Dublin Bus Changes to Improve City Center Journeys

devnull wrote: »

Taxi Drivers have started kicking off:

In terms of public movement & transport, the order of priority & media attention should be:
1. Pedestrians
2. Cyclists
3. Bus & LUAS
4. Donkey
5. Taxi
6. Private Cars

Instead it appears to be:
1. LUAS
2. Taxi
3. Bus
4. Cyclists
5. Private Cars
6. Pedestrians


I don't see why the main public transport options should be rerouted from College Green, while taxis continue to drive through there. It is plainly obvious to any neutral observer that one third to half the road space through the areas affected is taxis, and in particular it is taxis who are jumping the queue.

hmmm wrote: »

In terms of public movement & transport, the order of priority & media attention should be:
1. Pedestrians
2. Cyclists
3. Bus & LUAS
4. Donkey
5. Taxi
6. Private Cars

Instead it appears to be:
1. LUAS
2. Taxi
3. Bus
4. Cyclists
5. Private Cars
6. Pedestrians


I don't see why the main public transport options should be rerouted from College Green, while taxis continue to drive through there. It is plainly obvious to any neutral observer that one third to half the road space through the areas affected is taxis, and in particular it is taxis who are jumping the queue.

As there's no 24hrs transport, taxis are very important.
Maybe the Dublin planners who are responsible for this mess should be arrested and charged for gross waste of public money, making the city a more dangerous place for pedestrians and cyclists, longer delays in transit for the vast majority of people, the loss of business and man hours and lastly.....a laughing stock of Europe for when it comes to something as simple as public transport.

MJohnston wrote: »

Only for the brief window of hours where the Luas and buses aren't running.

Yes but what does one do, walk for 10miles?

Hector Stocky Talc wrote: »

Gridlock.

https://i.imgur.com/X7hV37Q.jpg

That's passing College House up to the Trinity stop isn't it? The timing of that junction for the Luas is really poor - it should never be able to pass the Hawkins/Townsend Street junction until it has a free run onto College Street, instead of stopping halfway across and blocking Townsend Street traffic.

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Pedestrian Lights and road Traffic Lights are irrelevant aren't they? Doesn't the tram driver just have their own set of four white signal lights which is what they follow.

So really it just comes down to whether they also have to be aware of and follow the rules of junction boxes, I don't think they do but could be wrong.

Although Transdev,Tii and just about every other responsible Authority are keeping remarkably schtum about it,all indications point to a significant gap in the specific regulation of on-street Light Rail Operations in the Yellow Box scenario.

It appears that Luas movements are controlled ONLY by their specific signals,as outlined in the DoT's Traffic Signs Manual (2010),although it may also be the case that not everybody involved in the project has studied the bumf that applies to these Yellow Box issues....

Not all locations are suitable for treatment and it is necessary to apply certain criteria before deciding whether a particular site should be marked. The following points would be relevant:
• Yellow boxes are expensive to maintain and should be used only where other solutions will not work.
• Linked signals can help to keep a junction clear. In addition it is possible to provide detectors at a location after a vehicle passes through a junction. This can pick up ’tailbacks’ from the next junction and prompt the traffic signals to change thus preventing obstruction of the junction by vehicles.
• Sometimes a yellow box is not needed at a junction controlled by signals but is needed at an adjacent junction which does not have signals and is affected by queues from the signal controlled junction.
• The carriageway beyond the yellow box should be free from obstruction (this may require the imposition of parking restrictions or the relocation of a bus stop).
• Where a succession of locations gives rise to blocking a series of yellow boxes may be considered provided at least 20m storage can be maintained between successive boxes.
• There should preferably not be a high proportion of right turning vehicles.

I particularly liked the last little line,as it may have fed into the situation at D'olier St-College Green


7.9.7 Where a Light Rapid Transit (LRT) line enters a road used by general traffic, it may be advantageous to install a yellow box to maintain free access for the LRT vehicles. In such cases, the boundary lines of the box may follow the swept path envelope of the LRT vehicle.

9.12 Tram (Light Rapid Transit)
9.12.1 Where trams – light rapid transit (LRT) vehicles – are running on the public road special Tram Signals are used to control them (Signals RTS 008 to RTS 012 and S 104). The signals consist of a series of lights forming a narrow white line or plus sign on a black background. Single aspect signals are used, displaying the appropriate signal when required. The design of the signals is deliberately different from signals for other road users, since they are intended only for LRT drivers.
9.12.2 Tram Signals will often operate in conjunction with traffic signals controlling road traffic. In some instances they may be programmed to give a different instruction to tram drivers from that given to other drivers. For example a tram may be permitted to proceed while road traffic in adjacent lanes is stopped by a red signal.
9.12.3 The need for Tram Signals will be determined by the tram operating authority and their size, location and operation agreed with the Road Authority in accordance with the provisions prescribed in the Road Traffic (Signs) Regulations.

It is remarkable,yet entirely predictible,that our New Light Rail link,having been devised and constructed entirely in a stand-alone manner,with ZERO consideration given to broader interaction with pre-existing Public Transport systems is now contributing significantly to a rapid worsening of ALL City Centre Traffic and Public Transport operations.

Luckily for the directors of this increasingly Comic Opera,our State is a democratic Republic,in which responsibility is largely a concept viewed from afar,and negligent buffoonery is often celebrated and rewarded,at the highest levels.

Rather than summarily dismissing the entire cabal of supposed professionals associated with this ongoing nonsense,it is highly likely they will be promoted and set to work on other big-ticket projects,with largely similar outcomes.

It would perhaps,be easier and cheaper to draft in Light Rail & Public Transport Professionals from the furthest corners of the E.U.and set them to work on rectifying the Godawful mess created by this gang.

Every now and then,we are sharply reminded that a Chinese style benign dictatorship might not be all that bad.......;)

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Looks like Prime Time are covering this tonight on RTE 1. Good to see the issue getting some coverage.

https://twitter.com/downesr/status/958402049502339072

Sadly,it appears they are playing the thing for "wacky" laughs.

There is nothing wacky about what is now occuring every day in the City Centre area,as the turf-war continues.

Much of what is currently happening has it's roots deeply embedded in ensuring that permanent & pensionable senior positions fall to the "right" agencies,with the long established ones,being reluctant to concede ground to newer,and less traditional "Authorities" ?

On the other hand,perhaps "Wacky" is an accurate a summation after all ?

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Coming from left field here a bit, but ANYONE who has ANY power to sort out PT in Dublin should be using it every day. Same times as commuters are.

I think the car park in DCC at Wood Q is still in existence though

"I'm glad you raised that point,but first allow me to deal with.....(something totally unrelated to the original issue,but which will eat into the clock-time of the interview)"

Get me Terri Prone on the red telephone please........;)