upgrades and such.

It's tough one to solve.

ED E

Got a lift in a friends XTrail(I think, or something similar) bought new in '15 the other day. 1500km on the clock. Not 1500K KM, 1500. Only ever used for going to the shops. Depreciation alone is killing that. Taxis would have cost less all in. And now it has a serious mech issue. Luuuuuunacy.

andrewfaulk wrote: »

Taking cars out of parts of the city centre would make a huge difference, particularly for cyclists and pedestrians.. South William/Grafton/Dawson street area could really do with being pedestrianised

They've been trying that since the 90s with SW. Blocked every time by parking owners. You'd need to CPO a rake of carparks to get away with pedestrianisation and they're money makers so very much on the we can't afford it end of the spectrum.

Zebra3

defrule wrote: »

People will only use public transport if it is more convenient to do so but the PT would need higher usage in order to justify service upgrades and such.

It's tough one to solve.

Not true. I don't drive because I've no interest in driving and I see a car as a money pit.

magicbastarder

IE 222 wrote: »

The vast majority of car's traveling through are going cross city.

i've often wondered what this statistic actually is. you have a source on the above?

Stephen15

IE 222 wrote: »

It's unrealistic to think removing car's in the city centre is going to solve these issues by moving everyone onto buses and trams. The vast majority of car's traveling through are going cross city. All major routes lead into the city centre and all cross city routes are limited to 2 or 3 bridge crossings or forced onto the quays. The large number of one way streets and illegal turns has forced more and more traffic into detouring deeper into the city than they need to.

I agree but they shouldn't be in town they should be on the M50, The Eastlink or in The Port Tunnel and not in the city centre. I personally think if we removed the M50 toll we would get a considerable amount of cars off the city streets. I used to know who used they would drive through town to go from the Southside to Swords on a Saturday the reason given was they found the M50 'too boring' despite it being miles quicker.

magicbastarder

that's on a weekend though. the main issues that need to be sorted are weekday traffic. and the M50 is beyond capacity on weekdays.

Dravokivich

Stephen15 wrote: »

I agree but they shouldn't be in town they should be on the M50, The Eastlink or in The Port Tunnel and not in the city centre. I personally think if we removed the M50 toll we would get a considerable amount of cars off the city streets. I used to know who used they would drive through town to go from the Southside to Swords on a Saturday the reason given was they found the M50 'too boring' despite it being miles quicker.

I don't think you will. I drive from Fairview, to leixlip, via the city in the mornings during school year because it's quicker for me to do so. After already going to Fairview from clondalkin via the m50.

monument

IE 222 wrote: »

It's unrealistic to think removing car's in the city centre is going to solve these issues by moving everyone onto buses and trams.

It is, but it is not unrealistic to think that the vast bulk of people making these car trips can instead use a mix of:

Walking
Cycling
Bus
Tram
Train
Metro
Car park and bike
Car park and ride
Car share
And some drive directly

IE 222 wrote: »

The vast majority of car's traveling through are going cross city. All major routes lead into the city centre and all cross city routes are limited to 2 or 3 bridge crossings or forced onto the quays. The large number of one way streets and illegal turns has forced more and more traffic into detouring deeper into the city than they need to.

All major routes lead into the city centre and nearly all of them are detrunked at the M50 and have other options for diverting before the city centre.

The bulk of people using cars in the city centre are staring inside and around the M50 aren’t going that far — the people starting beyond that are a minority and most of those aren’t giving into the depths of the city centre. For example, most people commuting from far out are driving to locations out near the M50.

IE 222 wrote: »

There is a grown number of people working nights or early starts that PT won't cater for.

Still a small percentage of people who work when there’s no public transport and cycling won’t meet their meet their needs.

IE 222 wrote: »

As the commuter belt expands again and with more companies expanding to offices further out from the city we are going to see more cross city demand.

We’re also going to see better cross-city public transport and cycle routes.

This image of the commuter belt expanding really needs challenging — the commuter belt would have to expand massively for it to outnumber the volume of people who live in Dublin City and Suburbs and areas just beyond such which have or will have decent enough public transport.

IE 222 wrote: »

It's not possible for PT serve a link between every town in the Dublin region.

It doesn’t have to. Some people will still drive to outer locations, others will use existing or improved public transport links — both direct or at a park and ride. Others will mix driving or car pooling or trains etc with cycling.

IE 222 wrote: »

The focus needs to be put on creating routes for better flows and separation rather than making it difficult for car users. A road like the A12 in belfast sunk below the surface and cover were needs be orbiting along the canals would be ideal but unlikely to happen.

It’s not about “difficult for car users” — it’s about providing alternatives.

Your suggestion of providing a motorway along the central section of the Grand Canal is 1970s thinking. Now that it is widely known how poorly cars are in cities, and the area is already fairly heavily populated with homes and workplaces.

IE 222 wrote: »

It needs to be accepted that a certain percentage of traffic will remain as private car. PT will never wipe out the use of private car's regardless how well or good it works.

But a tiny fraction of your vision of motorways along the central canals.

ED E wrote: »

Got a lift in a friends XTrail(I think, or something similar) bought new in '15 the other day. 1500km on the clock. Not 1500K KM, 1500. Only ever used for going to the shops. Depreciation alone is killing that. Taxis would have cost less all in. And now it has a serious mech issue. Luuuuuunacy.




They've been trying that since the 90s with SW. Blocked every time by parking owners. You'd need to CPO a rake of carparks to get away with pedestrianisation and they're money makers so very much on the we can't afford it end of the spectrum.

Zero need to CPO car parks — provide entry to the Brown Thomas car park on one side and, if needed, provide entry/exit to the other tiny car parks from the other end of the street. Is it just one now of any note if the AA’s is redevelopment?

This can be done without CPOs: http://irishcycle.com/2017/08/10/is-it-time-for-a-car-free-south-william-street-in-dublin/

AndrewJRenko

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I've often wondered why there are so many cars all joining up in the CC. Maybe they are not commuting, but going to hospitals, etc. and so on. The fact that there are free parking spaces for Civil Servants and City Council workers is a joke. But it will never be withdrawn will it?

Yeah, an absolute joke - I can't think why school inspectors, public health nurses, building inspectors, housing managers would need access to parking - can you?


Is this really a significant factor in our parking issues? The total number of spaces for civil servants are relatively modest, given the overall number of staff 37k nationwide. DCC have something like 400-500 spaces at Wood Quay, and over 10k staff, so it doesn't like a huge problem to me.


http://www.thejournal.ie/parking-levy-department-of-finance-budget-public-service-opw-427408-Apr2012/

IE 222

magicbastarder wrote: »

i've often wondered what this statistic actually is. you have a source on the above?

I don't have a link but if you experience the traffic flows its easy to see where the traffic is heading (Not actual final destination but the general area outside the city centre).

IE 222

Stephen15 wrote: »

I agree but they shouldn't be in town they should be on the M50, The Eastlink or in The Port Tunnel and not in the city centre. I personally think if we removed the M50 toll we would get a considerable amount of cars off the city streets. I used to know who used they would drive through town to go from the Southside to Swords on a Saturday the reason given was they found the M50 'too boring' despite it being miles quicker.

The M50 is no help inside the Canals and is jammed as is.

Stephen15

IE 222 wrote: »

The M50 is no help inside the Canals and is jammed as is.

When a large percentage of cars shouldn't be inside the canals they should be on the M50. Nobody from the Southside should be in the city centre if they are going to Santry, The Airport, Swords or beyond they should be on the M50 or in the Port Tunnel.

NewbridgeIR

Dravokivich wrote: »

Get rid of on street parking in the city. You've loads of extra space right there. Multi story car parks are a potential solution that's not used, because you've still got cars coming into the city.

A lot of major roads lead through the city. I'd suggest most of the traffic is through traffic. At least 95% of the time I'm driving there, Dublin City is not my destination. Someone will need to re-evaluate what was the purpose of the M50 and see what can be done to stop directing us "low capacity vehicles" into the city.

I work in the city centre and take the train in and out. For most of the time, it works out fine. I have no parking space and find driving in the city stressful when it's busy.
However if I am going out in the city centre (meal, pub, gig, club), I now tend to drive in as I can park for free on the quays after 7.00pm and I don't have to worry about catching last bus or train.

I don't think that getting rid of street parking is the answer - during the day it's very costly and I imagine consists of people travelling in for meetings rather than parking for hours on end.

Dravokivich

NewbridgeIR wrote: »

I work in the city centre and take the train in and out. For most of the time, it works out fine. I have no parking space and find driving in the city stressful when it's busy.
However if I am going out in the city centre (meal, pub, gig, club), I now tend to drive in as I can park for free on the quays after 7.00pm and I don't have to worry about catching last bus or train.

I don't think that getting rid of street parking is the answer - during the day it's very costly and I imagine consists of people travelling in for meetings rather than parking for hours on end.

On a lot of streets it passively consumes 50% of the available capacity.

Driving it the city is a horrible experience because of tight roads, too many bespoke junctions, and very little space for all road users to share it.

IE 222

monument wrote: »

It is, but it is not unrealistic to think that the vast bulk of people making these car trips can instead use a mix of:

Walking
Cycling
Bus
Tram
Train
Metro
Car park and bike
Car park and ride
Car share
And some drive directly



All major routes lead into the city centre and nearly all of them are detrunked at the M50 and have other options for diverting before the city centre.

The bulk of people using cars in the city centre are staring inside and around the M50 aren’t going that far — the people starting beyond that are a minority and most of those aren’t giving into the depths of the city centre. For example, most people commuting from far out are driving to locations out near the M50.




Still a small percentage of people who work when there’s no public transport and cycling won’t meet their meet their needs.




We’re also going to see better cross-city public transport and cycle routes.

This image of the commuter belt expanding really needs challenging — the commuter belt would have to expand massively for it to outnumber the volume of people who live in Dublin City and Suburbs and areas just beyond such which have or will have decent enough public transport.



It doesn’t have to. Some people will still drive to outer locations, others will use existing or improved public transport links — both direct or at a park and ride. Others will mix driving or car pooling or trains etc with cycling.




It’s not about “difficult for car users” — it’s about providing alternatives.

Your suggestion of providing a motorway along the central section of the Grand Canal is 1970s thinking. Now that it is widely known how poorly cars are in cities, and the area is already fairly heavily populated with homes and workplaces.




But a tiny fraction of your vision of motorways along the central canals.



Zero need to CPO car parks — provide entry to the Brown Thomas car park on one side and, if needed, provide entry/exit to the other tiny car parks from the other end of the street. Is it just one now of any note if the AA’s is redevelopment?

This can be done without CPOs: http://irishcycle.com/2017/08/10/is-it-time-for-a-car-free-south-william-street-in-dublin/

We can offer all the PT in the world for free there will still be people who will use private car's to commute. For some its not a choice its a necessity. Most commuters working in the heart of the city use PT its were PT doesn't provide a link from house to work place that leads to car's passing through the city centre.

The M50 is kind of irrelevant to city centre traffic. The M50 doesn't offer any realistic releaf to the city centre. For example if someone needs to commute from Clontraf to James St. they will need to travel through the city centre, M50 does nothing in this case. These are the type of journeys that causing the issues.

The only people using the M50 are people working along it or heading out of Dublin.

IE 222

Stephen15 wrote: »

When a large percentage of cars shouldn't be inside the canals they should be on the M50. Nobody from the Southside should be in the city centre if they are going to Santry, The Airport, Swords or beyond they should be on the M50 or in the Port Tunnel.

Well the Port Tunnel costs a €10 and another €2 or so on the eastlink so that's hardly appealing.

Depending on were you live in the on the south side trying to get onto the M50 could double your journey time. There should ring roads that allow motorists to bypass the heart of the city.

Shefwedfan

Easy answer, start at castleknock gates of park and draw a big red circle.....anything inside that circle is shut down to cars apart from
Residents in area
Taxi
Delivery vehicles
Construction if they can show the only way to get access
Everyone else either on bike/bus/train

Stephen15

IE 222 wrote: »

Well the Port Tunnel costs a €10 and another €2 or so on the eastlink so that's hardly appealing.

Depending on were you live in the on the south side trying to get onto the M50 could double your journey time. There should ring roads that allow motorists to bypass the heart of the city.

€10 is excessive it really is the logic of this country that they would charge more at the peak hours in order to reduce peak time traffic. But going via the city centre could also double your journey time. Where would you propose putting ring roads without knocking down people's houses already controversial enough proposing to take away parts of people's front gardens away for bus lanes.

Mrs OBumble

Often you’re only taking about a few hundred people in cars per hour on many routes — easily transferred to other modes.

But you have no idea what those people were doing before and after you saw them in their car. Eg - dropping two kids at creche - not so easily moved to another mode. Coming from the country to take out an elderly relative - ditto.

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Easy answer, start at castleknock gates of park and draw a big red circle.....anything inside that circle is shut down to cars apart from
Residents in area
Taxi
Delivery vehicles
Construction if they can show the only way to get access
Everyone else either on bike/bus/train

Home-care workers. Public health nurses. Environmental health staff. Rubblsh collections. Tradespeople (you'll never get a plumber to fix your blocked toilet if s/he needs to go an prove things to road-police first). Housing officers. Debt collectors. Surveyors. Valuers. Interior decorators. Lawyers / doctors / physios / hairdressers visiting house-bound elder clients. Elderly and disabled people who cannot manage the bus and rely on lifts from family and friends to visit places in town. Parents taking kids to creches in the zone. A zillion other things I've not thought of.

I'm a major public transport advocate, and actually bother my hole to do a lot to encourage it. But individual vehicles (powered and manual, two wheels or four) aren't evil. They are part of the overall personal transport infrastructure.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

DCC have something like 400-500 spaces at Wood Quay, and over 10k staff, so it doesn't like a huge problem to me.

that could be read as you saying that DCC have over 10k staff at wood quay, which is not true.
they've just a bit over 6,000 employees in total.

monument

IE 222 wrote: »

We can offer all the PT in the world for free there will still be people who will use private car's to commute. For some its not a choice its a necessity. Most commuters working in the heart of the city use PT its were PT doesn't provide a link from house to work place that leads to car's passing through the city centre.

The M50 is kind of irrelevant to city centre traffic. The M50 doesn't offer any realistic releaf to the city centre. For example if someone needs to commute from Clontraf to James St. they will need to travel through the city centre, M50 does nothing in this case. These are the type of journeys that causing the issues.

The only people using the M50 are people working along it or heading out of Dublin.

Clontarf to James's Street? For most people, it's easily done by bicycle or public transport or a mix of public transport, cycling and walking.

IE 222 wrote: »

There should ring roads that allow motorists to bypass the heart of the city.

The 1970s called and they want they ideas back.

Seriously, the number of cars entering the city centre isn't in your wildest dreams a justification for an inner ring road -- and there's still ample scope for model shift, getting more people out of their cars.

Shefwedfan

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Home-care workers. Public health nurses. Environmental health staff. Rubblsh collections. Tradespeople (you'll never get a plumber to fix your blocked toilet if s/he needs to go an prove things to road-police first). Housing officers. Debt collectors. Surveyors. Valuers. Interior decorators. Lawyers / doctors / physios / hairdressers visiting house-bound elder clients. Elderly and disabled people who cannot manage the bus and rely on lifts from family and friends to visit places in town. Parents taking kids to creches in the zone. A zillion other things I've not thought of.

I'm a major public transport advocate, and actually bother my hole to do a lot to encourage it. But individual vehicles (powered and manual, two wheels or four) aren't evil. They are part of the overall personal transport infrastructure.

Majority of the task's listed above do not require a car. Are you really telling me that if a city centre is blocked off that no trademan in Ireland would ever go near it again?

Please explain why lawyers need a car? also a doctor going to a hospital needs a car for what reason? maybe an emergency GP but they would travel under emergency service banner. Also seriously a hairdresser? :P

I won't even ask why a debt collector needs a car? also how you would come up with that as a job that needs to be considered for a public transport discussion. Does he/she need to carry their work tools?

For the few that might require a car then zero emission would be a requirement.

Cars are not evil. It is the people driving them that are just lazy. It is easier to walk out the door and jump into a car, then moan rest of day about the traffic.

It is harder to use imagination and say I can get to work/etc via bus/train/and God help us all a bicycle.

If you really can think of a zillion other things and are a public transport advocate as you claim, think of those zillion things and write beside them why it can't be done on public transport? I bet I could give a zillion simple solutions to majority of them

Dravokivich

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Majority of the task's listed above do not require a car. Are you really telling me that if a city centre is blocked off that no trademan in Ireland would ever go near it again?

Please explain why lawyers need a car? also a doctor going to a hospital needs a car for what reason? maybe an emergency GP but they would travel under emergency service banner. Also seriously a hairdresser? :P

I won't even ask why a debt collector needs a car? also how you would come up with that as a job that needs to be considered for a public transport discussion. Does he/she need to carry their work tools?

For the few that might require a car then zero emission would be a requirement.

Cars are not evil. It is the people driving them that are just lazy. It is easier to walk out the door and jump into a car, then moan rest of day about the traffic.

It is harder to use imagination and say I can get to work/etc via bus/train/and God help us all a bicycle.

If you really can think of a zillion other things and are a public transport advocate as you claim, think of those zillion things and write beside them why it can't be done on public transport? I bet I could give a zillion simple solutions to majority of them

I left my car in work to go for a few beers on friday. It took me 2 hours to get from clondalkin to leixlip by public transport, to collect my car from work.

Imagination isn't lacking from anyone other than those who are meant to be running the system.

Shefwedfan

Dravokivich wrote: »

I left my car in work to go for a few beers on friday. It took me 2 hours to get from clondalkin to leixlip by public transport, to collect my car from work.

Imagination isn't lacking from anyone other than those who are meant to be running the system.

Less than 15km.....you would have cycled that in less

Also double bonus as you would be healthier and also get rid of all those alcohol toxins

:-)

I did say in my post to take a red marker from Castleknock and draw circle, both locations are outside of that circle.

monument

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

But you have no idea what those people were doing before and after you saw them in their car. Eg - dropping two kids at creche - not so easily moved to another mode. Coming from the country to take out an elderly relative - ditto.





Home-care workers. Public health nurses. Environmental health staff. Rubblsh collections. Tradespeople (you'll never get a plumber to fix your blocked toilet if s/he needs to go an prove things to road-police first). Housing officers. Debt collectors. Surveyors. Valuers. Interior decorators. Lawyers / doctors / physios / hairdressers visiting house-bound elder clients. Elderly and disabled people who cannot manage the bus and rely on lifts from family and friends to visit places in town. Parents taking kids to creches in the zone. A zillion other things I've not thought of.

I'm a major public transport advocate, and actually bother my hole to do a lot to encourage it. But individual vehicles (powered and manual, two wheels or four) aren't evil. They are part of the overall personal transport infrastructure.

Do you think Amsterdam or Oslo are real or fictional places? I'm guessing you'll agree they are real...

Now, do you think Amsterdam or Oslo have none of those workers or what?

Half the point of this thread is that advocates of sustainable transport coming up with all these excuses is part of the problem. If you keep coming up with excuses, those excuses weaken the case for investment in sustainable transport and space and priority for it.

magicbastarder

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Less than 15km.....you would have cycled that in less

while drunk in charge of a pedal cycle.

heroics

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Less than 15km.....you would have cycled that in less

Also double bonus as you would be healthier and also get rid of all those alcohol toxins

Where there's a will there's a way

What if they don't want to cycle? The problem with all the people pushing public transport is that you can't see why people like their car. If its raining I don't want to cycle 15Km from leixlip to clondalkin or anywhere else.

Also get me from North Wicklow to Blanch by 5:30am using PT and home at 1pm. By car its 30-40 mins each way.

I own a car anyway so comparing costs from PT to car ownership and including all of them is not really a valid comparison. I am paying for that anyway whether I take PT or not as I like my car.

Shefwedfan

magicbastarder wrote: »

while drunk in charge of a pedal cycle.

He/she was collecting car....so if drunk then should not have been driving the car....

Shefwedfan

heroics wrote: »

What if they don't want to cycle? The problem with all the people pushing public transport is that you can't see why people like their car. If its raining I don't want to cycle 15Km from leixlip to clondalkin or anywhere else.

Also get me from North Wicklow to Blanch by 5:30am using PT and home at 1pm. By car its 30-40 mins each way.

I own a car anyway so comparing costs from PT to car ownership and including all of them is not really a valid comparison. I am paying for that anyway whether I take PT or not as I like my car.

If they don't want to cycle then that is their choice, but then dont bitch and moan about no public transport....it's 15km, hardly a stage on Tour de France

Again I make reference to my original point. Go from Castleknock and draw a big circle. Did I mention Wicklow?

Their is people who will have valid reasons why they need to drive a car but in reality they are in the minority. THe majority could use public transport and have no decent reason why they couldn't.

ED E

heroics wrote: »

I own a car anyway so comparing costs from PT to car ownership and including all of them is not really a valid comparison. I am paying for that anyway whether I take PT or not as I like my car.

The city needs to stop servicing you and start servicing the masses. Individual preference has to be demoted when we live in large groups.

troyzer

Until public transport can get me from my house (Lucan) to my office (Ballsbridge) in half an hour like my car can, I'm simply not going to use it.

My car has so many sunk costs like car insurance and tax (nearly €2.5k a year) that I'm paying anyway whether I use it or not. To get public transport into work I wouldn't be able to make my 7:00 AM start without being either really early or really late and would likely have to take at least two buses over the space of an hour to an hour and a half to get in. Why would I pay extra to start work later and spend two or three times as long in traffic? A bus pass costs another grand or so a year.

It's madness. I'd love to be able to get decent public transport to work like I did before in Australia but it just doesn't work here and I can never see it working.

Shefwedfan

troyzer wrote: »

Until public transport can get me from my house (Lucan) to my office (Ballsbridge) in half an hour like my car can, I'm simply not going to use it.

My car has so many sunk costs like car insurance and tax (nearly €2.5k a year) that I'm paying anyway whether I use it or not. To get public transport into work I wouldn't be able to make my 7:00 AM start without being either really early or really late and would likely have to take at least two buses over the space of an hour to an hour and a half to get in. Why would I pay extra to start work later and spend two or three times as long in traffic? A bus pass costs another grand or so a year.

It's madness. I'd love to be able to get decent public transport to work like I did before in Australia but it just doesn't work here and I can never see it working.

Public transport will not improve till more people use it, more money and then more investment.



Of course PT can get you into city centre/ballsbridge in same time a car could, the problem is people are not using the PT so they have to run infrequent service or it will run at a loss.

The government has 2 options. A straight out ban of all cars in city centre as I posted above.

Or a congestion charge, personally I would go with 20 euro per day. Shutting down on street parking as much as possible as well. Make driving into city centre an absolute nightmare for people....

The masses will not change till it hits their pocket. They will always find an excuse, a reason why it won't work. If they are paying 100 euro per week just to drive into city centre suddenly those reasons will disappear.

monument

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The government has 2 options. A straight out ban of all cars in city centre as I posted above.

Or a congestion charge, personally I would go with 20 euro per day. Shutting down on street parking as much as possible as well. Make driving into city centre an absolute nightmare for people....

Really? How do you explain all the cities which have taken a more pragmatic, incremental approach?

Luas Cross City, BusConnects, cycle routes etc fit with the incremental approach.

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The masses will not change till it hits their pocket. They will always find an excuse, a reason why it won't work. If they are paying 100 euro per week just to drive into city centre suddenly those reasons will disappear.

Really? Does Amsterdam or Utrecht have a congestion charge?

Macy0161

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's probably also important to understand why people are driving into the city. are they driving in because they're already going to be coming a sizable distance where public transport is not feasible, but there aren't adequate park and ride facilities on the outskirts to complete the journey?
or because they've a free parking space and 'may as well use it'?

Probably both? I'm not in the city centre, but have parking. I mix up driving and parking up and cycling. I could park and ride for dart, but space is limited and fills, and it's a poor service to Greystones.

The Luas park and rides are too far in/ I'd get caught in the traffic. They also explicitly restrict usage of the parking to people travelling by luas (ruling out using them for cycle commuting).

So my options is various on street options I've established over the years. Not ideal for residents or from a security point of view for me. The reality is, to be sure of getting them, I'm nearly as early as I would be to avoid "the traffic"...

Further in, you already have people using on street parking to park and ride on Dublin Bus.

Although in theory I commute on a well served corridor (the N/M11) there's massive capacity issues with public transport, and unless you live on the specific route, no option to park and ride. I think this is a massive missed opportunity. Buses, bus lanes instead of hard shoulder even at a few pinch points, and park and rides. Buses are full as it is, but demand to park and ride is enough that some villages (eg Ashford) have to have parking restrictions to stop people parking and riding. I've raised it with local politicians, but they're too busy pushing for widening of the M11...

troyzer

Shefwedfan wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

Until public transport can get me from my house (Lucan) to my office (Ballsbridge) in half an hour like my car can, I'm simply not going to use it.

My car has so many sunk costs like car insurance and tax (nearly €2.5k a year) that I'm paying anyway whether I use it or not. To get public transport into work I wouldn't be able to make my 7:00 AM start without being either really early or really late and would likely have to take at least two buses over the space of an hour to an hour and a half to get in. Why would I pay extra to start work later and spend two or three times as long in traffic? A bus pass costs another grand or so a year.

It's madness. I'd love to be able to get decent public transport to work like I did before in Australia but it just doesn't work here and I can never see it working.

Public transport will not improve till more people use it, more money and then more investment.



Of course PT can get you into city centre/ballsbridge in same time a car could, the problem is people are not using the PT so they have to run infrequent service or it will run at a loss.

The government has 2 options. A straight out ban of all cars in city centre as I posted above.

Or a congestion charge, personally I would go with 20 euro per day. Shutting down on street parking as much as possible as well. Make driving into city centre an absolute nightmare for people....

The masses will not change till it hits their pocket. They will always find an excuse, a reason why it won't work. If they are paying 100 euro per week just to drive into city centre suddenly those reasons will disappear.

It doesn't get me there quicker. I have to leave an hour earlier to get there at the same time via PT. It's ridiculous. Loads of people already use public transport but as has been said repeatedly, there is a small subset of people who just aren't properly served on either the basis of time of day or location. I tick both boxes.

I have off street parking which I don't pay for. Making me pay a congestion charge is silly because there's very little traffic at that time of day anyway. Which makes it even more astonishing that the bus can take up to an hour and a half.

The masses will change when public transport is more convienent. Making driving less convenient is an awful way of forcing people onto public transport which is over capacity, expensive and inefficient.

troyzer

troyzer wrote: »

Shefwedfan wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

Until public transport can get me from my house (Lucan) to my office (Ballsbridge) in half an hour like my car can, I'm simply not going to use it.

My car has so many sunk costs like car insurance and tax (nearly €2.5k a year) that I'm paying anyway whether I use it or not. To get public transport into work I wouldn't be able to make my 7:00 AM start without being either really early or really late and would likely have to take at least two buses over the space of an hour to an hour and a half to get in. Why would I pay extra to start work later and spend two or three times as long in traffic? A bus pass costs another grand or so a year.

It's madness. I'd love to be able to get decent public transport to work like I did before in Australia but it just doesn't work here and I can never see it working.

Public transport will not improve till more people use it, more money and then more investment.



Of course PT can get you into city centre/ballsbridge in same time a car could, the problem is people are not using the PT so they have to run infrequent service or it will run at a loss.

The government has 2 options. A straight out ban of all cars in city centre as I posted above.

Or a congestion charge, personally I would go with 20 euro per day. Shutting down on street parking as much as possible as well. Make driving into city centre an absolute nightmare for people....

The masses will not change till it hits their pocket. They will always find an excuse, a reason why it won't work. If they are paying 100 euro per week just to drive into city centre suddenly those reasons will disappear.

It doesn't get me there quicker. I have to leave an hour earlier to get there at the same time via PT. It's ridiculous. Loads of people already use public transport but as has been said repeatedly, there is a small subset of people who just aren't properly served on either the basis of time of day or location. I tick both boxes.

I have off street parking which I don't pay for. Making me pay a congestion charge is silly because there's very little traffic at that time of day anyway. Which makes it even more astonishing that the bus can take up to an hour and a half.

The masses will change when public transport is more convienent. Making driving less convenient is an awful way of forcing people onto public transport which is over capacity, expensive and inefficient.

I don't think you should be looking at public transport in terms of profitability. Whether or not a route makes money shouldn't matter. Public transport can and should create its own demand. The Luas did this very well, Ryanair is famous for creating demand in routes simply by being cheap. Public transport can do the same simply by being efficient. I would hopefully pay a small premium to get into work on PT even if meant ten or fifteen minutes longer. The problem is it's much, much, much longer.

LeChienMefiant

monument wrote: »

Really? Does Amsterdam or Utrecht have a congestion charge?

In the case of the former the lack of affordable parking negates the need for a congestion charge.

cgcsb

heroics wrote: »

What if they don't want to cycle? The problem with all the people pushing public transport is that you can't see why people like their car. If its raining I don't want to cycle 15Km from leixlip to clondalkin or anywhere else.

Also get me from North Wicklow to Blanch by 5:30am using PT and home at 1pm. By car its 30-40 mins each way.

I own a car anyway so comparing costs from PT to car ownership and including all of them is not really a valid comparison. I am paying for that anyway whether I take PT or not as I like my car.

Hardly relevant to this thread which is about car use in Cities.

cgcsb

troyzer wrote: »

Until public transport can get me from my house (Lucan) to my office (Ballsbridge) in half an hour like my car can, I'm simply not going to use it.

My car has so many sunk costs like car insurance and tax (nearly €2.5k a year) that I'm paying anyway whether I use it or not. To get public transport into work I wouldn't be able to make my 7:00 AM start without being either really early or really late and would likely have to take at least two buses over the space of an hour to an hour and a half to get in. Why would I pay extra to start work later and spend two or three times as long in traffic? A bus pass costs another grand or so a year.

It's madness. I'd love to be able to get decent public transport to work like I did before in Australia but it just doesn't work here and I can never see it working.

Your return journey by car from Ballsbridge to Lucan at circa 15:00 certainly takes you more than half an hour. Actually it's quite likely that with bus connects fully implemented, a C and B bus will get you there in under 40 mins.

Shefwedfan

troyzer wrote: »

I don't think you should be looking at public transport in terms of profitability. Whether or not a route makes money shouldn't matter. Public transport can and should create its own demand. The Luas did this very well, Ryanair is famous for creating demand in routes simply by being cheap. Public transport can do the same simply by being efficient. I would hopefully pay a small premium to get into work on PT even if meant ten or fifteen minutes longer. The problem is it's much, much, much longer.

Luas and Ryanair are both run by companies that want to make money

Anything in Ireland that is propped up by the government is a disaster....it needs to be run by a company that can drive a profit

PT could offer the best service in the World tomorrow,....you would still not get Irish people to use it because the root of the problem is most people are lazy. It is easier to walk out the door and jump into a car then walk 5 mins up the road and get onto a bus.......you even have an app now which tell you exactly when the bus will arrive to stop so you dont have to stand around and still people dont use it....



The only way to move people onto PT is to hit their pockets. Simple as that, otherwise we will be having this discussion in 30 years time and nothing will have changed.

cgcsb

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The government has 2 options. A straight out ban of all cars in city centre as I posted above.

Or a congestion charge, personally I would go with 20 euro per day. Shutting down on street parking as much as possible as well. Make driving into city centre an absolute nightmare for people....

There are more than those two options actually. Over the next year we are likely to see the following traffic limiting measures:

-College Green pedestrianisation
-Quays car ban
-George's St car ban
-One way systems in Terenure, Stoneybatter and Rathmines.

These measures alone will dissuade thousands of drivers from their cars. Then we can face more difficult issues, closing Drury st/Brown Thomas car parks and pedestrianizing the entire area or make it bike only for example.

Shefwedfan

Shefwedfan wrote: »

If they don't want to cycle then that is their choice, but then dont bitch and moan about no public transport....it's 15km, hardly a stage on Tour de France

Again I make reference to my original point. Go from Castleknock and draw a big circle. Did I mention Wicklow?

Their is people who will have valid reasons why they need to drive a car but in reality they are in the minority. THe majority could use public transport and have no decent reason why they couldn't.

Have you tried getting on the Luas green between 7 and 9 in the morning?

Cars have to disappear for ecology, even so called zero cars like electric - all they do is make the pollution remote to the rich. There is nothing unharmful in the manufacter of cars. How to get rid of cars? Make everything available locally. Jobs from home or kiosks. Manufactering done by automaton. Virtual shops where you order and get delivery.

Make no reason to have a car. Public transport can never be enough capacity, even in the cities we praise for infra structure, there are many cars.

The achievable is to have no cars in city centres, anything else is sky pie!

cgcsb

troyzer wrote: »

The masses will change when public transport is more convienent. Making driving less convenient is an awful way of forcing people onto public transport which is over capacity, expensive and inefficient.

You can't have one without the other in practice. Improved public transport = more road space for buses = less roadspace for cars.

Stephen15

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Luas and Ryanair are both run by companies that want to make money

Anything in Ireland that is propped up by the government is a disaster....it needs to be run by a company that can drive a profit

Comparing the Luas to Ryanair is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Transdev are subcontracted by the government to run the Luas at a fixed fee. TII a government own the track and the NTA own the rolling stock and keep the fares. It is a PSO service like Dublin Bus, Irish Rail or Bus Eireann albeit not operated by a semi state body. Go-Ahead will operating on that model too.

Podge_irl

No public transportation system will cater for everyone but focusing on some hard cases is missing the point. When people talk about reducing car use in the city they generally are not talking about people driving into work at 6am. They are not impacting anyone. It is the people driving up the quays at 8am who are complaining about "traffic chaos" when the road was turned into two bus lanes that are the problem. It was a public transportation initiative which improved commuting times for the 90% of people using them and yet somehow the focus was on the 10% of people who were stuck in their wildly inefficient cars, still taking up 33% of the space, that were the focus of pretty much everyone.

And yes, some of those people will have utterly legitimate reasons to be driving. But they should neither demand nor expect to be the focus of transport planners.

orangerhyme

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Luas and Ryanair are both run by companies that want to make money

Anything in Ireland that is propped up by the government is a disaster....it needs to be run by a company that can drive a profit

PT could offer the best service in the World tomorrow,....you would still not get Irish people to use it because the root of the problem is most people are lazy. It is easier to walk out the door and jump into a car then walk 5 mins up the road and get onto a bus.......you even have an app now which tell you exactly when the bus will arrive to stop so you dont have to stand around and still people dont use it....



The only way to move people onto PT is to hit their pockets. Simple as that, otherwise we will be having this discussion in 30 years time and nothing will have changed.

People use metros and undergrounds; people will use buses if they're frequent and fast enough.
That's why the busconnects and road widening projects are so important.

One big issue I see is when autonomous electric taxis come in. These will be very cost competitive without the cost of petrol or drivers wages.
Very difficult for a bus to compete with.

Stephen15

orangerhyme wrote: »

One big issue I see is when autonomous electric taxis come in. These will be very cost competitive without the cost of petrol or drivers wages.
Very difficult for a bus to compete with.

I think if such things were to come into existence they should be limited to a certain number the prevent a free for all.

Dravokivich

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Less than 15km.....you would have cycled that in less

Also double bonus as you would be healthier and also get rid of all those alcohol toxins

:-)

I did say in my post to take a red marker from Castleknock and draw circle, both locations are outside of that circle.

Cycling ain't an option. Too many hazards. And wouldn't be much use getting the kid to creche, with a school run coming up this year.

Anyhow castelknock is a bad example on your part. A lot of the congestion comes from it's own area. With the exception of a rat run to the N3 from Phoenix park.

Shefwedfan

Dravokivich wrote: »

Cycling ain't an option. Too many hazards. And wouldn't be much use getting the kid to creche, with a school run coming up this year.

Anyhow castelknock is a bad example on your part. A lot of the congestion comes from it's own area. With the exception of a rat run to the N3 from Phoenix park.

You said Friday night, I would have expected you picked up Saturday!!



I used Castleknock because of gates to park.....the park should be closed ASAP to all traffic apart from PT

monument

Dravokivich wrote: »

Cycling ain't an option. Too many hazards. And wouldn't be much use getting the kid to creche, with a school run coming up this year.

Anyhow castelknock is a bad example on your part. A lot of the congestion comes from it's own area. With the exception of a rat run to the N3 from Phoenix park.

This is the point of the thread -- not current conditions alone but how we think of the move away from current conditions.

But even in the current condition a growing number of people cycle with their children to creche or school. With improved conditions more and more people will accept the option.

FYI I'm not making any recommendations for you personally -- I'm looking at the wider picture.