brt for dublin?

tom1ie

hi all
does anyone know what ever happened to this: https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Bus-Rapid-Transit-Core-Network-report11.pdf
I think the report is from 2014.
Ive been looking at these systems on the internet and they seem to be quite popular in asia and south america.
Do you think it could work here?
The two routes identified on the website are Blanchardstown to UCD and Clongriffin to Tallaght.
Do you think theyll ever be built?

GerardKeating

tom1ie wrote: »

hi all
does anyone know what ever happened to this: https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Bus-Rapid-Transit-Core-Network-report11.pdf
I think the report is from 2014.
Ive been looking at these systems on the internet and they seem to be quite popular in asia and south america.
Do you think it could work here?
The two routes identified on the website are Blanchardstown to UCD and Clongriffin to Tallaght.
Do you think theyll ever be built?

For the Blanchardstown to UCD, would they not be better to just upgrade the Maynooth line ?

Zebra3

All just a smokescreen for doing nothing.

annfield1978

Consultants are working on the designs at present, expect to see movement in new year as part of BusConnects

xper

GerardKeating wrote: »

For the Blanchardstown to UCD, would they not be better to just upgrade the Maynooth line ?

While I think there are still questions over the feasibility of a true BRT route through parts of the inner Dublin suburbs, I wouldn’t think so. For one, UCD is not directly served by DART (or LUAS for that matter). And large parts of Blanchardstown are a long way from the train stations on its southern edge. While BusConnects may turn out to envisage high frequency feeder services to rail services, that’s a very convoluted way to provide a journey between two major trip generators. And then there are all the shorter trips that BRT would serve along the proposed corridor. One needs to avoid discussion of proposed commuting solutions running between A and B simply in the sole context of trips between A and B.

(The upgrade of the Maynooth line has many other merits)

annfield1978 wrote: »

Consultants are working on the designs at present, expect to see movement in new year as part of BusConnects

It will be interesting to see if BRT forms a cornerstone of BusConnects or is more peripheral. I’ve never been convinced of an enthusiastic backing by either politicians or the relevant state bodies for the proposed BRT routes, relative to other transport plans (and that’s before you get into can-kicking conspiracies). They do require significant funding and custom infrastructure, compared to ‘just’ reorganising routes using existing assets. If BRT turns out to be a requisite component of BusConnects it will undoubtedly impact any implementation timetable significantly and increase the risk of the plan being delivered only in part or even not at all.

handlemaster

annfield1978 wrote: »

Consultants are working on the designs at present, expect to see movement in new year as part of BusConnects

Who is actually working on this ?

tom1ie

There's info on this here:
https://www.busconnects.ie/news/busconnects-can-increase-bus-passenger-numbers-by-50-nta/
Not sure how they're gonna implement these "next generation bus lanes" I don't see where the space above ground is.
The cost of this project seems to be 1 billion euro. Seems like a lot of money with no tunnel to be built.
It seems obvious to me to bypass the city centre using an underground tunnel for the brt, and if needed spec it that it can be upgraded for rail in future.

annfield1978

handlemaster wrote: »

Who is actually working on this ?

Consultants on a framework are looking at feasibility of 10 to 12 routes

tom1ie

So is bus connects not just a rehashed version of swiftway?

Markcheese

BRT done properly will cost money
.. (it should still be a lot cheaper than luas), theres going to have to be proper platforms, possible change in road alignments, as well as a dedicated bus lane (a lot of road space) and a compete change to signaling..

handlemaster

annfield1978 wrote: »

handlemaster wrote: »

Who is actually working on this ?

Consultants on a framework are looking at feasibility of 10 to 12 routes

Who ? What company ? Who is paying to this

LXFlyer

Consultants are Jarrett Walker.
The NTA are funding this.

Kevtherev1

I was wondering whatever happened to the BRT route plans in Dublin. I did a internet search and have been reading this article from Feb 2017 on the wasted money spend. Link Here


https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/over-85m-spent-yet-implemented-12580665


It will be soon be another 18 months on from this article (August 2018) and still no sign of BRT implementation. So it was more Bull**** as usual, another example of wasted NTA and government policy / money



Late in 2018 or early 2019 if a election campaign starts i will be highlighting no BRT, No public infrastructure implementation in dublin or galway, cork cities to the idiot at the door.

xper

Swiftway as a stand-alone project is dead. BusConnects is the new show in town. Add cynicism to taste.

BusConnects currently includes delivering the previously proposed three bus rapid transit routes as one of its stated goals. However, I have seen it suggested (I can't find where I read it) that the actual plan, when it emerges into daylight, may not extend to using dedicated tram-like vehicles and instead, the BRT principles (dedicated lanes, high traffic priority, high-quality stops, cashless operation, multi-door use, etc.) are to be applied more widely over a re-designed network using the existing and future city-wide fleet

Sam Russell

xper wrote: »

Swiftway as a stand-alone project is dead. BusConnects is the new show in town. Add cynicism to taste.

BusConnects currently includes delivering the previously proposed three bus rapid transit routes as one of its stated goals. However, I have seen it suggested (I can't find where I read it) that the actual plan, when it emerges into daylight, may not extend to using dedicated tram-like vehicles and instead, the BRT principles (dedicated lanes, high traffic priority, high-quality stops, cashless operation, multi-door use, etc.) are to be applied more widely over a re-designed network using the existing and future city-wide fleet

If that means:
No bendy-buses, then that is great news.
Faster ticket validation would speed journey times.
Enforcement of bus lanes is needed (possibly by in-bus ANPR enforcement cameras).
Full bus priority at junctions.
Simple fare structure to favour commuting and transfers.

Then that would be wonderful.

Markcheese

What do people have against bendy buses?

They're just another transport tool... There are places they suit, and places they don't...
In Lisbon I saw articulated (bendy) trams similar to luas, there were other routes that only had small "traditional" tram cars..... It was horses for courses. the bendy teams couldn't go on those windy hilly routes, and the small trams couldn't carry the volumes and had longer dwell times..

Sam Russell

Markcheese wrote: »

What do people have against bendy buses?

They're just another transport tool... There are places they suit, and places they don't...
In Lisbon I saw articulated (bendy) trams similar to luas, there were other routes that only had small "traditional" tram cars..... It was horses for courses. the bendy teams couldn't go on those windy hilly routes, and the small trams couldn't carry the volumes and had longer dwell times..

Bendy trams are not bendy buses.

Bendy buses are three axle buses where the third axle is a trailer, articulated and designed to bounce. It has no exit doors and no ventilation - or at least those used on the number ten fitted this description. They offer no advantage over a DB doubledecker and they offer many disadvantages - eg they cannot go around corners. The number ten had to wait for a gap in traffic to go from Lincoln Place to Westland Row.

Now if the bendy buses had four axles, and multiple doors they might be OK, but only if they can go round corners. The four axles removes the bounce, and multiple doors allows safe exit and reduced dwell time.

The doubledecker is your only man*.

*Noticed a single decker in Dun Laoghaire the other evening, so there is at least one left.

L1011

There are two single deckers for a specific route they can't take double deckers. The outer routes being transferred to Go Ahead will have more single deckers also

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

Bendy trams are not bendy buses.

Bendy buses are three axle buses where the third axle is a trailer, articulated and designed to bounce. It has no exit doors and no ventilation - or at least those used on the number ten fitted this description. They offer no advantage over a DB doubledecker and they offer many disadvantages - eg they cannot go around corners. The number ten had to wait for a gap in traffic to go from Lincoln Place to Westland Row.

Now if the bendy buses had four axles, and multiple doors they might be OK, but only if they can go round corners. The four axles removes the bounce, and multiple doors allows safe exit and reduced dwell time.

The doubledecker is your only man*.

*Noticed a single decker in Dun Laoghaire the other evening, so there is at least one left.

You keep repeating this stuff without recognising why they didn’t work which was infrastructure related primarily.

The problem with the articulated buses that the DTO insisted that Dublin Bus purchase was that zero infrastructure was put in place for their safe and effective operation.

They were moved around from one route to the next and at no stage was the infrastructure modified - therefore you’re commenting on something that was not properly implemented. If the infrastructure had been modified then things would have been significantly different, but it wasn’t.

In other words there were:
* No extended bus stop bays to allow the entire bus length align with the kerb and therefore allow safe operation of the second doors

* No priority measures such as retreated stop lanes or bus gates to allow the buses turn tight corners safely put in place (such as Lincoln Place on the 4 - not the 10) - in other words push the stop line on Westland Row further back to allow buses make the turn

The BRT plans were predicated on the infrastructure being put in place before the articulated buses were put into operation. That’s a massive difference.

Whether BRT as such is going to feature or not as part of BusConnects we don’t actually know.

Now personally speaking I think double deckers are more suitable for the longer distances - articulated buses offer more standing capacity but expecting people to stand for that length of time is pushing things I think. Far better to try out tri-axle double decks with multiple doors such as those in Berlin. These offer the same overall capacity but more seats.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

The doubledecker is your only man*.

Double deckers have some major disadvantages that bendy buses can fix when used on the correct routes, in the correct manner.

The problems with doube deckers are:

- The bus full fallacy.

Any of us who are regular users of Dublin Bus, will have experienced buses flying by your stop because the bus is full, at least from the drivers perspective, but you can easily see that there is plenty of space, it is just a few people standing by the driver, while there is actually plenty of standing room at the back of the bus and free seats upstairs.

I believe the theoretical maximum of double deckers is in reality rarely met.

BRT's with multiple doors and exit/entrance through any doors eliminate this issue and I honestly believe they reach their theoretical maximum capacity much more easily then double deckers, as we can easily see with Luas.

- Accessibility.

Obviously upstairs is a complete no go area for elderly and mobility impaired persons. Bendy-buses give these people a lot more space.

- Slow dwell times.

Needing to make your way up and down a stairs tends and then squeeze your way through the crowds is absolutely detrimental to dwell times.

- Injury

Idiots hurting themselves going up/down stairs. With modern public transport, their simply isn't the time for drivers to wait for people to get upstairs and seated before leaving a stop or it would murder dwell time. Obviously bendy buses don't have this issue.

Obviously no one is suggesting doing the number 10 again. That was a disaster and pretty much a text book case of how not to operate bendy-buses.

Instead what was suggested was to implement mainland European BRT style operations which is highly succesful and we are all use to from Luas:

- 3/4 doors
- Entrance/exit through any door
- Off bus ticketing, zero driver interaction
- Only on routes specifically designed for it, with the needed infrastructure and priority.

While it wasn't suited to all routes, it could have been a great addition to our city and a very useful tool for core routes.

Sam Russell wrote: »

*Noticed a single decker in Dun Laoghaire the other evening, so there is at least one left.

There are currently two, but seemingly a lot more will be coming to GoAhead on the quieter routes.

Interestingly one mistake people make about single deckers vs double deckers is in thinking that double deckers offer almost twice the capacity. It isn't the case. Due to no standing upstairs and the space taken up by the stairs, it is normally only around 20% extra. For instance 85 to 90 people (for most DB deckers), versus 70 on the latest single deckers down in Cork.

The new BRT in Belfast is 100+ people, but then you have to keep in mind if those DB deckers are really meeting that theoretical capacity and what the impact on dwell times is.

The advantage of deckers is that there is more seating space, but not necessarily much more capacity.

The overall operating approach at DB is you will most likely get a seat, but you will also take almost all day to get where you need to go as they take a magical mystery tour of every estate in Dublin and spend ages boarding people at each stop (which of course are like every 100meters).

In other European cities the approach is different, you will normally stand (if not elderly, etc.), but not for long as the bus gets to where you need to go in half the time.

Sam Russell

LXFlyer wrote: »

You keep repeating this stuff without recognising why they didn’t work which was infrastructure related primarily.

The problem with the articulated buses that the DTO insisted that Dublin Bus purchase was that zero infrastructure was put in place for their safe and effective operation.

They were moved around from one route to the next and at no stage was the infrastructure modified - therefore you’re commenting on something that was not properly implemented. If the infrastructure had been modified then things would have been significantly different, but it wasn’t.

In other words there were:
* No extended bus stop bays to allow the entire bus length align with the kerb and therefore allow safe operation of the second doors

* No priority measures such as retreated stop lanes or bus gates to allow the buses turn tight corners safely put in place (such as Lincoln Place on the 4 - not the 10) - in other words push the stop line on Westland Row further back to allow buses make the turn

The BRT plans were predicated on the infrastructure being put in place before the articulated buses were put into operation. That’s a massive difference.

Whether BRT as such is going to feature or not as part of BusConnects we don’t actually know.

Now personally speaking I think double deckers are more suitable for the longer distances - articulated buses offer more standing capacity but expecting people to stand for that length of time is pushing things I think. Far better to try out tri-axle double decks with multiple doors such as those in Berlin. These offer the same overall capacity but more seats.

I think bandy buses are awful because I travelled on them. Nobody wanted to go on the trailer bit because it was noisy, un-ventilated and bouncy. The lack of infrastructure may be true, but Dublin City streets are not designed for such vehicles, and nor is Dublin traffic.

BRT is basically a diesel powered rubber wheeled Luas, I can live with that, but use four axles, and possibly use overhead electric wires - trolley buses.

In Nice they use tiny buses with standing room for 60 passengers, and seating for 20. When full they are like sardine cans, but are cheap, quick, and plentiful.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think bandy buses are awful because I travelled on them. Nobody wanted to go on the trailer bit because it was noisy, un-ventilated and bouncy. The lack of infrastructure may be true, but Dublin City streets are not designed for such vehicles, and nor is Dublin traffic.

BRT is basically a diesel powered rubber wheeled Luas, I can live with that, but use four axles, and possibly use overhead electric wires - trolley buses.

In Nice they use tiny buses with standing room for 60 passengers, and seating for 20. When full they are like sardine cans, but are cheap, quick, and plentiful.

People didn’t use the rear part because in general the centre doors weren’t being used which meant a trek to get on and off.

Why was that? The rear part of the vehicle was normally sticking out in the street.

Why was that? Because the bus bays were not big enough to allow the vehicles enter, line up and depart the bus stops safely.

The buses could have been used safely and effectively if the proper infrastructure had been put in place. It wasn’t. That is the bottom line. To say that Dublin isn’t suited to them is nonsense. It could be if the infrastructure was put in place correctly.

Sam Russell

LXFlyer wrote: »

People didn’t use the rear part because in general the centre doors weren’t being used which meant a trek to get on and off.

Why was that? The rear part of the vehicle was normally sticking out in the street.

Why was that? Because the bus bays were not big enough to allow the vehicles enter, line up and depart the bus stops safely.

The buses could have been used safely and effectively if the proper infrastructure had been put in place. It wasn’t. That is the bottom line. To say that Dublin isn’t suited to them is nonsense. It could be if the infrastructure was put in place correctly.

The infrastructure for bendy buses turning from Lincoln Place into Westland Row does not exist anywhere - the turning circle of the buses is woeful.

Now I agree about bus stops being inadequate, but some of that inadequacy comes from legal paid parking being too close to the bus stop for bendy buses. However, illegal parking was to blame as well.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

The infrastructure for bendy buses turning from Lincoln Place into Westland Row does not exist anywhere - the turning circle of the buses is woeful.

Now I agree about bus stops being inadequate, but some of that inadequacy comes from legal paid parking being too close to the bus stop for bendy buses. However, illegal parking was to blame as well.

Again, this is nonsense. Yes it does exist. It is called a retreated stop line.

Take a trip on the 14 to Dundrum and watch how it turns from Ballinteer Road onto Dundrum Main Street. It can only do so because the stop line is pushed back from the junction to allow buses safely turn the corner.

The stop line on Westland Row would be pushed further back along the street to allow the buses turn and use the full width of the street to turn.

That’s not rocket science.

It’s called putting the correct infrastructure in place.

With respect Sam, while the vehicle comfort may have been an issue, the vast majority of your complaints could (and should) have been solved by putting infrastructure in place.

Sam Russell

LXFlyer wrote: »

Again, this is nonsense. Yes it does exist. It is called a retreated stop line.

Take a trip on the 14 to Dundrum and watch how it turns from Ballinteer Road onto Dundrum Main Street. It can only do so because the stop line is pushed back from the junction to allow buses safely turn the corner.

The stop line on Westland Row would be pushed further back along the street to allow the buses turn and use the full width of the street to turn.

That’s not rocket science.

It’s called putting the correct infrastructure in place.

With respect Sam, while the vehicle comfort may have been an issue, the vast majority of your complaints could (and should) have been solved by putting infrastructure in place.

Retreated stop lines sound great, but are not respected by taxis or cars. Neither are bus lanes.

Comfort is not a word positively associated with the DB crop of bendy buses.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

Retreated stop lines sound great, but are not respected by taxis or cars. Neither are bus lanes.

Comfort is not a word positively associated with the DB crop of bendy buses.

Really??? I must be dreaming every time the 14 makes that turn in Dundrum so, as it’s impossible unless the cars observe the retreated stop line.

I don’t see that as a valid reason to argue against articulated vehicles - it’s more of an excuse (or a personal dislike of them) to be honest.

The fact remains that they could operate if the proper infrastructure was in place. But it never was.

Stephen15

I would support the BRT idea but not the Swiftway one. Swiftway had a lot of elements which reminded me of the disastrous FTR concept. To me BRT should be bendy buses with multiple doors in the same livery as the rest of the bus network.

Markcheese

There's not much difference between BRT and a modern tram, to work properly they both need a dedicated lane, multiple entry/exit points, platforms at stops to easily enter.... Plus in the same way that the luas doesn't pull into stops it just pulls up to the stops...
And luas would stop working if we let people park / stop on the line, enforcement is needed, (I was only running into the shop for a minute.. No bother your car was removed with a grab and the fine is X thousand...

Markcheese

Incidentally I don't care whether a brt system would use a single decker with 60 or 70 or a 2 way or 3 way bendy, if it was fast, frequent and reliable.... If if if.. 😀

Carawaystick

Sam Russell wrote: »

Retreated stop lines sound great, but are not respected by taxis or cars. Neither are bus lanes.

It's very easy to enforce a retreated stop line, remove the traffic lights forward of the line. put the lights back near https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3422107,-6.2504507,3a,75y,106.44h,84.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGOeI1xQA1QBY2b4dRl0rCQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DGOeI1xQA1QBY2b4dRl0rCQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D184.13481%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en and remove the light from Sweneys

tom1ie

Do we know what the 16 radial routes are going to be that are proposed for bus connects yet?
Indeed same question for the orbital routes. Or is this info not out until July?

LXFlyer

tom1ie wrote: »

Do we know what the 16 radial routes are going to be that are proposed for bus connects yet?
Indeed same question for the orbital routes. Or is this info not out until July?

Infrastructure plans now due to be announced in June.
Revised network due to be announced in July.

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

Do we know what the 16 radial routes are going to be that are proposed for bus connects yet?
Indeed same question for the orbital routes. Or is this info not out until July?

Routes is probably not the best way to think about this, more like corridors. Think the major, wider roads coming into the city (e.g. Swords Road, Stillorgan Road, etc.).

You will actually end up with multiple routes operating along these corridors, much as they do today, but with better infrastructure along the corridors.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

Routes is probably not the best way to think about this, more like corridors. Think the major, wider roads coming into the city (e.g. Swords Road, Stillorgan Road, etc.).

You will actually end up with multiple routes operating along these corridors, much as they do today, but with better infrastructure along the corridors.

Yeah that's what I'm thinking bet has to be, however in the sw area of the city I just don't see the space for it.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

Routes is probably not the best way to think about this, more like corridors. Think the major, wider roads coming into the city (e.g. Swords Road, Stillorgan Road, etc.).

You will actually end up with multiple routes operating along these corridors, much as they do today, but with better infrastructure along the corridors.

Yeah that's what I'm thinking brt has to be, however in the sw area of the city I just don't see the space for it.

cgcsb

LXFlyer wrote: »

Infrastructure plans now due to be announced in June.
Revised network due to be announced in July.

That's great. There definitely needs to be a public plan in place when the college green gate debacle is decided on.

FreudianSlippers

tom1ie wrote: »

Yeah that's what I'm thinking brt has to be, however in the sw area of the city I just don't see the space for it.

That's the case on a significant amount of the mooted routes, not just those in the SW IMO.

bk

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That's the case on a significant amount of the mooted routes, not just those in the SW IMO.

A lot of money is going to be spent on this. That means a lot of CPOing to buy up front gardens and build bus lanes through them, along with bridge widenings, etc.

This isn't just going to be your usual slap a bit of paint on the road.

Take a look at the recent road widening at the cat&cage pub in Drumcondra.

They spent €3.5 million widening this short stretch of road so it could be four lanes, but it has been a terrific success, IME making a journey that use to take me on average 40 minutes, just 20 minutes!! And that is without any other changes (like faster ticketing, multi-door operation).

Now I haven't looked at the SW corridor in detail to see if the same is possible there at the pinch points, but the above should be an example of what BusConnect will be doing through out the city.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

A lot of money is going to be spent on this. That means a lot of CPOing to buy up front gardens and build bus lanes through them, along with bridge widenings, etc.

This isn't just going to be your usual slap a bit of paint on the road.

Take a look at the recent road widening at the cat&cage pub in Drumcondra.

They spent €3.5 million widening this short stretch of road so it could be four lanes, but it has been a terrific success, IME making a journey that use to take me on average 40 minutes, just 20 minutes!! And that is without any other changes (like faster ticketing, multi-door operation).

Now I haven't looked at the SW corridor in detail to see if the same is possible there at the pinch points, but the above should be an example of what BusConnect will be doing through out the city.

It isn’t - unless you demolish Rathmines, Rathgar, Harold’s X, and Terenure villages, which is not going to happen.

The degree of CPO activity that would be required along the rest of the corridors is massive - that is only going to end up bogged down in the courts for years to come.

cgcsb

It won't be ideal for the SW of the City due to a high degree of sharing road space but of course the other corridors aren't an ideal solution either, rather they are complimentary to future high frequency rail corridors. However vast improvements can be made and pinch points can be reduced or removed through taking parts of parks and gardens and adding bus priority lights/bus gates in the villages along the corridor.

The SW of the City has the worst deal in that there's no firm plans for a rail corridor and the bus corridor is going to be lower spec than on the other corridors, even if a lot of money is spent. The SW will also benefit from orbital routes connecting it to the proposed Sandyford-Swords Metro line.

Even still. It would be best if the NTA published at least a provisional plan for a SW to NE metro route.

tom1ie

cgcsb wrote: »

It won't be ideal for the SW of the City due to a high degree of sharing road space but of course the other corridors aren't an ideal solution either, rather they are complimentary to future high frequency rail corridors. However vast improvements can be made and pinch points can be reduced or removed through taking parts of parks and gardens and adding bus priority lights/bus gates in the villages along the corridor.

The SW of the City has the worst deal in that there's no firm plans for a rail corridor and the bus corridor is going to be lower spec than on the other corridors, even if a lot of money is spent. The SW will also benefit from orbital routes connecting it to the proposed Sandyford-Swords Metro line.

Even still. It would be best if the NTA published at least a provisional plan for a SW to NE metro route.

I’d like to know if the orbital routes will be brt standard.
As a resident of the sw area I’m not happy to accept that we’ll get a lower spec bus corridor at all. If your going to do something right do it properly, don’t waste massive amounts of money on a half arsed job that’s not going to reduce journey times or increase frequency.
The money should be used for other large infrastructure improvements that will make a difference.

roadmaster

when the bus corridors are built will they be restricted to a certain type of bus service or will the likes of Bus Eireann expressway be able to use them?

LXFlyer

roadmaster wrote: »

when the bus corridors are built will they be restricted to a certain type of bus service or will the likes of Bus Eireann expressway be able to use them?

All buses would continue to be allowed use bus lanes. I don’t see why that would change.

bk

LXFlyer wrote: »

All buses would continue to be allowed use bus lanes. I don’t see why that would change.

That was even the plan under the old BRT Swiftway plan, though they were to have different bus stops.

I think it will continue to be open to all buses under BusConnects. Though hopefully with more restrictions on Taxis where needed and dedicated bike lanes where possible.

LXFlyer

tom1ie wrote: »

I’d like to know if the orbital routes will be brt standard.
As a resident of the sw area I’m not happy to accept that we’ll get a lower spec bus corridor at all. If your going to do something right do it properly, don’t waste massive amounts of money on a half arsed job that’s not going to reduce journey times or increase frequency.
The money should be used for other large infrastructure improvements that will make a difference.

The outer orbital corridor will be easier to implement, as there is pretty much enough space for four lanes of traffic as it is along most of it in south Dublin (Green Route (Ballinteer to Old Bawn), Belgard Rd & Fonthill Rd on the south side. Some CPO activity will be required.

The real issue will be the inner orbital corridors which certainly will require substantial CPO activity.

FreudianSlippers

I thought the whole point of BRT was that they were segregated lanes?

tom1ie

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I thought the whole point of BRT was that they were segregated lanes?

Yeah that's what brt pretty much depends on. What it sounds like we are getting is a re branding of db and maybe if we are lucky some new busses.
Somehow this will cost 100 million per year for 10 years!!

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

Yeah that's what brt pretty much depends on. What it sounds like we are getting is a re branding of db and maybe if we are lucky some new busses.
Somehow this will cost 100 million per year for 10 years!!

The BRT is not happening now, according to the latest info. BusConnects replaces it, the idea to upgrade the entire dublin city fleet in various ways, rather then just 3 BRT routes. It has it's pros and cons.

BTW 100million really isn't much money for this sort of stuff. We spend roughly 40m a year just replacing 100 DB buses every year to keep up with normal fleet replacement schedule. And that is without any expansion of the fleet.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

The BRT is not happening now, according to the latest info. BusConnects replaces it, the idea to upgrade the entire dublin city fleet in various ways, rather then just 3 BRT routes. It has it's pros and cons.

BTW 100million really isn't much money for this sort of stuff. We spend roughly 40m a year just replacing 100 DB buses every year to keep up with normal fleet replacement schedule. And that is without any expansion of the fleet.

But I thought bus connects was brt? Doesn’t it say so in the ndp?

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

But I thought bus connects was brt? Doesn’t it say so in the ndp?

No.

A few years ago we had a project called Swiftway. Which was 3 BRT routes. Detailed plans were published, etc.

The NDP included a new project called BusConnects, headed up by Jarrett Walker, a world renowned consultant who has helped redesign and improve bus networks in 50 cities around the world.

It hasn't been officially announced, but rumour has it that the original Siwftwat/BRT project has been scrapped and instead BusConnects will look at improving the entire bus network, with a particular focus on 16 core corridors.

We will need to wait for the detail plan for the BusConnects plan to know for certain what is exactly planned.

I'm personally disappointed that the BRT element might not go ahead, but also look forward to hearing with Jarrett comes up with. When I've heard him speak, on radio here and reading his blog, he seems to have really good insight into how bus networks work and how to improve them.

bk

Hmmm.. So I'm going to very happily say that I'm wrong!

LXFyler will be very happy to hear that

So I just took a look at www.busconnects.ie and the things up there now are quite different to what was first up there and what was first announced. Sounds like the project may have sucked in other projects under one umbrella and if it all happens then it would be really good news.

Seemingly it now includes ticketing:
https://www.busconnects.ie/initiatives/just-the-ticket/

The second biggest source of bus delays, after traffic congestion, is the payment process at bus stops. Payment of fares by cash is still commonplace, slowing down the boarding time. Even when using the Leap Card, the complexity of payment stages means a high percentage of passengers have to interact with the driver, with resultant delays at bus stops. At busy bus stops these delays can be for several minutes. Multiply by the number of busy stops on a route, and those delays accumulate to add significantly to the overall journey time.

Under BusConnects we will simplify and streamline the process of paying for bus journeys. We want to make the fare system simpler, and we also want to make movement between different bus services seamless and easy, without financial penalty. This will require a move to either a “tag-on” and “tag-off” facility, similar to Luas and DART, or a single “flat fare” approach in order to reduce the need to interact with the driver for fare payments.

As part of this process, cashless operation will be introduced on all buses, to remove the delays caused by cash payments. Currently over 70% of fare payments are made by Leap card. As this increases over the next couple of years, the transition to a cashless regime will become easier. BusConnects will incorporate the latest developments in account-based ticketing technology, potentially allowing use of credit / debit cards or mobile devices as a convenient means of payment. This will also allow integration with other transport payments such as parking facilities and bicycle hire.

All sounds great.

It also seems to include BRT on three routes:

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a high-quality bus based transit system that delivers a service with higher speeds and quality of service than traditional bus services.

We’re planning to do this by improving road infrastructure and providing specially designed vehicles, with rapid, frequent operations and faster boarding and alighting.

We are proposing that a number of the Core Radial Bus Corridors will be developed as Bus Rapid Transit routes, where the passenger numbers forecast are approaching the limits of conventional bus route capacity.

BRT will represent a major step-change in the provision of bus services on some of the busier bus corridors in the Dublin region.

A typical BRT system uses multi-door vehicles, higher platforms for level boarding and stops that are spaced further apart than those that serve conventional buses. Using different vehicles than normal buses, a BRT route can cater for a higher volume of passengers than a normal bus corridor.

In designing the BRT details, we will ensure that it is fully integrated into the overall bus system, providing a coordinated overall network.

This one I'd be less sure of. It was a well informed source that said Swiftway/BRT had been cancelled, but perhaps they had just misunderstood and it has been just folded into the BusConnects plan or perhaps it has been cancelled and that site hasn't been updated. But I hope BRT still happens.

Next Generation Bus Corridors:
https://www.busconnects.ie/initiatives/next-generation-bus-corridors/

At the heart of the BusConnects project is the proposal to develop continuous bus lanes, as far as is practicable, along the busiest bus corridors.

The Transport Strategy sets out a network of bus corridors forming the “Core Bus Network” for the Dublin region. Additional Text. There are eleven radial bus corridors planned in addition to the Bus Rapid Transit routes, as well as three orbital bus corridors.

At present, these busy bus routes only have dedicated bus lanes along less than one third of their lengths. This means that for most of the journey, buses are competing for space with general traffic and so are affected by the increasing levels of congestion.

The resultant delays are a source of real frustration for people looking for consistent and predictable journey times. This makes the overall bus system less efficient, less reliable and less punctual. As a result, many people do not see any benefit in choosing bus transport.

Our objective is to develop these eleven radial bus corridors and three orbital bus corridors so that each will have continuous bus priority – in other words, a continuous bus lane in each direction. This “next generation” of bus corridors will deliver a transformation in the performance of these routes, making it easier and quicker for you to come and go by bus, whether your journey is related to your job, your studies, or your social life and family life.

We want to remove the current delays and uncertainties, so that in the future, bus journeys will be faster, more punctual and more reliable. Making those changes is an essential part of delivering a vastly improved service for passengers.

Achieving this will, in some instances, require a widening of the road and changes to parking arrangements, but the end result will not just be better services for bus passengers, but will benefit all users of the corridor.

Cyclists will be provided with safe cycling facilities, largely segregated from other traffic, along these routes. Pedestrians will benefit from additional safe pedestrian crossing points and reconstructed footpaths. Car users will have reduced interactions with cyclists and buses as well a resurfaced roadway providing smoother journeys with less wear on vehicles.

We will also take the opportunity of enhancing key local centres on the corridors with additional landscaping and other works aimed at improving the local environment in these centres.

Lots of really good sounding stuff on that site, it would be brilliant if it all happened. Of course the devil is in the detail. We will have to wait and see the detailed plans and then if they are actually actioned on.