Cyclists in the bus lane on the Chapelizod Bypass

cython

kidneyfan wrote: »

What! No way. How can private cars be delaying ANYONW when it is the slowest way to travel in peak time traffic?

What a ridiculous question. The very reason that they are the "slowest way to travel in peak time traffic" is that the cars are delaying each other! If you can't see that simple fact then there is no reasoning with you whatsoever.

Similarly, any vechicle that has to interact with private cars (e.g. buses on routes without an end-to-end bus lane), is automatically being delayed by these cars also. And that's before you consider the ones cutting into bus lanes early, etc. that delay both buses and cyclists.....

Qualitymark

Drivers who sit alone in three tons of metal, using an engine that could power a factory to drag their fat bodies along the roads are using up the last drops of a precious power resource that the world badly needs.

Internet Friend

Just sayin...

07Lapierre

As the bus is coming up the hill, I assume the driver can see the cyclists? Buses have indicators..can he not put on his right indicator and when the traffic slows, move out into the car lane until he passes the cyclists?

In rush hour traffic, I assume the car lane is clogged and this is not possible, so the only people moving are the cyclists and the bus right?...so what's the problem? TOO MANY CARS! that's the real problem here.

Carawaystick

roverrules wrote: »

However,normally cars aren't in the bus lane

You probably don't get the bus or cycle in past Whitehall church in the morning....


Actually, the biggest delays I've experienced here, while getting the bus to Galway, was motorists and vegetation blocking the bus's progress.

Orion

Internet Friend wrote: »

Just sayin...

If only that were true about it saving you money ... ooo look at that shiny Ultegra groupset ... :pac:

seamus

kidneyfan wrote: »

What! No way. How can private cars be delaying ANYONW when it is the slowest way to travel in peak time traffic?

It is not the cyclist's fault, or the NRA's fault, or the government's fault that bus is going slower than it could. It is your fault. You personally share the blame for this poor progress of this bus.

You, in your car, are holding everyone else up.

What are you going to do about it?

Internet Friend

Orion wrote: »

If only that were true about it saving you money ... ooo look at that shiny Ultegra groupset ... :pac:

Therein lies the paradox, by cycling I save money to spend on more cycling related things!!! Mostly shiny things that make me think I go faster!

Orion

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But anyway, we have to share the road. Cyclists nowadays are (slowly I know) being very well catered for with cycle lanes and so on.

Well catered for? That's one of the funniest things I've read all day. Drivers certainly seem to have no problem "sharing the road" when it suits them ... http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/06/19/free-the-cycle-lanes/

Carlos Orange

seamus wrote: »

It is not the cyclist's fault, or the NRA's fault, or the government's fault that bus is going slower than it could. It is your fault. You personally share the blame for this poor progress of this bus.

Someone should invent dedicated bus lanes with just buses in them.

Carawaystick

psinno wrote: »

Someone should invent dedicated bus lanes with just buses in them.

Maybe a road made of steel rails
Maybe one that goes underground the city of Dublin? Nah fe1c it, a tram to near dublin airport will solve this issue.

roverrules

desertcircus wrote: »

Because, unlike cars, cyclists are specifically permitted to use bus lanes. It makes no sense to look at two lanes of traffic jams and one lane doing 25kph and claim that lane is the problem.

But the argument is that the cyclist isn't doing that kind of speed uphill, perhaps it needs a crawler lane similar to the ones you see on some road hills for HGVs

Carawaystick

roverrules wrote: »

But the argument is that the cyclist isn't doing that kind of speed uphill, perhaps it needs a crawler lane similar to the ones you see on some road hills for HGVs

The bus can use the middle lane to pass them out. This lane is going faster than the cyclist then right?

I presume if the bus has to stop, it'll let cyclists pass and won't be holding them up delaying them?

Busses average speed are so low, a short delay in traffic will make shag all difference.

kidneyfan

roverrules wrote: »

But the argument is that the cyclist isn't doing that kind of speed uphill, perhaps it needs a crawler lane similar to the ones you see on some road hills for HGVs

perhaps an elevated bridge up the bypass or a wooden cycling boardwalk or ban cyclists from the bypass.

ibstar

you just opened a can of worms
Cyclist forum here on boards is similar to feminazis.
You will be attacked, scratched and mentally destroyed

kidneyfan

Carawaystick wrote: »

The bus can use the middle lane to pass them out. This lane is going faster than the cyclist then right?

I presume if the bus has to stop, it'll let cyclists pass and won't be holding them up delaying them?

Busses average speed are so low, a short delay in traffic will make shag all difference.

The people in their cars are slower than the bus and maybe even slower than the cyclist. That doesn't matter. The bus should be privileged and the cyclists should lead, follow or get out of the way.

Seaswimmer

kidneyfan wrote: »

The people in their cars are slower than the bus and maybe even slower than the cyclist. That doesn't matter. The bus should be privileged and the cyclists should lead, follow or get out of the way.

Absolutely agree.

How about having a double bus lane similar to Pearse Street during peak hours and reducing the other traffic to one lane. The buses would fly along then.

Most of the traffic coming off the bypass ends up in single lane traffic anyway around South circular/Heuston and parts of the Qualys

tommythecat

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/10/what-cities-would-look-like-without-cars/

kidneyfan

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Absolutely agree.

How about having a double bus lane similar to Pearse Street during peak hours and reducing the other traffic to one lane. The buses would fly along then.

Most of the traffic coming off the bypass ends up in single lane traffic anyway around South circular/Heuston and parts of the Qualys

That's quite a good idea. Though you may be saying it to be confrontational there are 6 lanes available run a contraflow bus lane on the side of the road that is not experiencing peak traffic.

Seaswimmer

kidneyfan wrote: »

That's quite a good idea. Though you may be saying it to be confrontational there are 6 lanes available run a contraflow bus lane on the side of the road that is not experiencing peak traffic.

That would make no difference as it would still not solve your initial problem as cyclists would be in both bus lanes (perfectly legally)

Also very expensive and confusing. Much easier to put down a white line and some signs. Your initial post claimed the problem was with cyclists holding up buses and this solves it very easily.

Car commuters may not like it but maybe enough of them will switch to the new faster bus service to lessen the impact on the people that absolutely need to drive?

kidneyfan

Seaswimmer wrote: »

That would make no difference as it would still not solve your initial problem as cyclists would be in both bus lanes (perfectly legally)

Also very expensive and confusing. Much easier to put down a white line and some signs. Your initial post claimed the problem was with cyclists holding up buses and this solves it very easily.

Car commuters may not like it but maybe enough of them will switch to the new faster bus service to lessen the impact on the people that absolutely need to drive?

Put an enormous underground car park somewhere around M50 (or better yet 100 of them served by buses).

Carlos Orange

tommythecat wrote: »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/10/what-cities-would-look-like-without-cars/

I think private cars should be banned from the city center in a couple of decades.

07Lapierre

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Absolutely agree.

How about having a double bus lane similar to Pearse Street during peak hours and reducing the other traffic to one lane. The buses would fly along then.

Most of the traffic coming off the bypass ends up in single lane traffic anyway around South circular/Heuston and parts of the Qualys

That's a good Idea. The problem is though, even if every bus in the city was operating at full capacity every day, there still aren't enough buses to cater for everyone. that's why so many people drive and cycle every day.

For once I agree with the AA when they say penalising people who drive into the city is pointless until there is a viable public transport alternative.

BTW..According to the news this morning, Dublin bus drivers might be going on strike! Geez! :mad:

Oops sorry..its the train drivers, not bus drivers.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0909/726630-rail-unions-talks/

GreatDefector

kidneyfan wrote: »

Folks it is time to ban cyclists from the Chapelizod bypass. I can't count the number of times I have seen a bus driving BEHIND a cyclist up the hill there. Does Mr I don't pay road tax EVER get out of the Buses way?

NOT on YOUR NELLY!

Time to BAN cyclists from the bypass and make them go through Chapelizod.

and what about the time that I was on a bus going to town and it was blocked for almost an hour due to idiot car drivers in the bus lane blocking it, thinking it was OK because they were going left at kilmainham....

Took me almost 2 hours to get into town that day... but no, cyclists are the real problem here

kidneyfan

GreatDefector wrote: »

and what about the time that I was on a bus going to town and it was blocked for almost an hour due to idiot car drivers in the bus lane blocking it, thinking it was OK because they were going left at kilmainham....

Took me almost 2 hours to get into town that day... but no, cyclists are the real problem here

Those people should have been interned and their cars destroyed. I am on the side of the humble bus passenger here.

alias no.9

Seaswimmer wrote: »

That would make no difference as it would still not solve your initial problem as cyclists would be in both bus lanes (perfectly legally)

Also very expensive and confusing. Much easier to put down a white line and some signs. Your initial post claimed the problem was with cyclists holding up buses and this solves it very easily.

Car commuters may not like it but maybe enough of them will switch to the new faster bus service to lessen the impact on the people that absolutely need to drive?

Neither cyclists nor taxis are normally permitted to use contraflow bus lanes.

beauf

kidneyfan wrote: »

What car is that ? I only pay €700 a year and my car is enormous.

How do you pay 700 for something and not know what it is.

seamus

07Lapierre wrote: »

That's a good Idea. The problem is though, even if every bus in the city was operating at full capacity every day, there still aren't enough buses to cater for everyone. that's why so many people drive and cycle every day.

For once I agree with the AA when they say penalising people who drive into the city is pointless until there is a viable public transport alternative.

Chicken-and-egg, carrot-and-stick, etc.
One of the interesting things about traffic management is how capacity management for private -v- public infrastructure are the exact.

That is, when you expand the infrastructure for private vehicles, demand increases to fill the additional supply.

But with public vehicles, you have to increase the demand before the supply can increase. If you increase supply without adequate demand, you end up massively subsidising under-used services.

But you are right in that in many cases, the demand for public service exists, but the supply isn't following up. Many bus routes in the morning are completely full before the bus has even gone 1km down the road. People living at that part of the route will likely decide that the hour's drive into work is preferable to spending 20 minutes watching jammed busses go by, before having to cram onto a bus yourself and spend 40 minutes getting into the city.

The introduction of RTI should be giving DB far more leeway to introduce flexible bus schedules where they just run busses at 3 minute intervals (or less) between 8am and 9am during term times or other busy periods.

In fact, it should allow them to do really targetted and efficient scheduling, so that if they notice that Thursdays in September are 10% busier than Mondays in January, then they can schedule more busses for those days.
The problem with a fixed schedule like they have now is that it puts both a minimum and a maximum on the number of bussses you can run. Instead the schedule should outline the minimum number of busses that will run, and then use smart scheduling and proper analysis to add additional buses to routes and times whenever they're needed.

kidneyfan

seamus wrote: »

The introduction of RTI should be giving DB far more leeway to introduce flexible bus schedules where they just run busses at 3 minute intervals (or less) between 8am and 9am during term times or other busy periods.

In fact, it should allow them to do really targetted and efficient scheduling, so that if they notice that Thursdays in September are 10% busier than Mondays in January, then they can schedule more busses for those days.

But they have a finite number of buses and drivers.

cython

alias no.9 wrote: »

Neither cyclists nor taxis are normally permitted to use contraflow bus lanes.

Please update yourself on the Road Traffic Act as of 2012, not 1997/1998 (bus only street included for good measure):

S.I. No. 332/2012 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012 wrote:

Bus Lanes


32. (1)(a) A bus lane shall be indicated by means of traffic sign number RUS 028 or traffic sign number RUS 029 used in association with traffic sign number RRM 024.


(b) A contra-flow bus lane shall be indicated by means of traffic sign number RUS 030 used in association with traffic sign number RRM 024.


(2) A person shall not enter a bus lane with a vehicle other than a large public service vehicle or a pedal cycle during the period of operation of the bus lane indicated on an information plate.


(3) A person shall not enter a contra-flow bus lane with a vehicle other than a large public service vehicle or a pedal cycle.


(4) A person shall not enter a bus-only street with a vehicle other than a large public service vehicle or a pedal cycle except for the purpose of access.


(5)(a) Sub-articles (2) and (3) do not apply to a vehicle crossing a with-flow bus lane or a contra-flow bus lane solely for the purpose—


(i) of entering or leaving premises or property adjacent to such a bus lane, or


(ii) of entering or leaving a road inset adjacent to such a bus lane in order to load or unload goods.


(b) Sub-article (2) does not apply to—


(i) a taxi or a wheelchair accessible taxi which is being used in the course of business, or


(ii) a vehicle authorised and identified in accordance with sub-article (6), being driven by a driver authorised under that sub-article, in which is being carried, a member of the Government, a Minister of State who regularly attends meetings of the Government, the Attorney General or the Ceann Comhairle, in the course of his or her duties as such.


(6) The Minister may—


(a) authorise vehicles and drivers for the purposes of the exemption from this article contained in sub-article (5)(b)(ii), and


(b) specify the form of identification to be attached to the windscreen of a vehicle to which that exemption applies.


(7) Vehicles and drivers authorised under the Road Traffic (Bus Lanes) (Exemption) Regulations 2011 ( S.I. No. 527 of 2011 ) shall be deemed to be authorised under sub-article (6).”,

Source: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print