Dublin - BusConnects

tom1ie

The thing is, I get leaflet from John lahart saying parts of bus connects are "positive" and then goes on to give out that it won't be in place until 2027. He also says cctv/anpr needs to brought in.
So if he is FF transport spokesman, how are other members of FF calling for BC to be scrapped.
It's all very confusing to figure out what their transport policies are.

donvito99

tom1ie wrote: »

So if he is FF transport spokesman, how are other members of FF calling for BC to be scrapped.
It's all very confusing to figure out what their transport policies are.

It allows them to win seats in constituencies where there is huge opposition to the plan as well as constituencies where opposition is minimal. Its pure politics, there's no actual conventional sense to it.

cgcsb

They've also copy and pasted the housing policy of SF after seeing how much of a boost it gave them in the polls. They've no intention of even attempting to deliver these promises.

Idbatterim

Ff will propose a harrier bus , can just take off vertically , when it reaches end of a qbc ... they are total and utter scum. Ff wanting to ditch current transport plans again , is what has made voting fg so obvious for me. Imagine you were responsible for metro north plans , then Dublin metro work. The huge amount of work , man hours. Then some other morons get in and want to reinvent the wheel. They should as a team , flat out refuse !

Let those ff morons redesign it , I’m sure they’ll come up with a solution that appeases everyone! No need for a hundred public consultations either , with joe soap public , turned infrastructure expert.

dublinman1990

The Week in Politics on RTÉ One tonight have a debate on the environment which includes Transport which is later on in the dabate. BusConnects has been briefly mentioned in the debate already. Richard Bruton of FG has said that the party will still implement it along with new cycleway infrastructure to address the environment when they are back in government.

LXFlyer

tom1ie wrote: »

The thing is, I get leaflet from John lahart saying parts of bus connects are "positive" and then goes on to give out that it won't be in place until 2027. He also says cctv/anpr needs to brought in.
So if he is FF transport spokesman, how are other members of FF calling for BC to be scrapped.
It's all very confusing to figure out what their transport policies are.

The objection that Jim O’Callaghan and other TDs have relates to the infrastructure element of BusConnects, not the network redesign, and specifically the CPO of gardens and the widening (in particular) of Terenure Road East and Rathgar Road to incorporate two bus lanes, two general traffic lanes and two cycle lanes, which would involve a lot of trees being removed.

I suspect that the revised plans due to be published in February will see a significant change to those which will involve general traffic in one direction being re-routed away from Rathgar Road and possibly a different cycle route, therefore any widening required will be significantly less than before.

The latter is probably the most sensible solution which will maintain the current nature of the two roads in so far as is possible and delivers a degree of bus priority.

Rather than decrying anyone who as objects as morons as one Daily Mail style contributor here constantly does, the NTA do appear to have listened, and are developing a sensible compromise that will maintain the urban realm in the area and delivers bus priority.

People need to remember that once the changes happen, that’s it. They will never be reversed, and it is important that they get it right.

I am a daily commuter through the area, but I don’t particularly want to see road widening to the extent the original plans had quite simply as it would completely change the nature of the area for good.

Ultimately the only solution that will delivers real journey time improvements will be a Metro and that needs to be in the updated strategy document.

From the outset I questioned the potential journey time improvements to be delivered by the Rathfarnham and Templeogue routes which were wildly optimistic, and I certainly didn’t think that the degree of CPO in the original plans would happen. A compromise will happen which will deliver improvements but I do fear that the inner orbital roads risk becoming completely clogged up at peak times which has serious implications for the new orbital bus routes.

LXFlyer

Just to add, I think that the various groups and TDs and others on all sides would be far better advised to tone down the rhetoric and actually have a constructive debate.

Sensible compromise is the only way forward.

Pete_Cavan

dublinman1990 wrote: »

Richard Bruton of FG has said that the party will still implement it along with new cycleway infrastructure to address the environment when they are back in government.

My fear is that anyone but FG is very likely to flipflop on BusConnects (and other important infrastructure projects) which could lead to them being hobbled. If I could choose the Minister for Transport in the next government, Bruton would be my choice, seems to get things done, doesn't faff about trying to please everyone and he is willing to sign off on spending big money.

cgcsb

I'd support giving the NTA autonomy and budgetand let them get on without needing a competent minister to sign off, because we're unlikely to get one.

donvito99

LXFlyer wrote: »

The objection that Jim O’Callaghan and other TDs have relates to the infrastructure element of BusConnects, not the network redesign, and specifically the CPO of gardens and the widening (in particular) of Terenure Road East and Rathgar Road to incorporate two bus lanes, two general traffic lanes and two cycle lanes, which would involve a lot of trees being removed.

I suspect that the revised plans due to be published in February will see a significant change to those which will involve general traffic in one direction being re-routed away from Rathgar Road and possibly a different cycle route, therefore any widening required will be significantly less than before.

The latter is probably the most sensible solution which will maintain the current nature of the two roads in so far as is possible and delivers a degree of bus priority.

Rather than decrying anyone who as objects as morons as one Daily Mail style contributor here constantly does, the NTA do appear to have listened, and are developing a sensible compromise that will maintain the urban realm in the area and delivers bus priority.

People need to remember that once the changes happen, that’s it. They will never be reversed, and it is important that they get it right.

I am a daily commuter through the area, but I don’t particularly want to see road widening to the extent the original plans had quite simply as it would completely change the nature of the area for good.

Ultimately the only solution that will delivers real journey time improvements will be a Metro and that needs to be in the updated strategy document.

From the outset I questioned the potential journey time improvements to be delivered by the Rathfarnham and Templeogue routes which were wildly optimistic, and I certainly didn’t think that the degree of CPO in the original plans would happen. A compromise will happen which will deliver improvements but I do fear that the inner orbital roads risk becoming completely clogged up at peak times which has serious implications for the new orbital bus routes.

There will be significant improvements in journey times for outbound bus passengers thru the area you refer to given that the only outbound bus lane between the canal and templeogue is a short stretch between Rathgar village and the Brighton Rd junction (approx 200m).

Markcheese

cgcsb wrote: »

I'd support giving the NTA autonomy and budgetand let them get on without needing a competent minister to sign off, because we're unlikely to get one.

It's a great idea , but it only goes so far ... Like the hse ,the paymaster is still the minister ..

LXFlyer

donvito99 wrote: »

There will be significant improvements in journey times for outbound bus passengers thru the area you refer to given that the only outbound bus lane between the canal and templeogue is a short stretch between Rathgar village and the Brighton Rd junction (approx 200m).

I didn’t say that there won’t be improved journey times. There clearly will be. But not to the degrees that the NTA claimed. I’d point out that not all the stretch from the canal to Templeogue is bumper to bumper in the evenings either. Most of Rathgar Road is clear as is Templeogue Road. The real problems are Rathmines and the four village pinch points.

The point that I was making was that I dispute the original NTA claims about improvement in journey times as a result of the changes being in the region of 55-60 minutes, which is nonsense.

We will have to wait and see exactly what is proposed in the revised before we can quantify what the improvements could be.

LeinsterDub

Martin had a presser today were he said he supports both BusConnects and Metrolink. Perhaps he could tell his candidates that

loyatemu

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Martin had a presser today were he said he supports both BusConnects and Metrolink. Perhaps he could tell his candidates that

in their current form, or does he want them "re-evaluated" (i.e. tear it all up and start again).

LeinsterDub

loyatemu wrote: »

in their current form, or does he want them "re-evaluated" (i.e. tear it all up and start again).

It's unclear. Presser was the wrong world he spoke at an event and I've only seen 2nd hand reports of what he said
https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1220273518878822400?s=19

LXFlyer

People like Jim O’Callaghan are not necessarily representative of the entire party view. I certainly would not take his view as gospel.

There are far more prospective TDs in areas where the project is viewed favourably than not.

I suspect that the revised proposals to be published in February which appear to be likely to include far less CPO activity and less removal of trees, but with more bus gates and more re-routing of general traffic will be viewed as the only realistic way forward by all of the parties.

donvito99

LXFlyer wrote: »

I didn’t say that there won’t be improved journey times. There clearly will be. But not to the degrees that the NTA claimed. I’d point out that not all the stretch from the canal to Templeogue is bumper to bumper in the evenings either. Most of Rathgar Road is clear as is Templeogue Road. The real problems are Rathmines and the four village pinch points.

The point that I was making was that I dispute the original NTA claims about improvement in journey times as a result of the changes being in the region of 55-60 minutes, which is nonsense.

We will have to wait and see exactly what is proposed in the revised before we can quantify what the improvements could be.

Rathgar Rd outbound in the evening is just as bad as Rathmines, occassionally even in the mornings. Serious measures are required.

LXFlyer

donvito99 wrote: »

Rathgar Rd outbound in the evening is just as bad as Rathmines, occassionally even in the mornings. Serious measures are required.

That’s a bit of an exaggeration. It’s nowhere near as bad as Rathmines. There is an issue that arises from the village pinch point at Rathgar that could be addressed by rerouting outbound general traffic.

There is no issue between Rathmines and Rathgar Church, which is half the length of the road, or immediately after the church.

Frankly the traffic issue is at the southern end, in the last 20% of Rathgar Road, generally from no further north than about the junction with at Winton Avenue to the village.

That is not the same as Rathmines Road Lower where the entire road is one long traffic jam.

I’m not saying there isn’t a problem, but it’s not the length of Rathgar Road or even close to it. There is an issue for sure that needs addressing, but exaggerating it isn’t very constructive.

Idbatterim

machaseh wrote: »

Being from the Netherlands and obviously not having voter rights here, the fact that Irish people KEEP voting for FF/FG frustrates me to no end. I've never met anyone unironically stating that they endorse their awful policies, yet they seem to manage to win every single election. Why on earth is this? Why on earth would you vote for a party that does not want to improve public transportation EVEN IF most dubliners I met are also dependent on it?

They are the only parties of any scale. There must be a massive fear of starting a new party here and challenging the old ways, it must be an Irish thing.

blanch152

LXFlyer wrote: »

I suspect that the revised proposals to be published in February which appear to be likely to include far less CPO activity and less removal of trees, but with more bus fares and more re-routing of general traffic will be viewed as the only realistic way forward by all of the parties.

I would think you are right.

People will keep their front gardens and trees, but the driving restrictions to get home will be greater.

donvito99

blanch152 wrote: »

I would think you are right.

People will keep their front gardens and trees, but the driving restrictions to get home will be greater.

Templeogue, as an example, won't get additional road space for bus lanes now but "bus priority signals" instead, if the latest reports are accurate.

IMO the jury is still out on whether this will actually work for long stretches of road to be covered and it seems to me to be the very least they can do to advantage buses over private vehicles.

cgcsb

The 24hr bus gate on bachelors walk was backed up to the four courts full of cars this morning, as is typical. How can 'bus priority' work in a suburban location when it's ignored on bachelor's walk?

LXFlyer

cgcsb wrote: »

The 24hr bus gate on bachelors walk was backed up to the four courts full of cars this morning, as is typical. How can 'bus priority' work in a suburban location when it's ignored on bachelor's walk?

Some do, some don’t.

The queue relocator on Templeogue Road inbound works well as does the inbound bus lane on Rathgar Road.

The bus lane north of the Dodder on Rathfarnham Road is ignored constantly but the one south of the Dodder works well.

Zebra3

cgcsb wrote: »

The 24hr bus gate on bachelors walk was backed up to the four courts full of cars this morning, as is typical. How can 'bus priority' work in a suburban location when it's ignored on bachelor's walk?

What's needed is citizens to stand there and protect the bus lanes like cyclists do the cycle lanes.

Stand in front of cars until they move out of the bus lane.

Confront the problem and get the issue publicised.

cgcsb

Zebra3 wrote: »

What's needed is citizens to stand there and protect the bus lanes like cyclists do the cycle lanes.

Stand in front of cars until they move out of the bus lane.

Confront the problem and get the issue publicised.

I think it's past that. If I were in charge I'd remove cars entirely from the very centre, keep the most central part of the city car free, buy out the car parks and convert them to housing. Car drivers simply will not follow the rules.

Idbatterim

cgcsb wrote: »

I think it's past that. If I were in charge I'd remove cars entirely from the very centre, keep the most central part of the city car free, buy out the car parks and convert them to housing. Car drivers simply will not follow the rules.

yeah, but this is primarily because of zero enforcement!

Chiparus

Zebra3 wrote: »

What's needed is citizens to stand there and protect the bus lanes like cyclists do the cycle lanes.

Stand in front of cars until they move out of the bus lane.

Confront the problem and get the issue publicised.

Easier to introduce a congestion charge between 730 and 930, use the tolls to subsidise public transport.
Much cheaper than the ripping up of gardens to build superhighways that will fill with traffic in a few years.

Zebra3

cgcsb wrote: »

I think it's past that. If I were in charge I'd remove cars entirely from the very centre, keep the most central part of the city car free, buy out the car parks and convert them to housing. Car drivers simply will not follow the rules.

No issue with what you suggest, but nothing like that is gonna happen soon.

cgcsb

Zebra3 wrote: »

No issue with what you suggest, but nothing like that is gonna happen soon.

NOTHING is going to happen soon.

Sam Russell

Without enforcement, they might as well forget Busconnects entirely.

Without any major investment. improvements can be achieved.

For example, the South Circular from Leonards Corner to the Bleeding Horse could improve hugely by making the existing bus lanes 7AM to 7PM, with clearway over the same time. The double yellows are studiously ignored by the 'just a minute' shoppers, and the double parking white vans doing their deliveries.

Enforcement is a small effort that would pay for itself.