Dublin - BusConnects

Brian CivilEng

If anything private cars are benefiting from Bus Connects. It is road widening after all. In some cases there will be more driving lanes, in others buses are moved out of general traffic lanes. Heck even the likes of the one way system through Santry should make car traffic move quicker without right turning traffic.

Really need to get the message out there that an "empty" bus lane, with one bus every 5mins carries more people than a full car lane with 800 cars an hour though. And that every extra person on the cycle lane is one less car in the driving lane.

LXFlyer

tom1ie wrote: »

Imagine, inconveniencing single occupancy cars for busses carrying approx 90 people, the horror!

“She also said the NTA has requested 26 additional staff for 2019 and “a similar number” for 2020 to ensure the body has adequate resources to work on BusConnects and Metro North.”

FFS! Metro north?! The standard of journalism is shocking.

I would be far more concerned about the substantive point.

It’s quite clear that the NTA don’t have anywhere near enough staff (and in my view enough people with significant operational experience) to manage these changes.

The quality of the management of the roll out of the recent changes in bus services has been shocking, and it is still woeful with crazy gaps in timetables, timetables displayed at stops that are completely out of date, RTPI not working properly, bus stops not physically in place along a new bus route, and a bus company allowed to introduce new schedules which have running times that are 20-30 minutes too tight, resulting in mass cancellations.

This kind of stuff is basic.

That doesn’t bode well for future projects.

cgcsb

Post 1 of 2 on proposed Kimage QBC

cgcsb

Post 2 of 2 on Kimmage CBC

cgcsb

It seems some good bus priority, although strange that a part of Harold's X park wasn't taken to include an outbound bus lane. On the cycling front it seems to be mostly fudge, massive diversions onto 'quiet' streets for cyclists on convoluted routes in order to maintain 2 way car flows. It seems cars just wont be tackled seriously and they are being prioritised over sustainable modes.

I've only included a handful of the key design points just to summarise.

cgcsb

Liffey Valley, Post 1 of 2

cgcsb

Post 2 of 2 on Liffey Valley

cgcsb

Liffey Valley CBC seems to be the best result possible for buses with lots of road space. What's surprising is how cyclists are treated with this one. The mantra is basically cyclists must divert onto painted on cycle lanes on the N4 dual carriageway, would you be able?


Then there's really strange bits like High Street in the City Centre where you have 2 traffic lanes a central median and 2 traffic lanes with ample church grounds on one side, yet cyclists are still expected to cycle through bus stops on a painted on cycle lane. It's like they just gave up on cycling here despite the ample room available to provide cycle lanes that bypass bus stops.


So far it's not looking good for the cyclists

RayCun

cgcsb wrote: »

It seems some good bus priority, although strange that a part of Harold's X park wasn't taken to include an outbound bus lane. On the cycling front it seems to be mostly fudge, massive diversions onto 'quiet' streets for cyclists on convoluted routes in order to maintain 2 way car flows. It seems cars just wont be tackled seriously and they are being prioritised over sustainable modes.

I've only included a handful of the key design points just to summarise.

maps with different orientations make my head hurt

It looks like a bus gate between Kimmage and Harolds Cross park, bikes but no cars?
And a separate bike route from Harolds Cross park to the canal
And a bike route diverting cyclists from Terenure Road West? (which is a horrible road)

cgcsb

RayCun wrote: »

maps with different orientations make my head hurt

It looks like a bus gate between Kimmage and Harolds Cross park, bikes but no cars?
And a separate bike route from Harolds Cross park to the canal
And a bike route diverting cyclists from Terenure Road West? (which is a horrible road)

That's pretty much it yes. The snips are best I could do. The official docs will be out in about 6 weeks.

LeinsterDub

cgcsb wrote: »

Liffey Valley GBC seems to be the best result possible for buses with lots of road space. What's surprising is how cyclists are treated with this one. The mantra is basically cyclists must divert onto painted on cycle lanes on the N4 dual carriageway, would you be able?


Then there's really strange bits like High Street in the City Centre where you have 2 traffic lanes a central median and 2 traffic lanes with amble church grounds on one side, yet cyclists are still expected to cycle through bus stops on a painted on cycle lane. It's like they just gave up on cycling here despite the ample room available to provide cycle lanes that bypass bus stops.


So far it's not looking good for the cyclists

I made this point repeatedly in this thread and was basically told a polished turd is better than nothing.

cgcsb

Quite disappointing really, inbound car traffic should be sent on detours, not bikes. I can't help but think this will negatively affect cycling modal share. We'll be removing on street cycle lanes, no matter how bad, and sending bikes on 2-3km detours to maintain car traffic as is.

LeinsterDub

cgcsb wrote: »

Quite disappointing really, inbound car traffic should be sent on detours, not bikes. I can't help but think this will negatively affect cycling modal share. We'll be removing on street cycle lanes, no matter how bad, and sending bikes on 2-3km detours to maintain car traffic as is.

Are they actually proposing banning cyclist from here ? Because if they are it's outrageous and if they aren't it make the entire thing pointless

cgcsb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Are they actually proposing banning cyclist from here ? Because if they are it's outrageous and if they aren't it make the entire thing pointless

Not banning cyclists but the existing cycle lanes, however bad, will be gone and moved to convoluted detours.

LeinsterDub

cgcsb wrote: »

Not banning cyclists but the existing cycle lanes, however bad, will be gone and moved to convoluted detours.

So cyclist will continue to "block" buses or have to compete with regular. 200 k of high quality infrastructure indeed

marno21

There was a 2 hour meeting of the Oireachtas Transport Committee yesterday with the NTA relating to the BusConnects Core Corridors. From watching it, the following seem to be the main points:

1. The consultations so far have been on concepts for the proposals. They are not the final design, and are out to public consultation so that people who have concerns can outline their concerns and make alternative proposals. From my reading of what's going on, there's far too much dog whistling going on that people are having their buses taken away from them/having their gardens taken from them/cyclists being discommoded as if this was a done deal, however this is only a public consultation, and people need to make their views known to the NTA in a submission rather than all the booing and moaning.

2. The NTA are under-resourced and the amount of projects ongoing is causing these delays, and from what I can see, all the side campaigns by opposition politicans ratcheting up fear in people by spreading misinformation is simply delaying these projects out of sheer volume of submissions after public consultation. In reality, the NTA need to be resourced to match the vast increase in projects since the Metrolink/BusConnects/DART Expansion/Galway BusConnects/Cork BusConnects etc started.

cgcsb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So cyclist will continue to "block" buses or have to compete with regular. 200 k of high quality infrastructure indeed

Basically, at least on the Rathmines section, most of the kimmage route and from Inchicore to the City Centre.

In the later case I would have expect the cycle route to use Inchicore Road's existing 2 way cycleway and the grounds of the modern art museum and Dr Steven's hospital. But no such luck. Cycling has been abandoned by the plan and buses can still only go as fast as the slowest cyclist.

In the case of Rathmines, I see the only proper solution as being a one way for cars, a double bike lane and build a new road for cars on the convoluted detour proposed for cyclists.

LeinsterDub

marno21 wrote: »

1. The consultations so far have been on concepts for the proposals. They are not the final design, and are out to public consultation so that people who have concerns can outline their concerns and make alternative proposals. From my reading of what's going on, there's far too much dog whistling going on that people are having their buses taken away from them/having their gardens taken from them/cyclists being discommoded as if this was a done deal, however this is only a public consultation, and people need to make their views known to the NTA in a submission rather than all the booing and moaning.

And their concepts regarding cycling have been so poor as to raise serious alarm bells . This isn't a case of cyclist being dog whistling nimbys. "I want my bus" "I want my foot of garden.

This is a case of "I don't want to be killed cycling to work" "I want to decarbonise our economy". People are well aware this is pre-consultation and they are making it known that what they plan to hold a public consultation on is unacceptable.

marno21

LeinsterDub wrote: »

And their concepts regarding cycling have been so poor as to raise serious alarm bells . This isn't a case of cyclist being dog whistling nimbys. "I want my bus" "I want my foot of garden.

This is a case of "I don't want to be killed cycling to work" "I want to decarbonise our economy". People are well aware this is pre-consultation and they are making it known that what the plan to hold a public consultation on is unacceptable.

I didn't say it was, but they made it crystal clear yesterday that these were only the NTA's concept designs. If people think they are wrong, or there are better ideas, send them into the NTA at the first opportunity and they will be taken into account.

And I should have split up my comment there which I will apologise for, most of the fearmongering, if not all of the fearmongering, has been more to do with buses and routes.

cgcsb

The first routes Malahide, Blanch, Swords and Lucan seem to do both bus cycling priority fairly well. Early indications are that for the south west of the City, cycling seems to have been completely fudged in favour of cars. Very disappointing, I'll be making a lengthy submission in January, I'd advise others to do likewise.

LeinsterDub

marno21 wrote: »

I didn't say it was, but they made it crystal clear yesterday that these were only the NTA's concept designs. If people think they are wrong, or there are better ideas, send them into the NTA at the first opportunity and they will be taken into account.

And I should have split up my comment there which I will apologise for, most of the fearmongering, if not all of the fearmongering, has been more to do with buses and routes.

Yes but there are national and international standard for this kind of thing which the NTA has allegedly ignored if they aren't following best practice whats the point?

Qrt

Christ on a bike (!) the cycling provision for the Liffey Valley route is shocking. Any reason why there’s so much parking at Inchicore college??? It’s a third level institute, people don’t get dropped off by their parents like.

jd

The NTA are looking at an alternative for Santry that would maintain two way access for cars. This would necessitate a land take from properties in Santry between the Omni and Shantalla Bridge, 1 to 2 meters in most cases.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/alternative-busconnects-plan-could-affect-further-80-homes-1.3752831

CatInABox

jd wrote: »

The NTA are looking at an alternative for Santry that would maintain two way access for cars. This would necessitate a land take from properties in Santry between the Omni and Shantalla Bridge, 1 to 2 meters in most cases.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/alternative-busconnects-plan-could-affect-further-80-homes-1.3752831

I love how Noel Rock is now complaining that the people most affected by the change weren't in the room. Was attendance meant to be compulsory or something?

I predicted on here that if they couldn't do a one way system, then they'd move to a CPO of the gardens, so what did he expect really? I mean, it sounds as if he's trying anything to escape the blame for getting those gardens CPO'd.

jd

Those at the forum were asked not to comment on social media/to national media until the NTA had a chance to contact affected property owners directly.
Didn't stop at least one local pol from posting from the meeting
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2794571663902520/

cgcsb

Noel Rock wanted this, no? he seemed to comment negatively on the one way system, unless he had another alternative in mind?

loyatemu

cgcsb wrote: »

Noel Rock wanted this, no? he seemed to comment negatively on the one way system, unless he had another alternative in mind?

didn't he want to build a tunnel?

jd

loyatemu wrote: »

didn't he want to build a tunnel?

No, that was a local resident at one of his meeting, maybe 3 or 4 years ago.

LeinsterDub

jd wrote: »

No, that was a local resident at one of his meeting, maybe 3 or 4 years ago.

Bus Connects hasn't been a thing for 3 or 4 years. It was a few months ago

jd

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Bus Connects hasn't been a thing for 3 or 4 years. It was a few months ago

It was a meeting I was at where a number of options were discussed regarding transport options for North Dublin/Fingal. It was in the context of one option to have the BRT turning at Coolock Lane and running down the Santry By-pass. This would have left Santry with a much reduced bus service, and one resident opined the BRT should run through Santry, with a tunnel from the Omni down to Whitehall Church.