BusConnects Dublin - Bus Network Changes Discussion

TheChrisD

KD345 wrote: »

The 70 is actually an excellent service and is well liked and used by passengers, running direct down the N3 apart from looping Littlepace.

The 70/270 are only excellent when you happen to actually align with it's current somewhat awkward time of the hour that the buses depart at.

Right now the 270 in particular is pretty useless for someone who has to get to the Centre to start work at 11am because you have to get up an entire hour earlier to make it in on time regardless of the day of week. Similar issues arise with the regular 70 and having to be in town for the top of the hour.

If a max 8-minute wait at the Centre when going to town is the tradeoff for actually being able to leave Dunboyne at three different times of the hour off-peak, then I'm all for it.

Qrt

Stephen15 wrote: »

I'm a little unhappy myself about some of the changes in my local area regarding the local routes. The 63 which goes to DL is being replaced in Cornelscourt, Carrickmines, Ballygoan and Kilternan by the 226 and 227 both which are going to Blackrock rather than DL.

The 63 is a handy bus for me and gets used by a wide variety of school children, young people and older people. It saves a long walk up to Deansgrange or Foxrock Church to get a 46a or 75 for people in the Cabinteely area. It was recently changed to serve Pottery Road it previously served Clonkeen Road. This means it now carries more numbers than it did previously. It could be described as one of the few Network Direct success stories previously it went into the city centre infrequently before it became a local route to DL more frequently.

In my opinion DL is a more popular destination than Blackrock. The new 227 route takes a very wandery route whereas the 226 takes a more direct to Blackrock similar to the current 84 routing whereas the 227 loops wanders around Pottery Road, Abbey Road as far Caryfort Ave.

It would be better if the 229 which goes from Brides Glen to Dun Laoghaire is changed to go to Blackrock following the 227 route from Abbey Road on and the 227 takes the 229 routing from Abbey Road to DL remaining similar to the 63 is now from Ballygoan to DL.

Make sure you get involved with the consultation process. I'm sure there's a couple of oversights within the plan, Tallaght isn't changing too much but I'll be making sure any oversights are brought up.

blanch152

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Ditto for anyone living in Glenville, Delwood, Summerfield, Roselawn, Springlawn or Blanch village. Their journey will be much longer.

Kfagan10

I'm a little unhappy from a Celbridge point of view. The changes out here are clearly aimed at getting more people onto the train at peak hours, which is perfect, once capacity is there.

I think it's a big mistake to remove the existing X service at rush hour and replace with the one through Leixlip.

I haven't fully gone over the frequencies and won't slam or hype the new routes either way, yet, but from reading the graphs regarding weekend use being limited by the currently ****e 67 service, and demand being there for more, and more frequent services to town (Along C corridor) it looks somewhat promising.

Dyr

A small price to pay in the grand scheme, comrades. Your sacrifice will be appreciated

Slutmonkey57b

G_R wrote: »

But under this new system those people will have the option to get a luas to Connolly and then get a dart to Bray all for the one fare

People aren't doing that on that route at rush hour. The 145 is empty-ish up to O'Connell bridge. In the space of about 4-5 stops it is *jammed* to the rafters and cannot take on any more passengers until ucd. At ucd it swaps as many students on as it loses getting off. It then gradually empties out until around just after stillorgan, at which point it never takes on more passengers.

The problem with the route is city centre congestion (which radial or orbital route designs aren't solving) and short hop passengers using space on long route buses where they could use other options.

If anything, "frequent changes" is going to make that problem worse as the short hop assholes will just cram onto even more routes they don't belong on.

The frequency of buses on that route hasn't been worsened by congestion over the last few years. However once buses are full, you will not get on a bus until after 6.30 if you are South of the canal, but you will see buses whistling past every 10 minutes.

Qrt

blanch152 wrote: »

Ditto for anyone living in Glenville, Delwood, Summerfield, Roselawn, Springlawn or Blanch village. Their journey will be much longer.

Slightly off topic, but how much would increased permeability in these areas help? I recall reading a Fingal CC report on it and Summerfield rings a bell.

dublinman1990

If anyone was thinking about the new 7 from Dun Laoghaire to Glasnevin while going through the CC.

The Luas could be a big help here if you got off the 7 at Four Courts & use the Luas to allow you to get off at Jervis to do your shopping at Jervis SC or Abbey Street if you wanted to get off near O'Connell Street. It is a bit of a trade off when you consider that the 7 would not be able to go through Merrion Square, Westland Row, Pearse Street and Westmoreland Street or TCD anymore. Having the regular convenience of getting off or boarding the bus at O'Connell Street or on O'Connell Bridge won't be there for you either if this route was agreed to & set in stone by the NTA. But having to use the Luas at Four Courts, in theory, can get you much quicker to these places if you don't want to take the long walk further along the north quays.

But the challenge here is that both the new 7 and the Luas are both services that are very frequent all day; lasting throughout the week. The new 7 will be having a frequency of 10 minutes all day. The Luas would be once every 5 to 10 minutes give or take through the same period. I hope that if this plan gets implemented that the Luas will not suffer more problems with capacity between Jervis & Abbey Street in future.

There is another potential issue with the new 7; that is going through Georges Street which could be negatively impacted with unexpected high levels of traffic because of the new plan for the College Green Plaza. With a frequency at every 10 minutes; I do hope to god that this route does not become another victim of bus bunching all over again with unexpected delays of traffic if a ban on private cars was not implemented through this area by the NTA. A ban of private cars on this street feeding into Dame Street & Christchurch Cathedral will be the only sensible idea to make the new 7 work brilliantly in future as with all other routes serving that area.

dfx-

KD345 wrote: »

The 70 is every 10 minutes in the mornings and evenings, it is hourly throughout the day but supplemented by the 270 between Dunboyne and Blanchardstown.
The 70 is actually an excellent service and is well liked and used by passengers, running direct down the N3 apart from looping Littlepace.

I can understand why Patww79 likes the current service.

Indeed, another route that doesn't need to be redrawn.

Stephen15

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

People aren't doing that on that route at rush hour. The 145 is empty-ish up to O'Connell bridge. In the space of about 4-5 stops it is *jammed* to the rafters and cannot take on any more passengers until ucd. At ucd it swaps as many students on as it loses getting off. It then gradually empties out until around just after stillorgan, at which point it never takes on more passengers.

The problem with the route is city centre congestion (which radial or orbital route designs aren't solving) and short hop passengers using space on long route buses where they could use other options.

If anything, "frequent changes" is going to make that problem worse as the short hop assholes will just cram onto even more routes they don't belong on.

The frequency of buses on that route hasn't been worsened by congestion over the last few years. However once buses are full, you will not get on a bus until after 6.30 if you are South of the canal, but you will see buses whistling past every 10 minutes.

A big issue I see with the 145 is Bray in general northbound. If the traffic is heavy leaving Bray in places like Shankill, Loughlinstown and Cabinteely.

What I would do in Bray is build a bus lane on both sides of the road from the Windsor Garage as far the Dargle River. You easily do a good few CPOs there as a there is quite a lot of derelict land there around Lidl. Also the other CPOs will mostly commercial and not residential properties who will be more likely to just take the cash and not object.

The CPO here would include part of the Windsor Garage, 4 or 5 front gardens, green space in front of a few houses, The Ford and Topaz garage, the green space in front of Lidl, the old Everest Cycles premises and commercial premises across the road from Supervalu.

I would also make Bray Main Street from the river as far as McDonald's bus only Monday to Saturday between 07:30 and 19:00. It's good that the truck route in Bray the E1 will go to the DART station only and not Ballywaltrim this should alsondecrease journey times and mean the bus will no longer will be full once it leaves Bray. As people from thetop end of Bray will now use the shuttle bus to the DART station and use the DART instead of the bus.

xper

loyatemu wrote: »

... It was the lack of a local service for Southern Cross I was referring to as the Finnegans route doesn't seem to be considered part of the wider network.

drake70 wrote: »

.... As Finnegan's are a private company with the licence to operate from the southern cross to Bray train station and on to Sandyford, I can't see them including this route in their plans.

I note on the Finnegan's timetable that the last bus reaches the end of the southern cross at 8:15pm. I'm sure the people that live there would like a later service and that this should be looked into.

I sincerely hope none of the JW network redesign is being influenced by a supposed need to not interfere with the handful of disparate private services running in various parts of the greater Dublin area.

I don't enjoy criticising Finnegans because god knows they got me home from many a night out in my younger days when a taxi was an impossibility. However, they run their two local routes in Bray as a shambles - clapped out or unsuitable vehicles, destination scrawled on a bit of cardboard thrown onto the dashboard, desperate timetable and separate fare structure. The services don't reach their potential at all.

I will be suggesting that the proposed frequent local route 212 that is replacing the last couple of miles of the current 145 in Bray would be extended along the Southern Cross, Vevay Road, Putland Road and Meath/Sidmonton Rd back to the train station creating a two-way circular route. They're proposing something similar in Greystones with route 204 and I would think the same reasoning for that applies two-fold in the larger town. The use of Bray train station as the E1 terminus and local route hub makes a great deal of sense under the JW philosophy but it must be recognised that the station is poorly located in the north east corner of the town with very little housing in its immediate catchment and a good 30+ minutes walk from many estates.



Further north near where I live now, it looks like I may be switching from route 7 to E2 (ex-46A) or the DART for my trips into the city. This is fine assuming that, with the introduction of the 90-minute all-mode fare, annual and monthly tickets will all become multi-mode as well but at a reasonable price point - I currently use a bus-only annual ticket.

I agree with others' observations that the local routes into the Blacrock and Dun Laoghaire hubs seem to to suffer from the same everything-running-largely-in-parallel-north-south that the current network does which leaves some relatively densely populated areas poorly connected. Some areas south of Dun Laoghaire would need two buses just to get onto any orbital route.

I think there is a case for an E3 service to branch off the E2 route at Honeypark and head south-east through Sallynoggin as far as Ballybrack (at least, maybe even Brides Glen) - the roads are already wide enough, it would take minutes and give a huge suburban area a direct route and cross many local routes. That or an all-day frequent service running along that alignment and continuing north via Stradbrook and Stillorgan to the apparently massive UCD interchange.


Overall the redesign looks great, just needs tweaking. JW was quoted in the paper as saying that every plan they've done has undergone changes after public consultation, this is just part of the process of getting it right.

Implementing the change is going to be fun. I'm intrigued by the idea of a big bang changeover - could it be done in the quiet week between Christmas and New Year?

Love reading the irate protests of some posters. I guess some people would have settled for a faster horse. :rolleyes:

murphaph

Qrt wrote: »

Slightly off topic, but how much would increased permeability in these areas help? I recall reading a Fingal CC report on it and Summerfield rings a bell.

Great point. Summerfield does ring a bell. Many estate dwellers want cul de sacs with no pedestrian permeabilty. That's a huge issue across the city. You could easily bring many more into bus route catchment areas by having more.

LeinsterDub

dfx- wrote: »

Indeed, another route that doesn't need to be redrawn.

And for every route (and let's be honest here you mean a certain section of the route when the frequency happens to match your timetable perfectly). I'll show you 4 that are falling apart at the seams. Let's start with the 40, 13 ,4 and 17a

bk

murphaph wrote: »

Great point. Summerfield does ring a bell. Many estate dwellers want cul de sacs with no pedestrian permeabilty. That's a huge issue across the city. You could easily bring many more into bus route catchment areas by having more.

Exactly, it is a big problem!

Just over the wall, not 2 minutes away, at the back of my development is one of those major corridors with many routes. Instead I have to walk for 10 minutes out and then around to get to those stops! Makes no sense at all.

tommythecat

Same here with the personal disappointment. I’m on the 16/49 route currently and alight at mount tallant stop on Harold’s cross road. Now it looks like the 49 is gone and the 16 is taking this route over but will only be every 20-25 mins. It’s such a busy bus route I would have thought an A route would have been likely. I don’t believe the kimmage road route is busier.

L1011

Permeability measures are in basically every new planning requirement, if even a small development is going in that could increase permeability the council will be interested in it. Often residents associations are actually against it due to insane ideas that it'll "make it easier for burglars".

Two 1990s estates in Maynooth will be getting new pedestrian entrances (one of them in two different places) to a new estate that'll cut probably 25 minutes off getting to the 67/future W8 route. 25 minute walk plus journey time means people currently would always drive any short trip.

LeinsterDub

L1011 wrote: »

Often residents associations are actually against it due to insane ideas that it'll "make it easier for burglars".

Often quite the concern is antisocial behaviour. This concern is often quite valid but adding 25 minutes to everyone's walk for example isn't the right answer.

loyatemu

Kfagan10 wrote: »

I'm a little unhappy from a Celbridge point of view. The changes out here are clearly aimed at getting more people onto the train at peak hours, which is perfect, once capacity is there.

I assume the consultants have had a view of the Dart Upgrade plans and are also working around those; though they will take a lot longer to implement so hopefully that's been taken into account.

L1011

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Often quite the concern is antisocial behaviour. This concern is often quite valid but adding 25 minutes to everyone's walk for example isn't the right answer.

Having to convince people they aren't going to be alleyways is the issue - any modern plans are for wide paths with proper lighting due to being pedestrian and cycle anyway.

Pelvis

Are these bus corridors literally going to be bus only? I see that the proposed new journey time for Clongriffin > City Centre is 30-35 minutes. The way I see it this will only be possible if there's literally no traffic, considering the bus needs to stop for passengers.

bk

Pelvis wrote: »

Are these bus corridors literally going to be bus only? I see that the proposed new journey time for Clongriffin > City Centre is 30-35 minutes. The way I see it this will only be possible if there's literally no traffic, considering the bus needs to stop for passengers.

Yes, that is the eventual plan. The other part of this plan is to build dedicated bus corridors the length of these core routes.

magicbastarder

they've confirmed that taxis will be allowed in them though.

MJohnston

Think I posted this before, but in this video, Jarrett Walker himself points out why permeability is so important for transport:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEYzGBXLBak&feature=youtu.be&t=1202

dfx-

LeinsterDub wrote: »

And for every route (and let's be honest here you mean a certain section of the route when the frequency happens to match your timetable perfectly). I'll show you 4 that are falling apart at the seams. Let's start with the 40, 13 ,4 and 17a

You don't need to be a world recognised expert for 20 years to spot the problem with the 40 and 13, 4 and 27 and 16 amongst a handful of others - 39A being another. It's almost all caused by Network Direct joining up two routes to save money, cut services and cut capacity. Ten years ago.

The 10, 51B, 51C, 77, 78A and 27 were not falling apart at the seams operationally at least (you could set your watch by the 51B and 51C), so why are they now...

What should not be the case is that the problems with the 27 and 40 impacting the 70 or any other number of routes which are fine as they are.

Podge_irl

dfx- wrote: »

You don't need to be a world recognised expert for 20 years to spot the problem with the 40 and 13, 4 and 27 and 16 amongst a handful of others - 39A being another. It's almost all caused by Network Direct joining up two routes to save money, cut services and cut capacity. Ten years ago.

The 10, 51B, 51C, 77, 78A and 27 were not falling apart at the seams operationally at least (you could set your watch by the 51B and 51C), so why are they now...

What should not be the case is that the problems with the 27 and 40 impacting the 70 or any other number of routes which are fine as they are.

From my understanding though, they are simply not looking at it on a route-by-route basis. There is no point identifying "performing" routes and "non-performing" routes and only altering the latter.

They have basically gutted the entire bus network and rebuilt it from scratch so every single route is affected. There is no point, nor is it possible, to do it piecemeal.

liger

Pelvis wrote: »

Are these bus corridors literally going to be bus only? I see that the proposed new journey time for Clongriffin > City Centre is 30-35 minutes. The way I see it this will only be possible if there's literally no traffic, considering the bus needs to stop for passengers.

The 15 does clongriffin to CC in 35mins already. At peak you'll get to connelly in 35mins and the rest of the time you'll probably get to Dame st, Once there is no driver hand over.

cgcsb

My only gripe is that there seems to be complete ignorance that Church St Chancery St Jervis St and Capel St exist and can provide good north-south access.

LegallyAbroad

Podge_irl wrote: »

From my understanding though, they are simply not looking at it on a route-by-route basis. There is no point identifying "performing" routes and "non-performing" routes and only altering the latter.

They have basically gutted the entire bus network and rebuilt it from scratch so every single route is affected. There is no point, nor is it possible, to do it piecemeal.

I'm not sure that's true. If you look at routes that they are maintaing, but lowering the frequency of, their justifications are based on current route usage, in isolation of other factors.

MJohnston

cgcsb wrote: »

My only gripe is that there seems to be complete ignorance that Church St Chancery St Jervis St and Capel St exist and can provide good north-south access.

Perhaps they realised that getting DCC to implement bus-only streets on those would be an impossible task.


Without that, Capel Street, for example, would be a really bad place to route buses.

cgcsb

Capel Street would be a great option as a two way bus only street carrying the A/E routes over to George's st