dublinman1990 wrote: What does anyone think of it.
Grassey wrote: » That none of them have ever taken a bus from rathfarnham to town currently.
dublinman1990 wrote: » I've just seen the petition against the proposals on the Rathfarnham to City Centre on Change.org.https://www.change.org/p/leo-varadkar-stop-the-destruction-of-communities-by-busconnects-corridor-12?original_footer_petition_id=13114551&algorithm=promoted&source_location=petition_footer&grid_position=2&pt=AVBldGl0aW9uAA8p2wAAAAAAXNi2xn7jIT9iYzFjOWMwOA%3D%3D What does anyone think of it. Do you think it will stand up to scrutiny? Do some of these people live in those big mansions within Dublin 6?
Rulmeq wrote: » Love how they play down "to save 7 minutes" - yeah, that's 7 minutes to everyone on the bus, every day (probably twice a day). That's a lot of time, and a lot of people. That's 3,360 minutes (56 hours) per person, per year (assuming 7minutes, twice a day, 5 days a week, for 48 weeks a year). If there's 50 people on the bus that's an entire year's worth of lost productivity.
salmocab wrote: » I think more important than the actual time saved is the consistency, that’s where the current services are really lacking. If you know the run to your destination will take 35/40 minutes you are much more likely to take it over a 30/60 minute run.
Lofidelity wrote: » Why is nobody talking about congestion charges? Something like 7am-7pm between the canals. Its the only way to get people out of their cars and onto a bus.
salmocab wrote: » There has to be viable alternatives before we could force thousands out of their cars. There isn’t room for people on buses and trams at the moment.
Lofidelity wrote: » Bring it in gradually but there needs to be a culture shift that driving a car to work is no longer viable. Increase bus numbers and frequency. Can be done much faster and cheaper than Luas or metro. They faced this dilemma in Amsterdam in the middle of the last century. The choice was, fill in canals and build wider streets, or stop giving priority to cars on the narrow streets.
marno21 wrote: » The NTA's line on congestion charging is that it's not feasible until there is a proper alternative in place.
sharper wrote: » Currently, for whatever reason, it's not even possible to get cars following the basic rules of the road on the quays and elsewhere in the city centre. Something obviously has to change but even basic enforcement would probably improve things as much as a congestion charge.
LeinsterDub wrote: » The NTA are also planning to widen km's of road to keep private vehicles happy and build a 700 M ring road around Galway ahead of an orbital bus route. The NTA aren't radical enough
marno21 wrote: » The Galway Ring Road is TII, not NTA. The NTA have to work within the limitations of being a statutory body bound by Government policy. They can't do what they like. If we had an NTA 20 years ago we mightn't be in such a mess we're in now.
cgcsb wrote: » -remove BT and arnotts multi storey and replace them with housing.
cgcsb wrote: » While initially successful in London it's become ineffective in the long term. It now just acts as a class barrier. In terms of mode choice if you have a car and free work place parking, you'll drive, no matter what else is on offer. Reducing car use can be better tackled with:-taxing work place parking as a bik -reducing street parking to a handful of disabled spaces, e.g. charging points and loading areas -remove BT and arnotts multi storey and replace them with housing. - no body wants to peruse these policies because of public perception but I expect you'll hear about them when metro is being built and there's a few new cbc in operation
AlmightyCushion wrote: » How does that one work? Will employees only pay BIK on a parking space that is designated just for them? What about workplaces that have general pool of parking spaces for employees but they're not designated to any one employee? Would they have to pay BIK whether they drive or not?
salmocab wrote: » Bus connects is trying to increase bus numbers and frequency but if we throw extra vehicles onto the roads with no infrastructure we will slow the city down more. Metro is needed badly as it will take a lot of pressure off the north side. I doubt anyone on here thinks we don’t need a culture shift bit without real alternatives telling people to stop driving will do nothing but cause trouble.
LXFlyer wrote: » Bus connects is NOT increasing frequency to/from the city centre. Let’s be clear about that. The revised network plan involved reducing the number of buses through the city centre and reallocating them to orbital routes. Don’t get me wrong - more orbitals are needed but not at the expense of capacity to/from the city. ..... Since 2018 Dublin Bus have increased frequency further on many routes through the city and whatever the NTA come up with in September is going to have to reflect that. The frequency has also increased on existing orbitals and the 175 has been introduced too.
bk wrote: » What a load of rubbish! Dublin Bus have increased frequency on core routes since 2018, because the NTA gave 10% of their routes, the quieter local ones and orbital routes to GoAhead and the NTA have increased the overall size of the Dublin city bus fleet (DB + GA combined) by 10%. Thus DB were able to move their big double deckers from quiet local routes to the core routes. This was all done under the direction of the NTA and as part of BusConnects. DB can't just change routes or increase frequencies themselves! Routes and frequencies are set by the NTA, not DB. And the buses are bought by the NTA. Everything you are talking about above is NTA actions.
LXFlyer wrote: » I was referring to the BusConnects network plans in the post above, not the NTA in general.
All changes have been approved by the National Transport Authority.
bk wrote: » That is your problem. BusConnects is the NTA! Exactly the same people who created the BusConnects plan, are the people who put out the 10% of routes out to tender, decided which routes, are approving increases in frequency, etc. This is what you are failing to grasp. What has been happening the past few months is BusConnects. BusConnects is just a marketing name that includes a whole rake of different bus service improvement plans that these folks in the NTA (and yes DB/GA) have been working hard on over the last few years and planning for the next few years. We have already seen parts of this plan start to deliver: - GA getting 10% of routes. - Increase in the number of buses by 10% - DB buses shifting to core routes to increase frequency - Increased frequency off peak We are likely to see the following in the next year or so: - Flat Fare/T90 ticket - Next gen ticketing Obviously the infrastructure side is the really big bit, but that will take years. But all the rest has been quietly been worked on over the past few months with constant announcements of schedule and frequency improvements. DB didn't just decide to do these. It was the NTA who decided to increase the bus fleet by 10%, fund it and decided where those buses went and decided to put 10% of routes out to tender. You'll also remember that the NTA when then announced GA winning the tender, put out a FAQ where they said that DB would lose no buses or drivers and that their buses will instead be moved to increase frequency on core routes. So clearly this has always been the NTA's intent. Sure, I've no doubt that DB gave input on which routes should gain the extra buses, etc. They have the on the ground experience. This is how a partnership like this should work. But clearly this strategic change is being made by the NTA as part of their BusConnects plans. That is why every press release from DB about these changes includes the following: The NTA certainly wouldn't be improving these changes if it didn't suit their plans!
LXFlyer wrote: » I shall repeat that in my original post I was referring to the revised network plan published in 2018 by Jarrett Walker and his team and how it planned to reassign the fleet from city services to orbitals. The plan was predicated on that fact. I was clear about that in my initial post.
LXFlyer wrote: The revised network plan involved reducing the number of buses through the city centre and reallocating them to orbital routes. Don’t get me wrong - more orbitals are needed but not at the expense of capacity to/from the city.
Additional service would be provided at peak hours to limit overcrowding. The proposed network features additional peak-hour frequencies on most routes.
LXFlyer wrote: As for implementing frequency changes I think that you’ll find that it has actually in general been up to DB to implement the service changes as it sees best fit, based on operational requirements, albeit subject to NTA approval, which in general is forthcoming. That has been my understanding of the process and I’m not aware of it having changed. I am fully aware of what BusConnects embraces, and don’t need it explained to me again, but thanks anyway.
