BusConnects Dublin - Bus Network Changes Discussion

sharper

Stephen15 wrote: »

I don't understand the obsession with every area including estates having to have a direct bus service to the city centre when most elderly people don't even go into town but rather they make local trips to shop etc.

Aside from all the issues around frequency etc it all leads to the current problem where if you want to get from anywhere to anywhere else you have to go through the city centre first.

Bray Head

sharper wrote: »

The LUAS is run by Transdev and they're paid by the NTA to run it. If nobody steps onto a LUAS for the next year Transdev's revenue will be entirely unaffected. The same is true for go ahead and the orbital routes.

This is well known.

My point is that it would make it much easier for the NTA to parcel up certain routes for tender. The routes will be much more obviously profit- or loss-making compared to now.

devnull

Bray Head wrote: »

This is well known.

My point is that it would make it much easier for the NTA to parcel up certain routes for tender. The routes will be much more obviously profit- or loss-making compared to now.

Not really, because if the operator doesn't see the ticket revenue, how many passengers they take or how profitable the service is doesn't effect the operator since they're just paying to run the bus a set distance a set time of day.

This puts revenue risk with the NTA, but it also means that if a route is profitable, it can then be re-invested in public transport services to drive continued improvement.

_Kaiser_

Podge_irl wrote: »

Similar was said about the proposed Metrolink route.

Some people have an utterly bizarre notion of what a public consultation is for.

Ah yes, the Metrolink that if I recall right proposes to dig up half of the Green line LUAS as well to replace it? One of the few pieces of infrastructure that actually works? (until the cross city nonsense anyway which of course required a lot of digging and money too)

We just love pissing away money in this country.

I'll say it again.. the opinions of views of posters here as enthusiasts will not match the average user whose main concern (justifiably so) is going to be "how is this going to impact on my existing services?" If the answer is arguably "worse!" then it won't matter a jot about the "bigger picture". Local TD's will push for changes that will water down the whole thing.

We don't do long term planning in this country... see my first point above.

sharper

Bray Head wrote: »

My point is that it would make it much easier for the NTA to parcel up certain routes for tender. The routes will be much more obviously profit- or loss-making compared to now.

The person operating the checkout at Tesco doesn't care at all which items have the best margin. They're paid to operate the checkout.

The spectre of profitable parts of public transport being packaged and sold off has been raised many times but that's simply not possible under the current way of doing things.

Podge_irl

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ah yes, the Metrolink that if I recall right proposes to dig up half of the Green line LUAS as well to replace it? One of the few pieces of infrastructure that actually works? (until the cross city nonsense anyway which of course required a lot of digging and money too)

We just love pissing away money in this country.

I'll say it again.. the opinions of views of posters here as enthusiasts will not match the average user whose main concern (justifiably so) is going to be "how is this going to impact on my existing services?" If the answer is arguably "worse!" then it won't matter a jot about the "bigger picture". Local TD's will push for changes that will water down the whole thing.

We don't do long term planning in this country... see my first point above.

Bizarre rant that doesn't have anything to do with my point.

You are suggesting that they should not have published the route or plan until they had sorted out all the problems with it. But that is the entire point of the public consultation - to allow the public point out issues that the planners either overlooked or dismissed and potentially have some reworking done.

sharper

Podge_irl wrote: »

You are suggesting that they should not have published the route or plan until they had sorted out all the problems with it. But that is the entire point of the public consultation - to allow the public point out issues that the planners either overlooked or dismissed and potentially have some reworking done.

Also apparently we can't start building a metro in the 2020s because it wasn't factored into the plan from the 1990s to build the green line of the LUAS.

_Kaiser_

Podge_irl wrote: »

Bizarre rant that doesn't have anything to do with my point.

You are suggesting that they should not have published the route or plan until they had sorted out all the problems with it. But that is the entire point of the public consultation - to allow the public point out issues that the planners either overlooked or dismissed and potentially have some reworking done.

The NTA brought in someone to design a integrated single plan for Dublin - grand. But it fails to take into account the significant local lobbying and self-interest that has dominated the discussions since.

If you start pulling at bits of it to accommodate locals then you're watering down the overall effectiveness each time. Do so enough and the whole thing becomes pointless and will make things worse than they were when you started!

Podge_irl

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The NTA brought in someone to design a integrated single plan for Dublin - grand. But it fails to take into account the significant local lobbying and self-interest that has dominated the discussions since.

If you start pulling at bits of it to accommodate locals then you're watering down the overall effectiveness each time. Do so enough and the whole thing becomes pointless and will make things worse than they were when you started!

An no doubt if they railroaded the plan through as is you would be super on board?

A public consultation is necessary for such a project as no expert or small group is going to be able to cover all the bases. Some tweaking of the plan is inevitable and not an issue if the core concept is not diluted. There is absolutely no sign so far that they are going to alter it simply to accommodate locals but if sensible changes are suggested I am sure they will be looked at. An element of adjustment was no doubt expected.

Peregrine

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ah yes, the Metrolink that if I recall right proposes to dig up half of the Green line LUAS as well to replace it? One of the few pieces of infrastructure that actually works? (until the cross city nonsense anyway which of course required a lot of digging and money too)

We just love pissing away money in this country.

I'll say it again.. the opinions of views of posters here as enthusiasts will not match the average user whose main concern (justifiably so) is going to be "how is this going to impact on my existing services?" If the answer is arguably "worse!" then it won't matter a jot about the "bigger picture". Local TD's will push for changes that will water down the whole thing.

We don't do long term planning in this country... see my first point above.

You recall incorrectly. And so much of the rest of your post is invalid.

Go read the plan.

devnull

Knowing someone who went to some of these community meetings about BusConnects that have been talked about, today I asked them as to what happened at these meetings and what information was given or handed out.

There was no information distributed about the plans as advertised on BusConnects.ie, instead people were reading from briefs and bulletins that were circulated by the NBRU which was presented as facts and there appeared to be handouts from the NBRU like attached.

I think that the NTA need to start holding their own roadshows very soon because there seems to be a lot of fear being whipped up with scaremongering with community groups taking what the likes of the NBRU are saying at face value, without being presented with the actual plans from the NTA and Jarrett Walker.

john boye

devnull wrote: »

Knowing someone who went to some of these community meetings about BusConnects that have been talked about, today I asked them as to what happened at these meetings and what information was given or handed out.

There was no information distributed about the plans as advertised on BusConnects.ie, instead people were reading from briefs and bulletins that were circulated by the NBRU which was presented as facts and there appeared to be handouts from the NBRU like attached.

I think that the NTA need to start holding their own roadshows very soon because there seems to be a lot of fear being whipped up with scaremongering with community groups taking what the likes of the NBRU are saying at face value, without being presented with the actual plans from the NTA and Jarrett Walker.

"Areas of Crumlin left with no direct access to Glasnevin Cemetery". Good grief.

Qrt

john boye wrote: »

"Areas of Crumlin left with no direct access to Glasnevin Cemetery". Good grief.

I can't view the attachment but that pretty much sums up everything that's wrong with the current system.

devnull

Qrt wrote: »

I can't view the attachment but that pretty much sums up everything that's wrong with the current system.

Sorry - I just got hold of the full NBRU handout rather than a few pages so I've replaced the original attachment with a new one which is more comprehensive.

howiya

devnull wrote: »

Knowing someone who went to some of these community meetings about BusConnects that have been talked about, today I asked them as to what happened at these meetings and what information was given or handed out.

There was no information distributed about the plans as advertised on BusConnects.ie, instead people were reading from briefs and bulletins that were circulated by the NBRU which was presented as facts and there appeared to be handouts from the NBRU like attached.

I think that the NTA need to start holding their own roadshows very soon because there seems to be a lot of fear being whipped up with scaremongering with community groups taking what the likes of the NBRU are saying at face value, without being presented with the actual plans from the NTA and Jarrett Walker.

These are already planned. Additional dates and areas to follow.

https://www.busconnects.ie/media/1266/confirmed-information-session-locations-august-2018.pdf

LeinsterDub

Qrt wrote: »

I can't view the attachment but that pretty much sums up everything that's wrong with the current system.

I think the NBRU have confused themselves with the Irish Taxi Drivers Federation

Pelvis

KD345 wrote: »

I also don’t think traveling from Firhouse to Tallaght to go to the city centre is an attractive option for many.

Sure we all know Firhouse is in Tallaght.

*ducks for cover*

howiya

devnull wrote: »

Sorry - I just got hold of the full NBRU handout rather than a few pages so I've replaced the original attachment with a new one which is more comprehensive.

Just looked at their comments on the route I mostly use (14). They're portraying it as if they are taking the bus out of Beaumont completely by referencing the A3 as the replacement instead of the A1.

devnull

It's also notable that they make no reference to frequency whatsoever in those leaflets of any of the new routes.

blah

devnull wrote: »

It's also notable that they make no reference to frequency whatsoever in those leaflets of any of the new routes.

But at then end of the day they are just rabble rousing to get more money, right? They don’t care if it makes the overall service better or worse?

Qrt

howiya wrote: »

Just looked at their comments on the route I mostly use (14). They're portraying it as if they are taking the bus out of Beaumont completely by referencing the A3 as the replacement instead of the A1.

I only read half of it but the information just sounds wrong. They say the D2 will go through druncondra yet the published map says otherwise.

CatInABox

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ah yes, the Metrolink that if I recall right proposes to dig up half of the Green line LUAS as well to replace it? One of the few pieces of infrastructure that actually works? (until the cross city nonsense anyway which of course required a lot of digging and money too)

It works for now, but the Green Line is projected to be beyond capacity after 2020, with all the easy upgrades done already. Regardless of BusConnects, the Green Line will need an upgrade to Metro standard, sooner rather than later.

howiya

devnull wrote: »

It's also notable that they make no reference to frequency whatsoever in those leaflets of any of the new routes.

Well in the case of the 14 there isn't a remarkable jump in frequency. I've a 15 minute frequency now. It'll be 10-15 under the new plan.

cgcsb

Goldengirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

bus connects will improve the lot of the old and disabled with more destinations served, better frequency and more comfortable bus stops.

cgcsb

Podge_irl wrote: »

If they can't walk out of their estate where are they going on the bus that they'll be able to do anything on the other end?

If they require literal point-to-point transport than public transport isn't for them.

The existing PT network, as with any PT network in the world, is not point to point for almost any of the users, it works because of walking and cycling to final destinations. If people cannot walk any distance at all, as a previous poster suggested, or use a wheelchair for any distance at all, then I'm afraid no bus plan will satisfy you. what such users need is a taxi or more likely an ambulance.

cgcsb

Bray Head wrote: »

People want to keep the network structured around bus users with limited mobility and lots of time.


These people may be better served by a dial-a-bus service. I think there is a case for these even in urban areas.

Most Dublin Bus users are mobile and want to get where they are going asap. Bus Connects seems to be - finally - prioritising the needs of the many, not the few.

Posters here want a redesign to accommodate the 0.001% of potential users, lord knows they cant actually use the bus now, who are comatose.

I think it's a thinly veiled attack on public transport in general by private car idealogues, the type of people who through the disabled and elderly under the bus the minute a new bus lane or pedestrian area is announced.

devnull

howiya wrote: »

Well in the case of the 14 there isn't a remarkable jump in frequency. I've a 15 minute frequency now. It'll be 10-15 under the new plan.

Sure, but the way some people carry on in reaction to the proposals is like having a direct service a handful times of day is more important than having a hugely more frequent local service that connects to a high frequency service to the city for example.

I'd rather be able to make a journey a large number of times a day by taking two buses than have a small number of direct services a day and nothing else outside of these.

cgcsb

Bray Head wrote: »

This is probably behind a lot of the objection to Bus Connects so far.

Aside from DB staff and PBPAAA mouthpieces, who actually wants DB to be allowed operate every route unchallenged for ever?

devnull

cgcsb wrote: »

Aside from DB staff and PBPAAA mouthpieces, who actually wants DB to be allowed operate every route unchallenged for ever?

Personally the service, ease of use of said service and customer experience is much more important to me than the ideology as I believe a public transport service should be run for the benefit of the public, first and foremost.

cgcsb

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ah yes, the Metrolink that if I recall right proposes to dig up half of the Green line LUAS as well to replace it?

Nope