We very much welcome the decision of Dublin City Council, as I understand it, yesterday evening to approve the proposal to create a bus gate at College Green from 7 a.m. until 10 a.m. and from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. That is a recommendation the joint committee made in its report on a short-term action plan for more efficient bus services in Dublin. I invite the city manager, Mr. John Tierney, to make the first presentation. We will then hear from the other two groups. Before Mr. Tierney commences, I welcome him and his colleagues from Dublin City Council, Mr. Michael Philips and Mr. Brendan O'Brien. I also welcome from the Dublin Chamber of Commerce Mr. Peter Brennan, vice president, Ms Gina Quinn, chief executive, and Aebhric McGibney, as well as Mr. Conor Faughnan from AA Ireland. I invite the city manager to commence his presentation.
Proposed Bus Gate: Discussion.
Mr. John Tierney
On the stage we are at in the process, the strategic policy committee met yesterday evening. It made a recommendation to the city council which will make a final decision on the matter on 11 May. The Chairman explained the decision. We submitted a short outline of our presentation. Mr. O'Brien will give a brief synopsis on the impact of the proposed scheme on public transport and business.
Mr. Brendan O’Brien
The proposal we put to the startegic policy committee yesterday was that public transport be given priority in the area of College Green. The work we have done shows that approximately 6% of car users who enter the canal cordon during the morning peak period use this corridor. One of the key points of the proposal is that cars would not be banned from the city centre, rather they would be rerouted to maximise the efficiency of public transport within the area.
The public consultation process revealed that 78% of respondents were opposed to the original scheme which proposed a 24-hour bus gate, operational seven days a week. Some of the major groups which objected included the DCBA, Dublin Chamber of Commerce and AA Ireland, with various retailers. Concerns were expressed about the potential negative impact the bus gate would have on retail sales, the difficulties shoppers might have in accessing the city centre and access to car parks. It was suggested the timing of the scheme was premature and that it should not proceed until after the completion of Samuel Beckett Bridge and Marlborough Street Bridge, real-time passenger information was available on buses and the car park information system had been improved. Submissions were made on the hours of operation of the scheme.
The groups in favour of the scheme included the major public transport operators, Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann, as well as the RPA. The argument made by Dublin Bus in favour of the scheme was that approximately 100 million passengers a year would benefit from it, as that is the number of passengers it carries through or whose destination is in this corridor. Approximately 4,500 buses pass through the corridor between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Dublin Bus estimates that the operational cost of congestion is in the order of €3 million. It also estimates that the cost to passengers in journey time variability and time cost is approximately €25 million.
Some groups which made submissions indicated this would be a welcome initiative as a means of improving the pedestrian and cycling environment and that it also would provide an opportunity to redesign College Green at a later stage.
The members of the SPC voted unanimously in favour of option 3, a peak hour bus gate, which means that it would be operational mornings and evenings only, Monday to Friday. We consider this to be a reasonable option, as it takes accounts of the views of the business community in the retail trade and these are the hours during which Dublin Bus experiences the most severe congestion in the corridor.
Our retail impact assessment of the scheme revealed that a large proportion of retail sales in the city would be completely unaffected by it and that in terms of a 24-hour scheme the potential maximum decrease in retail sales would be approximately 3.2%. It also revealed that approximately 80% of shoppers in the city were non-car based; in other words, they travelled to the city by bus, walked or cycled.
In our consideration of the hours of operation of the scheme, we discovered that between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m approximately 6,000 cars — as opposed to approximately 2,000 buses — passed through the area. This is a key period for the retail trade. The operation of the scheme would result in a marked reduction in the number of cars that could potentially be affected by the bus gate and potentially impact on retail sales. We also considered the times the maximum number of vehicles passed through the area. Between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. there is not a high number of car borne shoppers. The same applies to the period after 6 p.m., except on Thursdays.
We compared the spend profile of shoppers in the city centre on a weekday and a Saturday and found that on a Tuesday the average spend was accounted for by 26% of car users compared to 74% by non-car users. However, on a Saturday the average spend accounted for by car users increases to 52%. That was the reason we decided the restrictions should not apply on Saturdays and Sundays. The bus service does not experience as much congestion through the area on a Saturday or a Sunday; clearly, Saturday, in particular, is a very important day for retailers.
We also took account of the submission made by the DCBA. It pointed out, in particular, that car shoppers had a different pattern as they did not use the road during morning and evening peak traffic hours. We also took account of a submission from Weir & Sons which indicated that car borne shopper numbers peaked at lunchtime and were not a major factor during the peak traffic periods.
We examined the impact of the scheme on bus passenger numbers by using a measure which did not give them a benefit between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. The red circle on the graph in the presentation marks the passenger numbers who would be affected. As members will note, these hours are well outside peak carrying times. While many buses pass through the area during these hours, we considered that congestion and time variability would not be particularly bad for the bus service during off-peak traffic periods and also that passenger numbers were not as high as during peak traffic hours. At the special SPC meeting the members unanimously voted to approve option 3 without amendments.
Did the delegates have a preferred option or did they adopt a neutral position as to which would be the best option?
Mr. Brendan O’Brien
We originally proposed a 24-hour bus gate, operational seven days a week. If one considered such a proposal from a purely public transport point of view, it would make a good deal of sense. However, the reason we engaged in the public consultation process was to take account of the views of the various parties concerned. When one considers the potential impact of the proposed scheme from the point of view of the retailer, it makes sense for us to commence the scheme taking account of morning and evening peak traffic hours. Saturday is an important retail day. Many bus lanes are operational from Monday to Saturday, but it was considered that in this area it would be more appropriate for them to be operational from Monday to Friday.
Mr. O'Brien said that under option 3 cars would not be banned, rather that they would be rerouted. Will he outline a brief synopsis of the rerouting proposed? Specifically what areas would be closed to car users?
Mr. Brendan O’Brien
The area between Bank of Ireland and Trinity College would be closed in this respect. During the hours of operation of the bus gate, private cars would not be allowed in this area. A person driving down Dame Street would pass by the taxi rank and as there would be a break in the median, he or she would have to turn back. A person who needed to access Dame Street for loading or a car park would continue to be allowed to do so but would not be allowed to drive past Bank of Ireland. Coming from D'Olier Street, a driver would come into College Green but would have to turn back to Westmoreland Street and would not be allowed to drive around the front of Trinity College. Access to D'Olier Street and Westmoreland Street for deliveries and car parking would also be maintained.
Mr. Peter Brennan
The College Green area is the hub of the city. It is critical for business, commerce, students and tourists. Before I talk about the bus gate, I will indicate how the Dublin Chamber of Commerce sees the College Green area developing when everything is finished. It will not be affected immediately by the metro but the Luas BX line and the Lucan line will pass in front of College Green. The bus gate would mean huge improvements in pedestrianisation, which we welcome, and significant access for cyclists and the city would be open for business because of the other infrastructure works to facilitate traffic coming in and out. Our vision for College Green is for something progressive and would be a huge improvement on the current situation.
We envisage the work taking approximately five years, with metro north probably beginning in two years, and by 2015 or 2016 the vision we have would be delivered. We support the RPA, the Government and the council to ensure everything is done to get metro north and the DART interconnector approved by planning authorities and subsequently built. We are full supporters of public transport in the city centre. When all the issues are sorted out, there will be a big debate on congestion charges but that is for another day.
As regards the College Green bus gate, we only had an issue with timing. When the Marlborough Street-Hawkins Street bridge is built, buses will come down Hawkins Street and Marlborough Street and will be able to use the bridge to gain access to the quays and the south and north city. The bridge is at planning stage with the council and is a critical piece of infrastructure for bus routing in and around the city centre.
We believe Samuel Beckett Bridge will take a huge amount of traffic out of the city centre. Some 80% of the current volume of traffic going up Nassau Street in the morning goes to offices around St. Stephen's Green and Merrion Square and there is no reason the vast bulk of it will not use the Macken Street bridge when it opens next year. That will instantly relieve pressure on College Green.
We also hope to see real-time passenger information for buses in the next 12 months and an improvement in signage. We did not envisage that the bus gate would be built now and always supported it being built as part of a package of enabling works that would start when metro north got under way, but not before. Buses in and around College Green need Marlborough Street bridge and it is necessary for traffic to be diverted via the Macken Street bridge north and south of the city. Signage and real-time passenger information are also needed but none of this will happen before next July. There will be a rerouting of cars but there will also be a rerouting of buses. There is no reason a substantial number of buses cannot go over the Macken Street bridge and handle a huge an amount of south side business, creating space on College Green.
I only got the chance this morning to read the economic report but will study it more closely. We received 23 documents from the RPA yesterday about this proposal and the wider traffic management plans for the city. They are hugely important documents for commerce but I have not read all of them yet. There is a huge assumption that there will be a metro stop on O'Connell Street but there is also talk of one elsewhere, perhaps in the Marlborough Street area. If the metro stop is in Marlborough Street rather than O'Connell Street, it will have fundamental implications for the flow of buses and traffic through the city centre. We hope it will be in O'Connell Street but accept that there is a planning hearing. We take the view that there is no point digging up or rearranging College Green if, 18 months later, Luas lines are constructed across the city and out to Lucan, meaning we will have to contemplate further works to accommodate the enabling works in the area.
When the metro starts, all of Westmoreland Street will close, except one lane for public transport only — a proposal which we support — and College Green will be a no-go area for cars. We had hoped the bus gate would be built at that time, not in advance of it. It will be tough enough for the private motorist in the city when metro north starts and we had hoped for a delay in putting in a bus gate at College Green. We had hoped to see a bus gate at College Green when metro north started, perhaps 18 months from now.
We will work very closely with the city manager and his team. We have spoken in favour of a limited bus gate proposition, to apply in the mornings and, possibly, in the evenings. We will talk to the city manager, the RPA and Dublin Bus, which is a member of Dublin Chamber of Commerce, to see what we can practically do to make sure there is no significant disruption to the commerce of the city. Last night I spoke to several businesses in the city centre about the decision and was told any reduction in retail sales, on top of what was already an absolute disaster, would not be welcomed. We need to keep jobs in the city and send a message that car access to the city is encouraged. We are disappointed that there have been briefings to the effect that the city centre is to be made car free. We acknowledge that vision for the time when metro north is finished but not in the current climate. There is scope to achieve a sustainable, more pedestrianised city in which there is more cycling, but we must go through five years of construction pain if we are to get there. We want to work with all the stakeholders to ensure there is the right balance between public transport and better access.
We consider last night's decision to be very important and are digesting its implications. We need to consult our members on the large amount of documentation received in the past 24 hours. We get on well with Mr. Tierney and his team and with the city council, the RPA and Dublin Bus. We want to work with them to see what is the best practical solution. We have a number of genuine concerns about the College Green bus gate in the short, medium and long term.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
I thank committee members for giving me the opportunity to speak today. The proposed College Green bus gate has, unsurprisingly, been a matter of great concern and interest for the people of Dublin. The AA has received a large volume of calls and e-mails from members and I have held detailed conversations with many of the affected parties, including Dublin Bus, city councillors and officials, traders, publicans, hoteliers and car park owners.
The AA is a representative group for private motorists but private motorists are relatively unaffected as relatively few private cars use the affected area since restrictions were introduced in O'Connell Street and Great George's Street South a number of years ago. Of the 64,000 cars which enter the city centre via the canal cordon each morning peak period, only 6% actually use the affected streets. I do not have a problem either ideologically or practically with the concept of making this portion of the city centre car free. A fellow member of the Dublin City Council transport committee, Mr. Derek Peppard described a vision of Dublin's answer to Barcelona's Ramblas where one creates a civic space that runs from St. Stephen’s Green down Grafton Street, passes the front of Trinity College, on to Westmoreland Street to O’Connell Street. That is a very attractive idea and I can certainly see the benefits, but in a scheme of this scale, there needs to be a clear understanding of the consequences and implications. It is certainly true that buses are frequently badly delayed in the affected area and it is also common sense to favour public transport and give it priority. However, I am not at all sure that the solution is to hand over the entire space to Dublin Bus. I do not think that we will bring about the sort of city centre open space vision that we want by turning one of the most attractive parts of the city into a solid wall of buses, which is what I fear will happen.
The congestion that one sees in the area every day is most often caused by buses. I have met Dublin Bus executives to discuss this and it appears that of all the passengers that Dublin Bus carries across the whole of the greater Dublin area 60% or 90 million people annually are funnelled through O'Connell Street and College Green. I find this astonishing and I cannot believe it represents the best use of resources. The congestion in the College Green area seems to be dominated by buses and I am not convinced that enough planning or route design work has been done to minimise that. Despite my efforts, I have been unable to find out how many of these 90 million passengers are actually heading to a destination within the city centre. Anyone who wants to travel from Rathfarnham to Blanchardstown or from Glasnevin to Ballsbridge must make two trips and walk the connection in the city centre and Dublin Bus counts this as two satisfied customers, both of whom need to be on College Green or O'Connell Street.
Dublin Bus deserves a great deal of credit for the service it provides. We would be lost without it and it is worth making the point that it is severely underfunded. By international and European standards, the rate of annual subvention for Dublin Bus is shamefully low, nevertheless, I do not want to see the city centre become a car park of buses. The example I gave at the meeting last night where this was discussed was Oxford Street in London. If one knows Oxford Street, it is effectively two streets, one on either side and they are completely cut off from each other by a constant wall of buses. One has pedestrians and tourists competing for space on overcrowded footpaths. One cannot look up and see the buildings. I do not think that is attractive and in my mind it diminishes what should be a beautiful urban space.
I cycle regularly in central Dublin and I know at first hand about the city's ongoing traffic problems. We must look at it more broadly. There would be a significant effect on the numbers of shoppers using car parks and a consequent cost to local traders and as everybody knows local traders have been very concerned about this idea. Obviously nobody wants to do economic damage to the city. As has been said, the plan will also be affected by the construction of both the Luas extension and metro north. Whether those plans will go ahead in their current form, we do not know, but they are currently part of the plan.
It is the AA's policy to support public transport and to provide motorists with good alternatives. That is the model for success in cities around the world and it should be the centre of our policy here. For this reason the AA was a strong champion of the Luas. Even when all around were criticising it during construction, we supported the installation of quality bus corridors and we favour spending motoring taxes on supporting Dublin Bus and on providing rail and cycling facilities. When this proposal was brought before the traffic SPC of Dublin City Council earlier this year, I expressed my concerns but I supported sending the plan forward for public consultation. During that period I met representatives from Dublin Bus and others and I sought the views of AA members through our website. I felt there might be the bones of a very good idea in it, but I could not support it in its proposed form.
At the SPC meeting last night the issue was again debated and in response to the concerns raised in particular with respect to the effect on traders, a compromise proposal was agreed upon, option 3 that Mr. Brendan O'Brien has outlined in his briefing. That revised scheme will see the bus gate used only during the peak commuter periods, 7 a.m to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Monday to Friday. This is reasonable in that it provides bus priority when it is most needed but it should not be too disruptive to the economy. I supported that revised proposal and was happy to vote in favour of it last night. The AA believes the bus gate proposal will have limited benefit to Dublin Bus in the absence of more meaningful route design. We cannot simply allow the area to be filled up by more and more buses being funnelled into the newly available space. This could be a critical moment for Dublin Bus, which must simply demonstrate that it can make proper and efficient use of this privileged access to a scarce resource. I would like to think that this committee could take an interest in its performance in this regard.
There are other issues. There have not been proper assurances as to improved pedestrian or cycling facilities. I have yet to see clear details on what is to be done to improve things for cyclists and for pedestrians and it will be very important to plan and signpost the car access routes to the city centre and to the shopping car parks. Private motorists, as I have noted, will not be all that affected, so it will not be a hot issue for them, but it has been very relevant.
I also feel that the presentation of this option is very important. It should not be presented as a car ban in Dublin city centre because it is nothing of the sort. That sort of message being sent out does no favour to city centre traders. One cannot give the impression that there is no access to town and that one cannot drive into town. What these restrictions mean is simply that one cannot commute through some central streets at peak times. It is very important to present the message correctly to the public. This has the potential to be an effective and useful measure. Whether it will be in the end will depend on the determination of a number of agencies, most notably Dublin Bus.
Before I take questions from members of the committee, will Mr. Tierney respond to the points made by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce and the AA?
Mr. John Tierney
Some of the comments point to the issues that came out of the public consultation and the reason for putting forward the three options as part of the second deliberation on the scheme. The view has been taken — the members adopted this view as well — that the stepped change where one brings about very significant improvements for Dublin Bus but at the same time in a period of very difficult economic times that cognisance is taken of car borne shoppers which is critical to the retail sector in the first iteration of the proposal. That is the balance that has been struck in the first change.
Many issues have been raised on the routing of the buses and so on. I know the committee has deliberated with Dublin Bus on the Deloitte report and what will come out of it. Irrespective of what changes are made, this will be a critical artery for Dublin Bus in the current and future service provision. That point must be stressed.
Most of the documents that have been distributed in recent days are actually the documents associated with the metro works. The timing is not meant to be coincidental with the deliberation on the bus gate. The only proposed stop for the metro in this area is in O'Connell Street. There is a suggestion by some of the observers to the metro north process that the stop should be elsewhere but the proposal is for a stop in O'Connell Street.
Are taxis allowed through?
Mr. John Tierney
Yes.
Taxis and buses are allowed though, but what is the story about deliveries?
Mr. Brendan O’Brien
During the hours of operation of bus gate, deliveries are not allowed through.
I welcome the decision and it is a good idea to introduce it at peak times as opposed to an all day ban. I hope it will prove successful.
I have one question for the city manager. We were given very good proposals by the city engineer, Mr. Michael Philips and the DTO on the traffic modelling exercise being done to show that rerouted traffic could access the city very successfully and particularly car parking in the city which would not be affected by the opening of the bus gate. Could Mr. Tierney reinforce his past statements in this regard?
It is reassuring that when this initiative is up and running the delegation is absolutely confident it will be successful, that it will enhance the city centre from the point of view of its trade, commerce and quality of life. This is the reassurance I received when I went into a great deal of detail with Mr. Michael Philips and with Mr. John Henry. I welcome the response of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce and the AA. It is certainly not as negative as previous responses and this is significant. I put it to the delegation that every modern city in Europe and throughout the world is moving away from the culture of people expecting to drive their cars into the city centre and to their places of work in particular. I refer to the point made by Mr. McGibney with regard to Nassau Street, that so many of the cars are being driven to offices. I refer to the committee's short-term action plan for developing an efficient bus network for Dublin. We have to discourage people from driving cars into the city centre and this starts with us politicians. Is there not a need for both organisations to accept that driving into the city, particularly commuter traffic, is a non-starter and should be discouraged in every way? I am delighted to see that 80% of shoppers surveyed are not using cars and account for 63% of retail sales. There is certainly a requirement——
On that point, how many shoppers in the Dublin region would be car-based in the four Dublin counties?
I wish to finish my point. In regard to the need for access to car parking space, nobody has any argument about that and I await the manager's response.
I have a specific question for the delegation. Mr. Conor Faughnan of the AA in particular was very negative when the committee endorsed this proposal last year. I recall and I have documentation here that when the Stillorgan bus lane was being introduced, he said it would bring south Dublin to a standstill but it is now the most successful quality bus corridor in Europe. The Dublin Chamber of Commerce has constantly told us that this should all happen subsequent to the introduction of a state-of-the-art public transport system. To have a good bus network, we must take some hard decisions in regard to the number of people coming into the city in cars. This is my question to the delegation. Is it not time we had some hard decisions taken such as this one, to make it more difficult for commuters and to encourage them to use the bus in the short term and when we have better metro and Luas services, to use the other forms of public transport in the longer term?
Mr. John Tierney
In response to the questions put by the Chairman, we can illustrate the rerouting of the through traffic and the access to car parks. We will take a very deliberate approach to signage and we have received suggestions in that regard from the submissions in terms of how it can be improved and whether people want to access car parks on the south city or the north city. Most of the people who come in to park on either side of the city will walk to the other side to do their shopping rather than take the car across as part of that shopping expedition. We are very conscious — we have mentioned this in the report — of the absolute importance of the bus shopper and the figures are very significant in that regard. We do not have the breakdown which Deputy Broughan is asking for——
Is this not very significant? This is a point the Chairman is missing to some extent. When I was a city councillor and the leader of the rainbow alliance on Dublin City Council, one of the issues we faced constantly was that Dublin city centre competes directly with Blanchardstown, directly with Liffey Valley, directly with Dundrum and directly with Tallaght. This week, a major decision is to be made about Northside centre. The Pavilions in Swords has applied for 120,000 sq. m of retail space. I support the decision taken by my colleagues. Some of my Labour Party colleagues spoke very strongly in favour of the proposal and of option three and I heard the view of our chairperson, the former Deputy Seán Kenny and Councillor Andy Montague and Councillor Mick Conaghan. One of the issues for which we always felt responsible is that this choice is offered around the M50 ring and other European cities do not have massive suburban centres directly competing with a widely spread town centre. One of the special problems faced by Dublin is to protect Henry Street and Grafton Street and the general town centre in the face of these other centres yet the delegation does not have the figures on this problem. They cannot tell us how many shoppers overall in the Dublin region are car-based. With regard to overall retail spend in the past five years, is it known what the relationship is between Dublin city centre and those outlying centres?
Mr. John Tierney
With regard to the Deputy's initial question about the number of carborne shoppers to the city centre being from Dublin or from outside Dublin, we do not have the——
That is not what I asked.
Mr. John Tierney
Sorry, that was the question that I understood the Deputy asked.
No. I am asking about shoppers within the four Dublin counties. Mr. Tierney is the former manager of Fingal County Council and he has been manager of the four Dublin counties. What percentage of them are not shopping in the city centre at all? They have free car parking in Blanchardstown and it is almost free in Dundrum, they have free parking in Quarryvale and so on. These are planning disasters for the Dublin region in some respect because of the effect on Dublin centre. There is concern that the centre is under severe pressure. I support a pedestrian centre but we have to manage it very carefully because it has very severe competition outside that region.
Mr. John Tierney
We do not have the figures here but we can provide approximate footfall figures for each of the destinations referred to by the Deputy. However, a fundamental policy of Dublin City Council has been and is, through the retail core policy, to ensure that the primary shopping destination in this country is Dublin city centre. This focus is very evident at the moment because another oral hearing being carried on is on the Carlton development and we have also had the proposals for Arnotts. The actions of Dublin City Council have been very strong in making Dublin city centre the most attractive destination for shopping.
To return to the question I asked earlier about the modelling exercise.
Mr. John Tierney
We can show the committee the redistribution of traffic based on the current proposals. I mentioned the issue of signage and how this will be improved. A new variable messaging system, VMS, will be installed and it is hoped this will be implemented by the end of the year or very early next year. With regard to pedestrians and cyclists, the 30 km/h limit will be introduced for a defined area in the city centre to improve conditions for both the pedestrian and cyclist and the HGV ban has been a wonderful success story by making conditions more suitable for them.
Is the delegation categorical in saying that the proposed traffic diversion or traffic rerouting will not have a negative impact on the retail and trading of the city?
Mr. John Tierney
We presented those figures about the retail impact assessment at the meeting yesterday. Mr. Peter Brennan and his colleagues would like to consider this report further.
Mr. Peter Brennan
I wish to make some further remarks. Whether a person chooses to drive into the city centre to shop or go to the Pavilions in Swords it is a case of what suits the person best and what his or her perceptions are. If a shopper hears that car movements are to be discouraged in the city centre, then he or she will go elsewhere. This is what is being said in the media and it is not helping the city centre retailers. I appreciate what the Chairman said, that we must discourage car traffic and I agree with him. However, this can be done when we have the metro and when the DART interconnector is finished and when the two Luas lines are built. We will then pedestrianise the city centre, have this fantastic civic space and everyone will be proud of our city centre. However, we have a minimum of five years of pain to go through to get there and we do not need to send out messages to reluctant shoppers that they cannot come into the city centre because route X, Y or Z is closed. They can become discouraged very quickly and they can go to the suburbs. We do not want them to go to the suburbs, we want them to shop in the city centre. There is a sizable communications piece related to what we are trying to do, which is one of our major concerns. We must genuinely be able to say to everyone, including the committee, that Dublin city centre is open for business and that, over time, whether one wishes to commute or go to work; one will have the most fabulous public transport system in Europe.
The essential point is that we must discourage commuters for the peak morning and evening times. They are not shoppers; they are commuters, including ourselves. We must switch from the car to the bus for the moment and to the Luas and DART to a limited degree. Is that not a key message?
Mr. Peter Brennan
It is a key message.
For that key message to be successful is it not absolutely essential that we do not wait for five years of total chaos in the city centre while all the construction work has been ongoing, as the delegation suggested, and that it must be done now?
Mr. Peter Brennan
Let us suppose the bus gate goes ahead in August. Some 13 months following the bus gate enabling works and construction work on Metro north would then start. Then we could say, "You ain't seen nothing yet," because the entire area of Westmoreland Street bar one lane would be closed. There would be significant disruption to D'Olier Street and in and around St. Stephen's Green, through O'Connell Street and up around Parnell Square. The shopper commuter will face a significant number of bus gate equivalent problems throughout the city. While the bus gate is very significant for Dublin Bus, there is a far bigger picture here, which is, getting buses in and through the city. Thus, the importance of the Marlborough Street to Hawkins Street bridge. It is very important to get the Macken Street bridge built, because that would take a significant percentage of through traffic from O'Connell Street and College Green such that the person who works in Merrion Square can get to the north side over the Macken Street bridge.
Why does the city council not wait for those two bridges?
Mr. Peter Brennan
That is what we are asking.
Mr. John Tierney
We have demonstrated that the proposal we have put in place can work as it stands. The matter will be reviewed again when the Macken Street bridge opens. It has been stated that we will review the operation of the proposal when Macken Street bridge opens which will be approximately early next year.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
I do not feel AA Ireland has been negative about these and other transport initiatives. We accept in the broadest sense that people cannot use their cars to excess and I have said so many times. I am on record and there are many articles and comments over the years to that effect. The real wasteful behaviour, especially in Dublin's case, is the use of cars for commuting, not the use of cars for access to do business in the city centre. I have also made that point many times over the years.
When clamping was introduced in Dublin in 1997, Owen Keegan was the city manager. One would have expected an old-fashioned lobbying or representative organisation such as AA Ireland simply to declare itself passionately against it, but that was never our view. We always accepted that its function was to ensure that on-street parking spaces turned over and that the city operated more efficiently and there is no doubt that it worked. We supported it all along.
The real damaging behaviour is when people use the private car to commute in mass volume and there is a tidal flow in and out in the morning. That is the biggest single traffic problem for Dublin. Throughout the world, as it was pointed out, modern cities are moving completely away from that model. One can point to examples such as Los Angles which is dysfunctionally car dependent. Our model is more in line with the European city such as Amsterdam, Munich or Copenhagen where the vast bulk of the population commute by public transport. That is in keeping with the policy of AA Ireland, which is a motoring and touring body.
AA Ireland is a member of the pan-European network of AA-type clubs. They are all similar to ours and were all founded approximately 100 years ago. The largest and most successful such club in the world per capita is the Dutch club, which has been to the forefront in such matters, promoting cycling in Holland. We say everything we possibly can that is supportive of public transport and cycling. We explicitly supported the Luas when it was under construction despite the fact that many people were very critical of the cost. We always believed it was a good idea. We fully agree that one must spend motoring taxes on providing public transport. We are often critical of things which have not taken place which we wish to see. For example, there is still a dearth of park and ride sites serving Dublin, a relatively low tech solution that could be done better and has not been done much at all. We complained fairly passionately about that, but I do not believe we are negative and certainly not in a dysfunctional pro-car sense. That debate has long since been put to bed and has been accepted by AA Ireland and me for as long as I have done this policy job.
As for the comments on the Stillorgan QBC, it is one of those classic examples. Humphrey Bogart never said "Play it again, Sam" but it will forever be quoted. Perhaps it is simply that when I make a positive comment one is far less likely to see it in print than if I say something that seems like the start of a right good dust up.
Mr. Faughnan does not need to tell us that.
We welcome your positive comments today.
I welcome the delegations and I strongly support the decision taken by the Dublin City Council traffic strategic policy committee yesterday. The step-by-step approach of the city manager is probably correct. The city council has already made very significant changes such as those related to Pearse Street and Dawson Street. I remember when those changes were made there were many naysayers and doom mongers but the changes eased the pressure in moving towards this bus gate. In general terms this is the way to proceed. The council had to prepare people some way back for major changes.
I share some of the concerns of the chamber of commerce in respect of the city centre. I read the planning list for Fingal and South Dublin county councils. I note people have applied to treble or quadruple the capacity in the Pavilions, or to double the size of Blanchardstown shopping centre and so on. These present great challenges that other cities in Europe with perhaps more integrated planning do not have because they have set out to make the city centre the commercial centre in every respect. The Chairman referred to such cities. We have failed in that regard by allowing certain matters to develop. There are tribunals investigating at least one of those centres and the way it was allowed to develop.
I refer to the question correctly raised by Mr. Faughnan. If the area in question becomes a parking space for buses or becomes completely bus dominated it is likely to be very unattractive. What are the city manager's proposals in respect of pedestrians and cycling? We have seen this space transformed at festival time such as on St. Patrick's Day. I remember when we gave the freedom of the city to Bill Clinton and the space in front of Trinity College became a very attractive city plaza. What proposals does the council have to enable the area to become very cycle and pedestrian friendly, in other words, to enable it to become a common area for all the users of the city? The council indicated the number of people who are, even if they bring a car to the outskirts, pedestrians and who walk back and forth between the north and south side whether it is over the last new bridge or in this area. What does the council intend to do for this new space to make it a better area for the community? There have been a significant number of complaints about the grotesque lack of taxi infrastructure. I am aware there is at least one major rank in that area. What does the council intend in that regard?
The Chairman has referred many times to the matter of park-and-ride facilities. If the city council wishes to promote pedestrianised shopping why has it taken virtually no action in respect of providing park-and-ride facilities? I recall when I sat on the city council. It was before the current city manager held that position, but Mr. Phillips will remember my constant motions calling for park-and-ride facilities at DART stations. Speaking as a former city councillor, we did nothing and took no action to develop the park-and-ride concept for the outskirts of the city to enhance the city centre.
I refer to the proposed metro and all other major public transport which my party and I strongly support. There seems to be a deficit. I understand the city manager is the chairman and the director of the committee established by the Minister more than one year ago. I got the information from some of the companies that had tendered for it and who visited the Oireachtas. It was from this source I learned, for example, that the statues of Daniel O'Connell and Parnell would go as well as the other monuments. One of them told me that 78,000 truckloads of infill would have to be taken out of the boxes, as he called them, for the new O'Connell and Parnell stations. This would seem to be one of the great engineering projects in the history of Europe, or perhaps the world, and Mr. Tierney is the man in charge of the preparation for it, I believe.
We need more information. Obviously, the Bord Pleanála open hearings are taking place at the moment, but at this stage we would like to know more since we are ready to take the pain on behalf of our constituents, as the gains will be massive. Between the metro and the interconnector they will bring us, hopefully, in football terms up the championship level, although not perhaps to premiership level, in terms of public transport. However, there is an information deficit at the moment and we do not have a clue as to what will happen. We should know, and above all, our businesses should know because they could be crucified if this goes wrong and the whole city centre sterilised for perhaps three or four years, at the end of which we could have a disaster in terms of a dead centre, as one finds in one or two of the UK cities.
Mr. John Tierney
The Deputy gives me more credit than I deserve. About 18 months ago, given all the various projects that were being talked about and the multiplicity of agencies involved, I established what is called the Transport 21 implementation group. On a voluntary basis we invited representatives from all the agencies and the Department of Transport to participate on what is really a co-ordinating group, to ensure that all the different issues associated with the implementation of works were being taken into account. We took the lead as well in doing a good deal of work on modelling. The Chairman saw some of the work we did in that regard. The purpose of that was to have a very significant input into all of the traffic management arrangements to be brought forward as part of the construction methodologies that would be put in place for the metro north works. These are some of the drawings to which Mr. Peter Brennan referred, earlier.
The metro north project is being run by the RPA which is directly responsible for running it. The Transport 21 implementation group also set up a number of committees. Given all of the agencies participating, we set up what we describe as a contingency committee to deal with works that are in operation and so on. Mr. Brendan O'Brien will update the committee, in dealing with the first two questions it tabled, but one of the areas that committee is looking at is the whole issue of park and ride. The major work of the third committee involves communications. It will deal with some of the issues Mr. Brennan talked about in terms of the message being put forward concerning projects such as the bus gate, even though that committee is more directly associated with all the works that will be done under the metro north umbrella. When we have all the various agencies around the table, including the chamber of commerce, city centre businesses association and so on, we will have a very effective vehicle for disseminating proper information about works.
Ultimately, in all of this, Dublin City Council has been trying to maintain effective traffic management in the city centre, as part of all of the works that must be done, while at the same time facilitating the delivery of those programmes as quickly as possible.
I welcome the delegations here today. I am somewhat disappointed that the only transport lobby group present is the car lobby, represented through the AA. Had I known about this, we might, perhaps have extended an invitation to the Dublin Bus users society and the Dublin Cycling Campaign, but so be it.
The Green Party supports a 24-hour, seven-day week bus gate. Our vision is a car-free College Green, a place where business and tourism can thrive and prosper. I certainly look forward to the speed limits being reduced. I look forward to a city centre where I can let go of my children's hands and feel safe when they are on the street. That will involve wider footpaths, lower speed limits and a good deal of other work. I am glad there is some movement towards such a scenario.
Cities such as Stockholm, Amsterdam and Copenhagen show that there are precedents for economically vibrant socially thriving and prosperous cities and Dublin is not moving fast enough towards those models. I urge the city manager and his team to move faster in that regard. Buses are being held up by cars at the moment, as the figures show. It can take a 46A 40 minutes to get from Parnell Square to St. Stephen's Green, or it can take 15 minutes. The detailed study shows that there are three times as many cars as buses going through College Green. It is important to highlight this.
As regards the AA's presentation, I am disappointed that in its written submission it opposed the proposal. I am not greatly surprised, but I am disappointed. I would not mention this were it not for the fact that the AA, in its presentation said it supported the installation of quality bus corridors. However, I cannot allow Mr. Conor Faughnan to re-write history. Ten years ago he said that his organisation did not want the Stillorgan quality bus corridor, QBC, until such time as there was real-time passenger information, integrated ticketing and "park and ride". It is somewhat like the St. Augustine line, "Lord, make me holy, but not just yet". If we took Mr. Faughnan's approach, we still would not have quality bus corridors. At that time we even had to have the Chartered Institute of Transport in Ireland admonishing motoring organisations for opposing QBCs. It was polite enough not to name the objectors, but I am not aware of any particularly strong motoring lobby groups apart from the AA. Normally we are at one on the vast bulk of initiatives in this city and I do not want to fall out. However, I do not wish to see history being re-written. We both want to see radical reform of Dublin Bus and reliable buses. If we want reliability, we cannot have buses stuck in a logjam at College Green and that means taking the cars out. It will not work if it is done for six hours a day. It should be 24-hours, seven days a week.
I have one or two questions for Dublin City Council. I have had several meetings with Dublin Bus which says it is ready for real-time passenger information on the major bus stops in the city. However, it expects Dublin City Council to provide some of the funding. I wonder whether the council has been approached for funding in this regard or if it intends to provide it for real-time passenger information on the street, as it has at Luas stations.
On my last question for Dublin City Council, I believe there is a good deal of misunderstanding as to what a bus gate is. Some people have an image of large gates that open and close, so perhaps the council can put on record what else, apart from the signage and road marking, we will actually see in College Green. I would like to see a good deal more surface treatment, for one thing, involving the upgrading of the footpaths. I would like to see wider footpaths and more appropriate planting. I would happily see some of the rather scraggly plane trees taken out and a better planting scheme in place. However, for the moment, over the summer, if the project goes ahead, what physical changes will take place, other than signage and road marking? Those are my two questions for the council, as regards funding of the real-time passenger information and the physical changes.
Will Mr. Brennan say whether he accepts that 80% of the shoppers do not use cars and that almost two-thirds of spending in the city centre does not come from private car users? I sense enormous representation here for the car driver, but perhaps not enough for so many other travellers who spend a great deal of money, whether they come into town by taxi, by Luas, bike or on foot. They also spend a great deal of money. I do not hear the chamber of commerce speaking strongly enough for them. I know from my 12 years as a city councillor and seven years as a TD that whenever a change in transportation is proposed there are strong voices saying that we should make the change but not yet. Whether the project is one year, three years or five years down the road, I am always disappointed when I hear people talking about obstacles. People said that we could not pedestrianise until the M50 was open. Now it is now open, people say that we cannot do it until we have QBCs, or until we have the metro.
I say to Peter Brennan that I am disappointed by the opposition his organisation is putting forward today. I hope he can accept that the vast bulk of retail spending comes from non-motorists, who also need to be represented. We should not pander to those who drive their cars. There are drivers who want to drive up to the second floor of Brown Thomas and park their car in the menswear section. We have to be realistic, and we have to consider models that work in Europe. Good, successful cities limit car use and give public transport its fair share of road space. I am disappointed that Peter Brennan is not making representations on that as strongly as he might.
The discussion we are having today is similar to the one 20 or 25 years ago about the pedestrianisation of Grafton Street. Many people said that could not be done and asked where the cars would go. Ultimately, the proposal is about putting forward a vision for Dublin city centre, and I am pleased that Dublin City Council is moving towards what I think is a more sustainable vision. I hope the other organisations represented here today will move more quickly towards buying in to that vision.
I welcome the delegations. I disagree with Deputy Cuffe. I find myself more on the side of Dublin Chamber of Commerce, whose views I echoed during all our discussions. I welcome the decision that Dublin City Council's SPC has made and hope that the full council will endorse it. It is ridiculous to place a 24/7 ban on cars going through College Green. Three days a week, I drive into the city from the north side. I turn into O'Connell Street, into Westmoreland Street, into College Green, into Nassau Street and into Leinster House. There are few buses at half past seven, which is my usual arrival time, and there is not huge congestion——
How does the Deputy get into O'Connell Street?
I come from Fairview to Parnell Street. I turn left into Marlborough Street, right on to O'Connell Street, straight over O'Connell Bridge, into D'Olier Street, into College Green, left up Nassau Street, right into Kildare Street, and into Leinster House. It is very simple. The number of buses I encounter from the time I get to Parnell Street is not huge. There is never any congestion. Most days, there are no buses at College Green. They can usually be seen there later in the day, but at that time there are few. I say to those who advocate a 24/7 ban that it is unrealistic and unnecessary. To those who believe that cars do not exist, I say that 65,000 motorists drive into Dublin city every day from the north and south, some 20,000 of which use the M1 motorway from the north. We need public transport, including metro north. The positive message that I would like to come from today's meeting is for all the organisations that are represented — AA Ireland, Dublin Chamber of Commerce and Dublin City Council — and us as politicians to keep hammering home the need for metro north and to counter the negative publicity that emanates from the supposedly expert economists who say that it is not needed. We will get cars off the road only if we have reliable public transport, and the principal mode of transport is rail. The success of the metro and DART proves that, and I have no doubt that metro north will be equally successful. Obviously, we also need back-up bus support.
Closing off College Green without the two proposed new bridges is unacceptable. When Mr. Tierney was here before, I asked him why there is no urgency about getting the Macken Street bridge and the Marlborough Street to Hawkins Street bridge in place. Without them, more traffic will be channelled into less road space. Our first target should be to put those bridges in place and create new traffic patterns for buses.
From my quick read of Conor Faughnan's presentation to the city council, I agree with him about Dublin Bus. Deloitte's recent study of Dublin Bus recommended that five routes should be abolished through the amalgamation of services and the creation of new routes. There is no reason every Dublin bus has to travel from south to north and vice versa. There can be links within the city area that will enable people to get to their place of work.
Dublin Chamber of Commerce is right to be concerned about its members, but the commuting issue is not just about shopping. It is also about getting people to work, whether they live on the south side and work in the north or vice versa. We should not lose sight of that. I am happy with the proposed trial from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m, which is certainly much better than a 24/7 ban, but I ask Mr. Tierney to confirm when he will deliver the two bridges. That is more important than closing College Green. I am certainly not against that, but the projects should run in parallel.
I will call Deputy Andrews and then allow the witnesses to answer. However, I say to Deputy Kennedy that I took the bus yesterday from Busáras to Beaumont — it was only half full — and at about 6 o'clock the road was absolutely chock-a-block with traffic. I wondered why more people do not take the bus. It was an excellent service. It got me there very quickly, and that is the issue as far as I am concerned.
People do not have choice.
The Deputy says that we should wait for the metro, but there are excellent bus services from the area where he lives. The task must be to allow buses to run more quickly and freely so that more people get on them.
The Chairman knows that there are not enough buses to take people from my area.
There will be more buses if they are allowed to run.
It is fine for the Chairman, as a Galway TD. He can come up on the train. When I leave here tonight, I have to get to two functions. If I am lucky, I will get home at 11 o'clock. I do not have the luxury, when I am in Dáil Éireann, of knowing that I have nothing else to do on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. Generally, because I am a Dublin TD——
Is the Deputy suggesting that we have nothing to do——
No, but people do not expect you to be in Galway. The Deputies' constituents do not call meetings at 8 o'clock or 9 o'clock at night — that is what I am saying.
The idea of our workplace travel planning exercise in the Dáil is that we would use the bus one day a week and plan our activities accordingly.
I suggest a compromise. Maybe we should have a pilot scheme such as the one the Chairman proposed in Galway.
We are doing this in Galway, and it is hugely successful. We have quadrupled the number of passengers on one bus route in Galway. I am a convert from the car to the bus, which I use as much as I can, but it is a big cultural change to move away from people sitting in their cars and driving into city centres. It is for that reason the initiative is welcome.
In response to Deputy Cuffe, to judge from the picture painted, even if the gate is introduced, I do not think he will be able to let go of his child's hand, because the child could end up being knocked down by a bus.
It is a curious choice of picture, I have to say, looking at the figures and at the picture.
On a more serious note, I welcome the manager's comments, which are balanced, as usual. I also welcome the compromise because it is about balance and the evolution of this type of proposal. It requires taking one step at a time. Too many steps were taken too quickly but this offers a good balance. Weirs & Sons stated that the numbers of shoppers with cars peak at lunchtime and are not a major factor during high traffic periods in the morning and evening. I believe we have achieved the balance and have reflected the view of businesses in the city centre.
The city manager mentioned the possibility of a review when the Macken Street bridge is in place. Is there a willingness to review the scheme in its entirety, either to progress it or to pull back and restore conditions to the way they were? Is there a timescale for the bridge? Is there a plan to carry out ongoing retail impact assessments to determine how retail businesses will be affected over the next six to 18 months? That would ensure we receive not only anecdotal information but a factual impact assessment on how small businesses are doing. It is important that this be implemented on an ongoing basis in order to liaise with retailers and determine if there is a real impact on them.
Mr. Peter Brennan
According to the city council's own document, 600 bus journeys per week would be "significantly" disrupted because of delays at College Green. There are 4,400 bus movements per day. I am not great at mathematics but in effect about 2% of bus movements per day in the city would be affected by the proposed College Green bus gate. We must bear in mind what will happen to this space after the bus gate is in place. Westmoreland Street is to be closed 18 months after that and there will be even more limited access through College Green for buses and perhaps for taxis. We then have to build a Luas track around College Green, which will probably be routed along Westmoreland Street and Dame Street and up Nassau Street. This will all happen within three or four years. Significant construction will take place in the very bus gate we are now trying to promote.
Our argument is that if we are going to have this disruption let us have it when there is absolute need because it will be very significant when it happens. I was in Brussels when that city was rebuilding its metro and light rail lines and can report there is significant disruption. One cannot believe how much there is. We are prepared to put up with this but we must be real about it. There will be very significant traffic congestion and minimisation measures and diversions will be required across the city centre. We acknowledge that and we want to work with the city council, as we are doing, in order to sort this out.
There will not be fewer buses going through College Green if this decision is not taken. There is no proposal to route the buses down to Macken Street bridge, down the quays or over the Marlborough Street-Hawkins Street bridge. Such a proposal would have significant impact in releasing space in College Green, as Deputy Kennedy and others noted. I see the releasing of space in College Green as being essential, not to the bus gate proposal but to facilitate the construction of metro north. This is, effectively, a pre-metro north proposal and we must see it and communicate it in that sense. This is not a standalone, pull an easy winner out of the drawer proposal because it looks good. In terms of space, the College Green bus gate will have to be closed 18 months later because of the Luas and metro north enabling works and construction.
Taking cars out and having the exercise fermenting in the interim period will be a good plan. Surely Mr. Brennan is not saying that cars should continue to access this area while the metro is being built?
Mr. Peter Brennan
We acknowledge that and believe this message should be communicated to commuters, shoppers and everybody else. There will be significant restrictions on car access into the city centre when the metro north works start. We support metro north. I have made it very clear to Deputy Cuffe that we support it and have been consistent in supporting it along with the DART interconnector, all the Luas lines and public transport in general. We have been emphatic in our support and have not wavered.
The reality is that the city centre is in for a huge shock and it will be seven years before it is returned to its citizens as a pedestrian-friendly zone with the best public transport in Europe. We want to get to this point but we must realise there will be a great deal of disruption to pedestrians, shoppers, buses and everybody when metro north is under construction. We cannot paint a picture in which the College Green gate solves everything. There will be a bus gate problem at the top of Grafton Street, at St. Stephen's Green and around the other metro stops, as I mentioned already. This is one of a number of significant disruptions.
We will let the city manager respond to that.
Mr. Peter Brennan
One or two questions were asked, if I might finish. We did not comment on how much shoppers spend because the figures we have vary by approximately 50% from those found by the Goodbody Economic Consultants group. I read this only this morning as I came in on the DART and have not looked at the other figures. We will look at the figures we have. Our retail members tell us that these figures are higher than the Goodbody figures which surveyed only 200 people. We must find out what the real figures are and we will be happy to share them with the committee.
Who carried out this study?
Mr. Peter Brennan
Our own members.
Is it the same study as that carried out by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, or the Dublin city businesses?
Mr. Peter Brennan
No. They are separate.
Another point is that the issue of deliveries and access to business is key. It is not only a matter of access to carparks. We understand from an earlier comment that delivery vehicles will not be able to get around the bus gate as part of the new a.m.-p.m. proposal. Another significant issue is that commerce transacts across the city all the time. It is not only a matter of commuters and shoppers. If a person wishes to deliver a package from Nassau Street to Mountjoy Square it is necessary to go across the city. Much cross-city commerce goes through College Green, one of the most precious pieces of infrastructure in the city centre.
We share much common vision with many of those present in the room. Our issue is one of timing. The gate will be imposed because of metro north and I believe we should wait until then.
This time next year the committee will invite Mr. Brennan back and we shall see who is right or wrong.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
It is worth putting on record that at the meeting last night of the strategic policy committee, SPC, it was very evident that everybody in the room was on the side of Dublin. Nobody is campaigning actively against city centre trade or prosperity nor is anybody seeking to frustrate what Dublin wants to do with public transport. There was a good deal of commonality in the room and it is only fair to record that.
Deputy Cuffe and I have an argument about the Stillorgan QBC but I doubt that we will fall out over it on a personal basis. We have aired it on more than one occasion and in more than one forum over the years. For what it is worth, at the time we were critical of the proposal and I can still stand over that criticism. We were promised a quality bus corridor and, in our innocence, we put a great emphasis on the word "quality". We thought we would be getting park-and-ride sites and integrated ticketing. Deputy Cuffe tells me that if it had been down to us we might never have had a bus corridor at all. The counterpoint I would make is that we still do not have park-and-ride sites and integrated ticketing and they were supposed to be part of what a QBC entailed.
There is a while to go to Foxrock.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
I appreciate that one cannot merely acquire such a facility although I believe AIB has a grand site in Foxrock. Perhaps that might come free. One never knows.
Who knows?
Mr. Conor Faughnan
There are more important issues than tiffs between Deputy Cuffe and me. Commuting is our real problem. In Dublin city we currently do not have physical capacity to deal with the commuting volumes, morning and evening. The data on that are astonishing. I speak from memory but the figures come from the Dublin Transportation Office, DTO, data which are generally available. They refer to the city centre area, where matters have improved. Over the past ten years car numbers in the centre are down by 15% and bus numbers are up by 25%. Even within that, in the city centre, only about 50% of people at most use all public transport modes combined — DART, Luas, bus, taxi. These can take only 50% of the people who are coming into the city centre. On the peripheries of the city the proportions are even worse. Deputy Cuffe and others have commented that there are people who want to be allowed to drive all the way into Brown Thomas, up to the second floor to the men's wear department.
I would not accuse Mr. Faughnan of that.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
I would not be caught in that shop. Can the witnesses see how well attired I am?
The men's wear is on the first floor of Brown Thomas.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
Owen Keegan made a similar comment at a forum some years ago. It is easy to say, but it is not true. However, there are tens of thousands of people crying in desperation, stuck in their cars every morning, coming in on the Navan road, for example. They have no desire to be there. If a rail link existed one would not have to dissuade them from car use. They would use it immediately.
If there was an efficient bus service until the rail link is there——
Mr. Conor Faughnan
It is not physically there. There is no way the existing public transport infrastructure can cater for the people coming into Dublin on the Navan road every morning. They do not want to be on the Navan road or the M50. Charging them €5 every time they do it, or charging them €200 for their workplace car parking space does not solve the problem. I have e-mails, calls and letters from these people——
May I interrupt for one moment? This is the argument that has this, and every city in this country, clogged. Bus Éireann has recently put on a series of new double-decker coaches from Navan. The real issue for all of us is that we must get people into those buses and out of the cars. We need a culture change. The most fascinating thing I have seen in many years in this House is the arguments put up against quality bus corridors being put in. I have gone out and spoken to people. One of the people recently admitted to me that he was wrong when he went to the Taoiseach and Tánaiste's offices. Those offices were the last two standing objecting to the new bus corridor coming down from Heuston Station on the north quays. The Dublin City Manager might confirm this. I am sure the AA and Dublin Chamber of Commerce were also objectors at some stage.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
Excuse me, we were not.
We need to get people such as Mr. Faughnan on track. I am a convert to encouraging people into buses for the moment. We will have the metro in five or six years. The only way we will see this city operating for the next five years is to get many people who are commuting in and out of this city into buses. That was the reason for this plan. If anything comes out of today I hope it will be that we have given the AA and the Dublin Chamber of Commerce the message that we must get more commuters out of cars and into buses morning and evening. Today's development will assist in the greater frequency and reliability of those buses.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
I take issue with the Chairman on a specific point. The AA was not an objector to the bus corridor on the north quays.
I am glad.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
We explicitly supported it. It came in at the same time as the HGV ban and the removal of the HGVs facilitated its installation on the quays. We said it was all apropos of the plan and we thoroughly supported it. This debate happens with the car-free day every year. If, for example, we declared tomorrow that every single one of us would leave the car behind there is not even a shadow of a possibility that the existing public transport infrastructure could physically cope with that.
Then we improve it.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
It is not a chicken and egg situation and a case that if only the cars were not there the bus service would be great. It is delusional to believe that is the case. The physical infrastructure is not there. In Stockholm 77% of all commuters are on public transport, the bulk of them on rail. In London, the other city that has a congestion charge, even before they brought it in, 87% of commuters were already using public transport. Only a small residue still used cars. We are nowhere near that. As an example I ask people when they last hired a car in London. One does not do it. It would not dawn on one to do it because one assumes that one arrives in London city, picks up a tube map and can get wherever one wants to go. That is not the case here in Dublin. I have volumes of correspondence——
The Malahide quality bus corridor is proof that what Mr. Faughnan is saying is wrong. Since the Malahide quality bus corridor was implemented in the past year there has been a significant increase in the number of passengers and a significant decrease in the number of cars coming in on that route. We have received the figures from Dublin Bus.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
Public transport infrastructure, wherever it is good attracts custom——
One cannot improve it if one does not allow the buses to run.
Reliability is the issue here and Mr. Faughnan opposes it.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
The Chairman's example proves my point rather than his. Public transport usership is at its best in Dublin city where the links are good, namely the DART links, Luas and better functioning QBCs. There is no doubt that if one can guarantee good quality public transport one will automatically draw people on to it——
How can one guarantee good quality public transport unless one allows buses to run faster and more frequently? Leaving aside the metro for a moment, how can one do that until one takes the cars out of the way?
Mr. Conor Faughnan
That is exactly the point I challenge.
Reliability is the key issue for buses.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
If one could wave a wand and make all cars disappear from the street tomorrow, and Deputy Cuffe would probably press that button if it were in front of him——
As Mr. Faughnan well knows, I use the car quite often and it is disingenuous of him to suggest I do not. I use a car and a bike, and I use the appropriate means of transport.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
I withdraw that. I did not mean to be glib, and I use all modes myself. Removing all the cars tomorrow would not be the solution to Dublin's problems.
I am not saying that. I am sure Mr. Faughnan has read our report. We are saying that if we implement a series of initiatives to allow quality bus corridors, including this key one today, that will enable many more people to use the bus because it is faster, more efficient and more reliable.
Mr. Conor Faughnan
I am not sure there is a point of disagreement. I voted in favour of this measure last night. However, I want the committee members to accept my point as true, and I will endeavour to convince them if I can, either within this forum or outside it. My point is that in Dublin, almost uniquely among the cities of Europe given the way we have neglected public transport and allowed the city to grow, there is a population that is more than willing to move to public transport and it is physically not there to serve them. One cannot change that reality. One cannot turn us into a Munich with its U-Bahn or——
We will have a pint on that one. Of course one can change it.
Mr. John Tierney
On the comment that the bus gate is a Transport 21 project, that is not the case. The bus gate proposal has been around for a long time and we are doing it because of the coincidence of a number of events; one has an impact on the other. One of the aspects of the bus gate is that it improves the attractiveness of using the bus. Having that occur before the metro north works happening means, hopefully, more people will have transferred to the bus and the number of cars will be reduced. That is part of the process. I accept that Mr. Brennan and the Dublin Chamber of Commerce have to go through the various drawings they have received in recent days. He will see the emphasis put on making sure the bus runs as well as possible during the course of the works and the work we have done with Dublin Bus, the RPA and other agencies to try to ensure that happens.
The bridges have been mentioned. We have progressed the Macken Street bridge, and have put our money where our mouth is by funding 50% of it, which is difficult enough in these economic times. There will be a very fine event in the next few weeks when the bridge comes in constructed from the Netherlands, and there will be a substantial amount of work to put it in place. We hope to make an event of the arrival of the bridge. It will be in situ by the end of this year or very early next year. The proposal for the Marlborough Street bridge is being fast-tracked as much as possible and the application is with An Bord Pleanála.
What is the time scale for the Marlborough Street bridge?
Mr. John Tierney
Assuming fairly early approval, it is approximately May 2011. Between tender and construction——
With due respect, that is the point I made during our early discussions. The bridges should have been the priority. I am not suggesting Dublin City Council has done nothing, but 2011 for Marlborough Street bridge, the bus bridge, is unacceptable. We are talking about taking buses out of College Green. We have had a problem for a long time. The building of the Marlborough Street bridge has not been fast-tracked. I do not want to be overcritical but that is a fact. Why was that not done given that the council knew about this problem for at least ten years? As long as I have been on Fingal County Council I have been hearing about the Marlborough Street to Hawkins Street bridge. It has been on the stocks for as long time. It is now projected to be finished in 2011. Metro will be open by then.
Mr. John Tierney
On that point, Macken Street Bridge has been on the books for a while. The issue of funding it had to be resolved. That will be in place early next year.
The Marlborough Street bridge has only been confirmed in relation to the finalisation of the Luas lines. We have progressed that very quickly since then. If there is any issue with regard to the opening of the permanent bridge, it has been agreed that a temporary bridge will be put in place because that bridge is primarily needed for the initial works on Metro North. That is a crucial part of the scheme of traffic management we have put in place.
We recommended putting in place a Bailey bridge, which we are informed could be done in six weeks. Would the council not consider that?
Mr. John Tierney
There has been a delay with the oral hearing. Depending on the outcome of that, a decision will be taken on whether a temporary bridge is needed. There would be no point in spending money on a temporary bridge if the permanent bridge will be in place on time. Mr. O'Brien wishes to address a couple of other issues that were raised.
Mr. Brendan O’Brien
There was a question about real time passenger information displays at bus stops. The Department of Transport has asked Dublin City Council to take a role as the lead agency on the project. The funding is coming from the Department of Transport. We are currently preparing tender documents for the implementation of 500 displays at bus stops throughout the greater Dublin region, which we hope to have in place in mid-2010. As to when we will see this at College Green, there is the question of its signage and its lining. We are upgrading all the pedestrian crossings. We are widening some of them. We are also installing a new pedestrian crossing in the area. This measure will help to improve the pedestrian environment around there.
There was also a question about what we are doing with regard to cyclists. The most obvious thing in this area is the removal of approximately 3,500 cars from the area during the peak hours. Last week the SPC approved new speed limits which include a 30 kph zone in this area because one of the issues, of which as a cyclist I am particularly aware, is the speed differential between cars and cyclists. That can be a major problem, so the new speed limits are part of the proposals for that area. We are also conscious that there is a Luas proposal for this area so we have emphasised putting in the bus gate but not doing works which we then have to undo in a very short period. It is a measured approach and there will be improvement for pedestrians.
The issue of park and ride facilities was also raised. The contingency group for the subgroup for the Metro North works has looked at the issue and has brought forward a couple of proposals to the Department of Transport, in particular for a facility in Fingal at Lissenhall. These are currently with the Department of Transport.
Is that to put in a bus-based park and ride facility in Lissenhall?
Mr. Brendan O’Brien
It is initially a bus-based park and ride facility.
Will it then become a Metro-based park and ride facility?
Mr. Brendan O’Brien
Yes. It is not on the Metro site. It is adjacent to it.
Mr. Peter Brennan
I will not repeat the more general comments made. I will focus on bus provision. Like the Chairman and members of the committee, we would love to see as many buses as possible serving commuters, employees and shoppers in the city centre. However, all we hear about are cutbacks. If the Government wants to convince passengers that something will happen in real time that is reliable it should double or quadruple the number of buses coming in and out of the city. Unfortunately, the opposite is happening. Work needs to be done at Government level to have joined up thinking to increase the provision for bus capital provision and current spending and get people into buses. At the moment the opposite is happening. Part of the reason for that is lack of park and ride facilities. We made a submission on Metro North and one of the many points we made is that provision for park and ride facilities for Metro North is woefully inadequate.
The bottom line, which I want to re-emphasise, is that we have huge support from our members to make sure the Transport 21 package, including the bus gate, is constructed as quickly as possible. On that basis we will support the committee, DCC, RPA to make sure this happens. The transport experience in Dublin will be unbelievable when it is finished. We want to get there as quickly as possible.
Will there be ongoing consultation with retailers to establish if there is a downturn or if it has an impact?
Mr. John Tierney
There are two comments I want to make. Regarding ongoing assessment I am an ex officio member of Dublin Chamber of Commerce. We have regular meetings with the DCBA because we realise the critical importance of the retail sector to a functioning Dublin city. We are hugely aware of that. There will be ongoing assessment as there is all the time in regard to public transport proposals. I want to send out a very clear message that Dublin city centre is accessible by bus, by cars when shoppers must be car-borne. That is a fundamental part of our strategy.
We thank the delegations for their contributions. We appreciate the concerns of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce in particular and will invite it back this time next year to review progress and see whether the problems are as great as feared. Our short-term action plan proposes to provide 350 extra buses and to deal with a series of pinch points, including the bus gate. As a person who drives into the city much less now than I used to, I am convinced, as Mr. John Henry told us here, that if we can persuade people to leave their cars at home and take the bus even one or two days a week — and there would be 200,000 fewer car trips every day if people left their car at home once a week — if we can free the city from the terrible congestion for which Dublin has now become so famous, it would be the biggest contribution towards enhancing the commerce and business of the city centre.
I visited Stockholm not so long ago and saw the impact of the initiatives taken there, including congestion charging. I spoke with the Chamber of Commerce and with Mr. Conor Faughnan's counterpart. They are absolutely convinced that the initiatives they have taken are very good for business in the centre of Stockholm. I have no doubt it will be the same for Dublin.
I compliment the city manager and his team. Mr. Michael Philips has been of enormous assistance to us, as has Mr. Ciarán de Búrca from the Dublin quality bus network office, who is no longer with us. We often complain about local authorities but the work that Dublin City Council has done in planning a traffic free city centre is to be admired. Having heard all sides of the argument, I am convinced the bus gate will enhance the city centre business environment when more cars are taken out whether by people coming in by bus in the interim or Metro and Luas in the longer term. I thank you all for your contributions and we will certainly have you back in 12 months' time.