Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Proposed route and timetable changes around Dun Laoghaire

Comments

  • #2
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,932 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    That still looks like a draft document, given that the submission date has question marks beside it.

    However, that being said I think that most of the proposals are grounded in common sense.

    Re-routing the 7 directly along Sallyglen Road (which has bus bays along it) and out of Sallynoggin is long overdue. The 45a every 30 minutes should be adequate for those people in Sallynoggin who cannot walk out to the Sallyglen Road.

    I think that extending half of the 7 buses up to Brides Glen LUAS will provide a good connection, while retaining a decent service to Loughlinstown Park, and sending inbound buses along the Blackrock bypass should improve the service. Outbound the route through Blackrock Village doesn't take that much longer so isn't so much of an issue.

    The 59 and 63 changes also make sense, as in particular, they cut out the double backing that the 59 does, although I can see the residents of Killiney Village not being too happy at losing their service. The increase in frequency for the 59 to every 30 minutes is good news.

    The loss of the 8 I don't think will affect that many people - anytime I've seen it south of Monkstown Church it has been carrying thin air.

    The 111 probably should have gone some time back.

    Overall I think the changes are pretty positive.


  • #3
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,932 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/News-Centre/General-News/Dun-Laoghaire-Sallynoggin-and-Loughlinstown-Network-Review/

    Dun Laoghaire, Sallynoggin and Loughlinstown Network Review

    Published on Monday, July 27, 2015

    Dublin Bus, in conjunction with the National Transport Authority, proposes to improve the bus network in Dún Laoghaire, Sallynoggin and Loughlinstown. The proposed changes will deliver a service which is more direct and frequent, with improved connections to Luas and DART. This will provide access to new destinations across Dublin.

    Dublin Bus carried out research and analysis into the current travel patterns of customers on the following routes:

    Routes 7, 7b, 7c, 7d, 8, 45a, 59, 63 and 111
    This research found that, with changes to traffic infrastructure and customer travelling requirements, a redesign of bus services is required to continue to provide a quality service to customers in the area.

    The key objectives of this review are to:

    • simplify the area’s bus network,
    • provide a service which meets the level of demand in the area,
    • provide improved connections to Luas and DART,
    • improve journey times on key bus routes, and
    • provide more consistent frequencies.

    Please click on the links below to view proposed changes:

    Proposal for Routes 7, 7c and 45a
    Proposal for Routes 8, 59, 63 and 111
    Proposal for Routes 7b and 7d

    Dublin Bus is committed to engaging with customers in regard to these proposed changes. We welcome your feedback. You can submit your feedback by:
    Email: feedback@dublinbus.ie

    Post: Dún Laoghaire Feedback,
    Media and Communications Department,
    Dublin Bus,
    59 Upper O'Connell Street,
    Dublin 1.

    Please send us your feedback by Friday 14th August 2015.

    Dublin Bus is hosting an Information Day in Dún Laoghaire Shopping Centre on Friday, 31st July between 12.00 and 16.00


  • #4
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    so why 7c and not simply re-use 7a :confused:
    c normally refers to short workings to the city centre only, no?


  • #5
    KD345
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭KD345


    Why is this review being presented by Dublin Bus?

    Surely this should be fronted by the NTA/Transport For Ireland? If you compare this to a similar project in London, the review would be carried out by Transport For London, hosted on their website with their staff organising and appearing at any community meeting. Dublin Bus is simply the operator and should not be the face of these changes. Any information on the Dublin Bus site should link to Transport For Ireland, not the other way around.

    Some of the routes involved are on a list of tendered services by the NTA, meaning Dublin Bus may not be operating them in the near future. I understand it's probably a joint operation behind the scenes, and rightly so. Dublin Bus has vast experience in this local area, but when it comes to interacting with the public on route changes, it should be Transport For Ireland only. They decide the routes, they decide what type of buses operate on them and how frequent they should run. The passenger shouldn't need to be dealing with the operator. It may have been acceptable in the past, but when Transport For Ireland sells itself as the "single public transport brand" then things like this just confuse the customer and weakens what Transport For Ireland should be about.


  • #6
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,932 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    KD345 wrote: »
    Why is this review being presented by Dublin Bus?

    Surely this should be fronted by the NTA/Transport For Ireland? If you compare this to a similar project in London, the review would be carried out by London Transport, hosted on their website with their staff organising and appearing at any community meeting. Dublin Bus is simply the operator and should not be the face of these changes. Any information on the Dublin Bus site should link to Transport For Ireland, not the other way around.

    Some of the routes involved are on a list of tendered services by the NTA, meaning Dublin Bus may not be operating them in the near future. I understand it's probably a joint operation behind the scenes, and rightly so. Dublin Bus has vast experience in this local area, but when it comes to interacting with the public on route changes, it should be Transport For Ireland only. They decide the routes, they decide what type of buses operate on them and how frequent they should run. The passenger shouldn't need to be dealing with the operator. It may have been acceptable in the past, but when Transport For Ireland sells itself as the "single public transport brand" then things like this just confuse the customer and weakens what Transport For Ireland should be about.

    I imagine that the NTA don't have the resources and expertise that DB have from an operational perspective. The NTA may well be too busy with ongoing reviews of Bus Eireann networks.

    To be honest that's something that will happen over time - I would expect some migration of roles away from both DB and BE to the NTA. But all of this is going to take time.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,932 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    so why 7c and not simply re-use 7a :confused:
    c normally refers to short workings to the city centre only, no?



    Not necessarily.


    There have been plenty of other "c" variants as normal routes, but only the 41c remains.


    7c is probably a better choice than 7a to be honest:


    7b - Ballybrack
    7c - Cherrywood
    7d - Dalkey


    There is logic there!!


  • #8
    KD345
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭KD345


    I agree, the background staffing will take time to organise but the customer doesn't need to know that. As I said, Dublin Bus have the expertise in this area and should be involved. But basic things like saying "Dublin Bus are holding a meeting" really should be "Transport For Ireland are holding a meeting".

    Perhaps it's wishful thinking on my part, but either Transport For Ireland is the main brand or it's not.

    This was a prime opportunity for TFI to solely establish itself as the face of public transport.


  • #9
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    lxflyer wrote: »
    7c is probably a better choice than 7a to be honest:

    7b - Ballybrack
    7c - Cherrywood
    7d - Dalkey


    There is logic there!!

    since when does Shankill start with a 'b' :D
    and strictly speaking that terminus is Bride's Glen, not Cherrywood.


  • #10
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,932 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    since when does Shankill start with a 'b' :D
    and strictly speaking that terminus is Bride's Glen, not Cherrywood.

    Let's not get too pedantic - my answer was somewhat tongue in cheek!

    I was struggling for the b!


  • #11
    thomasj
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,836 ✭✭✭thomasj


    A few changes made




    From my reading of it: (could be wrong)

    - 7 cherrywood to city via sallyglen road and blackrock bypass
    - 7a loughlinstown to city via sallynoggin and blackrock village
    - 45a looks to retain its current setup
    - 59 hourly dun laoghaire to killiney
    - 111 hourly dalkey to cherrywood
    - 8 still looks to be cut


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    the groutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,096 ✭✭✭✭the groutch


    this is what happens with political interference (no doubt due to an upcoming election) to try satisfy a minority, a half-assed wishy-washy approach that helps nobody.


  • #13
    lil5
    Registered Users Posts: 430 ✭✭lil5


    The planned changes to the 7 route are overcomplicated and would only work if DB would actually run those 4 buses every hour on that route.

    As it happens DB can do neither complicated nor run a full time tabled service on that route.

    For those between the Sallyglen road and Sallynoggin or in and around Blackrock village it'll be guess work at which stop to wait for a bus.

    And forget about the RTPI for the 7 route, it's pure fiction.


    The original proposals had merit.
    The planned changes will keep the 7 route in the same sorry mess as it is already, if not make it worse.


  • #14
    the groutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,096 ✭✭✭✭the groutch


    worse, because the new 7a will likely have longer dwell times, leading to bunching between the two routes.


  • #15
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,932 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    lil5 wrote: »
    The planned changes to the 7 route are overcomplicated and would only work if DB would actually run those 4 buses every hour on that route.

    As it happens DB can do neither complicated nor run a full time tabled service on that route.

    For those between the Sallyglen road and Sallynoggin or in and around Blackrock village it'll be guess work at which stop to wait for a bus.

    And forget about the RTPI for the 7 route, it's pure fiction.


    The original proposals had merit.
    The planned changes will keep the 7 route in the same sorry mess as it is already, if not make it worse.


    Bear in mind that producing a new schedule will in all probability mean changes to the running times which should improve reliability.

    However, that being said - the proposals as they stand will result in bunching inbound between Glenageary Roundabout and the city centre.

    It would be far better to switch the current buses on route 8 to the 7a and provide a 75 minute service, while retaining a 4 buses per hour service via the new routing.

    There is a more detailed discussion of this subject here:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057458237


  • #16
    lil5
    Registered Users Posts: 430 ✭✭lil5


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Bear in mind that producing a new schedule will in all probability mean changes to the running times which should improve reliability.

    However, that being said - the proposals as they stand will result in bunching inbound between Glenageary Roundabout and the city centre.

    It would be far better to switch the current buses on route 8 to the 7a and provide a 75 minute service, while retaining a 4 buses per hour service via the new routing.

    There is a more detailed discussion of this subject here:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057458237


    Reliability on the 7 route? That'd be novelty.
    Will the new schedule take the 4 route into consideration or run in tandem as before?

    Bunching as before so. And private hire, out of service or turned off displays by the time they reach Vincent's.

    4 buses per hour running a timetabled service on the 7 route in any shape or form will remain on paper only.


    Thanks for the link.


  • #17
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,932 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    lil5 wrote: »
    Reliability on the 7 route? That'd be novelty.
    Will the new schedule take the 4 route into consideration or run in tandem as before?

    Bunching as before so. And private hire, out of service or turned off displays by the time they reach Vincent's.

    4 buses per hour running a timetabled service on the 7 route in any shape or form will remain on paper only.


    Thanks for the link.

    It would be very tricky to integrate the 4 and the 7 timetables - they are starting at different locations and meeting mid-route. Sure an effort could, and should, be made, but without holding buses mid-route it would be difficult to ensure that buses are evenly spaced apart.

    I would expect longer running times (the length of time allowed to get from one terminus to the other) on the 7a so that the issues of the buses going out of service would be much less than currently. The revised route on the 7 should mean that the existing running time will be sufficient.

    The running time is the key - provided that is sufficient then a reasonably reliable service can be delivered.


  • #18
    lil5
    Registered Users Posts: 430 ✭✭lil5


    lxflyer wrote: »
    It would be very tricky to integrate the 4 and the 7 timetables - they are starting at different locations and meeting mid-route. Sure an effort could, and should, be made, but without holding buses mid-route it would be difficult to ensure that buses are evenly spaced apart.

    I would expect longer running times (the length of time allowed to get from one terminus to the other) on the 7a so that the issues of the buses going out of service would be much less than currently. The revised route on the 7 should mean that the existing running time will be sufficient.

    The running time is the key - provided that is sufficient then a reasonably reliable service can be delivered.


    Looking at how the 7 route was and is mismanaged by DB for years I have zero confidence that these complicated changes can be delivered successfully by DB.

    But hey, they can always blame the NTA.
    Or the fare paying passengers.


Advertisement