Swiftway - Dublin's first bus rapid transit route - detailed plans released

Stevek101 · 13-10-2014 4:21pm #1

Fairly comprehension report located here. Probably going to be live in the next few days. If anyone wants to look at detail stop design a full list can be found on the NTA's upload index.

Update:

Official page now live

Swiftway Public Consultation

TheBandicoot · 13-10-2014 5:01pm

Thus some sharing of the corridor will be necessary. In
such cases there will need to be segregation of bus stops and Swiftway stops, with
indented lay-bys for regular buses so that Swiftway vehicles can pass unimpeded.
On the other hand, the Swiftway stops generally need to be in-line so as to suit the
pull-in to the platform by Swiftway vehicles. A stopped Swiftway vehicle will
therefore impede a regular bus following behind. However, such delays to regular
buses will be brief due to the short dwell times at the Swiftway stops

I think what this is saying is that where possible, existing bus services will pull in to a lay-by stop, and where not possible both Swiftway and regular buses will share a non-lay-by stop? If that's the case, it's weird they only talk about Swiftway blocking a regular bus, when surely the much more pressing problem there is the regular bus blocking the Swiftway?

Found some artists' impressions, kind of clears things up for me. Looks quite nice really, a really improved streetscape, and noticeably less car traffic, but would be a massive change to the city centre so there might be opposition to it. Also the Parnell Square layout seems to require buses to pull across the cycle lane to access stops(reminds me of the infamous Arran Quay stop..), which seems stupid- if you're going to reconfigure the road completely, isn't there a better option? The terminus at Earlsfort Terrace seems to be even worse, there is a cycle lane directly next to the Swiftway stop and the artists impression shows a bus blocking the lane..

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/BRT-0150_225244-10_P1-69.pdf

Aard · 13-10-2014 5:37pm

Wow, a lot of food for thought. Thanks for the links, this should generate some good discussion!

Calina · 13-10-2014 5:43pm

bk wrote: »

- 16, 41 will clearly go away, their routes are almost totally duplicated by BRT and these are the most frequent buses on the route

16 does not just serve city centre and not all of its stops are on the proposed BRT route even north side.

I have severe issues with BRT - their own documentation says it will be over capacity on day one. Really, they should stop pussy footing around and build the metro and have done with it.

LXFlyer · 13-10-2014 5:44pm

bk · 13-10-2014 6:21pm

Wow!! I've just flicked through the above report and one or two sections and I'm impressed.

It isn't a fully segregated BRT, but it does seem to be a revolutionary restructuring of the entire road space along the route, we a massive amount of work, just some highlights:

- Fully segregated bicycle path along the majority of the route

As in: Footpath - cyclepath - green verge/trees - Bus/BRT lane - car lane - same in reverse
- Majority of Dublin Bus stops to be "indented" further into the footpath and out of the Bus/BRT lane
- Brand new BRT stops. BRT and DB won't share stops.
- It seems every pedestrian crossing will be updated to a Toucan style crossing (so both cyclists and pedestrians can cross). Also seem to be lots of new crossings.
- Some land acquisition and lots of road widening. They are even talking about widening some bridges!

Some nuggets I got from the report:
- It seems BRT will stop at every stop and have a 15 to 20 second dwell time. Think more like Luas then DB.
- BRT stops will be inline with the road, while DB stops will be indented. This is why they mention DB buses potentially getting stuck behind BRT, but not the other way around, as they will be pulling off the main Bus/BRT lane most of the time.

So this is far more then just drawing a line on the road. I'd call this a medium BRT, not fully segregated, but very heavily engineered.

But the bigger thing I'm taking from this is that this isn't really a BRT project. That is just the carrot to sell it to people. Really it is a complete road space re-engineering project.

It looks like it will lead to a far superior experience for pedestrians, cyclists, residents and public transport users.

monument · 13-10-2014 6:42pm

My first impression is that there's an amazing amount of compromise -- some of it clear (keeping a higher level of motoring priority, cost) and some of it far less clear.

The NTA's love of mixing people on bicycles and on foot is just growing for some unknown reason.

It's a disappointment, to say the least.

monument · 13-10-2014 6:59pm

This is bonkers...

Cycle paths on the west side of Westmorland Street between one of the busiest footpaths in Ireland and a BRT stop and also crossing the flow of Collage Green-O'Connell Street foot traffic:

They need to go back to the drawing board on this.

John_C · 13-10-2014 7:16pm

monument wrote: »

This is bonkers...

Cycle paths on the west side of Westmorland Street between one of the busiest footpaths in Ireland and a BRT stop and also crossing the flow of Collage Green-O'Connell Street foot traffic:

They need to go back to the drawing board on this.

That looks like a straightforward mistake though. The northbound cycle land on O'Connell bridge just morphs into a southbound lane on Westmorland street. I presume the lane on Westmorland street is supposed to be all northbound.

Either way, it'll be filled with pedestrians and most/all cyclists will probably stay in the bus lane.

EDIT: Looking at that again, do the traffic and bus lanes cross each other between Westmorland Street and O'Connell Bridge?

Aard · 13-10-2014 7:58pm

Cycle provision is especially underwhelming. I hesitate before using the word "poor" because at the very least there has been some consideration of bike infrastructure. Specifically there are several points on which the NTA could improve:

- Car parking spaces should be between the cycle track and the carriageway. The drawings indicate that parking will be by the footpath, and cyclists will have to weave between parked cars and moving cars. The arrangement on Merrion Sq where parking is perpendicular will lead to an accident.

- Bike tracks go around BRT stops, but not general bus stops. Search me as to why one should be treated any differently to the other.

- No cycle lanes are indicated through junctions. This is usually not an issue on regular cross-roads, but several junctions are going to be extremely complex and certainly unique and unintuitive. Cycle lanes should be indicated through every junction in the city centre.

- I hope to the Lord Almighty that the significant and unintuitive diversion for cyclists down Hardwicke St will be well indicated. Otherwise everybody will continue straight through to a left turn onto Nth Frederick St. Similarly, I'd be very keen to see how the NTA expects cyclists to negotiate the weaving that will have to take place northbound on Nth Frederick St.

- The O'Connell Bridge/Westmoreland/D'Olier junction looks tacked together. This would have been an ideal spot to introduce a Dutch style junction with those special "protection" kerbs for bike lanes. Having an important two-way bike track feed sheepishly into the junction is beyond careless. It's not going to work the way it's been designed. While I'm at it, I note that there is no BRT lane on Westmoreland Street. Unless they got their colouring-in wrong.

- The eastbound contraflow bike track on Pearse St will have to cross three lanes of opposing traffic. The bike track must be clearly indicated on the street.

- The junction of Pearse St and Westland Row will not allow bikes to continute straight through from Westland to Lombard St.

- The junction of Clare St and Merrion Sq is just confusing, and this is from somebody well used to reading these maps. No right turn from Clare St to Merrion Sq W. No right turn from Merrion Sq W onto Merrion Sq N. This is where more Dutch style junctions would have made a huge difference for the cost of a little corner of pavement.

- Merrion St Lwr has a bifurcated bike lane where to go straight ahead you'll have to cut across left-turning cars. Yay. To turn right you'll have to cut across the BRT lane. Argh. Why not bifurcate the lanes ever-so-slightly-differently?

- The corner of St Stephen's Grn and Leeson St hasn't been resolved for bikes. Turning right from Leeson St onto SSG East? Prepare to be cut off by cars driving onto SSG South.

- Beyond the city centre, it looks like we will be treated to the finest examples of shared spaces. Around busy BRT stops no less. Hurray.

I gotta say as a general supporter of BRT, this is embarrassing. And I haven't even commented on the actual BRT elements yet!

That username is already in use. · 13-10-2014 8:18pm

Cycle infrastructure a complete afterthought as usual. Weaving in and out of bus lanes, conflict with on-street parking, death trap junctions. Yet another wasted opportunity to get it right.

Time to copy what the Dutch and Danes do instead of mummy Britain.

AlekSmart · 13-10-2014 8:21pm

Aard wrote: »

I gotta say as a general supporter of BRT, this is embarrassing. And I haven't even commented on the actual BRT elements yet!

Do you get the impression Aard,that this document was rushed into print ?

There is something disquietingly unfinished about it all...or am I being too harsh ?

AlekSmart · 13-10-2014 8:28pm

That username is already in use. wrote: »

Cycle infrastructure a complete afterthought as usual. Weaving in and out of bus lanes, conflict with on-street parking, death trap junctions. Yet another wasted opportunity to get it right.

Time to copy what the Dutch and Danes do instead of mummy Britain.

The fact that we are seeing any great level of retention of "On Street Parking" at all along the Swiftway route sez an awful lot about the thrust of the project.

This should be a Game-Changer in terms of fast-direct access to and through the City Centre,however it appears it's current function is to merely continue the Battle,and hope for the best ?

Aard · 13-10-2014 8:43pm

Alek, I wish I could say that this document was rushed. However I suspect that that would be the "nice" story. What I would imagine is more likely, unfortunately, is that this was never going to be any more than a "QBC-Plus" job. There are some hallmarks of BRT -- off-board ticketing, and many reduced conflict points in the Swords area. And of course, the big attention-grabber of swanky busses. Other than that, this is just QBC done right. It's not BRT.

There are so many things I want to comment on, and I don't have the hours right now to do so. I'd stay up all night poring over the maps if I could. A few things that jump out at me:

- Conflict points have been somewhat reduced, but many have been added. Check out the "Oldtown" map -- there are "future" access points dotted in, sometimes less than 100 metres from each other. This is intolerable.

- Centre-running could easily have been continued until Santry.

- There are a few roundabouts and major junctions where the blue streak has been wiped away. Airport roundabout being one. God almighty, they could have run the BRT lane through the roundabout, as happens in many cities around the world, but instead a nice mound of grass will have to do.

- The sheer number of non-BRT bus stops. I really thought that services would be amalgamated such that these stops would only be few and far between, especially in outlying areas. Look at the Green Luas as guidance -- no competing bus service to speak of, and yet residents along the route get by with ~750m spacing between stations. BRT through most of the Northside should be the same. So many pokey little bus stops to add to the confusion.

- Shared pedestrian and bike lanes. Pedestrian provision has actually been worsened in these plans. If I had little kids, I'd be afraid to let them out onto the path lest a commuting cyclist run them over. Ok, perhaps a little OTT on my part.

- Several junctions just don't cater for pedestrian and cyclist movements in a respectful way. Lots of round-the-world button-pressing. I'm talking about the Santry-Swords section mainly.

- There's no bike infrastructure on the Swords Bypass, which is fine. The NTA state that the main trunk cycle route will go down the Main Street, and not the Bypass, again perfectly fine. However, they completely undermine their argument by making it almost impossible to turn from the Main Street (or Seatown West / Balheary Road as the case may be) onto the proposed BRT-adjacent cycle tracks.

Are these examples of carelessness? Rushed work? Pure couldn't-be-arsed-ness? Generally not having a clue about transport design for all modes? I don't know. I expect a lot of further designs, redesigns, then before you know it magic-hey-presto we suddenly have the money for Metro North. Rant over!

VWD8 · 13-10-2014 8:57pm

The NTA is destroying Cork city with cycle lanes, don't let them do the same in Dublin.

monument · 13-10-2014 9:12pm

VWD8 wrote: »

The NTA is destroying Cork city with cycle lanes, don't let them do the same in Dublin.

Keep on topic please.

-- Moderator

Dyr · 14-10-2014 12:00am

Is there going to be seperation of cycle lanes and pedestrian areas?

hfallada · 14-10-2014 12:10am

How is off board ticketing revolutionary? In Munich you walk onto the trams and the bus. On each bus is a small ticket machine that sells day tickets and zone ticket. It takes cash and card. It's about the size of 3 medicine cabinets. There is nothing Dublin bus having them on their buses other than the fact fate evasion would be huge

Aard · 14-10-2014 12:58am

Bambi wrote: »

Is there going to be seperation of cycle lanes and pedestrian areas?

Largely yes. Look at the maps a few posts up for exact details.

Aard · 14-10-2014 1:02am

hfallada wrote: »

How is off board ticketing revolutionary?

Nobody is claiming it revolutionary. People paying at the driver accounts for around 20-25% of total journey time in Dublin. Purely by switching to off-board ticketing, journey times can be reduced by a commensurate amount. Indeed, it states clearly in the documents above that dwell time will be about 15 seconds at each stop, instead of up to and over one minute. Considering the reduced number of stops along the route, this adds up to significant time savings.

Have you read the documents yet?

Dyr · 14-10-2014 9:02am

Aard wrote: »

Largely yes. Look at the maps a few posts up for exact details.

From looking at the nice pictures on the maps the answer would often appear to be no, all they seem to be doing is taking the pedestrian footpaths that are already fairly tight (drumcondra for example) and reducing them further without actually segregating the cycle lane via a kerb

thus less space for pedestrians and no physical segregation from traffic.

Dyr · 14-10-2014 9:06am

hfallada wrote: »

How is off board ticketing revolutionary? In Munich you walk onto the trams and the bus. On each bus is a small ticket machine that sells day tickets and zone ticket. It takes cash and card. It's about the size of 3 medicine cabinets. There is nothing Dublin bus having them on their buses other than the fact fate evasion would be huge

Whats are the fare evasion levels like on the luas?

Proper off board ticketing is probably the biggest single thing that would decrease bus transport times in this city but there seems to be a real resistance to introducing it, e.g the leap fiasco

Hungerford · 14-10-2014 9:15am

My initial reaction: it's BRT Jim, but not as we know it.

monument · 14-10-2014 9:37am

Bambi wrote: »

Is there going to be seperation of cycle lanes and pedestrian areas?

Large amount of shared use paths in and around Whitehall, Coolock Lane, around Northwood, around Swords, etc.

jacko1 · 14-10-2014 9:41am

not impressed

Luas Cross City extension/spur line to airport is way to go!

http://www.thestar.ie/star/new-luas-line-on-track-for-airport-24990/

Subpopulus · 14-10-2014 10:53am

In terms of cycling provision it's a real mixed bag - there's some nice lanes and several new contra-flow sections but a huge amount of the same old crummy junctions with forking lanes and busses repeatedly crossing and re-crossing lands. A fair amount of the stuff will be more or less redundant - check out the bus-stop bypasses on O'Connell street. They'll probably be teeming with people and cyclists will just cycle straight ahead through the bus lane.

An awful lot of these conflict points could have been eliminated with a bit of thought and effort.

LXFlyer · 14-10-2014 12:35pm

Consultation details (all at better times than the last one):

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

The National Transport Authority is currently holding a public consultation on the proposed Swiftway Bus Rapid Transit Scheme, including the Preferred Route, for the Swords/Airport to City Centre corridor. The National Transport Authority invites you to now make a submission on the preferred route for this proposed Swiftway Bus Rapid Transit Scheme.

Closing date for submissions is 5.00pm, Friday, November 28th.

Following the assessment of submissions made at this phase, it is proposed to submit an application for planning permission to An Bord Pleanála early in 2015 in relation to this Scheme.

Visit the Public Consultation:

Ø Fingal County Council Civic Offices, Main Street, Swords, Co. Dublin

Ø Dublin City Council Civic Offices, Wood Quay, Dublin 8

Ø National Transport Authority Offices, Dún Scéine, Harcourt Lane, Dublin 2

Members of the project team will be available to answer queries at the display locations below on the following dates and times:
##Croke Park, Jones’ Rd, Dublin 3: Monday 20th of October from 3pm to 9pm;
##Fingal County Council Civic Offices, Main Street, Swords, Co. Dublin: Thursday 23rd of October from 3pm to 9pm;
##O’Callaghan Stephen’s Green Hotel, 5 Harcourt St, Dublin 2: Tuesday 28th of October from 3pm to 9pm;
##Fingal County Council Civic Offices, Main Street, Swords, Co. Dublin: Tuesday 4th of November from 3pm to 9pm;
##Applewood Community Centre, Castleview Lawn/ Bunbury Gate Road, Swords, Co. Dublin: Tuesday 11th of November from 3pm to 9pm;
##Whitehall Colmcille G.A.A Club, Collins Avenue, Dublin 9: Thursday 13th November from 3pm to 9pm; and
##Dublin Civic Offices, Wood Quay: Tuesday 18th of November from 3pm to 9pm.

Muahahaha · 14-10-2014 12:46pm

Regarding cycling I hope they come up with some segregated solution whereby cyclists can continue onwards at junctions and arent downgraded to pedestrian status to get across a junction. There are loads of those cyclelanes around Dublin that are up on the footpath and they pose more of a danger than anything IMO. At this stage I never use footpath mounted cycleways because when you get to a junction all you get is a headache trying to get through.

While the plans all look good in general and the route is satisfactory there is a large part of me thinking that by the time this is built it won't be able to sustain the demand for the service and the powers that be will be scratching their heads in 2025 wondering why we didn't just build the metro. There's a wise mantra I like 'buy cheap, buy twice' and this BRT seems to be a typical case of that in that we'll end up paying out €300m for the route to Swords & the airport only to spend another €2bn on a metro further down the line so it can do the job that the BRT is over capacity for. To me the planning isn't long term whatsoever, the NTA is planning to spend a little now so they can spend a lot later. The govt should be moving heaven and earth to find the funds to begin it, we already needed the Metro 10 years ago and Dublins population is continuing to grow.

The other objection I'd have is the selection of the airport route itself when taken in context of other projects that are equally or more desirable. My thinking would be that a BRT to either Lucan & Maynooth or Blanch would have been preferable to do first over the airport route and focus on the metro there. Metro West isn't going to be built for a long long while yet so it arguably makes more sense to spend a bit of money connecting western suburbs better now and focus on providing a quality underground link from Swords and the airport to the city centre.

earlyapex · 14-10-2014 1:00pm

Stupid route choice, I live in Swords and I will never use this service as it stands now.

cgcsb · 14-10-2014 1:13pm

some criticisms:

City Centre:

The footpath on the West side of westmoreland street needs to be much wider than it is now. What is proposed is maintaining current width

In some locations there is on street parking on the side of the BRT lane meaning that parkers are going to have to cut accross BRT and lets not forget the large number of people who cannot/will not parallel park and will cause an obstruction.

Rest:

Along the rest of the route, there isn't much change to the existing QBC. There are improved cycling facilities but the brt lane will still disappear to be replaced by a left turning lane at every junction, and of course motorists will take it opon themselves to get into the brt lane long before it turns into a left turning one, to skip the queues. There should be a narrow piece of concrete paving between the brt lane and general traffic as they approach junctions and left turning motorists should wait with the rest of traffic.

Aard · 14-10-2014 1:14pm

earlyapex wrote: »

Stupid route choice, I live in Swords and I will never use this service as it stands now.

Care to expand on that? Why is it "stupid"? Do you live outside its catchment?

LXFlyer · 14-10-2014 1:31pm

Aard wrote: »

Care to expand on that? Why is it "stupid"? Do you live outside its catchment?

A very large element of Swords is outside the catchment area - basically any of the estates south of Rathbeale Road, and pretty much all of the estates to the west of the Forest Road (including all of River Valley).

The report briefly refers to potential bus route rationalisation and feeder routes, but provides no detail on either.

foggy_lad · 14-10-2014 1:41pm

I can't see how buses at ordinary stops are not going to delay these much longer articulated buses because we all know that when two or more buses pull into bus stops they are rarely against the kerb and at least one will be partly or completely in the traffic lane blocking or severely restricting the traffic flow.

Many of the streets this is planned to go through are not wide enough for this plan and could not reasonably have traffic cut from current levels of 2-4 lanes down to one single lane in many areas. Residents of most of these old well established areas will fight tooth and nail to prevent anyone taking most or even part of their gardens for this. I believe that these and other elements of this plan will make it unworkable

I honestly don't have many ideas for improvement apart from doing away with cash fares on Dublin bus to cut dwell times and also put a tag on machine in each bus where passengers can pick their own fare on their Leap card(same as the driver does), this would have to be supported by proper revenue protection.

Proper policing and prompt removal of all vehicles in bus lanes or blocking stops, even if the driver turns up make them pay the full removal and storage fees before letting them drive off. I'm not for penalising car drivers but they must be knocked into line so that they support rather than hinder the operation of public transport.

Another thing I would have is designated stopping places on each street well away from any bus stops for taxis and ban them from picking up at any other place, This will stop their usual practice of disrupting traffic by dangerously pulling across lanes to pick up fares, they should also be banned from bus lanes along with all other non bus vehicles.

cgcsb · 14-10-2014 1:51pm

worth noting: The route proposes to use the central part of the Swords bypass, i.e. it is taking the proposed metro north route i.e. we're not getting metro north, at least on the route that already has planning permission.

Kumsheen · 14-10-2014 4:47pm

As expected it's nothing like a real BRT, but a tweaked version of the current infrastructure. Still predominately shared use space running alongside the pavement, and there will be no increase in enforcement to keep it clear.

The only positive comment i can make about the luas looking buses is the improvement in access for passengers with reduced mobility. Other than that all the other measures can be rolled onto the current network.

hmmm · 14-10-2014 4:55pm

If there's a line of cyclists going along, how does a BRT-lite bus pull into its stop? Bully its way in putting cyclists at risk?

monument · 14-10-2014 5:35pm

The drawings posted today by the NTA includes Luas tracks.

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

cgcsb · 14-10-2014 6:03pm

hmmm wrote: »

If there's a line of cyclists going along, how does a BRT-lite bus pull into its stop? Bully its way in putting cyclists at risk?

Those of us who have actually looked at the diagrams know that the brt stops arent recessed. The standard Dublin bus stops are the recessed ones. There are also separate cycling facilities along most of the route

cgcsb · 14-10-2014 6:06pm

Regarding Westmoreland st/ o'connell bridges diagrams, I think there a number of errors in the diagram that should be corrected.

JeffK88 · 14-10-2014 6:23pm

Completely off topic (sorry) but the drawings of the system include some similar pictures of cars from the original Grand Theft Auto (1997) game. http://gta.wikia.com/Vehicles_in_GTA_1
http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/BRT-0150_225244-10_P1-52.pdf

Are they allowed to do this ?

Aard · 14-10-2014 6:24pm

lxflyer wrote: »

A very large element of Swords is outside the catchment area - basically any of the estates south of Rathbeale Road, and pretty much all of the estates to the west of the Forest Road (including all of River Valley).

The report briefly refers to potential bus route rationalisation and feeder routes, but provides no detail on either.

Yes I understand that. But the poster said that the route choice was stupid...and just didn't elaborate. Hardly a persuasive argument. Metro North would have been equally non-serving of those areas too, for example.

Aard · 14-10-2014 6:35pm

I notice on the "updated" maps that the cycle tracks bypassing the BRT stops on O'Connell Street have been removed. Ok then

monument · 14-10-2014 6:41pm

cgcsb wrote: »

Those of us who have actually looked at the diagrams know that the brt stops arent recessed. The standard Dublin bus stops are the recessed ones. There are also separate cycling facilities along most of the route

Separate isn't quite the optimal word given how much the cycle routes merge into footpaths, how they are placed between bus lanes and bus stops, and how there's shared traffic / cycle and bus / cycle lanes.

Aard wrote: »

I notice on the "updated" maps that the cycle tracks bypassing the BRT stops on O'Connell Street have been removed. Ok then

Footpaths are too busy for it?

But the same should apply two fold to the two-way cycle path on Westmoreland Street.

John_C · 14-10-2014 6:54pm

Who has priority here, the car on the side road or the cyclist on the main road? The stop line seems to be half way across the cycle track.

Aard · 14-10-2014 7:01pm

John_C, there's so many little oversights like that in the documents. On a BRT route, all minor side roads should be raised on entry to the main carriageway, maintaining priority for both ped's and cyclists. Like most of central Amsterdam, for example (although this is not necessarily in a BRT-context).

John_C · 14-10-2014 7:06pm

Aard wrote: »

John_C, there's so many little oversights like that in the documents. On a BRT route, all minor side roads should be raised on entry to the main carriageway, maintaining priority for both ped's and cyclists. Like most of central Amsterdam, for example (although this is not necessarily in a BRT-context).

I agree but I'm worried that they're not just oversights in the documents. That one jumped out at me because there's something very similar near my gaff. I guess I don't have faith that these will be corrected before construction.

Aard · 14-10-2014 7:09pm

All I can say is get that submission in!!!

www.swiftway.ie

Cookie_Monster · 14-10-2014 7:49pm

Swords Rd / South Corballis Rd junction & stretch of road is crazy.

Narrow shared ped/cycle lanes, random piece of two way cycle track stuck in, no ability to cross the main junction from any direction for bikes without dismounting or blocking the BRT lane, BRT stops completely blocking the ped/cycle way, but the grass stays in place. Why not simply remove a lane of traffic and use the space better?

LXFlyer · 14-10-2014 7:53pm

monument wrote: »

The drawings posted today by the NTA includes Luas tracks.

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

cgcsb wrote: »

Regarding Westmoreland st/ o'connell bridges diagrams, I think there a number of errors in the diagram that should be corrected.

Aard wrote: »

I notice on the "updated" maps that the cycle tracks bypassing the BRT stops on O'Connell Street have been removed. Ok then

I've updated the links in my original post for the updated maps.

The draft reports have been taken down so I've removed the links.

Buttercup78 · 14-10-2014 8:20pm

Living in swords I can't see what this adds to the existing peak services. Even the 41x going through the port tunnel can take an hour to get across the Liffey. Anything going through drumcondra is going to be a nightmare, there's no way they can widen the roads there. How quick is the route supposed to get into town?

AlekSmart · 14-10-2014 8:37pm

Buttercup78 wrote: »

Living in swords I can't see what this adds to the existing peak services. Even the 41x going through the port tunnel can take an hour to get across the Liffey. Anything going through drumcondra is going to be a nightmare, there's no way they can widen the roads there. How quick is the route supposed to get into town?

No need to widen any road IF the general traffic level is significantly reduced instead.

Swiftway - Dublin's first bus rapid transit route - detailed plans released

Comments