BusConnects Dublin - Big changes to Bus Network

n97 mini · 24-05-2017 7:41pm

lxflyer wrote: »

Read all of my posts - point me to where I said that at peak time the difference was 5 minutes. All along I said during the day, off peak and at against peak flow.

At peak times the 66x and 67x provide faster alternatives to going via Chapelizod - no one is forced to take a bus that goes that way. Now let's be honest, you do have a choice at peak times - you also have the train.

Going into town in the evening peak the buses going via Chapelizod do not take more than five minutes longer than the 25a/25b via the bypass. I should know - I did that precise trip every day for 4 years.

At peak time I wouldn't entertain the notion of using the bus as the train will beat it every time in both directions. But that's the 66, which goes through Chapelizod so of course the train will beat it!

sharper · 24-05-2017 7:51pm

lxflyer wrote: »

But that is the point of the 66x and 67x at peak times.

Dublin bus's idea of "peak times" and traffic volume's idea of peak times are very different.

In the evening the 66x runs between 5-6pm. Traffic starts to hit peak volumes from 4pm onwards.

Another problem is the Xs that originate from UCD are often full by the time they hit the city centre so you can only count on the ones starting from Westmoreland Street of which there are only two.

If you want to work from 8pm-4pm you're pretty much out of luck unless you want to spend a decent chunk of your life sitting on a bus. If you happen to miss out on the couple of services on a given day because you get delayed then it makes a bad day worse.

The other issue it's quite hard to actually get on a 66 in the city centre anywhere around peak times because they're full of people travelling to Chapelizod/Lucan.

Today I left work at 4pm hoping to get a 66 home. The 16:05 which should hit the CC around 4:20 simply never showed up and the 16:15 didn't arrive until 16:35.

That got me to Maynooth at 17:35 while the 66x leaving an hour after I left work came 20 minutes later.

It's simply a bad experience and if I was trying to get to somewhere where there just wasn't much demand I could live with it but there are plenty of people going direct to justify a service running throughout the day - or at the very minimum across the modern idea of peak times and not the 80s version.

LXFlyer · 24-05-2017 8:38pm

I don't disagree about the need for more Xpressos - they're needed across the city covering outer suburbs and for longer periods particularly in the evening peak.

But resources are a real issue in terms of additional buses and drivers - the pace of introduction has been glacially slow.

Buses not showing up is a different problem with the ongoing LUAS works causing serious reliability issues and buses are getting caught in the associated traffic congestion.

StreetLight · 24-05-2017 8:44pm

Chapelizod should have one main bus route for the city - the 26 operating to and from the West County at an average 30-minute frequency, more at peak times. Everything else should be run along the Chapelizod Bypass.

The 25 should then be re-routed (and get more running time) to serve Kennelsfort Road, through Liffey Valley and back onto the Lucan Road.

LXFlyer · 24-05-2017 8:53pm

StreetLight wrote: »

Chapelizod should have one main bus route for the city - the 26 operating to and from the West County at an average 30-minute frequency, more at peak times. Everything else should be run along the Chapelizod Bypass.

The 25 should then be re-routed (and get more running time) to serve Kennelsfort Road, through Liffey Valley and back onto the Lucan Road.

That wouldn't even come close to meeting the demand in Chapelizod and Islandbridge - you're talking about a reduction in all day frequency from every 7-8 minutes (26, 66/a/b, and 67) to every 30 minutes.

Try selling that to bus users in those areas and see what their reaction is like! You'd be lynched.

How would people get to the points along the Lucan QBC if you terminate the route at the West County.

The numbers making that journey are not exactly insignificant.

Stephen15 · 24-05-2017 9:13pm

lxflyer wrote: »

That wouldn't even come close to meeting the demand in Chapelizod and Islandbridge - you're talking about a reduction in all day frequency from every 7-8 minutes (26, 66/a/b, and 67) to every 30 minutes.

Try selling that to bus users in those areas and see what their reaction is like! You'd be lynched.

How would people get to the points along the Lucan QBC if you terminate the route at the West County.

The numbers making that journey are not exactly insignificant.

Put bus stops with acess points on the bypass then.

ddx05 · 24-05-2017 9:15pm

StreetLight wrote: »

Chapelizod should have one main bus route for the city - the 26 operating to and from the West County at an average 30-minute frequency, more at peak times. Everything else should be run along the Chapelizod Bypass.

The 25 should then be re-routed (and get more running time) to serve Kennelsfort Road, through Liffey Valley and back onto the Lucan Road.

Dublin Bus will not do this though for the following reasons:

1 - There would be big opposition for a hefty reduction around Chapelizod and Islandbridge

2 - Dublin Bus know that people will pay a higher fare if it gets them to their destination quicker. Hence why the Xpressos cost more than their standard counterparts. If the 66/67 ran along the same routes as the 66x/67x, that would be revenue lost for DB and from a business point of view, there is no way they will allow that

3 - The 25 would have little purpose in running via Liffey Valley and the Kennelsfort Road as it would increase travel time for those using it from Dodsboro and Lucan Village, and the Kennelsfort Road already has the 26

StreetLight · 24-05-2017 9:17pm

lxflyer wrote: »

That wouldn't even come close to meeting the demand in Chapelizod and Islandbridge - you're talking about a reduction in all day frequency from every 7-8 minutes (26, 66/a/b, and 67) to every 30 minutes.

Try selling that to bus users in those areas and see what their reaction is like! You'd be lynched.

How would people get to the points along the Lucan QBC if you terminate the route at the West County.

The numbers making that journey are not exactly insignificant.

I think it would meet demand. I suggested a 30-minute average. There would obviously be a need for more departures at peak times, less at others.

Other connections to the Lucan Road QBC can be achieved from a re-routed 25.

Forcing a much higher patronage of bus users from the likes of Celbridge and Maynooth to travel through Chapelizod and Islandbridge, where traffic can be erratic and unpredictable, is not really fair on them.

LXFlyer · 24-05-2017 9:22pm

StreetLight wrote: »

I think it would meet demand. I suggested a 30-minute average. There would obviously be a need for more departures at peak times, less at others.

Other connections to the Lucan Road QBC can be achieved from a re-routed 25.

Forcing a much higher patronage of bus users from the likes of Celbridge and Maynooth to travel through Chapelizod and Islandbridge, where traffic can be erratic and unpredictable, is not really fair on them.

Chapelizod and Islandbridge have an all day frequency of every 7-8 minutes - not just at peak times.

You're talking about serious cuts in their service if you cut that to every 30 minutes average.

The solution for longer distance customers is to add more Xpresso services - increase their frequency and extend the operating hours.

Outside of the peak hours, the time difference is very limited between the two routes - no more than five minutes - if you want I'll put the actual RTPI timetables up here to prove that.

Removing a bus service, slashing frequency and connectivity is not the solution frankly.

LXFlyer · 24-05-2017 9:25pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Put bus stops with acess points on the bypass then.

Can I ask are you familiar with the route?

StreetLight · 24-05-2017 9:27pm

ddx05 wrote: »

If the 66/67 ran along the same routes as the 66x/67x, that would be revenue lost for DB and from a business point of view, there is no way they will allow that

But if the 66 and 67 ran along the bypass, there would be no more need for the 66X or 67X. These buses could then be added to an enhanced 66/67, thereby enticing more users attracted by the enhanced service.

Similarly when the 25A and 25B were re-routed along the bypass, the 25X was slashed, allowing buses to be utilised for better use.

sharper · 24-05-2017 9:38pm

ddx05 wrote: »

2 - Dublin Bus know that people will pay a higher fare if it gets them to their destination quicker. Hence why the Xpressos cost more than their standard counterparts. If the 66/67 ran along the same routes as the 66x/67x, that would be revenue lost for DB and from a business point of view, there is no way they will allow that

Most regular users of an X service are likely using some type of monthly/annual ticket. You pay the same whether you're using an X or not.

Stephen15 · 24-05-2017 10:16pm

lxflyer wrote: »

Can I ask are you familiar with the route?

Im not but judging by google maps they build passageways and areas for buses to pull in onto the bypass with bus stops.

sharper · 24-05-2017 10:33pm

lxflyer wrote: »

That wouldn't even come close to meeting the demand in Chapelizod and Islandbridge - you're talking about a reduction in all day frequency from every 7-8 minutes (26, 66/a/b, and 67) to every 30 minutes.

Try selling that to bus users in those areas and see what their reaction is like! You'd be lynched.

What happens if the consultants suggest this? It's obviously not possible to have more direct feeder services while maintaining the same frequency for the areas all the existing An Lar services traverse.

I'd be perfectly happy getting one service to Liffey Valley and then another to the city centre as was suggested if it meant I spent less time on the bus overall and less time trying to figure out if today is a "good" day to leave work before Dublin Bus deems it peak time.

My worry is I'll end up with a slow infrequent "feeder" service winding its way around to get to Liffey Valley. Then end up waiting a while there becuse there just aren't enough busses for everyone and still end up taking the slow route into the city. Essentially the 66 split into two in each direction and no X.

Then someone will tell me sure it would be nice to increase capacity but the resources just aren't there.

n97 mini · 24-05-2017 10:40pm

ddx05 wrote: »

Dublin Bus will not do this though for the following reasons:

1 - There would be big opposition for a hefty reduction around Chapelizod and Islandbridge

2 - Dublin Bus know that people will pay a higher fare if it gets them to their destination quicker. Hence why the Xpressos cost more than their standard counterparts. If the 66/67 ran along the same routes as the 66x/67x, that would be revenue lost for DB and from a business point of view, there is no way they will allow that

3 - The 25 would have little purpose in running via Liffey Valley and the Kennelsfort Road as it would increase travel time for those using it from Dodsboro and Lucan Village, and the Kennelsfort Road already has the 26

And they're all fair points, but none of them take into consideration the very large population beyond Chapelizod and what's best for them.

Arguably the 25a/b, which are very frequent and much shorter than the 66/67 should be running through Chapelizod with the 66/67 bypassing it.

LXFlyer · 24-05-2017 11:01pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Im not but judging by google maps they build passageways and areas for buses to pull in onto the bypass with bus stops.

I gathered as much by the fact that you even suggested it.

With respect go out for a trip on the 25a to Liffey Valley and back and you will realise how impossible a suggestion that is.

Stephen15 · 24-05-2017 11:26pm

lxflyer wrote: »

I gathered as much by the fact that you even suggested it.

With respect go out for a trip on the 25a to Liffey Valley and back and you will realise how impossible a suggestion that is.

Why would it be impossible if the proper infustructure was put in place to provide bus stops it would surely be doable?

n97 mini · 24-05-2017 11:37pm

lxflyer wrote: »

I gathered as much by the fact that you even suggested it.

In fairness that's an ad hominem defence: question the poster's credentials rather than the argument put forward by them.

Is there anyone in DB or the NTA that knows the entire network backways, and all the intricacies that go with it? Yet these people are the ones that decide who gets what.

StreetLight · 24-05-2017 11:42pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Why would it be impossible if the proper infustructure was put in place to provide bus stops it would surely be doable?

Practically impossible. The bypass is not at-grade with any other road between Palmerstown and Con Colbert Road to allow pedestrian access to them, without building some significantly detailed walkways.

If you start getting buses to pull in somewhere along the bypass, it would negate the whole time-advantage of them running there in the first place.

Stephen15 · 24-05-2017 11:48pm

StreetLight wrote: »

Practically impossible. The bypass is not at-grade with any other road between Palmerstown and Con Colbert Road.

If you start getting buses to pull in somewhere along the bypass, it would negate the whole time-advantage of them running there in the first place.

Yes but they could build steps with a wheelchair ramp or lift up to the bus stops. Perhaps it would work better if they were to build a BRT there but not completely impossible.

What I meant was build bus stops where can pull in away from the road and not block the bus lane.

StreetLight · 24-05-2017 11:54pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Yes but they could build steps with a wheelchair ramp or lift up to the bus stops. Perhaps it would work better if they were to build a BRT there but not completely impossible.

What I meant was build bus stops where can pull in away from the road and not block the bus lane.

BRT would be a great idea there with walkways and ramps, but unfortunately it hasn't been mentioned in any long-term plans of which I am aware towards that corridor of the city.

We'll have to deal with standard buses for the moment.

I do understand your point, though.

dfx- · 25-05-2017 1:50am

I think the N4 is one of the least areas in need of a redesign. It needs extra frequency at certain off peak times as 25A/Bs especially and 66/67s are heavily loaded.

I don't think really we need to overthink this with all sorts of different modes of transports, orbital complications and ticketing arrangements.

I think we need to start with relieving the pressure on the major routes (mostly created by the architecture of Network Direct) which are too long and too unreliable. The 4/7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 27, 40, 123, 145.

If you don't fix those, it's largely rearranging deckchairs.

AlekSmart · 25-05-2017 10:52am

dfx- wrote: »

I think the N4 is one of the least areas in need of a redesign. It needs extra frequency at certain off peak times as 25A/Bs especially and 66/67s are heavily loaded.

I don't think really we need to overthink this with all sorts of different modes of transports, orbital complications and ticketing arrangements.

I think we need to start with relieving the pressure on the major routes (mostly created by the architecture of Network Direct) which are too long and too unreliable. The 4/7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 27, 40, 123, 145.

If you don't fix those, it's largely rearranging deckchairs.

Very true,and in many of those cases,it would be a straightforward "fix",with minor straightening out of the current "round the houses" routings.

Almost no cost,and a great return in terms of scheduling and reliability.

Remember Network Direct was a survival strategy,an emergency response to keep the system functional,at a time when the entire Country was on a knife edge.

That time has come and,thankfully,gone (for now),but sadly few appear to be willing to push forward out of the ND ethos.

It is also of some strategic importance that the Promotion of Walking & Cycling is an intrinsic element of the NTA Strategy for Public Transport in the Greater Dublin Region,which in relaity encompasses far more than simply painting a Cycle Path along a Bus Lane.

Fewer Bus Stops with,slightly longer walks,to reach more reliable,frequent and rapid Core Bus Services.

Win-Win for everybody.

LeinsterDub · 25-05-2017 12:51pm

lxflyer wrote: »

But that did ultimately go through according to the plan - the 4 was extended, the 63 serves the local area, and the 46a takes the direct route.

Extended and cut the service. The old 4 was much better

LuckyLloyd · 25-05-2017 2:51pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Put bus stops with acess points on the bypass then.

Jesus man, that's a bad post.

AlekSmart · 25-05-2017 2:54pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Extended and cut the service. The old 4 was much better

Indeed,the 4,as it originally stood,was a very successful and well structured service,a model,if you will,of what the future Dublin Bus policy should have been.

Instead,and for reasons which have never been fully clarified,the Route was restructured and effectively worsened,and has never recovered.

More Duties,more buses running on the former alignment would be a very simple,and highly sensible decision,if there were the stomach for such things ?

antoinolachtnai · 25-05-2017 5:51pm

Well, it is one of the things DB could or should have been.

To be really effective, DB needs to be a lot of different things for different places and people.

There is certainly a lot of value to be added and money to be made with a really well developed and invested 4 service. And that is certainly important.

But it has to be broader than that. There are lots of other things DB should be doing too, in terms of serving outlying or developing areas and helping them develop. Turning the whole service into 'super-routes' won't really address the whole problem.

L1011 · 25-05-2017 9:41pm

lxflyer wrote: »

Something has to go via Chapelizod - how do you propose serving it and Islandbridge, and linking them to the points along the Lucan QBC.

Maybe put the short-distance services back, or some of them (they're not very populous areas) and let the long distance ones actually have a sane running time?

Putting the 25s on the bypass and leaving the 66/67s to trundle through sounds like a Lucan resident made the decision

There are woefully insufficient Xpresso services and they removed the only useful one from Maynooth - the one that didn't serve Leixlip.

n97 mini · 25-05-2017 11:27pm

L1011 wrote: »

Maybe put the short-distance services back, or some of them (they're not very populous areas) and let the long distance ones actually have a sane running time?

Putting the 25s on the bypass and leaving the 66/67s to trundle through sounds like a Lucan resident made the decision

There are woefully insufficient Xpresso services and they removed the only useful one from Maynooth - the one that didn't serve Leixlip.

Like I said earlier... 25a/b through Chapelizod and 66s/67 on the bypass. Everyone is moderately happy. There was disbelief around here after Network Direct that the shorter routes got to go the quickest into town.

BonnieSituation · 26-05-2017 3:02am

Get fooked. Leave my 25's alone. They're bad enough as is.

Chapelizod and Islandbridge are over-serviced as is. Let's solve that problem first thien straighten out the 66/67.

No bus west of the M50 should go through chapelizod. None.

A more regular 26 from Cherry Orchard Hospital would solve this problem in a stroke. Freeing up buses for that wouldn't take much given the more reliable services that would result of the 66/67 being made use the bypass. It really is a no-brainer.

BusConnects Dublin - Big changes to Bus Network

Comments