Does Dublin need a congestion charge? An environmentalist vs a business representative

Sadhbh O’Neill: Yes, congestion charges work, but they need to be part of a wider strategy

Drivers in Dublin spent 145 hours in traffic in 2022, more than those in any other city in the world, according to research by TomTom, the company known for developing the Satnav. The same index ranked Dublin the third most congested city in the world – not metrics we should be proud of. Congestion is typically measured in terms of lower travel speeds, an increased frequency of delays and traffic jams, all of which is understandably frustrating.

A 2017 assessment of the economic cost of congestion in Dublin by the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport forecast annual costs of €2.08 billion per year in 2033. Bear in mind that the original two Luas lines cost almost €778 million to build.

Heavy traffic significantly affects quality of life, community spaces, the ability to engage economically, and the health of the air we breathe. Congestion affects our cardiovascular and respiratory health and of course, as the on-street environment deteriorates, it dissuades us from choosing to walk or cycle – leading to a not-so-virtuous cycle of traffic inducing more traffic. For older people, disabled people and children, the effects are even more damaging but largely invisible. Inner city residents are least likely to own or use a car and yet bear the burden of noise, pollution and disconnection that comes with congestion and commuter traffic. Streets used to be spaces for play and social interaction; now they are taken over by traffic and car storage.

Data collected by Dublin City Council shows an increase in cycling, but journeys by car are still by far the most common mode of travel in and out of the city centre. Worryingly, the 2022 data shows a reduction of nearly 30 per cent in numbers cycling in and out of the canal cordon since 2018, which may be due to poor cycling infrastructure. Electric vehicles (EVs) might have zero tailpipe emissions but they are just an extension of the last century’s car-based paradigm. They are still a highly inefficient way to move people around.

Many young Chinese feel they have been denied the dream of globalisation

---

The outlook for interest rate cuts is changing - so should Irish borrowers be worried?

---

Live like a lord: Wicklow estate that featured in The Tudors and Matt Damon film for €8m

---

An Irishwoman sailing around the world: ‘Only when I’m back in Dublin I notice how I’ve changed’

---

Congestion is choking our cities and towns, but it is not inevitable. Congestion charges should be an important part of an integrated strategy to tackle unnecessary trips, and research shows that they work. Singapore, Rome, Durham, London, Stockholm, Valletta, Milan and Gothenburg have all introduced different forms of charging or permit systems in recent years. Some cities such as London have introduced low-emission zones to target polluting vehicles in particular; others have introduced congestion charges aimed at reducing car trips regardless of engine type.

[ Congestion charges are looming for Irish motorists. Here’s how they work elsewhere ]

A review published in the Lancet in July this year looked at the effectiveness of low-emissions zones and congestion charges and found that they lower congestion, improve air quality and reduce road traffic injuries. NTA modelling research in 2022 looked at the effects of a €10 inbound congestion charge and found that congestion charges, alongside parking constraints, car-free urban centres and improved public transport interchanges would be effective in delivering reduced carbon emissions.

Furthermore, concerns over a “waterbed” effect whereby traffic is simply diverted into areas outside of the cordon are likely to be misplaced. Studies show that, if well executed, traffic management measures can literally make traffic “disappear” altogether.

It is true that charges are unlikely to be politically acceptable if there are no viable alternatives. Dublin needs an expanded network of Luas lines and these must be part of an integrated transport strategy. But planning for light rail takes time, and supply-focused interventions such as BusConnects can’t work if the streets are clogged with cars.

Where congestion charges have been effective and seen to be fair, there has been a strong political mandate for their introduction. Dublin City Council must be given the power to shape the city’s future, by negotiating a dedicated transport infrastructure package, with all revenues from a congestion charge invested in improving public transport and cycling infrastructure. The council must ensure that congestion charges are equitable by targeting investment that improves transport access for all.

Sadhbh O’Neill is the co-ordinator of the Stop Climate Chaos coalition

Richard Guiney: No to congestion charges – they’re obsolete, inefficient and unfair

The need to dramatically reduce vehicle movements on our roads is obvious and urgent. Not only must we reduce CO₂ and other pollutants, but we must also make our cities more efficient and accessible. This will promote increased investment as well as visits. To compete internationally our cities must be vibrant, pleasant, viable and relevant.

Congestion charges are one-dimensional, obsolete tools. Instead of crude measures, at a time of rapid technological advancement we need to be clever and use the technology available and emerging to achieve real and sustainable emission reductions. Almost 80 per cent of Dublin city customers use sustainable transport. The out-of-town shopping centres are the mirror opposite of this – almost 80per cent of customers drive. So making it awkward and expensive to visit the city while not addressing the periphery won’t work. It will only lead to longer distances travelled and additional congestion in peripheral locations. When Liffey Valley introduced parking charges last Christmas, Blanchardstown quickly became congested. Cars filled bus lanes, bringing buses to gridlock and adding to travel delays and emissions. From a public policy perspective, this was not a victory.

The most efficient answer to tackling climate change lies in our cities and larger town centres. Town centres must be promoted as places to live, work, recreate, socialise and shop. Ireland, like many other countries, has adopted a town centre-first policy to meet this objective. We must make this policy a working reality.

Post-pandemic, we have seen Government-supported localism, which will only lead to population dispersal, personal transport dependence and carbon inefficiency. Localism and nimbyism are bedfellows: the essential upgrade for the metro to Sandyford was halted because some locals objected to changes in access routes for vehicles in Ranelagh. This decision represented the essence of madness. When we fail to meet our climate targets, we will only have ourselves to blame.

The need to rapidly invest in public transport is a given but what else can we do? We must deploy equitable road charging technology. Singapore and New Zealand already have charges based on miles travelled and time taken on a road (which is influenced by congestion). This combination provides a more exact charge for both energy use and emissions.

[ Bust-up over congestion charges in London could soon play out in Dublin ]

There is a need to maintain some parking provision in town centres and other destinations, particularly for older people and those with mobility issues, hotel guests and some shopping trips. However, we must also be clever in prioritising vehicle access and parking provision.

For example, we need to look at free employee parking. Peak road use still centres on worktime rush hours. Employers and employees should pay for parking provided, as is the case in Nottingham, where employers who provide it are charged a levy. The funds derived are used to improve cycle and public transport infrastructure, such as shelters and real-time information. To be fully effective such charges should apply equally within and outside town centres.

We must systematically reduce on-street parking and assess current and projected public parking provision. Disused car parks can be used as marshalled taxi hubs, where taxis can be shared by people travelling in the same direction, increasing taxi efficiency and use at peak night-time periods and helping people get home safely after a night out. The technology to do this is available and is employed in Germany, for example.

The freed-up space could also be used as shared delivery points to service multiple business premises, reducing the number of delivery vehicles required in the city centre and providing a depot for shared deliveries to customers’ homes. This would incentivise sustainable transport use for most shopping trips.

We have a huge task to reduce our transport emissions by 51 per cent. We need to be clever in designing and implementing policy responses focused on this objective. We have existing and emerging technology to help us.

So why resort to redundant ideas like congestion charges? They’re not the way to an equitable and workable transition to the city of the future.

Richard Guiney is chief executive of Dublin Town