Dublin - BusConnects

CatInABox

tom1ie wrote: »

So how easy do you think it will be to get a second cpo for a set back bus stop after bc is delivered, when it could have been done the first time? That’s ludicrous.

Legally speaking, about the same.

Politically speaking, probably easier. Right now, most of the CPO's consist of one to two metres, and face opposition from hundreds of houses, but there's no one that's getting truly shafted. Set back bus stops could result in 5 or more metres being taken (and in narrow sections, it's possible that people may even lose their houses). Combine the two into one project, and you've got a much larger battle on your hands.

tom1ie

CatInABox wrote: »

Legally speaking, about the same.

Politically speaking, probably easier. Right now, most of the CPO's consist of one to two metres, and face opposition from hundreds of houses, but there's no one that's getting truly shafted. Set back bus stops could result in 5 or more metres being taken (and in narrow sections, it's possible that people may even lose their houses). Combine the two into one project, and you've got a much larger battle on your hands.

Yeah fair enough, but another way of thinking about it is the home owner thinking they’ve already cpoed some of my garden x years ago for bc, now they’re coming back looking for more! They’ve made a balls of it etc etc.

LXFlyer

Bear in mind Tom that BusConnects, as it stands, plans to reduce the number of buses on the spines over the current levels (I personally don’t think that will happen though).

Again I will make the point that buses do manage to overtake one another at bus stops on the existing QBCs. The main problem is being stuck in general traffic or at pinch points.

LXFlyer

tom1ie wrote: »

You are the one comparing the stillorgan qbc with the known frequency of bc spines at 3 min (Lucan spine). So unless you come up with hard data on frequencies of existing spines I suggest you justify your argument another way.

Tom I don’t have to justify my knowledge of the bus network to you or anyone else. My long posting history on the subject alone should tell you that much.

I can tell you that the Stillorgan QBC has the highest peak frequency of any QBC.

If you don’t want to believe me that’s up to you but I’m not in the habit of making things up.

CatInABox

tom1ie wrote: »

Yeah fair enough, but another way of thinking about it is the home owner thinking they’ve already cpoed some of my garden x years ago for bc, now they’re coming back looking for more! They’ve made a balls of it etc etc.

Sure, but from the legal perspective, there's no real recourse for the home owner, so long as the NTA has their ducks in order.

From the political perspective, it'll be easier for politicians to ignore* it, as the number affected will be lower, and the CBC project will already have provided significant savings, showing that this kind of project does have a positive affect.


*It's not that they will ignore it, but rather will complain and then slowly drop it. Won't be a massive vote winner for them, and could in fact be a vote loser overall, if a successful CBC project makes people realise that PT improvements actually work.

tom1ie

LXFlyer wrote: »

Tom I don’t have to justify my knowledge of the bus network to you or anyone else. My long posting history on the subject alone should tell you that much.

I can tell you that the Stillorgan QBC has the highest peak frequency of any QBC.

If you don’t want to believe me that’s up to you but I’m not in the habit of making things up.

I’m not disputing the fact that the stillorgan qbc is the busiest in the country, I’m trying to find out what that frequency is and to compare that to the known 3min frequency of the Lucan spine. If the frequency is 5min compared to the 3min figure on the Lucan spine then bc will make bunching worse with in line stops.

It’s not an attack on you, don’t take it so personal!

tom1ie

CatInABox wrote: »

Sure, but from the legal perspective, there's no real recourse for the home owner, so long as the NTA has their ducks in order.

From the political perspective, it'll be easier for politicians to ignore* it, as the number affected will be lower, and the CBC project will already have provided significant savings, showing that this kind of project does have a positive affect.


*It's not that they will ignore it, but rather will complain and then slowly drop it. Won't be a massive vote winner for them, and could in fact be a vote loser overall, if a successful CBC project makes people realise that PT improvements actually work.

Yes but if the spines are not working well because of in line bus stops, the further cpo’s for set back bus stops will be seen as “another project that the nta messed up and didn’t design correctly in the first place”

CatInABox

tom1ie wrote: »

Yes but if the spines are not working well because of in line bus stops, the further cpo’s for set back bus stops will be seen as “another project that the nta messed up and didn’t design correctly in the first place”

Except that spines with in line bus stops will still deliver significant improvements on what is currently there. Sure, they could be better with set back bus stops, but it'll still be far better than what people are currently experiencing.

More likely, it'll be seen as "the CBC was a successful project, and these new CPOs will improve things further"

LXFlyer

tom1ie wrote: »

I’m not disputing the fact that the stillorgan qbc is the busiest in the country, I’m trying to find out what that frequency is and to compare that to the known 3min frequency of the Lucan spine. If the frequency is 5min compared to the 3min figure on the Lucan spine then bc will make bunching worse with in line stops.

It’s not an attack on you, don’t take it so personal!

Well quite frankly that is how it came across - I did actually provide you with the tool to do just that for any stop in the city. Using the departures tab on the NTA Journey Planner app is even easier. You can do direct comparisons.

I have a very good working knowledge of the service levels across the city bus network and that’s how I could make that statement without counting them all up.

But just for you, I have. There’s currently 52 buses serving stop 772 at Donnybrook Garage between 08:05 and 09:05.

The Lucan QBC is split in two for most of the route also.

LXFlyer

Incidentally any of the existing frequencies listed in BusConnects network redesign are now completely out of date due to the ongoing rollout of additional departures across the Dublin Bus and Go Ahead networks.

tom1ie

Fair play lx, ya know your ****!

LXFlyer

tom1ie wrote: »

Fair play lx, ya know your ****!

Thanks but anyone could do that exercise in all honesty.

My point stands though. The key part of the project is segregating buses from general traffic.

Most buses stop at every stop along the QBCs during the peak as it is so recessed bays aren’t the be all and end all. Several existing ones are badly designed in any case and are useless. Look at the one in Rathmines at the swimming pool - it’s too small for the volume of buses and it is too short to allow a bus safely enter, line up flush with the kerb, stop and pull out.

As I said to my mind it is getting past general traffic that is key.

The revised proposal in Santry is I think a good compromise that will facilitate local access and bus traffic. Going any further in and the bus stops would take up most of the front gardens which isn’t great for residents being honest. The NTA need to bring the residents with them on this.

cgcsb

Have seen proposals for all remaining corridors. Mostly it's as you'd expect, I'll just outline a few interesting points:

Ballymun-City Centre:

Starting from FR Mathew Bridge heading north you've bus lane in both directions, no separete cycling lanes as far as May's lane. Between there and King St junction, entry is controlled by bus priority signal. Standard southbound cycling lane and standard north bound bus lane on this stretch.

Left turn from Upper Church St onto King st banned. This will impede the Brunswick st/King st function as an orbital route for cars, how this will be fixed is not yet known. Coleraine st Cosntitution Hill and the Royal Canal Bank will be used as a quiteway for bikes. Bus lane will be continuous except for a short stretch just north of Monck place and the NCR junction, where it will be shared with left turning cars, entry to this stretch controlled by bus priority signal

2 way bus lanes are maintained north of this. The Royal Canal quietway for bikes rejoins the main route at the Westmoreland Bridge.
Bizzarly at this point, there is no proposed bus stops at the proposed Whitworth road station.

From Whitworth road to Botanic Road/Prospect Way there is a south bound bike lane and bus lane but northbound cyclists can sing. The start of the Finglas Rd will consist of a northbound Bike lane, bus lane and general traffic, a right turning bus lane and a right turning general traffic.

North of Botanic/Prospect there's a north bound bus lane and a short stretch of south bound bus lane and cycle lane. South bound buses will share with cars for a stretch, controlled by signaling.

St Mobhi Road get's contentious. Heavy CPO activity here. Bus and cycle lanes in both directions here and south bound only cars. This goes as far as Griffith Avenue and from there you have bus and bike lanes as standard on the wide ballymun rd.

monument

tom1ie wrote: »

Yes but if the spines are not working well because of in line bus stops, the further cpo’s for set back bus stops will be seen as “another project that the nta messed up and didn’t design correctly in the first place”

I’ve read all or most of your posts and the replies by others, but I still don’t know what your obsession is with having set back bus stops — unless there is a massive amount of space (ie N11 etc) these rarely work well in terms of buses meeting the kerbs and the space in most cases would be better used for bus stop bypasses / island bus stops, which take up less space to get right.

cgcsb

Bunching is only an issue in a small number of locations at present where different bus routes converge. I expect this will be reduced by the merging of bus routes into spines with a common time table. I don't think it's a massive issue outside central Dublin

LXFlyer

cgcsb wrote: »

Bunching is only an issue in a small number of locations at present where different bus routes converge. I expect this will be reduced by the merging of bus routes into spines with a common time table. I don't think it's a massive issue outside central Dublin

While there are some integrated timetables, bunching does happen a lot more than your post suggests, and frankly that won’t change. Jarrett Walker recognised that bunching will still happen. Not necessarily from poor scheduling, but rather a fact of life in the sense that they still have to interact with passengers and traffic!

Actually delivering buses onto the spines on schedule from routes that don’t have priority isn’t going to be that easy to do.

Also the number of buses serving the city centre has increased in the last twelve months and I’m totally unconvinced that you can reduce them as significantly as BusConnects suggests. Passenger numbers are consistently rising.

The original plan cut capacity from many areas and I just don’t think that is sustainable anymore.

By all means the orbitals need increasing (as Go Ahead are doing) but I think that the notion of removing significant capacity from radial routes to deliver that is going to be canned somewhat.

jd

Received this a short while ago

Please note that there will be an extension to the period of consultation for the Swords to City Centre Core Bus Corridor. The deadline for submissions for this corridor is now Friday 1st March 2019.

CatInABox

jd wrote: »

Received this a short while ago

It's probably the change to the Santry section that's caused the delay, not much point in continuing with the old consultation if it was already out of date.

alentejo

I think in 20 years plus commuting either by bike, bus or driving, the traffic on the Terenure-Rathgar-Rathmines route was the worst I have ever seen it.

What ever Busconnects delivers, it will need to ban cars on certain sections of this route or else it will not work!

cgcsb

There's been a massive climbdown at the NTA regarding Rathmines. The convoluted detour for cyclists is gone and instead Rathmines village will have one way outound traffic and 2 way bus and cycle lanes. Aditionally Richmond St is to be a bus gate. Completely removing this as a commuter route for cars.

I for one welcome this and predict a drastic reduction in car commuting as a result.

tom1ie

cgcsb wrote: »

There's been a massive climbdown at the NTA regarding Rathmines. The convoluted detour fohr cyclists is gone and instead RAthmines village will have one way outound traffic and 2 way bus and cycle lanes. Aditionally Richmond St is to be a bus gate. Completely removing this as a commuter route for cars.

I for one welcome this and predict a drastic reduction in car commuting as a result.

Very good. Is the detailed drawing/map up on the bc website?

cgcsb

tom1ie wrote: »

Very good. Is the detailed drawing/map up on the bc website?

It will be closer to the end of the month.

CatInABox

cgcsb wrote: »

There's been a massive climbdown at the NTA regarding Rathmines. The convoluted detour for cyclists is gone and instead RAthmines village will have one way outound traffic and 2 way bus and cycle lanes. Aditionally Richmond St is to be a bus gate. Completely removing this as a commuter route for cars.

I mean, this is a climbdown on the cycling/bus side, but it's going to be a massive uphill struggle on the car commuter side. Just look at the Santry opposition for example.

I suppose the difference is that Santry can be sorted without too much hassle for the NTA and their bus corridors, there really doesn't seem to be any other option in that area.

cgcsb

I know what you mean but the battle is different. In Santry it's the 'concerned resident' Helen Lovejoy Crowd, and the conflicting interests is motorists vs local owners of gardens. I'm also not convinced that the NTA will go with the 2 way Santry option. In Rathmines it's concerned motorists vs people who cycle. Much less sympathy there.

blanch152

cgcsb wrote: »

Bunching is only an issue in a small number of locations at present where different bus routes converge. I expect this will be reduced by the merging of bus routes into spines with a common time table. I don't think it's a massive issue outside central Dublin

Bunching happens in Dublin 15, especially when the Blanchardstown Centre is busy.

monument

blanch152 wrote: »

Bunching happens in Dublin 15, especially when the Blanchardstown Centre is busy.

Blanch is to have a load of bus bays etc.

The design is not right yet, but what it will get is likely far better than what it has now.

Stephen15

LXFlyer wrote: »

They’re talking about *scheduling* buses to be more evenly spaced.

That doesn’t mean that will be what actually happens on the ground, and Jarrett Walker admitted that publicly, namely that bunching will still happen.

Given that some routes (from the first draft) would be joining the spines from roads with little or no priority measures, that’s going to be difficult to avoid.

What needs to be done is the introduction of headways. If two buses are bunched or a controller sees there's a risk of buses bunching he or she should inform one of the drivers to wait at the stop 5-10 mins before continuing on the journey in order to keep a headway. Along with bus priority at lights and proper enforce,ment of bus lanes.

There's also incidents where two high frequency bus routes leave the terminus at the same time and I have seen this with my own eyes as presumably one bus is on time and another is late. If a route is meant to run every 10 mins then the priority should be to keep the bus at a 10 minute headway not keep it running its scheduled departures which is something that seems logical on paper but not in reality.

RayCun

Yeah, tell a driver to stop for ten minutes at a stop for no reason other than to let the bus ahead get further ahead.
The passengers would love that.

CatInABox

RayCun wrote: »

Yeah, tell a driver to stop for ten minutes at a stop for no reason other than to let the bus ahead get further ahead.
The passengers would love that.

I've been on several buses in London that have done something similar. In some cases, there's a wait of a few minutes at a bus stop, and in other cases, the bus waited for a little bit at several bus stops in a row.

There's usually a pre-recorded announcement over the speakers at the time. No one really complains, not really. Might say something to the person sitting next to them, but that's all.

sharper

My experience with Dublin Bus bunching is that they're usually bunched up around the time of the later bus and not the earlier one so if you ask one to stop you'll be increasing the delay. I would guess this is because bunching is typically caused by traffic bottlenecks and not delays at the stops.

For example at peak times I've seen 3 25as coming along together down the quays. That's a 10 minute frequency and about 8 stops from departure so I don't believe they're being held up for that long at the stops.

I've also been on buses which pulled over and everyone had to get on the next one coming so the bus could go off and do something else, it's very disruptive and annoying.

Busconnects will also complicate this logic a lot. You have a high frequency spine that's composed of a number of subroutes. If three "A" buses are bunched up they're all going to different places and people are relying on each of them to show up at the interconnect to complete their journey.