Dublin North Quays - now double bus lane

amcalester · 16-08-2017 01:37PM

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Come off it - this forum is bursting at the seams with suppositions that every driver who uses the quays is a lazy sod who could take a bike / public transport, and who apparently takes this route just so they can clog up the road for fun (or something). Even this thread is replete with posters gloating at motorists' 'loss'. Many contributors cannot see outside the 20s/30s worldview of having an easily commutable job with few responsibilities. That people may need to do X or Y on the way to / from work, or need to be 'ready to go' for whatever reason (sick child / relative; work), or don't fancy stacking a couple of kids on the back of a bike, or have had bad experiences on PT, is something that does not apply to them so they ignore such considerations - but they do apply to many others. I don't live in Dublin but, as far as I can see, commuting through the city by car is a miserable experience - why would people do it unless they had to?

You're still arguing for the exception rather than the rule though.

It's been shown that the vast majority or people arrive into the city center by methods other than private vehicle so can you quantify how many people that are being adversely affected have no alternative options?

FWIW I don't work or commute into the DCC but on the rare occasions that I do travel there I tend to drive because I find it more comfortable than getting the bus (Luas isnt an option where I live) so I am very much part of the problem but with these changes I'll probably start getting the bus.

magicbastarder · 16-08-2017 01:56PM

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Come off it - this forum is bursting at the seams with suppositions that every driver who uses the quays is a lazy sod who could take a bike / public transport, and who apparently takes this route just so they can clog up the road for fun (or something).

there's only a few hundred using the quays though, per hour.

monument · 17-08-2017 12:51AM

A correction to my previous posts -- the council thinks it's only generally around 600 people in 500 car per hour...

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

A lot of the posts I was replying to are "Father Ted" like shot's of reality. Some of them come across as simple-minded, childish and brudgery driven given that they are clearly reveling at the inconvenience being caused to motorists.

Also, that comment there of "not worth your grandstanding" comes across as an attack the poster type response. However, I won't report it as I amn't a coward. I know we've never seen eye-to-eye on matters such as this

The main problem is some people here are confusing people pointing out the realty of Luas coming to being anti-motorist.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

I wasn't talking about bicycles was I?

Or are you trying to stir-up your misunderstanding that I am anti-cyclist?

Stop jumping to conclusions... I was pointing out the bicycles are already starting to outnumber cars on the quays.

I'm not sure how the picture can be made any clearer -- more and more people are traveling by sustainable transport in the city, and more and more space will have to be reallocated to sustainable transport.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Currently, the quays forms or is part of a more direct route to work for some people. That's a fairly valid reason. So, yes, they will be rightly irritated by the prospect that their journey is going to be made more awkward. Finally, since when is a persons choice of gym location anyone else's business?

A better way to do this would be (at the very least) to find out where people are driving from with a view to identifying gaps in the transport network. Then, use this information to introduce new bus routes to soften the blow of inconvenience. However, this very crucial step in the process is not registering with people on this thread.

If the person wants, they can still get to the gym. There'll still be loads of routes which will be faster once Luas is in place.

But it's a bit contradictory of your post to ask us not to discuss where people are going while you want a mass tracking system.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Well, given that other cities in the developed world (with similar populations I might add) are doing many times the above, I would certainly consider them the bare minimum requirements.

.....

Did I say DART or Metro? No!
You're really trying to put words in my mouth that aren't really there.

I said that new bus routes could be introduced to accommodate the aforementioned 800 people. This is something that could be done overnight by a public or private organization if it wasn't for the bureaucratic process of applying for bus licenses.

So, in an ideal world, instead of inconveniencing them with forced diversions and very likely lengthened journeys, the new routes would capitalize on the new bus lane.

You're mentioning how other cities "are doing many times the above" and you're getting really annoyed when I ask if you're looking for Metro North etc.

A far better idea than some kind of strange, unpractical new bus routes for 800 people who live all over the place is 30 extra buses adding to capacity across the Dublin Bus network -- the capacity of those 30 buses exceeds 800 people per hour, but according to the council in interviews etc, it's more like 600 people in 500 cars.

Even if it was 800 people -- there'll still be space for some of them to sit in their cars on the quays. You know the new trams will carry up to 380 people each?

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

You may have misunderstood me when you wrote this response. Whether or not that was intentional is another matter. Anyway, I was saying that motorists who occupy space dedicated to another class of road user are incredibly inconsiderate in this precise example. That includes parking on cycle lanes, driving in bus lanes, blocking trams etc.

Other than that, if people are driving around in the city in a safe, law-abiding manner, there is nothing inconsiderate about that. This goes for all other classes of road users.

What exactly do you mean by low-level law breaking?

No offence, but you really seem clueless as to how motorists (or humans generally) act in congested traffic.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

You see, in this country when we come up with schemes, they are often half baked. For example, the plaza on College Green is all very well. Yet, we still haven't implemented Metro North or DART Underground. So, it's a case of inconvenience motorists without a solution or attractive alternative. I guess what I am saying is that once you have a more inclusive contingency plan in place, only then, are you in a position to inconvenience people.

Perhaps, use of the phrase "incredibly inconsiderate" was a tad emotive.

I'm afraid the city can't be put on hold for ever waiting for national government to agree on and fund those large project... the city is growing and it needs to relocate space to modes of transport which can move more people using that space.

You know Luas Cross City, the quays bus lanes, College Green, the Liffey Cycle Route, the planned BRT routes, etc are all part of an interconnected plan?

Also: I asked did you want Metro North and Dart first, and you got quite annoyed that I was putting words in your mouth.

patrickbrophy18 · 17-08-2017 02:03AM

monument wrote: »

A correction to my previous posts -- the council thinks it's only generally around 600 people in 500 car per hour...

Perhaps, carpooling could become more streamlined to cater for the more niche areas where bus transport would be nonviable to minimize the amount of single occupancy vehicles.

monument wrote: »

The main problem is some people here are confusing people pointing out the realty of Luas coming to being anti-motorist.

Right. I am delighted to see that the two Luas lines are being joined up and I'm looking forward to seeing its results.

monument wrote: »

Stop jumping to conclusions... I was pointing out the bicycles are already starting to outnumber cars on the quays.

And that is brilliant. Plus, the welcomed addition of cycle lanes on the quays should better accommodate them. I've changed my standing on this.

monument wrote: »

I'm not sure how the picture can be made any clearer -- more and more people are traveling by sustainable transport in the city, and more and more space will have to be reallocated to sustainable transport.

My previous point applies to this as well as I also understand that continued provision for the car is not sustainable. This holds true especially for journeys which are 6 kilometers or less.

monument wrote: »

If the person wants, they can still get to the gym. There'll still be loads of routes which will be faster once Luas is in place.

But it's a bit contradictory of your post to ask us not to discuss where people are going while you want a mass tracking system.

Okay. You got me here alright. I suppose what I was saying is that using peoples data to better provide for them is what I was ultimately getting at.

monument wrote: »

You're mentioning how other cities "are doing many times the above" and you're getting really annoyed when I ask if you're looking for Metro North etc.

Not in this case and I'm sorry if I got annoyed. Having said that, Metro North and DART Underground are still very large pieces missing from the public transport jigsaw.

monument wrote: »

A far better idea than some kind of strange, unpractical new bus routes for 800 people who live all over the place is 30 extra buses adding to capacity across the Dublin Bus network -- the capacity of those 30 buses exceeds 800 people per hour, but according to the council in interviews etc, it's more like 600 people in 500 cars.

To add to my first point, a mixture of new routes and carpooling along with high-level data gathering could help in addressing this issue.

monument wrote: »

Even if it was 800 people -- there'll still be space for some of them to sit in their cars on the quays. You know the new trams will carry up to 380 people each?

Fair enough. Not every journey will have a financially viable bus alternative. So, if the existing plans do result in less car journeys for the respective beneficiaries, the removal of a lane or traffic will balance itself out.

monument wrote: »

No offence, but you really seem clueless as to how motorists (or humans generally) act in congested traffic.

I do actually.

I see all types driving to Citywest never-mind the odd trip to the City Center. There are the absolute tossers who try to intimidate other road users, rear ending road rage when I'm sticking to the posted speed limit and let's not forget those who are constantly on their phones. There are loads of people in souped up SUVs who can't even gauge the width or length of their vehicles and choose to drive one solely as a status symbol.

monument wrote: »

I'm afraid the city can't be put on hold for ever waiting for national government to agree on and fund those large project... the city is growing and it needs to relocate space to modes of transport which can move more people using that space.

If bus route license processing was carried out more hastily, alternatives could be put in place where they are viable. Anyway, if the pedestrianization of Grafton Street proved successful, there is no reason why the current matter won't be. So, once again, I'm sorry if my conspiracy theory mindset got ahead of itself.

monument wrote: »

You know Luas Cross City, the quays bus lanes, College Green, the Liffey Cycle Route, the planned BRT routes, etc are all part of an interconnected plan?

I do know that. Eventually, when Metro North and DART Underground are implemented, it will be the icing on the public transport cake.

monument wrote: »

Also: I asked did you want Metro North and Dart first, and you got quite annoyed that I was putting words in your mouth.

Having read the thread again, it was a valid question as I'm still rooting (or should that be routing...no pun intended

). I got bit hot under the collar at the time I posted and I will try not to be as direct the next time.

Anyway, friends?

NuMarvel · 20-08-2017 11:39AM

I cycled along the quays this morning, about half an hour after the new layout officially opened. For the most part it was okay, but the bikes lanes will probably need bollards put up along some parts to stop taxis and buses using them as parking spots. That said, there were two things that really jumped out at me.

Firstly, on the approach to the turn off for Jervis Street car park, I question the wisdom of putting a bike lane on the left hand side of a left hand turning lane. It puts left hand turning motorists into the path of cyclists going straight ahead, and I know from personal experience that some motorists aren't great at checking their blind spots.

Secondly, and this was the biggie for me, I noticed cars turning into the bus lane before the Bus Priority lights to avoid red lights. This might be down for driver confusion (remember, it was only half an hour after opening), but it's something that the council would need to nip in the bud pretty asap in case it becomes widespread.

LXFlyer · 20-08-2017 11:44AM

NuMarvel wrote: »

I cycled along the quays this morning, about half an hour after the new layout officially opened. For the most part it was okay, but the bikes lanes will probably need bollards put up along some parts to stop taxis and buses using them as parking spots. That said, there were two things that really jumped out at me.

Firstly, on the approach to the turn off for Jervis Street car park, I question the wisdom of putting a bike lane on the left hand side of a left hand turning lane. It puts left hand turning motorists into the path of cyclists going straight ahead, and I know from personal experience that some motorists aren't great at checking their blind spots.

Secondly, and this was the biggie for me, I noticed cars turning into the bus lane before the Bus Priority lights to avoid red lights. This might be down for driver confusion (remember, it was only half an hour after opening), but it's something that the council would need to nip in the bud pretty asap in case it becomes widespread.

The original plans had bollards being put in place to stop the latter practice (along the lines of what's in place at Whitehall Church).

That would seem blindingly obvious to me as what would be necessary here.

LollipopJimmy · 20-08-2017 11:46AM

NuMarvel wrote: »

I cycled along the quays this morning, about half an hour after the new layout officially opened. For the most part it was okay, but the bikes lanes will probably need bollards put up along some parts to stop taxis and buses using them as parking spots. That said, there were two things that really jumped out at me.

Firstly, on the approach to the turn off for Jervis Street car park, I question the wisdom of putting a bike lane on the left hand side of a left hand turning lane. It puts left hand turning motorists into the path of cyclists going straight ahead, and I know from personal experience that some motorists aren't great at checking their blind spots.

Secondly, and this was the biggie for me, I noticed cars turning into the bus lane before the Bus Priority lights to avoid red lights. This might be down for driver confusion (remember, it was only half an hour after opening), but it's something that the council would need to nip in the bud pretty asap in case it becomes widespread.

It's mayhem now. I cycled it about 20mins ago. There's a lot of coke park traffic though. So I'll reserve any judgement until I do it during the week.

AndrewJRenko · 20-08-2017 11:56AM

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

It's mayhem now. I cycled it about 20mins ago. There's a lot of coke park traffic though. So I'll reserve any judgement until I do it during the week.

What do you mean by mayhem?

ThisRegard · 20-08-2017 11:57AM

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

It's mayhem now. I cycled it about 20mins ago. There's a lot of coke park traffic though. So I'll reserve any judgement until I do it during the week.

There were a lot of traffic restrictions around the city earlier due to the Ironman too.

LollipopJimmy · 20-08-2017 12:04PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What do you mean by mayhem?

Cars, taxis and buses darting every which way. Bachelors walk is blocked by coaches unloading. I hope I'm wrong but I give it a week before a cyclist is hit
Ironman restrictions on this stretch were lifted at 10

trellheim · 20-08-2017 01:22PM

I am considering worst possible outcomes at the moment .

DART and IE will not be affected by this.

If we assume the No.1 priority is to keep City buses to time as that mode carries the majority . ( yes LUAS carries more per tram but thats not the point )

Worst outcomes ( for particular groups )

1) Removal of all private traffic from O'Connell Bridge area
2) Removal of small PSV traffic from O'Connell Bridge area ( i.e taxis )
3) Rerouting of long distance and tourist bus services away from O'Connell Bridge area
4) Shortening the new trams to fit on O'Connell Bridge
5) turning back trams at Stephens Green and matching place on Northside to reduce cross-river frequency especially at peak

There might well be an argument to just run the longer trams just between SSG and Sandyford anyway as its crush loadings at peak on that stretch anyway.

Not a perfect outcome by any means but there will deffo need to be compromises

LXFlyer · 20-08-2017 01:36PM

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

Cars, taxis and buses darting every which way. Bachelors walk is blocked by coaches unloading. I hope I'm wrong but I give it a week before a cyclist is hit
Ironman restrictions on this stretch were lifted at 10

I suspect that the Gardai are going light touch today with the enforcement given it's the first day.

It doesn't help that earlier bus lanes along the Quays are Monday to Saturday 07:00 to 19:00 and the new ones are Monday to Sunday 24 hours.

Consistency is needed to avoid confusion.

LollipopJimmy · 20-08-2017 01:53PM

LXFlyer wrote: »

I suspect that the Gardai are going light touch today with the enforcement given it's the first day.

It doesn't help that earlier bus lanes along the Quays are Monday to Saturday and the new ones are Monday to Saturday 07:00 to 19:00.

Consistency is needed to avoid confusion.

I really think that it's a good layout in principle. But it's going to need driver education

monument · 20-08-2017 06:31PM

trellheim wrote: »

If we assume the No.1 priority is to keep City buses to time as that mode carries the majority . ( yes LUAS carries more per tram but thats not the point )

When Luas Cross City opens, Luas may also carry more than any other surface mode in the area of O'Connell Bridge.

The red line already carries more people than the buses on the quays, and green line trams will have even more capacity.

It would not take a whole load of extra Luas routes for Luas to surpass the numbers carried on Dublin Bus.

Just saying...

trellheim wrote: »

4) Shortening the new trams to fit on O'Connell Bridge
5) turning back trams at Stephens Green and matching place on Northside to reduce cross-river frequency especially at peak

There might well be an argument to just run the longer trams just between SSG and Sandyford anyway as its crush loadings at peak on that stretch anyway.

Not a perfect outcome by any means but there will deffo need to be compromises

That's a joke? Right? Because it's not realistic at all.

LXFlyer · 20-08-2017 07:15PM

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

I really think that it's a good layout in principle. But it's going to need driver education

It's going to take enforcement.

punisher5112 · 20-08-2017 07:31PM

LXFlyer wrote: »

It's going to take enforcement.

None of that as is so it will be normal.

LXFlyer · 20-08-2017 07:34PM

monument wrote: »

When Luas Cross City opens, Luas may also carry more than any other surface mode in the area of O'Connell Bridge.

The red line already carries more people than the buses on the quays, and green line trams will have even more capacity.

It would not take a whole load of extra Luas routes for Luas to surpass the numbers carried on Dublin Bus.

Just saying...

That's a joke? Right? Because it's not realistic at all.

You can "just say" all you like monument, but the bus service remains the public principal transport provider in the city and surrounding areas, and if the funding is forthcoming to expand the Dublin Bus network by 10% then user numbers will grow further.

It's all well and good saying LUAS does this or that, or has x capacity, but the reality is that LUAS only runs along two routes, and for much of this city the bus service is the only option.

I'm not aware of any further LUAS routes that are going to happen anytime soon, so that argument is irrelevant.

LUAS is fine for those that can use it, but the vast majority of the city isn't on a LUAS line, and relies on the bus services, be it DB or BE, or other operators.

Keeping the bus services moving, and improving overall reliability was the principal motivation for the extra bus priority measures so I'm not really sure why you're going on about this.

LXFlyer · 20-08-2017 07:39PM

Also, I expect that some peak journeys will use the turn back at St Stephen's Green - they won't all continue through the city centre to Parnell or Broombridge.

Stephen15 · 20-08-2017 10:56PM

LXFlyer wrote: »

Also, I expect that some peak journeys will use the turn back at St Stephen's Green - they won't all continue through the city centre to Parnell or Broombridge.

Where would they pull in unless they put in an additional bay platform

LXFlyer · 20-08-2017 11:20PM

Stephen15 wrote: »

Where would they pull in unless they put in an additional bay platform

There is a turnback siding on St Stephen's Green North.

Stephen15 · 21-08-2017 12:00AM

LXFlyer wrote: »

There is a turnback siding on St Stephen's Green North.

But realistically that may only be practical to be used if trams are laying over for long periods in the city centre eg between morning and evening peak.

If there is going to be frequent services between Brides Glen/Sandyford to SSG only there will probably need to be an additional bay platform unless there is going to be extremely quick turnaround times between Parnell St/Broombridge trams. I suspect such services may only be useful as some type of Luas equivalent of Euro duties.

If there is going to be SSG only trams from Brides Glen/Sandyford then will there also be Broombridge to SSG trams also.

monument · 21-08-2017 01:19AM

LXFlyer wrote: »

You can "just say" all you like monument, but the bus service remains the public principal transport provider in the city and surrounding areas, and if the funding is forthcoming to expand the Dublin Bus network by 10% then user numbers will grow further.

It's all well and good saying LUAS does this or that, or has x capacity, but the reality is that LUAS only runs along two routes, and for much of this city the bus service is the only option.

I'm not aware of any further LUAS routes that are going to happen anytime soon, so that argument is irrelevant.

LUAS is fine for those that can use it, but the vast majority of the city isn't on a LUAS line, and relies on the bus services, be it DB or BE, or other operators.

Keeping the bus services moving, and improving overall reliability was the principal motivation for the extra bus priority measures so I'm not really sure why you're going on about this.

Maybe read the post in the context it was set? Ie in reply to trellheim's suggestions to "Shortening the new trams to fit on O'Connell Bridge" or "turning back trams at Stephens Green and matching place on Northside to reduce cross-river frequency especially at peak"

Maybe read it also in the context that I am not suggesting to cut bus priority and I support greater bus priority, including but not limited to have a bus only Eden Quay and two-way buses on Parliament Street?

trellheim · 21-08-2017 06:13AM

My point was to consider all the possibilities including the ones you don't like - it is precisely because they are unpalatable that they are there , should we rule them out just because we don't like them ? .

I've yet to see an options modelling that bashes all the numbers out for a revised junction

LXFlyer · 21-08-2017 06:34AM

monument wrote: »

Maybe read the post in the context it was set? Ie in reply to trellheim's suggestions to "Shortening the new trams to fit on O'Connell Bridge" or "turning back trams at Stephens Green and matching place on Northside to reduce cross-river frequency especially at peak"

Maybe read it also in the context that I am not suggesting to cut bus priority and I support greater bus priority, including but not limited to have a bus only Eden Quay and two-way buses on Parliament Street?

I'm fully aware of the latter half of Trellheim's post, which isn't likely to happen.

However, let's be fair here, you quoted a completely different section of their post in your reply, to which I replied.

My post was also a general comment on the LUAS -v- bus capacity issue. For most of Dublin (excluding the two specific routes along which LUAS operates) it is a complete red herring, as most people don't have the option to use LUAS to commute.

I completely agree re your latter paragraph above. I don't doubt your support of the bus measures at all - I just think that blindly quoting capacity statistics isn't really relevant given that the two modes aren't competing in the vast majority of the city.

LXFlyer · 21-08-2017 08:04AM

Stephen15 wrote: »

But realistically that may only be practical to be used if trams are laying over for long periods in the city centre eg between morning and evening peak.

If there is going to be frequent services between Brides Glen/Sandyford to SSG only there will probably need to be an additional bay platform unless there is going to be extremely quick turnaround times between Parnell St/Broombridge trams. I suspect such services may only be useful as some type of Luas equivalent of Euro duties.

If there is going to be SSG only trams from Brides Glen/Sandyford then will there also be Broombridge to SSG trams also.

I'm purely talking about peak extras - they can easily go back to Sandyford from the turnback siding without laying over there all day long.

Could I suggest you go and familiarise yourself with the track layout as clearly you aren't by reading your posts.

It'll become very obvious if you go and look at it as to how it could operate.

sharper · 21-08-2017 09:01AM

Naturally a delivery truck on Ormond Quay partially blocked the bus lane and caused a tailback all the way back.

I haven't seen any indication enforcement and traffic management are even acknowledged a problem that has real impacts. It would be nice to see some planning around proper traffic corps and automated enforcement. That delivery truck should have had its number plate tagged by every bus that was forced to merge into regular traffic.

cherryghost · 21-08-2017 09:12AM

Anyone commute on the Quays this morning? How was traffic flow?

Interested to hear.

Beechwoodspark · 21-08-2017 09:14AM

cherryghost wrote: »

Anyone commute on the Quays this morning? How was traffic flow?

Interested to hear.

Currently on it in a bus. Pretty much Free flowing at the moment. I'm coming from heuston and now at 4 courts in less than 5 mins.

LXFlyer · 21-08-2017 09:23AM

Went and had a look around 08:20.

The buses were flowing freely east of Grattan Bridge and bus lanes being adhered to by general traffic.

The switch from the right hand lane to far left west of Grattan Bridge for traffic heading for Jervis St is causing a lot of confusion though - a signalled bus gate would be a better solution here.

But from what I could see the buses were passing through much faster than before.

It will be interesting to see how the westbound traffic works this evening.

I'd echo the earlier comment - it would be good to see the Garda out enforcing the new measures.

Sierra Oscar · 21-08-2017 09:30AM

cherryghost wrote: »

Anyone commute on the Quays this morning? How was traffic flow?

Interested to hear.

I was on 39A, it flew down the quays. A journey which usually takes 35 - 40 mins took 15 mins this morning.

Now admittedly it's August, but there's still a massive difference. I'd say the journey will take 20 mins or so once September hits.

Dublin North Quays - now double bus lane

Comments