BusConnects Dublin - Big changes to Bus Network

GT89

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

All I am saying is that existing bus users from Dalkey may wind up flocking back to their cars to get around given the pairing back of frequency of services in that immediate area.

The same interchanges between Greystones and Dublin 4 (i.e. Bray, Dun Laoghaire, Blackrock and Sydney Parade) are being enhanced which will primarily benefit people from those areas.

So, for those Dalkey denizens who don't mind having interchanges along their journey and aren't in a rush to get to their destination, it may be beneficial.

Having said all of that, I've been living in Bray for the past year and a half and it will benefit massively from these changes.

Nearly everyone who uses the bus in Dalkey doesn't have a car or even a bike for that matter. The demand is not there for a regular bus service presently other than what already exists in the form of the 7d, 59 and 111. The 59 and 111 are very much routes that are designed around the needs of elderly and disabled bus users with some scope for additional bus users who may find it a more convenient alternative to the DART for going to Dun Laoghaire but in the case of the 59 more so on the Killiney end of the route rather than the Dalkey end.

The lack of direct routes to locations other than the city centre is hardly a Dalkey specific issue and Dalkey is not the only area where interchanges are required in order to get to a non city centre location in the new network. The main improvement to public transport as part of the increased government investment in recent years to benefit Dalkey is and will remain 10 minute DART frequency.

patrickbrophy18

GT89 wrote: »

Nearly everyone who uses the bus in Dalkey doesn't have a car or even a bike for that matter.

Where is the evidence of this?

Also, do you not think we should be making it more attractive for existing car users to make a switch to buses?

GT89 wrote: »

The demand is not there for a regular bus service presently other than what already exists in the form of the 7d, 59 and 111.

Again, where is the evidence of this?

As far as I am concerned, any attempt at providing a regular service for Dalkey has been somewhat underhanded. The routes serving Dalkey, I believe are bastardised from the get go as a Machiavellian attempt to see them fail and ultimately scrapped. For example, the current 111 connects Dalkey to the Green Line Luas on paper. However, the circuitous nature of it and the resultant 40 minutes to an hour it takes to get there before even making a Luas journey won't make it an attractive alternative to the car. As such, people will continue driving to places like Sandyford, Dundrum and Stillorgan.

GT89 wrote: »

The 59 and 111 are very much routes that are designed around the needs of elderly and disabled bus users with some scope for additional bus users who may find it a more convenient alternative to the DART for going to Dun Laoghaire but in the case of the 59 more so on the Killiney end of the route rather than the Dalkey end.

This approach is incredibly myopic in that we are pigeonholing the purpose.

GT89 wrote: »

The lack of direct routes to locations other than the city centre is hardly a Dalkey specific issue.

I know that. We should be looking at streamlining for other areas facing this issue as well and not providing the bare minimum.

GT89 wrote: »

The main improvement to public transport as part of the increased government investment in recent years to benefit Dalkey is and will remain 10 minute DART frequency.

I appreciate that. However, it is merely an improvement of what is already there.

GT89

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Where is the evidence of this?

Also, do you not think we should be making it more attractive for existing car users to make a switch to buses?

Eh the current demographic using routes 59 and 111 in and out of Dalkey.

Again, where is the evidence of this?

As far as I am concerned, any attempt at providing a regular service for Dalkey has been somewhat underhanded. The routes serving Dalkey, I believe are bastardised from the get go as a Machiavellian attempt to see them fail and ultimately scrapped. For example, the current 111 connects Dalkey to the Green Line Luas on paper. However, the circuitous nature of it and the resultant 40 minutes to an hour it takes to get there before even making a Luas journey won't make it an attractive alternative to the car. As such, people will continue driving to places like Sandyford, Dundrum and Stillorgan.

The main purpose of the 111 serving Dalkey is to provide an extra connection between Dalkey and DL not give it connection to the Luas. It is a community route giving Dun Laoghaire, Sallynoggin, Ballybrack and Loughlinstown a connection to Loughlinstown Hospital it is not a Luas feeder route. However the timetable does not give a frequency of half hourly.

Also it's odd that you are suggesting Dalkey should have a bus connection to the Luas but at the same time you say that a Dart to bus connection is not useful to Dalkey residents but yet a bus to Luas connection somehow is useful.

AlekSmart

donvito99 wrote: »

Exactly. The people who have never had a useful bus service before who will have one with Bus Connects aren't writing to their local councillors because there is no appreciation for what they will lose. Those people are just as entitled to a bus service as the people who stand to lose out as a result of a re-routing.

The decision of the NTA (under the advice of it's many and varied consultation respondents) to push out the completion date of BCXT's to :eek:2027:eek: indicates that there will be even more "alterations" to the,by now well emasculated Jarrett Walker plan.

The reality of Walker's plan being focused upon the Bus Transport requirements of Dublin 2040 has been well and truly swept under the shag-pile.

Further debate on BusConnects,as a viable focused plan is now futile,as what we have left is largely more of the same oul codology which got us to where we are today.

Good for an occasional laugh though

Heartbreak Hank

I attended the Kimmage to City Centre CBC Community Forum Webinar last night - actually got my times mixed up so was a half an hour late so I missed the presentation from the 3 speakers (Hugh Creegan and 2 technical people I presume from the consultants) and only got the question and answer session.


I would say the mood, if gauged from the people asking questions, was generally pretty negative and very much centered on people's own patch. Some people were downright outraged that their car journey would be impacted.



4 public representatives spoke, one from FF, one Labour, an independent aligned with I4C, and one Green Party (not sure if I am allowed name names here). In my opinion, the first two offered nothing to the forum, while the second two offered reasoned comments and constructive criticism.
The FF councillor, it seemed to me, suggested that Covid means that people will not work normal hours in offices and no longer need bus services - but then said that a metro was needed for the corridor.
The Labour councillor complained about a lack of engagement with public representatives and not having access to the documents and really didn't seem to have a grasp on the concept at all. She also suggested she wanted a metro

The independent said that he was vehemently against the original plans (widening by taking gardens etc.) but that there were good compromises in the latest proposals and that some suffering was required to provide a solution that worked for all

The GP councillor was generally supportive but asked that mechanisms be put in place to monitor the scheme after it is in place to see any issues and address them, she used the term "after care"



In response to the two councillors' comments about a metro, Hugh Creegan said that the GDA Transport Strategy is to be reviewed next year and, as part of that, a feasibility study into a south west metro would be undertaken. He also stressed that even if there was a metro, bus improvements would be needed regardless.


As with the previous consultation nights, I was very impressed with the performance of the chair, the NTA, and consultants, especially when there was quite a bit of repetition in the questioning and a lot of axe grinding.



However, one area where I think they have badly let themselves down, especially considering its importance to this scheme in particular, is in the explanation of bus gates. I really feel that about half the people asking questions think that there will be no access whatsoever beyond a bus gate. I think they really need to drive the point home that a) there will be no (negative) impact on people who walk, cycle, or use public transport and b) there will be nowhere in this corridor which will not be accessible by car, merely the route to a destination would be altered.


If they had a short video which explained the impact on private cars I think it would allay many fears.

cgcsb

Heartbreak Hank wrote: »

I would say the mood, if gauged from the people asking questions, was generally pretty negative and very much centered on people's own patch. Some people were downright outraged that their car journey would be impacted.

*sigh.

Heartbreak Hank wrote: »

The FF councillor, it seemed to me, suggested that Covid means that people will not work normal hours in offices and no longer need bus services - but then said that a metro was needed for the corridor.

Emmm well he is a member of the ruling party is he not? why don't they build a metro so?

Heartbreak Hank wrote: »

The Labour councillor complained about a lack of engagement with public representatives and not having access to the documents and really didn't seem to have a grasp on the concept at all. She also suggested she wanted a metro

Typical headless chicken, no homework done, labour stuff. If she can't google it, why even join the call?

alentejo

Heartbreak Hank wrote: »

I attended the Kimmage to City Centre CBC Community Forum Webinar last night - actually got my times mixed up so was a half an hour late so I missed the presentation from the 3 speakers (Hugh Creegan and 2 technical people I presume from the consultants) and only got the question and answer session.


I would say the mood, if gauged from the people asking questions, was generally pretty negative and very much centered on people's own patch. Some people were downright outraged that their car journey would be impacted.



4 public representatives spoke, one from FF, one Labour, an independent aligned with I4C, and one Green Party (not sure if I am allowed name names here). In my opinion, the first two offered nothing to the forum, while the second two offered reasoned comments and constructive criticism.
The FF councillor, it seemed to me, suggested that Covid means that people will not work normal hours in offices and no longer need bus services - but then said that a metro was needed for the corridor.
The Labour councillor complained about a lack of engagement with public representatives and not having access to the documents and really didn't seem to have a grasp on the concept at all. She also suggested she wanted a metro

The independent said that he was vehemently against the original plans (widening by taking gardens etc.) but that there were good compromises in the latest proposals and that some suffering was required to provide a solution that worked for all

The GP councillor was generally supportive but asked that mechanisms be put in place to monitor the scheme after it is in place to see any issues and address them, she used the term "after care"



In response to the two councillors' comments about a metro, Hugh Creegan said that the GDA Transport Strategy is to be reviewed next year and, as part of that, a feasibility study into a south west metro would be undertaken. He also stressed that even if there was a metro, bus improvements would be needed regardless.


As with the previous consultation nights, I was very impressed with the performance of the chair, the NTA, and consultants, especially when there was quite a bit of repetition in the questioning and a lot of axe grinding.



However, one area where I think they have badly let themselves down, especially considering its importance to this scheme in particular, is in the explanation of bus gates. I really feel that about half the people asking questions think that there will be no access whatsoever beyond a bus gate. I think they really need to drive the point home that a) there will be no (negative) impact on people who walk, cycle, or use public transport and b) there will be nowhere in this corridor which will not be accessible by car, merely the route to a destination would be altered.


If they had a short video which explained the impact on private cars I think it would allay many fears.

It is disappointing that this Q&A session was not advertised much.

Heartbreak Hank

alentejo wrote: »

It is disappointing that this Q&A session was not advertised much.

I was notified by email as a "community forum member" - I am not sure when I supplied my email and that corridor 11 was relevant to me TBH. I was at a previous meeting in the Hilton so probably then; I think that one was advertised generally.

Qrt

Think it’s safe to make an assumption re: the FF and Labour councillors.

I have to say, I really do love the “we need a metro but the buses are fine“ line, really makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

At the moment, Kimmage “Village” (the Sundrive Road junction?) is an absolute mess, actually the whole road is an absolute mess. The area will be much better off after this is done.

p_haugh

Somewhat relevant to bus connects:

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1329126320375296002?s=19

Qrt

p_haugh wrote: »

Somewhat relevant to bus connects:

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1329126320375296002?s=19

I really do love the new livery

Peregrine

Lucan to City Centre community forum: Most of the concerns were about the reallocation of parking spaces. Some questions about the lack of a continuous safe cycle route along this corridor and footpath widths.

Finglas/Ballymun to City Centre community forum: Loads of complaints over Phibsborough village not getting an urban realm upgrade and the lack of cycling facilities. The Ballymun Main Street proposal was going under the radar until Noleen Reilly brought it up and said it would cause traffic. Some questions about traffic flow at the Griffith Avenue junction.

Swords to City Centre community forum: Fairly quiet. Inner city residents asking about pedestrian crossings and cycle lanes (Parnell Square). Lorcan residents wondering how the cycling diversion would work. Santry residents asking about the safety implications of putting the cycle lane inside Santry Park near Morton.

Blanchardstown to City Centre community forum: Stoneybatter (Aughrim Street side) residents asking about traffic increase in their area. Questions about the Castleknock Manor and Prussia Street cycling facilities (or lack thereof). Some grumpy *cough* Joe Costello *cough* comments about Stoneybatter dying if traffic is reduced.

Clongriffin to City Centre community forum: Quiet. Very quiet. Not much to report. People asking for clarifications. Concerns over shared space. Positive comments about consultation so far.

Tallaght to Terenure community forum: Terrible. Just terrible. Most of the participants were from Terenure and wanted the entire thing cancelled. Complaining about having to drive around the corner. Lack of consultation, extend the consultation deadline, you're driving a motorway through my village etc. Deirdre Conroy and Mary Freehill were in it, enough said. Some concerns over traffic in areas around the bus gate. Worst one so far and a sign of things to come (Rathfarnham to City Centre).

cgcsb

I would add to the above that in the Blanchardstown webinar there was a question about enforcement of the bus priority, particularly at the pinch points south of Navan rd /Cabra road. The NTA claimed that they were at 'an advanced stage' of talks with regard to getting camera based enforcement powers. I feel this is the real meat of the whole scheme. Enforcement plus integrated ticketing is where the journey time savings and increased frequency are coming from.

Joe Costello once again highlighting why you shouldn't vote Labour and remaining firmly out of touch with the under 40s

Seth Brundle

cgcsb wrote: »

Joe Costello once again highlighting why you shouldn't vote Labour and remaining firmly out of touch with the under 40s

What was saying (or not saying)?

AlmightyCushion

Seth Brundle wrote: »

What was saying (or not saying)?

From Peregrine's post above:

Some grumpy *cough* Joe Costello *cough* comments about Stoneybatter dying if traffic is reduced.

Absolutely laughable comment.

GT89

p_haugh wrote: »

Somewhat relevant to bus connects:

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1329126320375296002?s=19

Sort of similar colours to German bus stops

cgcsb

Seth Brundle wrote: »

What was saying (or not saying)?

Basically he thinks that the shops in Stoneybatter are utterly dependent on through car traffic, despite the observable fact that there isn't really any parking where the shops are and one needs to get out of one's car to buy something generally speaking. There's only ever a dozen or so spaces free for non residents further up manor street, but somehow all these businesses depend on passing traffic... he's just being a large moron as per usual.

MJohnston

Between Costello and the awful Dermot Lacey, among others, it's remarkable how conservative Labour have become.

Qrt

I’d expect nothing less from the Terenure crowd, middle-class southsiders really are a different breed. I can’t remember off the top of my head, but the Tallaght-Terenure corridor doesn’t have that many diversions if I remember correctly?

Liam282

Evil_g wrote: »

Jarrod Walker's original proposal included an F3 route that would have passed outside my door (Stannaway Rd.), connected with all orbital services, and taken a direct route into town.

After three years of consultations (or at least that's what it feels like) they've redirected that through Kimmage, and we're left with the equivalent of the current 83 which travels half way around the world to get into town.

Yay.

I suppose I can console myself with the fact (and it is a fact) that there isn't a hope in hell of the Lower Kimmage Road infrastructure ever being built.

Hi - just wondering why you think the the Lower Kimmage Road infrastructure will never be built? There doesn't seem to be much of it - just a few bus "gates" (mostly just paint) and some trees?

Seth Brundle

Scaremongering in Rathgar?

https://twitter.com/ccferrie/status/1330816493219680262

Amirani

MJohnston wrote: »

Between Costello and the awful Dermot Lacey, among others, it's remarkable how conservative Labour have become.

Labour are a strange one, really heterogenous group of representatives these days, with little seemingly tying them together.

Some real progressives and cycling advocates, people like Rebecca Moynihan, Ciaran Ahern and Annie Hoey. Even Aodhan O'Riordan is fairly good on these sorts of issues despite being a massive NIMBY when it comes to other issues.

At the same time, there's some absolute dinosaurs in the party, such as the 2 you mentioned. As a Dublin Central resident, I won't be bothering to give Labour any sort of preference until Costello is gone.

donvito99

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Scaremongering in Rathgar?

https://twitter.com/ccferrie/status/1330816493219680262

On the one hand the leaflet says that the improved bus service is for commuters and will have a detrimental effect on shopping in the village.

It goes on to say that the movement of an outbound bus stop further away from the village will have a detrimental affect on shopping as people use the bus to shop in Rathgar...

There is no reason to their opposition other than the fact that they do not want any change to take place.

cgcsb

community not a corridor...for buses, but grand for loads of cars, we'll be a corridor for that, sign us up.

Citrus_8

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Scaremongering in Rathgar?

https://twitter.com/ccferrie/status/1330816493219680262

Garbage. People should be ashamed of using paper for no reason, just show their stupidity and arogance.

Heartbreak Hank

cgcsb wrote: »

community not a corridor...for buses, but grand for loads of cars, we'll be a corridor for that, sign us up.

NTA should present a table of people movements & motor vehicle movements now vs post launch. People movements (walking, cycling, PT, and private cars) will surely go up but motor vehicle movements (buses and private cars) will surely go down as 1 bus will equate to significant number of cars. They could apply a weighting to buses if they feel the impact is greater from a noise/ disturbance point of view.

donvito99

Heartbreak Hank wrote: »

NTA should present a table of people movements & motor vehicle movements now vs post launch. People movements (walking, cycling, PT, and private cars) will surely go up but motor vehicle movements (buses and private cars) will surely go down as 1 bus will equate to significant number of cars. They could apply a weighting to buses if they feel the impact is greater from a noise/ disturbance point of view.

Opponents of the plans always prefer to use "diesel buses" rather than just buses, insinuating that it's public transport is somehow to blame for poor air quality.

In Rathgar, Metro is the only solution according to residents shouting loudest and opportunistic councillors alike, but you can be quite sure that when the NTA comes along with a Metro South West plan, there will be as many if not more residents up in arms at the thought of losing entire houses (not just gardens) and vast swathes of playing pitches in order to build station boxes, depots, access shafts... They might even try the same shtick as residents in Glasnevin who oppose Metrolink on the basis that the air quality in underground metro systems is dangerous.

Ultimately, what Rathgar residents want is no change at all - no Bus Connects, no Metro. They're close enough to the city, and generally of a certain means and age that commuting is not as big an issue for them.

punisher5112

New bus stop poles and information boards across the inner city starting, seen new poles on Eden quay today.

Mad waste of money to be honest as the stops that were there till today were over the top expensive ones as it was, not the yellow pole actually much more to them.

I'd rather see the money used to improve the service, speed, roads etc etc etc...

dazberry

I saw this up on stop 1987 this evening.



I don't live up that way anymore, but with the re-routing of the Clondalkin buses (formally 13) and with other changes to the (formally 68 and 69) that stop is going from 6? (not necessary evenly spaced) services per hour to one - I can't see that as an easy sell - anyone know if they was a BusConnects meeting in the Oblates!?

Thelonious Monk

We have fools like this to contend with, who will probably be listened to, opposing... well, everything, according to his leaflet. All because he's worried it might affect him and his car.

https://twitter.com/build_up_dublin/status/1333392231173066758