Swiftway BRT: Issues highlighted in public consultation

cdebru · 19-08-2014 7:32pm

MYOB wrote: »

Singapore isn't a country I'd like us to be copying regulations from generally but this is something that may be needed at this stage. Would have to be sold to the drivers as "stamping out part-timers" or similar though.

Actually very good way of selling it , if all taxis had to do x number of off peak hours that were rostered for them it would make it difficult for those holding down other full time jobs to remain in the industry, and for those that have taxi plates to just use bus lanes etc.

monument · 21-08-2014 1:17am

Sorry, have not got a chance to reply on till now… and again, I’m at pains defending the BRT plans without knowing the detail, so please take this as defending BRT in principle more than anything...

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

but how can they start a consultation unless they have already determined some basic issues, like how can a suitably uncongested lane be achieved? This is a prerequisite of BRT and there is no point in holding consultations unless they know they can achieve it.

There are many ways.

It’s a BRT menu rather than them having to pick all options: Centre running; at-kerb lanes up to junctions, bus-only streets, priority at traffic lights, kerb-segregated lanes, fixed camera enforcement, on-bus camera enforcement, etc.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The website state "Uses own BRT lane or shared bus/BRT lane" so clearly they are happy to share the bus lane where a dedicated lane cannot be achieved. If this is the case, BRT will not be faster than the buses.

It is likely that BRT will be replacing many/most local bus routes on the corridors the routes are planned for.

But the lane improvements will improve speeds for all buses.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Changing the DB system to use off-board ticketing and rationalising the number of stops would be far more beneficial at a fraction of the cost.

No would not be far more beneficial. You’re only able to say that because you’re underestimating and undervaluing the benefits.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The problem with these projects is that they are often presented to make it look like they are going to represent some sort of 'quantum leap' in service, when the reality is that they are just justifications to get more budget to gold plate something that was happening anyway. The capital might be better pumped into getting the nuts-n-bolts to work rather than the fancy stuff.

It could be seen as the gold plate option but on the other hand a lot of the possible ways of improving priority needs political will (will to give traffic light priority, will to have as near as possible continuous bus/BRT lanes). That political will is far, far more likely to support a complete package of measures that BRT has to offer, over slower marginal improvements.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

There aren't that many cities in Europe with a population as big as Dublin's that don't have a more comprehensive system of segregated rail public transport.

Both Amsterdam and Copenhagen originally pushed ahead with promoting more sustainable modes and giving over space to such modes without metro lines or systems in place.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Your diagrams indicate a 100-foot wide road. Are there really roads that wide in Drumcondra?

Even if this can be executed on wide sections, how will any road layout solve the problem of bottlenecks in certain places on the route? The bottlenecks are the problem, not the uncongested parts.

I should have included the warning that it’s my educated guesswork rather than firm figures, but there is scope for narrowing what's in the cross-sections I posted (ie remove/reduce buffers, reduce footpaths or cycle paths, remove parking, only having staggered stops etc). My educated guess is that it’s 28-30 meters in places and goes down to ~25 meters in other spots.

Bottlenecks elsewhere could be done by having more bus/access-only streets, or one-waying private traffic while keeping BRT two-way, or some short sections of shared running, or short one-lane sections of BRT which allow buses to go both ways, etc…. did you have any location in mind?

BTW: Cross sections were created using streetmix.net.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Six junctions is a lot of interaction with an on-street LRT as busy as the Luas. It will result in maybe 4 or 5 minutes of delay on every round-trip. If you create a two-way bus-lane separate from the other traffic between the two directions of BXD, you will create a much more complex junction at either end, and the bus will still need to cross the Luas somewhere or other.

I know the city council and other may have a problem with it, but putting two-way on the east side of O’Connell Street could really limit the effect of crossing the Green line at two points -- you’d only then be talking about crossing southbound trams (northbound tram movements and BRT would than be segregated).

Almost all road traffic crossing the river in the city centre already suffers from crossing the red line and there’s no way around that for any mode.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

All could be done, at the end of the day, but you would need really world-class bus operations in Dublin, because bus would be more critical than ever in the mix. You cannot do this with the current management of buses in Dublin. They are just not capable of it.

I would share your concern about Dublin Bus running BRT -- and generally without some kind of tendering for the running of the service (like Luas).

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Do private cars make up a small percentage of the people travelling on the street very often? On the busiest streets at busy times, this is certainly true, but it is not always true. Private cars are also important for shopping trips for 'higher order' goods. This is why out of town centres are doing well, and the city centre is economically weak. You can't just look at the number of people. You also have to look at the economic activity.

The amount of city centre car shoppers is overestamted even by retailers: http://arrow.dit.ie/comlinkoth/10/

Private cars -- it’s worth pointing out -- will still have access to the city centre car parks.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

And again, the problem is there is no viable replacement for the private car (or taxi) in most cases. The buses we have in Dublin are just not of sufficient quality to take the place of the car. They could be improved, and various agencies claims they are fixing up buses, but there is no real will to really fix things. The service is bad, and also very expensive.

BRT is part of an attempt to fix the bus system.

And it is part of an offering to have viable replacements for the private car.

cdebru wrote: »

So you want to create massive on street parking to facilitate the oversupply of taxis ?.

As I’ve said and I’m not sure how to make it clearer: I’m not suggesting that ranks would be set up to hold all of the oversupply.

But part of the problem is that the rank spaces amounts to an undersupply even if the numbers of taxis were at a more sustainable level.

cdebru wrote: »

Also how are they going to stop cars, trucks, vans etc pulling in and parking in the BRT lanes, and why don't they implement those plans on current bus lanes?

Improvements that amount to what BRT might deliver could be implemented for very little cost, rationalize stops, use triaxle buses and implement off bus ticketing, and actually police the bus lane laws we have.

Because the plans are fairly radical and for that you need coherent master plan -- and that’s what BRT is!

Banjoxed · 21-08-2014 12:02pm

monument wrote: »

Sorry, have not got a chance to reply on till now… and again, I’m at pains defending the BRT plans without knowing the detail, so please take this as defending BRT in principle more than anything...

There are many ways.

It’s a BRT menu rather than them having to pick all options: Centre running; at-kerb lanes up to junctions, bus-only streets, priority at traffic lights, kerb-segregated lanes, fixed camera enforcement, on-bus camera enforcement, etc.

It is likely that BRT will be replacing many/most local bus routes on the corridors the routes are planned for.

But the lane improvements will improve speeds for all buses.

No would not be far more beneficial. You’re only able to say that because you’re underestimating and undervaluing the benefits.

It could be seen as the gold plate option but on the other hand a lot of the possible ways of improving priority needs political will (will to give traffic light priority, will to have as near as possible continuous bus/BRT lanes). That political will is far, far more likely to support a complete package of measures that BRT has to offer, over slower marginal improvements.

Both Amsterdam and Copenhagen originally pushed ahead with promoting more sustainable modes and giving over space to such modes without metro lines or systems in place.

I should have included the warning that it’s my educated guesswork rather than firm figures, but there is scope for narrowing what's in the cross-sections I posted (ie remove/reduce buffers, reduce footpaths or cycle paths, remove parking, only having staggered stops etc). My educated guess is that it’s 28-30 meters in places and goes down to ~25 meters in other spots.

Bottlenecks elsewhere could be done by having more bus/access-only streets, or one-waying private traffic while keeping BRT two-way, or some short sections of shared running, or short one-lane sections of BRT which allow buses to go both ways, etc…. did you have any location in mind?

BTW: Cross sections were created using streetmix.net.

I know the city council and other may have a problem with it, but putting two-way on the east side of O’Connell Street could really limit the effect of crossing the Green line at two points -- you’d only then be talking about crossing southbound trams (northbound tram movements and BRT would than be segregated).

Almost all road traffic crossing the river in the city centre already suffers from crossing the red line and there’s no way around that for any mode.

I would share your concern about Dublin Bus running BRT -- and generally without some kind of tendering for the running of the service (like Luas).

The amount of city centre car shoppers is overestamted even by retailers: http://arrow.dit.ie/comlinkoth/10/

Private cars -- it’s worth pointing out -- will still have access to the city centre car parks.

BRT is part of an attempt to fix the bus system.

And it is part of an offering to have viable replacements for the private car.

As I’ve said and I’m not sure how to make it clearer: I’m not suggesting that ranks would be set up to hold all of the oversupply.

But part of the problem is that the rank spaces amounts to an undersupply even if the numbers of taxis were at a more sustainable level.

Because the plans are fairly radical and for that you need coherent master plan -- and that’s what BRT is!

Gold plate? Unless this is implemented properly this will be every bit as Tin plate as the botched QBC project was, no matter how fake trammy the buses will be.

antoinolachtnai · 21-08-2014 12:17pm

monument wrote: »

Bottlenecks elsewhere could be done by having more bus/access-only streets, or one-waying private traffic while keeping BRT two-way, or some short sections of shared running, or short one-lane sections of BRT which allow buses to go both ways, etc…. did you have any location in mind?

Drumcondra is the obvious one that comes to mind, but there are plenty other places on the route where there is big pressure.

The amount of city centre car shoppers is overestamted even by retailers:

This is a very limited and flawed study in a retail area that is in long-term decline.

BRT is part of an attempt to fix the bus system.

It is an attempt to re-engineer the bus system from something which serves communities (where the people are) to serve corridors (where the roads are). It is bringing rail planning thinking to short-range urban buses. This makes no sense in the context of Dublin and in particular the suburbs we are talking about.

The core problem with buses in Dublin isn't the buses or the routes or the street layouts. It's the operations. The quality is too low and the cost is too high.

And it is part of an offering to have viable replacements for the private car.

But is it really viable? There is no indication from the investigation work done that it would really be viable.

A viable replacement for the private car in an area like Beaumont or Santry would be a good (reliable,clean, with adequate capacity), regular (10 minute frequency) bus service at a reasonable price within 10 minutes of everybody's house. It is not radical but it would work.

cdebru · 21-08-2014 1:06pm

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The core problem with buses in Dublin isn't the buses or the routes or the street layouts. It's the operations. The quality is too low and the cost is too high.

By cost is too high I presume you mean the cost to the consumer ?

I asked you before to show how DBs costs were too high and how you would cut them, but you couldn't /wouldnt .

The fares in DB are too high but that is because the burden of paying the fare falls on relatively few of the passengers.

antoinolachtnai · 21-08-2014 7:16pm

I mean the cost, the amount of money it costs to deliver a unit of service, so for example, an hour of operation or a km of vehicle operation.

The cost in Ireland is far above what it is in Scotland or England outside London.

The result is that fares are too high and services are too infrequent.

I didn't say anything about DB's costs. But since you bring it up, I'd really need management accounts or at least a trial balance to really say anything. Can you supply that? My hunch would be that a major step would be to do something about the vast army of people who work in Dublin Bus but who don't actually drive a bus.

cdebru · 22-08-2014 9:41am

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

I mean the cost, the amount of money it costs to deliver a unit of service, so for example, an hour of operation or a km of vehicle operation.

The cost in Ireland is far above what it is in Scotland or England outside London.

The result is that fares are too high and services are too infrequent.

I didn't say anything about DB's costs. But since you bring it up, I'd really need management accounts or at least a trial balance to really say anything. Can you supply that? My hunch would be that a major step would be to do something about the vast army of people who work in Dublin Bus but who don't actually drive a bus.

It was already pointed out to you that you are comparing apples and oranges, comparing the whole of Scotland with a city is not a valid comparison, you are comparing mam and dad rural part time operations with city operations.

You can get a good idea from their published accounts, and as pointed out to you previously the staffing levels are not that high, when you consider what services DB has to provide, that's not to say there is no waste but in general it would be staff redeployment rather than culling. There are about 1200 non driving staff which sounds high till you start breaking it down there are 9 main depots, plus head office plus medical department. When you start dividing them up and then taking account of some of those support staff like mechanics, inspectors, controllers having to work shifts over 7 days a week, it isn't that high. So like I said it is staff in the wrong places rather than too many staff.

I notice you are not putting any figures this time last year you were bandying I think it was 50% too high, but I blew that out of the water by showing it was completely impossible as even if the company only paid minimum wage to drivers and employed no one else, no managers, maintenance, cleaners, controllers, inspectors they still couldn't cut their costs by 50%. Now you are just trying to throw out the costs thing without tying yourself down because you know now it is BS.

antoinolachtnai · 22-08-2014 10:44am

You are going well off the topic.

Can you put forward any comparators for a city service in the UK that is as expensive in terms of operating costs as Dublin Bus?

What proportion of the overall do 'mam and dad operations' make up in Scotland? How come they can operate so efficiently? Surely there should be benefits of scale for large operators?

1200 non-driving staff to look after a few hundred buses mostly-new buses seems like an extraordinary number. Dublin Bus also has service contracts for some operations, which makes it even crazier.

You are right about the staff being in the wrong places. The place they should be is driving buses.

The published accounts are a load of gunge. It is very hard to make head or tail of them. The reserves fly all over the place.

monument · 23-08-2014 4:11pm

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Drumcondra is the obvious one that comes to mind, but there are plenty other places on the route where there is big pressure.

There is busy sections of Drumcondra, but I can't think of any bottlenecks bar Cat and Cage, which is being sorted.

BRT is all about segregating buses from that congestion and giving buses the priority at lights.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

This is a very limited and flawed study in a retail area that is in long-term decline.

How is it flawed?

Is it really in a long-term decline? Sure there has been a fairly normal shift given the amount of out-of-town shopping centre which have been built, but the city centre has also grown.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

It is an attempt to re-engineer the bus system from something which serves communities (where the people are) to serve corridors (where the roads are). It is bringing rail planning thinking to short-range urban buses. This makes no sense in the context of Dublin and in particular the suburbs we are talking about.

The core problem with buses in Dublin isn't the buses or the routes or the street layouts. It's the operations. The quality is too low and the cost is too high.

I don't think it's bringing rail planning thinking to short-range urban buses. It's bringing light rail or modern tram thinking to bus operations -- that's what BRT is and it has proven successful around Europe and in parts of the US.

BRT will need to tackle operations and street layout. And I have to say that street layout and enforcement has a fairly large impact on bus operations:

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

But is it really viable? There is no indication from the investigation work done that it would really be viable.

A viable replacement for the private car in an area like Beaumont or Santry would be a good (reliable,clean, with adequate capacity), regular (10 minute frequency) bus service at a reasonable price within 10 minutes of everybody's house. It is not radical but it would work.

The difference between BRT/trams and conventional buses is that generally BRT/trams can offer the frequency, reliability and quality of service that people will walk or cycle further to stops.

Infini · 23-08-2014 4:29pm

To be honest myself I dont know how this BRT would be even viable on these corridors expecially since Dublin in many parts is extremely cramped and narrow. Even on the road out of drumcondra for example theres already bus there taking up half the road in parts which leaves little room for this.

Personally we need more rail options in Dublin like the dart underground and expansion of the luas as the road network in dublin inner city is well overloaded.

cgcsb · 23-08-2014 5:11pm

I would imagine that with luas BXD, 5 radial BRT routes, a new two way cycle path along the quays and possibly DART underground that Dublin in the 2020's will be largely car free bar deliveries and some access to the city carparks on a restricted and congestion charged basis, possibly with a total ban during peak hours. The NTA/City council need to be brutal in handing over road space to BRT, this won't work while attempting to appease the motor industry at the same time. It's decision time, and short term populism has to go in order for the city to grow. The NTA has thus far proven it's self to be somewhat capable for a state agency. Let's hope they have the liathrodí to grab the required road space.

antoinolachtnai · 23-08-2014 5:18pm

Firstly, I agree with you that there are ways to make buses go faster on that corridor and all others. That should be done for sure. There are a bunch of ways this can be done, and most of the ones involving road space have already been done.

The problem comes down to road space at the narrowest points on the road and more specifically to junction capacity. As it is, the space for private vehicles has already been reduced to one lane. You can't reduce it any further. Even if there were no private passenger cars commuting or shopping, you still need quite a lot of commercial traffic just to sustain a modern city (restocking, remove waste, alterations/construction/repairs, sales and so on), and this needs to be facilitated.

There is a shortage of road space in the city centre in particular but also in the 'burbs and it limits the possibility for a BRT-style scheme, or for that matter an LRT. Rearranging the road space doesn't make any more of it. This is especially the case at junctions, where rearranging the space is likely to result in less road space rather than more (because pedestrian volumes require space of their own).

Dublin city centre has its own problems and they are serious. It is no longer a national centre for shopping - people from outside the city now go to the outlying shopping centres rather than the city centre. The flaws with the study are that it deals with perceptions of relatively junior people in the retail business (store managers) and deals in a very odd way with outliers. It only surveys the shoppers who are actually in the city, not the ones who decided to go elsewhere.

So that is all bad news. What would I suggest doing? I would proceed by corridor improvement schemes on every single corridor. Improving the modal share of buses on each corridor by 10 percentage points is feasible, and this would make an immense difference to journey speeds in the city centre. But if all the money is spent on one or two corridors, it may result in a 15 percent improvement on those two corridors, but this will only amount to a 1 or 2 percent improvement overall, and this will not make any real difference.

(I actually doubt the Swords corridor can deliver much in terms of improved modal share, because the airport and swords are already better served than the BRT can serve them, and the suburbs between there and the city are not that densely populated. But a study would need to be done to find out. This could be done easily enough using census data, but it apparently has not been done.)

AlekSmart · 23-08-2014 6:03pm

cgcsb wrote: »

I would imagine that with luas BXD, 5 radial BRT routes, a new two way cycle path along the quays and possibly DART underground that Dublin in the 2020's will be largely car free bar deliveries and some access to the city carparks on a restricted and congestion charged basis, possibly with a total ban during peak hours. The NTA/City council need to be brutal in handing over road space to BRT, this won't work while attempting to appease the motor industry at the same time. It's decision time, and short term populism has to go in order for the city to grow. The NTA has thus far proven it's self to be somewhat capable for a state agency. Let's hope they have the liathrodí to grab the required road space.

This City Centre Car Parking issue is rumbling along with NO end in sight.

These operations morphed from being "Bombsite"surface car parks,supervised by "Lockhards",to the significant business opportunities which exist today.

Any attempt to restrict or eliminate access to City Centre Multi-Stories will be met with rapid,effective (and Expensive) opposition.

AFAIR,a legal warning shot was fired across DCC's bows some years back,which was apparently of the highest risk in terms of potential cost to DCC compensation wise.

Whether the NTA has the measure of the Multi-Story Operators remains to be seen ?

Aard · 23-08-2014 6:08pm

With increased economic activity in the city centre, Kelleher's old Dawson Street building recently going for €23m, the MacNamara development on the Green going to be rented out at €450/sqm -- these are all signs that perhaps in the not-so-distant future it may make more sense for the carpark owners to tear them down and build Class A office buildings instead with limited underground parking for employees. Certainly if I was in ownership of a massive car park I'd be weighing up my options for redevelopment.

L1011 · 23-08-2014 6:49pm

Fair few of the city centre carparks are on constrained sites, entirely underground or on undesirable streets for office developments. Some may close, but consider that there's carparks in central London - others will just get dearer.

Banjoxed · 23-08-2014 7:20pm

AlekSmart wrote: »

This City Centre Car Parking issue is rumbling along with NO end in sight.

These operations morphed from being "Bombsite"surface car parks,supervised by "Lockhards",to the significant business opportunities which exist today.

Any attempt to restrict or eliminate access to City Centre Multi-Stories will be met with rapid,effective (and Expensive) opposition.

AFAIR,a legal warning shot was fired across DCC's bows some years back,which was apparently of the highest risk in terms of potential cost to DCC compensation wise.

Whether the NTA has the measure of the Multi-Story Operators remains to be seen ?

Sure wasn't it the case that Aer Rianta said primly "no thank you" to bringing rail to Dublin Airport because of its captive audience of travellers parking their cars there? Easy for lobbyists to monetise car drivers and traffic congestion.

cgcsb · 23-08-2014 7:50pm

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The problem comes down to road space at the narrowest points on the road and more specifically to junction capacity. As it is, the space for private vehicles has already been reduced to one lane. You can't reduce it any further. Even if there were no private passenger cars commuting or shopping, you still need quite a lot of commercial traffic just to sustain a modern city (restocking, remove waste, alterations/construction/repairs, sales and so on), and this needs to be facilitated.

A big problem along existing bus corridors is sharing road space between bus and cars particularly for left turning movements. This can be done without removing forther road space from private cars.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Dublin city centre has its own problems and they are serious. It is no longer a national centre for shopping - people from outside the city now go to the outlying shopping centres rather than the city centre. The flaws with the study are that it deals with perceptions of relatively junior people in the retail business (store managers) and deals in a very odd way with outliers. It only surveys the shoppers who are actually in the city, not the ones who decided to go elsewhere.

Footfall in city centre is increasing steadily. I don't know where you are getting the idea that the suburban centres are hoovering up all the custom.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

(I actually doubt the Swords corridor can deliver much in terms of improved modal share, because the airport and swords are already better served than the BRT can serve them.

I agree that there is little scope for journey time improvement along the corridor with the exception of the cat and cage road widening (which is being done anyway). Perhaps an elaborate bus only by-pass of Santry village can also offer some journey time improvement. However there is plenty of scope for overall improvement of service. The airport services are piss poor. You can get a 16 which meanders through the burbs before getting to the airport and you have the horribly infrequent 41. These services are kept piss poor deliberately because DC are trying to flog their rip off €6 each way 'airport express' which takes more than an hour end to end.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

and the suburbs between there and the city are not that densely populated.

I'm afraid you are talking out your yazoo there. The Drumcondra/whitehall/Santry/Swords corridor is densley populated, that is why it was selected for a metro line and that is why the NTA have deemed that BRT is incapable of meeting the demand of that corridor.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

But a study would need to be done to find out. This could be done easily enough using census data, but it apparently has not been done.)

This has been done.

cgcsb · 23-08-2014 7:59pm

The car parking is a conundrum alright. I think many of them will eventually disappear over time. Jervis Street, Ilac and Brown Thomas could be more profitable as offices. Also DCC could decide that those endless signs around town, pointing you towards car parks and telling us how many spaces there are, are no longer required and are contributing to visual clutter/pollution. Throw in a congestion charge and the car parks will start to die of natural causes.

monument · 23-08-2014 11:23pm

cgcsb wrote: »

The car parking is a conundrum alright. I think many of them will eventually disappear over time. Jervis Street, Ilac and Brown Thomas could be more profitable as offices. Also DCC could decide that those endless signs around town, pointing you towards car parks and telling us how many spaces there are, are no longer required and are contributing to visual clutter/pollution. Throw in a congestion charge and the car parks will start to die of natural causes.

Amsterdam city centre has far more restricted streets, yet it has car parks like Dublin's.

The death of car parks has been predicted before and I'm sure it will be predicted again.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Firstly, I agree with you that there are ways to make buses go faster on that corridor and all others. That should be done for sure. There are a bunch of ways this can be done, and most of the ones involving road space have already been done.

The problem comes down to road space at the narrowest points on the road and more specifically to junction capacity. As it is, the space for private vehicles has already been reduced to one lane. You can't reduce it any further. Even if there were no private passenger cars commuting or shopping, you still need quite a lot of commercial traffic just to sustain a modern city (restocking, remove waste, alterations/construction/repairs, sales and so on), and this needs to be facilitated.

Northbound there's, for example, missing sections of bus lane:

300 meters -- between the Royal Canal and just after the junction with Cloniffe Road
290 meters -- between Hollybank Rd to Millbourne Ave
etc

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Rearranging the road space doesn't make any more of it. This is especially the case at junctions, where rearranging the space is likely to result in less road space rather than more (because pedestrian volumes require space of their own).

No rearranging road space does not make more of it -- it re-prioritises road space to the modes which can carry more people.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Dublin city centre has its own problems and they are serious. It is no longer a national centre for shopping - people from outside the city now go to the outlying shopping centres rather than the city centre.

The death of the city centre is greatly exaggerated.

Sure, it's no longer the national centre of shopping that it once was. But that's so for many reasons -- one of them is the boom in selection elsewhere, away from the East of the country. I know around my home area, Galway can now largely rival a lot of the selection Dublin had, Sligo does so to a lesser extent, and even in Castlebar there's shops which most people would have ever expected in Mayo. Online shopping has also changed things. Lots of things have changed.

But it's not doom and gloom for Dublin City Centre. The population of Dublin City and the Greater Dublin Area has also boomed. And many people the region and from all over the country still shop in Dublin City Centre.

The city centre has also built up some stores -- both large and small, both independent local and large international -- that are not in out-of-town centre or in other cities. While these may not pull in as many people from around the country as used to be pulled in, these shops are a pull factor for many in the Greater Dublin Area, which is set to grow in population terms.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The flaws with the study are that it deals with perceptions of relatively junior people in the retail business (store managers) and deals in a very odd way with outliers. It only surveys the shoppers who are actually in the city, not the ones who decided to go elsewhere.

It far from just deals with perceptions of junior mangers -- we've heard the heads of retailers overestimating the amount of shoppers who are traveling by car, as well as overvaluing the positive effect of Luas.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

But if all the money is spent on one or two corridors, it may result in a 15 percent improvement on those two corridors, but this will only amount to a 1 or 2 percent improvement overall, and this will not make any real difference.

BRT is effectually dealing with five corridors, not one or two.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

(I actually doubt the Swords corridor can deliver much in terms of improved modal share, because the airport and swords are already better served than the BRT can serve them, and the suburbs between there and the city are not that densely populated. But a study would need to be done to find out. This could be done easily enough using census data, but it apparently has not been done.)

Overall the Swords - City Centre corridor looks to be more densely populated than the corridor severby the Luas green line.

The NTA now has so much population, trip and traffic research that it makes planning in the past look like it was stone age based. I don't think you can accuse them of not doing their homework!

antoinolachtnai · 24-08-2014 12:55am

If they have done the homework, where is it? Saying that it is possible to get from swords to the city centre and back in 70 minutes is not homework. It is just bald assertion and politicking.

Will adding extra lengths of bus lane actually make much difference to bus speeds? To achieve what NTA promise, BRT would have to double the current speed and be almost as fast as the Luas green line.

The Ballymun density for the km either side of the corridor looks a lot higher to me, looking at the map. Is there a study?

The reason Metro North was proposed to go via Drumcondra to Swords had little enough to do with the density of the population there.

I am not saying that bus priority is not a good thing, just that it has to be applied realistically and pragmatically.

The biggest thing we need to bring about modal shift is more buses at a lower cost.

Pete_Cavan · 24-08-2014 2:12pm

The best way to deal with car parks is to tackle the problem at source and target their customers by making it so difficult to drive into the city that people just wont bother. The first thing and a no brainer would be to extend the bus gate from the top of O'Connell Street to Dame Street/Georges Street junction and Pearse Street/Tara Street junction operated 24 hours and enforced by CCTV cameras and issuing fines to drivers. This of course would be beneficial to the vast majority of people in the city. The problem is that the powers that be wont listen to the majority and instead bend to the will of a small number of vested interests who are happy to see the city streets clogged with traffic so they can charge them ridiculous prices to park. Any direct attack on car parks will be met with serious resistance so it has to be done indirectly.

As regards BRT, sharing with normal buses wont work as journey times will not be reduced because they will only be as fast as the slowest service using the lane. The choice is either have BRT only on the selected routes with DB buses feeding these (so BRT only along Drumcondra Road with DB using other roads but interchanging with the BRT at Collins Ave, Griffith Ave, etc.) or else upgrade DB to include some of the characteristics of BRT (mainly off board ticketing and a reduced number of stops). In either case, the services will be undermined by other traffic as full segregation is not possible. What we need (right now, not just if they want to introduce BRT) is a system whereby bus drivers can report people obstructing their lane, either reporting directly to Gardai or to their own dedicated division who can deal with these issues. If a bus driver finds his lane obstructed, he radios in the location and a lorry is available to come immediately to remove the obstruction and a hefty fine is issued to the owner. Cameras on the front of the bus would record the licence plate of the car should it have moved in the meantime. This is particularly important for taxi drivers who think

Also, certain bus lanes need to be in operation 7 days a week and for longer each day. In certain places the bus lane becomes a car park after a certain time and off peak services are not much faster than at peak times, for example Dorset Street and Amien Street. It is not the 60's anymore, the city doesnt shut down at 7pm and people need to get around the city on a Sunday.

monument · 24-08-2014 2:59pm

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

If they have done the homework, where is it? Saying that it is possible to get from swords to the city centre and back in 70 minutes is not homework. It is just bald assertion and politicking.

In the context of general population, trip and traffic research, here's their homework:

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/publications/transport-planning/
http://www.nationaltransport.ie/publications/transport-planning/draft-transport-strategy-background-documents/

Will adding extra lengths of bus lane actually make much difference to bus speeds? To achieve what NTA promise, BRT would have to double the current speed and be almost as fast as the Luas green line.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The Ballymun density for the km either side of the corridor looks a lot higher to me, looking at the map. Is there a study?

It is, but the ghost of Metro North has not given up yet.

The Swords BRT route has higher density than a lot of the Luas Green Line.

The bulk of Northwood -- with CSO Small Areas which have ~10-24 persons per SQKM -- is about as close to the Swords Road as it is to the planned Metro North stop in the far corner of the Northwood campus.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The reason Metro North was proposed to go via Drumcondra to Swords had little enough to do with the density of the population there.

You could be getting at many things, but the area has both good density and more than its fare share of trip generators. You claim that "the suburbs between there and the city are not that densely populate" is just not that true.

Look at the overall picture inside the M50 -- we can't select the persons per SQKM measure for the exact catchment area as that would not match Electoral Divisions, but we can look at the Electoral Divisions connected to the routes to get an idea...

There's a perception that these are low density, but this is not true expect for the area which includes the fields around DCU.

With the Swords BRT route it works out as follows:

Average between M50 and canal: 5,000 persons per SQKM
Average inside M50: 10,000 persons per SQKM

That compares well to the Luas Green Line area inside the M50:

Average between M50 and canal: 6,300
Average inside M50: 8,500

That compares well to the overall average density in Amsterdam (4,908/km2), a comparable city population wise and one which has a load of tram lines and a few metro lines.

For the record, here's the full data I worked off:

Swords BRT

Turnapin -- 1,790.4 persons per SQKM (~50%+ business / motorway)
Kilmore A -- 4,551.9 persons per SQKM
Whitehall C -- 3,006.8 persons per SQKM (includes Omni Park, other businesses)
Whitehall B -- 5,189.3 persons per SQKM (goes from the Ballymun Road to Swords, with some unfinished apartment developments in middle)
Whitehall D -- 4,242.6 persons per SQKM
Whitehall A -- 2,706.1 persons per SQKM (includes DCU and a few fields)
Drumcondra South C -- 4,254.7 persons per SQKM
Drumcondra South A -- 4,437.9 persons per SQKM
Botanic B -- 6,661.2 persons per SQKM
Drumcondra South B -- 4,488.2 persons per SQKM
Ballybough B -- 9,568.6 persons per SQKM (includes areas on both sides of the canal)
Inns Quay A -- 12,346.9 persons per SQKM
Mountjoy B -- 12,418.2 persons per SQKM
Rotunda A -- 18,792 persons per SQKM
Mountjoy A -- 17,753.3 persons per SQKM
North City -- 9,544.6 persons per SQKM
North Dock C -- 7,241.7 persons per SQKM
Mansion House A -- 6,488.1 persons per SQKM
Mansion House B -- 1,662.5 persons per SQKM
St. Kevin's -- 7,919.4 persons per SQKM

Luas Green Line:

Stillorgan-Leopardstown -- 4,261.4 persons per SQKM
Stillorgan-Merville -- 2,450 persons per SQKM
Dundrum-Balally -- 2,797.2 persons per SQKM (includes Sandyford Business Park)
Stillorgan-Kilmacud -- 4,206.6 persons per SQKM
Dundrum-Kilmacud -- 3,512.1 persons per SQKM
Dundrum-Taney -- 4,296.5 persons per SQKM
Churchtown-Woodlawn -- 3,375.6 persons per SQKM
Clonskeagh-Farranboley -- 4,169.4 persons per SQKM
Churchtown-Orwell --1,888.4 persons per SQKM (golf club)
Rathmines East B -- 4,426.4 persons per SQKM
Rathmines East C -- 4,584.9 persons per SQKM
Rathmines East D -- 7,563.9 persons per SQKM
Rathmines East A -- 6,715.9 persons per SQKM
St. Kevin's -- 7,919.4 persons per SQKM
Royal Exchange B -- 8,700 persons per SQKM
Mansion House B -- 1,662.5 persons per SQKM

And if BRT's pull works anyway like Luas you can expect notable amounts of people walking or cycling further than the traditional catchment area.

LXFlyer · 24-08-2014 3:56pm

monument wrote: »

BRT is effectually dealing with five corridors, not one or two.

While I think the Swords and N11 corridors are good candidates for BRT, and possibly Blanchardstown, I remain totally unconvinced about the Malahide Road and Rathfarnham routes due to there being insufficient road space for two BRT/bus lanes and two normal traffic lanes for substantial portions of each route.

Without widespread CPOs being instigated, I cannot see it working, and the number of CPOs that would be required I just cannot see being acceptable.

Cool Mo D · 24-08-2014 4:12pm

lxflyer wrote: »

While I think the Swords and N11 corridors are good candidates for BRT, and possibly Blanchardstown, I remain totally unconvinced about the Malahide Road and Rathfarnham routes due to there being insufficient road space for two BRT/bus lanes and two normal traffic lanes for substantial portions of each route.

Without widespread CPOs being instigated, I cannot see it working, and the number of CPOs that would be required I just cannot see being acceptable.

Where is the problem with the Malahide road? It's already continuous bus line almost the entire way from Fairview to Clongriffin, minus about 100 metres in Artane and Marino.

LXFlyer · 24-08-2014 4:35pm

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Where is the problem with the Malahide road? It's already continuous bus line almost the entire way from Fairview to Clongriffin, minus about 100 metres in Artane and Marino.

The stretch from Fairview to Griffith Avenue is only bus lane on one side of the road and just beyond Kilmore Road - totalling about 700m.

Without CPO'ing every front garden it's going to be difficult to put in full BRT.

Banjoxed · 24-08-2014 4:42pm

lxflyer wrote: »

The stretch from Fairview to Griffith Avenue is only bus lane on one side of the road and just beyond Kilmore Road - totalling about 700m.

Without CPO'ing every front garden it's going to be difficult to put in full BRT.

And therein is the heart of the problem. It may well be called BRT, but the danger will be that at pinch points it will be far from rapid.

Still, the Indo and the Irish Daily Mail will marvel at the sexy buses.

antoinolachtnai · 24-08-2014 6:39pm

To get the big gains, you don't have to have exclusivity for every inch of the way. The most critical thing is getting to the front at junctions.

The practical job of the traffic engineer is to do this with as little disruption as possible. It is the space at the junctions that is critical.

That said, you will not get the metro-like speeds that NTA are holding out without a dedicated busway, from which non-BRT buses are excluded.

cgcsb · 24-08-2014 10:22pm

There isnt any serious constraint on the malahide rd corridor except for a small section near Fairview. I'd be more worried about the blanch and tallaght routes.

Cinephille1888 · 19-11-2014 12:23am

I was speaking to a DIT lecturer of mine about it, as I shared a draft submission I intend to hand in to the NTA.

He told me that at a recent BRT conference the Head of the NTA said they were going full steam with this project, and the other routes.

He also said that the NTA "put the shutters" on the idea of Metro North happening any time soon. And that BRT was the future for transport improvements, for some time to come.

There is also the "north Dublin transport option review" which is due in Jan/Feb. This may include Luas Expansion, Swiftway, Maynooth Electrification, Ballymun QBC to the Airport, and possible new corridors identified.

The Submission date is next week for those still interested.

cgcsb · 19-11-2014 11:11am

How extremely frustrating for Dubliners. Swiftway 2.0 + a curvatious extension of BXD that'll have a journey time exceeding existing services. Why is there such a resistance to building proper high capacity infrastructure, that'll secure our transport needs into the future?

schemingbohemia · 19-11-2014 12:34pm

cgcsb wrote: »

How extremely frustrating for Dubliners. Swiftway 2.0 + a curvatious extension of BXD that'll have a journey time exceeding existing services. Why is there such a resistance to building proper high capacity infrastructure, that'll secure our transport needs into the future?

Eh, I'm guessing it's money related. We're still broke.

cgcsb · 19-11-2014 3:05pm

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Eh, I'm guessing it's money related. We're still broke.

There was ample money in the coffers from 1995-2008. A period in which, hospitals, schools and railways just got rustier and more decrepit.

Tragedy · 19-11-2014 7:12pm

cgcsb wrote: »

There was ample money in the coffers from 1995-2008. A period in which, hospitals, schools and railways just got rustier and more decrepit.

A huge amount of money was spent on schools and hospitals in the last decade, as well as transport infrastructure. Railway spending isn't particularly low, CIE is just utterly inept and mismanaged.

SeanW · 20-11-2014 3:10pm

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Eh, I'm guessing it's money related. We're still broke.

Then why bother?

LXFlyer · 25-11-2014 3:58pm

Just as a reminder, deadline for submissions on the Swords BRT plans is this Friday at 5pm.

Details at http://www.nationaltransport.ie/consultations/public-consultation-on-swiftway-bus-rapid-transit-swordsairport-to-city-centre/

pclive · 25-11-2014 4:18pm

At a recent conferecne on the BRT the planners were asked if taxis were to be allowed to use the BRT lanes.

His answer was they they havent decided yet.

I think the wole project will fail if they are allowed to access BRT lanes.

monument · 25-11-2014 10:16pm

pclive wrote: »

I think the wole project will fail if they are allowed to access BRT lanes.

If there's decent priorty (which is lacking in places right now), taxes won't matter as much as you might think.

cgcsb · 26-11-2014 1:01am

Taxis will definitely impact in central areas as will sharing the bus lane with left turners. The buslane on the quays is congested in the mornings, only its not buses blocking it, its taxis, left turners and illegal parkers.

If BRT routes have the same poorly segregated road space then there's no point in claiming that brt represents any time saving for commuters, its simply not true. Without vastly improved segregation, all we're getting is bendy buses.

pclive · 26-11-2014 9:28am

And not to mention non existant enforcement of existing bus lanes

Kumsheen · 26-11-2014 6:37pm

pclive wrote: »

At a recent conferecne on the BRT the planners were asked if taxis were to be allowed to use the BRT lanes.

His answer was they they havent decided yet.

I think the wole project will fail if they are allowed to access BRT lanes.

I'd bet money they will be allowed to use them, and they will stop in them too as they currently do.

AlekSmart · 26-11-2014 8:33pm

Kumsheen wrote: »

I'd bet money they will be allowed to use them, and they will stop in them too as they currently do.

The decision on Taxi access has yet to be made,however one piece of thinking doing the (internal) rounds is focusing on a form of annual BRT Lane Taxi Permit which Taxi Drivers could purchase,allowing them to utilize the BRT lane,stopping only at a limited number of specific Taxi-Stops. (I forsee another coloured sticker/roof sign to cover this)

loyatemu · 27-11-2014 10:06am

AlekSmart wrote: »

The decision on Taxi access has yet to be made,however one piece of thinking doing the (internal) rounds is focusing on a form of annual BRT Lane Taxi Permit which Taxi Drivers could purchase,allowing them to utilize the BRT lane,stopping only at a limited number of specific Taxi-Stops. (I forsee another coloured sticker/roof sign to cover this)

that's a dumb idea, either let them use the lanes, or don't. How much of a contribution to reducing congestion do taxis actually make, for every cab with passengers in it, there's probably 2 driving around empty or blocking a traffic lane while the driver picks up/drops off/tries to squeeze onto the end of a rank.

cgcsb · 27-11-2014 10:06am

AlekSmart wrote: »

The decision on Taxi access has yet to be made,however one piece of thinking doing the (internal) rounds is focusing on a form of annual BRT Lane Taxi Permit which Taxi Drivers could purchase,allowing them to utilize the BRT lane,stopping only at a limited number of specific Taxi-Stops. (I forsee another coloured sticker/roof sign to cover this)

That'd require a level of enforcement that just isn't possible, least of all in Ireland. I'd like to see the camera idea on the dash of buses being implemented, take a snap of the license plate and bang, whopping fine. Same at junctions where drivers simply can't help themselves driving into a yellow box and stopping.

pclive · 27-11-2014 10:19am

The idea of a permit is not enforceable considering the current lack of enforcement

cgsb have you made a submission regarding enforcement?

cgcsb · 27-11-2014 3:09pm

pclive wrote: »

The idea of a permit is not enforceable considering the current lack of enforcement

cgsb have you made a submission regarding enforcement?

I made 2 submissions, one recommending centre of the road running (standard for BRT and light rail the world over) for the BRT to avoid conflict with left turning movements. That submission has evidently gone flat on it's ass.

My second submission proposed a small barrier, consisting of some sort of paving stone, no greater than 5cm in breadth and 3cm in height separating the BRT lane from general traffic. This coupled with 0 tolerance enforcement, and license plate capturing cameras would ensure segregation.

Carawaystick · 27-11-2014 4:22pm

How would homes on the route get served by taxis if taxis could not stop in the bus lane? stop in the car lane and let people out in the middle of the road?

cgcsb · 27-11-2014 8:01pm

Carawaystick wrote: »

How would homes on the route get served by taxis if taxis could not stop in the bus lane? stop in the car lane and let people out in the middle of the road?

the same way that you get a taxi when your home is on a pedestrian street, you walk to the nearest location where it's possible to do so. No big deal.

The real question is how are 90+ people on a bus supposed to get tto work when there's rows of taxis parked on front of them.

Carawaystick · 28-11-2014 11:04am

cgcsb wrote: »

the same way that you get a taxi when your home is on a pedestrian street, you walk to the nearest location where it's possible to do so. No big deal.

You probably never had the big deal of not being able to walk, so I suppose it is grand for you.

AlekSmart · 28-11-2014 11:46am

Carawaystick wrote: »

How would homes on the route get served by taxis if taxis could not stop in the bus lane? stop in the car lane and let people out in the middle of the road?

As I understand it,the issue at hand is Taxi access TO THE BRT SPECIFIC lane/s.

Thus,in the case you mention,the taxi would continue to utilize those stretches of carriageway NOT specifically allocated to BRT.

All quite incredible to our ears at present,however the arrival of Luas BXD,Swiftway and the asssociated changes to physical infrastructure ensures that change WILL be necessary..it will suit some (Majority) and will discommode some (Minority).

Progress in Ireland has generally been a slow proicess,the NTA appear to have decided to ramp up the process by a factor and a half ?

loyatemu · 28-11-2014 11:49am

Carawaystick wrote: »

You probably never had the big deal of not being able to walk, so I suppose it is grand for you.

most of the major routes into the city are already clearways at rush hour - taxis can't stop on those either, yet the world keeps spinning.

Swiftway BRT: Issues highlighted in public consultation

Comments