mad m wrote: » A taxi can use a normal (with-flow) bus lane only while it is operating as an SPSV – carrying a passenger, on the way to pick up a pre-booked customer, or plying for hire. Taxis must not use bus lanes if they are not operating as an SPSV – for example, driving home at the end of a shift, travelling on personal business, or transporting only goods and not passengers. Taxis are not allowed to use contra-flow bus lanes (in which traffic travels in the opposite direction to the traffic beside it) under any circumstances. Hackneys and limousines are not permitted to use bus lanes.
Hotale.com wrote: » If everyone used public transport we'd all get around more quickly and therefore productivity would increase, therefore by using your own car you cost the economy money.
Ray Palmer wrote: » They were always allowed use them as are cyclists. They are actually commuter lanes but named bus lanes for convenience. Some are strictly bus lanes that only busses can us, counter-flow one are the only such ones AFAIK
Spook_ie wrote: » Thinly veiled "Taxis can use the new bridge I can't Boo Hoo" thread
patrickpc wrote: » When did society decide that Taxis should be allowed to use bus lanes? Isn't this just another case of the richer in society (those who can afford to take taxis) benefitting at everyone's else expense? Not to mention the likes of Michael O'Leary who had his own private Taxi back in the boom. Does anyone else think this is wrong?
Tail Docker wrote: » I can hear the roars of the Truck-drivers from here.
endacl wrote: » You'd wear a top hat with a tuxedo? Between the hours of 7am to 7 pm? The tuxedo is only to be worn from dusk to dawn. Where did you go to school? My dear chap, I very much fear that it is you the peasants might be laughing at!
Santa Cruz wrote: » Meaning no control over what type of scum sits beside you. I'll pay for a taxi instead
seamus wrote: » Well if you're being reasonable about it, taxis are operating a business which depends on the ability to move about on the roads, much like busses. If they cannot move about freely on the roads, then their ability to carry out their business is effectively crippled and they go under. As much of a pain in the ass taxi drivers are, they do provide a valuable function to the economy by providing direct public transport between areas which may not be linked by other forms of public transport. This is vital for the tourism sector. They also provide a valuable social function by allowing those who are infirm to make trips from their home when they might otherwise be unable to do so. People on dialysis for example may have to go to the hospital multiple times per week. They're too sick to take the bus (or live nowhere near a bus stop) but not so sick that they should tie up an ambulance. Taxis fill in this gap. Private vehicles by contrast provide minimal benefit to the economy at large, since the vast majority of commuters in the Dublin region drive by choice rather than necessity. A private commuter driving to work costs the economy money, whereas a taxi operating on the roads contributes to it. I would support light commercial vehicles using bus lanes in the city centre during certain times for the same reason that taxis can use them.
c_man wrote: » I cost the economy money by driving to work...? Care to explain that one
seamus wrote: » A private commuter driving to work costs the economy money, whereas a taxi operating on the roads contributes to it.
super_furry wrote: » Nothing I like more that putting on my top hat and monocle, having my tuxedo freshly pressed and sitting in the back of a taxi to laugh at the peasants.
Hotale.com wrote: » Have taxis become an upper class thing? I can still get to anywhere in my town for a fiver in a taxi, that's not exactly gonna break the bank.
patrickpc wrote: » Ok by the same logic - buses would work better if there weren't taxis in the bus lanes.
Birneybau wrote: » Public transport?
