Cars to be banned from key Dublin City Centre streets; priority to walking, buses etc

LXFlyer

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

If I use a bus I only use a Leap Card. The rate is still too high. The 150 route was a popular route. If it now follows the 121 route near the city, the route is just weird. Crumlin has a large population so needs lots of buses. Willington, where the 150 roughly starts, doesn't have that many buses near the 150 stop. Surely a 150 following the old route with maybe a 150A, say, for local access and service in the Coombe and immediately adjoining areas, could be considered. There is also the serious lack of radial routes, but before that the traditional axial routes like the 15 or 150 need improvement.

The main grumble for me is the terrible cycle situation. The cycle lanes for one, and the lack of an effective Garda response to the very high rate of bicycle theft (I was half tempted to edit some Donedeal posters at bus shelters and add 'stolen' before bicycle):pac:.

Well if you can come up with another way of financing public transport that does not cost the Exchequer money and keeps all of the operating companies solvent then you're welcome to try!

Willington has the 54a and 150, and a short walk away the 15a, and for some in the eastern half the 15 is fairly close too. I would think that is sufficient to meet local needs. Further along the route the 9 also provides additional buses.

The 150 operates every 15 minutes at peak, and every 20 minutes off-peak. It seems to cope with that frequency.

The Crumlin Road has a large number of buses - the 27, 56a, 77a and 151 all provide a high frequency on that route. Why does it need another route - that's just adding unnecessary duplication. That was the whole point of re-routing the 150 - eliminating the overcapacity on the corridor (merging with the 121) and unnecessary duplication.

Radial routes = routes linking a central point in a city or town with a suburb - I would suggest that there are more than enough of those?

Do you mean orbital services? And where?

cgcsb

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

If I use a bus I only use a Leap Card. The rate is still too high. The 150 route was a popular route. If it now follows the 121 route near the city, the route is just weird. Crumlin has a large population so needs lots of buses. Willington, where the 150 roughly starts, doesn't have that many buses near the 150 stop. Surely a 150 following the old route with maybe a 150A, say, for local access and service in the Coombe and immediately adjoining areas, could be considered. There is also the serious lack of radial routes, but before that the traditional axial routes like the 15 or 150 need improvement.

The main grumble for me is the terrible cycle situation. The cycle lanes for one, and the lack of an effective Garda response to the very high rate of bicycle theft (I was half tempted to edit some Donedeal posters at bus shelters and add 'stolen' before bicycle):pac:.

I want to second a point well made, about litter and the unsightly way recycle and other waste is left by businesses for disposal.

I note you complain about the single fares:

€1.50
€2.05
€2.60

I'm just struggling to think how they could be considered too high by comparison (granted there's a lot of things wrong with our transport system) but in terms of single fares they are very cheap. If I look at single fares in similar sized European Cities:

Copenhagen
Amsterdam
Vienna

you're talking the same/more

French and Spanish Cities have slightly lower fares coupled with massive government subsidy. Would you rather pay more income tax to fund a huge subsidy?

Calina

lxflyer wrote: »

Well if you can come up with another way of financing public transport that does not cost the Exchequer money and keeps all of the operating companies solvent then you're welcome to try!

Therein lies one of the big problems. Your starting point is a) not spending any money and b) keeping all the operating companies solvent.

Leaving (b) aside for the moment, one of the core problems in Ireland is we just don't want to pay for infrastructure. Or if we have to, we don't want to pay for stuff to be done properly. We want to pay as little as we can get away with.

Public transport is a social good, and comprehensive functional public transport supports the economy, not costs it. In this country, we are not willing to invest enough in it for it to be adequate. We just want to pay as little as we can get away with.

cgcsb wrote: »

I note you complain about the single fares:

€1.50
€2.05
€2.60

I'm just struggling to think how they could be considered too high by comparison (granted there's a lot of things wrong with our transport system) but in terms of single fares they are very cheap. If I look at single fares in similar sized European Cities:

Copenhagen
Amsterdam
Vienna

you're talking the same/more

French and Spanish Cities have slightly lower fares coupled with massive government subsidy. Would you rather pay more income tax to fund a huge subsidy?

I don't object to the individual journey fares on Leapcard. I'd prefer to see a flatfare in place rather than the ridiculous situation where even smart card holders have to interact with the drivers, but in the grand scheme of things, the individual fares are not where I see cost problems for end users. The 30 day passes, or monthly pass, whether you choose a rambler card or an adult month pass, are too expensive. Far too expensive. They should be cheap enough to draw people away from the individual journey fares for workday commute. Frankly, they aren't.

Here's an example:

An adult monthly commuter card for STIB which is the Brussels public transport area which covers bus, metro and tram is 49E - info here: http://www.stib-mivb.be/abonnement.html?l=en

An adult monthly commuter card for Dublin Bus covering bus only is 132E for Travelwide or a 30day rambler is 147.50E. If you want DART and Luas added it's 171E for a short hop. The Dublin Bus ticket involves the airlink but unless you're travelling to the airport weekly, this probably doesn't matter. If you're taking a 2.05E fare twice a day, and that is pretty much it, then you're not going to spend a huge amount more than around 85E per month in fares.

Sure, you can reduce the cost if you're willing to spend 12 months on your travel pass up front, and involve your employer via the taxsaver program but because you have to a) buy it up front and b) involve your employer, this adds an admin burden.

I'd pay maybe 90E a month for a monthly card and that would slightly exceed what I pay in bus fares at the moment. The trade off would be some convenience for myself. But 132E is more than 50% higher than what I am spending at the moment in individual fares per month.

Spanish Eyes

@ Calina, I am sure you already know this, but in case others are not aware, there is a weekly cap of €27.50 for Dublin Bus. That now includes Expresso which I think is new.

https://www.leapcard.ie/en/PageSetting/ContentViewer.aspx?Val=T%2FHcRN0lgkhyO2TJbCpdXbpkQ6D59bgR9MwK7i5q52U2rfQVZcNw%2BAb2e13wL37V62K83icu4wP%2FKxugVQHB8%2Ftfq8sS44StQmsdGiKYqRWG4lf%2Bgc7EYaq1dJckxC1SOs8Oi5WHyaggCxyPdGXNqCkz6KJl%2FC2vRG9pBSEkDcc%3D&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

So that means €110 per month unlimited travel on DB. Which is high I know, but not that bad just the same.

Best bet is TaxSaver.

LXFlyer

Calina wrote: »

Therein lies one of the big problems. Your starting point is a) not spending any money and b) keeping all the operating companies solvent.

Leaving (b) aside for the moment, one of the core problems in Ireland is we just don't want to pay for infrastructure. Or if we have to, we don't want to pay for stuff to be done properly. We want to pay as little as we can get away with.

Public transport is a social good, and comprehensive functional public transport supports the economy, not costs it. In this country, we are not willing to invest enough in it for it to be adequate. We just want to pay as little as we can get away with.

My starting point is from the reality of the financial position that both our country and the operating companies find themselves in.

Some people (and I am not suggesting that you are) seem to be in continuing denial and don't seem to realise that we are a long way from being solvent again.

Don't get me wrong I want to see the PSO grant go up again, but I don't think that the Department of Transport is minded to increase the state's % of revenues compared to the customers.

As to the company - I've already pointed out that its finances are still a mess and with wage costs going back up in 2015, it's going to take a few more years before they return to stability.

Calina wrote: »

I don't object to the individual journey fares on Leapcard. I'd prefer to see a flatfare in place rather than the ridiculous situation where even smart card holders have to interact with the drivers, but in the grand scheme of things, the individual fares are not where I see cost problems for end users. The 30 day passes, or monthly pass, whether you choose a rambler card or an adult month pass, are too expensive. Far too expensive. They should be cheap enough to draw people away from the individual journey fares for workday commute. Frankly, they aren't.

Here's an example:

An adult monthly commuter card for STIB which is the Brussels public transport area which covers bus, metro and tram is 49E - info here: http://www.stib-mivb.be/abonnement.html?l=en

An adult monthly commuter card for Dublin Bus covering bus only is 132E for Travelwide or a 30day rambler is 147.50E. If you want DART and Luas added it's 171E for a short hop. The Dublin Bus ticket involves the airlink but unless you're travelling to the airport weekly, this probably doesn't matter. If you're taking a 2.05E fare twice a day, and that is pretty much it, then you're not going to spend a huge amount more than around 85E per month in fares.

Sure, you can reduce the cost if you're willing to spend 12 months on your travel pass up front, and involve your employer via the taxsaver program but because you have to a) buy it up front and b) involve your employer, this adds an admin burden.

I'd pay maybe 90E a month for a monthly card and that would slightly exceed what I pay in bus fares at the moment. The trade off would be some convenience for myself. But 132E is more than 50% higher than what I am spending at the moment in individual fares per month.

Well again this boils down to funding public transport - what level the government are prepared to subvent public transport at, compared to what level they want the public to pay for it.

The PSO subsidy has only stopped falling in 2015 - the drops in recent years coincided with a definite switch in the balance of funding between state and customers.

I'd disagree about the pricing of the 30 day rambler - if you take 2 x €2.60 trips, you're already getting value in a day. The fact that the days are non-consecutive is very useful too. The tickets are valid for 18 months - are you saying you'd not do that level of travel in that time?

Calina

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

@ Calina, I am sure you already know this, but in case others are not aware, there is a weekly cap of €27.50 for Dublin Bus. That now includes Expresso which I think is new.

https://www.leapcard.ie/en/PageSetting/ContentViewer.aspx?Val=T%2FHcRN0lgkhyO2TJbCpdXbpkQ6D59bgR9MwK7i5q52U2rfQVZcNw%2BAb2e13wL37V62K83icu4wP%2FKxugVQHB8%2Ftfq8sS44StQmsdGiKYqRWG4lf%2Bgc7EYaq1dJckxC1SOs8Oi5WHyaggCxyPdGXNqCkz6KJl%2FC2vRG9pBSEkDcc%3D&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

So that means €110 per month unlimited travel on DB. Which is high I know, but not that bad just the same.

Best bet is TaxSaver.

I wasn't really aware of this tbh although I knew about the daily cap.

That being said, the fact that the 110E cap is lower than the monthly ticket is frankly insane.

Calina

lxflyer wrote: »

My starting point is from the reality of the financial position that both our country and the operating companies find themselves in.

Some people (and I am not suggesting that you are) seem to be in continuing denial and don't seem to realise that we are a long way from being solvent again.

Don't get me wrong I want to see the PSO grant go up again, but I don't think that the Department of Transport is minded to increase the state's % of revenues compared to the customers.

As to the company - I've already pointed out that its finances are still a mess and with wage costs going back up in 2015, it's going to take a few more years before they return to stability.



Well again this boils down to funding public transport - what level the government are prepared to subvent public transport at, compared to what level they want the public to pay for it.

The PSO subsidy has only stopped falling in 2015 - the drops in recent years coincided with a definite switch in the balance of funding between state and customers.

I'd disagree about the pricing of the 30 day rambler - if you take 2 x €2.60 trips, you're already getting value in a day. The fact that the days are non-consecutive is very useful too. The tickets are valid for 18 months - are you saying you'd not do that level of travel in that time?

I spend 4.10 per day on buses Monday to Friday. So neither the 30 day rambler nor the monthly pass are good value for me. Nor is the weekly cap. I'd be very interested to see a fare usage breakdown for Dublin Bus between the leap fares. My suspicion is that more people are on the 2.05E fare than the 2.60E fare.

As for the rest, you've really just underlined my assertion which is the country does not want to pay for infrastructure, or at least, they are not voting in politicians who understand that there's a desire on the part of voters for a coherent transport system which is properly financed.

LXFlyer

Calina wrote: »

I spend 4.10 per day on buses Monday to Friday. So neither the 30 day rambler nor the monthly pass are good value for me. Nor is the weekly cap. I'd be very interested to see a fare usage breakdown for Dublin Bus between the leap fares. My suspicion is that more people are on the 2.05E fare than the 2.60E fare.

As for the rest, you've really just underlined my assertion which is the country does not want to pay for infrastructure, or at least, they are not voting in politicians who understand that there's a desire on the part of voters for a coherent transport system which is properly financed.

The rambler ticket really is (and was) designed for people taking more than two trips a day - it's for people using multiple buses, and who use the bus on an occasional basis.

The recent changes in fare structure with LEAP being developed, and that (along with LEAP90 discount) has made these products less attractive. The €2.05 LEAP fare now straddles two fare stage groups and as a result would be the principal fare that most pay.

The monthly/annual tickets are (with the exception of those paying the top fare), more attractive now for those who can avail of them under the taxsaver scheme.

I would love to see the state invest in the infrastructure and in the ticket pricing, but where is the money going to come from? Increased taxes? I am pretty sure that would go down like a lead balloon with the electorate. The country is still in a financially perilous situation - we are not flushed with cash. What we will continue to see is ongoing simplification of the fares structures on an annual basis, based on what is affordable - you're not going to see it all happen in one go.

Calina

lxflyer wrote: »

The rambler ticket really is (and was) designed for people taking more than two trips a day - it's for people using multiple buses, and who use the bus on an occasional basis.

The recent changes in fare structure with LEAP being developed, and that (along with LEAP90 discount) has made these products less attractive. The €2.05 LEAP fare now straddles two fare stage groups and as a result would be the principal fare that most pay.

But what you're saying is that regular commuters have limited options. I mean, the monthly ticket is absolutely not attractive at 132E a month for someone whose commute costs around 85E per month using single Leap fares. I want to reiterate this because any time someone mentions Dublin Bus/expensive in the same breath, someone pops up and says "Leap" like it will magically make things better. Some of us are already ahead of that race.

And a lot of people don't want to account for transport on an annual basis for various practical reasons.

lxflyer wrote: »

The monthly/annual tickets are (with the exception of those paying the top fare), more attractive now for those who can avail of them under the taxsaver scheme.

I don't see the taxsaver scheme as attractive to be honest. That represents a transport subsidy either which way - why not cut the price of the commuter tickets and pay the tax rebate as a subsidy? I imagine there would be an administrative saving by doing so too.

lxflyer wrote: »

I would love to see the state invest in the infrastructure and in the ticket pricing, but where is the money going to come from? Increased taxes? I am pretty sure that would go down like a lead balloon with the electorate. The country is still in a financially perilous situation - we are not flushed with cash. What we will continue to see is ongoing simplification of the fares structures on an annual basis, based on what is affordable - you're not going to see it all happen in one go.

I actually don't object to paying taxes for improved services. Again, what you are saying is that in Ireland, people do not want to pay for a decent transport system. They want as little as they can get away with paying collectively. And I get that. I've pointed it out as a core problem here. It's not even limited to the public transport system as it happens.

At some point, as a country, we have to cop on to the fact that our lives will be full of more stupidities like the M50 second bridge (because the first one was enough) and the cross city Luas works (because of course it wasn't necessary to join up the lines) every time we do something on the cheap in the short term which winds up costing a fortune in the long term.

In the meantime, it's not wrong to point out that monthly commuter fares for Dublin City's bus service are comparatively expensive unless you're a power user taking the bus at least three times a day. And that this is counterproductive if Dublin Bus has a desire to reduce the number of people having interaction with the driver at journey start.

LXFlyer

Calina wrote: »

But what you're saying is that regular commuters have limited options. I mean, the monthly ticket is absolutely not attractive at 132E a month for someone whose commute costs around 85E per month using single Leap fares. I want to reiterate this because any time someone mentions Dublin Bus/expensive in the same breath, someone pops up and says "Leap" like it will magically make things better. Some of us are already ahead of that race.

And a lot of people don't want to account for transport on an annual basis for various practical reasons.

If you travel less than 8 stages each way five days a week then the monthly tickets have never offered a saving over normal fares and really were not designed for such short trip users.

But if you travel 8-13 stages then your LEAP fare dropped dramatically earlier this year, so I'm not sure it's fare to say you are not being offered anything?

The monthly and annual tickets really have always been aimed at people who use the bus for longer trips, and who also use the buses at weekends, or who make use multiple buses each day, of which there are quite a few people.

Calina wrote: »

I don't see the taxsaver scheme as attractive to be honest. That represents a transport subsidy either which way - why not cut the price of the commuter tickets and pay the tax rebate as a subsidy? I imagine there would be an administrative saving by doing so too.

The taxsaver scheme, being honest about it, is really aimed at higher earners, in an effort to prise them out of their cars. In other words give people a personal carrot.

Calina wrote: »

I actually don't object to paying taxes for improved services. Again, what you are saying is that in Ireland, people do not want to pay for a decent transport system. They want as little as they can get away with paying collectively. And I get that. I've pointed it out as a core problem here. It's not even limited to the public transport system as it happens.

At some point, as a country, we have to cop on to the fact that our lives will be full of more stupidities like the M50 second bridge (because the first one was enough) and the cross city Luas works (because of course it wasn't necessary to join up the lines) every time we do something on the cheap in the short term which winds up costing a fortune in the long term.

In the meantime, it's not wrong to point out that monthly commuter fares for Dublin City's bus service are comparatively expensive unless you're a power user taking the bus at least three times a day. And that this is counterproductive if Dublin Bus has a desire to reduce the number of people having interaction with the driver at journey start.

I don't disagree with what you are saying in terms of investment in our infrastructure, but you need to read the political realities of our current situation. Whether you like it or not, that's what the government have to work within.

Right now I don't expect rapid change, it simply is not going to happen in our public sector, be it in any of the departments - transport, health, environment, etc., because we are constrained by what we can afford.

At the same time the companies have to operate within their means and that includes what the government is prepared to give by way of PSO grants. As a result they are constrained in what they can afford in terms of changes in revenues.

All of that militates against any rapid change, and I just think that (whether you like it or not), you need to accept that's the environment in which our public transport companies will have to operate for the next few years.

On your last point, I will again say that the monthly/annual tickets were never aimed at short trip users, and expecting them to be is pushing things a bit. They were always aimed at the 13+ stage fare or multiple daily bus users. They would have covered the 8-13 stage users too, but as I pointed out that fare dropped dramatically in January for anyone using LEAP.

BoatMad

cgcsb wrote: »

Bar France, I think taxes on income here are pretty steep comparatively. VAT is also eye watering compared to the rest of Europe. In the UK they pay roughly the same tax on their incomes and less on VAT, they also maintain a free national health service. And after all that can still sweep streets and change light bulbs. There certainly isn't grass comming through the pavement/cobbels/public drains like

You might compare uk on population density , roads per pop et. Not to mention inner city areas that look like war zones. The uk has it's fair share of issues with public service too

BoatMad

Calina wrote: »

But what you're saying is that regular commuters have limited options. I mean, the monthly ticket is absolutely not attractive at 132E a month for someone whose commute costs around 85E per month using single Leap fares. I want to reiterate this because any time someone mentions Dublin Bus/expensive in the same breath, someone pops up and says "Leap" like it will magically make things better. Some of us are already ahead of that race.

And a lot of people don't want to account for transport on an annual basis for various practical reasons.



I don't see the taxsaver scheme as attractive to be honest. That represents a transport subsidy either which way - why not cut the price of the commuter tickets and pay the tax rebate as a subsidy? I imagine there would be an administrative saving by doing so too.



I actually don't object to paying taxes for improved services. Again, what you are saying is that in Ireland, people do not want to pay for a decent transport system. They want as little as they can get away with paying collectively. And I get that. I've pointed it out as a core problem here. It's not even limited to the public transport system as it happens.

At some point, as a country, we have to cop on to the fact that our lives will be full of more stupidities like the M50 second bridge (because the first one was enough) and the cross city Luas works (because of course it wasn't necessary to join up the lines) every time we do something on the cheap in the short term which winds up costing a fortune in the long term.

In the meantime, it's not wrong to point out that monthly commuter fares for Dublin City's bus service are comparatively expensive unless you're a power user taking the bus at least three times a day. And that this is counterproductive if Dublin Bus has a desire to reduce the number of people having interaction with the driver at journey start.

The m50 was the child of road planning from the 70s and demand projection was simply wrong. A three lane motorway with full free flow should obviously have been built from the start.

There is also now a need to build an outer orbital as well as an eastern motorway tunnel in my opinion.

LUAS cross city actually will have engineering track connections to the red line, were it deemed useful, fully upgrading the connections to support full tram lengths wouldn't be difficult

I actually don't object to paying taxes for improved services. Again, what you are saying is that in Ireland, people do not want to pay for a decent transport system. They want as little as they can get away with paying collectively. And I get that. I've pointed it out as a core problem here. It's not even limited to the public transport system as it happens.

No different to most countries , uk , France, even Sweden , where attempts are being made to scale back the welfare state ( also Finland)

Carawaystick

Calina wrote: »

At some point, as a country, we have to cop on to the fact that our lives will be full of more stupidities like the M50 second bridge (because the first one was enough)

I'm unsure of your point here.
Are you saying there should have been an 8 lane bridge built linking Tallaght to Blanchardstown from the get go?
Or allowing Liam Lawlor, Raephael Burke and Jailbird George (I save a lot) Redmond organise our infrastructure?
Or that we should be paying 500million for a bridge that cost 28 million?

Or that there's no safe & sane way to cross the liffey on a bike in Co Dublin from N-S above Islandbridge
(Chapelizod is safe, if you want to cycle from Islandbridge gate of the Park up, but that's hardly sane.)

Calina

lxflyer wrote: »

On your last point, I will again say that the monthly/annual tickets were never aimed at short trip users, and expecting them to be is pushing things a bit. They were always aimed at the 13+ stage fare or multiple daily bus users. They would have covered the 8-13 stage users too, but as I pointed out that fare dropped dramatically in January for anyone using LEAP.

I hear what you're saying. The problem is this: my understanding is that there is a desire to reduce the number of passengers requiring interaction with the driver. It isn't enough to do away with cash fares here because anyone wanting a journal of less than 13 stages has to interact with the driver, Leap card or not.

Hence, I'm trying to point out that one good way to do this would be to reduce the monthly tickets to about 90E. The core objective I am trying to support is reduction of driver/passenger interaction.

BoatMad wrote: »

No different to most countries , uk , France, even Sweden , where attempts are being made to scale back the welfare state ( also Finland)

There's a core difference between the welfare state and the public transport system. A decent public transport system supports economic growth and is an investment.

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'm unsure of your point here.
Are you saying there should have been an 8 lane bridge built linking Tallaght to Blanchardstown from the get go?
Or allowing Liam Lawlor, Raephael Burke and Jailbird George (I save a lot) Redmond organise our infrastructure?
Or that we should be paying 500million for a bridge that cost 28 million?

Or that there's no safe & sane way to cross the liffey on a bike in Co Dublin from N-S above Islandbridge
(Chapelizod is safe, if you want to cycle from Islandbridge gate of the Park up, but that's hardly sane.)

My point is the Irish approach to everything seems to be "yerrah it'll be grand" rather than doing stuff properly.

But your mileage may vary.

LXFlyer

Calina wrote: »

I hear what you're saying. The problem is this: my understanding is that there is a desire to reduce the number of passengers requiring interaction with the driver. It isn't enough to do away with cash fares here because anyone wanting a journal of less than 13 stages has to interact with the driver, Leap card or not.

Hence, I'm trying to point out that one good way to do this would be to reduce the monthly tickets to about 90E. The core objective I am trying to support is reduction of driver/passenger interaction.

I suspect that would result in a drop in company revenues though - and who will plug that gap? The company has to remain solvent (legally)!


Someone has to pay, and so far the companies and you and I have been bearing the burden, while the PSO funding has been cut back.

Calina

lxflyer wrote: »

I suspect that would result in a drop in company revenues though - and who will plug that gap? The company has to remain solvent (legally)!

This is something which could potentially be sorted by a visionary transport and a visionary industry Minister imo.

One of the primary issues I have with public transport in Dublin is that it's fundamentally unpredictable in terms of journey duration. Sure, RTI tells me when the bus is coming so that I reduce the amount of time I spend standing at a bus stop more in hope than anything else, but I have a journey time that is varying between 25 and 45 minutes at the moment, same journey, same route, generally departing in the 7.35-7.55 window. I believe this is an issue a lot of people have with public transport and at the moment, I don't have an alternative because of my current work location.

If we are looking to get more people to switch to public transport, then journey time reliability becomes important. What I'm driving at here is that if we a) reduce the dwell time linked to passenger interaction with the driver and b) allowed people to alight and exit at both doors and c) put an 800m gap between bus stops, we might see better journey time reliability.

I recognise that the bus companies need to stay solvent. One way of doing so would be by getting more people to travel with them.

I'd be interested in suitably anonymised journey payment data from Dublin Bus. I'd really like to see what the usage clusters are. I'd even analyse it for one route/one day just to get a feel if I could. But I suspect that data won't come available for commercial reasons.

Aard

Wrt journey time reliability, the suggestions from the Transport Study should help greatly.

It's something that the operators have little control over. There needs to be infrastructural change. Advnced green lights for buses. Better segregation for buses. Bus-only streets (Georges St anyone? Too much for wee Dublin?). More city centre streets opened up for buses rather than everthing going through College Green / OCS.

LXFlyer

Calina wrote: »

This is something which could potentially be sorted by a visionary transport and a visionary industry Minister imo.

One of the primary issues I have with public transport in Dublin is that it's fundamentally unpredictable in terms of journey duration. Sure, RTI tells me when the bus is coming so that I reduce the amount of time I spend standing at a bus stop more in hope than anything else, but I have a journey time that is varying between 25 and 45 minutes at the moment, same journey, same route, generally departing in the 7.35-7.55 window. I believe this is an issue a lot of people have with public transport and at the moment, I don't have an alternative because of my current work location.

If we are looking to get more people to switch to public transport, then journey time reliability becomes important. What I'm driving at here is that if we a) reduce the dwell time linked to passenger interaction with the driver and b) allowed people to alight and exit at both doors and c) put an 800m gap between bus stops, we might see better journey time reliability.

I recognise that the bus companies need to stay solvent. One way of doing so would be by getting more people to travel with them.

I'd be interested in suitably anonymised journey payment data from Dublin Bus. I'd really like to see what the usage clusters are. I'd even analyse it for one route/one day just to get a feel if I could. But I suspect that data won't come available for commercial reasons.

Most of those issues are down to infrastructure and in particular the ongoing LUAS works which are causing mayhem - that is the main cause of journey time unpredictability at the moment.


I just think you need to appreciate that I suspect the NTA want exactly the same as you, but have more realistic timescales in which to deliver it. What you want will not happen overnight, but I think over several years it is deliverable.


That much I think you're going to have to accept.

ezra_pound

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

@ Calina, I am sure you already know this, but in case others are not aware, there is a weekly cap of €27.50 for Dublin Bus. That now includes Expresso which I think is new.

https://www.leapcard.ie/en/PageSetting/ContentViewer.aspx?Val=T%2FHcRN0lgkhyO2TJbCpdXbpkQ6D59bgR9MwK7i5q52U2rfQVZcNw%2BAb2e13wL37V62K83icu4wP%2FKxugVQHB8%2Ftfq8sS44StQmsdGiKYqRWG4lf%2Bgc7EYaq1dJckxC1SOs8Oi5WHyaggCxyPdGXNqCkz6KJl%2FC2vRG9pBSEkDcc%3D&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

So that means €110 per month unlimited travel on DB. Which is high I know, but not that bad just the same.

Best bet is TaxSaver.

Actually it's over 119 euro a month!

bk

lxflyer, I really couldn't disagree with you more on this matter.

Personally I don't think there is a better time to introduce flat fares then now:

- DB made a significant profit of 12 million last year
- Oil prices are down
- Ireland, in particular Dublin is coming out of the recession. It is clear to see that traffic and passenger numbers are well on their way back to celtic tiger levels.
- DB themselves are projecting significant increases in passenger numbers and thus revenue and profits over the next few years.
- All planning agencies are expecting big increases in the number of people living in Dublin over the next few years and thus the increasing importance and usage of buses, see the NTA city center plan.
- 90 new buses to be acquired this year (older buses being kept on to expand the fleet)
- 50 extra drivers to be hired this year in addition to the 160 last year
- Big increase in staff in the RPU

Non of this sounds like a company who is doing badly. Quiet the opposite, it sounds like a company who is doing extremely well and expanding.

Better now to implement the radical changes, before the congestion gets really bad on the streets.

You also continually ignore the point that a simplified flat fare and the resulting improvements in dwell time and thus journey time will likely lead to a not insignificant increase in passenger numbers. Also their is the point that reducing journey times will allow them to turn around the buses quicker and get better utilisation out of the same number of drivers and buses.

Also I find it incredibly hard to believe that the NTA doesn't have the ticketing information to allow them to set the flat fare at a level that on the whole would be revenue neutral.

I'd even be in support of the NTA filling the gap in any lose of revenue due to this change. Worse case scenario it would be only a few million and they could always adjust the flat fare up to make up for it or even return to the old fare system if it was a real failure.

But I honestly don't believe that would be necessary, I expect the opposite would happen and that it would be very successful and result in higher profits, just as it did for Lothian bus when they introduced flat fares.

And I think it is quiet obvious that the NTA are preparing to do so, just look at the current fares:

€1.50
€2.05
€2.05
€2.60

Looks very symmetrical to me, .55 cent lower and higher then the average fare. The next step is obvious, increase stage 1 to 3 fare from €1.50 by .55 cent to €2.05 and decrease the €2.60 fare by .55 cent to €2.05.

We then have a nice flat fare of €2.05, make it €2.10 if you want, though it would be better overall if they could make it a nice round €2 to start with. Then the complaints of the less then stage 3 people would be easily ignored by the majority of bus passengers.

Sure you might lose some stage 1 to 3 people but I'd guess you will gain lots of stage 13+ people to make up for it.

You would also benefit from wiping out fare dodging by underpaying fares. I believe a lot of people who ask for the €1.50 fare are in fact travelling much further, as a passenger I've seen that happen a few times myself.

Being typical cautious Irish I could see them not introducing the high flat cash fare initially, in order to reduce the shock to the stage 1 to 3 people. Get the flat leap fare in first and leave it settle in for a year or two while continuing to gradually increase cash fares, then also switch to a single high cash fare, before finally (10 years from now) going cashless.

Seriously there are so many upsides to this:
- Simpler and easier to understand fares
- Much faster dwell times
- Faster journey times
- Much less interaction with drivers, drivers can focus on their primary job, safely driving the bus.
- More customers
- Better utilisation of buses due to journey times improvements.

Really, it is a win, win all around, for drivers, passengers and the company. I'll remind you that Dublin Bus themselves, previously tried to introduce a flat fare, but was blocked by the government at the time. So clearly they would be in favour of it too.

LXFlyer

Conveniently you ignore the fact that there are €40m of accumulated losses that still need to be recouped, a balance sheet that is qualified and has net current liabilities, and whose pay costs are returning to normal again. Yes the company performance is improving but there is a long way to go to get it back to normal.

You could do well perhaps to do a basic accounting course before making daft assertions.

beauf

Well if you want to increase numbers you have to make it more desirable. Making it simpler and easier is part of that. Also time unreliability is helped by increased frequency, at least on some routes. Especially if you can easily switch from one mode to another.

Van.Bosch

bk wrote: »

Looks very symmetrical to me, .55 cent lower and higher then the average fare. The next step is obvious, increase stage 1 to 3 fare from €1.50 by .55 cent to €2.05 and decrease the €2.60 fare by .55 cent to €2.05.

We then have a nice flat fare of €2.05, make it €2.10 if you want, though it would be better overall if they could make it a nice round €2 to start with. Then the complaints of the less then stage 3 people would be easily ignored by the majority of bus passengers.

Sure you might lose some stage 1 to 3 people but I'd guess you will gain lots of stage 13+ people to make up for it.

You would also benefit from wiping out fare dodging by underpaying fares. I believe a lot of people who ask for the €1.50 fare are in fact travelling much further, as a passenger I've seen that happen a few times myself.


Being typical cautious Irish I could see them not introducing the high flat cash fare initially, in order to reduce the shock to the stage 1 to 3 people. Get the flat leap fare in first and leave it settle in for a year or two while continuing to gradually increase cash fares, then also switch to a single high cash fare, before finally (10 years from now) going cashless.

So a flat fare on leap but not on cash? So for people on stage 1-3 the cash fare is cheaper? Sure that would increase dwell times surely. There cannot be a situation where cash < leap.

It will be interesting to see the 2016 fares, i suspect you are right and we will see another band removed.

cdebru

Van.Bosch wrote: »

So a flat fare on leap but not on cash? So for people on stage 1-3 the cash fare is cheaper? Sure that would increase dwell times surely. There cannot be a situation where cash < leap.

It will be interesting to see the 2016 fares, i suspect you are right and we will see another band removed.

I would presume that bk would envisage the current 1.95 for 1-3 stages would rise to at least 2.10 or higher so there would be no benefit to paying cash.
I agree with bk the NTA have to have the information that they could work out what should be a cost neutral flat fare.

bk

lxflyer wrote: »

You could do well perhaps to do a basic accounting course before making daft assertions.

!!! attack the post, not the poster!

Either way, fares are now decided by the NTA, so it will be up to them, not DB, if they want to introduce a flat fare or not.

As I mentioned and which you ignored, I'm quiet happy to see the NTA subsidise any gap in revenue by trying to go flat fare.

But I honestly don't believe that will be necessary, every example of bus companies having gone flat fare have been widely successful. But you never seem to acknowledge that!

Van.Bosch wrote: »

So a flat fare on leap but not on cash? So for people on stage 1-3 the cash fare is cheaper? Sure that would increase dwell times surely. There cannot be a situation where cash < leap.

Well I'd obviously prefer if they went the full distance from the start and introduced a high cash flat fare, but I think they are a little more conservative then that, so instead they will keep the cash fares around for a while.

Just like how the Stages 4 to 7 and Stages 8 to 13, cash bands are different, but they have merged them for Leap. Actually this is the clearest indication that they are working towards a flat leap fare.

I'd also expect that they will increase the stage 1 to 3 cash fare to the same or more then the Leap flat fare of €2 to €2.10, to avoid this problem.

I'd expect that they would continue to increase all the cash fare bands over the next few years while keeping the Leap flat fare relatively steady to put more distance between the cash fares and Leap and to make Leap more attractive.

Van.Bosch wrote: »

It will be interesting to see the 2016 fares, i suspect you are right and we will see another band removed.

Yeah, they could alternatively merge the 13+ band into 4 to 13 band, but leave the 1 to 3 band. So anyone going 4 or more stages would use the right hand validator.

The downside of this is that it might have more impact on DB's revenue. They would lose 50 cent of 13+ passengers, but not gain anything from the 1 to 3 stage passenger.

On the other hand if you merge them all at the same time, then it would more likely to balance out. They would lose 55 cent from 13+ passengers, but gain 55cent from the 1 to 3 stage passengers.

You can see the symmetry in the upcoming changes from last years changes.

Last year they went from:
Stage 04 to 07 €1.95 to €2.05 (+10 cent)
Stage 07 to 13 €2.15 to €2.05 (-10 cent)

A very balanced meeting in the middle. We now have:

Stage 01 to 03 €1.50 (-55 cent from average)
Stage 04 to 13 €2.05
Stage 000 13+ €2.60 (+55 cent from average)

Really what they are going to do is blindingly obvious.

I guarantee that the child fare will become a €1 flat fare this year. It is currently €0.90 (stage 1 to 7) and €1.10 (stage 7+). Whatever about the adult fare, a very easy simplification here.

I'd love to see them make the Leap flat fare €2. Imagine the great marketing they could do with that? "Travel as far as you like on Dublin Bus for just €2"

It would be fantastic marketing and I'm certain it would draw lots of new passengers to Dublin Bus.

Aard

Flat fare would also make revenue protection staff next to redundant. More savings there.

A lot of 1-3 stage fares are probably people travelling a longer distance. So while some 1-3 stage passengers may decide to walk/bike should that fare increase, many if not most of those passengers will continue using the bus. Big increase in revenue from this cohort.

bk

Aard wrote: »

Flat fare would also make revenue protection staff next to redundant. More savings there.

It would certainly help, though they would still be needed to check free travel passes (that they aren't fake and actually belong to the person in question).

And to be honest, it is the FTA pass where the worst fraud happens.

Aard wrote: »

A lot of 1-3 stage fares are probably people travelling a longer distance. So while some 1-3 stage passengers may decide to walk/bike should that fare increase, many if not most of those passengers will continue using the bus. Big increase in revenue from this cohort.

I agree and I've seen it a few times myself. The worst was when a girl (mid 20's and professionally dressed) gets on in front of me at O'Connell Street and asks for the €1.50 fare. Driver looks at her suspiciously and asks where specifically she was going, she says Merrion Square. I end up sitting behind her upstairs, no surprise, she is still sitting there when I get off at the RDS!

I wonder if the driver challenged her when she tried to get off? He was definitely suspicious when she was getting on.

I suspect many if not most stage 1 to 3 fares are at least questionable.

BTW if they lose some genuine stage 1 to 3 passengers to walking/cycling, that would actually be good for society in general and in line with normal public transport policy which is to discourage such passengers from taking public transport and to walk/cycle instead, thus freeing up more space for long distance commuters who have no other option. That is why most public transport has a relatively high initial base fare, but then only gradually increases the further you travel (see Luas and DART fares for instance).

I expect any lose of stage 1 to 3 passengers would more then be made up for in an increased number of stage 13+ passengers.

patrickbrophy18

While banning cars from Dublin City Centre Streets is all well and good, a more holistic plan needs to be put in place for the entire county and preferably one which makes public transport more attractive as well as cycling. We are still a long way off in this regard. For example, if buses are mooted not to be terminating in Dublin City anymore, does this mean that the routes which currently terminate in there are going to become cross city routes?

One route that currently does this well is the 4 which goes from Monkstown Avenue to Harristown. However, a few more routes could do with taking a leaf out of it's book. The 7 and 8 are some examples which could terminate in locations other than Mountjoy Square. For instance, the 7 could terminate in Liffey Valley while the 8 could terminate in Blanchardstown. The 11 could be extended to terminate in Carrickmines Retail park. These are just some suggestions.

As to the infrastructure in the Dublin Suburbs. This will also need to be heavily reconfigured in such a way as to allow the seamless and quick traversal of bus routes so that they can behave more like rapid transit services and less like a chauffeur service. I've said it once and I'll say it again, speed is key in promoting public transportation routes. As well as that, public transport can't be attractive if routes resemble a spider web from a birds eye point of view. The 59 and 63 are local routes which exhibit this.

These routes should have proper grade-separated cycle tracks to enable safe feeding of cyclists to public transportation nodes. It is also important that they facilitate cyclists wishing to do bike trips from places as far out as Dun Laoghaire, Dalkey and Bray to Dublin City i.e. independent of public transport. That way, it promotes hybrid trips (bike-bus/train/tram) and standalone cycle trips for the keenest and fittest of cyclists.

Yes, there are going to be places that are architecturally sensitive. But, there are always going to be logical workarounds like one-way systems. I still maintain that some architectural sacrifices will need to be made as you can't impose conservation laws everywhere within a half mile radius of such areas. There are still missing pieces of the urban to suburban transport jigsaw puzzle that need to be filled in so that maximum coverage is achieved.

Once the suburbs have been reconfigured and travel patterns move away from the private car, we can begin pedestrianization of many of the thoroughfares along urban and suburban towns to make them more pleasant to do business, socialize and relax. Grafton Street and Henry Street are prime examples of how successful pedestrianizing shop streets have been.

Finally, it is absolutely vital that DART Underground and Metro North are build as well as the Luas Extension to Broombridge and the DART Airport Spur at Clongriffin. Combined, each piece of infrastructure coupled with a heavily enforced ban on cars in Dublin City should allow them to flourish both financially and statistically.

crushproof

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

While banning cars from Dublin City Centre Streets is all well and good, a more holistic plan needs to be put in place for the entire county and preferably one which makes public transport more attractive as well as cycling. We are still a long way off in this regard. For example, if buses are mooted not to be terminating in Dublin City anymore, does this mean that the routes which currently terminate in there are going to become cross city routes?

One route that currently does this well is the 4 which goes from Monkstown Avenue to Harristown. However, a few more routes could do with taking a leaf out of it's book. The 7 and 8 are some examples which could terminate in locations other than Mountjoy Square. For instance, the 7 could terminate in Liffey Valley while the 8 could terminate in Blanchardstown. The 11 could be extended to terminate in Carrickmines Retail park. These are just some suggestions.

As to the infrastructure in the Dublin Suburbs. This will also need to be heavily reconfigured in such a way as to allow the seamless and quick traversal of bus routes so that they can behave more like rapid transit services and less like a chauffeur service. I've said it once and I'll say it again, speed is key in promoting public transportation routes. As well as that, public transport can't be attractive if routes resemble a spider web from a birds eye point of view. The 59 and 63 are local routes which exhibit this.

These routes should have proper grade-separated cycle tracks to enable safe feeding of cyclists to public transportation nodes. It is also important that they facilitate cyclists wishing to do bike trips from places as far out as Dun Laoghaire, Dalkey and Bray to Dublin City i.e. independent of public transport. That way, it promotes hybrid trips (bike-bus/train/tram) and standalone cycle trips for the keenest and fittest of cyclists.

Yes, there are going to be places that are architecturally sensitive. But, there are always going to be logical workarounds like one-way systems. I still maintain that some architectural sacrifices will need to be made as you can't impose conservation laws everywhere within a half mile radius of such areas. There are still missing pieces of the urban to suburban transport jigsaw puzzle that need to be filled in so that maximum coverage is achieved.

Once the suburbs have been reconfigured and travel patterns move away from the private car, we can begin pedestrianization of many of the thoroughfares along urban and suburban towns to make them more pleasant to do business, socialize and relax. Grafton Street and Henry Street are prime examples of how successful pedestrianizing shop streets have been.

Finally, it is absolutely vital that DART Underground and Metro North are build as well as the Luas Extension to Broombridge and the DART Airport Spur at Clongriffin. Combined, each piece of infrastructure coupled with a heavily enforced ban on cars in Dublin City should allow them to flourish both financially and statistically.

Twas April Fool's day months ago Pat :pac: Unfortunately what you've said is a pipe dream in Dublin's eyes, we're light years away from any semblance of sustainable integrated transport.

MrMorooka

Truly awful article in the Indo about this : http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/restricting-access-to-the-capital-will-not-solve-traffic-chaos-31348668.html

Banjoxed

Seriously, if you are earning a living writing "why oh why" Daily Mail style articles you can afford a taxi.

_Kaiser_

MrMorooka wrote: »

Truly awful article in the Indo about this : http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/restricting-access-to-the-capital-will-not-solve-traffic-chaos-31348668.html

She has a point - actually several of them... but once again this will be shouted down by the consensus that demands we completely reconfigure the city centre to appear like grown-ups (because shure isn't that they way they do these things in Europe?) and because of an inferiority complex that demands every form of public transport in a small low-density city (where the residents are being forced further and further out because of a housing/rental crisis).

Unless phase 2 of the plan IS to address the outer-city transport methods as well, and do something about the hoardes of methadone addicts roaming the inner city, closing down the tacky amusement arcades, endless fast food joints, and phone repair/accessory shops, then all these plans will do is inconvenience those who HAVE to travel into the city (for work or education) and push those who are doing so for leisure or shopping to suburban alternatives.

I genuinely would have no reason whatsoever to go into the city centre 99.9% of the time anymore. Shopping is handled by the suburban centres or online, food, drink and entertainment likewise - and I certainly don't need the hassle and expense of parking, or wasting the day taking the "scenic route" on public transport.. when it shows up that is!

The ONLY way this nonsense would be a good idea is if it was integrated with plans for those who come into the city from outside D3/D4 (maybe P&R facilities that are free or integrated with the fare - eg: in Cork there's a very successful P&R that for a fiver gives you parking and a return fare in and out with very frequent buses), revisal of planning permissions and incentives to encourage development of enough secure high-rise, high-density, euro-sized apartment complexes to drive rents down and make city centre living financially viable and attractive for those who don't WANT to spend hours commuting to a 3-bed semi-D in the middle of nowhere.
Alongside that of course is a requirement to crackdown on crime and get the junkies and beggars off the city streets.

Do all that and maybe this plan would work.. as it stands though it'll just make life harder for those with no alternatives (as usual) and push the traffic issues further out as people stay local instead.

MJohnston

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Unless phase 2 of the plan IS to address the outer-city transport methods as well, and do something about the hoardes of methadone addicts roaming the inner city, closing down the tacky amusement arcades, endless fast food joints, and phone repair/accessory shops, then all these plans will do is inconvenience those who HAVE to travel into the city (for work or education) and push those who are doing so for leisure or shopping to suburban alternatives.

I genuinely would have no reason whatsoever to go into the city centre 99.9% of the time anymore. Shopping is handled by the suburban centres or online, food, drink and entertainment likewise - and I certainly don't need the hassle and expense of parking, or wasting the day taking the "scenic route" on public transport.. when it shows up that is!

Sorry, but this part of your post I have to say I think is anecdotal nonsense - you're applying the standards of what you want from an inner city to the rest of us.

If you can point to any suburban centres (perhaps Ranelagh or Stoneybatter might the closest competition) that offer the range of superb food and drinking options that are available in the city centre in areas like South William Street, or Fade Street, or Liffey Street, or Georges Street, or indeed the boutique shopping options available on Exchequer Street, Dawson Street, and adjoining areas, well then you might have a point, but in my opinion, and surely in the opinions of the thousands I see in these areas every night of the week, there is absolutely reason to travel into or to the city centre.

beauf

A lot of people meet socially in the city center as its central for them, and has the most options for public transport for people coming from different directions.

nowecant

7AM to 7PM Bus Gate from August to November. Or will they keep it in place longer?

http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-major-traffic-luas-works-cross-city-2206095-Jul2015/

Thinkingaboutit

MrMorooka wrote: »

Truly awful article in the Indo about this : http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/restricting-access-to-the-capital-will-not-solve-traffic-chaos-31348668.html

If they cannot afford taxis, the Indo journos should cut down [mod: we'll leave it at that]

Anyhow banning cars now will simply wreck city centre commerce. Alternate ways of getting there are barely adequate. Maybe later.

cgcsb

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

If they cannot afford taxis, the Indo journos should cut down [mod: we'll leave it at that]

Anyhow banning cars now will simply wreck city centre commerce. Alternate ways of getting there are barely adequate. Maybe later.

what kind of a mad loon drives into town to go shopping anyway?

Macy0161

There was an interesting piece on Utrecht on the ITV Tour De France rest day show yesterday. Contrary to what I thought, it was a conscience decision in the 70's in the Netherlands to move away from cars towards bicycle and pedestrian friendly cities, and it actually reinvigorated the city centres rather than kill commerce. In the 60's there were demolishing buildings to make bigger and wider roads, and now they're having to build multi-storey bike racks to cope with the amount of bikes!

Cookie_Monster

Macy0161 wrote: »

There was an interesting piece on Utrecht on the ITV Tour De France rest day show yesterday. Contrary to what I thought, it was a conscience decision in the 70's in the Netherlands to move away from cars towards bicycle and pedestrian friendly cities, and it actually reinvigorated the city centres rather than kill commerce. In the 60's there were demolishing buildings to make bigger and wider roads, and now they're having to build multi-storey bike racks to cope with the amount of bikes!

plenty of talk about it on the opening day too. Newest bikepacrk will have space for 5,000 bikes (maybe it was ten?)
It's all very impressive.

nowecant

cgcsb wrote: »

what kind of a mad loon drives into town to go shopping anyway?

My housemate! Or at least he claims that he should be able to whenever he wants. This is a guy who wont go into the city centre for a pint from just outside the canal because he claims all the pubs are too full.

He still wants to be 'able' to drive down Grafton street if he wants to....

Seriously there is no satisfying some people

cgcsb

nowecant wrote: »

My housemate! Or at least he claims that he should be able to whenever he wants. This is a guy who wont go into the city centre for a pint from just outside the canal because he claims all the pubs are too full.

He still wants to be 'able' to drive down Grafton street if he wants to....

Seriously there is no satisfying some people

such people can be congestion charged back to reality.

ClovenHoof

Are newspaper journalists aware that Dublin has more than 2 streets?

Irish Steve

Nearly 200 posts in, and no one has mentioned that for a city centre to work, it has to have a number of different factors, all of them working in some degree of unison.

Most of what's been talked about so far is public transport, cycling, and car usage. The missing factor in this is that city centres need residents if they are to remain viable and active, and those residents need support services for things like deliveries, some of which have to be made during normal working hours. There are also the requirements to be able to deliver to business premises, but not to deliver goods that will be used as part of the business activity.

Yes, it's specific, and I know a lot about it because I used to be very closely involved, and that's things like delivering fresh flowers. That might be a bouquet to a person for a special occasion, or it might be flowers for a business like a hotel, or it may be a lot of flowers to somewhere like a church for a wedding. In order to make those sorts of deliveries, the vehicle has to be able to get access to the area, and to be able to park for however long is appropriate to make the delivery. For a retail delivery, that might be as short as 10 minutes, for a large wedding in a church, the preparation time could well be several hours, and access to the vehicle is needed on a regular basis to collect the stock and related material that are needed for that work.

Whatever about making the city centre flow, there is also a requirement to make it accessible to the business community that makes it work, and that means that there has to be access and acceptable parking in the centre so that these activities can be carried out, and all too often, there is NO planning or serious thought given to making these essential services possible. Days like Valentine's day were a nightmare, because finding parking within reasonable distances from the delivery address was often just not possible, and if you've 20 deliveries( or more) on the vehicle, you can't spend 20 minutes walking from some distance away because there's no local parking closer to the address that you need to go to.

Keeping cars out of certain areas is probably the right way to go, but removing all vehicles from an area doesn't make that area work, and it can and does cause significant problems for service providers who need to be able to get access to the area during "normal" hours.

Changing the subject slightly now, why is it that we still don't have good, accessible large park and ride facilities in the area of the M50, with regular extended hours fast non stop links from those park and ride into the areas of peak demand? If it can work for cities of 100,000 people, then I'm sure it could be made to work for a city the size of Dublin.

Leap card, bluntly, too little, too late, too slow, too messy, and the problems with short stage journeys have already been rehearsed by others. The system in Amsterdam works, we were there a long time ago, and I was recently in Istanbul, and they have a similar system to LEAP there, but it's simpler, quicker, and cheaper to use, and it works well. Why can't we do it here, is it that there are too many vested interests that don't really want it to work well? I don't know, but somehow, there has to be fundamental change that makes things like LEAP a viable and faster option than the way it works now.

For me, the focus of too many of these reviews and reports is too narrow, and too much focussed on being anti commuter, with the result that the end product causes major problems for other users that have just as much right and requirement to be able to use the centre of the city. Removing all vehicles from some streets may solve some problems, but you may be sure that it will cause others, which may not even have been thought of, and fixing them can be a lot more complicated.

It will be interesting to see how this works out going forward.

monument

Irish Steve wrote: »

Nearly 200 posts in, and no one has mentioned that for a city centre to work, it has to have a number of different factors, all of them working in some degree of unison.

Most of what's been talked about so far is public transport, cycling, and car usage. The missing factor in this is that city centres need residents if they are to remain viable and active, and those residents need support services for things like deliveries, some of which have to be made during normal working hours. There are also the requirements to be able to deliver to business premises, but not to deliver goods that will be used as part of the business activity.

How does anything planned so-far block deliveries to residents or businesses in ways which can be overcome and which many cities have already overcome?

Irish Steve wrote: »

Yes, it's specific, and I know a lot about it because I used to be very closely involved, and that's things like delivering fresh flowers. That might be a bouquet to a person for a special occasion, or it might be flowers for a business like a hotel, or it may be a lot of flowers to somewhere like a church for a wedding. In order to make those sorts of deliveries, the vehicle has to be able to get access to the area, and to be able to park for however long is appropriate to make the delivery. For a retail delivery, that might be as short as 10 minutes, for a large wedding in a church, the preparation time could well be several hours, and access to the vehicle is needed on a regular basis to collect the stock and related material that are needed for that work.

Whatever about making the city centre flow, there is also a requirement to make it accessible to the business community that makes it work, and that means that there has to be access and acceptable parking in the centre so that these activities can be carried out, and all too often, there is NO planning or serious thought given to making these essential services possible. Days like Valentine's day were a nightmare, because finding parking within reasonable distances from the delivery address was often just not possible, and if you've 20 deliveries( or more) on the vehicle, you can't spend 20 minutes walking from some distance away because there's no local parking closer to the address that you need to go to.

There's no planned massive loss of loading access or loading bay space. The percentage of streets with major restrictions planned is small. But I agree it has to be handled well and loading needs to be better planned.

Generally speaking: Individual deliveries of flowers to residents etc on Valentine's Day or any other day is not an essential services and such activities should be ranked lowly in overall terms and even in terms of goods/loading access.

As with many types of changes, sometimes businesses should adapt, not everybody else. Adapting might mean walking / hauling goods that little bit further or switching to cargo bike. There's scope for business and city to look at options, like allowing Cargohopper services to access suitable pedestrian streets, bicycle-only streets, and bus only streets.

Irish Steve wrote: »

Changing the subject slightly now, why is it that we still don't have good, accessible large park and ride facilities in the area of the M50, with regular extended hours fast non stop links from those park and ride into the areas of peak demand? If it can work for cities of 100,000 people, then I'm sure it could be made to work for a city the size of Dublin.

The Red Cow is one example that's there and is well-used, Navan Road will likely work when the station is served by Dart, and, within the city centre plan, there's P&R planned for Heuston Station.

Irish Steve wrote: »

Leap card, bluntly, too little, too late, too slow, too messy, and the problems with short stage journeys have already been rehearsed by others. The system in Amsterdam works, we were there a long time ago, and I was recently in Istanbul, and they have a similar system to LEAP there, but it's simpler, quicker, and cheaper to use, and it works well. Why can't we do it here, is it that there are too many vested interests that don't really want it to work well? I don't know, but somehow, there has to be fundamental change that makes things like LEAP a viable and faster option than the way it works now.

Agreed.

Irish Steve wrote: »

For me, the focus of too many of these reviews and reports is too narrow, and too much focussed on being anti commuter, with the result that the end product causes major problems for other users that have just as much right and requirement to be able to use the centre of the city.

Anti commuter? What?

And can you elaborate on: "other users that have just as much right and requirement to be able to use the centre of the city" -- what users on what modes are you talking about?

Irish Steve wrote: »

Removing all vehicles from some streets may solve some problems, but you may be sure that it will cause others, which may not even have been thought of, and fixing them can be a lot more complicated.

That's so vague that I can safely say that, on balance, the positives to the city and its people and visitors likely outweigh any negatives.

Spanish Eyes

The LEAP card needs to be FANTASTIC value for money. It is not. I put €50 on it recently and it just disappeared. That admittedly was using bus/DART or bus/LUAS. only once or twice a week. I know there is a cap, but it is just very expensive for what you get.

And it is cumbersome as already mentioned. Interraction with the driver is crazy, so time consuming and terrible for those who can just use the validator. The times I have been sitting on a bus for nearly ten minutes for loading the thing where the driver is involved is unreal.

Anyway, first things first. Flat fares. How does the Oyster system work on the buses in London with all the zones? I used one there last year and the cap was the trick. Just use the validator. But over here? A journey into and out of town on a 2.05 fare means interraction with the driver twice.

Should the cap be reduced?

Apologies, I am just rambling here while having a cup of tea with one eye on the TV and the other on the laptop. I must concentrate on the issue in hand a bit more before I rant!

pclive

The hours of operation of the College Green bus corridor will be extended on the 10th August. The bus corridor will then operate 07:00hrs to 19:00hrs Mon - Fri

LXFlyer

Not before time. The works are causing significant bus congestion on Pearse Street and coming from O'Connell Street and the Quays.

Calina

lxflyer wrote: »

Not before time. The works are causing significant bus congestion on Pearse Street and coming from O'Connell Street and the Quays.

This happens even when the bus corridor is in operation. It took 20 minutes for me to get from Rosie Hackett to Dame Street on a bus one morning last week. This is not because cars can use the area. They can't at that time.

Sure the works are causing serious bus congestion but extending the bus corridor isn't going to fix the problems at times of high usage because the corridor is already in place. Personal view is that the number of buses needing to stop on D'Olier Street is a serious chokepoint for cross city buses which is just exacerbated by the works on College Green.

cgcsb

A City the size of Dublin shouldn't be reliant on buses for Centre-Suburb commuting, there should be high capacity rail routes along major corridors with buses to fill in the gaps, accommodate orbital travel and act as a feeder service.

Our collective stupidity is why buses are bumper to bumper from Smithfield to O'Connell Bridge every morning. Extending the hours of the bus gate is welcome but is not going to solve our infrastructural deficit.

LXFlyer

Calina wrote: »

This happens even when the bus corridor is in operation. It took 20 minutes for me to get from Rosie Hackett to Dame Street on a bus one morning last week. This is not because cars can use the area. They can't at that time.

Sure the works are causing serious bus congestion but extending the bus corridor isn't going to fix the problems at times of high usage because the corridor is already in place. Personal view is that the number of buses needing to stop on D'Olier Street is a serious chokepoint for cross city buses which is just exacerbated by the works on College Green.

Of course it won't solve the problem, but it might help somewhat. There is only so much that can be done when traffic is restricted to one lane in either direction.

Off-peak congestion in the area can be worse than peak times.