On 13 August 2015, two things happened. The Detail TV released their report on the Road Traffic Collision (RTC) numbers. It is well worthwhile, especially for the map showing where each collision occurred. Rural roads and towns fare badly.


From DetailData

As if to illustrate that point at 11am, in Ballynahinch, during the town’s market, a pedestrian was knocked down and killed by a six-wheel tipper truck. The driver, perhaps unaware of the collision, drove on but was later arrested.

Incensed at this needless death I took to Twitter. Even with a cursory glance I could see Goods Vehicles are overrepresented in the stats on fatal and serious collisions. Time for the industry to get its house in order, I tweeted.

In other industries serious failings are addressed with tight investigation protocols. As incidents are investigated information is fed back in order the same does not occur again.

If a component of a Boeing 777 fails the entire fleet is grounded, inspected and where faults are found remedial action carried out.

Compare how swiftly the Civil Aviation Authority took action after the Shoreham Air Show disaster, amending rules immediately, long before the outcome of the investigation by the Air Accident Investigation Branch is known.

In response to train crashes safety protocols are put in place meaning that similar incidents do not reoccur and the railways’ good safety record is maintained.

There is nothing in place to learn from collisions with Goods Vehicles on our roads. Each collision is taken as a unique incident, but there are rather a lot of these unique incidents. As a whole they point to a systemic failure to safeguard vulnerable road users against Goods Vehicles. Mark Treasure writes about this much better than I can.

The Detail’s report does not focus on what vehicles were involved in each RTC, but the data set includes vehicle type and casualties. The data set is restricted to all serious and fatal collisions.

It appears NI data back up findings in London.

A quick cross-referencing of the tables revealed the following data for 2014:

There were 20 serious and fatal collisions on footways. One bus, one private hire vehicle and 18 cars were involved. 5 of the collisions had a fatal outcome.


The Cyclist Menace

Local radio is very fixated on the danger that cyclists pose to pedestrians on footways. It is, however, very unlikely a pedestrian will end up in hospital with a serious injury as a result of colliding with a cyclist.

Only 3 pedestrian – cyclist road traffic collisions were deemed serious by PSNI. Two of these collisions occurred at a pedestrian crossing. No one died. There were 651 serious and fatal RTC in 2014.


Serious & Fatal RTC 2014

Goods Vehicles

As for goods vehicles. There were 158 pedestrian KSI (Killed Seriously Injured) as a result of 155 serious and fatal RTC. Goods vehicles were involved in 3 RTC, but two of these resulted in a fatality.


Goods vehicles make up 2.5% of registered vehicles in NI. The percentage of RTC and the share of all vehicles match quite well. But when the two do meet, the outcome is more than likely fatal for the pedestrian.

Pedestrians are on footways, but cyclists must use the road, where Goods Vehicles are.


Cyclists share the road with goods vehicles and buses

The figures:

62 serious or fatal RTC resulting in 62 cyclist KSI. Goods vehicles were involved in 7 of these. Of these 7 collisions 2 were fatal.

Or to put it more bluntly: goods vehicles make up 2.5% of traffic, but are involved in 11% of serious and fatal RTC with a cyclist. And as with pedestrians the outcome is not good.

The total number of cyclist fatalities in Northern Ireland in 2014 was three. And two of these cyclists were killed by Goods Vehicles.

These are very small numbers, but they mirror findings across the Irish Sea. Goods Vehicles are disproportionately involved in serious collisions with cyclists.

There are many good and conscientious hauliers, but time and again roadside spot checks reveal that many HGV are operated with serious faults or driven by unfit drivers that could put lives at risk.

It is time for government to act reduce the terrible price communities are forced to pay.

I am sure everyone has seen this video of a cyclist colliding with a car door in London’s Mile End, losing control and falling in the path of a London Black Cab.

Happily, no serious harm was done. The parked car’s door was dented and the car driver has offered to pay for the cyclist’s expenses.

The cyclist was too close to the parked cars. He should have been further out into the road. But could he have been?

Moments before the road was narrowed by road works. I hear the words of my driving instructor still: the most dangerous place for collisions is just at the end of road works.

Then of course there is the road design. The cycle route is one of Boris Johnson’s magic blue cycle routes. The lane is shared with buses.

It’s main function, however, is a car park. Drivers can use the bus lane as car park for most of the day, but in doing so push bicycle users (and buses) out into general traffic.

International best practice puts the cycle path between the footway and the parked car, leaving a buffer zone for opening car doors. Like so:





Google Streetview of Ormeau Embankment

in Belfast cycle lanes are painted directly beside car parking bays (above) or on-road parking boxes. Elsewhere cyclists are expected to share with buses, but are still threatened by drivers opening car doors:


Typical parking on Belfast's Lisburn Road

In years past NIGreenways ran a campaign to point out this fatal flaw in Belfast’s extensive cycle lane network; it is a car park for most of the day.

Currently, Dublin bicycle users are running a similar #freethecyclelanes campaign.

Both campaigns show that without meaningful enforcement motorists take a chance on breaking the law and mostly get away with parking illegally.

Avoiding the door zone puts the cyclist in the middle of general traffic. This gif shows very neatly where cyclists are squeezed into a very narrow channel between parked cars and moving traffic.

Belfast’s Lisburn Road has a tidal parking restriction, but this is too hard for motorists to understand.

TransportNI have concluded their tidal restrictions trial in South Belfast and deemed it a success, making the arrangement permanent despite cars obstructively and illegally parked in the bus lane or other sections of the Urban Clearway on a daily basis.

When the trial was announced I wrote in protest saying bicycle users would be in danger of getting doored. Like the bicycle user in the video above. My protest fell on deaf ears. Conall McDevitt, then a MLA, responded saying the trial and new parking arrangements were necessary to support local businesses and retailers. (Despite many examples worldwide of traders seeing a boost to profits when a cycleway was installed.)

The published Northern Ireland Bicycle Strategy spells out clearly cycling is a higher priority than parking cars.


Very commendable. There remains that suspicion, however, when vested interests, especially local traders with an on-street parking fetish, and safety of vulnerable road users meet, the traders’ interests prevail.

I was forewarned. I follow a fair few Hackney cyclists on Twitter. They are an unhappy bunch. And with some justification too.


Blurton Road

As I type this the Evening Standard presents their survey of cycling fatalities since 2008. It is a grim report, detailing how in over half of cycling fatalities in London HGV employed in the construction industry are involved.

Since the start of 2015 Hackney has seen two cycling fatalities, both involving turning HGV. One cyclist, Akis Kollaros, was killed on Homerton High Street at its junction with Wardle Street. It’s in background of this picture (where the silver car emerges).


This is a fairly typical two way main road around Hackney. There is nothing to help cyclists cope with heavy traffic, including numerous large goods vehicles and buses.

Just a short distance away is this ridiculous bit of cycling infrastructure:


Wow. If only it ran for more than a few yards…

The Council want to rip it up and turn the adjacent one-way road (a notorious rat run) into a two-way. I’d like to rip up the lane too. But only to replace it with something better. Local campaigners have blogged about it so I’ll not repeat their excellent and professional analyses.

The one good thing this short stretch does is lead cyclists safely between two side streets that form a staggered junction with Wick Road. They form a good quiet North-South route from Homerton High Street past Homerton Station to Victoria Park.


And the contraflow lane on Bradstock Road looks like this:


Yes, please can we have some of that in Belfast?

Elsewhere there are not so pretty contraflow door zone cycle motif monstrosities, such as this one in Hassett Street:


A pity that the photo of the van almost covering the painted cycle motif is more representative of Hackney than the nicely separated cycleway above.

If there is one thing Hackney consistently does well is the clever use of filtered permeability and one way streets, closing off roads for through traffic. In the Netherlands similar measures are used to make streets “autoluw”, where cars don’t impose.

What Hackney consistently does poorly is help cyclists at busy junctions and on major roads. The Council expect bicycle users to use the quiet back street routes, rather than form contiguous cycle tracks along main arterial routes like the A10 or A107. This subject has been covered before by Mark of ibikelondon. I have seen no evidence it has altered much since the post was written.

I watched with morbid fascination as an older cyclist slowly moved across two lanes of traffic on Mare Street at the Amhurst Road junction, indicating and gesticulating all the way, then go between two moving buses to turn right and continue up Mare Street.

The junction sits between the pedestrianised section of Mare Street (where cycling is allowed) and the Martello Street cycle and foot path.

Where the Martello Street path crosses Richmond Road it does so using a very Dutch feeling design. There are elephant footprints marking the cycle way across the road, adjacent to a zebra crossing. This is revolutionary stuff in the UK! My wife was not much impressed by my raving on about a crossing.


Google reveals it as an update on a previous design that did not include the pedestrian crossing.

Obviously cars must yield to pedestrians who start crossing. This is clear in the Highway Code. But will bicycle users starting to cross trigger the same response? It appears they do, though I’d counsel against riding across without checking both ways.

(I must qualify this by saying I passed it twice and twice cars stopped for bicycle users. This is obviously not representative.)

What my wandering around Hackney has revealed is a disjointed approach to cycling. Bicycle users are very welcome to use the quiet back streets and are helped with useful filtered permeability, signage and in some cases impressive cycling infrastructure.

However, on main roads bicycle users compete for space with heavy traffic. And this competition has seen two deaths since the beginning of the year.

Hackney does not seem to recognise that cyclists want to take the shortest, most direct route, pushing them instead onto back streets which don’t quite connect up to form a useful cycling network.

It is said you make up your mind about the success of a job applicant in the first few seconds of the interview. The job on offer is “Cycling Capital of these Islands”. Is Hackney a contender?

No, despite some very well executed ideas. A neighbouring London area, Waltham Forest, is planning a mini Holland which, on paper, looks very good. If they make it happen they could very well run off with that trophy.


Bicycle parking on Chatsworth Road

Tuesday, 30 June 2015 saw the opening of the £5mln Lagan Weir Bridge. It is more of a reopening because it is a replacement for the first Lagan Weir Bridge.

The first bridge was a of relatively simple construction comprising of a series of decks between the weir’s buttresses. It was completed in 1994.

The Weir serves to stop mudflats being exposed between Stranmillis and the City Centre. Dredging and aeration also helped reintroduce life to the river.


At either end of the bridge there were a flight of steps for and two semi circular ramps to allow prams and mobility scooters on to the bridge.


East bank access


West bank access

But look! The first bridge was not a shared space. It was a footbridge. Where cycling was banned.

With much fanfare Department of Social Development (the government department in charge) billed this as an investment in cycling, by allowing cycling on the new bridge.

The DSD, rather than DRD, are taking the lead as the weir and bridge has been part of the Lagan regeneration project, bringing the river back to life and developing the derelict river banks for housing and leisure. The bridge reconstruction is part of DSD’s Queen’s Quay Masterplan (pdf)

Graham Construction won the contract for the new crossing. They also were responsible for the ramps at either end and the replacement of the wasteful Halogen floodlighting with energy efficient LEDs.




So we get a gracefully curved shared space, crossing the river. And three benches down the middle towards the west bank of the bridge. There is no separation between pedestrians and cyclists.

On the positive side, the wider deck (up to 8m) will give much more space to pass. Or stop, sit on a bench and eat your piece.

To me it has echoes of Rotterdam’s Rijnhavenbrug. The Rotterdam bridge is built on a much bigger scale, with a lifting section to allow ships to pass. Mark Wagenbuur comments that the deck arrangement will only work in situations with few cyclists. Rotterdam has a low cycling uptake in comparison to the rest of the Netherlands, but their low is still a 4- or 5-fold of Belfast’s figure.

Another shared space bridge in the Netherlands is Venlo’s Weerdsprong. It is remarkable for its lighting design. Venlo also has a cycling modal share roughly double that of Rotterdam. It will be interesting how all three designs cope with the disparate demands of cycling and walking.

Doomsayers are blasting the plan, with the arguments boiling down to shared space = no space for cycling or pedestrians. And where there’s conflict there is local radio phone in show host Nolan.

I am no fan of shared space, but I like this bridge as a public space.

If you want a bridge with separate space for cycling to cross the Lagan there is the QE2 within a stone’s throw upstream.

On Thursday a little bird told me that DRD were having an information event at their HQ in Belfast’s Adelaide Street.

Here is the press release.

We weren’t given much notice. Yet I found myself with a spare 30 minutes, grabbed a Belfast Bike from Bradbury Place and went to inspect the plans.


On offer were two versions for an improved two-way cycleway between Chichester St and Ormeau Ave, one with the cycleway to the east, the other to the west (the current situation). The plans are designed to improve the network of paths between Belfast Bike Hire stations at Arthur Street, Alfred Street and the Gasworks.






The plans are not yet finalised and many details remain to be resolved.

Cycling Unit staff were open to suggestions and ideas. For instance, having parked cars act as protection for the cycle lane was suggested by a number of people and I got the impression DRD would look at this variant.

Some of the “details” are quite serious.

There is an obvious gap in provision on Ormeau Avenue. Currently a short stretch of shared use path connects the Gasworks site to Joy Street. Are DRD proposing to extend the shared use path to the next junction? Or is something better in the pipeline, perhaps a protected cycleway all the way from the Gasworks to Blackstaff Square?

The importance of this missing link will become very evident when the Gasworks Bridge opens. More cyclists will use the routes leading to the bridge. A similar gap exists at Shaftesbury Square where there is no eastbound cycle lane or crossing connecting Donegall Road and Donegall Pass.

It would be better for the Cycling Unit to start a discussions with the DRD Dinosaur Unit that is still looking to implement the Southern section of Belfast’s inner ring, so blocking any development along Ormeau Avenue (and blighting the area with fenced off surface car parks). Plans for a gyratory to take traffic between Cromac Street and Bruce Street should not stop the development of a cycle path along the Avenue. Ormeau Avenue is wide enough to reallocate space for cycling.

I suspect the gap is left in the plans as leverage for further budget and development. A holistic large-scale area-wide approach may well be unpalatable to the car lobby within DRD.

A second issue is the Advanced Stop Lines in the design. Why? Why in the UK are cyclists abandoned when they need protection most, i.e. at junctions? The lane needs to come right up to the junctions. The design plans for the May Street crossing are a case in point:


The minor junctions in the design are designed right: the lane carries across the side road; and priority is given to the cyclists over traffic emerging from side streets. I’d prefer a little more hard protection at the corners to stop drivers left- or right-hooking.


The Cyclesaurus Memorial Junction

The good news is that the Cyclesaurus is going to die. At last (see design above). However, the issue of cyclists needing to cross the carriageway (and pass each other on the right side) has been moved to the path’s entry points at Chichester Street and Ormeau Avenue.


West fudge


East fudge

The designers have drawn a patch of shared space to fudge the ends. But as above, good design at the junction can sort this out.

One big disappointment is that Upper Arthur Street remains open to cars. What is the rationale behind this? There are two on-street parking spaces in one version, none at all in the other. Why do cars need access at all? There needs to be access for deliveries, emergency services and collecting refuse, but I struggle to see the need for any other motorised vehicles.

As you drive down May Street a sign directs you down Upper Arthur Street for access to the Montgomery Street and Victoria Square multi-storey car parks:


Sign on May Street

It appears DRD see Upper Arthur Street as a shortcut to access city centre multi-storeys.

One of the principles underlying Groningen‘s successful cycle strategy is making drivers go the long way around, but giving cyclists, pedestrians and public transport direct access. Here, motorists are given a sneaky shortcut, consequently access for pedestrians and cyclists is compromised.

When you pass this sign you have already passed Montgomery Street. But the street’s one way direction is “wrong”. And arguably the person who ignored the previous right turn on to Victoria Street to access Victoria Square should not be rewarded with a shortcut to make up for their foolishness.

To access the multi-storey the direction of the one way Montgomery Street could be reversed between May Street and the car park entrance. Cars exiting can leave the area by Gloucester Street and Seymour Street.

All things considered, would it not make sense for Upper Arthur Street to be closed off for motorists, allowing for the carriageway to be used as a cycle route and increasing outside space for the street’s cafés and restaurants? Here’s an example in central Utrecht, photographed by @cyclingchch:


I don’t often advocate the removal of a cycle path. Here, removing cars and the infamous bin lane are probably the best solution.

BBC Northern Ireland on Monday, 25 May 2015, showed “Something to Ride Home About”, featuring the best of cycling in Northern Ireland and Michael Smiley.


The photo above shows a cyclist approaching Belfast’s award winning Cyclesaurus. The cycle path is a two-way provision running alongside one ways Alfred St and Upper Arthur St. The latter section is colloquially known as the bin lane.


The cyclist continues on the green path across the junction. And this leaves him on the wrong side of the street. Where they ran out of paint.


This is the new and improved Cyclesaurus.

The correct way to use this marvellous piece of official street graffiti is of course to keep to the left of the lane. Stop and yield to all traffic approaching the junction. Then cross the junction diagonally. DRD have kindly provided a miniature cycle lane as an aide memoire to cyclists.

Someone in DRD must be really proud that it was featured on TV.

Generally, I don’t do problems. They are opportunities to change practice for the better.

Cars don’t move much

Cars don’t move very often. Most of the time they sit outside your home, then sit outside your place of work. Occasionally they sit outside a shop, or a leisure centre. You get my drift. Cars do an awful lot of sitting.

And when they are sitting they take up space. Lots of space. Belfast City Centre is not very big. A very walkable square mile or two, well connected by public transport. Yet it hosts about 14,000 parking spaces. Each taking up roughly 15 square metres of prime city centre real estate. Around 30 football piches, not including space for access. Occupancy of car parks at peak time is about 60%. Or: 12 of those 30 pitches are always empty.


Belfast City Centre car parking core zones

The implementation of Belfast on the Move has coincided with an increase in the number of cars parking in the City Centre.

Belfast on the Move is a small success. The number of people going into the City Centre has increased; the number of cars entering the area above has gone down. Translink Metro and NI Railways have seen an increase in passenger numbers.

The public perception is that Belfast on the Move is a failure because congestion has not decreased.

Reduction of congestion for private vehicles was never the purpose for the scheme. At its core the scheme is designed to shift people from private vehicles to other forms of transport and removing through traffic to the Westlink:

Road space in Belfast has been reallocated to public transport and impressive numbers justify the building of bus lanes. At Great Victoria Street two out of every three people access the City Centre by bus for the price of a lane of car traffic.

The survey period between 2011 and 2013 saw an increase in consumer confidence, so the increase in people accessing the City Centre cannot be totally ascribed to Belfast on the Move.

Let’s park that there.


People cite convenience as a motivation for on-street parking over multi-storey parking.

It is well observed that people are not willing to walk more than 1000ft, 300m or 5 minutes to access public transport.
The density of public bike hire schemes correlates with the scheme’s success. The optimum distance between stations is 300m. There is pressure to expand a scheme too thinly, leading to poor uptake.

Large airport car parks offer bus links to parking sites more than 300m from the front door. Any closer and people will walk.
In airport terminals and stations it is worthwhile putting in moving walkways if the gates or platforms are more than 5 minutes walk from the front door. Moving walkways are slower, but the benefit is derived from arriving at your gate or platform without moving a muscle.

At the front door of my place of work there is a small multi-storey, named Car Park 2. Queues of cars build at 10:00 and again at 14:00.
A larger multi-storey car park, Car Park 1, is just that bit further away from the entrance. It is just within the 300m radius from the front door. The total number of spaces on the site is more than adequate to absorb the number of vehicles.
Drivers, despite causing chronic congestion and blocking junctions, will wait for a chance to park close to the front door in Car Park 2, rather than find a guaranteed space in Car Park 1 and walking.


Queuing for a space

The congestion on the City Hospital campus is caused by a large number of drivers competing for a small number of premium spaces. Just like Central Belfast there is an over-provision of spaces, but public perception is of too few spaces, because of the queues.
It appears humans will prefer sitting in a queue for a longer time than it takes to park further away and walk.

On Twitter cyclists deplore that on-street parking is taking up road space that could more usefully be used for moving people on bikes. Similarly, hauliers need access to shops and businesses for deliveries. They have been lobbying for more and better enforced loading bays.

Looking at the raw statistics you could lose all the on-street parking in Belfast and still have ample room to spare.


By Andy Singer

But it’s never as easy

At 80% occupancy a person seeking a place for their vehicle is more likely to consider the location full.

Car park operators will try and increase occupancy by showing at the gate, or at the city centre’s edge, how many places are left.

Car park operators use guides to lead people to empty spaces. These guides can be high tech or human. In this way car parks can increase occupancy above 80%.

Modern Dutch bicycle parking facilities at railway stations use sensors to track occupancy, highlight empty spaces and charge for overstaying. But can this be done on the streets of inner city Belfast? For cars?

In San Francisco they have dynamic pricing, with a phone app to show where places are available and the cost of parking. This encourages people to park in cheaper, less convenient, locations and reduces cruising for free spaces. This has increased occupancy and reduced congestion.

Up to 1/3 of congested city centre traffic are motorists looking for a space to leave their vehicle. But, are they looking for any space? Or are they looking for a premium space, nearest their destination?

Back to the airport

Airline companies try to eke profits out of the tightest of margins. They need to ensure maximum bums on seats to make it worthwhile flying. The 6:55 from Belfast to London will be very sought after, but the 14:30 not so.

So they charge more for a seat on the 6:55 and less for that mid afternoon slot. A number of passengers who don’t have morning business meetings can be persuaded to fly at a later time.

But if they charge a premium for all early morning seats all the passengers may well fly with someone else. So the airline puts a few seats on at less than cost price to generate interest. And as the plane fills up the prices go up.

Belfast city centre parking does not work that way. A uniform charge is applied whether you find a premium space outside your destination, or if you drop the car off some streets away. We expect more from and pay more for parking in multi-storeys, but again, a single hourly charge is levied.

Can city centre parking not be modelled on airline pricing? So, as premium spots fill the prices in the area go up, but around the corner the price could go down as an inducement to park there instead and walk a little further.

Traders, especially those in premium locations, will object to charging more for parking. But, if I were a shopkeeper I’d worry that time customers spend looking for premium parking places is time not spent in store.

The trader could subsidise the cost of parking outside their shop, either directly by paying the parking operator, or indirectly by refunding the customer.

However, if I were a trader I would not chase the car customer. A number of studies have concluded that car customers are not as important as people think. Car parking does not equal footfall. Cars don’t shop, people do.

Another group who consistently oppose removal of on-street parking are disability rights groups. They demand and get prime parking spots in the retail heart of Belfast. Despite there being ample accessible spaces in multi-storeys within a short radius.

Whilst TransportNI rate provision for pedestrians, cyclists, public transport and road hauliers higher than for private cars, a blue badge means these motorists are considered first. A blue badge should only prioritise them over other drivers, not over all other road users.

In 2012 BBC NI reported that the cost of enforcement of parking restrictions is not covered by income generated from issuing fixed penalty notices and car park charges. Effectively, the tax payer is paying for car parking.

Local government has gone further in the past, offering free on-street parking as a boost to trade, despite there being no clear evidence this actually works. It is a knee jerk reaction to traders’ demands.

TransportNI thinks tax payers footing the bill for car parking is justified. But I challenge them to provide data to support this stance. Is it good value for money? And in a time of serious financial constraints can our government be generous with tax payer’s money, especially supporting something that already costs us dear?


Ample free parking didn't help this retailer...

Motorists are blind to the true cost of parking. When they are charged at anything like cost price, national newspapers get involved and call it a rip off.

Since 1 April 2015, Belfast City Council controls most city centre car parks, but TransportNI retains control over on-street parking. Now we have two public-funded authorities with different remits and priorities offering competing services. Splitting control of parking is arguably not in Belfast’s best interests.

The Council has recognised the issue of car parking, but can other service providers be brought to share the same way forward?


Beside the two authorities, a number of privately owned car parking companies operate in Belfast. Some illegally. Additionally, any city centre employers have private car parks for staff use. All in all 30 football pitches, of which 12 are permanently empty.

All these car parks are invitations to car drivers to visit Belfast City Centre by car. And it’s very difficult to rescind that invitation. Car parks demand access, access demands big roads and big roads deter pedestrians and cyclists.

Road hauliers have been lobbying local authorities for improved loading bays and their better enforcement. Making some car parking spaces loading bays will help. Better still would be to ban car traffic from certain sections of town completely, with manually operated or automated bollards to allow HGV access before, for example 11am.

Loading bay abuse is rife as Chris Murphy documents:


Minicabs in Loading Bay


Belfast car parking, as the Council’s Strategy document highlights, needs to be rationalised. Fewer, more efficient multi-storey car parks, accessible from the city’s inner road ring. Car parking must be centrally coordinated, so strategic objectives to turn Belfast’s city centre into a place where people want to come, shop, work, learn and relax, without the constant throb of road traffic dominating.

Removal of on-street parking where there is a multi-storey in close proximity is essential. Introducing dynamic pricing to regulate supply and demand and advertising the up to the minute cost of parking at the city centre’s edge.

Opponents will need to be swayed and shown they will be better off in a city that doesn’t prioritise private car access.

Belfast City Council is inching towards this future, and every move forward, taking away space from cars and giving it back to people should be applauded.

Main sources: DRDNI 2013 BotM Survey
BCC Framework for car parking


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.