Dublin - BusConnects

Last Stop

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Perhaps you should read just the actual words more often and not get yourself twisted up in hidden nuance between the lines that doesn't exist.

A department follows the lead of their minister and let's not forget just last week FG were talking about eCars in the bus lanes. There is no obvious reason behind it and there has been no indication it's not feasible. All we have is Ross saying that he won't do it.

Perhaps you should understand what he is saying in the context rather than focusing on the specific words.
A department advises the minister on what’s best based on their knowledge. They are the experts. The minister is then free to make up his mind but he would be very foolish not to take on board expert advice.
I really don’t see what the reference to ecars is about. Are you suggesting that the government have it in for buses in which case this project is screwed even before the obvious underlying flaws are pointed out.
You hardly think a minister is going to come out and say “we can’t do it” do you?

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, maybe, but if a driver is stopped behind a motorist illegally in the bus lane, I would think most bus drivers would delight in pushing the button that takes the photo.

I would think that if only 10% of buses were fitted out, it would not be too expensive, but would be quite effective.

Sam, again, a bus driver’s job is to drive the bus, not to be taking photos to enforce the road traffic acts. It doesn’t work like that anywhere else.

Please just expunge this notion from your head once and for all.

There are automated solutions to this issue which can be implemented with the right amount of political will.

Zebra3

Last Stop wrote: »

I’m reading between the lines. It’s quite obvious that there is reason behind it and it’s not just his complete incompetence as a minister which some on here are blaming. If it was feasible, the advisors in his department would have pushed it through.

Maybe Ross feels he depends on the votes of a demographic who don’t want penalties for those who illegally use bus lanes.

Chivito550

Have to say I'm not as in favour of busconnects as I used to be. I've moved to Celbridge recently and the 67x is absolutely crucial in terms of my commute. Having all buses going through Leixlip and Lucan village would be nothing short of a disaster.

I haven't been following it over the last while and dont have the time to read through so many posts. What's the latest on busconnects in general and Celbridge in particular?

LXFlyer

Chivito550 wrote: »

Have to say I'm not as in favour of busconnects as I used to be. I've moved to Celbridge recently and the 67x is absolutely crucial in terms of my commute. Having all buses going through Leixlip and Lucan village would be nothing short of a disaster.

I haven't been following it over the last while and dont have the time to read through so many posts. What's the latest on busconnects in general and Celbridge in particular?

It has completely changed.

https://busconnects.ie/media/1635/celbridge-leixlip-accordian-leaflet-260919-fa-web.pdf

Full detail is in chapter 7 of the full report
https://busconnects.ie/media/1769/fullreport_chapter_7.pdf

Chivito550

LXFlyer wrote: »

It has completely changed.

https://busconnects.ie/media/1635/celbridge-leixlip-accordian-leaflet-260919-fa-web.pdf

Full detail is in chapter 7 of the full report
https://busconnects.ie/media/1769/fullreport_chapter_7.pdf

That looks much better.

The 67x remains as it was with the 327 and 328. Doesn't give specific frequency but it says it will remain unchanged from before.

The C4 is an improvement on 67. While it's still just every 30 mins, it now skips Chapelizod.

On top of that a service to Maynooth and Tallaght, via Hazelhatch every 30 mins (W8) is very welcome. Throw in the local 259 route (also every 30 mins) to Hazelhatch and Confey and there is good connectivity to both train lines. (4 per hour each direction and 2 per hour each direction).

LeinsterDub

Last Stop wrote: »

Perhaps you should understand what he is saying in the context rather than focusing on the specific words.
A department advises the minister on what’s best based on their knowledge. They are the experts. The minister is then free to make up his mind but he would be very foolish not to take on board expert advice.
I really don’t see what the reference to ecars is about. Are you suggesting that the government have it in for buses in which case this project is screwed even before the obvious underlying flaws are pointed out.
You hardly think a minister is going to come out and say “we can’t do it” do you?

Ministers have often said. On the advise of the AG we can't do it. Or that it's too expensive we can't do it. I don't know why you're so desperate to invent excuses for Ross. Just so we are clear you've no evidence for your position right?

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/council-rejects-taoiseach-s-proposal-for-electric-cars-in-bus-lanes-1.4070771

sharper

Chivito550 wrote: »

Have to say I'm not as in favour of busconnects as I used to be. I've moved to Celbridge recently and the 67x is absolutely crucial in terms of my commute. Having all buses going through Leixlip and Lucan village would be nothing short of a disaster.

You may also be interested to know the 67x is about to get a service increase

https://twitter.com/CathMurphyTD/status/1192144252991606786

L1011

The 67X going to Maynooth in the evenings but not the mornings is something I've always found a bit odd.

sharper

L1011 wrote: »

The 67X going to Maynooth in the evenings but not the mornings is something I've always found a bit odd.

Especially since you'll often see at least some of the buses go out of service from Maynooth anyway to become a 67x in Celbridge.

Even the earliest 66x (7:10) is having a tough time getting to the city centre before 8:30am which is totally nuts. An earlier one would be welcome but I assume the NTA are still going with the idea that the train should be used instead.

Of course under bus connects none of the 67 services go to Maynooth which is even worse.

Chivito550

sharper wrote: »

Especially since you'll often see at least some of the buses go out of service from Maynooth anyway to become a 67x in Celbridge.

Even the earliest 66x (7:10) is having a tough time getting to the city centre before 8:30am which is totally nuts. An earlier one would be welcome but I assume the NTA are still going with the idea that the train should be used instead.

Of course under bus connects none of the 67 services go to Maynooth which is even worse.

The W8 goes to Maynooth from Celbridge though. Same frequency as before.

Crazy the 66x takes that long. The 67x takes me 40-45 mins every morning.

Riskymove

L1011 wrote: »

The 67X going to Maynooth in the evenings but not the mornings is something I've always found a bit odd.

Celbridge people wouldn't be bale to get on most likely - certainly more capacity would be required if they started in Maynooth

going home in evening is a more spread out process time wise

Riskymove

Chivito550 wrote: »

Crazy the 66x takes that long. The 67x takes me 40-45 mins every morning.

where is the bottleneck for the 66x? Leixlip?

sharper

Chivito550 wrote: »

The W8 goes to Maynooth from Celbridge though. Same frequency as before.

Crazy the 66x takes that long. The 67x takes me 40-45 mins every morning.

The W8 is a great addition, especially for getting to CityWest which is a non-starter by public transport right now.

The 66X has to get past the Intel plant which for the last couple of years has held it up for ages due to shift changes happening at the same time as the morning peak. The recent road realignment might have helped but it's hard to know until everything is finished.

Leixlip is another traffic problem. there's often a queue of traffic from the N4 roundabout all the way back through the village and over the salmon leap bridge.

I would guess anyone trying to use the 66X to get to UCD for a 9am lecture is barely making it most days.

Seth Brundle

sharper wrote: »

Leixlip is another traffic problem. there's often a queue of traffic from the N4 roundabout all the way back through the village and over the salmon leap bridge.

I would guess anyone trying to use the 66X to get to UCD for a 9am lecture is barely making it most days.

In the mornings, traffic frequently is backed up past Aldi to around the church all the way to the roundabout.
There is a definite issue in leixlip even during off-peak times. I don't know if they made signal changes at the bottom of Captain's Hill but something has changed it (not just heavier traffic volumes).

cgcsb

Last Stop wrote: »

And that is when the minister was advised (the we in the statement) that a law change wouldn’t be feasible bringing us to the statement he issued yesterday.

Lol if that were how things work, Ireland would be a technocratic utopia. Personal whims of ministers are ALWAYS put before professional advice. Hence why we had 2 unconnected luas lines etc.

sharper

A more complete breakdown of C spine and 32[X] direct services frequency in comparison to present

https://twitter.com/CathMurphyTD/status/1192760301105680384

Sam Russell

Mod: Please do not attack posters. It is against the charter. Posts deleted.

downtheroad

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would think a bus mounted camera activated by the drive that took a picture with a readable number plate, time and GPS location, transmitted to AGS for review. Gardai the check vehicle for tax, ins, and NCT. Gardai then issue appropriate paperwork. No need for changes o the law.

If only 100 buses were fitted out, out of a fleet of over 1,000, it would be no time at all before bus lanes would be for buses.

Has anyone here been pulled in by a Garda for driving in the bus lane? I cycled by 2 Gardaí this morning who had pulled in 2 cars in Fairview for driving in the bus lane and it seems like a cumbersome process to take their details and issue the fine.

Then further up the road several cars were back in the bus lane because they knew they had passed the checkpoint for this morning. Pity the 2 Gardaí didn't separate and stay 1km apart, they'd have caught many more offenders.

Automation is the only deterrent that will actually work.

MJohnston

downtheroad wrote: »

Then further up the road several cars were back in the bus lane because they knew they had passed the checkpoint for this morning

This is one of big problems with manual enforcement - especially when it’s done so sparsely like the Guards do. I reckon this form of enforcement actually *increases* violations, because once you’ve passed a checkpoint, you know you’re extremely unlikely to encounter another guard.

cgcsb

Automation is the only way. It's not even a debate. Start with the 24hr bus gate on bachelors walk, that's chokoblock with cars all the time. Same at burgh quay and college green. Use it to ban taxis from college green and diesel cars too. Plenty more blackspots to get going with. The existing bus system would b3come super efficient within a week.

Last Stop

cgcsb wrote: »

Use it to ban taxis from college green and diesel cars too.

How does this work?

Taxis are entitled to use college green. It’s unlikely the legislation will change on this.

How do you detect diesel cars? The Garda ANPR will detect if the car has valid tax/insurance/NCT but to the best of my knowledge it won’t detect the fuel type. How could it? The guards are not that bothered about whether or not you’re using petrol or diesel. The reg plate will tell you make, model, colour and engine size which make the car identifiable but fuel type is rather less important.
The only way it could be linked is via the tax system but I’d imagine there is data protection involved there.

Qrt

Last Stop wrote: »

How does this work?

Taxis are entitled to use college green. It’s unlikely the legislation will change on this.

Not going southbound between 07:00 and 10:00 they aren’t.

Last Stop

Qrt wrote: »

Not going southbound between 07:00 and 10:00 they aren’t.

That’s an NTA “ban” which has no legal basis.

Qrt

Last Stop wrote: »

That’s an NTA “ban” which has no legal basis.

Well the council have yet to bulldoze the sign, sooooooooooo... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Last Stop

Qrt wrote: »

Well the council have yet to bulldoze the sign, sooooooooooo... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But who can enforce the ban?
The guards can’t because its not a road traffic offence.
The NTA can’t because they can’t legally stop traffic.

Meaning that while the sign is still present, no one can ever be charged with an offence because there isn’t an offence to be charged with.

JohnC.

Last Stop wrote: »

How does this work?

Taxis are entitled to use college green. It’s unlikely the legislation will change on this.

How do you detect diesel cars? The Garda ANPR will detect if the car has valid tax/insurance/NCT but to the best of my knowledge it won’t detect the fuel type. How could it? The guards are not that bothered about whether or not you’re using petrol or diesel. The reg plate will tell you make, model, colour and engine size which make the car identifiable but fuel type is rather less important.
The only way it could be linked is via the tax system but I’d imagine there is data protection involved there.

Anyone can put a reg into any of a number of car sites and get the basic data you mentioned, including fuel type. ANPR gives them more information, so surely it includes they fuel type too? Other places have gone about banning diesel cars, so don't say it's impossible.

Last Stop

JohnC. wrote: »

Anyone can put a reg into any of a number of car sites and get the basic data you mentioned, including fuel type. ANPR gives them more information, so surely it includes they fuel type too? Other places have gone about banning diesel cars, so don't say it's impossible.

The car sites link back to insurance databases which charge a fee for the information. The basic information you get for free is used to lure you in to pay for a full check to cover this cost.
I never said it was impossible, I just don’t believe that the Garda ANPR currently processes or checks that info.

Seth Brundle

Last Stop wrote: »

The car sites link back to insurance databases which charge a fee for the information. The basic information you get for free is used to lure you in to pay for a full check to cover this cost.
I never said it was impossible, I just don’t believe that the Garda ANPR currently processes or checks that info.

Insurance companies do not share much info even with the gardai. The info on the car sites is from the NVDF!

L1011

With the way the insurance system works in Ireland there is zero way to tell from a plate that the driver driving the car is insured to do so; or that there is any insurance on the car. You can be insured to drive any car whether it is insured or not for instance.