Go-Ahead Dublin City Routes - Updates and Discussion

devnull

AlekSmart wrote: »

Do you think it might be possible that the NDA,as a statutory body itself,may have been prompted by,the level and extent of representations it was recieving,from many local & national Disability Representative Groups ?

Is it your contention that the NDA is somehow incapable of acting independently, and without the "extensive lobbying" which you reckon prompted their action ?

Could the situation actually be that the NDA itself,were compelled to react to another statutory body facilitating a significant lowering of standards,which had been developed over an extended period and which worked very well.

I never suggested that the NDA were lobbied by anyone, please re-read my post.

What I was trying to say was that perhaps someone or something prompted the NDA to make contact with the NTA very late in the day. Then I suggested that the NDA may have then made representations to the NTA to influence the decisions made in relation to a bus livery, which is the very definition of lobbying.

What I know is that a meeting happened in July in relation to this matter. I do not know what prompted that but it is unusual for an authority to wake up very late in the day to something that had been proposed and in the public domain for months previously.

devnull

dublinman1990 wrote: »

What I don't understand; why does the NTA agree by spend taxpayers hard earned money by releasing two conflicting bus stop designs around Dublin in which one type of stop is meant to be replaced in it's entirety & one type bus stop that is meant to be it's new & permanent replacement.

I personally reckon the fact that they're re-branding yellow poles with new logos rather than putting new stops in may be the same reason that we're seeing yellow being brought into the bus livery.

If you're arguing that the bus livery needs yellow to be seen, the bars inside need to be yellow to be seen by those with vision difficulties, it's a natural extension that any such party claiming that will also say the same about silver/grey stops I'd have thought.

I really hope I am proven wrong in October when the real acid test will be, but like Alek has stated earlier, everything I have seen from the NTA recently suggests that we are unlikely to see London levels of integration and we won't get the kind of seamless integration that would serve passengers well and may end up with something more fragmented.

MJohnston

Is there something about the yellow that is somehow better for disability needs than just white? White would be so much easier to integrate.

Stephen15

These are a number of points I made on this thread about a year ago where I questioned the benefits of putting the routes out to tender. A large proportion of which were dismissed by posters who are in favour of this tendering scheme however now that it's not long before GAI start operating services a lot of the points I made are starting to look like very real possibilities.

I will put my hands up and say I have been proven wrong about one point I made. I did not think GAI would be able to take over the services in time however so far it has not been GAI whom I have been unimpressed with it has been the NTA who I am not at all impressed with.

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057775214/7

The whole livery fiasco is riddiculous but I'm not at all surprised. Anytime DB have changed livery in the past they have put a number of buses in a trial livery to see how it looks in real and to see what the relevant stakeholders think of it. This has not been done and should have been.

The NTA should also have already started this process of putting DB buses in new livery so when GAI commence operations there is absolutely no confusion but I guess they are still faffing around over what they are going to do next. It appears we are looking at a fragmented system but nothing can be done now for the time being it's too late.

This is going to leave a bad taste in lot of people's mouths and it questions the integrity of the NTA as a whole. This isn't that major a thing for the NTA manage compared to the likes of Metrolink, DART expansion and Bus Connects but if the NTA are incompetent about small things like this how are they going to manage thing much bigger things.

dfx-

devnull wrote: »

I think that the NTA did not expect there to be the issues in relation to it which there have been. I reckon in June/July, the NDA were possibly prompted by something or someone to extensively lobby the NTA for a change.

I think you can cut and paste that first sentence into every topic coming. Why did they not think of those issues?

The apprentices are now running the business..

xper

dublinman1990 wrote: »

That 175 bus stop pole on Deerpark Road looks so much better than the crap example on the Dublin Bus poles in Firhouse.

I heard the 17 bus stop shelter in UCD has gotten new signage on the top of it. But I'm not sure if it is the same one as the Firhouse example....

I think the new round blue sign has appeared this week on top of the shelter at the southbound stop on the N11 between the UCD sliproad and the Foster's Ave junction but not on the northbound stop across the road. Both to be served by the 175. So not sure what the logic is or whether the changes are complete.



We're seeing some mis-steps by the NTA in the final stages of project delivery in the last twelve months. While I am generally a fan of their overall vision and openness to radical change, they are taking on an awful lot of big projects at the same time and these 'little details' are the kind of errors that emerge late on in such projects where the organisation has spreading itself too thin in terms of experience, resources and oversight. (Been there, done that!)

Stephen15

I don't think the issue about the stops are such a big deal. For a starters I don't think the NTA want to make the same mistake again like they appear to have done with the livery by making a large scale and expensive change and then going back to try and fix it at a later date.

I also believe the NTA don't want to go installing expensive new stops only for them to change them again due to Bus Connects or for them to be rendered obsolete because of Bus Connects either. Let's hope the NTA have learnt a good lesson here and don't make the same mistakes again during up coming transport projects in Dublin.

GM228

AlekSmart wrote: »

As has been pointed out by other posters,the small extent of the Airlink fleet in comparison to the BAC service fleet does have a relevance here.

I disagree, there is no relevance whatsoever to fleet size, that's like saying it's only one small fleet with less patronage so the disability requirements are not as important as that with the greater usage.

If the point of disability requirements is to be made by disability groups then it certainly is a case of paint everyone with the same brush, you can't pick and choose who it should apply to. If there is an issue with visibility then it does not matter if there is a handful of buses or 175 buses, the needs of the users of both services should be afforded equal treatment and that applies to any operator who's bus is too dark even if they have just one single bus.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Is it your suggestion,for example,that BAC's last major interaction with Disabled Groups was 13 years ago ?

Yes that was the last major consultation involving government departments, transport operators and disability groups.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Are you suggesting that the Company is acting in a manner which ignores or fails to prioritize Disabled access to it's services ?

What gave you that idea? I never suggested such.

AlekSmart wrote: »

You may indeed suggest that a simple contrast between the new NTA Dark Grey interior panels and Light Grey stanchions,is in fact an improvement upon that between the pre-existing Yellow and Grey,however I am quite confident that the majority of those with vision deficiencies will disagree with you.

I never said it was an improvement, in fact I said:-

GM228 wrote: »

whilst the grey handrails in the new GA buses is poor IMO they do contrast with the dark blue seats and that is all that DB (and other operators and disability groups) ever agreed to - to have contrasting handrails, mind you I'm not so sure they contrast with the stairwells.

I said they were poor, but, did contrast against the seats, although not against the stairwells, remember agreed standards only require a contrast in the light reflected, not a specific colour palette, yes yellow is better I agree 100%.

Tarabuses

devnull wrote: »

See attached

There are four stops in each direction on Taney Road. The first heading from UCD to Dundrum is named Taney Road when maybe Taney Grove or "The Goat" might have been more informative.

I then found this stop at the Taney Road entrance to the Luas. Surprisingly it includes route 75 as well as 175.

Is the 75 to be rerouted through Dundrum Main Street to Taney Road and then back to Upper Kilmacud Road via Sydenham Road? Route 75 isn’t shown on the other 3 stops on Taney Road.



https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=459902&stc=1&d=1535643849

Stephen15

Tarabuses wrote: »

There are four stops in each direction on Taney Road. The first heading from UCD to Dundrum is named Taney Road when maybe Taney Grove or "The Goat" might have been more informative.

I then found this stop at the Taney Road entrance to the Luas. Surprisingly it includes route 75 as well as 175.

Is the 75 to be rerouted through Dundrum Main Street to Taney Road and then back to Upper Kilmacud Road via Sydenham Road? Route 75 isn’t shown on the other 3 stops on Taney Road.

Surely not! The 75 takes long enough as it without having to take a diversion around Dundrum Main Street and Tandy Road.

It could be a misprint.

devnull

That's the style of bus stop info proposed for Go Ahead services.

SPDUB

devnull wrote: »

https://t.co/7XkQbXfmHU?amp=1

That's the style of bus stop info proposed for Go Ahead services.

That's a pdf link for anyone who might have problems

Tarabuses

devnull wrote: »

That's the style of bus stop info proposed for Go Ahead services.

It is interesting that the bus stop info refers to Taney Grove as I suggested for the bus stop sign itself.

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

That's the style of bus stop info proposed for Go Ahead services.

Good to see stop specific information but I wonder are they going to put the same stop specific information for DB services at other shared stops. Also how do they plan to integrate the timetable information at shared DB/GA stops.

KD345

Stephen15 wrote: »

Surely not! The 75 takes long enough as it without having to take a diversion around Dundrum Main Street and Tandy Road.

It could be a misprint.

I understand the plan is to bring the 75 into Dundrum Village to serve the LUAS stop and then run via Taney Road and Sydenham Road and back onto its route.

Stephen15

KD345 wrote: »

I understand the plan is to bring the 75 into Dundrum Village to serve the LUAS stop and then run via Taney Road and Sydenham Road and back onto its route.

That's a silly idea in my opinion. The 75 is bad enough route for traffic and running time without having to take a diversion off it's route to serve Dundrum Village where it will run parallel to the 175. Sydenham Rd. isn't the widest either and would likely struggle to take a double decker every half hour. The turn from Sydenham Rd. onto Kilmacud Road is quite tight and I could see a bus struggling there.

A better routing in my opinion would be if the 175 turned right off the main street onto Ballinteer Road and continued on the 75s current routing as far as Wckyham Way. This would mean the 75 could be straightened out a bit and could continue on Overend Ave. as far as Wckyham instead of getting caught in traffic in Dundrum and could interconnect with the Luas at Balally. This would cut a fair chunk off the journey time and it would still serve Dundrum SC.

Qrt

devnull wrote: »

That's the style of bus stop info proposed for Go Ahead services.

So it's tells you to contact Go-Ahead directly. We're doomed.

prinzeugen

Tarabuses wrote: »

There are four stops in each direction on Taney Road. The first heading from UCD to Dundrum is named Taney Road when maybe Taney Grove or "The Goat" might have been more informative.

I then found this stop at the Taney Road entrance to the Luas. Surprisingly it includes route 75 as well as 175.

Is the 75 to be rerouted through Dundrum Main Street to Taney Road and then back to Upper Kilmacud Road via Sydenham Road? Route 75 isn’t shown on the other 3 stops on Taney Road.



https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=459902&stc=1&d=1535643849

The "bus" on that sign is a train. A British Rail class 323. There are plenty of other picture forms they could have used for a bus.

And they chose a train!

Yer Da sells Avon

prinzeugen wrote: »

The "bus" on that sign is a train. A British Rail class 323. There are plenty of other picture forms they could have used for a bus.

And they chose a train!

As a casual observer (i.e. neither a bus nor train spotter), it would never have occurred to me in a million years that it isn't a bus.

Tarabuses

Stephen15 wrote: »

That's a silly idea in my opinion. The 75 is bad enough route for traffic and running time without having to take a diversion off it's route to serve Dundrum Village where it will run parallel to the 175. Sydenham Rd. isn't the widest either and would likely struggle to take a double decker every half hour. The turn from Sydenham Rd. onto Kilmacud Road is quite tight and I could see a bus struggling there.

A better routing in my opinion would be if the 175 turned right off the main street onto Ballinteer Road and continued on the 75s current routing as far as Wckyham Way. This would mean the 75 could be straightened out a bit and could continue on Overend Ave. as far as Wckyham instead of getting caught in traffic in Dundrum and could interconnect with the Luas at Balally. This would cut a fair chunk off the journey time and it would still serve Dundrum SC.

I agree that diverting the 75 makes no sense at this stage. It did originally travel through Dundrum village and up Taney Road but continued to The Goat and travelled along Lower Kilmacud Road to Stillorgan (like the proposed 225).

I can't see a VT making the turn from Sydenham Road to Upper Kilmacud Road when heading towards Dun Laoghaire.

Tarabuses

KD345 wrote: »

I understand the plan is to bring the 75 into Dundrum Village to serve the LUAS stop and then run via Taney Road and Sydenham Road and back onto its route.

When is this due to start?

Bray Head

Are we now using a full five digits for bus stop numbers???

punisher5112

Tarabuses wrote: »

I agree that diverting the 75 makes no sense at this stage. It did originally travel through Dundrum village and up Taney Road but continued to The Goat and travelled along Lower Kilmacud Road to Stillorgan (like the proposed 225).

I can't see a VT making the turn from Sydenham Road to Upper Kilmacud Road when heading towards Dun Laoghaire.

Vt won't be on them as gt and sg or single Decker's with go ahead.

RebelButtMunch

Are they doing away with all that mystical 'stage' rubbish and having a clear guide on cost?

Dravokivich

RebelButtMunch wrote: »

Are they doing away with all that mystical 'stage' rubbish and having a clear guide on cost?

Nope. Fare structures are aligned.

Bray Head

Dravokivich wrote: »

RebelButtMunch wrote: »

Are they doing away with all that mystical 'stage' rubbish and having a clear guide on cost?

Nope.  Fare structures are aligned.

Can someone point me to anything in the public domain on how many stages are between stops on the 175 route?

Tarabuses

punisher5112 wrote: »

Vt won't be on them as gt and sg or single Decker's with go ahead.

That's from 7 October but will the revised route commence before then? Would they put up new stops that far ahead of the change?

Stephen15

Tarabuses wrote: »

That's from 7 October but will the revised route commence before then? Would they put up new stops that far ahead of the change?

I couldn't see it happening before a revised timetable is drawn up which I can't see happening until Go-Ahead are up and running and extra capacity is in place.

punisher5112

Tarabuses wrote: »

That's from 7 October but will the revised route commence before then? Would they put up new stops that far ahead of the change?

They won't change it till they take over would be my guess

Tarabuses

punisher5112 wrote: »

They won't change it till they take over would be my guess

Isn't it confusing to have stops then on Sydenham Road with no indication that they are not in use?