nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Liffey quays cycle route: Detailed drawings online

monument

Here: http://www.dublincitycycling.ie/blog/?p=1479

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

Look I appreciate that you have a particular interest from the cycling perspective, but please stop trying to belittle the impact on public transport. At peak times this is not going to add "only seconds" to bus journeys and trying to suggest otherwise is just not realistic. At least 95 Dublin Bus vehicles in one hour plus everything else thrown in are going to experience longer journeys.

This is the principal public transport corridor for most of west Dublin and funnelling every bus/coach from that direction down a road that will lead to two T Junctions is not a viable prospect.

I'm absolutely in favour of developing improved cycling facilities in this city, but they should be in tandem with improved public transport - not at it's expense. That's a nonsense.

Focus on what I'm saying rather than what you think I'm saying, please and thank you.

Can you accept the benefits around capacity, tourism, health, sustainable? Or not? If not why not?

Where are the two T-junctions?

Where am I'm belittling the delay? What delay would you put on it? It will be quicker for buses coming from Blackhall Place, it will avoid the current mess of a bus stop before the Four Courts.

beauf

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

... the cyclists all want option 3 or 2 without consideration for anyone else.....

In fairness a couple of us have mentioned option 4 as worthy of consideration.

monument

Option 3 is the only one I'd concider because it's the most balanced for all users. Option 2 would be worse for buses and option 1 would have too many walking/cycling conflicts.

Option 4 is in ways worse than what's there now because it's narrow segregation where it's least needed and exposed at junctions. It has low benefits because it won't be attractive to many more people than are already willing to cycle in current conditions.

LXFlyer

monument wrote: »

Focus on what I'm saying rather than what you think I'm saying, please and thank you.

Can you accept the benefits around capacity, tourism, health, sustainable? Or not? If not why not?

Where are the two T-junctions?

Where am I'm belittling the delay? What delay would you put on it? It will be quicker for buses coming from Blackhall Place, it will avoid the current mess of a bus stop before the Four Courts.

I am focussing on what you are saying - your posts have continually expressed a view that changes that have negative impacts on public transport, specifically buses and coaches, are not necessarily a bad thing, be it in this case or in the re-routing of buses via Westland Row and Pearse Street due to LUAS BXD.

I find that view really infuriating - we should be trying to encourage cycling and public transport and making using the car a less attractive option.

This is the biggest public transport corridor from West Dublin into the city and while there are benefits for cyclists (and rightly so), the public transport users (who any plans ought to be trying to encourage) are discommoded, while car users seem to be virtually untouched.

There are 2 T Junctions:
1 - Turning from Hammond Lane into Church Street
2 - Turning from Church Street back onto the North Quays

I cannot take your suggestion that funnelling 90 buses and probably another 20 coaches during one hour down that route and through a signal controlled junction with a yellow box onto a short stretch of road leading to another signal controlled T-junction (T from buses perspective) is going to add "seconds" to a journey that is currently a straight line route at peak times. I just can't.

cgcsb

Option 3 seems to be coming out on top with slightly less disruption for buses. Why is diverting cars, instead of buses off the quays not an option?

desertcircus

monument wrote: »

Red light camera already in place at nearby junction, once can be put in place at Church St.

Transport and tourism benefits outweigh a very small, if any peak time delay to buses.

Much of the cycling traffic is crossing the river so the delay is minimal to none.

A cycle path on the right-hand side of traffic, if it's used, will require cyclists to cross lanes when entering and exiting, whether on the quays or on the bridges. And a lot of cyclists simply won't bother using such a system; they'll simply stay on the road instead.

monument

cgcsb wrote: »

Option 3 seems to be coming out on top with slightly less disruption for buses. Why is diverting cars, instead of buses off the quays not an option?

Diverting cars would mean cars crossing bus lanes twice and would mean a larger impact on buses.

desertcircus wrote: »

A cycle path on the right-hand side of traffic, if it's used, will require cyclists to cross lanes when entering and exiting, whether on the quays or on the bridges. And a lot of cyclists simply won't bother using such a system; they'll simply stay on the road instead.

People said the same about the canal route yet it carries far more that the parallel cycle lanes. Also, there won't be room in many places to stay on the road, unless you want to go slowly along slow moving traffic (ie Option 2/3 from Blackhall Place to Church Street at rush hour).

Re crossing lanes -- in most cases, it will be at signalised junctions so it won't be "crossing" lanes of traffic in the normal since -- it will be more like going straight on and then turning:

My big question is how are they planning to do right turns for bicycles on bridges northbound and turning right to go eastbound -- that'll require good design and signalising.

A lot will depend on signalising. That's a bit of a worry of mine.

lxflyer wrote: »

I am focussing on what you are saying - your posts have continually expressed a view that changes that have negative impacts on public transport, specifically buses and coaches, are not necessarily a bad thing, be it in this case or in the re-routing of buses via Westland Row and Pearse Street due to LUAS BXD.

My stance on diverting buses is a pragmatic one due to everything not fitting into College Green and it being better for all modes not to try to do such -- if you look back to older BXD threads, you'll find my posts were saying that Luas should go around.

lxflyer wrote: »

I find that view really infuriating - we should be trying to encourage cycling and public transport and making using the car a less attractive option.

I agree, but sometimes the best solution is to move buses, as in this case because moving cars to the building side would create two major crossovers which would impact on buses more so than the Option 3.

lxflyer wrote: »

This is the biggest public transport corridor from West Dublin into the city and while there are benefits for cyclists (and rightly so), the public transport users (who any plans ought to be trying to encourage) are discommoded,.....

I'm not talking about "benefits for cyclists" -- the capacity benefits are benefits for the city and employment; the tourism benefits are benefits for the city and employment, the health benefits are benefits for the health service and the taxpayer as well as individuals, and the sustainability benefits is a benefit for the city and its people, not just those who cycle.

The phrase "for cyclists" also edges towards the misleading because most will read it as for current bicycle users when cycling is going to account for a far larger modal share than it does now.

lxflyer wrote: »

.....while car users seem to be virtually untouched.

Most options include omitting parking along the quays and the removal of a general traffic lane from Capel Street to O'Connell Bridge, etc

lxflyer wrote: »

There are 2 T Junctions:
1 - Turning from Hammond Lane into Church Street
2 - Turning from Church Street back onto the North Quays

Fair enough, but the Church St and the north quays isn't a T-junction -- it's a slip junction at one side of a four-way junction.

I've said before that there's no real reason why they don't make that a fully protected turn for buses that can be green all the time bar when pedestrians are crossing.

lxflyer wrote: »

I cannot take your suggestion that funnelling 90 buses and probably another 20 coaches during one hour down that route and through a signal controlled junction with a yellow box onto a short stretch of road leading to another signal controlled T-junction (T from buses perspective) is going to add "seconds" to a journey that is currently a straight line route at peak times. I just can't.

As I've said: It will be faster for some buses such as the ones coming from Blackhall Place; other benefits include the removal of the vast bulk of bicycles from the bus lane and it will avoid the poor junction before the Four Courts.

The design could do with some tweaking and red light enforcement cameras should be put on all bus/Luas junctions.

My main issue with the way buses are treated is in the Docklands -- parking being kept with no justification such as local shops, rather than retaining bus lanes etc.

Greenmachine

Option 3 seems the most bizarre. Are they planning on giving that section of the north quay to grass and two cycle lanes. If they can reroute buses along benburb street why not send the cyclists that way.

monument

Greenmachine wrote: »

Option 3 seems the most bizarre. Are they planning on giving that section of the north quay to grass and two cycle lanes. If they can reroute buses along benburb street why not send the cyclists that way.

A quay-side park with grass footpaths and a cycle path. What's so bizarre? This is a city, not just a network of roads for commuters or anybody else. The population density along the quays is a massive 10,000 people per square KM. This is about more than just transport.

Why not reroute bicycles?

1. Because the cycle route is along the river-side and rerouting it would require people cycling to cross three lanes of traffic at both ends of the detour. OR if the traffic light times were bearable for cycling, it would have a far larger impact on all modes of transport as they have to wait longer.

2. Both options could have such a massive impact on cycling that people may not use the route.

3. For people using the cycle route westbound and back onto the south side, that detour would not be the first but second detour -- making the route very unattractive to them. And coming up with an alternative to a the madness that is cycling on the south quays is a big part of this project.

4. Even if there were not the above reason, accomadation local access and a two-way cycle route would be a lot harder than putting in a bus lane.

hmmm

monument wrote: »

I'm not talking about "benefits for cyclists" -- the capacity benefits are benefits for the city and employment; the tourism benefits are benefits for the city and employment, the health benefits are benefits for the health service and the taxpayer as well as individuals, and the sustainability benefits is a benefit for the city and its people, not just those who cycle.

No-ones arguing about the benefits of a cycle lane along the quays. What is the question is whether sacrificing the bus commuters who travel via that route is the correct answer to the question.

The travel time at rush hour for commuters from Lucan is currently about an hour, with those coming from places like Leixlip, Celbridge & Maynooth even longer. You could say "move closer to the city then", but it has been the (stupid) planning policy to build what are effectively massive suburbs in West Dublin which have a large commuter population.

Giving Helga and Helmut a more pleasant cycle route down the quays on the way to the zoo is hardly a good argument for creating what looks like a massive bottleneck for bus commuters along that route. The above poster who describes it as a new Suffolk street is exactly right, that junction looks like an absolute nightmare, and we'll be lucky to get 3 or 4 buses through it at every light change - can you give any example of an existing similar junction that is coping with the level of bus traffic which currently uses the North Quays?

LXFlyer

monument wrote: »

My stance on diverting buses is a pragmatic one due to everything not fitting into College Green and it being better for all modes not to try to do such -- if you look back to older BXD threads, you'll find my posts were saying that Luas should go around.

I agree, but sometimes the best solution is to move buses, as in this case because moving cars to the building side would create two major crossovers which would impact on buses more so than the Option 3.

Well you will forgive me, if I fundamentally disagree with your view on diverting the principal bus corridor from west Dublin from a direct route into one that leads into what are effectively for those buses two signalised T junctions.

And I have to say that at times I do find the tone of many of your posts (rightly or wrongly) as somewhat belittling the bus service in this city and the needs of its passengers. Suggesting that this diversion is going to just "add seconds" to people's journey times, particularly at peak times when journey times are critical, is just not a credible statement and comes across as that the buses don't really matter.

monument wrote: »

Fair enough, but the Church St and the north quays isn't a T-junction -- it's a slip junction at one side of a four-way junction.

I've said before that there's no real reason why they don't make that a fully protected turn for buses that can be green all the time bar when pedestrians are crossing.

I did qualify my comment about the Church Street/North Quays junction in the next paragraph as being a T Junction from the buses perspective.

It is effectively a T junction for buses as they will be turning left into what is a general traffic lane, from which the general traffic then merges into the lane outside before the bus lane starts. There is a strong risk that their path may be blocked at peak times by cars backed up to the junction.

monument wrote: »

As I've said: It will be faster for some buses such as the ones coming from Blackhall Place; other benefits include the removal of the vast bulk of bicycles from the bus lane and it will avoid the poor junction before the Four Courts.

The design could do with some tweaking and red light enforcement cameras should be put on all bus/Luas junctions.

I don't agree with this statement either - the 37, 39, 39a and 70 will just see the junction onto the Quays move from Blackhall Place to Church Street. They're still going to have to wait for the lights to change to get onto the Quays, and now all the other buses will have to as well, and the 83 and 83a may have to queue longer in Church Street.

The existing stop on the Quays before Church Street could be improved by redesigning it in a much safer manner in the existing location. No need to divert buses to do that.

monument

hmmm wrote: »

No-ones arguing about the benefits of a cycle lane along the quays. What is the question is whether sacrificing the bus commuters who travel via that route is the correct answer to the question.

The travel time at rush hour for commuters from Lucan is currently about an hour, with those coming from places like Leixlip, Celbridge & Maynooth even longer. You could say "move closer to the city then", but it has been the (stupid) planning policy to build what are effectively massive suburbs in West Dublin which have a large commuter population.

Giving Helga and Helmut a more pleasant cycle route down the quays on the way to the zoo is hardly a good argument for creating what looks like a massive bottleneck for bus commuters along that route. The above poster who describes it as a new Suffolk street is exactly right, that junction looks like an absolute nightmare, and we'll be lucky to get 3 or 4 buses through it at every light change - can you give any example of an existing similar junction that is coping with the level of bus traffic which currently uses the North Quays?

See the two lines which I've put in bold -- you clearly are arguing about the benefits of a cycle path along the quays. Here's 12 reasons why the Liffey Cycle Route should be supported -- I'd post it here but it'd make for quite a long post and over the image limit count.

The phrase "sacrificing the bus commuters" is hyperbold to the extreme.

hmmm

monument wrote: »

See the two lines which I've put in bold -- you clearly are arguing about the benefits of a cycle path along the quays.

No I am not. Perhaps you might stop picking out small pieces of posts out of context.

I am arguing the choice of route and the choice to discommode bus passengers.

Greenmachine

We seem to be giving more and more road space to cyclist without them contributing to the costs. We can provide all these cycle lanes and the cyclist won't even have to use them. Can't we come up with some kind of grading systems for cycle lanes and declare that cyclist are obliged to use higher category lane where they are provided. And cycle slower where hazards exist.

ezra_pound

Greenmachine wrote: »

We seem to be giving more and more road space to cyclist without them contributing to the costs. We can provide all these cycle lanes and the cyclist won't even have to use them. Can't we come up with some kind of grading systems for cycle lanes and declare that cyclist are obliged to use higher category lane where they are provided. And cycle slower where hazards exist.

We've only begun giving space over to cyclists. We've got a long way to go. We need to greatly increase the incentives and facilities for cycling. And all traffic should show down where hazards exist.

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

Well you will forgive me, if I fundamentally disagree with your view on diverting the principal bus corridor from west Dublin from a direct route into one that leads into what are effectively for those buses two signalised T junctions.

And I have to say that at times I do find the tone of many of your posts (rightly or wrongly) as somewhat belittling the bus service in this city and the needs of its passengers. Suggesting that this diversion is going to just "add seconds" to people's journey times, particularly at peak times when journey times are critical, is just not a credible statement and comes across as that the buses don't really matter.

The full quote: "Should what may only amount to seconds of a delay come before extra added route capacity, high tourism benefits, health benefits, safety benefits, and sustainably benefits?"

You have yet to answer it or offer how long you think the delay will be. I think the main affect will be on off-peak buses, peek buses just need a small bit of priority to be kept moving but they are not usually bombing it down the quays.

And the junctions are not even close to T-junctions -- and this really does matter here...

lxflyer wrote: »

I did qualify my comment about the Church Street/North Quays junction in the next paragraph as being a T Junction from the buses perspective.

It is effectively a T junction for buses as they will be turning left into what is a general traffic lane, from which the general traffic then merges into the lane outside before the bus lane starts. There is a strong risk that their path may be blocked at peak times by cars backed up to the junction.

The traffic light sequence even on the current filter / slip turn onto the quays is nothing like a T-junction. Traffic turning left off the single leg of a T-junction has a longer and more independent cycle than traffic turning left onto the quays (which happens when northbound and southbound traffic also have green). By switching where buses are will also have to mean quicker cycles which give the quays less priority.

lxflyer wrote: »

I don't agree with this statement either - the 37, 39, 39a and 70 will just see the junction onto the Quays move from Blackhall Place to Church Street. They're still going to have to wait for the lights to change to get onto the Quays, and now all the other buses will have to as well, and the 83 and 83a may have to queue longer in Church Street.

(A) Being left to their own devices and joining the quays as they currently do.
(B) Joining the quays with a whole load of other buses

Under which option are the Blackhall Place buses more likely to get greater priority?

lxflyer wrote: »

The existing stop on the Quays before Church Street could be improved by redesigning it in a much safer manner in the existing location. No need to divert buses to do that.

Keeping left turns, keeping right turns, keeping bicycles on the building side, and redesigning the bus stop in any meaningful way... good luck with that!

LXFlyer

Monument - I'm just not going to bother arguing this with you anymore - it's pointless, as it always just descends into an intense point by point analysis to the point of minutiae, and I have better things to do than to be getting into that.

I fundamentally disagree with your views and your analysis - let's leave it at that.

I will happily submit to the consultation process, which is where it counts, and will make sure that as many bus users do so as possible.

Aard

Having reviewed the drawings I am shocked and appalled.

I won't go on at length, much as I'd like to critique every inch of the proposals. My main objections are as follows:

1. Shared space. Disaster for pedestrians and cyclists alike. Impossible for the visually impaired, or those with assistance dogs. Shared space seems to be used as an "ah sure I couldn't be bothered" when figuring out many of the junctions.

2. Junctions in general. No thought has been given to most junctions for cyclists. What this will result in is cyclists trying to figure out how to navigate junctions on the fly. They will likely have a stream of other people on bikes right behind them, so will be forced to make quick decisions that will likely endanger themselves and other road users. Absolutely unacceptable.

3. Frank Sherwin Bridge. This is just a massive "fcuk you" to cyclists. Despite what the drawings indicate, there is a Dublin Bikes station immediately north of Heuston Luas stop. Most people access this station from the quays. Likewise, most people depart from this station and go down the quays towards town. These movements have not been catered for. Expect to see a lot of confused cyclists on Heuston Bridge luas tracks. It is unacceptable that such hazardous conditions are being engineered into street design in 2015.

There is a lot more where that came from, but my blood pressure is too high right now!

Utterly disgusted with Dublin City Council and AECOM. What a joke.

paddyland

There are a lot of things wrong with these DCC proposals. And there are a lot of things wrong with this Commuting & Transport forum. But I will say just one thing.

I am warning you folks, if this diversion proposal goes ahead, you have seen NOTHING like the mayhem that will ensue for buses. This double T-junction, zig-zag for buses at Church Street, WILL NOT WORK. It will be a DISASTER. I am seventeen years driving buses in Dublin city. I know what causes conflict and mayhem, believe me, I have sat in enough traffic jams over all those years, not moving, to observe and understand forensically what causes them.

It will also cause an enormous backlog into Church Street and Constitution Hill for general traffic, and Bridge Street and High Street in the other direction too, something that has not been considered or even mentioned here. Because either the buses from the tram lane get priority at the bridge, or the traffic from Church Street and the bridge. It cannot be both.

The overall effect is to reduce the capacity of the junction at the bridge by a third. To everyone. It'll take too long to describe. I understand traffic flow and traffic light sequences. I have studied enough of them. You just add up in your mind what the effect of cutting a third from the green sequence to each traffic flow here in the morning peak will do. Including the buses. And that is without the possibility of the box junction being blocked even just some of the time. Ponder that for a moment.

Do you think, for a moment, that anyone in DCC has yet considered the traffic light sequence timing intervals? No? Yes?

I christen them the Zig and Zag proposals, for obvious reasons.

cgcsb

Another point that has yet to be raised is the introduction of BRT bendi buses.

Can bendi buses do the double T junction?? surely their tail end would cause blockages if they were caught by a red light?

Ben D Bus

I may have missed it, but can someone explain why buses would be send along Benburb St while cars continue to use the Quays?

Would it not be better in every way if the buses used the Quays and cars were diverted to the back streets?

cgcsb

something about crossing over at parkgate street, easy enough with cleaver traffic lights and indeed easier than the double T solution for the bendy buses.

Ben D Bus

cgcsb wrote: »

something about crossing over at parkgate street

Solve that one problem at the entrance to the new corridor and many of the subsequent issues just go away. And I've no doubt it an be solved easier than the Church St junction problem.

NS77

Is it just me, or is the space allocated for each individual cycle lane (~1.5m) far too small? That's just enough for one bike, with no space available to overtake....

pclive

No need to send the buses down Benburb street as per my previous post if:
general traffic is reduced to one lane from Heuston and around the back of Croppy Acre this allows the bus lane to continue onto the North Quays and should allow the two way cycle track with the help of a boardwalk for pedestrians

pclive wrote: »

I think the best option is a mixture of two of the options: Section A option 1 and Section A option 3

Have all traffic going around Croppy acre but reducing the general traffic lane to one lane after the LUAS at Heuston Station. This would also allow a bus lane to be installed from Heuston Station across The Frank Sherwin Bridge linking up with the bus lane coming in from Parkgate Street.

Keeping the traffic reduced one lane after Heuston would allow the bus lane to rejoin the north Quays at Ellis Quay

A board walk would be needed as shown in Seaction A option 1 to allow the bus lane continue along the north Quays

Diverting the bus lane along Benburb Street would have a very negative impact on bus journey times as buses would be delayed getting back onto the Quays at Church Street.

cgcsb

Ben D Bus wrote: »

Solve that one problem at the entrance to the new corridor and many of the subsequent issues just go away. And I've no doubt it an be solved easier than the Church St junction problem.

I know, I suggested it a few posts back. It really is the easiest way.

monument

lxflyer might have left the thread, but anybody who thinks the diversion of buses will have a massive impact, please answer these two questions:

How long do you think the delay will be?

Will the delay not be worth it give the extra capacity of people, and the benefits relating to business, tourism, health, a livable city and sustainability?

If you're not addressing those questions, you're really not addressing the issue at hand.

And if you're willing to answer, please do remember the following about the diversion route in option 3:

-- With Luas and buses the junctions will likely have the highest flow of public transport passengers on any surface route -- priority will have to be kept high

-- It has fewer bus stops -- which cuts down dwell time and/or buses getting in the way of other buses
It has a continuous bus lane its full length

-- It has a bus bay inside a bus lane at it's only stop

-- It removes turning conflicts of motorists needing to use the bus lane to turn into Blackhall Place, and into Smithfield

-- It removes the vast bulk of bicycle conflicts (along the diversion route and for a long way along the quays)
It gets buses away from one of the most poorly designed bus stops on the quays

-- It will use junctions which have are are due to have red light cameras
It includes bus priority of having a bus-only turning lane from the Church St to the quays

I'm not saying all of this will mean that there's no delay, but these factors will minimise any delay.

cgcsb wrote: »

Another point that has yet to be raised is the introduction of BRT bendi buses.

Can bendi buses do the double T junction?? surely their tail end would cause blockages if they were caught by a red light?

No BRT route will be traveling west-east around here:

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SWIFTWAY_City_Centre_Map.jpg

Ben D Bus wrote: »

Solve that one problem at the entrance to the new corridor and many of the subsequent issues just go away. And I've no doubt it an be solved easier than the Church St junction problem.

How far down the N4 do you want to hold traffic up?

What's your solution?

pclive wrote: »

No need to send the buses down Benburb street as per my previous post if:
general traffic is reduced to one lane from Heuston and around the back of Croppy Acre this allows the bus lane to continue onto the North Quays and should allow the two way cycle track with the help of a boardwalk for pedestrians

Which leaves major conflict points where the boardwalk can't integrate with bridges, tiny cycle path widths which will be a pain from day one, both of which will mean safety issues and capacity issues and attractiveness issues, meaning it's less attractive to residents, cycling commuters, tourists, and a no go for blind people.

And you'd also have the removal of a footpath, and the isolated boardwalk space and all the issues those have.

If they suggested anything like the impacts option one has for walking and cycling for buses they'd be murder.

trellheim

Lads - this is ridiculous .. .this is not debate it is soapboxing of the worst order . I cycle and get the bus along this corridor and people are taking crazy pills if this is the discussion.

Spanish Eyes

My view?

Try and accommodate ALL public transport options over cars. I know that will irk car drivers, but moving cars out of the city as far as possible seems to be the policy du jour now.

So.... pedestrians, cyclists and buses get priority. That is the only way I can see this working.

On the quays, one lane dedicated to bus, one similar size lane or even larger for bikes, and a boardwalk for the pedestrians. I don't know how it would be configured, but I reckon that is the way to go.

Cars go down Benburb Street and do the turn that buses would do. At least buses carry 80+ passengers per vehicle, so they do deserve priority over cars.

Now I don't want anyone to have a go at me, because I am tired today, but I am totally against the buses going down Benburb Street. Totally. As if it wasn't bad enough as it is! At least it's a straight line and works well as it is.

So, as I said, ALL public transport options should be given absolute priority, and let the planners work it out.

MrMorooka

monument wrote: »

How long do you think the delay will be?

Easily 5 minutes at least, assuming this was dropped in tomorrow with no change to anything else(like DB dwell times). All it takes is one bus to have an extended stop at Smithfield(a wheelchair user, a large group, a belligerent passenger) to wreck things.

monument wrote: »

Will the delay not be worth it give the extra capacity of people, and the benefits relating to business, tourism, health, a livable city and sustainability?

The people who will be effected by the delay won't perceive any of these benefits as applying to them- they are living out in the suburbs and are only in the city for work. From their perspective, they won't get anything out of it but the delay. "business, tourism, health, a livable city and sustainability" are ephemeral things that mean nothing to the person living in a sprawling estate out in D15 with no intention(or financial ability) to move to the more urban environment where these things are more obvious. All they will see is their already too-long commute taking even longer.

On that point, are the "business, tourism, health, a livable city and sustainability" benefits worth the added stress and impact an extended commute on thousands of people will have?

For example, each minute
of commuting time is associated an average reduction of 0.002 points in how people rate their life
satisfaction on a scale from 0 to 10.
Holding all else equal, this means that a 10 minute increase in commuting time (one way) is
associated with approximately 0.02 points decrease on average in life satisfaction, happiness
and the sense that one’s activities are worthwhile. It is also associated with 0.05 point increase in
anxiety

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_351954.pdf