Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Dublin - BusConnects

Options
1…2122242627…118

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Compared to continuous dedicated cycle lanes

    And how do they compare to the current cycling infrastructure in those areas?


  • Options
    #693
    Heartbreak Hank
    Registered Users Posts: 232 ✭✭Heartbreak Hank


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    the current example of the off-road cycle lane going behind the bus-stop in Fairview for example is absolutely horrific.


    There seems to be a big difference in the bus bypass taper lengths between the Clongriffen and Swords designs. The Clongriffen ones shift very close to the bus stop whereas the Swords ones have decent tapers with good visibility.


  • Options
    #694
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    The real issue in the south central area (again none of the 14, 16 or 140 are going southwest and nor would the A3/A4 so I don’t know why you keep referring to it as southwest),


    I generally refer to Dublin in 4 quadrants, not 6 as you do, but different strokes and all. I think most people refer to it in 4 quadrants also. I think most cities are referred to this way, it's not a specific geographic term or one based on electoral districts or anything.
    LXFlyer wrote: »
    The real problem is the lack of space where buildings are right up against the footpaths (Rathmines, Rathgar and Terenure and Harold’s X) where unless you demolish stuff then there’s little option to put bus lanes in. The only option left is to potentially close routes to general traffic.


    I think that is dealt with making some of these villages one way for cars. Or if you look at the Blanchardstown route paying particular attention to the old cabra road-Stoneybatter section. There isn't space to provide for everything so the solution sought is that there will be no through access from one end to the other so the roads usefulness as an arterial commuter route for cars is gone and the only cars remaining are local access. This is a decent solution provided it's enforced.
    LXFlyer wrote: »
    That’s going to cause major problems - where is it all going to go?

    modal shift and evaporation

    LXFlyer wrote: »
    Today has been somewhat underwhelming in terms of priority measures - don’t get me wrong I welcome any improvement for bus passengers, but I don’t quite see how they will deliver the vast improvements in journey time that they’re quoting.

    Indeed the changes are depending on one key aspect, enforcement. The 24hr bus lane on the quays is great in theory but most of the time it's full of audis.
    We need to move toward a society where rules are actually enforced. Not just in terms of traffic management but also in all aspects of society.


  • Options
    #695
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,736 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    RayCun wrote: »
    And how do they compare to the current cycling infrastructure in those areas?

    better than nothing is not an argument in favour of putting in half-assed infrastructure. They should be trying to get it right - there are some examples of well designed cycling infrastructure around (and obviously plenty of international best practise).


  • Options
    #696
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    loyatemu wrote: »
    better than nothing is not an argument in favour of putting in half-assed infrastructure. They should be trying to get it right - there are some examples of well designed cycling infrastructure around (and obviously plenty of international best practise).

    just looking at the Clongriffin route, it looks like there are large sections of new, separated cycling lanes on most of the Malahide road


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,736 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    RayCun wrote: »
    just looking at the Clongriffin route, it looks like there are large sections of new, separated cycling lanes on most of the Malahide road

    I've only skimmed the docs TBH, I know the Dublin Cycling Campaign have expressed some reservations, they'll be going through the proposals in details.


  • Options
    #698
    prunudo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,033 ✭✭✭prunudo


    Haven't looked at the plan in detail and without knowing the routes very well its hard to match up drawings with actual places but there simply isn't enough space to cater for all road users. Is this plan trying to improve the Bus service or the cycle network. There has to be a compromise somewhere because as it is a lot of people are up in arms about loosing their gardens when in reality there should be more ground taken to accommodate everyone.
    As I've said in the Metrolink thread, there has to be collateral damage because without it the city will continue to grind to a halt.


  • Options
    #699
    riddlinrussell
    Registered Users Posts: 978 ✭✭✭riddlinrussell


    loyatemu wrote: »
    better than nothing is not an argument in favour of putting in half-assed infrastructure. They should be trying to get it right - there are some examples of well designed cycling infrastructure around (and obviously plenty of international best practice).

    I would argue that the perfect is the enemy of the good, get this large amount of 'decent' cycle infra laid down, fight some battles on points where connectivity in future would be ruined by the proposals, then instead of campaigning for a full cycle route along major corridors, now you're only asking for improved junctions for cyclists to link up "Superhighways" and 'connecting up the last parts of the network' instead of asking for the whole network done at once. Anything that isn't a white line painted on the road is an improvement.

    Someone also said they didn't like cycle paths running behind bus shelters, what would you propose as the alternative, bearing in mind the aim of encouraging those not comfortable with lots of on road cycling (and thus not too keen on overtaking buses) to get cycling? They have been deployed to good effect in a number of cycle positive cities so far.

    I think my main fear is that if there are just constant complaints from cyclists then Councils/Government will just provide whatever is cheapest while still fulfilling the requirements of 'providing cycling infrastructure', which leads to abominations like this...


  • Options
    #700
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    matrim wrote: »
    This has probably been brought up before but is the "pedestrian - cycle - bus - car - car - bus - cycle - pedestrian" configuration not going to cause loads of issues where you have pedestrians crossing cycle lanes to get to / from bus stops and even crowing them while waiting / queuing for the bus.

    What is the alternative?
    pedestrian - bus - cycle - car?


  • Options
    #701
    riddlinrussell
    Registered Users Posts: 978 ✭✭✭riddlinrussell


    RayCun wrote: »
    What is the alternative?
    pedestrian - bus - cycle - car?

    Something like what I have below? Meaning bus lanes are fully segregated and buses cannot enter the mainline traffic (Mainline traffic cannot enter the cycle/bus lanes, but I'd say junctions would be hellish to figure out)

    drumcondra-road.png


    Remember that cycleway needs to be fully segregated from traffic if you want to encourage major modal change to cycling.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I generally refer to Dublin in 4 quadrants, not 6 as you do, but different strokes and all. I think most people refer to it in 4 quadrants also. I think most cities are referred to this way, it's not a specific geographic term or one based on electoral districts or anything.




    I think that is dealt with making some of these villages one way for cars. Or if you look at the Blanchardstown route paying particular attention to the old cabra road-Stoneybatter section. There isn't space to provide for everything so the solution sought is that there will be no through access from one end to the other so the roads usefulness as an arterial commuter route for cars is gone and the only cars remaining are local access. This is a decent solution provided it's enforced.



    modal shift and evaporation




    Indeed the changes are depending on one key aspect, enforcement. The 24hr bus lane on the quays is great in theory but most of the time it's full of audis.
    We need to move toward a society where rules are actually enforced. Not just in terms of traffic management but also in all aspects of society.

    I defy anyone to tell me that somewhere due south of the city centre is anywhere but south?

    Churchtown, Rathmines, Ballinteer are not in southwest Dublin by any stretch of the imagination.

    The potential restrictions on traffic in the likes of Rathmines, Terenure and Rathgar are going to be the contentious issue.

    I also think you’re being extraordinarily optimistic about the “modal shift and evaporation” in the areas outside of the city centre that are the main bottlenecks. Much of the traffic passing those south central areas is not going to the city centre and I don’t share your opinion that it’s going to magically go away.


  • Options
    #703
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    riddlinrussell wrote: »
    Something like what I have below? Meaning bus lanes are fully segregated and buses cannot enter the mainline traffic (Mainline traffic cannot enter the cycle/bus lanes, but I'd say junctions would be hellish to figure out)

    drumcondra-road.png


    Remember that cycleway needs to be fully segregated from traffic if you want to encourage major modal change to cycling.

    So cyclists have to cross the bus lane to get to the cycle lane, and they have traffic on both sides rather than one side, and they have to cross a bus lane to turn left, and if the bus lane ends...

    I'd rather cycle behind a bus stop now and again.


  • Options
    #704
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    bk wrote: »
    ^^^

    The removal of the choke point in front of the Cat & Cage in Drumcondra, just 100 meters of bus lanes had a massive impact on reducing my journey into town. Cut it almost in half!

    It really showed me that removing choke points like these can really have massive positive effect. I can't wait to see more improvements like this on my route and see the same benefits being rolled out across the city.

    Big difference between the Cat & Cage and the south Dublin pinch points where the buildings are all built right up to the footpath.


  • Options
    #705
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    RayCun wrote: »
    And how do they compare to the current cycling infrastructure in those areas?

    Are you saying we push accept a polished turd because previously we were just given a steaming pile of ****e?


  • Options
    #706
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Are you saying we push accept a polished turd because previously we were just given a steaming pile of ****e?

    No, I'm saying we welcome a massive improvement, even if it doesn't come with a ribbon on top.


  • Options
    #707
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    jvan wrote: »
    Haven't looked at the plan in detail and without knowing the routes very well its hard to match up drawings with actual places but there simply isn't enough space to cater for all road users. Is this plan trying to improve the Bus service or the cycle network. There has to be a compromise somewhere because as it is a lot of people are up in arms about loosing their gardens when in reality there should be more ground taken to accommodate everyone.
    As I've said in the Metrolink thread, there has to be collateral damage because without it the city will continue to grind to a halt.
    If the compromise has to be made it should car that loses out


  • Options
    #708
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    RayCun wrote: »
    No, I'm saying we welcome a massive improvement, even if it doesn't come with a ribbon on top.

    This is a once in a lifetime chance to get cycling infrastructure right on these routes , there won't be a second round of CPO's if we do it wrong now we are stuck with it for decades. So no I'll not welcome a polished turd thanks very much.


  • Options
    #709
    AlanG
    Registered Users Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭AlanG


    cgcsb wrote: »
    Or if you look at the Blanchardstown route paying particular attention to the old cabra road-Stoneybatter section. There isn't space to provide for everything so the solution sought is that there will be no through access from one end to the other so the roads usefulness as an arterial commuter route for cars is gone and the only cars remaining are local access. This is a decent solution provided it's enforced.

    The treatment of the Old cabra road on the Blanchardstown route seems very strange. They want to close this major route to all private through traffic including trucks even thought there is plenty of garden space that could be used to widen this route. Under the current plan the refusal to CPO on the Old Cabra road will force loads of traffic off a main road and onto local routes as there is no other major artery joining North West Dublin to the west of the city center.
    A cynic would say it seems almost designed to be rejected so the real plan could go through easier. Implementing a proper one way system in the area using Aughrim street would seem to make a lot more sense.


  • Options
    #710
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    I defy anyone to tell me that somewhere due south of the city centre is anywhere but south?
    It is south of the City Centre but if you are to consider Dublin as a whole and divide it into 4 quarters, it's the South West. If you were to divide Dublin into 6 or more segments then fine, but I think most people consider the 4 segments for the sake of identifying where something is generally.
    LXFlyer wrote: »
    I also think you’re being extraordinarily optimistic about the “modal shift and evaporation” in the areas outside of the city centre that are the main bottlenecks. Much of the traffic passing those south central areas is not going to the city centre and I don’t share your opinion that it’s going to magically go away.

    I couldn't say that they are all going to the City Centre but they are mostly using roads that are City Centre-Suburb so on that basis clearly many are using it that way. Bus connects also aims to improve non-radial journeys.


  • Options
    #711
    riddlinrussell
    Registered Users Posts: 978 ✭✭✭riddlinrussell


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    This is a once in a lifetime chance to get cycling infrastructure right on these routes , there won't be a second round of CPO's if we do it wrong now we are stuck with it for decades. So no I'll not welcome a polished turd thanks very much.

    To my mind this IS cycling infrastructure being done MOSTLY right on these routes. if there are minor issues with junctions, small areas, they can be tackled piecemeal following on from this. If the improvements listed were to double the number of people (voters) cycling along the route, doubling the number of people who deal with those issue spots/pinch points, wouldn't that increase the number demanding improvements to the route?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    bk wrote: »
    I can't wait to see more improvements like this on my route and see the same benefits being rolled out across the city.

    There in lies the problem. With a 2021 construction start date it'll be at least 2022 before the first minor improvements come into use. That's 4 years at least before the first, and easiest items are delivered.


  • Options
    #713
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    AlanG wrote: »
    The treatment of the Old cabra road on the Blanchardstown route seems very strange. They want to close this major route to all private through traffic including trucks even thought there is plenty of garden space that could be used to widen this route. Under the current plan the refusal to CPO on the Old Cabra road will force loads of traffic off a main road and onto local routes as there is no other major artery joining North West Dublin to the west of the city center.
    A cynic would say it seems almost designed to be rejected so the real plan could go through easier. Implementing a proper one way system in the area using Aughrim street would seem to make a lot more sense.

    There isn't much garden space for CPO when you get down close to Lidl.


  • Options
    #714
    Brian CivilEng
    Registered Users Posts: 1,016 ✭✭✭Brian CivilEng


    While overall Bus Connects is one big project, the beauty of it is that it can be done incrementally. If we built the airport Metrolink station tomorrow, it would be useless until the tunnel and at least one other station opened. Whereas if we just built the airport roundabout section of Bus Connects, there would be minor benefits immediately. This also has the advantage of allowing planning, costs etc. to be split into minor packages, a hold up getting permission to construct a section in Santry wouldn't stop the rest the system being built, whereas with Metrolink we could have Dunville Ave and Na Fianna adding years on to the opening date.

    Obviously the system as a whole will have much greater benefits than the sum of it's parts, but if only half of the proposals are built in 5 years time, then it would still be better than waiting another 5 years for the first "big bang" capacity increase.


  • Options
    #715
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    cgcsb wrote: »
    It is south of the City Centre but if you are to consider Dublin as a whole and divide it into 4 quarters, it's the South West. If you were to divide Dublin into 6 or more segments then fine, but I think most people consider the 4 segments for the sake of identifying where something is generally.

    I couldn't say that they are all going to the City Centre but they are mostly using roads that are City Centre-Suburb so on that basis clearly many are using it that way. Bus connects also aims to improve non-radial journeys.

    I think you’d be very surprised. Much of the traffic branches off the Templeogue QBC in Rathmines, Rathgar and Terenure for example not going anywhere the city centre.

    I’d like to see how (apart from frequency increases) you can improve the orbital routes through inner south central area - there are no plans in the current phase of this project to change the infrastructure so journey times aren’t going to improve.

    Easier to do along the corridors used by the 75 & 175 but not really along the route taken by the 18 and the western part of the 17. Any extra buses will be clogged up.


  • Options
    #716
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    I think you’d be very surprised. Much of the traffic branches off the Templeogue QBC in Rathmines, Rathgar and Terenure for example not going anywhere the city centre.

    Can you quantify that?


  • Options
    #717
    Nermal
    Registered Users Posts: 2,614 ✭✭✭Nermal


    L1011 wrote: »
    Lucan corridor does not have sufficient improvements to deliver the claimed inbound reductions tbh.

    You'd need to tackle the N4/Kennelsfort and N4/Oval junctions and Con Colbert Rd to shave anything significant off really, disappointing that nothing's planned there.


  • Options
    #718
    TCM
    Registered Users Posts: 736 ✭✭✭TCM


    It would be great to have an improved bus service here in Swords where the A route will serve Swords to town at a rate of 1 every 4-8 minutes.
    The problem is that presently the 41, A, B, C service etc is completely unreliable. Busses regularly disappear from the live timetable or simply don't turn up. When contacted Dublin bus just say that the bus didn't run for "operational reasons"
    So, new routes or not, if the shambles of a service continues then the whole thing is pointless.


  • Options
    #719
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    RayCun wrote: »
    Can you quantify that?

    I can quantify it by the fact that there are tailbacks every morning along the length of Orwell Park, Highfield Rd and Charleston Rd/Castlewood Avenue.

    That traffic ain’t going to town but is using the main corridor for some of the trip.


  • Options
    #720
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    TCM wrote: »
    It would be great to have an improved bus service here in Swords where the A route will serve Swords to town at a rate of 1 every 4-8 minutes.
    The problem is that presently the 41, A, B, C service etc is completely unreliable. Busses regularly disappear from the live timetable or simply don't turn up. When contacted Dublin bus just say that the bus didn't run for "operational reasons"
    So, new routes or not, if the shambles of a service continues then the whole thing is pointless.

    The PSO bus service between the city and Swords will drop from the current 6-8 per hour between the 33, 41 group and 43 in the off-peak to 4 under this plan.

    Similarly the airport PSO bus service from the city will drop from 8-9 per hour to 4.

    Not quite an improvement.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    I can quantify it by the fact that there are tailbacks every morning along the length of Orwell Park, Highfield Rd and Charleston Rd/Castlewood Avenue.

    That traffic ain’t going to town but is using the main corridor for some of the trip.

    But how does that compare to the level of traffic that continues on the main corridor? And why is modal shift - onto the S4 orbital route - not a possibility?


Advertisement