24-hour lane on the stretch of N11 from Foxrock Church to Loughlinstown (?)

breadmonkey

I'm ont quite sure how far the bus lane runs for but why in the name of God is it 24 hour?!

GerardKeating

breadmonkey wrote: »

I'm ont quite sure how far the bus lane runs for but why in the name of God is it 24 hour?!

Bus lanes which are built in former hard scholders are always 24 hour.

Ham'nd'egger

breadmonkey wrote: »

I'm ont quite sure how far the bus lane runs for but why in the name of God is it 24 hour?!

Many of the bus lanes approaching the M50 are 24-7, it ensures a clear lane for public transport and emergency services if need be. While there isn't bus services at night, there can be times of severe traffic congestion, even late at night.

Wishbone Ash

breadmonkey wrote: »

I'm ont quite sure how far the bus lane runs for but why in the name of God is it 24 hour?!

What difference does it make if it's 12 or 24 hour?

breadmonkey

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

What difference does it make if it's 12 or 24 hour?

I don't understand. Traffic usually breaks around 7 on the N11 (town to foxrock) when the bus lane opens. I just thought the benefits would be similar here.

Bus lanes which are built in former hard scholders are always 24 hour

Why?

breadmonkey

Hamndegger wrote: »

Many of the bus lanes approaching the M50 are 24-7, it ensures a clear lane for public transport and emergency services if need be. While there isn't bus services at night, there can be times of severe traffic congestion, even late at night.

Sorry missed this first time around.

John R

This topic is brought up here every few months and so far no one has been able to explain why they need access to bus lanes in the extremely low traffic times that regular bus services don't run (1am-6am).

Regarding the N11 specifically, while all the bus lanes installed in the last few years are 24/7 the older sections (Donnybrook to Foxrock) are 7-7 and a small number of car users abuse this to skip traffic in the early evenings when there is still significant traffic on this section. The better question is why the older and more heavily used sections haven't been changed to 24/7 to match the rest.

mackerski

John R wrote: »

a small number of car users abuse this to skip traffic in the early evenings when there is still significant traffic on this section. The better question is why the older and more heavily used sections haven't been changed to 24/7 to match the rest.

When did keeping left change from legal obligation to abuse?

breadmonkey

I presume he's referring to people using the bus lanes before 7.

Cookie_Monster

GerardKeating wrote: »

Bus lanes which are built in former hard scholders are always 24 hour.

Not true, from Foxrock INTO town was built on hard shoulder also and are only 12 hour.

BrianD

It makes absolutely no difference if the bus lane is 24 hours when it is built on a former hard shoulder. Beforehand it couldn't be used at any time of the day.

mackerski

BrianD wrote: »

It makes absolutely no difference if the bus lane is 24 hours when it is built on a former hard shoulder. Beforehand it couldn't be used at any time of the day.

Of course it makes a difference. Replace HS with part time bus lane and you get a lane that can be used out of hours by cars.

Unless you expect drivers to check every bus lane for evidence of burnt off HS markings just in case.

Carawaystick

I thought it's to do with the speed limit on the road - south of Foxrock it's 80 so 24hr buslane; north of Foxrock it's 60 so 12 hour buslane.

breadmonkey

BrianD wrote: »

It makes absolutely no difference if the bus lane is 24 hours when it is built on a former hard shoulder. Beforehand it couldn't be used at any time of the day.

Are you serious? Obviously it does make a difference because...

mackerski wrote: »

Replace HS with part time bus lane and you get a lane that can be used out of hours by cars.

Carawaystick wrote: »

I thought it's to do with the speed limit on the road - south of Foxrock it's 80 so 24hr buslane; north of Foxrock it's 60 so 12 hour buslane.

Why?

John R

breadmonkey wrote: »

Are you serious? Obviously it does make a difference because...

And again we have someone wanting the use of bus lanes outside peak times without any explanation as to why it is necessary. Are 2 lanes really not enough on the N11?

If there is congestion outside the posted times then they should still be reserved for buses to cut through the congestion and if there is no congestion then there is no need for cars to have a third lane to use.

breadmonkey

more lanes = more capacity = faster travel time. It's as simple as that really and you are aware of this. Why not try and answer my initial question instead of needling me with this rubbish?

It's not that there's a huge amount of congestion at these times, it's rather that I like the ability to drive unimpeded past the queues of morons in the middle lane.

BrianD

breadmonkey wrote: »

more lanes = more capacity = faster travel time. It's as simple as that really and you are aware of this. Why not try and answer my initial question instead of needling me with this rubbish?

It's not that there's a huge amount of congestion at these times, it's rather that I like the ability to drive unimpeded past the queues of morons in the middle lane.

Because, to be frank, you are talking rubbish!

Here's the facts ...

There has been no change to the status quo for private motorists on this stretch or road. What was an unusable hard shoulder is now an usable bus lane.

Buses now have a 24 hour dedicated bus lane even if it be relatively unused in the post midnight to 6am time of day. Two lanes will adequately carry all private traffic. I might point out that you should not be using any lane to undertake "morons' as you call them. This is against the law.

Finally, the indisputable fact - as discussed elsewhere on this board - is that the overall capacity of the N11 corridor has increased since the introduction of 12 hour and 24 hour bus lanes. What has happened on the Foxrock to Loughlinstown stretch is that an extra traffic lane has been added to the route so you are correct: more lanes = more capacity = faster travel. Has the penny dropped yet?

Trust your questions are now answered.

breadmonkey

There has been no change to the status quo for private motorists on this stretch or road. What was an unusable hard shoulder is now an usable bus lane.

Right so what you're saying is let's just keep it the same despite the fact that there's a perfectly usable lane wasted on an infrequent bus service? Why not use it to improve on the existing situation?

I might point out that you should not be using any lane to undertake "morons' as you call them. This is against the law.

Of course. I simply drive in the left hand lane as I'm supposed to. That's not against the law is it? No, in fact quite the contrary.

Finally, the indisputable fact - as discussed elsewhere on this board - is that the overall capacity of the N11 corridor has increased since the introduction of 12 hour and 24 hour bus lanes. What has happened on the Foxrock to Loughlinstown stretch is that an extra traffic lane has been added to the route so you are correct: more lanes = more capacity = faster travel. Has the penny dropped yet?

So extra traffic lane + unused bus lane < extra traffic lane? Did you actually think about any of this before you wrote it?

Trust your questions are now answered.

No, you're inane comments are derailing my thread. I want to know why the bus lane is a dedicated 24 hour one, not to discuss my wish not to have it so.

Stark

breadmonkey wrote: »

Right so what you're saying is let's just keep it the same despite the fact that there's a perfectly usable lane wasted on an infrequent bus service? Why not use it to improve on the existing situation?

There are quite a lot of buses that use that lane even after 7PM. By giving them a dedicated lane, you're encouraging more people to leave their cars at home and get the bus. Afaik, bus usage has increased quite a bit on that route over the last few years. Taking that lane away from those people and giving it back to private car traffic isn't a sound long term traffic plan.

The current situation seems to work well. The buses run quickly and congestion on the other two lanes is relatively light compared to other routes in Dublin.

breadmonkey

Stark wrote: »

There are quite a lot of buses that use that lane even after 7PM. By giving them a dedicated lane, you're encouraging more people to leave their cars at home and get the bus. Afaik, bus usage has increased quite a bit on that route over the last few years. Taking that lane away from those people and giving it back to private car traffic isn't a sound long term traffic plan.

Are there really a lot of buses running that route? I'll have a check in my Street Guide but I really don't think there are. Though I'm sure you're right that bus usage has increased, especially with the introduction of the 145.

I'm not talking about taking the lane away from the buses except after 7! I'm all for encouraging public transport but we all know that'll take more than a bus lane. Anyway, that's another thread.

Ham'nd'egger

breadmonkey wrote: »

Are there really a lot of buses running that route? I'll have a check in my Street Guide but I really don't think there are. Though I'm sure you're right that bus usage has increased, especially with the introduction of the 145.

I'm not talking about taking the lane away from the buses except after 7! I'm all for encouraging public transport but we all know that'll take more than a bus lane. Anyway, that's another thread.

Breadmonkey, I notice that you didn't really take my point into account. To put it into a very real perspective, June last, a footbridge replacement on the N 11 forced the Saturday night closure of it and the M 11. While this closure was well signalled in the media, there was dire tailbacks as a result. If on this night, any bus or ambulance needed to reach (For arguments sake, Loughlinstown hospital, it being handy), it didn't have a prayer were it not for the bus lane. One friend of mine was working that night in Wexford; he spent over an hour on the road around here; I am sure that you will agree that we allow access to a major road at it's arteries as these 24-7 lanes allow.

breadmonkey

Hamndegger wrote: »

Breadmonkey, I notice that you didn't really take my point into account. To put it into a very real perspective, June last, a footbridge replacement on the N 11 forced the Saturday night closure of it and the M 11. While this closure was well signalled in the media, there was dire tailbacks as a result. If on this night, any bus or ambulance needed to reach (For arguments sake, Loughlinstown hospital, it being handy), it didn't have a prayer were it not for the bus lane. One friend of mine was working that night in Wexford; he spent over an hour on the road around here; I am sure that you will agree that we allow access to a major road at it's arteries as these 24-7 lanes allow.

Sorry, I got bogged down in all the superfluous rubbish.

I do take your point but I don't think the comparison you make above is valid. The closure of an entire road is obviously going to cause chaos compared to a "congested" 3 lane dual carriageway. They aren;t close.

Plus, everyone who's getting on my back about this is using the argument that there's no congestion to speak of so surely then no ambulance will be impeded?

So anyway, is emergency service access the definitive answer?

mickoneill30

No hard shoulder is the definitive answer. Well it seems to be if you actually read the posts above.

There are two options.

1: Have a hard shoulder and a normal lane. Nobody complains.
2: Open up the hard shoulder to public transport and still have the normal lane. People complain. Its a really "glass is half empty" kind of complaint that is common these days.

Taxis can use bus lanes too so at the times the buses aren't running that's at least 10% of traffic taken out of your way Breadmonkey.

breadmonkey

No hard shoulder is the definitive answer. Well it seems to be if you actually read the posts above.

No hard shoulder what? There was talk of hard shoulder and emergency service access. So it seems to be eh? Wow, that's pretty definititive alright.

There are two options.

1: Have a hard shoulder and a normal lane. Nobody complains.
2: Open up the hard shoulder to public transport and still have the normal lane. People complain. Its a really "glass is half empty" kind of complaint that is common these days.

I have a great idea. Let's call it "Option 3". What happens is you have a bus lane in operation 7:00 - 19:00 and then you open it up to all traffic thereafter. And how exactly is this a "glass is half empty complaint"? Does that actually mean anything or were you just trying to sound intelligent? All I'm trying to do is find out why the bus is 24 hour. I'm taking an objective view and wondering why what seems an obvious improvement to me is not in operation.

Taxis can use bus lanes too so at the times the buses aren't running that's at least 10% of traffic taken out of your way Breadmonkey.

10%. Sure why not.

mickoneill30

breadmonkey wrote: »

No hard shoulder what? There was talk of hard shoulder and emergency service access. So it seems to be eh? Wow, that's pretty definititive alright.

To explain the glass half empty comment (as it seems to have gone over your head).

Glass half full - Great they opened up the hard shoulder to public transport. That means more room for me on the normal lane.
Glass half empty - They only opened up the hard shoulder to public transport. I want more room dammit.
I wasnt' trying to sound intelligent. Obviously though it was too complicated for some.

As to the rest of your post it's been answered before.

For the 10% I posted for the taxis number. That is a number I took off the top of my head for the times that buses wouldn't be around (say between 11pm - 7am). I thought it was low. If you know better then feel free to correct me (with facts, not meandering posts).

John R

breadmonkey wrote: »

more lanes = more capacity = faster travel time. It's as simple as that really and you are aware of this. Why not try and answer my initial question instead of needling me with this rubbish?

It's not that there's a huge amount of congestion at these times, it's rather that I like the ability to drive unimpeded past the queues of morons in the middle lane.

That is what the outside lane is for, overtaking on the left is still illegal.

Again, if there is enough traffic to hold you up then there is good reason for the bus lane to still be in operation, unless of course if what you really want is to be able to pass a handful of cars at high speed by using the bus lane.

Oh and I did answer your original question, the original N11 lanes were 7-7 as was the policy when they were commissioned, now the policy is for lanes that are not intended for general traffic to be 24/7

maxheadroom

Its actually very simple. They have decided that this lane is to give public transport priority in times of traffic congestion.

If there is traffic congestion after 7pm, then it makes sense for the bus lane hours to extend beyond 7.

If there is no congestion after 7pm, then it makes no difference if the bus lane is available for general use, as the available road capacity is adequate for general traffic.

breadmonkey

How intensely frustrating.

To explain the glass half empty comment (as it seems to have gone over your head).

Glass half full - Great they opened up the hard shoulder to public transport. That means more room for me on the normal lane.
Glass half empty - They only opened up the hard shoulder to public transport. I want more room dammit.

And now for the clincher - "Great they opened the hard shoulder to public transport 7:00 - 19:00 and then I can use it after that. Now not only do I get more room on the normal lane but I also get even more room after 19:00, making my travel time even less!" Is that really that hard to understand? This isn't a case of glass being half full or half empty, it's bout being at the correct level. Do you understand that? Please for the love of God don't reiterate yourself.

For the 10% I posted for the taxis number. That is a number I took off the top of my head for the times that buses wouldn't be around (say between 11pm - 7am). I thought it was low. If you know better then feel free to correct me (with facts, not meandering posts).

I don't know better. That's why I wouldn't pull numbers out of my head and use them to argue a point.

John R wrote: »

Oh and I did answer your original question, the original N11 lanes were 7-7 as was the policy when they were commissioned, now the policy is for lanes that are not intended for general traffic to be 24/7

OK but WHY?

maxheadroom wrote: »

Its actually very simple. They have decided that this lane is to give public transport priority in times of traffic congestion.

If there is traffic congestion after 7pm, then it makes sense for the bus lane hours to extend beyond 7.

If there is no congestion after 7pm, then it makes no difference if the bus lane is available for general use, as the available road capacity is adequate for general traffic.

Adequate yes but could be improved further. That's my point.

L1011

John R wrote: »

That is what the outside lane is for, overtaking on the left is still illegal.

I thought it was specifically legal *IF* the right hand lane is going slower? I've definately undertaken a garda car due to the outside lane of the N4 suddenly getting glacial (while I was in the inside anyway)...

BrianD

breadmonkey wrote: »

How intensely frustrating.


And now for the clincher - "Great they opened the hard shoulder to public transport 7:00 - 19:00 and then I can use it after that. Now not only do I get more room on the normal lane but I also get even more room after 19:00, making my travel time even less!" Is that really that hard to understand? This isn't a case of glass being half full or half empty, it's bout being at the correct level. Do you understand that? Please for the love of God don't reiterate yourself.


I don't know better. That's why I wouldn't pull numbers out of my head and use them to argue a point.


OK but WHY?


Adequate yes but could be improved further. That's my point.

i think this thread should be closed. Bread monkey you seem unwilling to accept the facts of the matter and clinging to the old "why is there a 24 hour bus lane when Dublin Bus don't run 24 hours" malarkey.

The fact of the matter is that a new traffic lane has been opened when there wasn't one before. MORE LANES MORE CAPACITY FASTER TRAVEL TIMES

This creates a dedicated route 24 hours for high capacity vehicles.

it takes these high capacity vehicles out of the existing two lanes of the route.

The existing two lanes of traffic are more than adequate to carry traffic post 19:00. There would be no improvement to your journey times

You are looiking for more MORE LANES MORE CAPACITY and FASTER TRAVEL TIMES. This is achieved for all N11 users by the addition of this 24 hour lane. QED.

breadmonkey

MYOB wrote: »

I thought it was specifically legal *IF* the right hand lane is going slower? I've definately undertaken a garda car due to the outside lane of the N4 suddenly getting glacial (while I was in the inside anyway)...

I thought this too. Just had a quick look at the Rules Of The Road and found this:

You may overtake on the left when
1)You want to go straight ahead when the driver in front of you has moved
out and signalled that they intend to turn right.
2)You have signalled that you intend to turn left.
3)Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is
moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane.

I don't know if this applies to 3 lane carriageways but I'd rather if another thread was started to discuss this.

breadmonkey

i think this thread should be closed. Bread monkey you seem unwilling to accept the facts of the matter and clinging to the old "why is there a 24 hour bus lane when Dublin Bus don't run 24 hours" malarkey.

I'm questioning existing policy with a view to seeking improvement. It is you who is blindly clinging to current staus quo.

The fact of the matter is that a new traffic lane has been opened when there wasn't one before. MORE LANES MORE CAPACITY FASTER TRAVEL TIMES

This creates a dedicated route 24 hours for high capacity vehicles.

it takes these high capacity vehicles out of the existing two lanes of the route.

The existing two lanes of traffic are more than adequate to carry traffic post 19:00.

See above where I already refuted this.

There would be no improvement to your journey times

Yes there would be (as there currently is on other stretches) an improvement to my journey times when using the bus lane, primarily because most motorists choose not to use it.

You are looiking for more MORE LANES MORE CAPACITY and FASTER TRAVEL TIMES. This is achieved for all N11 users by the addition of this 24 hour lane. QED.

In part, yes. I don't deny this. I argue that FASTER TRAVEL TIMES can be achieved in the evening by opening up the lane to other road users.

mackerski

MYOB wrote: »

I thought it was specifically legal *IF* the right hand lane is going slower? I've definately undertaken a garda car due to the outside lane of the N4 suddenly getting glacial (while I was in the inside anyway)...

No. You'd be hard pressed to overtake on the left without the right hand lane being slower, don't you think?

breadmonkey

mackerski wrote: »

No. You'd be hard pressed to overtake on the left without the right hand lane being slower, don't you think?

Please, I already asked for new thread if people wish to discuss this.

L1011

mackerski wrote: »

No. You'd be hard pressed to overtake on the left without the right hand lane being slower, don't you think?

Aherm, check the bit of the ROTR that breadmonkey posted. I think the offence of undertaking pretty much applies to cases where you duck in/out of the inside lane to pass traffic in the outside lane rather than driving in there and happening to pass slower traffic.

Take the N4/M4 any evening around 6pm. Impossible not to undertake...

John R

breadmonkey wrote: »

In part, yes. I don't deny this. I argue that FASTER TRAVEL TIMES can be achieved in the evening by opening up the lane to other road users.

Faster times for YOU. The purpose of all the work redesigning junctions, traffic lights and road markings was to improve journey times for PUBLIC TRANSPORT.

It needs to be said again because you are still not getting it; If there is sufficient traffic to slow YOU down then the lanes are still required to allow PUBLIC TRANSPORT better progress, if there is insufficient traffic to slow you down then you have no need to use the bus lane anyway. Therefore no matter what way you put it you have no justification for using the bus lane.

breadmonkey wrote: »

I'm questioning existing policy with a view to seeking improvement. It is you who is blindly clinging to current staus quo.

That is the only thing we can agree on, there should be changes made.

The rest of the N11 bus lanes along with many other older bus lane installations need to be made 24/7 to stop the likes of you using them post 7pm as an express overtaking lane which is illegal and dangerous.

mackerski

MYOB wrote: »

Aherm, check the bit of the ROTR that breadmonkey posted. I think the offence of undertaking pretty much applies to cases where you duck in/out of the inside lane to pass traffic in the outside lane rather than driving in there and happening to pass slower traffic.

I've read it many times along with the road traffic law concerned. I don't get the sense that you have, though. The important word here is 'slowly' - it doesn't say "more slowly".

@breakmonkey: yes, I read your request. But such are the dynamics of a thread and it's still on-topic given the relevance to bus lanes and traffic failing to keep left.

breadmonkey

Faster times for YOU. The purpose of all the work redesigning junctions, traffic lights and road markings was to improve journey times for PUBLIC TRANSPORT.

Yes I have no problem with this but if an obvious corollary can be put in place that helps motorists without hindering public transport then surely this should be implemented?

It needs to be said again because you are still not getting it; If there is sufficient traffic to slow YOU down then the lanes are still required to allow PUBLIC TRANSPORT better progress, if there is insufficient traffic to slow you down then you have no need to use the bus lane anyway. Therefore no matter what way you put it you have no justification for using the bus lane.

It basically comes down to driver habits and the fact that most drivers dont drive in the bus lane when they are supposed to. It's a simple fact that driving in the bus lane (and let's not forget that this is the correct lane to be driving in after 19:00 on the relevant stretches) gets you from A to B faster. All motorists would still benefit if they drove properly because of the increased capacity and yes the decreased bus service (and it's indisputable that the service is reduced at these times) would be affected. I'm talking about a trade off that allows for maximum efficiency of the system as a whole.

Encouraging public transport is all well and good but in this instance we're talking about a linear, one-dimensional bus service, not an integrated system that actually works. The fact remains that most people need to use their cars because the public transport system does not cater for them and I don't agree with the idea of "encouraging" a substandard public transport system that unecessarily punishes those who simply cannot avail of it.

The rest of the N11 bus lanes along with many other older bus lane installations need to be made 24/7 to stop the likes of you using them post 7pm as an express overtaking lane which is illegal and dangerous.

Or maybe we could teach people to drive properly instead of compensating with an inefficient road system?

For what it's worth, I'm not a deranged motorist; in fact I take the bus most of the time.

Stark

breadmonkey wrote: »

Yes I have no problem with this but if an obvious corollary can be put in place that helps motorists without hindering public transport then surely this should be implemented?

And that would be? Anything that further encourages private car usage in the city is generally a bad idea as it draws people away from public transport, increasing congestion and making the bus service less viable.

The only places where it really makes sense to help motorists is places like the M50 and the inter-urban motorways, where you want to make the motorway option as attractive as possible to draw cars away from city streets.

breadmonkey wrote:

All motorists would still benefit if they drove properly because of the increased capacity and yes the decreased bus service (and it's indisputable that the service is reduced at these times) would be affected. I'm talking about a trade off that allows for maximum efficiency of the system as a whole.

You might think that YOU will get somewhere faster if priority is taken away from public transport and given back to you. However, in reality if the bus service goes to pot, then those hundreds of people who were using the bus will think "screw this, I'm taking the car in future" and you'll be competing with a whole lot of extra morons on your commute.

breadmonkey

And that would be*? Anything that further encourages private car usage in the city is generally a bad idea as it draws people away from public transport, increasing congestion and making the bus service less viable.

I feel I qualified this later in my post where I said:
"Encouraging public transport is all well and good but in this instance we're talking about a linear, one-dimensional bus service, not an integrated system that actually works. The fact remains that most people need to use their cars because the public transport system does not cater for them and I don't agree with the idea of "encouraging" a substandard public transport system that unecessarily punishes those who simply cannot avail of it."

The only places where it really makes sense to help motorists is places like the M50 and the inter-urban motorways, where you want to make the *motorway option as attractive as possible to draw cars away from city streets.

I don't think the above can be confined to the specific areas you mention but I agree in principle.

You might think that YOU will get somewhere faster if priority is taken away from public transport and given back to you. However, in reality if the bus service goes to pot, then those hundreds of people who were using the bus will think "screw this, I'm taking the car in future" and you'll be competing with a whole lot of extra morons on your commute.

Yes but the bus service won't go to pot with the minor change I'm suggesting.

*EDIT: Sorry, didn't answer this first time around. I was referring to making the bus lane 7:00 - 19:00 as opposed to 24 hr.

Carawaystick

Buslanes with 80kmh speedlimits are generally permanent because it is not very safe to allow undertaking to occur at this speed, compared to 60 kmh sections.

Most of the buses in Dublin are double decker and a 65kmh speed limit applies to them.

This isn't much more than a handwavy explanation but that's all there is.
some civil servant decided this, it's established practice now, and the lanes will only be changed to 12 hr usage if the speed limit is reduced to 60. And probably not even then.

SeanW

Slightly OT, but are the ex-Hard Shoulder Bus lanes still legally usable as a motorist breakdown lane? What would a motorist be expected to do if they had for example a blowout in the 2nd (old 1st) left hand lane?

Victor

SeanW wrote: »

Slightly OT, but are the ex-Hard Shoulder Bus lanes still legally usable as a motorist breakdown lane? What would a motorist be expected to do if they had for example a blowout in the 2nd (old 1st) left hand lane?

You pull in to the kerb. A stopped vehicle at the kerb is safer for everyone than one in the middle of the carraigeway.