BusConnects Dublin - Big changes to Bus Network

OscarMIlde

RayCun wrote: »

naughtb4 wrote: »

Thousands travel from outside the county to Dublin to work

Most of them at peak times. Hence the name.

They are worsening the peak time service. That is my main grievance. Expresso services reduced to 3 in the morning and three in the (very early) evening to Maynooth. The same reduction is planned for Celbridge. They are also now routing these 'express' buses through Lucan village rather than using the bypass so extending the journey time. This change is particularly strange since the expresso services are already standing room only by Maynooth or early Leixlip stops and rarely pick up passengers beyond Lucan bypass due to lack of capacity.

It's a mad change and I don't understand the rationale behind it.

MJohnston

Thing is, what are your existing options off-peak from Maynooth to UCD direct? Are there any? 66X is only between 7 and 8am, just like the new 323 (which I would say doesn't need to detour through Lucan as is planned). Is the 66X a heavily used service to/from Maynooth specifically (ie. not just from Leixlip onwards)?

Other than that, there's the 66 which gets you to the city centre and you have to switch. The C3 would be essentially the same as the 66, except the C3 would have a much better peak frequency (10 minutes vs 30), and a slightly better off-peak daytime frequency (20-26 minutes vs 30).

And there's the train, which, if the BC plan is fully implemented, could possibly cost a lot less from Maynooth.

OscarMIlde

RayCun wrote: »

OscarMIlde wrote: »

I used to get it, but my work times can be a bit unpredictable (I'm a research scientist) and the train is great (if packed ) at peak times but there is no early option if I have to be in early and there are masssive gaps in frequency after seven. I used to get really stressed trying to make it out on time and eventually settled on the bus when time to decide on a single ticket. If the combined bus and rail tickets weren't so expensive or there was some kind of Irish rail equivalent to a rambler I would use both modes of transport.

I can't imagine you are ever going to have public transport options that are really satisfactory if you are frequently travelling at off-peak times to and from a town in a different county.

I probably won't, but since very many people commute from north Kildare to the city centre I don't see why an effort shouldn't be made to improve journey times to Dublin. I'm also not frequently travelling at off peak times but it can happen that my work is delayed by half an hour to an hour so I will leave at 6 or half six rather which is not terribly off peak. Certainly buses and trains are still full at these times. My point about bus connects was that the proposed changes were going to worsen peak commuter times and frequency for my area, with minimal (but welcome!) Improvements to off peak journey times. I just don't see the point of extending already long commute times at the times of peak usage.

MJohnston

OscarMIlde wrote: »

They are worsening the peak time service. That is my main grievance. Expresso services reduced to 3 in the morning and three in the (very early) evening to Maynooth. The same reduction is planned for Celbridge. They are also now routing these 'express' buses through Lucan village rather than using the bypass so extending the journey time. This change is particularly strange since the expresso services are already standing room only by Maynooth or early Leixlip stops and rarely pick up passengers beyond Lucan bypass due to lack of capacity.

It's a mad change and I don't understand the rationale behind it.

The rationale is the train, interchanging, DART expansion, and a flat-fare in the Dublin commuter area across all modes. That's the rationale. It's not a crazy one, it just requires actual effort by our transport companies.



Also, if you look at the peak-only BusConnects routes, there are 3 between 7 and 8 from Maynooth to UCD, then there is a Leixlip only route to UCD with a similar frequency, another from Lucan, and I believe another from Celbridge.



So, the 323 will end up being almost exclusively for Maynooth residents (again, I do think they should scrap the Lucan detour).

OscarMIlde

MJohnston wrote: »

Thing is, what are your existing options off-peak from Maynooth to UCD direct? Are there any? 66X is only between 7 and 8am, just like the new 323 (which I would say doesn't need to detour through Lucan as is planned). Is the 66X a heavily used service to/from Maynooth specifically (ie. not just from Leixlip onwards)?

Other than that, there's the 66 which gets you to the city centre and you have to switch. The C3 would be essentially the same as the 66, except the C3 would have a much better peak frequency (10 minutes vs 30), and a slightly better off-peak daytime frequency (20-26 minutes vs 30).

And there's the train, which, if the BC plan is fully implemented, could possibly cost a lot less from Maynooth.

I'm not generally off peak, I generally travel at peak hours. I have no problem switching buses in the city centre, I often do. I don't think there should be direct routes to UCD, very few people are on the bus past the city centre and it is very easy to hop off and catch other buses going southside in the morning. I'm not looking for special dispensation for having an awkward commute. I'm simply pointing out that the new express route planned is both even longer than it's current long times (over an hour to city centre) but will be full to capacity before leaving Maynooth due to reduced frequency.

Any sane planner would have extended expresso peak service times (have some earlier ones in the morning and some later ones in the evening, they will be utilised) and sped up the route a bit e.g have some go direct from Maynooth to the Lucan bypass. Also have more depart from Leixlip and Celbridge as start points as often people there cannot get on buses as they are full and it takes a while to reach there from Maynooth meaning the first express bus hits Leixlip around half seven, which leaves little wiggle room for people with strict start times if traffic is heavy.

OscarMIlde

MJohnston wrote: »

Thing is, what are your existing options off-peak from Maynooth to UCD direct? Are there any? 66X is only between 7 and 8am, just like the new 323 (which I would say doesn't need to detour through Lucan as is planned). Is the 66X a heavily used service to/from Maynooth specifically (ie. not just from Leixlip onwards)? Other than that, there's the 66 which gets you to the city centre and you have to switch. The C3 would be essentially the same as the 66, except the C3 would have a much better peak frequency (10 minutes vs 30), and a slightly better off-peak daytime frequency (20-26 minutes vs 30). And there's the train, which, if the BC plan is fully implemented, could possibly cost a lot less from Maynooth.

I'm not generally off peak, I generally travel at peak hours. I have no problem switching buses in the city centre, I often do. I don't think there should be direct routes to UCD, very few people are on the bus past the city centre and it is very easy to hop off and catch other buses going southside in the morning. I'm not looking for special dispensation for having an awkward commute. I'm simply pointing out that the new express route planned is both even longer than it's current long times (over an hour to city centre) but will be full to capacity before leaving Maynooth due to reduced frequency. Any sane planner would have extended expresso peak service times (have some earlier ones in the morning and some later ones in the evening, they will be utilised) and sped up the route a bit e.g have some go direct from Maynooth to the Lucan bypass. Also have more depart from Leixlip and Celbridge as start points as often people there cannot get on buses as they are full and it takes a while to reach there from Maynooth meaning the first express bus hits Leixlip around half seven, which leaves little wiggle room for people with strict start times if traffic is heavy.

MJohnston wrote: »

OscarMIlde wrote: »

They are worsening the peak time service. That is my main grievance. Expresso services reduced to 3 in the morning and three in the (very early) evening to Maynooth. The same reduction is planned for Celbridge. They are also now routing these 'express' buses through Lucan village rather than using the bypass so extending the journey time. This change is particularly strange since the expresso services are already standing room only by Maynooth or early Leixlip stops and rarely pick up passengers beyond Lucan bypass due to lack of capacity.

It's a mad change and I don't understand the rationale behind it.

The rationale is the train, interchanging, DART expansion, and a flat-fare in the Dublin commuter area across all modes. That's the rationale. It's not a crazy one, it just requires actual effort by our transport companies.



Also, if you look at the peak-only BusConnects routes, there are 3 between 7 and 8 from Maynooth to UCD, then there is a Leixlip only route to UCD with a similar frequency, another from Lucan, and I believe another from Celbridge.



So, the 323 will end up being almost exclusively for Maynooth residents (again, I do think they should scrap the Lucan detour).

But the 323 will have an additional travel bottleneck by going through Lucan village so journey time will increase by at least 20 minutes due to this alone And three 323s from Maynooth is less than the current 5 66xs (not to mention 67xs) that depart Maynooth now. And these are already full.

OscarMIlde

MJohnston wrote: »

Thing is, what are your existing options off-peak from Maynooth to UCD direct? Are there any? 66X is only between 7 and 8am, just like the new 323 (which I would say doesn't need to detour through Lucan as is planned). Is the 66X a heavily used service to/from Maynooth specifically (ie. not just from Leixlip onwards)? Other than that, there's the 66 which gets you to the city centre and you have to switch. The C3 would be essentially the same as the 66, except the C3 would have a much better peak frequency (10 minutes vs 30), and a slightly better off-peak daytime frequency (20-26 minutes vs 30). And there's the train, which, if the BC plan is fully implemented, could possibly cost a lot less from Maynooth.

I'm not generally off peak, I generally travel at peak hours. I have no problem switching buses in the city centre, I often do. I don't think there should be direct routes to UCD, very few people are on the bus past the city centre and it is very easy to hop off and catch other buses going southside in the morning. I'm not looking for special dispensation for having an awkward commute. I'm simply pointing out that the new express route planned is both even longer than it's current long times (over an hour to city centre) but will be full to capacity before leaving Maynooth due to reduced frequency. Any sane planner would have extended expresso peak service times (have some earlier ones in the morning and some later ones in the evening, they will be utilised) and sped up the route a bit e.g have some go direct from Maynooth to the Lucan bypass. Also have more depart from Leixlip and Celbridge as start points as often people there cannot get on buses as they are full and it takes a while to reach there from Maynooth meaning the first express bus hits Leixlip around half seven, which leaves little wiggle room for people with strict start times if traffic is heavy.

MJohnston wrote: »

OscarMIlde wrote: »

They are worsening the peak time service. That is my main grievance. Expresso services reduced to 3 in the morning and three in the (very early) evening to Maynooth. The same reduction is planned for Celbridge. They are also now routing these 'express' buses through Lucan village rather than using the bypass so extending the journey time. This change is particularly strange since the expresso services are already standing room only by Maynooth or early Leixlip stops and rarely pick up passengers beyond Lucan bypass due to lack of capacity.

It's a mad change and I don't understand the rationale behind it.

The rationale is the train, interchanging, DART expansion, and a flat-fare in the Dublin commuter area across all modes. That's the rationale. It's not a crazy one, it just requires actual effort by our transport companies.



Also, if you look at the peak-only BusConnects routes, there are 3 between 7 and 8 from Maynooth to UCD, then there is a Leixlip only route to UCD with a similar frequency, another from Lucan, and I believe another from Celbridge.



So, the 323 will end up being almost exclusively for Maynooth residents (again, I do think they should scrap the Lucan detour).

But the 323 will have an additional travel bottleneck by going through Lucan village so journey time will increase by at least 20 minutes due to this alone And three 323s from Maynooth is less than the current 5 66xs (not to mention 67xs) that depart Maynooth now. And these are already full.

L1011

There is zero capacity on the train line for extra commuters as it stands. Celebridge will get some more (off peak though) soon, within weeks probably, but Maynooth won't for years. They need to revise the plan to cope with the interim

Irish Rail are hiring the project staff for the DART upgrade but there's no sign of a tender for vehicles

RayCun

OscarMIlde wrote: »

They are worsening the peak time service. That is my main grievance. Expresso services reduced to 3 in the morning and three in the (very early) evening to Maynooth. The same reduction is planned for Celbridge. They are also now routing these 'express' buses through Lucan village rather than using the bypass so extending the journey time. This change is particularly strange since the expresso services are already standing room only by Maynooth or early Leixlip stops and rarely pick up passengers beyond Lucan bypass due to lack of capacity.

It's a mad change and I don't understand the rationale behind it.

But at peak times, the train should be the preferred public transport option between Maynooth and Dublin. Bus routes should fill in when there is not enough demand for a train.

L1011

RayCun wrote: »

But at peak times, the train should be the preferred public transport option between Maynooth and Dublin. Bus routes should fill in when there is not enough demand for a train.

At peak times the trains are dangerously full already and there is no scope for further capacity increases for at least 3, probably 5 years.

Qrt

L1011 wrote: »

At peak times the trains are dangerously full already and there is no scope for further capacity increases for at least 3, probably 5 years.

No real solution unless it's DART Underground, but that seems to already have had a bit of a renaissance on C&T so I'll stop it here

Cookie_Monster

CatInABox wrote: »

Auckland is essentially the same plan as BusConnects, and passenger numbers are going up there. Plenty of people will swap over given a chance.

And encountering some of the same problems too, the rail system is overloaded already as a result of the uptake. They do at least have proper integrated ticketing across the various modes, zonal fares and a proper interchange hub in Britomart. Still see crazy traffic impacts though, 20 mins to get down 1km of Queen st!

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

They're fast and fuel efficient. If you want to rule it out because of prejudice, that's up to you.

Sure you could cycle the 32km odd in less time than it currently takes him to travel... thats how bad the current system is. A motorbike or even moped is such a cheap alternative to save probably 10 hours+ a week of your life!

RayCun

L1011 wrote: »

At peak times the trains are dangerously full already and there is no scope for further capacity increases for at least 3, probably 5 years.

My point is, on a route with a rail line (or luas or dart), that's what should be used to provide capacity as much as possible. Buses should be used when rail is absent or uneconomic, or as a short term patch. The long term solution here should be increased rail capacity.

circular flexing

RayCun wrote: »

My point is, on a route with a rail line (or luas or dart), that's what should be used to provide capacity as much as possible. Buses should be used when rail is absent or uneconomic, or as a short term patch. The long term solution here should be increased rail capacity.

Yes that's acknowledged. The problem is there is a severe shortage of capacity through city centre due to signalling capacity and also a lack of capacity at Connolly to terminate trains at. It's been a while since I looked at it but I seem to remember that capacity was 12 trains per hour but there were plans to increase it to 20 - not sure if they were completed.

sharper

RayCun wrote: »

My point is, on a route with a rail line (or luas or dart), that's what should be used to provide capacity as much as possible. Buses should be used when rail is absent or uneconomic, or as a short term patch. The long term solution here should be increased rail capacity.

That makes sense for sure but the government hasn't done a great job with the railways over the last few decades.

The thing about the bus service is it should be much easier to match capacity with demand. Instead we have people watching full busses go past them for years before any increase in service is considered and that makes little sense to me.

bk

sharper wrote: »

That makes sense for sure but the government hasn't done a great job with the railways over the last few decades.

The thing about the bus service is it should be much easier to match capacity with demand. Instead we have people watching full busses go past them for years before any increase in service is considered and that makes little sense to me.

While it is comparatively easy to increase capacity of buses, versus rail, it isn't really that easy.

It isn't like buses are sitting around unused at peak times, they are pretty much all out at peak times. You could of course buy new buses, but they cost 400k each, but really the bigger problem is getting enough drivers to drive them, at a time when we are close to full employment, that can be difficult.

But the other big issue is the road and bus stop space in the city center for all those buses. Many streets are already pretty much bumper to bumper at peak times and bus stops overflowing with people, so where do you put extra buses?

BusConnects was designed to tackle this issue, to schedule different routes as one, so there would be less overlap in the city and the limited space more easily used.

The good news is that they are increasing the number of buses, currently a 10% increase in the number of buses is coming online.

But the truth is we are fiddling around the edges of trying to squeeze out the last drop of efficiency from buses, dart and luas and there is only so much you can do with that. In reality we need the big investments in the big infrastructure projects to really help take the pressure off. Metrolink, Dart Expansion, etc.

ThunbergsAreGo

RayCun wrote: »

My point is, on a route with a rail line (or luas or dart), that's what should be used to provide capacity as much as possible. Buses should be used when rail is absent or uneconomic, or as a short term patch. The long term solution here should be increased rail capacity.

100% I think all are in agreement on this.

But without this as a precursor to BC, it could be an absolute disaster for many areas

XPS_Zero

OscarMIlde wrote: »

People who have an extremely long commute are entitled to be upset if changes are made which make it even longer. We are not talking about a small group of people. There are thousands of new houses being built in the west Dublin/north Kildare area and bus connects did not account for this.

Calling people whingers and complaining of parish pump politics is pathetic. Extra commute times has very real implications for quality of life. It can mean the difference between being able to keep working while having young children or being forced to give up as it is impossible to meet creche opening times and get to work on time for example.

I'm not against change but it needs to be well considered and many aspects of the report seem to lack appropriate local knowledge and rely on too much blue sky thinking. Sneering at prople won't change that reality.

But the whole point of this entire thing is you have more frequency and you get there faster, you just have to make a change. It's ignorance of this fact that is running this opposition. It IS parish pump politics I know it because I work with some of the clowns that know full well this is a good plan but are leading people up the garden path pretending it's the end of the world just for the sake of their own PR and you are all falling for it so easily. The most scary lesson I've learned in politics is how easy it is to manipulate people.
I literally had a councilor, when I tried in exasperation to explain it to them the basic core of how the plan works, smirk and say "yeh yeh maybe but it's a good issue to get out there on".



The Irish are not easy to race bait, thankfully were at least spared the fascist parties that are propping up worldwide, but we are really easy to fool on every other issue.



You need to appreciate the history of this. Doom has been predicted by a subset of these politicos with every major project this state has ever done, most on here would be too young to remember it but a few were around during T21 and ought to remember. They are using you and you are letting them.




I have no issue asking genuine questions. I have one myself: will these interchanges with proper shelters and timers be in place BEFORE this starts, and will all these bus lanes be built BEFORE it starts or are people going to be waiting at interchanges for ages then 3 of the same bus turn up like it is now. There are many legit questions you can ask, this is a country that makes a balls of things frequently, whos public sector lacks much professionalism and has almost no customer service ethos, but they should be based on logic, and people should bother to read the bloody thing before complaining about it NOT take at face value what some local councilor or TD says is the plan when they haven't even read it themselves and don't care anyway!!!!! Jesus people complain to me all the time about the quality of our public reps and I remind them: you put them there. You complain about them then allow really obvious sleaze manipulation of your fears.


It's not the legit questions I object to - it's the stupid ones based in total ignorance of even the basics of how this plan works. It's not even that hard a plan to understand.

end of the road

XPS_Zero wrote: »

But the whole point of this entire thing is you have more frequency and you get there faster, you just have to make a change.

except there is no guarantee that he gets there faster. that cannot be guaranteed.

XPS_Zero wrote: »

It's ignorance of this fact that is running this opposition.

on the ground, no it isn't. people are aware of their current services and the proposed new services. if the proposed new services look like they are going to cause users greater issues then they have with their current services, then all the frequency increases, and supposed journey time decreases which cannnot be guaranteed, will not bring about support for the changes by those people.

tom1ie

The only way people are going to be won over by the bc redesign, is to build the radial bus corridors first so that journey times can be guaranteed.
This along with enforcement measures, anpr cameras, car bans in areas etc etc, is the only way people will be convinced.
At the moment you are asking people to make a leap of faith with a government/ transport minister/ (to a lesser extent) nta, who just don’t inspire confidence.

Build the infrastructure, then change the system to take advantage of the infrastructure, doing it the way we are trying is backwards.

goingnowhere

Delete

CatInABox

tom1ie wrote: »

The only way people are going to be won over by the bc redesign, is to build the radial bus corridors first so that journey times can be guaranteed.
This along with enforcement measures, anpr cameras, car bans in areas etc etc, is the only way people will be convinced.
At the moment you are asking people to make a leap of faith with a government/ transport minister/ (to a lesser extent) nta, who just don’t inspire confidence.

Build the infrastructure, then change the system to take advantage of the infrastructure, doing it the way we are trying is backwards.

You can never guarantee journey times, not in any transport system, so waiting until they can be guaranteed is pointless, nothing will ever change in that case.

BusConnects will use the same roads as the bus network today, so if it works today, it'll work post BusConnects. The only infrastructure that needs to be done is the interchanges at the hub, Blanch, etc.

sharper

XPS_Zero wrote: »

But the whole point of this entire thing is you have more frequency and you get there faster, you just have to make a change.

That works for non-commuting usage over the entire day. People just want to go from A to B so the frequency of the service is important in getting them there.

It doesn't do anything for people's commutes. They already leave work/home at whatever time they need to get the bus. Frequency improves capacity which is also needed but it's not getting anyone anywhere faster.

Also of note Adding 20 Minutes to Your Commute Makes You as Miserable as Getting a 19 Percent Pay Cut

I don't think it's controversial to say Bus Connects focused on the all day usefulness of the bus system and did very little for commutes.

devnull

sharper wrote: »

It doesn't do anything for people's commutes. They already leave work/home at whatever time they need to get the bus. Frequency improves capacity which is also needed but it's not getting anyone anywhere faster.

I know many people at the moment who get a bus at a particular time and are at work 20+ minutes before they need to be, because of the fact that the later bus means that they will be late. I also know people who have to hang around for a while after work for a bus for the same reason.

With a more frequent service you have less time waiting around, which while it may not improve the time the journey actually takes, it will mean the time from leaving home to starting work as well as finishing work and arriving home, will be less, which could mean and extra 20-30 minutes of sleep in the morning and an extra 20-30 minutes with the kids at night.

tom1ie

CatInABox wrote: »

You can never guarantee journey times, not in any transport system, so waiting until they can be guaranteed is pointless, nothing will ever change in that case.

BusConnects will use the same roads as the bus network today, so if it works today, it'll work post BusConnects. The only infrastructure that needs to be done is the interchanges at the hub, Blanch, etc.

What about the radial routes with qbc’s that are to be built under the bc infrastructure plan?
These will give a much more accurate frequency of busses as they will segregate busses from cars. Of course they’ll make a difference to journey times.

Slutmonkey57b

devnull wrote: »

I know many people at the moment who get a bus at a particular time and are at work 20+ minutes before they need to be, because of the fact that the later bus means that they will be late. I also know people who have to hang around for a while after work for a bus for the same reason.

With a more frequent service you have less time waiting around, which while it may not improve the time the journey actually takes, it will mean the time from leaving home to starting work as well as finishing work and arriving home, will be less, which could mean and extra 20-30 minutes of sleep in the morning and an extra 20-30 minutes with the kids at night.

The problem at peak times isn't frequency. Bus connects on average matches existing frequency at peak or adds 1-2 buses per hour on the existing QBC's. There physically are not enough buses to cope with passenger numbers. You'd have to double numbers of buses at 5pm to do that

OscarMIlde

XPS_Zero wrote: »

OscarMIlde wrote: »

People who have an extremely long commute are entitled to be upset if changes are made which make it even longer. We are not talking about a small group of people. There are thousands of new houses being built in the west Dublin/north Kildare area and bus connects did not account for this.

Calling people whingers and complaining of parish pump politics is pathetic. Extra commute times has very real implications for quality of life. It can mean the difference between being able to keep working while having young children or being forced to give up as it is impossible to meet creche opening times and get to work on time for example.

I'm not against change but it needs to be well considered and many aspects of the report seem to lack appropriate local knowledge and rely on too much blue sky thinking. Sneering at prople won't change that reality.

But the whole point of this entire thing is you have more frequency and you get there faster, you just have to make a change. It's ignorance of this fact that is running this opposition. It IS parish pump politics I know it because I work with some of the clowns that know full well this is a good plan but are leading people up the garden path pretending it's the end of the world just for the sake of their own PR and you are all falling for it so easily. The most scary lesson I've learned in politics is how easy it is to manipulate people.
I literally had a councilor, when I tried in exasperation to explain it to them the basic core of how the plan works, smirk and say "yeh yeh maybe but it's a good issue to get out there on".



The Irish are not easy to race bait, thankfully were at least spared the fascist parties that are propping up worldwide, but we are really easy to fool on every other issue.



You need to appreciate the history of this. Doom has been predicted by a subset of these politicos with every major project this state has ever done, most on here would be too young to remember it but a few were around during T21 and ought to remember. They are using you and you are letting them.




I have no issue asking genuine questions. I have one myself: will these interchanges with proper shelters and timers be in place BEFORE this starts, and will all these bus lanes be built BEFORE it starts or are people going to be waiting at interchanges for ages then 3 of the same bus turn up like it is now. There are many legit questions you can ask, this is a country that makes a balls of things frequently, whos public sector lacks much professionalism and has almost no customer service ethos, but they should be based on logic, and people should bother to read the bloody thing before complaining about it NOT take at face value what some local councilor or TD says is the plan when they haven't even read it themselves and don't care anyway!!!!! Jesus people complain to me all the time about the quality of our public reps and I remind them: you put them there. You complain about them then allow really obvious sleaze manipulation of your fears.


It's not the legit questions I object to - it's the stupid ones based in total ignorance of even the basics of how this plan works. It's not even that hard a plan to understand.

I've explained multiple times that for North Kildare there is reduced frequency and longer routes with the proposed increase. They are even forcing the people of Celbridge, who've had appallingly bad transport options for years now, to route through Leixlip after Celbridge. That seems the opposite of what bus connects should do.

L1011

The lack of a bus service from Celbridge to Leixlip and the subsuming of the existing 66b are the reasons for that routing. Doing so without sufficient provision of the express buses for peak period isn't acceptable though.

The NTA seem to be claiming that two morning services changing from SG to VT buses is sufficient extra capacity for Celbridge now also, when buses are full across all day parts. You'd almost think someone in command dislikes the town!

OscarMIlde

L1011 wrote: »

The lack of a bus service from Celbridge to Leixlip and the subsuming of the existing 66b are the reasons for that routing. Doing so without sufficient provision of the express buses for peak period isn't acceptable though.

The NTA seem to be claiming that two morning services changing from SG to VT buses is sufficient extra capacity for Celbridge now also, when buses are full across all day parts. You'd almost think someone in command dislikes the town!

Yep, I initially thought when I heard about the orbital routes that they would run a bus that hops between Lucan, Leixlip, Celbridge, and Maynooth, which is probably justified with one of the largest employers in Ireland being located in Leixlip and a university in Maynooth. That would leave the town buses free to utilise bypasses and increase the number of runs each bus could make. I honestly think no on the ground research was done when drawing up those changes.

L1011

They are proposing a bus between West Leixlip and Celbridge out to Hazelhatch also but it doesn't serve the 66b route.

It and the Maynooth-Tallaght route do add huge connectivity to Celbridge but unless the 67 is given equivalent service to now its not a net gain. There needs to be as many of the expresses as the 67X and they need to have the current or higher off-peak frequency as they are proposing to reduce it from the usual 30min clockface to 40min or 60min at times