I welcome the delegation and ask Mr. John Tierney, Dublin city manager, to introduce his colleagues.
Traffic Management and Park and Ride Facilities: Discussion with Dublin Local Authorities.
Mr. John Tierney
I am joined by Mr. David O'Connor, county manager; Mr. Michael Lorigan, director of services transport, Fingal County Council; Mr. Michael Phillips, director of traffic and city engineer, Dublin City Council; Mr. Owen Keegan, county manager, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council; and Mr. Joe Horan, county manager, South Dublin County Council.
The purpose of the meeting is to discuss traffic management systems and park and ride facilities. The joint committee has held discussions with Mr. Ciarán de Burca from the quality bus network project office and Mr. Michael Phillips of the transport department in Dublin City Council has been of great assistance.
Irrespective of how much good work is done, those forced to sit in their cars for an hour to make what should be a ten minute journey will not recognise that significant progress has been made. The quality bus corridor for the 46A bus and, more recently, the opening of the Malahide bus corridor are examples of what can be done. We must change our culture of being wedded to our cars. There is no doubt that establishing quality bus corridors and high frequency, reliable bus services offers a quick win for Dublin. The joint committee is also considering the role of QBCs in Galway, Limerick, Waterford and Cork.
Members will inquire about three main areas, the first of which is the measures the councils can take quickly to deliver increased performance in the provision of high quality bus corridors, deal with the pinch points to which members will shortly refer and ensure the big dig due to commence in Dublin in the coming 18 months does not cause chaos. While we have great plans for rail, Luas and a metro, the benefits of these projects will not be visible for a further five years. What improvements will we see in the meantime? The joint committee has set an objective of ensuring an additional 350 buses are run at high frequency, especially at off-peak times, on the streets of Dublin. The Luas has proven that passengers will use public transport at off-peak times if the service is reliable and runs at high frequency. We pointed out to a delegation from Dublin Bus that reducing frequencies considerably at off-peak periods, especially on high quality bus corridors, does not make sense.
The second issue is the proposals by the councils for park and ride facilities. We are conscious of a report published in October 2002 which arrived at the surprising conclusion that park and ride facilities for buses will not work in Dublin because the city is physically too large. While the report appears to have been accepted in most quarters, the joint committee does not agree with its conclusions, especially in light of the improvements local authorities have made in some of the key corridors, the western corridor on the N6 being the prime example. We are also aware of good work being done with rail based park and ride facilities and want to find out what proposals the local authorities have for significantly increasing the number of park and ride spaces on the national primary routes into the city to reduce the need for commuters to take cars into Dublin. The third issue concerns the proposals the councils have to clear cars from the city centre.
Mr. John Tierney
As the Chairman indicated, I will give a short presentation on behalf of the delegation. We welcome this opportunity to discuss the agenda surrounding Transport 21 and the attendant traffic management and park and ride issues the joint committee wishes to address.
On Transport 21, having consulted the Department of Transport, we established a Transport 21 implementation group which is, if one likes, a precursor to the Dublin Transport Authority. The purpose of the group is to ensure the co-ordination and phasing of the Transport 21 work programme are implemented in the best possible manner for the city and have regard for the need for Dublin to function effectively during the programme. I chair the group, which consists of Mr. Pat Mangan from the Department of Transport, Mr. David O'Connor who represents the county councils, superintendent Aidan Reid of the Garda Síochána, Mr. Michael Phillips from Dublin City Council, Mr. Tom Finn from Iarnród Éireann, Mr. Frank Allen from the Railway Procurement Agency, Mr. Joe Maher from Dublin Bus, Mr. Basil Good from the Dublin City Centre Business Association and Mr. P. J. Timmins from the Dublin Chamber of Commerce. It is very important to have a business input.
Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council both have dedicated Transport 21 project teams. The city team is led by Mr. Tim Brick who many members will know from his previous work on the Dublin Port tunnel. South Dublin County Council and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council have dedicated liaison staff and all the relevant local authorities regularly meet the various agencies. For example, representatives from Dublin City Council meet senior officials from the RPA approximately once per month.
Dublin City Council is preparing a master programme of all the works. Sometimes we think of Transport 21 in isolation but the city council must complete the water mains rehabilitation programme and the utility services must also complete various projects. We are doing a master programme of all such works until 2016, which will enable us to ensure works are co-ordinated during the period. This will involve making some difficult decisions in terms of having to delay works at certain times to ensure the city can continue to function effectively. We will produce a time location chart of the various works arising from this.
The city council is also doing work on city centre modelling. This will help us plan the way in which the city centre accesses the new modes of public transport and, for certain purposes, cars. Buses will be managed in the central area of the city during the Transport 21 programme and beyond. The contingency plan will relate to specific arrangements to implement some of the measures referred to by the Chairman to ensure access to the city is maintained during Transport 21. For example, we may need to make special arrangements for bus routes and shuttle buses and consider establishing a dedicated traffic corps from the Garda Síochána. Other important measures include establishing park and ride facilities and adopting a communications plan.
Some members will have visited our control room in Dublin City Council where we look after a large part of Dublin traffic each day. The control room operates 24 hours per day and representatives of Dublin Bus and the Automobile Association work with us each day. We also have links with the Garda Síochána, Dublin Port Tunnel Company and the RPA. The area covered extends to the M50 and its approach roads. Each day, from 7 a.m to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m, a traffic programme from the control room is broadcast on 103.2 Dublin City Anna Livia FM. That is a very successful programme. It is popular with the public and it helps the public to interact with us through the texting service in regard to trouble spots. We operate a texting and an e-mail service on a subscription basis.
The control room is linked to the SCATStraffic light system. At present about 450 of the 850 traffic lights are on the SCATS system, which means they act intelligently, responding to traffic flows as they arise, as opposed to being on set time frequencies. The control room can also intervene through the SCATS system as necessary. We operate variable messaging services and signage on the M50 and in respect of car parking. The bus and Luas are also given priority under the SCATS system. The HGV strategy has been in operation for almost 12 months and has been hugely beneficial in the city. It has been problematic to an extent on the M50 with the additional traffic during the works but that decision was taken and the HGV strategy is working well for the city. It has also enabled us to prioritise the bus system in relation to the north quays.
In addition to the traffic light control system the slide is not very good in the context of trying to view it today. There are 170 traffic cameras linked to the control room. The slide shows where they are located. One can go into the Dublin City Council website before undertaking a journey and check the traffic at these locations.
Our main priorities for the city are set out on the slide before the committee. While we are not in direct control of many of the projects associated with Transport 21 we want to see them implemented as effectively as possible, with least disruption to the city in respect of business and so on. That is one of the reasons we set up the implementation group to which I referred earlier. We look after the QBN office also. We are doing a great deal of work on city centre modelling, to which I referred earlier. We see that as a crucial input into decision making and the way access to the city centre will be managed in the future. On the point about access, when reconfigured traffic flows are put in place as a result of some of the decisions taken from the modelling it will make it more difficult for the car to access the city centre. That in itself will be a help in regard to using public transport.
We want to see the automatic vehicle location system on the buses put into operation as soon as possible — I am sure Mr. Joe Maher covered that issue with the committee — and we are working on a number of bridge projects which will be crucial during the works. The Macken Street bridge has commenced and we hope the new public transport bridge at Marlborough Street over to Hawkins Street will be approved and ready to go to construction in 2009. We are also trying to separate traffic from the Clonsilla line at Reilly's, for example, with a new bridge.
The next slide shows information on the modal shift between the city centre since 1997, the city centre in this case being defined as the area between the canals. The slide refers to traffic coming into the area during peak time in the morning. There is a direct correlation between the shift from the car to public transport with the percentage using public transport over 50%. It should also be remembered that 80% of all movement of those living within the cordon is pedestrian movement. That drives home the point about the need for more consolidated development within the city, an issue we are debating on another front. Unfortunately the position in the suburbs is that car usage has gone up and the bus patronage as a percentage of modal split has gone down during the same period.
The priority issues in South Dublin County Council are listed on the slide. The first phase of the M50, N7 to N4, is currently taking place and the majority of the works are in the south Dublin area. That phase of the works is scheduled to finish this year. The second phase has commenced, heading for the M1.
South Dublin County Council is also doing specific work on the bus network, on which Mr. Joe Horan will comment afterwards if necessary. The handout shows where the different works are taking place in south Dublin. The committee has already seen the slide on the QBC proposals for south Dublin under Ciarán de Burca's presentation.
In regard to south Dublin and park and ride, there is an obvious reliance on the county councils working with the transport providers to facilitate park and ride into the city. South Dublin already has the Red Cow park and ride facility associated with the Luas. While bus based park and ride has been a feature in the UK for many years it has not been a feature here. The urban sprawl has made it difficult to implement. Suitable locations for a frequency that can be implemented effectively are difficult to find and to acquire. The only existing facility in Ireland is at Black Ash in Cork. There is a proposed bus park and ride at Leixlip. It was with An Bord Pleanála for eight months but the board refused it yesterday. Hopefully the issues that were pointed out can be overcome and a further application made as soon as possible. The slide shows the location of the park and ride facility. It needs maximum bus routes to make it viable into the future.
Before South Dublin County Council proceeded with the proposal a survey was carried out on the difference between using the car and the bus on the N4. It shows the time differential which would be greater now given the priority on the quays having been improved last year. The differentials can be seen on the bottom line. It is our view that the differentials need to be of this order to make people get out of the car.
Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council is integrating its traffic control systems with the Dublin City Council system. It has the Luas extensions, Sandyford to Cherrywood and Cherrywood to Bray. Its park and ride facility has also focused on rail. There would have been an intention to await the outcome of the South Dublin County Council proposal to see how successful that would be. The committee would have seen that slide with Ciarán de Burca.
Priority issues in Fingal County Council include metro north and metro west, which are hugely important. Fingal County Council did a huge amount of work in proving the case for metro, for example, the metro to Swords with the potential to grow the population there to about 100,000. It is one of the first opportunities to plan smart growth in a large urban area based on public transport. Equally, the northern line electrification to Drogheda and the Dunboyne railway line are important projects, as is the removal of the level crossings on the Maynooth line.
In regard to park and ride concentration has been on the rail with the planning for metro north at Lissenhall. There is a major proposal for park and ride there and also at Pace for the Dunboyne line. On the northern rail line a fairly extensive proposal is being developed for the Ballast Pit in Skerries which will add over 400 spaces to the facility. There is also the potential for a facility to serve Rush and Lusk and that is being investigated. The representatives from Fingal County Council have three slides on the QBC proposals.
By way of conclusion we want to raise some issues which the Chairman touched on and which we would wish to see accelerated so that people are encouraged to change to public transport. First, the bus capacity on the QBCs needs to be maximised. Second, integrated ticketing needs to be introduced as quickly as possible and, third, real time information is crucial for people who wish to use the bus.
There is no doubt that implementing bus corridors is proving increasingly difficult. In some ways we have probably implemented those corridors for which there was a form of acceptance. Some of those to be implemented will probably be even more problematic. Another area we would like to see addressed is funding for bus corridors in developing areas, a matter which Mr. Joe Horan can deal with later. We can get parts of the network provided by developers but funding for linking those parts of the network together would still be required.
To return to the overall issue of Transport 21, I reassure the committee that even without a Dublin transport authority, a huge level of work is being undertaken at present. This is evident in terms of the project planning, city centre modelling, the master programme for all works in the city and bridge construction. With regard to the contingency plan, we hope to have the main elements such as alteration to bus routes and the communications strategy agreed before the end of this year, if at all possible, and ready to put in place before the end of 2009 or early 2010, in advance of the commencement of the Transport 21 projects on the street. We will do our best to answer any questions the committee may have.
Before I call the party spokespersons, I have two questions. Bus Éireann informed the committee two weeks ago that "journey times of up to 50 minutes from Mountjoy Square to St. Stephen's Green are a regular occurrence". Will the witnesses comment? The Department of Transport has told us it made available €51 million in the past four years but no funding has to date been taken up in Dublin city for bus park and ride facilities. Why is this the case? I am shocked when Mr. Tierney tells me that An Bord Pleanála yesterday refused permission for the first such facility in Lucan, when there is a quality bus corridor from there to O'Connell Bridge. Why did the board refuse permission?
I welcome the distinguished group of Dublin managers and the manager of the QBCs to the committee and thank Mr. Tierney for his presentation. I commend each one of the four Dublin authority managers on the initiatives taken in regard to traffic management, particularly in recent years, and the attempt to provide a much more people-oriented city centre and similar centres in places like Swords, Tallaght and Dún Laoghaire. Much work has been done.
We have seen the plans for Adamstown in south Dublin and the new developments at Portmarnock and in the Fingal area. Like the Chairman, I regret what has happened at Leixlip. Much has been achieved but, generally, our constituents, looking back over the record of the four Dublin authorities, would feel there has been a long history of pass the parcel between the counties, the transport companies, specifically Dublin Bus and Irish Rail, and the private operators. Through the years, what seemed to political representatives in the Dublin region as obvious sites for major park and ride facilities were not progressed because nobody would take the initiative.
There are many example across the four authority areas but I wish to refer to two examples from my area, one in Dublin city and one in Fingal. The Raheny DART station nexus, in a beautiful and historic village, is totally clogged up with commuter traffic and people often walk a mile to park their cars for the day. There were opportunities, acting with DART and CIE, to acquire a major park and ride facility but the opportunity was not taken. Likewise, nearby at Howth Junction, which is the station for Donaghmede and one of the key north side stations, Fingal County Council, acting with Dublin City Council, needed to take dramatic action to try to get people onto the DART and bus networks. This is the legacy we must now suffer.
I am often in contact with my local county manager, Mr. O'Connor, with regard to Fingal planning. Can we take it for granted there will be no more major planning decisions without major transport provision? For example, Mr. Tierney is faced with a huge development in part of my constituency at Northside shopping centre but no provision has been made for this. We tried to have the metro route located there but lost out to another part of the north side. We cannot proceed with the development of over 2,000 residential houses and a shopping centre the size of Blanchardstown's without some major public transport and park and ride-type initiatives. Is it definitive that there will be no more lost opportunities with regard to getting people to use public transport?
Would Mr. Tierney ultimately like to have congestion charges in Dublin? While I am grateful for the information on the quality bus network, I note that 35% of commuters still travel to the city by car. There has been a major improvement but the three outer authority areas and the city are still clogged up. How do we reduce commuting by car? The witnesses probably do not know it but the Chairman intends to launch a pilot scheme of congestion charges in Galway city at some stage. What will happen with regard to Dublin?
We have a list of major pinch points in the system, about which everyone knows, particularly the two directors of traffic who are present — Mr. Phillips knows the ones in Dublin city. An obvious pinch point coming from the north side is at Busáras and there are others. The documentation provided sets out a good methodology for Dublin city and suggests that the system will be changed fundamentally. Will the issue of pinch points be addressed?
South Dublin County Council is to be commended for the initiatives it has taken. It has applied for a bus licence, which is very interesting. Will the managers of the other three authorities also become bus operators? In other words, if the pass the parcel game with Dublin Bus, Bus Éireann and CIE was not their fault, will they apply for bus licences to make this work?
Mr. Tierney referred to the United Kingdom experience. Cities such as Chester, Oxford, Durham and others have had a necklace of park and ride facilities around their busy commercial centres for perhaps 30 years. Why can we not be like the British in this regard and do the same here, given Dublin is so vast? Mr. Tierney used to point out that Dublin has the same footprint as Madrid despite having just one quarter of its population.
Is there a particular problem with bus park and ride facilities due to rush hour? Can a regular service be provided or is there a difficulty in this regard? Is this why South Dublin County Council applied for its own bus licence?
I have been in this job for the past three years. Travelling to Dublin from north County Meath is a 40-mile journey. The only place I knew how to get to previously was Croke Park but I must now get to Leinster House, so I have had plenty of time to study this issue. Doing away with heavy goods traffic in the centre of the city has made a huge difference and one can see the system working when one gets into the city.
From my home area, a motorist could leave at 7.30 a.m and not get into the city until 10.20 a.m. but if that motorist waited until most of the traffic was gone at 8.50 a.m., he or she could still be in the city by 10.20 a.m. Has the two lanes in, one lane out system been considered? When one is driving to the city in the morning, the bus lane is empty and all the traffic is in one row whereas there is little traffic in the Dublin to Meath direction. The opposite is the case in the evening. No traffic is travelling towards the city, the bus lane has no buses in it and motorists are like ducks in a row.
The road network is in place but it is not being used. When we consider the road network that has been constructed, it is ridiculous that at peak times there is just one line of traffic in one direction. Has this system been considered? It would be a great help to commuters.
I will give the managers the opportunity to reply. We can then take more questions.
Mr. John Tierney
We will divide the questions between us. I will begin with the general issue of bus park and ride facilities. Several years ago, I visited Oxford and Bristol to investigate the park and ride systems in both cities. One of the most important aspects of those operations is that they are subsidised, which was a critical factor in getting them off the ground. It is quite difficult to make these facilities wash their faces, so to speak. The money the Chairman referred to is capital as opposed to operational, so that is a factor.
As regards the issue of pass the parcel--
Mr. Tierney mentioned the Black Ash park and ride facility in Cork, which is working profitably.
Mr. John Tierney
Yes.
There is certainly no major subsidy required. Most of the modern ones in Britain like York and Cambridge are now working without subsidy.
Mr. John Tierney
I am just pointing out the situation regarding the two examples quoted to me originally, which I investigated in England. As regards the issue of pass the parcel, that is one of the reasons we set up the implementation group — to ensure there was co-ordination between all sectors, an awareness of all the projects, and the impact on buses. Mr. Phillips will deal with this in more detail but on the issue of pinch points, the most controversial pinch point was the north quays, which we dealt with last year. We are aware of that situation and Mr. Phillips will deal with it in more detail. The northside was mentioned, which is a prime urban centre and will be a self-serving entity in itself. We are proofing all our framework plans concerning the city against six headings: economic, social, cultural, environmental, urban form and movement of people. Those six factors are being taken into account in all the framework plans that are now being made.
As regards congestion charges, the group's view is that given the changes that will occur because of changes to city centre access, Luas line BX, metro and the various Luas lines, there will have to be serious reconfiguration of traffic. Much of the access to the city centre will simply be for business purposes only so, over time, getting a car into the city centre will be a much more difficult exercise. If people do not change over to an alternative public transport network, at that stage the congestion charge will obviously have to be seriously considered. Even at the moment, the use of parking charges on a zonal basis is, in its own right, a deterrent to people bringing in cars.
Mr. Joe Horan
I refer to the park and ride proposal. I regret that we did not get permission for it. We picked a location on the M4 where there was great separation. One could get access to it on the way in along the M4 and on the way back out. For that reason we picked the site, which is far enough out for people to see tail-lights and make a choice. In doing background work on whether a park and ride facility would be viable, we used automatic number-plate recognition cameras and plotted journeys to see what the repeat journeys were, thus building up a pattern. We looked at the Cork example, which the Chairman mentioned. We did various studies and reckoned that in the first year we would probably have subsidised it to the tune of €1.2 million. After set-up costs, the subsidy would have been gradually reduced. We felt that it may well break even over a period, which was certainly what our studies were showing. It was very well placed for that purpose.
What was the exact location?
Mr. Joe Horan
The Woodies interchange on the N4. The difficulty with that concerning our own development plan and the Liffey Valley is that we have not yet seen the inspector's report. We need to study that to see precisely what the problems were. In effect, however, the board would have said that it was inconsistent with our development plan in terms of preservation of the Liffey Valley. We will look at other options within that location, so we may well find it is something that we can sort out fairly close by. Looking at it, we felt that was a location we could use. Our idea was that one would have integrated ticketing for the kind of events and functions that were being organised in this city, while holding cars in that location. It needed to grow to 1,000 spaces to make it viable. There are difficulties in locating something like this. One can see that there is a reasonable length of journey so people must make a choice to get out of the car. One must get a bus there fairly quickly and one must work out the frequencies. That was worked out in a business plan, so I am a little disappointed that we hit that problem with the site because it got through all the planning reports. However, we would like to try it in or around that location. If we have a problem we will see how viable it is in the long term. There is now a quality bus corridor all the way in and the quays are unblocked, so if one was ever to put it in a location our choice would be close to there. We do not want people to have to make too much of a detour off a main route.
We will also look at the N7, although when one looks at all the changes being made to the M50, the great separation around that and access to the Red Cow, we would probably have to look at access somewhere outside that.
We also studied the quality bus network, which is almost all radial at the moment. One of the analyses we have been doing is showing us the need to move people around the county, north-south. The network that has been displayed analyses the various journeys. We are committed to having one of these up and running to test the various assumptions and to track what happens based on that. We will re-examine the planning report and take it from there.
Mr. David O’Connor
I would like to answer some of the points made by Deputy Broughan. As regards the one park and ride opportunity in Howth Junction, that junction is a particularly hostile environment and the current physical location does not make it that easy to install a park and ride facility. It might be worthwhile to reflect for a minute on our experience with Malahide when we introduced parking immediately beside the station there. Our experience was that almost immediately the park and ride facility filled up very early in the mornings. On analysis, we found that most of the people parking there lived within five minutes walking distance from the station. For example, people who lived in the marina were actually driving their cars to Malahide train station. Unfortunately, we then had to restrict the opening hours back to 10 a.m. We had no other measure to restrict the use of the place except to charge high prices and that would not have been acceptable at that time.
Deputy McEntee mentioned routes into the city. We have three such routes, one of which is the N3 from Navan to the city centre. Deputy McEntee's point about the two-out, one-in idea--
It was three-out and one-in, reversed morning and evening.
Mr. David O’Connor
I understand. Where that occurs one always gets problems at the pinch-points. Unfortunately, the pinch points currently are the interchanges at the M50. One cannot operate that system on it because there are roundabouts and no freeflow. I remember seeing this working on Sydney harbour bridge where they move traffic cones across the place to have seven rows in one direction and two in the other in the mornings. It works extremely well on a big piece of infrastructure like that but it is much more difficult with the infrastructural designs we have. It is not that it has not been thought through, it is just that it is physically difficult to do so and one will still end up with the same pinch points.
As regards bus services generally, we are anxious to provide local bus services in our own areas. For example, the population of Blanchardstown-Dublin 15 is bigger than many regional towns — it is at least 70,000. We are currently examining a system whereby we would introduce a local bus service purely for Blanchardstown. We are anxious to try to connect the county with radial bus routes in the same way as Mr. Joe Horan mentioned for south Dublin.
Does Mr. O'Connor ever speak to Dublin Bus as to why it has not provided these services?
Mr. David O’Connor
We do and we have asked them. Now that the frequency of train services on the Maynooth line has increased appreciably we are anxious that a feeder service is provided for that. Unfortunately, however, we have not yet had any response on that.
Mr. John Tierney
In the developing areas in Fingal we set up an arrangement with Dublin Bus that, as the development was being planned, it, in turn, would plan the bus services in advance to feed the train stations without the necessity for large park and ride facilities, which will fill to capacity in any event. The idea was that as the areas developed, a bus service would be in place to serve a local train station, which is a much better solution.
Mr. Michael Phillips
The committee will be aware of the QBC programme we agreed with Dublin Bus. We meet regularly for discussion on what the company sees as the prioritised routes. At times during the public consultation, if we experience delays, we may shift priorities. Our programme is geared towards spending €40 million a year on QBCs. Most of the easy corridors have been built, but the more difficult ones will create a problem and people will feel the pain. As a result, the consultation period takes longer. We try to facilitate people and if we can facilitate local areas, we will do so.
Deputy Broughan referred to the pinch points. In constructing the new QBCs, we are reviewing the existing corridors, including the current pinch points. If they can be improved, for example, similar to the north quays where we joined up pieces, that will be done. It would not have been accepted previously to put such severe restrictions on traffic but people accept it because they accept the principle of the QBC and they would like it to be improved. We have carried out a review of all the pinch points, which we only received recently. We will examine them and we will eliminate them if we can.
I call Deputy Curran but I will give the delegation another opportunity to answer my question regarding the 50-minute journey from Mountjoy Square to St. Stephen's Green.
Transport 21 sets out what is proposed such as the new Luas lines, metro west, metro north and so forth but the committee is concerned about the short-term issues. Many of us experienced significant congestion during the construction of the Luas lines and QBCs and, in the intervening period, traffic has increased significantly. However, we still do not have integration and co-ordination between all the agencies. Not so long ago, in my constituency, the south Clondalkin QBC was completed and councillors had their photographs taken on a route that was not served by any buses. Surely a service level agreement should have been in place in advance of the corridor's construction. The reason for constructing a QBC and what it will deliver should be outlined. Such co-ordination is missing.
Mr. O'Connor stated he would love Dublin Bus to provide a service to a particular train station. I would love the company to provide a feeder service to the Luas station at the Red Cow roundabout. The integration we expect and the urgency attaching to it is not happening. Both the unions in Dublin Bus produced different lists of pinch points when they appeared before the committee. They pointed out their service would be much more user friendly if these were addressed. They were aghast at the failure of the local authorities to deal with them in a more urgent manner. Many times people refer to pinch points in the city centre but if one takes a bus from Clondalkin village to the city centre, half the journey is taken up crossing the roundabout at Watery Lane and Monastery Road. The issue is the total journey time, not the pinch points. It is frustrating that, despite Mr. Tierney's opening remarks about monthly high level meetings, satisfactory integration is not being experienced on the ground. QBCs are under utilised and pinch points are not being addressed.
Road capacity is limited and it is a finite resource. If I am involved in a car crash in the morning, the Garda and the ambulance service will arrive. If a truck or a car breaks down, it is at the discretion of whoever to turn up. In this day and age, a recovery service is needed. Because the road network is so heavily used, a minor breakdown can bring the city to a standstill but there is no sense of urgency to deal with this. More urgency has been shown on the M50 during the construction works but it does not happen on most other roads. The local authorities must address such breakdowns.
The committee is concerned about what will happen over the next two years as an additional 350 buses come into the service. They need to be operational prior to the big dig in Dublin city centre when the metro and Luas projects begin. The committee is aware of and strongly supports these projects but we are seeking a solution to turn the situation around in the next 12 to 24 months. I do not mean to be critical but I experience these problems every day sitting in traffic. Minor issues need to be addressed with a sense of urgency but I do not see the level of integration to which Mr. O'Connor referred on the ground. It is not happening, particularly in regard to local bus services.
It is good that the county managers are present. From working with them I am aware of the work done in recent years and I do not wish to be critical. However, quick fixes could be applied in several areas. Deputy Curran referred to the lack of integration among the different agencies, which is a problem. Mr. Tierney mentioned feeder bus services, which we raised with Dublin Bus representatives when they appeared before the committee. No new feeder services have been provided on any of the new estates in Dublin. They have been well designed to cater for public transport but we are banging our heads off a brick wall trying to secure bus services for these estates. During the interaction with Dublin Bus at the planning stage, what commitment does the company or other bus operators give to servicing such estates?
I would like Mr. O'Connor to refer to the Holywell-Gorse Hill area between Swords and Kinsealy where thousands of people live. They are served by three buses in the morning and evening and they have no feeder bus service. That is replicated throughout Dublin. Dublin Bus should be tied down at an early stage to provide services, particularly feeder buses. The proposed new 102-230 integrated route which serves Swords, the capital of Fingal County Council, has been delayed three times. Nobody from the town can access nearby train stations through public transport. It is a crazy situation, which has pertained for years. The committee must push Dublin Bus on this. The company made a good presentation but I am still concerned that this issue will be long-fingered again and we will be sitting here in a year's time without anything having happened.
I refer to Lissenhall. The Swords master plan contains a park and ride facility for metro north, which I welcome. Could such a facility be provided on the designated lands before the metro is built so that it can be used to serve the local bus routes? The port tunnel is a great facility that many drivers use regularly. I use it when I do not take the train. If a park and ride facility is opened in Lissenhall before the metro is completed, it could be utilised by buses with quick access to the city via the port tunnel. Will Mr. O'Connor comment on that? Are we under any constraints in terms of not being able to open it beforehand?
We have spoken on several occasions about parking at train stations. With regard to rapidly developing areas of north County Dublin, such as Rush and Lusk, Mr. Tierney referred in his presentation to the potential for further expanding parking facilities at the train station in the area and I heard through the grapevine that Iarnród Éireann is purchasing land there. When are we to expand the car park and how will we improve access? At present, people have to walk miles to the train station and similar issues arise in respect of the other train stations in the area. I was not aware of any park and ride facilities in Malahide, although we discussed the matter previously. When are we to consider expanding the facility? In fairness to the county managers, this is not solely their responsibility. As Deputy Curran noted, QBCs are in place but we are waiting for the buses. If new parking facilities are introduced, I would like to see more bus turning bays close to train stations. There have been problems in that regard in Portmarnock. What plans have been made for the next 18 months rather than the next five years? I am particularly interested in hearing Mr. Tierney's opinion on the possibilities for Lissenhall.
Mr. John Tierney
Mr. Horan and Mr. O'Connor both wish to respond, so I will be brief in my initial reply. The point Deputy Curran made about integration is the reason the Dublin transport authority is regarded as necessary. We are not a public transport provider but we are trying to facilitate that as much as possible, particularly in regard to QBCs and the master programme for the city centre. There is nothing more frustrating for a local authority than not seeing buses on a QBC it fought hard to implement. The issue of licensing private and public bus operators remains to be resolved but that is not within our control.
Mr. Joe Horan
With regard to availability on QBCs, we have to provide the buses. Like Deputy Curran, I saw a photograph of somebody standing on a bus network. At least the network in question was in place. The one we were talking about was slightly in advance. It was round the Adamstown area where we started to put the bus network on the road as we were building the road. The money provided for the bus network is for retrofitting but we are trying to accelerate delivery in advance.
Several valid comments were made in regard to pinch points. We have investigated bus journeys and believe more strategic journeys could be made. I do not like to criticise another body but if a bus deviates into a housing estate-
We want to get to the nuts and bolts of the matter. Has the authority made those specific points to Dublin Bus?
Mr. Joe Horan
Yes. A review of the bus network and how it moves has been conducted. My local authority colleagues and I would like to see buses running on strategic routes which people could join. Feeder buses would work in such a situation. We also advocate feeder buses for the Luas. Buses should operate on strategic routes because that would allow for tremendous flexibility in terms of expansion into new areas. A look at the grid of QBCs will reveal that shape emerging in our county.
We have been keen to say that bus networks do not necessarily have to be run by Dublin Bus. As a local authority, we are prepared to apply for a bus licence. We are studying patterns and developing mobility strategies to find out where people are going to work because knowing, for example, that 8,000 people work in the centre of Tallaght helps us decide how to intercept and move them. We hope to meet all the bus providers to discuss how the network might be used. It is important, however, that we take the opportunity to put the network in place because the buses will follow.
In regard to strategic development, we are repeating the Adamstown example of a quantum of infrastructure for every quantum of development with the Clonburris strategic development zone. We are linking development in the county to the delivery of infrastructure for metro, electrification and interconnectors. Approximately 80,000 people in our county could live without cars and that has to be the overall objective.
Mr. Owen Keegan
Deputy Curran is correct with regard to the importance of proper integration. Sandyford industrial estate, which is the key employment centre for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown as well as a growing residential centre, has a very poor bus service. We have had to remove a bus corridor on the Leopardstown Road because we failed to get a bus service after years of trying. We are now putting a bus priority lane on the Sandyford Road even though there has been no commitment from Dublin Bus on buses. We also put a priority lane on the Kilmacud Road. I continue to consider it preferable that we establish the lanes because the issue of buses or licensing of private operators will eventually be resolved. It is frustrating, however, when major growth areas which are being serviced receive no commitment and the lack of priority routes is not for the want of asking.
In regard to the allocation of lanes and tidal flows, I conducted an exercise when I worked for Dublin City Council on Merrion Road. The modal split of traffic on that road at the peak hour was between 55% and 60% inbound and 35% to 40% outbound. On a four-lane road, the optimal allocation is two lanes in each direction. To move to 75%, or three lanes in and one out, would represent a worse allocation. Apart from that, the adaption of fixed structures in the middle of the road as one approaches the city centre, such as pedestrian islands, would give rise to massive engineering costs and adverse safety implications. Therefore, while the idea is superficially attractive, significant issues must be addressed before it can be proposed for roads through built-up areas. I observed it on a brand new motorway in Australia where there was no pedestrian crossing provision and a system was in place of fixed barriers that could be moved. That would be difficult to replicate in a built-up environment with a variety of users, particularly pedestrians seeking to cross at regular intervals.
Mr. David O’Connor
We share Deputy Curran's view on integration and co-ordination, particularly in terms of the point he made on total journey times and pinch points. In Dublin 15 alone, the biggest pinch point is the interchange over the M50, which is likely to undergo at least four more years of work. With the best will in the world, it will be impossible to find a short-term solution other than diverting traffic to the N2 through Finglas. We are actively considering the route and have brought a scheme before An Bord Pleanála to divert much of the traffic on the N3 to the N2. I return to the point I made earlier about orienting the bus service for Dublin 15 around the railway because rail services are improving greatly in the area. Park-and-ride facilities and the line to Dunboyne are likely to be completed before the M4.
Have discussions been held with Dublin Bus on this specific issue?
Mr. David O’Connor
Yes.
To no avail.
Mr. David O’Connor
It used to take 55 minutes for a bus to travel from the city centre to Blanchardstown. The journey now takes 100 minutes, which is a terrible imposition on people. Another pinch point occurs at Oxmantown on the way into the city. This is the most difficult QBC for the city because it really will affect people's lives. The alternative of using the Phoenix Park will have to be considered seriously because it could relieve a great deal of pressure by connecting to the improved service along the quays.
In regard to Deputy O'Brien's specific questions on the Holywell-Gorse Hill issue, is the Deputy aware there is a private operator on that route? I see queues in the area every morning, so the route, which passes through the port tunnel, appears to be very heavily used. This is a case in which an alternative service has been provided and seems to work. However, this service is infrequent and the position is unsatisfactory. Deputy O'Brien is correct regarding the difficulties associated with providing a service from Swords to the DART at Malahide. From the perspective of Fingal County Council, it would be far better to provide a decent integrated bus service from Swords to the DART at Malahide than to try to acquire extremely valuable land around Malahide train station.
What has Dublin Bus been saying to Fingal County Council in this regard?
Mr. David O’Connor
We are unable to get a commitment to such a service.
I wish to make a few points on the proposed Lissenhall park and ride facility, which constitutes a possible early win. I also must sound a note of caution on what my colleague, Mr. Joe Horan, has just experienced with An Bord Pleanála in respect of his park and ride proposal. My understanding is that one reason for its refusal concerned the structure of his own county development plan, which did not cater for such a development. While both Fingal County Council and members are anxious to introduce such an initiative, it is probable that we would be obliged to vary our county development plan to allow us to so do in the short term. Having considered this issue, we believe it probably would be better to deliver an early, separate park and ride facility. Such a facility might not be placed at the final location for Lissenhall's park and ride facility because to do so would entail the provision of much road infrastructure. At present a location immediately to the north of the Lissenhall interchange is under consideration at which a short-term park and ride facility with bus-only services could be provided. This could be considered further and we will undertake to do so.
In respect of capacity management, has Fingal County Council begun the planning phase in respect of considering this alternative?
Mr. David O’Connor
Yes.
I meant pre-planning, rather than formal planning.
Mr. David O’Connor
Yes, pre-planning. I refer to the Swords master plan, which has given rise to a significant amount of work in this regard. A major publication of the Swords master plan will come out in the late spring or early summer. It will show the large park and ride facility at Lissenhall that will service the metro and take all the traffic off the road. However, the Deputy is correct to reflect on the timescale regarding the delivery of the metro in 2013. In that context, it would be better if Fingal County Council was to respond to the joint committee's initiative by attempting to deliver something before then. It should also learn lessons from the recent experiences of South Dublin County Council with An Bord Pleanála.
We would welcome that. I often fly from Galway to Dublin and when so doing I cross the M1 at 6.50 a.m., at which time four solid lanes of traffic are moving towards the city. The combination of the opening of the port tunnel with the possible introduction of a new quality bus corridor along the north quays from the Point Depot should facilitate the removal of a significant number of those cars that come into town and remain parked there all day. Any additional road network infrastructure that must be provided to allow bus access to the park and ride facility that may be developed for the metro would be welcome. Fingal County Council should consider this possibility and the joint committee welcomes its initiative to consider the more distant site.
Mr. David O’Connor
We completely agree with the Chairman. When we carried out the feasibility study for the metro we discovered that in the absence of something being done, there was a real danger that access to the airport could grind to a halt. People would be unable to get in or out of the airport without the metro. This constitutes one of the major reasons to deliver the metro to the north of Swords. As the Chairman noted, it would remove a great deal of traffic on the M1 that comes from the north. I have suggested an alternative short-term solution because the physical location of the park and ride facility will require the provision of a road network to it. As the permanent solution could take almost as long to deliver, we propose a short-term win.
As this meeting continues, the issues become more complex. If there was an easy answer, it would have been discovered by now. I come from outside the city region and am not in a position to discuss what transpires within its boundaries except that for the past 30 years, I have tried to negotiate my way in and out every week, which requires considerable negotiation.
Before turning to park and ride facilities, I revert to a simple matter related to Deputy Curran's point. How can a single incident, such as the breakdown of a truck or a car, literally bring half of Dublin to a halt? I can never understand this. Two weeks before Christmas, I left Leinster House on a Thursday morning at 7.30 a.m. It took me 90 minutes to reach Heuston Station because a lorry had broken down close to the Guinness yard. When I overtook it, I saw a broken-down lorry accompanied by two squad cars, one in front and one behind. Half of Dublin was held up for that length of time that morning. Can someone provide an explanation for the reason no person or group was able to remove the lorry? What does one do in such a scenario?
One should consider the number of traffic units that pass through such a restricted area. No matter what is done in future, neither the quays nor O'Connell Street will become any wider and car ownership is soaring. I have been informed that for every car on Irish roads at present, there is likely to be another car beside it in ten or 15 years' time. If car ownership increases to such an extent, notwithstanding the best efforts of the present witnesses and others who come before the joint committee, the best to be hoped for is that we will be running to stand still.
I refer to the major infrastructural programme to construct interurban routes that will connect all the country's cities to Dublin. One can imagine the enormous consequential volume of traffic that will enter the city every day. To a layman, it makes sense to intercept such traffic before it can inflict real damage on the city's levels of congestion. Just before Christmas, the Chairman and I, along with a few other members, visited Chelmsford, Essex. While I fully appreciate it did not resemble the position in Dublin, one imagines that great lessons could be learned for cities such as Galway or Cork. I appreciate Mr. John Tierney's point that such initiatives are costly to set up. While a subsidy was paid on the operation of the scheme in question, as the years went by it was noticed that the level of subsidy was reducing. It is thought that because people became so accustomed to the system, they were inclined to pay more for it.
While I do not wish to hold up the meeting, issues such as the point and method of intercepting people are critical. Although the bus that conveyed members in Essex was not operating at a peak time, they saw how the system operated. It was similar to the QBCs in operation in Dublin, whereby buses are given priority over all other traffic.
I refer to the initial cost of such systems from the taxpayers' perspective. Since my childhood, no traffic system has been built that has not cost a lot of taxpayers' money. Although some have been extremely successful, they have never paid for themselves because the initial cost was so great. Ultimately however, this is what must be done for the good of the commercial life of both city and country.
I am gravely concerned that too many reasons have been put forward to demonstrate that such a concept cannot be implemented. Mr. Horan's proposal was rejected by An Bord Pleanála for some reason. I do not understand its motivation because I am familiar with the site in question and consider it to have been strategically placed. The same is true of other locations. This point can be made in respect of buses or trains.
I assume that filling a single bus results in about 40 cars not being used. This is a highly simplified example. Can the witnesses imagine the effect that 40 additional cars could have at some of the pinch points mentioned earlier? My perception is that a couple of cars in the wrong place at the wrong time can create havoc in Dublin. Despite the difficulties encountered by the witnesses, do they consider that something substantial can be done in respect of this concept?
Mr. Tierney mentioned radio communications. I have a different view on the matter. When I hear there is a traffic black spot, I am likely to be in the middle of it and thus cannot do anything about it. If I am not in the middle of it and decide to take an alternative route, everyone else, having heard the communication, does the same, thus creating a new black spot. I am not sure, therefore, that radio communications are very important when one is caught in traffic.
I thank the Dublin City Council manager for his presentation. During the years local authorities have made some of the most significant improvements in traffic management. One could say they were better than those made by the other relevant agencies and stakeholders. The Dublin Port tunnel has been a great success in relieving inner city traffic congestion to the benefit of inner city communities.
A number of speakers have referred to pinch points. It seems to be quite some time since Owen Keegan introduced some left and right turns north and south of O'Connell Street and on Dawson Street and South Great George's Street. It was predicted at the time that not only would the traffic stop but that the world would also stop but this did not occur.
One of the managers referred to the need to reconfigure the traffic management system. Has he considered radical reconfiguration measures that would free the pinch points? Are there specific pinch points in mind? We need a radical solution.
New bridges are to be built across the River Liffey and they will certainly help, particularly with the development of the Poolbeg and Docklands areas, but must we wait so long? Is it not possible to erect Bailey or temporary bridges that would support the radical measures that need to be introduced and which would make a great difference in a short period?
Have the delegates considered the pros and cons of route charging as opposed to a blanket congestion charge, whereby one would charge for the use of particular roads at peak hours?
I welcome the delegation. I am delighted to have worked alongside Messrs. Tierney, O'Connor and Lorigan. The county managers and the director of services can use their influence on the other agencies involved. One might recall that, at the very first meeting in this regard, I stated we needed everybody in one room in order that they would all hear about the same problems. I spoke for years in the council about park and ride facilities but responsibility was passed from one to another. Dublin City Council states it is the responsibility of the Department of Transport, while the latter says it is the responsibility of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Everyone else says it has nothing to do with them, meanwhile the problem continues to feature. We all know park and ride facilities are a considerable means of removing cars from the roads.
Reference was made to the M1. I suggested recently at this committee that cars should be allowed to use the Dublin Port tunnel for 24 hours per day at a charge of €3 per journey. Every morning I see the M1 clogged up. I left from Swords at 1.15 p.m. today and noted that the link roads onto the M50 were chock-a-block. I flew through the tunnel and there was hardly a car or truck in it. Why do we channel every car from the north side into Dorset Street, Gardiner Street or Amiens Street, thereby causing congestion? It takes half an hour to travel a couple of hundred metres, which is ridiculous. I ask the managers to use their influence on all the agencies and authorities involved with a view to being realistic about the problems. We recognise that the tunnel was built to remove trucks from the city, which is very welcome, but the reality is that we now channel 20,000 cars into two roads that lead to the city. I refer to the north side but the problem is as bad if one is coming from the west, south or elsewhere.
It is ridiculous that the Department of Transport is not allowing Dublin Bus to use the tunnel given that Swords, for example, has a population of 40,000. The service of the private operator, the Swords Express, is working very well but, while there is one service starting from the centre of the town, all the commuters in the outer regions cannot access the tunnel. This is crazy. The commuters who are driven bonkers wonder why they spend an hour and a half sitting in the 41X from Swords when the Swords Express can reach town in 25 to 30 minutes. I ask the managers to use their influence and make recommendations to support us in changing the antiquated Act of 1932 or whatever legislation governs this matter.
I welcome what Mr. O'Connor said about providing the temporary park at the Lissenhall interchange and the shuttle buses at the train stations to link with the other bus services. On the Swords metro, I thank Messrs. Tierney, Lorigan and O'Connor for putting a package together to ensure metro north will extend as far as Lissenhall and not stop at the airport, as originally proposed. That sums up our problems.
I will give the delegates a chance to answer the last two questions.
Mr. John Tierney
The traffic information programme is very important and people are very tuned into it — forgive the pun.
On car ownership, the most recent figures suggest there are 416 car owners per 1,000 of the population. The average elsewhere in Europe is 465 and we are quickly approaching this figure.
There is a regime in place to deal with road traffic incidents. When considering incidents on the M50, for example, one must remember that contractors are trying to cope with 100,000 vehicles per day. This presents an enormous challenge. People underestimate the credit due to the company and the local authorities for keeping traffic moving while work is in progress.
Mr. John Tierney
A Bailey bridge may be constructed between Marlborough Street and Hawkins Street in advance of the permanent structure.
On getting to Mountjoy Square, the new traffic configuration for the city centre, involving restrictions on cars, will improve the efficiency of Dublin Bus in getting to Mountjoy Square. The new bridges will also bring about improvements.
How long will it take to build the Bailey bridge between Marlborough Street and Hawkins Street if it is decided upon?
Mr. Michael Phillips
The plans for the construction of the metro railway station are such that the contractor will have to provide a Bailey bridge if we have not completed the permanent one. It would be installed within a short period, that is, within two or three months. The main problem would be presented by foundations in the river, if deemed necessary. The structure would be temporary.
Will it accommodate buses?
Mr. Michael Phillips
Yes.
Why can it not be built now?
Mr. John Tierney
It must go through a planning process.
Why can that process not begin now?
Mr. John Tierney
The planning process will be completed this year.
Are there proposals to introduce radical reconfiguration measures such as those implemented in the past?
Mr. John Tierney
One development is the ongoing discussions we are having with Dublin Bus on the remodelling work in the city centre. This will create challenges for Dublin Bus with regard to how the routes are configured. This ongoing discussion is an important part of the remodelling work. It is tied into the construction programme for the Transport 21 projects and any further reconfiguring work that may be required when the works are completed.
Mr. Michael Phillips
Deputy Connaughton spoke about intercepting people at the right time and place. Human behaviour is fascinating because it is difficult to anticipate. People want a frequent service, both at peak and off-peak times. Commuters generally make their decision as to the mode of transport used based on two issues, namely, the frequency and reliability of a service. A related factor is their perception of the value of their time, that is, whether it would be quicker to leave their car behind and board a bus or Luas or whether they should drive into the city centre and leave their car in a parking space. It is a finely balanced issue.
Everybody can offer solutions to the city's traffic problems. One of the issues that fascinates us is driver behaviour. We often see that when a crash occurs on the northbound lanes of the M50, for example, a traffic jam will develop on the southbound lanes because the motorists on those lanes are rubber-necking. One cannot be sure how humans will behave in particular circumstances. These are the same motorists who tell us they are delayed travelling to Sandyford in the morning, for instance, yet they are looking across the road to see what is happening in the other lanes.
We must bear this in mind in trying to find the right solution. We will never get it fully right but the objective is to provide a quality service. For example, when the DART line from Bray into the city centre and on to Howth was electrified in the mid-1980s, the quality of the service provided far exceeded everybody's expectations. For many, there was no decision to be made as to whether to take the DART or drive. This was a first-class service of international standards. Shoppers and commuters alike simply parked their car at the station and got on the train. That is the standard of service we must provide. How we achieve it is another matter.
Luas has proven that if a reliable high frequency service is provided, people will use it at both peak and off-peak times. Surely the same can be done with the bus service. I acknowledge that Dublin City Council and Dublin Bus have overseen significant successes at specific locations. The 46A from Stillorgan is a good example, with buses every minute at peak times, according to Dublin Bus. I have begun to practise what I preach and use public transport. I am pleasantly surprised at how good it is. However, on my journey from Lucan this morning, it took an hour to get to O'Connell Bridge. Fewer than five buses passed us on the new bus lane along the north quays. Dublin City Council was courageous in taking the bit in its teeth and introducing that bus lane. The same degree of courage is required in order that similar bus lanes can be introduced elsewhere.
It seems the same objections are raised every time a new bus lane is proposed. Shortly after it is introduced, however, nobody has any difficulty with it because it is seen to be working well. Is it not time that we applied the critical infrastructure legislation to bus lanes? Local authorities should be able to impose them without all the usual baloney and the years of objections. The proposed bus lane on the Ennis road in Limerick has been held up for five years by a handful of residents who can park their cars in their driveways. The bus lane comes into the city boundary but cannot go any further. It is time that we dealt with these repeated objections.
How does Dublin City Council propose to reduce the journey time on the key route I mentioned? It can take 50 minutes for a bus to travel from Mountjoy Square to St. Stephen's Green. This journey time will probably increase when the council begins its works in the city centre.
Mr. John Tierney
As I said, there are ongoing discussions with Dublin Bus on city centre access. It is becoming clear that we will have to look at changing routes for the duration of the works. Ultimately, we must consider the implications of College Green becoming a car-free zone. Mr. Phillips can explain the details. I mentioned the improvements that will arise from the opening of the Macken Street bridge.
What is there to prevent Dublin City Council making the planned changes such as the opening of public transport bridges and making O'Connell Street and College Green car-free, while allowing buses to run freely, thus forcing people out of their cars to use the buses?
Mr. John Tierney
We must balance our objectives with the economic considerations of the city centre, as articulated by the Dublin City Centre Business Association and the Chamber of Commerce. Some provision must be made for a degree of access by car to city centre businesses. There are ongoing discussions with businesses in the city centre on this issue.
Business in the city centre is being choked because people cannot get in and out. We should find solutions before we begin digging up the city centre. The bus can become the key transport workhorse in solving city centre congestion if we make the corridors available to allow buses to move frequently and speedily.
Mr. John Tierney
That will be one of the key considerations in the contingency plan that must be put in place for the works. This will cause a reconfiguration of bus services and how they operate in the city centre.
In regard to objections, critical infrastructure legislation does not offer any guarantee in this regard in terms of timescale. There may be a way of looking at this issue through the roads legislation; that is an issue we can discuss with the committee. Something might be done under section 35 of the Road Traffic Act that would allow local authorities to proceed in imposing bus lanes, where required.
Mr. Ciarán de Burca will speak on the more detailed issues.
Perhaps Mr. Tierney will come back to the committee later in the year with details of how the contingency plan proposes to free up the city centre.
Mr. Ciarán de Burca
On the pinch points, we have the details from Dublin Bus that it gave to the union. The majority of the pinch points are incorporated into the quality bus network system we are implementing. I mentioned at the previous meeting that it was difficult simply to ban a right hand turn, for example, unless one was also imposing various other measures at the same time. Kilmore Road on the Malahide quality bus corridor was the case in point. It took us five years to get that turn banned because there were major objections to it.
Was there chaos when that change was implemented?
Mr. Ciarán de Burca
It involved a certain degree of delay for some motorists but they have found other routes. The scheme is not yet finished but we will issue a report when it is. I fully agree that when we get the website up and running, we must sell the success of the QBCs.
In regard to off-peak services, the success of the Luas when compared with the bus arises because commuters know when the next Luas is coming. Even though the Luas service is, in percentage terms, less frequent than the bus service at off-peak times, its great advantage is that passengers can wait at a Luas stop and know there is a tram coming in seven or right minutes. The same cannot be said for the bus service. A realtime passenger information, RTPI, facility for Dublin Bus users is absolutely essential.
I accept what was said about three lanes in and one lane out and so on. However, given the money invested by local authorities in providing bus corridors, we all have a responsibility to ensure buses are filled.
We appreciate all the good work being done. We would like the delegation to return towards the end of the year.
On the last point made by Ciarán de Burca, the interconnector between the two sections of Luas is being hailed as the greatest thing to happen to Dublin transport services. What is wrong with creating a high quality, high frequency bus service between the two Luas points? I shall ask the delegation to come back to us on that issue when it returns at the end of the year.
I emphasise that much good work has been done and that it is appreciated. We know the complications. The delegation has taken hard decisions and convinced the objectors that it is in the public interest and the public good. I have taken the trouble to go and speak to some objectors and ask whether it was as bad as they thought. The usual answer is: "We really did not know what they were doing and that it would be this good". We certainly need more of it. It will help enormously to get people out of their cars, which is the final objective.
I thank the delegation for what was a very good presentation.
The joint committee adjourned at 5.35 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Wednesday, 13 February 2008.