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
Dublin Bus Network Review
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
With respect how can you promise anything until after you sit down and review all the responses?
You can't expect instant decisions at a roadshow.
With equal respectfullness,I`m not suggesting that anybody expect "instant decisions" at a Roadshow.
I am,however,questioning all this "Roadshow" business occurring at this particular stage in the Network Direct process.
I`ve said it before,but I feel it`s worth saying agin,the time for Public Consultation "Events" was during the Deloitte investigations.
This would have allowed the formulation of a credible and Customer Focused set of "Improvements" rather than the mess we currently see unfolding on a daily basis,both internally and externally.
Deloitte`s recommendations,valid as they may be,come from a somewhat different perspective than that of Dublin Bus Customers.
My take is that Deloitte really did need to embark on a mass customer consultation programme before compiling it`s report,which might have allowed it to be somewhat more focused in it`s recommendations.
There really are so many ongoing problems involving Phase 1 "Improvements" that any attempt to simply bulldoze Phase 2 through is going to compound the damage being inflicted to service credibility.
This continuing fascination with "Tweaking" underlines the less than robust nature of the Network Direct Team`s interpretation of what Deloitte recommended.
Merging routes such as the 92 and 145 was never going to be a runner in my opinion and that`s how it remains.
The daily sight of a range of irregular workings,all full, travelling between Heuston Station and Leeson St indicates to me that Heuston has a problem,which it will grimly refuse to admit to.
Having said that,it appears the "Tweaking" process has now reached the Phase 2,route 11 "Improvements" as it now appears to be headed Heuston Stationwards also.
This seems to acknowledge the futility of Docklands Railway Station as a Terminus to begin with,but then compounds that by attempting to use the 11 Route as some form of Fire-Brigade to put out the Hesuton Station flames.
This "Improvement" still refuses to acknowledge the strong and increasing negative Customer Reaction from those who now realize the company are cancelling a viable and unique Route alignment without any credible alternative being offered to them.
As it currently stands the "Public Consultation" events are only serving to fan the flames and add a great deal of heat to a thoroughly avoidable situation.
But,it`s not too late to say a corporate mea-culpa and restart the Phase 2 process from a somewhat different focus.
Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
Charles Mackay (1812-1889)
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
With equal respectfullness,I`m not suggesting that anybody expect "instant decisions" at a Roadshow.
I am,however,questioning all this "Roadshow" business occurring at this particular stage in the Network Direct process.
I`ve said it before,but I feel it`s worth saying agin,the time for Public Consultation "Events" was during the Deloitte investigations.
This would have allowed the formulation of a credible and Customer Focused set of "Improvements" rather than the mess we currently see unfolding on a daily basis,both internally and externally.
Deloitte`s recommendations,valid as they may be,come from a somewhat different perspective than that of Dublin Bus Customers.
My take is that Deloitte really did need to embark on a mass customer consultation programme before compiling it`s report,which might have allowed it to be somewhat more focused in it`s recommendations.
There really are so many ongoing problems involving Phase 1 "Improvements" that any attempt to simply bulldoze Phase 2 through is going to compound the damage being inflicted to service credibility.
This continuing fascination with "Tweaking" underlines the less than robust nature of the Network Direct Team`s interpretation of what Deloitte recommended.
Merging routes such as the 92 and 145 was never going to be a runner in my opinion and that`s how it remains.
The daily sight of a range of irregular workings,all full, travelling between Heuston Station and Leeson St indicates to me that Heuston has a problem,which it will grimly refuse to admit to.
Having said that,it appears the "Tweaking" process has now reached the Phase 2,route 11 "Improvements" as it now appears to be headed Heuston Stationwards also.
This seems to acknowledge the futility of Docklands Railway Station as a Terminus to begin with,but then compounds that by attempting to use the 11 Route as some form of Fire-Brigade to put out the Hesuton Station flames.
This "Improvement" still refuses to acknowledge the strong and increasing negative Customer Reaction from those who now realize the company are cancelling a viable and unique Route alignment without any credible alternative being offered to them.
As it currently stands the "Public Consultation" events are only serving to fan the flames and add a great deal of heat to a thoroughly avoidable situation.
But,it`s not too late to say a corporate mea-culpa and restart the Phase 2 process from a somewhat different focus.
No it was not Alek.
Deloitte were tasked with assessing the situation for the Minister and providing broad recommendations using best practice. That was all. It was not their job (nor should it be) to come up with detailed proposals for every area of the network - that is the job of the bus company's management, subject to NTA approval.
DB are now implementing the report's recommendations which involved coming up with proposals as a starting point, putting them out for the public to express their opinions and then finalising their plans as a result.
This is a change process - plans can change as they go along. For goodness sakes the thing is not cast in stone.
As an example, the Finglas West plans changed post-consultation with the 40D being changed to route along Mellowes Road rather than continuing to serve Finglas South. Surely that shows that there is merit in asking the public for their views?
We've yet to see any of the other finalised post-consultation plans, so I think it is a bit difficult to pass judgement until we do?
As for phase 1 - we have discussed the problems at length here. I would suggest that they were running times being too short, capacity being underestimated and poor on-street information, rather than actual network redesign. By and large that was not the major problem.
The single biggest mistake on the N11 and N3 implementation was getting the running times wrong. Getting them fixed has taken far far too long (and based on what I'm reading here will take some time longer). That I blame on the company first and foremost as they came up with rosters that were simply unworkable, but I think blame must now be shared amongst everyone as it has taken 6 months to get an agreement on revised rosters.
The running times have been addressed on the 46a, 47, 63 and 236. It was about to be addressed on the 184 and 145 this weekend, but seemingly at the last minute the drivers have rejected the bill so the customers will have to wait even longer for a resolution.
The main Blanchardstown routes (37, 38/a, 39/a) are all having new bills drawn up to address the running time problems which are too I understand. But again I don't know if drivers have agreed to them.
The running time issue should never have happened, and for the rest of this process to have any credibility it needs not to happen again with any of the forthcoming schedules. It is simply not acceptable to the customer that people should have to suffer serious reliability problems for 4-6 months. That says to me that the internal processes for getting revised schedules are not working. Either one or both sides are being intransigent, and we as outsiders cannot tell, but at the end of the day this needs to get more streamlined, within the confines of the financial constraints that face the company going forward.
On the other two problems with phase 1, the capacity problems do however appear to have been addressed (leaving aside the reliabilty issues caused by the running time problems).
The on-street information problems were addressed by time the Lucan Road implementation came around.
There were significant errors made in phase 1 and they need to be fixed, but one would hope with the additional information now available through AVLC that running times will not be one of the problems going forward when the next round of implementation does take place.
The issues surrounding the 11 are nothing to do with running times but rather network redesign. You may well have a valid argument that there is indeed sufficient demand for it. I would suggest that it is down to the people to all put their views across on that. For any change process to happen, there has to be a starting point up for discussion. I am certainly not saying that it should or should not happen, but if sufficient people object then it may well change, despite what some managers reportedly said. We've yet to have the southside consultation for that route, so lets wait and see.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SandyfordGuy wrote: »Having been at Drumcondra railway station a lot in recent nights, very often 11's heading northbound in the evenings are totally full both standing and seating, yesterday I saw two in a row like this.
Sandyford Guy,what you are seeing in and around Drumcondra Station is pretty much the norm for weekday afternoon services,and that situation can be for much of the afternoon/evening.
However it remains a question of your observations vs Dublin Bus`s Statistics,of which there are vast amounts,all apparently thoroughly disproving what you think you have seen.
It should be noted that in his letter to Roísín Shortall TD,Mr Ray Coyne for the Network Direct team made specific reference to the 11 Route`s lack of Financial Viability as the reason for the proposed ND emasculation of the route.
If that Financial Viability can be somehow provided by running fewer buses along an already poorly supported Kilmacud-City Centre alignment then bring it on.
I would repeat that there was a very good reason for the 11 route`s historical alignment Clonskeagh-Drumcondra-Ballymun....It was Lucrative...and that situation still pertains today,if there`s anybody willing to accept the logic of it
SandyFordGuy:The Situation with the 145 is interesting, as every other route with running time issue has had the frequency reduced as Dublin Bus were not willing to throw any extra duties at them, however the 145 I understand will have no reduction in frequency but more duties thrown at it, this will mean no doubt they will have to make deeper cuts elsewhere to allow for this.
Interesting is an understatement in relation to the 145 situation.
A quite simple error of judgement was made here in attempting to merge the 92 and 145.
It`s not working,It`s unlikely to work no matter what "Tweaks" are made to it because there was never any synergy between the two types of route.
This is now being addressed in a somewhat typically ambigious fashion by the floating of a notion to route the "New Improved" 11 to Heuston Station rather than Docklands.
This,one assumes,is an attempt to regularize the Heuston Station-Leeson Street situation which the "New Improved-Improved" 145 cannot.
Fán go bFheicimid sez mise....:rolleyes:lxflyer:No it was not Alek.
Deloitte were tasked with assessing the situation for the Minister and providing broad recommendations using best practice. That was all. It was not their job (nor should it be) to come up with detailed proposals for every area of the network - that is the job of the bus company's management, subject to NTA approval.
DB are now implementing the report's recommendations which involved coming up with proposals as a starting point, putting them out for the public to express their opinions and then finalising their plans as a result.
This is a change process - plans can change as they go along. For goodness sakes the thing is not cast in stone.
Oh yes it was...or it shudda been !
Bearing in mind the reasoning behind the Deloitte Report`s commissioning was found to be flawed it still does not seem outrageous that a consultancy coming up with "Broad Recommendations using best practice" would at the very least investigate the Customer Requirements of the companies being reported on.
Oddly enough the "Cast in Stone" attitude was apparently in evidence at the Glasnevin/Drumcondra Roadshow as several of the attendees have independently corroborated each others accounts to me whereby they were advised that the "improvements" would be introduced as outlined but the company was open to "Tweaking" them as a means of further improving the situation.
Perhaps that is the sole purpose of "Public Consultation" but some would describe it otherwise.... Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
Charles Mackay (1812-1889)
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Another update from Róisín Shortall (I swear I'm not connected to her, just passing on information) who had a meeting with DB recently.The said they had received considerable negative feedback on the number 11
proposal in particular during the recent public consultation event. As a
result they agreed to look again at their proposals and see if there was
anyway they could achieve savings on the route other than by abolishing
it. I expect to hear from them very soon on this and will let you know as
soon as I have further news.
So, while nothing is promised either way, it at least indicates that the Na Fianna day had an impact. Still this seems to contradict the (implied) Heuston rumour that AlekSmart seems to have heard in the garage. I know which one I'd rather see becoming reality. 0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
As it currently stands the "Public Consultation" events are only serving to fan the flames and add a great deal of heat to a thoroughly avoidable situation.
But,it`s not too late to say a corporate mea-culpa and restart the Phase 2 process from a somewhat different focus.
You'll be happy to hear the 11 is remaining as a cross city service. Nice to see that the consultation days do affect the plans.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement