Dublin Bus Network Review

The_Wrecker

cson wrote: »

Every bus that passes me by now with SPECIALTA on it I'll be cursing you Alek. :P

I display Private hire as some folk cannot read the smaller words on the sorry display.

KD345

http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/News-Centre/Travel-News/Routes-40a-40b-40d-51-and-78a-Timetable-Changes/

Friday, November 04, 2011

Dublin Bus is pleased to announce changes to services in Ballyfermot and Finglas on Sunday 13th November. These changes are part of Network Direct, delivering more direct, high frequency services with significantly improved connections across the city centre. Changes will be implemented on route 40/40a/40b/40d/78/78a.

Route 40 will also operate with low floor technology providing increased comfort and accessibility levels for our customers in Ballyfermot and North Clondalkin.

Routes 40, 40a, 78 and 78a will be amalgamated and operate as Route 40. It will offer full cross city travel options for customers. Route 40 is high frequency route operating every 10 minutes at peak times.

Route 40 will provide full cross city travel options for customers operating from Liffey Valley to Finglas via North Clondalkin, Ballyfermot, Inchicore, Kilmainham, Thomas Street, Dame Street, O’Connell Street, Parnell Square, Mater Hospital, Dorset Street, Drumcondra, Whitworth Road and Phibsboro and Finglas. Route 40 will now operate via Dame Street in both directions. It will provide a quicker, more direct service benefitting from the priority of the College Green Bus Corridor in both directions.

Route 40d will provide faster journey times to the city centre, operating from Tyrrelstown to Parnell Street via Ballycoolin, Mellowes Road, Finglas Village, Hart’s Corner, Whitworth Road, Dorset Street and Parnell Street. Route 40d will operate via Parnell Square West when operating toward Tyrrelstown.

Route 40b will continue to connect Toberburr with Finglas and the City Centre.
Please note route 40 and 40d will no longer operate via Mountjoy Square when operating toward Finglas.
Route 51 will no longer operate alternative routes include 13, 68, 69 and 40.
There are no changes to other services in your area at this stage.
All service changes will offer improved punctuality and reliability by maximising the use of bus priority on Quality Bus Corridors, by operating at even frequencies and by managing buses with the use of GPS control systems.

All our timetables will be redesigned, easier to understand and at consistent times past each hour. Timetables will also have intermediate timing points to make it easier to plan your journey e.g. Route 40 will have a dedicated departure time from Parnell Square operating towards Ballyfermot. Real Time Passenger Information units are also installed at key stops on route.

Revised Route 40

Revised Route 40b

Revised Route 40d

A2000

5 min running time from liffey valley to finches is a bit tight particularly with heavy loading in the morning and the amount of schools the bus serves.. Given that the current 78a can take 50 mins to 1 hour to get to city this gives it 22 mins to get to finglas. Could this go they way the 13 did? Seems to be a big reduction in frequency for the 40/A. Current 40/a and 78a running time in 100 mins and is now 81 mins which is 19 mins less. A gap on the 78A causes chaos and large numbers of people at stops. The last thing that is needed is for buses to start passing by full due to large gaps. In principle I agree with the cross city routes as long as they are run properly. I dont think 81 mins from Finglas to Liffey Valley is at all realistic enough and will have teething problems. On a positive note its good to see the route will be fully accessible. Im not sure if VG's will fit under the bridge in Inchicore so these may be lost from the 40.

LXFlyer

The times at the bottom are only guide times.

The actual running times on the rosters are usually longer and do not have intermediate points except for city centre.

There would have to be a minimum 90 minutes to get from one terminus to the other in off-peak which if you look at the timetable is what seems to be the case.

A2000

lxflyer wrote: »

The times at the bottom are only guide times.

The actual running times on the rosters are usually longer and do not have intermediate points except for city centre.

There would have to be a minimum 90 minutes to get from one terminus to the other in off-peak which if you look at the timetable is what seems to be the case.

I still dont think its enough time even at 100 mins given the amount of local loadings on both suburban ends of the routes and the fact that the 40 will now have to transverse O'connell bridge/street.. 78A takes up to 40 mins from Inchicore to Ballyfermot at 15-00-15.45 due to the loading from the many schools along the route and the usual passengers and the school time traffic and this is classed as off peak but is not reflected in the timings. . I would imagine its the same in the Finglas area.

The maps dont work as usual and there are no intermediary times from Parnell Square to Ballyfermot. Also no mention of whether the last bus departs city to Ballyfermot at 23.30. Another point to note is that the last bus now leaves Liffey Valley at 23.20 instead of 23.30 except on Sunday. There is usually a good load on the 23.30 from the cinema who catch this bus by the skin of thier teeth. They havent a hope with it leaving at 23.20.

Also there are currently 102 departures from Liffey valley Mon -Fri on 78A, This has been cut to 89 a loss of 13 services along with the cuts that were imposed last year. Not a change for the better IMO. Its hard to sell improvements with reduced frequency. Remember the 78A used to be a 6 min peak frequency. I hope the route works out as it will benefit many buy crossing the city. From my own observations I can see some pitfalls but hopefully they will be ironed out before the chaos of christmas shoppers begins.

dfx-

A2000 wrote: »

A gap on the 78A causes chaos and large numbers of people at stops. The last thing that is needed is for buses to start passing by full due to large gaps. In principle I agree with the cross city routes as long as they are run properly. I dont think 81 mins from Finglas to Liffey Valley is at all realistic enough and will have teething problems. On a positive note its good to see the route will be fully accessible. Im not sure if VG's will fit under the bridge in Inchicore so these may be lost from the 40.

And the 13 won't be able to help the 40 like the 51B/C helped the 78A because the 13 is barely able to help itself.

Conyngham Rd's EVs fit underneath that bridge when they've been on the 78A. Might get more EVs. Harristown's AVs and AXs have been wandering onto the 83 in the past couple of weeks instead of VGs and EVs and obviously the 13 too, so the VGs might stay.

Though what happens to C/Rd's RVs..a couple of them are great buses with plenty of life left. Certainly the new 40 would still get the poorest AVs from C/Rd ala the 78A either way.

CIE

Fixing what isn't broken, once more. They have the 140 now to serve the old route 40 up until Finglas Village, but when they re-routed the 40 that way in the past, it didn't last and they had to bring the 40A back.

Routes 40B and 40D should get their own un-affixed numbers. How about 34 (for 40D) and 35 (for 40B)? Those aren't being used right now, and the 40B mostly operates along the former route 35 route anyhow.

shannon_tek

Bus Network seems a mess lately. And the number 4 seems to be well off. its suppose to be every 15mins from morning to 9 then becomes every hour. Sometimes you might get 2 in the hour or 2 together. or none at all.

I fear something is up and unfortunately its the only bus thats doing ballymun road without having to walk far. If it should go its going to cause problems or they will have to reroute the 13:(

prettyboy81

With the 40 now going to terminate at Finglas place, it's rolling back to years to when Dublin bus launched city swift service & they had the 40 terminating at Finglas place & circulating all around Finglas west & south before heading into town....interesting times ahead for us Finglas folk coz at the mo all 40 routes are ultra reliable!!!

Fingers crossed....

monument

The 40 seems like a good example of what will be a very long routes exposed to congestion where bus priority is missing or partly lacking. NTA needs to bash bring heads together to look at the congested sections of these routes.

But then again, should these bus routes not be on roads where there already is bus priority (ie 40 via N4)?

CIE

prettyboy81 wrote: »

With the 40 now going to terminate at Finglas place, it's rolling back to years to when Dublin bus launched city swift service & they had the 40 terminating at Finglas place & circulating all around Finglas west & south before heading into town....interesting times ahead for us Finglas folk coz at the mo all 40 routes are ultra reliable!!!

Fingers crossed....

Like I said, I think they're counting on the 140 to take over for the 40 once it's re-routed back to the failed CitySwift routing. Maybe the 40A will come back again in spite of it...

CIE

monument wrote: »

The 40 seems like a good example of what will be a very long routes exposed to congestion where bus priority is missing or partly lacking. NTA needs to bash bring heads together to look at the congested sections of these routes.

But then again, should these bus routes not be on roads where there already is bus priority (ie 40 via N4)?

If the 40 ran via the N4, then how would it serve Kilmainham and Inchicore...?

phasers

CIE wrote: »

If the 40 ran via the N4, then how would it serve Kilmainham and Inchicore...?

Or Ballyfermot or Neilstown?


Wouldn't it basically just follow the 25/66 route from Liffey Valley to the City Centre in that instance? That wouldn't benefit anyone.

monument

Sorry, while trying to post in a hurry I forgot to say use the N4 to skip James's Street to Emmet Street (my experience of some the worst affected areas on the 78a between Ballyfermot and town) .

Bit of a pointless diversion on by behalf from the topic at hand, because the outline of the plans for BRT will be doing a lot more than what I'm suggesting should have happened to the new "40" route. It'll be very interesting to see what they come up with regarding stops and BRT lane design -- will we get BRT proper or extra BRT light.

CIE wrote: »

If the 40 ran via the N4, then how would it serve Kilmainham and Inchicore...?

There's loads of options. It could skip them, could serve them very poorly from the N4, could serve them vie the current Sarsfield Road / Memorial Road / Inchicore Road axes, could serve them with some tweeks to those roads, or could served far better with major changes to those roads.

Sure, people would have to walk longer, but it would mean a better service not too far a way and better service overall for the rest of the now very long route. A better, faster, more attractive service overall.

The Emmet Road / Old Kilmainham / James's Street route looks far, far harder to deal with, but not imposable. An alternative would be to make those roads into access only for private traffic and only allow buses to use them as a through route. But as I said, far harder to deal with.

It's not about banning cars but allowing access and looking at improving flows on other routes for cars. A recurring theme I keep hearing from some people is that "we want it all" -- we want all modes to work on all routes. The result is congestion for cars and buses.

phasers wrote: »

Or Ballyfermot or Neilstown?

Wouldn't it basically just follow the 25/66 route from Liffey Valley to the City Centre in that instance? That wouldn't benefit anyone.

Sorry, see the correction as above.

Bazzer2

monument wrote: »

Sorry, while trying to post in a hurry I forgot to say use the N4 to skip James's Street to Emmet Street (my experience of some the worst affected areas on the 78a between Ballyfermot and town) .
.

That's what the 78 sort of does, but over the past few years it's been run into the ground and now it's going to be scrapped. I can see quite a few people being upset with that, as a fair crowd specifically used it to avoid the omnipresent traffic congestion along Emmet Road, Mount Brown and James Street.

If the rest of this phase of Network They Wrecked is anything to go by, the new 40 will be an almighty nightmare.

dfx-

I waited around to see the 13 late night operation westward on Dame St. Between 2224 and 2333, there was one bus, AX517 at 2244. Would that be the 2230 departure from Harristown? The 2200? Again, the RTPI 2307 bus didn't transfer into reality. Surely that on the RTPI relates to the 2230 departure from Harristown, what is the big problem with that service? Is there one every 45 minutes? One at 2205 seems to be regular, one at 2245 and the last one 2335ish. A bus every 30 minutes should not be a problem or need regulating. Luckily some people could get a 78A some of the way. People going to Clondalkin were obviously screwed, big queues.

Now if the 40 is repeated with similar gaps, the likes of Inchicore/Emmet Rd, Mount Brown might be best served by the 68 or 123. Unbelievably never thought I'd say that. If similar gaps are observed on the 40 and 13, most of that part of the city could be on fire in protest by the time the buses reach it.:)

Dodge

Better served by the once an hour 68 says it all (even it doesn't go near Mt Brown)

The traffic problems at Kilmainham Cross were pretty much under wraps for the last couple of years but the recent move to block traffic going in/out of James Hospital at the Rialto gate has seen most of this use the James St entrance (with knock on effect for Kilmainham and Inchicore). Was this a hospital decision and were DB and DCC consulted?

Also using the n4 to avoid James St misses out the pretty large sections of that bus route who use James St (hospital, schools), Thomas St (social welfare) and that's without the tourist traffic to Kilmainham Gaol, Royal Hospital and Guinness.

It would also need a right turn filter to be installed at Kulmainham cross, otherwise it'd handle eve worse problems getting past that corner onto Emmet Road

Basically it might help some Ballyfermot users get into town quicker, but it's a poorly thought out idea

monument

Dodge wrote: »

Also using the n4 to avoid James St misses out the pretty large sections of that bus route who use James St (hospital, schools), Thomas St (social welfare) and that's without the tourist traffic to Kilmainham Gaol, Royal Hospital and Guinness

It would also need a right turn filter to be installed at Kulmainham cross, otherwise it'd handle eve worse problems getting past that corner onto Emmet Road

Basically it might help some Ballyfermot users get into town quicker, but it's a poorly thought out idea

Not at all. Other buses would still directly serve the area, if needs be, those using the hospital or others could switch at Heuston (allow 40 ticket holders to switch at no cost, and should be free using passes or Leep). Most people could just walk the 500m to James's Street.

It could divert back onto the current route at Bridge Street / High Stree / Christchurch leaving one end of Thomas St very close. Tourists traffic to Kilmainham Gaol, and Royal Hospital would be better served. For tourists Guinness would not be too far away from the quays, Heuston or High Street, and they could also take the other buses, even more direct tour buses, or the soon to be expanded Dublin Bikes.

It does not just help those from/to Ballyfermot -- it would give the vast bulk of current and potential users along the soon-to-be very long route a better, faster, more reliable, overall more attractive service. That holds even if some people have to switch or walk a little further.

Dodge

So how would the bus turn from Emmet Road onto the N4 towards the city centre?

You talk about route length but nothing has changed for the Ballyfermot to city centre route. And as for your 500m to James st (uphill) for hospital users...

You haven't thought this through at all have you?

qerty

monument wrote: »

Not at all. Other buses would still directly serve the area, if needs be, those using the hospital or others could switch at Heuston (allow 40 ticket holders to switch at no cost, and should be free using passes or Leep). Most people could just walk the 500m to James's Street.

It could divert back onto the current route at Bridge Street / High Stree / Christchurch leaving one end of Thomas St very close. Tourists traffic to Kilmainham Gaol, and Royal Hospital would be better served. For tourists Guinness would not be too far away from the quays, Heuston or High Street, and they could also take the other buses, even more direct tour buses, or the soon to be expanded Dublin Bikes.

It does not just help those from/to Ballyfermot -- it would give the vast bulk of current and potential users along the soon-to-be very long route a better, faster, more reliable, overall more attractive service. That holds even if some people have to switch or walk a little further.

The length of time that it would take to get from Clondalkin/Ballyfermot would not be shortened significantly by using this routing. Also in this thread, there have been many comments about the very large percentage of people who use the 78a to travel between Thomas street - clondalkin and the areas in between. Removing the 40 from there would remove a heavily used and financially significant route and alienate more customers. It really wouldnt work.

As for your suggestion that inchicore/hueston/end of thomas street could be served by the n4, as well as the royal hospital, are served by the the 79/a already.

monument

qerty wrote: »

The length of time that it would take to get from Clondalkin/Ballyfermot would not be shortened significantly by using this routing.

Yes, yes, it would. The time it takes for the 79 to bypass this section proves it. Additional bus priority is also far easier to do on the bypass section than it is on the back roads the 40 is due to travel.

Sorry but it is really is dreamland stuff to think the N4 with bus lanes is not significantly faster than the current route which is mainly heavily congested small roads. But it's exactly this kind of attitude that looks to be forcing the NTA and the Department of Transport to cut funding for DB and move on to BRT independent of it. Let's hope they do it half right and show what a proper bus service is really like -- dependable and fast.

qerty wrote: »

Also in this thread, there have been many comments about the very large percentage of people who use the 78a to travel between Thomas street - clondalkin and the areas in between.

As already said:

It could divert back onto the current route at Bridge Street / High Stree / Christchurch. High Street is right beside and it would not be too far of a walk or Luas trip to other stops on the quays or at Heuston.

qerty wrote: »

Removing the 40 from there would remove a heavily used and financially significant route and alienate more customers. It really wouldnt work.

Financially significant? Somebody else highlighted the hospital, schools and social welfare office as the main things it would be bypassing. There may be other arguments for keeping serving these, but financially significant?

Yes, a side affect is you alienate a small few but in doing so you make the service better all round for the vast bulk of current passengers as well as potential passengers.

qerty wrote: »

As for your suggestion that inchicore/hueston/end of thomas street could be served by the n4, as well as the royal hospital, are served by the the 79/a already.

I'm not talking about serving those areas better (but that would be an effect of the change) but rather I'm talking about serving the whole now very long route better.

Dodge

monument wrote: »

It could divert back onto the current route at Bridge Street / High Stree / Christchurch. High Street is right beside and it would not be too far of a walk or Luas trip to other stops on the quays or at Heuston.

Laughable

Yes, a side affect is you alienate a small few but in doing so you make the service better all round for the vast bulk of current passengers as well as potential passengers.

Any basis for this? I bet none...

I'm not talking about serving those areas better (but that would be an effect of the change) but rather I'm talking about serving the whole now very long route better.

You have absolutely no idea how the 'new' route will work, and even less idea how many people will use the route beyond its existing to/from city centre routes

What you are doing is talking about removing a pretty succesful part of the route (to a route that can't happen)

monument

Dodge wrote: »

Laughable

Any basis for this? I bet none...

You have absolutely no idea how the 'new' route will work, and even less idea how many people will use the route beyond its existing to/from city centre routes

Laughable -- yes, it is that you think most people can't walk a few 100 meters and others can't switch.

Basis for what I said is that you make the route faster, more reliably and less dependent on congestion for most people. You even make it better for those who have to walk a little further.

I do have an idea how the new route will work -- one bus travelling an often heavily congested bit of road is the same as another doing the same.

Dodge wrote: »

Laughable

Any basis for this? I bet none...

You have absolutely no idea how the 'new' route will work, and even less idea how many people will use the route beyond its existing to/from city centre routes

Dodge wrote: »

What you are doing is talking about removing a pretty succesful part of the route (to a route that can't happen)

Why can't it happen?

And more so moving the route a bit and adding a bit extra to people's walks. The extra walk will be worth the better service.

Dodge

1) explain to me how the bus gets from Emmet Road to the N4

2) explain how you think people will be happier with a longer point to point journey when extra walking is included (and I dispute that your convulated Bridge st/north quays route is quicker but for this purpose we'll say you're right)

3) again, what's the basis for your 'vast majoirty' of users on that route claim

4) what percentage of the people from Ballyfermot who currently use the 79 instead of the 78a do so because of its more direct route, and what would happen this route?

dfx-

Dodge wrote: »

Better served by the once an hour 68 says it all (even it doesn't go near Mt Brown)

Yep, at least it has its terminus in the city centre and not the other side of the city. The simple things means it's the only successful change and potentially the only realistic option. It doesn't need bus priority or tweaks to roads, regulation or other such nonsense to be successful.

monument wrote: »

Financially significant? Somebody else highlighted the hospital, schools and social welfare office as the main things it would be bypassing. There may be other arguments for keeping serving these, but financially significant?

Yes, a side affect is you alienate a small few but in doing so you make the service better all round for the vast bulk of current passengers as well as potential passengers.

A small few? You haven't got the 78A or 51B/C/13 monstrosity much so.

starviewadams

The 13 practicaly half empties and then re-fills when it reaches the stop outside Spar on Thomas Street inbound.People going to work around the liberties or students going to the NCAD presumably.The same for the 78A.I don't see how removing this obviously well used service from the James/Thomas Street area would mkae it more successful at all.

Ben D Bus

For so long, Dublin Bus has been accused on this board of suffering from An Lár-ism.

It's somewhat amusing to read all the objections to the new DB routes and the alternative proposals suggested here, all of which seem to be aimed at finding the shortest route to O'Connell Bridge. And stopping there.

LXFlyer

Given the 77a now has a new roster from tomorrow (per post above) I would imagine efforts are now being made to rectify the 13, 27 and perhaps the 11 and 14 reliability issues with longer running times which ought to deliver the advertised schedule.

However it tends to take time to get these ready for implementation due to the complexities involved in schedule design, and then agreed with drivers and the NTA.

Bazzer2

Ben D Bus wrote: »

For so long, Dublin Bus has been accused on this board of suffering from An Lár-ism.

It's somewhat amusing to read all the objections to the new DB routes and the alternative proposals suggested here, all of which seem to be aimed at finding the shortest route to O'Connell Bridge. And stopping there.

Isn't that a part of what Network Direct is supposed to be about?

http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/Network-Direct/Benefits-of-Planned-Changes/


"Benefits of Planned Changes
The Dublin Bus Network Direct project will deliver the following benefits to you:

More direct routes: Bus routes will be straightened out with fewer diversions off Quality Bus Corridors (QBCs). Buses will operate on the most direct routes from the suburbs to the city centre."

dazberry

dfx- wrote: »

Yep, at least it has its terminus in the city centre and not the other side of the city. The simple things means it's the only successful change and potentially the only realistic option. It doesn't need bus priority or tweaks to roads, regulation or other such nonsense to be successful.

Yeah, if I'm in town late(ish) I tend to plan my evening around the 68 (9.20,10.20,11.30). Still use the 13 but tend to get the Luas A LOT more now... Ironically I would have used the old 68 and 19 a lot in the past, and have changed my commuting habits given the changes, and notably the poor frequency of the 68s at the w/end.

The other problem now is that none of the route stops (for Inchicore) are all that near each other either anymore, so you tend to have to commit to a route rather than floating between the different stops

D.