[article] Dublin Bus wants roads deal with Luas

Navan Junction

Dublin Bus wants roads deal with Luas
Tim O'Brien, Irish Times, 18/05/2006


Transport committee: Dublin Bus has said the viability of a €200 million plan to beat congestion may be in doubt if it can not come to an accommodation with Luas over crucial road space in Dublin city centre.


Both transport companies are vying for on-street priority in the crucial centre area of Nassau Street, College Green and Westmoreland Street.

Yesterday, managing director of Dublin Bus Joe Meagher said it could now take up to 25 minutes for a bus to travel between St Stephen's Green and Parnell Square, a situation which made bus use in the city "almost unviable".

Mr Meagher told the Oireachtas Committee on Transport that the bus company needed additional priority on city streets, and said the prospect of Luas utilising a route option along Nassau Street and College Green via Westmoreland Street to O'Connell Street was "a major, major issue for Dublin Bus".

The route is one of a number being considered to link up the existing Luas Red and Green lines. It emerged as favourite at a public consultation process in February, largely because it is the shortest and most direct.

The Railway Procurement Agency (RPA), builder of Luas, has said the success of tram systems around the world was dependent on trams having their own space where they travel on public roads and not queuing at traffic lights.

However, Mr Meagher said Dublin Bus provided 58 million passenger journeys which began or ended in the vicinity of the front of Trinity College.

With travel speeds in the city centre averaging between 5km/h and 8km/h depending on the time of the day, the company had developed an investment plan based on 425 new buses and new quality bus corridors (QBCs).

This plan was dependent on "free movement" of buses along QBCs and in the city centre.

He said the plan also included the development of more cross-city bus routes, six new orbital and five new radial QBCs and priority movement in the city centre.

Priority movement could mean continuous bus lanes, bus-only access roads, bus-only turns, and bus priority at lights and junctions.

He warned that congestion was currently costing the company €60 million a year, while the average speed of buses across the network had fallen to just 12km/h.

Mr Meagher said Dublin Bus had raised the issue with Luas, and had extensive discussions with the Dublin Transportation Office, which, he said, had been understanding of the bus company's position.

Dublin Bus also made a submission at the public consultation stage meetings held by the RPA.

The company recommended that Luas utilise "option B", a route around Trinity College to the west along Nassau Street and Westland Row.

Dublin Bus said it was also seriously concerned about the disruption to routes and services during the Luas construction phase, which could see Dawson Street, Nassau Street, Lower Grafton Street, College Green, Westmoreland Street and part of O'Connell Street dug up.

Mr Meagher said Dublin Bus did accept the importance of the Luas and metro projects in transport infrastructure but there was "a need for close co-ordination between Luas, metro and Dublin Bus to minimise disruption".

© The Irish Times

mackerski

Why not have buses use the tram reservation, as they do in other cities? They can obey the same signals and slot into a managed schedule.

Dermot

Hotblack Desiato

:rolleyes: If it's possible for cars to drive along it, they will. Just like bus lanes. That's why Luas has had to install concrete wedges, floppy 'no entry' signs, etc.

John R

mackerski wrote:

Why not have buses use the tram reservation, as they do in other cities? They can obey the same signals and slot into a managed schedule.

The RPA wouldn't even consider it with regards to the current lines.

This time the bus routes need to be given priority through the O'Connell St-Stephen's Green section, they carry (and will for the forseeable future) much higher volumes than Luas green line.

Really with the Metro following the same basic route the Luas extention should be scrapped altogether. The money saved can be put towards building the best possible Metro. After all wasn't the tight budget the reason the RPA were proposing cheap alternatives to an ideal alignment such as the airport hotel station and no interchange with the Maynooth line.

John R

ninja900 wrote:

:rolleyes: If it's possible for cars to drive along it, they will. Just like bus lanes. That's why Luas has had to install concrete wedges, floppy 'no entry' signs, etc.

Dealing with cars on tram lines and bus lanes is easy; fixed cameras and cameras on trams/buses add heavy penalty points and problem solved.

They are already installed on all Dublin Bus vehicles but there is no mechanism for using them to penalise drivers.

Hotblack Desiato

John R wrote:

This time the bus routes need to be given priority through the O'Connell St-Stephen's Green section, they carry (and will for the forseeable future) much higher volumes than Luas green line.

I totally agree. While the Luas is "sexy" it's far too slow, limited in capacity and has a limited catchment area.

I live in Clondalkin village, what makes my blood boil is that the government will tell you it's served by both Luas and suburban rail. Rail serves the extreme north edge, half an hour walk away from the village, Luas serves the Red Cow, nobody lives there, again it's half an hour walk away.

Factoring in the walk and the time taken to get into town, the bus is often quicker. Not that the provision for bus is any good, getting out of the village onto the Naas Rd is often a nightmare.

I go by motorbike, saves me 2 hours a day over public transport.

Lennoxschips

It works in Amsterdam. Buses drive on the tramlines no prob, plus taxis as well. But then again, the bus and tram company in Amsterdam is owned by the city council, so they can make the kind of integrated common sense decisions that can't be made in Dublin as long as all all the modes of public transport are competing against one another.

mackerski

John R wrote:

The RPA wouldn't even consider it with regards to the current lines.

I must have missed the bit where the government ceded all executive power to the RPA.

Dermot

dowlingm

John R

while your suggestion makes sense the problem is that the LUAS extension won't take long to build and the metro needs to go north asap where there is nothing right now. Also, won't the central line trackage be used for Lucan LUAS I thought?

However, metro planning should now state that once service to SSG starts the boring machine should keep going with a view to converting the Harcourt Street line to metro, thus the metro line becomes airport-Sandyford or wherever. That should not be an option, it should be in the official plan NOW. If that boring machine comes out of the ground it will cost a fortune to put it back in. Toronto used to own boring machines to incrementally extend the subway, now it's costing billions to reinstate that capacity.

John R

mackerski wrote:

I must have missed the bit where the government ceded all executive power to the RPA.

Dermot

Regarding who else can use Luas alignments they did.

John R

dowlingm wrote:

John R while your suggestion makes sense the problem is that the LUAS extension won't take long to build

Based on past experiences I wouldn't be too sure about that. The gap between it and the Metro will be relatively short anyway.

dowlingm wrote:

and the metro needs to go north asap where there is nothing right now.

Killing the Luas city extention will not slow down Metro, in fact the resources would be better concentrated on that alone.

dowlingm wrote:

Also, won't the central line trackage be used for Lucan LUAS I thought?

No need for that to ape Metro from O'Connell St to Stephen's Green either. An interchange Abbey St Luas/O'Connell Metro will do fine.

dowlingm wrote:

However, metro planning should now state that once service to SSG starts the boring machine should keep going with a view to converting the Harcourt Street line to metro, thus the metro line becomes airport-Sandyford or wherever. That should not be an option, it should be in the official plan NOW. If that boring machine comes out of the ground it will cost a fortune to put it back in. Toronto used to own boring machines to incrementally extend the subway, now it's costing billions to reinstate that capacity.

Agree completely, once extended to Cherrywood the Green Line will have serious capacity issues, the only sensible solution is to connect it up to Metro, upgrade the stations and scrap the city on-street section.

Metrobest

My initial feeling was that the luas shouldn't be extended.

I've changed my mind.

The luas looks sexy - and sexy is good. "Sexy" means that people will want to be inside that tram. Car drivers will go green with jealousy as they sit in a traffic jam and watch a sexy tram glide by. A fume-belching double decker bus would not cause similar levels of excitement.

I can't wait to see trams rolling around the front of Trinity! It will make Dublin's south city centre streets look beautiful again. The aesthetics of the city have been for too long been suffering from SUVs, taxis and double deckers.

So that's one reason for extending the luas: it makes the city look nicer, it adds something to the city, it helps with the marketing of Dublin as being a pleasant, cosmpolitan city for tourists to spend their money in.

That means an economic advantage for Dublin.

However, I don't think trams sharing a central spine of street space with buses is a practical idea for Dublin city centre. The tram needs to have a speed advantage over the bus to make the extension worthwhile.

Lennoxschips mentioned Amsterdam, but the key thing to mention is that in the canal ring of Amsterdam you don't find buses running on tram lines (or at least I can't think of any), except at night when buses replace trams. Where there is shared running of trams and other vehicles (such as Kinkerstraat), the arrangement does not work quite so well. This does not auger well for Dublin with its comparatively narrower windier, congested streets.

So instead of whingeing, Dublin Bus should be making the arrangements to take its double deckers off this section of streets. They haven't delivered the kind of service that would attract drivers out of their cars.

Buses were the future, once.

Then came Transport 21...

corktina

Metrobest wrote:

My initial feeling was that the luas shouldn't be extended.

I've changed my mind.

The luas looks sexy - and sexy is good. "Sexy" means that people will want to be inside that tram. Car drivers will go green with jealousy as they sit in a traffic jam and watch a sexy tram glide by. A fume-belching double decker bus would not cause similar levels of excitement.

I can't wait to see trams rolling around the front of Trinity! It will make Dublin's south city centre streets look beautiful again. The aesthetics of the city have been for too long been suffering from SUVs, taxis and double deckers.

So that's one reason for extending the luas: it makes the city look nicer, it adds something to the city, it helps with the marketing of Dublin as being a pleasant, cosmpolitan city for tourists to spend their money in.

That means an economic advantage for Dublin.

However, I don't think trams sharing a central spine of street space with buses is a practical idea for Dublin city centre. The tram needs to have a speed advantage over the bus to make the extension worthwhile.

Lennoxschips mentioned Amsterdam, but the key thing to mention is that in the canal ring of Amsterdam you don't find buses running on tram lines (or at least I can't think of any), except at night when buses replace trams. Where there is shared running of trams and other vehicles (such as Kinkerstraat), the arrangement does not work quite so well. This does not auger well for Dublin with its comparatively narrower windier, congested streets.

So instead of whingeing, Dublin Bus should be making the arrangements to take its double deckers off this section of streets. They haven't delivered the kind of service that would attract drivers out of their cars.

Buses were the future, once.

Then came Transport 21...

i like your thinking! never thought odf them as sexy before.....must try some moves on one next week.....:)

shltter

Metrobest wrote:

So instead of whingeing, Dublin Bus should be making the arrangements to take its double deckers off this section of streets. They haven't delivered the kind of service that would attract drivers out of their cars.

Buses were the future, once.

Then came Transport 21...

And move them to where and who will carry the 58 million people

corktina

58 million.....best to get a triple decker i'd say.....still only get about 100 on though....:mad:

John R

Metrobest wrote:

My initial feeling was that the luas shouldn't be extended.

I've changed my mind.

The luas looks sexy - and sexy is good. "Sexy" means that people will want to be inside that tram. Car drivers will go green with jealousy as they sit in a traffic jam and watch a sexy tram glide by. A fume-belching double decker bus would not cause similar levels of excitement.

That may sound good in your head but it is pure bull, once the initial novelty wears off the only attraction for car drivers is speed. If their journey takes an hour and there is an alternative that takes half an hour a lot of them will switch, the mode does not matter a great deal.

There is certainly nothing sexy about a 50 min+ red line trip from Tallaght standing crush loaded with your face in somebody's smelly armpit while the tram crawls (sorry glides) from junction to junction.

The N11 corridor has proved that buses can attract just as large numbers from cars as trams when they are able to give good journey times.

Within 10 years near silent zero-emission buses will be readily available.

Metrobest wrote:

I can't wait to see trams rolling around the front of Trinity! It will make Dublin's south city centre streets look beautiful again. The aesthetics of the city have been for too long been suffering from SUVs, taxis and double deckers.

And those overhead wires strung across the facia of all those famous buildings are just so nice to look at. :rolleyes:

Metrobest wrote:

However, I don't think trams sharing a central spine of street space with buses is a practical idea for Dublin city centre. The tram needs to have a speed advantage over the bus to make the extension worthwhile.

So artificially elevating the trams advantage by slowing the other public transport services is a reasonable attitude in your mind? And you wonder why I think you talk out of your arse?

Public Transport should be INTEGRATED to provide a better service for all, not in competition with itself.

Metrobest wrote:

So instead of whingeing, Dublin Bus should be making the arrangements to take its double deckers off this section of streets. They haven't delivered the kind of service that would attract drivers out of their cars.

Is the minor fact that these bus services cater for a huge population that is not served by tram irrelevant to you?

I suppose the fact that they also carry several times as many people as the trams you want to take their city access with is also irrelevant?

How many more people do you think will switch to cars when a 30-40min bus trip turns into a 60-70min one? Or is it all good as far as you are concerned as long as the trams run on time?

Metrobest wrote:

Buses were the future, once.

Then came Transport 21...

Fantastic soundbyte, pity it's crap.

Even after T21 there will be considerably more passenger journeys to/from the city by bus than by rail.

Developing rail and ignoring road or even worse sacrificing road for marginal rail projects will be disastrous for this city. We will end up with a few quality rail transport corridors with huge areas in between where car is still the major
form of transport.

Lennoxschips

When I was referring to buses and taxi's driving on tram lines in Amsterdam, I was referring to streets like Overtoom and Middenweg. The area inside the canal ring is only for tourists anyway.

Such an arrangement could have been done on the Naas Rd, where the Luas goes down the central reservation. It could have been developed as a dual bus/Luas alignment.

This bridge could be a nice shortcut for buses too, if it had been developed for both buses and trams:

spacetweek

John R wrote:

Even after T21 there will be considerably more passenger journeys to/from the city by bus than by rail.

Developing rail and ignoring road or even worse sacrificing road for marginal rail projects will be disastrous for this city. We will end up with a few quality rail transport corridors with huge areas in between where car is still the major
form of transport.

I'm pretty sure that's not the case. When T21 is complete rail will be available to all parts of the city and the bus will serve a secondary role, as it should be. Remember also that traffic congestion will be worse than now (even with all the PT projects), so long bus journey (suburb-city centre) times will have increased to unacceptable levels. Buses will make short journeys to and from the nearest rail station instead.

mackerski

John R wrote:

Regarding who else can use Luas alignments they did.

The areas under discussion aren't Luas alignments. They're streets. It is entirely reasonable, in a world where the RPA is asking for the right to run trams along them, for there to be an obligation to share, especially in a world where most of the suburbs lack tram services and where integrated ticketing is further away than ever.

Dermot

Metrobest

No, John R, I'm not saying that buses should be removed entirely from the city centre - just from Nassau Street, Dawson Street, Grafton Street and College Green. There just isn't room for both trams and buses along this stretch.

With or without the luas extension, buses should be removed from Ireland's most important civic space, College Green.

Lennoxschips has mentioned where buses and trams share street space in Amsterdam but it's important to note that Overtoom is a wide street with trams running in the centre on a raised platform. Buses only run along this street at night when trams are off. Taxis rarely feature as taxis in Amsterdam are seen as an expensive and unneccessary extravagance. Look at the way Overtoom's traffic is regulated and trams can run freely. Oops, pity about the roadworks..



Such an arrangement can't work between Stephen's Green and College Green because
(1) The streets are too narrow
(2) The volume of buses and taxis is too high
(3) Trams would be slow and unpredicatable, making the extension a white elephant and corrupting the reliability of the Green line.

Let's remember, everything changes in 2012 when the metroNorth party gets started. :cool:

Many southside bus passengers can choose to disembark their bus at Stephen's Green. Northside passengers can lepp out at Parnell Square. Presumably a one trip integrated ticket will be available at that point in time - so passengers will actively choose to jump out of the bus as soon as they get near a metro or luas stop.

So there are plenty of options for Dublin Bus to consider. Now is the time for it to show initiative and imagination. I'm sick of watching Dublin Bus sit back and play the "victim" card. They don't need to hire another team of expensive consultants to issue a 250-page report which could have been called "An evaluation of the bleedin' obvious" :rolleyes:

For example, Kildare Street can become two way with inbound buses turning right to their new termini at Merrion Square. Easily done if you remove parking spaces from the Merrion Street and Merrion Square West sections..

Or Cross-city buses could avoid the Kildare Street area altogether by using Kevin Street and Aungier Street. From here, buses could turn right down Aungier Street and George's Street where there is an existing bus lane, or they could continue up Kevin Street and then up Patrick Street and down Dame Street, or indeed over by Church Street. Heck, they could even continue on to a new out-of-city terminus out by the Coombe with its relatively high quality bus lanes.

Let's also look at the one concrete example of a city centre street that was designated luas only: Harcourt Street. Buses from Rathmines don't use Harcourt Street anymore and has it really made a noticeable difference to journey times? The alternative route is if anything more reliable. Moral of the story - luas forced Dublin Bus to come up with an alterative route and they did. Nobody suffered. Luas passengers benefited.

You are trapped in the mindset of Dublin Bus - that buses are being victimised and forced off "their" section of road. The complete opposite is true. The luas link up will hopefully trigger a Dublin Bus route shake up that could benefit passengers in many surprisingly good ways..

Hotblack Desiato

spacetweek wrote:

When T21 is complete rail will be available to all parts of the city

Bull, pure and simple. See my earlier post above. Is "available" a half hour walk in the rain to get onto a Luas that's been full from the terminus, followed by another 20 minute walk to get to your city centre workplace?

Do you propose to make Luas journey times competitive with buses by slowing down the buses?

and the bus will serve a secondary role, as it should be.

As it should be? I hear dogma.

Remember also that traffic congestion will be worse than now (even with all the PT projects)

Not if road pricing is brought in.

John R

mackerski wrote:

The areas under discussion aren't Luas alignments. They're streets. It is entirely reasonable, in a world where the RPA is asking for the right to run trams along them, for there to be an obligation to share, especially in a world where most of the suburbs lack tram services and where integrated ticketing is further away than ever.

It might well seem reasonable to you but in the blinkered minds of the imbiceles running this country reasonable rarely gets a look-in.

How many of the current Luas alignments that were previously roadways are now shared?

500yards one way down James' street and the curve from Harcourt St to the ramp at Charlemont. That is it.

A number of the former roadways could have been also used for bus services, it had been suggested but the RPA gave a blanket refusal. They have also sounded off about access to the development of the bus station at the Strand Street site as it would mean buses using "their" road.

There is nothing to suggest this attitude will be any different with regards to this extension, in fact an enquiry at the public consultation stage prompted the response that they were not interested in the effects on bus use as they were there to do rail only.

Lennoxschips

metrobest, i said that the overtoom and middenweg could best be compared to sections of the naas road, where the Luas has been laid in the central reservation, but as track only unable to carry buses.

there are many examples of buses and trams sharing right of way in Amsterdam and it works.

mackerski

John R wrote:

There is nothing to suggest this attitude will be any different with regards to this extension, in fact an enquiry at the public consultation stage prompted the response that they were not interested in the effects on bus use as they were there to do rail only.

This is why now, before they get any rights to the alignment, is the time to impose this kind of condition. One of the reasons public transport bodies receive money from the exchequer (along with presents of public roadspace that cars have to use in the absence of useful public transport) is so that they'll act in the interests of the public. This includes recognising that they form part of a larger team and working with that team so that it is greater than the sum of its parts.

It's quite easy for the government to insist on the correct behaviour - they sign the cheques, after all.

Dermot

John R

spacetweek wrote:

I'm pretty sure that's not the case. When T21 is complete rail will be available to all parts of the city and the bus will serve a secondary role, as it should be. Remember also that traffic congestion will be worse than now (even with all the PT projects), so long bus journey (suburb-city centre) times will have increased to unacceptable levels. Buses will make short journeys to and from the nearest rail station instead.

That's a fantasy that is in no way borne out by the reality of the T21 proposals.

There are certain areas where bus can be cut back to a certain extent but the idea that only feeder services for rail being necessary is just not correct on any level.

None of the main bus corridors on the Luas red line have seen use collapse, all of the Tallaght and Clondalkin routes are still very busy in peak times and the 123 route is over capacity much of the day. Within a few years they will all have regained any loss Luas has caused and be above their pre-Luas use.

The Dundrum routes had the biggest fall in numbers and were altered to take account but there is still a requirement for significant numbers of city-suburb buses on those routes as well.

Many of the busiest city-suburb routes are on corridors served by rail and Luas. There is nowhere near the capacity in the post T21 rail network to completely replace bus on the rail-served corridors and a huge expanse of population that will still not have a viable rail option.



NONE of the major bus routes that will be effected by this Luas city extention will be replaced by rail in any form. They will all still need to access the city centre rapidly in order to provide a viable PT alternative to large areas of the south city.

I have gone over the figures when the DB Network review document was published but do not have them to hand right now, they are publicly available if you want to check. Even with the most conservative bus use and most optomistic rail use figures post T21 bus will still carry more people into the city centre than Rail.

Victor

John R wrote:

None of the main bus corridors on the Luas red line have seen use collapse, all of the Tallaght and Clondalkin routes are still very busy in peak times and the 123 route is over capacity much of the day. Within a few years they will all have regained any loss Luas has caused and be above their pre-Luas use.

There is a graph in the Dublin Bus network review that shows the changes.

Figure 4.5 2004 v 2005 Transactions, page 17 (page 26 of the PDF)

http://www.dublinbus.ie/news_centre/dublin_bus_news.asp?action=view&news_id=551

John R

Victor wrote:

There is a graph in the Dublin Bus network review that shows the changes.

Figure 4.5 2004 v 2005 Transactions, page 17 (page 26 of the PDF)

http://www.dublinbus.ie/news_centre/dublin_bus_news.asp?action=view&news_id=551

This one:

4.3.2 Table 4.1 shows the impacts of LUAS on services grouped into BAC
categories of those that are affected by Red or Green LUAS services, or
unaffected.

Table 4.1 2004 & 2005 Bus Passenger Transactions
Percentage change

(comparing periods 2-6 in 2004 & 2005)
Services affected by Green Line -18.0%
Services affected by Red Line -6.1%
Services unaffected by Luas -0.5%
All Services -3.5%


4.3.3 The association of bus routes to the Red Line (Tallaght) encompass a large
proportion of 2004 patronage (30%) with this catchment reporting over half
of the system-wide decline in patronage from 2004 to 2005. These routes
reported a 6% fall in patronage and this definition may have been broader
than the concentrated 18% fall (but smaller overall magnitude) in Green
Line affected bus services. It would appear that a 0.5% decline in
unaffected routes (which may have been typical for the entire network) was
converted into a 3.5% decline as a result of LUAS introduction. Over the full
year 2005 Dublin Bus report that the underlying passenger growth achieved
was 1.0% after allowing for the impact of LUAS.

4.3.4 When comparing 2004 with 2005 it was necessary to group services into
common aggregations in order to avoid discrepancies arising from new bus
routes and bus withdrawal. For example patronage on service 51B fell from
1M to 500k, but was offset by 460k on a new service 51c. Data in Figure 4.5
presents a comparison based on these route aggregations (non allocated
routes account for some 1% of patronage in each year). Services classified
as being affected by Red or Green LUAS services are coloured appropriately.

Hardly terminal decline for the city's bus services.

bazzer06

It's interesting that no-one has replied to Metrobest's last post.... Is that because it makes perfect sense?:D

maxheadroom

Metrobest wrote:

Let's also look at the one concrete example of a city centre street that was designated luas only: Harcourt Street. Buses from Rathmines don't use Harcourt Street anymore and has it really made a noticeable difference to journey times? The alternative route is if anything more reliable. Moral of the story - luas forced Dublin Bus to come up with an alterative route and they did. Nobody suffered. Luas passengers benefited.

Emm.. yes, lots of people suffered as buses that would previously have turned left onto harcourt street instead went via hatch street and leeson st, before traversing a heavily congested stephen's green. This persisted for months before a dedicated bus priority system was devised. And this bus priority system was more the product of traffic re-routing for roadworks than it was of any public transport planning.

The alternative route which exists at present is exactly as reliable as the old route pre-luas.

But, you are correct in one respect - this is a perfect example of where many bus services serving a large area of the city / suburbs have been de-proiritised in favour of one single luas line.

EDIT: there you go bazzer