Can cycling cure gridlock?

We once cycled a lot. Today bicycles seem an obvious way to beat congestion. So how can we make them appealing and, more importantly, safe? James Nix writes

Two wheels take up much less space than four. And the bicycle offers the freedom to sail past frustrated drivers stuck in gridlock in cities throughout Ireland. Yet cycling is less and less common despite local authorities' best efforts to cater for it with cycle lanes.

Compare the Census figures for 1986 and 2002. Cycling to work has almost halved, from 60,750 to 34,250, despite a rise in the labour force from a million to 1.6 million. Had cycling retained its popularity 90,000 people would now go to work by bike. And there has been a close to fivefold drop in cycling to secondary school, from 50,648 to 11,118.

Do we know what has dented cycling's popularity? In 1961, in the 12 hours from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., nearly 100,000 bicycles crossed Dublin's canals each day. Ten years later this had fallen to 20,000 - the seeds of the decline in cycling set in long before the 1980s. If these figures are a clue to national trends, then the 1960s saw thousands leave their bikes at home. During the 1960s and 1970s a generation of lapsed cyclists began to rear children, and cycling has declined since. (Inside its canals, Dublin managed to stabilise cycling in the mid-1990s - but there has been no rise since - and suburban Dublin appears at one with national trends.)

Changes in house design must shoulder some blame. Leaving a suburban house in the morning usually requires walking past a car or, for people without cars, a walk past "unused" parking. Psychologically, this is a charter for car use.

Bicycle-friendly housing is hard to find. Some driveways are so constricted that trying to walk a bicycle around a parked car results in sore shins. New homes are often built without garages, but the cycle stands that could help replace them are seldom added. The result is bikes locked to lampposts or railings, where they hinder pedestrians, particularly people with visual impairments.

Bicycles tend to fare better with apartment blocks, but there is still a lot to do. Wider doorways would help. And it does little for cycling to find the bicycle racks behind bins or beneath pavement grilles - common spots for racks in underground car parks.

What could the Government do to turn cycling numbers around? It could ask architects and planners to give more attention to cycling when they consider new development. But to prompt a serious cycling recovery it should consider providing a fiscal jump-start.

With the exception of children's helmets, all bicycles and bicycle accessories are subject to 21 per cent VAT. The Government could remove it, although the full saving may not be passed on to cyclists.

A better idea may be to refund most of the VAT a few months later. Let's say a basic bicycle with accessories costs €200 before VAT. The tax adds €42. If the customer brought the bike back for its first service within six months, the rate of VAT could be cut to 5 per cent. The first service is usually free. Now it would come with a refund of €32.

This incentive is unlikely to cost the Government much - the fact that the Revenue Commissioners do not record how much VAT is raised from bicycle sales suggests a low figure.

VAT-back schemes are not novel, and there is already a clear need for VAT reform in the transport sector. Take safety equipment. Bicycle and motorbike helmets for adults attract VAT even though all personal protective equipment is meant to be exempt.

Dublin Cycling Campaign has asked the Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevy, to review the rate of VAT on helmets, reflective clothing and lights, which it believes is inappropriate.

And the group highlights another anomaly. An employee who drives to a work meeting can clock up untaxed mileage expenses, but aemployee paid an allowance to cycle to the meeting is taxed at the marginal PAYE rate. Dublin Cycling Campaign says this is ill conceived, as it ignores the wider social benefits of cycling. As well as urging the Government to make cycling allowances tax-free, it would like to see accelerated capital allowances for companies that build changing facilities and bicycle parking.

Cycling advocates eye with approval the tax-free public-transport tickets that employers can buy for their staff. Employees can save up to 48 per cent of the normal fare; employers save up to 10.75 per cent on PRSI contributions. A similar scheme, allowing employers to pay their staff's bike bills - with provision for a mileage allowance - would undoubtedly boost the number of people cycling to work. Unfortunately, tax changes will not redress the slump in cycling to school. Here, VAT reform would work better.

How can we make cycling safer?

Separate bicycle and HGV traffic. The number of accidents between cyclists and HGVs is disproportionately high. This might be due to HGVs' blind spot as they turn and the fact that HGVs rarely have low-level panelling that prevents other road users getting caught under their trailers.

Restrict speeds. Campaigners in Ireland point to Dutch cities where a 30 k.p.h. speed limit is to be enforced on 75 per cent of urban roads.

Simplify junctions. Many accidents, for example, occur at roundabouts with wide approach lanes, which encourage motorists to enter the junction at speed, so endangering cyclists.

Provide contraflow bicycle lanes on one-way streets. The advantages of cycling are sometimes negated by having to take the long way around.

Widen inside lanes. Where two lanes cater for traffic travelling in the same direction, the curbside lane should be the widest, giving the cyclist a little more space.

As for cycle lanes, the chief criticism of these is that they can "fence in" cyclists, making motorists more likely to disregard them. This can lead to more accidents, particularly at junctions. On the other hand, cycle lanes allow cyclists to pass queuing cars. For advocates of cycling it comes down to this: a measure that helps cyclists beat congestion in some circumstances does not tackle - and should not be portrayed as tackling - the number-one issue: safety.

Source: Cycle-Friendly Infrastructure - Guidelines for Planning And Design, Institute of Highways and Transportation (UK) 1996

Series concluded

James Nix is a transport and land-use researcher at Dublin Institute of Technology. E-mail james.nix@dit.ie