Smiles35 wrote: » Making full use of those new cycle tracks means pulling the thumb out as regards legislation for electric bikes/scooters.
Seth Brundle wrote: » Which cycle tracks? Most cycle tracks are not fit for purpose and in many cases they're just dangerous!
Smiles35 wrote: » New cycle tracks are coming as part of the BusConnects works. Can I ask what are your issues are with the cycle tracks? I was under the impression that slow but good progress was being made on them.
machaseh wrote: » Is busconnects ever even going to happen? Where are they currently working as we speak to realize busconnects and the associated bike paths? I'd like to see so I can go there to take a few pictures.
Smiles35 wrote: » New cycle tracks are coming as part of the BusConnects works. Can I ask what your issues are with the cycle tracks? I was under the impression that slow but good progress was being made on them.
Seth Brundle wrote: » I hadn't realised that you were referring to new cycle paths under BC (which I am unaware of or have not seen/used). I assumed that you meant the existing crap that is referred to as a cycle path, which with very few exceptions, is not fit for purpose. Anyone who asks what's wrong with the existing ones hasn't used them.
CatInABox wrote: » I'm lucky enough to have the Sutton to Sandycove cycleway nearby, that's about the only one that springs to mind as great.
MJohnston wrote: » Repeat after me: You can't encourage people out of their cars without better public transport. You can't make public transport better without removing cars from the road. That might look like a chicken and the egg scenario, but it's not. The only approach that works is to start banning cars, then the public transport will almost immediately start improving. We've tried it the other way around for decades, and it's a gigantic fúcking failure.
MJohnston wrote: » How quickly do you think that can happen? 10 years? 20 years? How much time do you actually think we have left to solve this problem? No, we can plan Metros and Luas lines, but they take a long, long time to happen.
Bull****. My cycle route takes me from Baggot Street along Pembroke Road, then out along the R118 out through Blackrock. Every single day there's a solid queue of traffic from the RDS to Monkstown Road Every. single. day. Heading into the city in the morning, heading out of it in the afternoon. This is a queue of traffic that sits choking on fumes on a road that runs DIRECTLY PARALLEL TO A DART LINE. But if that wasn't enough, there's also a mostly empty bus lane with frequent buses zooming along beside the queue of traffic (when a German car driver doesn't choose to decide the bus lane is fine for him, that is). Those car drivers are easily spending 2 or 3 times the amount of time commuting as anyone on the DART or bus, along that stretch. And they're at least 3 times slower than my fat ass zooming along easily on my bike. Even if those drivers have a journey that gets more complicated compared to the available public transport beyond Blackrock, the fact is that they've chosen to pass at least 3 or 4 park and ride carparks to get to or from their workplace in the city. Even if those P+Rs are full, the area is strewn with easily accessible on-street parking. They'd have to switch modes once, but I guarantee each and every one of those car drivers would save at least 20 minutes of journey time each way each day. By the way, it's of course worth noting that the vast majority of these cars are occupied BY ONE PERSON. Fúck these people. Seriously, **** em. There should be no placating this kind of mindlessly stupid and selfish behaviour anymore. Time for the cars to go.
Last Stop wrote: » So a simple question. Let’s ban the cars. What do you do with the 35,000 people who were driving towards the M50 yesterday morning? We’ve established that the buses are full and we all know about the capacity issues on DART and Luas. I’m guessing because they are outside the M50 that they are not in a position to cycle. What do you do with the 35,000 people??
Last Stop wrote: » So what’s the alternative? If you’re basing your argument to ban cars on the above scenario then there’s no point debating with you because you’re out of touch with reality. The DART is at capacity. In case you don’t understand, that means there’s no more room so it’s rather irrelevant whether or they’d be quicker. Park and ride has the same issue. That bus corridor is presumably are full too and serves just 2 routes. Keep in mind also that depending on where you are commuting from that part of the city is a pain to get to by public transport. To get there from PortLaoise to Ballsbridge for example would involve a train to Heuston, a Luas to Connolly and then the DART or bus. Even with traffic you’d still probably be quicker by car. It’s the same for a number of other journeys. Yes some people would be quicker to PT but without investment a significant number wouldn’t be and have no alternative but to drive.
loyatemu wrote: » people always say that when any suggestions are made to reduce car access to the city. What they mean is they'll leave the car at home when there's a metro station outside their front door that goes straight to their office. The reason the bus service is unreliable is because of the cars. Carrot and stick approach is required.
MJohnston wrote: » You are the problem. You. Your attitude. Where are YOUR suggestions? Come on, lay your smarts on us. Hint: "Keep on driving" is an idiot's idea of a plan.
Zebra3 wrote: » I actually think it's not so much car bans that are needed, but a removal of car parking spaces and road space for cars to cycling/PT lanes and for wider footpaths. Probably easier to introduce by stealth and give the clickbaiters in our dire media less fake outrage.
MJohnston wrote: » Use the extraordinarily huge amounts of space just freed up on the roads to introduce extremely reliable buses travelling at full tilt towards various points of the city centre. Realistically though, you're being far too extreme - I'm talking about car bans much closer in than the M50. Between the canals would be a good start. Phase bans in with a DCC-implemented congestion charge at first, to make up for a small amount of the revenue lost from the total removal of on-street parking from the city centre. You can also probably recoup a little more of that over time due to decreased road maintenance costs. There should certainly be a massive concerted effort to increase the amount of Park and Ride space available near major transport arteries. Encourage the expansion of a Dublin Bikes style scheme with pedelecs to these areas - allow people to drive to a Park and Cycle area and zip into the city on an electrically assisted bike. Legislate for the safe and legit use of e-scooters, and allow the entry of companies like Lime or Lyft to run a couple of e-scooter schemes. It doesn't look like you need to do much work to encourage courier companies to adopt non-van solutions for last-mile deliveries. They'll be more aware than most of the cost savings it will bring. DPD for example. I'm sure there are plenty more things authorities could do. It's not a new idea, there are so many cities who have successfully implemented car bans and congestion charges. Let's ask the experts from those cities for advice - Dublin isn't some unique, one-off situation that can never be fixed. Above all else - accept that this is the future of commuting in Dublin. We've tried it the car way, and it has been disastrous. For the city, for transport, for all our health, for children. There is no possible way to make things better for car commuters. None. Anyone who suggests otherwise is just pedaling some snake oil nonsense. And it's not like the status quo will maintain. Things are getting worse, and will keep getting worse. We haven't got the time to wait 10+ years for new Metros or new Luas lines. Change has to happen now. Where are the suggestions from the car lobby? What are the proposals to help? More lanes on the M50? Bury their heads in the tarmac? **** those people.
Last Stop wrote: » I have suggested on here from the very start the provision of several Luas lines to provide high capacity transpor on a number of corridors. Now that we have that, what’s your solution besides blaming cars?
Last Stop wrote: » But the buses are already at full capacity . Removing cars doesn’t create more space for buses if there’s no buses to fill the space.
MJohnston wrote: » Not. A. Solution. Are you incapable of reading posts? Unwilling? Able and willing but willfully ignorant? It took nearly 7 years to construct a single, short extension to an existing Luas line. It'll take at least 10 years to plan and construct any entirely new lines. This is not a solution.
MJohnston wrote: » This is utter nonsense. Buy more ****ing buses. Jesus christ.
Last Stop wrote: » Yeah because there is a bus shop which just has loads of buses on standby ready for Dublin...
Enduro wrote: » So you think buying some buses is too logistically complicated, but your alternative solution will be to magic up a few luas lines, with some easily acquired luas trams to go with them. Seriously?!!!!!
Last Stop wrote: » Nope. The point I was making is that buses will not appear overnight (they could take 2-3 years to deliver). We have a tender out for 600 at the moment. So banning cars in the morning as MJohnston is suggested will not work. Yes Luas lines is a longer term solution but it would be the best use of resources
CatInABox wrote: » One of the problem with the current bus service is the fact that buses get caught in traffic for significant lengths of their journey, meaning that they then can't do their scheduled return journey. Dublin Bus and the NTA have gotten around this by running an "out of service" bus out to the end of the line, and using that bus for the scheduled return journey. Removing cars would allow the current buses to run faster and more reliably, meaning that such "out of service" bus runs wouldn't be needed as much. This, in effect, means that we'll have more working buses on our roads for longer, and a higher capacity service. This is actually one of the stated aims of BusConnects. Of course, we don't actually need BusConnects to get the same effect, removing cars would have the same result.
loyatemu wrote: » there's also the problem of bunching - 3 buses show up, then a huge gap. This is very inefficient and reduces the overall capacity of the system.
MJohnston wrote: » You're not interested in solving this problem in the way it actually needs to be done.
I suspect if Dublin Bus could more reliably predict their schedules with no cars clogging up the place, we would require a lot fewer new buses than you predict. Even if we needed hundreds of them, that would be a tiny drop in the ocean of expenditure compared to the cost of a new Luas line.
That doesn't mean I don't think we should be planning new Luas lines, but to suggest that you can't do both things is downright silly. How do you have the fúcking gall to write off purchasing a fleet of buses as unreasonable, while at the same time proposing that we should build multiple new Luas lines CONCURRENTLY? Are you that detached from reality?
