Swiftway - Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

LXFlyer · 28-02-2014 05:33PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

If I were designing this, I would start with an express bus service at Malahide, Swords, Airport, then M1 to the Tunnel, Quays. This would not need bendy-buses.

I would extend the Dart from Clongriffin to the airport, and continue to Heuston via the Phoenix Park Tunnel.

The Dart Underground would then complete the picture, with extension to the western suburbs, and electrify the lines to Maynooth and Hazelhatch.

If the lines are there, with a reasonable level of service, then the traffic will follow.

Current bus routes can be improved by giving priority to buses all the way, and cashless ticketing.

Revenue protection needs to be real and visible.

Swords already has an express bus service via the M1 and Port Tunnel - Swords Express, and peak hour services on the 41x and 142.

This isn't just about Swords, it's about the entire Swords corridor.

Grandeeod · 28-02-2014 05:49PM

lxflyer wrote: »

This isn't just about Swords, it's about the entire Swords corridor.

The Metro North corridor.;)

cdebru · 28-02-2014 09:18PM

expectationlost wrote: »

€150m Sham
Written by North County Leader http://northcountyleader.ie/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=15355:150m-sham&Itemid=101

In fairness they were off peak journey times the NTA is aiming to provide a reliable journey time that would be the same all day everyday.
The same journey at 8am on a wet Monday morning would be radically different and could be in excess of an hour.

Banjoxed · 28-02-2014 11:22PM

AlekSmart wrote: »

Sadly I suspect there is a lot of truth in this viewpoint.

From what we can see,the CGI's purport to show a "Luas" Like Articulated Bus,remarkably similar to Wrights Street-Car vehicle.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/capuchinoking/8175806025/in/photostream/

The Street-Car initially debuted in York,for a major reworking of that City's Bus Service ,known as "ftr"...First Bus Marketing Speak for "Future"of Bus Transport.

Incredibly for the UK,it was far from a success as the required level of co-operation and understanding between ALL of the stakeholding bodies was NOT agreed and in place...(Sound familiar ??).

Since then,the original experiment on First York's route 4 has ended ,with the vehicles being cascaded elsewhere.

The original ftr's were tarted-up Volvo B7LA's...identical to Dublin Bus's 20 AW class vehicles and were similarly afflicted with a broad range of build and operational problems,which to my knowledge Volvo never fully addressed.

However,given the close business (and political) arrangements which have to be borne in mind when our vehicle ordering process comes into play,it is more than likely that Wrights and the NTA have worked closely on any specifications which may appear.

Personally,I would look towards the Mercedes Citaro for any articulated bus,but Mercedes Benz does not enjoy any great success with the Irish State (except for Ministerial Transport !!).

There is,also,lurking in the background,Wrights continuing American Market ventures which feature a development of the Street-Car adopted for Hybrid operation,which,if EU funding could be secured might just be even more PR friendly for any (aspiring) Minister to be photographed with....

There is far more riding on this Swiftway project than merely the mundane Public Transport requirements of Joe Soap...this type of project can make a career and get individuals recognised as being of the "Right Stuff" for future consideration...;)

I would suggest broadening one's focus out a bit to take in ancilliary works and the "associated" opportunities which come with them.....;)

Seems then it was as simple as an Irish Government official dropping a Wright Bus folder on someone's desk with heavy hints. Backee Scratchee!

monument · 01-03-2014 02:53PM

We're not getting Chinese or South American level BRT -- that was never on the cards here. That kind of BRT would only be posable with very heavy works and a (likely uncalled for) massive amount of displacement of cars on the former N4 and the N11 routes (with greater levels of displacement where those routes narrow.

This will be at best EU-style BRT -- maybe somewhere around what you get in France, the Netherlands or the UK.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

But that's the point you continually seem to be missing - this proposal (based on all the info currently available) isn't BRT - It's QBC/CitySwift 2

The QBCs have had a very positive effect on bus flows, so QBC 2 does not sound that bad. It sounds great.

And as for CitySwift 2, it's more like making a CitySwift-type service as the standard product. That sounds good too.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

1. There's no segregation/dedicated lanes. Instead it'll be forced to share the current Bus lanes with regular services and taxis - and bikes, motorbikes, squad cars etc.

None of those things block buses even half as much as general private motor traffic. Dealing with junctions will be key and the clear intent is at least brining bus lanes right up to junction -- that alone if done half right will offer a massive improvement.

Even Luas in the city centre gets by as being the most oversubscribed public transport form and deals with bicycles and police cars getting in the way.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Let's imagine it trundling down one of these Lanes. All is well until it comes up behind a regular service pulled in and loading. What now?

(a) sit behind the regular bus until loading is completed? Not very "swift"
(b) Try to merge into the regular driving lane and overtake, then move back over into its lane

The NTA claim it's the plan not to have regular buses block the lane or hold up BRT buses.

In some locations lay-bys might work, but I'm guessing it'll largely work by the most of the current bus routes along the BRT routes being merged into the BRT and doing things like limiting the amount of regular stops on the BRT sections of the regular services (ie having stops just before/after the regular route meets the BRT route / shared lane).

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

2. The proposed vehicles are just fancified versions of the bendy-buses which we previously had and did not suit many of Dublin's streets as shown in the video someone posted previously.

Ride quality issues are addressed in different models of articulated buses and, as already said, the NTA have been looking at surface quality of routes for some time and this will likely be kept up as part of this project.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Buying more tri-axles as suggested above (preferably with at least dual doors) would be a far more practical solution that would deliver the same capacity rather than the expense of rebuilding junctions, displacing parking etc.

Elements such as rebuilding junctions and displacing parking are more to do with service dependability, and secondarily capacity.

The expense is well worth it.

Lots of it will be done anyway as part of the GDA cycle network plan and complying with the Manual for Urban Roads and Streets.

Godge wrote: »

If this is the case then they are admitting failure before they begin.

Are you also saying that cycles will be able to use BRT lanes?

Even tram lanes are used by taxis in Amsterdam. And sections of BRT are used by taxis and cyclists in France.

Sam Russell wrote: »

If I were designing this, I would start with an express bus service at Malahide, Swords, Airport, then M1 to the Tunnel, Quays. This would not need bendy-buses....

That's not "designing this" that's mostly different types of services, different types of areas covered, and different routes.

Dart Underground is also still on the cards, so that's not different than BRT.

Filibuster · 01-03-2014 03:33PM

monument wrote: »

Even tram lanes are used by taxis in Amsterdam. And sections of BRT are used by taxis and cyclists in France.

If you really wanted a BRT line to Blanchardstown you would route the bus down Chesterfield Avenue in the Phoenix Park and down the luas track to O'Connell Street. Easy.

cgcsb · 01-03-2014 04:04PM

Filibuster wrote: »

If you really wanted a BRT line to Blanchardstown you would route the bus down Chesterfield Avenue in the Phoenix Park and down the luas track to O'Connell Street. Easy.

the population of the pheonix park is about 0, so you would only have good peak time loadings

Filibuster · 01-03-2014 04:11PM

cgcsb wrote: »

the population of the pheonix park is about 0, so you would only have good peak time loadings

Is it?? What about the ZOO (1 million visitors a year), the Garda Depot, McKee Barracks, OSI etc. Not to mention the 1,000's who want to run, walk and cycle around the Park everyday.

Aard · 01-03-2014 05:12PM

monument wrote: »

The NTA claim it's the plan not to have regular buses block the lane or hold up BRT buses.

In some locations lay-bys might work, but I'm guessing it'll largely work by the most of the current bus routes along the BRT routes being merged into the BRT and doing things like limiting the amount of regular stops on the BRT sections of the regular services (ie having stops just before/after the regular route meets the BRT route / shared lane).

The first sentence there is very worrying. If there is to be no shared-running with regular busses, then where are the regular busses going to go? Just plod along with the cars?

If there is not going to be any shared-running with non-Swiftway vehicles, then the only answer is a wholesale redesign of the legacy bus routes. To take a single example: the 145. Unless it can share the BRT lanes, and assuming there aren't going to be side-by-side BRT and bus lanes, the 145 would lose out on use of a buslane pretty much all the way from UCD to Heuston. Imo this is not acceptable, and shared-running should be a given.

loyatemu · 01-03-2014 05:27PM

Filibuster wrote: »

Is it?? What about the ZOO (1 million visitors a year), the Garda Depot, McKee Barracks, OSI etc. Not to mention the 1,000's who want to run, walk and cycle around the Park everyday.

I'd imagine the OPW don't want buses running through the park.

Filibuster · 01-03-2014 05:35PM

loyatemu wrote: »

I'd imagine the OPW don't want buses running through the park.

No they were all for it as detailed in their 2006 report - “The Phoenix Park Transportation Study”. They discovered that upwards of 15million car journeys were clogging up Chesterfield Avenue and wanted a solution to the problem. Bord Planeala in their infinite wisdom decided that buses were out of character neglecting to notice the hundreds of tour buses using the park on a daily basis.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/article176448.ece

AlekSmart · 01-03-2014 05:40PM

loyatemu wrote: »

I'd imagine the OPW don't want buses running through the park.

Correct,but not out of any thought-through policy decision,but simply down to the age-old Established Civil Service tradition of protecting it's own patch....The OPW won't actually know why it's agin it,but it knows sure as hell it just HAS to be agin it because some other agency has the lead on it.....:rolleyes:

Remember,the OPW has form for this type of administrative blackguardism...take a ramble around to St Stephens Green North (Opp The Shelbourne) and observe the artistically formed Bus Stops....why the funny shape Ted..?.....The OPW just ain't happy with Bus Stops on :eek: THEIR :eek:footpath so either get rid of them altogether or......get inventive about their placement....;)

Hard to credit this feckdoodling being carried on in a 21st Century Capital City,but thankfully The Office Of Public Works is there to preserve the "Old" Dublin for everybody...which surely indicates that the Phoenix Park,as a Public Transport Corridor is well dead in the water before it even dips a toe in it !!!!:mad:

Aard · 01-03-2014 08:32PM

While we're on the topic of the OPW... The proposed new mayor for Dublin includes the new office taking over management of the Phoenix Park and St Stephen's Green from the OPW. Could prove very useful for public transport.

HydeRoad · 01-03-2014 08:56PM

There is another consideration, of interest to nobody other than the wretched drivers who have to operate these things, and operate them safely.

The standard of bus lane design has been simply awful. Cyclists regularly complain about the inadequacy and danger of the cycling infrastructure. In a similar way, bus lane design has suffered through being designed by people who never drove a bus in their life.

Many bus lanes in Dublin are practically unusable, and often a bus driver will avoid the bus lane available to him out of pure safety concerns, or pure frustration. Some of the typical issues are as follows:

1) Bus lanes that are not wide enough for safe passage of buses, i.e. the Chapelizod Bypass, or where lamp posts, trees and even massive stone mock gate piers sit right at the kerb's edge, begging to take the mirror off a passing bus. Similarly, bus lanes on bends in the road, where the bus lane line follows a kerb all the way round a bend, taking no account of the extra width a bus needs for it's overhangs to clear the turn.

The most ridiculous bus lane of them all must be the bus lane on Samuel Beckett Bridge, which follows the width of the lane around a right angle, an impossibility for any bus to follow. Whoever sanctioned the painting of that really should not be involved in road design at all.

2) Bus lanes that are ridiculously short, such that any bus that enters it almost immediately has to indicate right and pull straight back out again. There are 'bus lanes' all around the city that are less than 100m long, even just 20m long in one place. WTF?

3) Bus lanes, where all day long the cars in the adjoining lane sit with their nearside wheels on or over the bus lane line, leaving buses in the bus lane to make no progress at all over a standing traffic queue, other than to be hemmed in at the end and cut off when they inevitable need to rejoin the stagnant traffic flow. In many cases, the main traffic lane is over a lane and a half wide, or even more, while the bus has barely six inches over it's own width to attempt it's progress.

4) 0700-1900 bus lanes, where at a minute past seven in the evening, bus lanes turn into high speed undertaking lanes, leaving buses in conflict with cars flying to take dangerous advantage of the general traffic situation. They should be 24 hour lanes, in the vast majority of cases.

5) Bus lanes, where bus drivers are placed in constant conflict with surrounding traffic. Rather than good road design assisting and accommodating buses to enter and exit lanes with fluidity and safety, the ingress and egress is usually made as difficult as possible by ill placed kerbs, ambiguous box junctions and other markings, and bad general use of the available road space. Again, this is down to lack of experience of designers, who have no idea of the dynamics of driving a bus in traffic.

In short, driving a bus in traffic can be a nerve wracking experience, only made worse in many cases by the bus lanes supposed to alleviate the situation. Too many bus lanes as they stand are simply not safe, and they suffer from the simple expedient of having involved no consultation with the bus drivers who will be expected to use them. Over the years I have made submissions to the various councils to have specific instances of particularly bad design revisited or made safer, and I have been roundly ignored.

I have little faith in grandiose plans for QBCs or BRTs that are designed by people who do not consult with the people who will have to effect the safe operation of their fine designs. I see nothing to the effect that this will be any different. A political gimmick, as usual.

Carawaystick · 02-03-2014 03:50AM

HydeRoad wrote: »

There is another consideration, of interest to nobody other than the wretched drivers who have to operate these things, and operate them safely.

The standard of bus lane design has been simply awful. Cyclists regularly complain about the inadequacy and danger of the cycling infrastructure. In a similar way, bus lane design has suffered through being designed by people who never drove a bus in their life.

Many bus lanes in Dublin are practically unusable, and often a bus driver will avoid the bus lane available to him out of pure safety concerns, or pure frustration. Some of the typical issues are as follows:

1) Bus lanes that are not wide enough for safe passage of buses, i.e. the Chapelizod Bypass,

This point is so obvious to users that I'd imagine the people we pay well to be in charge drive and don't give a crap and sums up the whole establishment point of view of public transit in Ireland/Dublin

monument · 02-03-2014 09:04AM

Aard wrote: »

The first sentence there is very worrying. If there is to be no shared-running with regular busses, then where are the regular busses going to go? Just plod along with the cars?

If there is not going to be any shared-running with non-Swiftway vehicles, then the only answer is a wholesale redesign of the legacy bus routes.

No, there is planned to be shared running, but normal buses stopping are to be kept out of the way.

And wholesale redesign of the legacy bus routes is also planned -- it's the main reason the NTA say they are keeping on Dublin Bus as the operator without open tendering.

Aard wrote: »

To take a single example: the 145. Unless it can share the BRT lanes, and assuming there aren't going to be side-by-side BRT and bus lanes, the 145 would lose out on use of a buslane pretty much all the way from UCD to Heuston. Imo this is not acceptable, and shared-running should be a given.

Thinking out loud:

The 145, maybe extended, could be a great spur off the UCD route. It would make for a great P&R route too. Something like: P&R at Island Bridge -- quays -- south city centre -- P&R at UCD.

bigar · 02-03-2014 09:45AM

HydeRoad wrote: »

There is another consideration, of interest to nobody other than the wretched drivers who have to operate these things, and operate them safely. <SNIP>

Very interesting post and I am amazed to see that if you would replace bus lane with cycle lane in the points you raise, it is obvious that both suffer from the same problems. Perhaps this should be tackled first before adding more traffic in those lanes.

Aard · 02-03-2014 01:45PM

monument wrote: »

And wholesale redesign of the legacy bus routes is also planned -- it's the main reason the NTA say they are keeping on Dublin Bus as the operator without open tendering.

Is that even legal? I was under the impression that all new routes had to be put out to tender. The legacy routes can also surely be changed by the NTA without consultation with Dublin Bus?

carlmango11 · 02-03-2014 01:55PM

Is BRT being pushed as an alternative to Metro North? I know MN is a long way from construction, or even the green light but surely we're not going to try push off this glorified bus service as a long term solution?

If so I've really lost all faith in public transport in Dublin. It's so staggeringly clear that trams and trains trump buses again and again. People don't like buses. Simple as. Dublin is more than big enough to require a proper underground rail solution

Aard · 02-03-2014 02:04PM

carlmango11 wrote: »

Is BRT being pushed as an alternative to Metro North?

That's the $64,000 question.

Actually the real question is why the Minister hasn't signed off on the NTA's draft Transport Strategy yet.

Filibuster · 02-03-2014 02:43PM

carlmango11 wrote: »

Is BRT being pushed as an alternative to Metro North? I know MN is a long way from construction, or even the green light but surely we're not going to try push off this glorified bus service as a long term solution?

If so I've really lost all faith in public transport in Dublin. It's so staggeringly clear that trams and trains trump buses again and again. People don't like buses. Simple as. Dublin is more than big enough to require a proper underground rail solution

The Swords to Tallaght corridor has a forecast demand that greatly exceeds the capacity of BRT in the current 2030 current infrastructure scenario and also exceed the 3,600 ppdph in the 2030 scenario.

The demand forecasts suggest that the introduction of Metro North on this corridor has a significant effect on demand on the BRT service, particularly as it serves both Swords and the Airport. The demand forecasting suggests that BRT is not a feasible proposal on this cross city corridor in the absence of other public transport provision such as Metro North.

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Bus-Rapid-Transit-Core-Network-report.pdf

If 3,600ppdph is the max capacity, what porportion of that is for standing passengers. People won't like being jostled about on a shakey bus.

Aard · 02-03-2014 03:42PM

That 3,600 figure is such baloney. The North Quays QBC has an operational capacity of over 9,000 ppdph. And that's without any fancy BRT measures. The NTA report completely underestimates the capacity of BRT and even admits to it in their fancy graph comparing bus/BRT/LRT/rail.

Godge · 02-03-2014 07:28PM

monument wrote: »

We're not getting Chinese or South American level BRT -- that was never on the cards here. That kind of BRT would only be posable with very heavy works and a (likely uncalled for) massive amount of displacement of cars on the former N4 and the N11 routes (with greater levels of displacement where those routes narrow.

This will be at best EU-style BRT -- maybe somewhere around what you get in France, the Netherlands or the UK.

So we are now finally all agreed that it isn't really top-class BRT.

It is only an inferior form of BRT and we just need to figure how bad it will actually be in practice once the local residents and businesses have talked to the councillors and planners and messed it up further.

monument wrote: »

The QBCs have had a very positive effect on bus flows, so QBC 2 does not sound that bad. It sounds great.

And as for CitySwift 2, it's more like making a CitySwift-type service as the standard product. That sounds good too.

This language is interesting.

I like hearing how this change has improved cycle flows or this change has improved bus flows from this place.

The real question is whether overall average commuting times have come down or not. It is all very well that commuting from Foxrock to Dublin is now taking 20 minutes less but if as a result everyone else's commute is up by 5 minutes, then it is not much of a result.

BRT will have the same problems.

monument wrote: »

None of those things block buses even half as much as general private motor traffic. Dealing with junctions will be key and the clear intent is at least brining bus lanes right up to junction -- that alone if done half right will offer a massive improvement.

Even Luas in the city centre gets by as being the most oversubscribed public transport form and deals with bicycles and police cars getting in the way.

Bringing bus lanes up to certain junctions will work.

But it won't be possible everywhere. Neither will it deal with the issue of smaller roads or private houses. It will be ignored in the Blanchardstown Centre as it is at the moment.

Luas gets away with it because it is not BRT, it is Luas, properly segregated.

Defending BRT by saying something works for Luas is strange when BRT is certainly not Luas standard.

monument wrote: »

The NTA claim it's the plan not to have regular buses block the lane or hold up BRT buses.

In some locations lay-bys might work, but I'm guessing it'll largely work by the most of the current bus routes along the BRT routes being merged into the BRT and doing things like limiting the amount of regular stops on the BRT sections of the regular services (ie having stops just before/after the regular route meets the BRT route / shared lane).

So if you live on say the 37 or 38 route, you might have to feed into BRT or you might lose frequency?

If you want to interchange with BRT, you will have to walk because the regular stops won't be in the same place.

monument wrote: »

Ride quality issues are addressed in different models of articulated buses and, as already said, the NTA have been looking at surface quality of routes for some time and this will likely be kept up as part of this project.

Elements such as rebuilding junctions and displacing parking are more to do with service dependability, and secondarily capacity.

The expense is well worth it.

Lots of it will be done anyway as part of the GDA cycle network plan and complying with the Manual for Urban Roads and Streets.

Displacing parking? Stoneybatter, even Donnybrook kept the kerbside parking, how many buses are delayed every day by cars pulling in and out and double parking?

monument wrote: »

Even tram lanes are used by taxis in Amsterdam. And sections of BRT are used by taxis and cyclists in France.

"Sections" of BRT, will only "sections" be open in Ireland or will it be the whole lot?

monument wrote: »

That's not "designing this" that's mostly different types of services, different types of areas covered, and different routes.

Dart Underground is also still on the cards, so that's not different than BRT.

Dart Underground will be delayed by BRT, that much is certain.

monument · 02-03-2014 08:53PM

Godge wrote: »

So we are now finally all agreed that it isn't really top-class BRT.

Err, no. That's nothing new.

That bit of my post was directed at people who are not bothered reading the thread or the reports and presentations online and linked to about Dublin's planned BRT.

If it was not so tragic, it would be funny that you only now think we are not getting top-level BRT (which requires four lanes reserved for BRT and isn't as far as I know used in any EU BRT project).

Godge wrote: »

This language is interesting.

I like hearing how this change has improved cycle flows or this change has improved bus flows from this place.

The real question is whether overall average commuting times have come down or not. It is all very well that commuting from Foxrock to Dublin is now taking 20 minutes less but if as a result everyone else's commute is up by 5 minutes, then it is not much of a result.

That's not the real question at all.

National, regional and local policy is to give priority to public transport and other sustainable transport. You seem to have a problem with this, and that's your choice to hold such views, but don't be mixing your views with the requirements of successful public transport.

And you can talk about Foxrock all you like but Foxrock is beyond the BRT route -- places like Ongar, Blanch, Cabra and Drumalee are directly on the BRT route. But those examples don't seem to fit what ever class agenda you have here.

Your comments about speeding up road travel into and out of Dublin City Centre are not facing up to the reality of an ever increasing population and workforce and more priority which will have to be given over to sustainable modes.

Godge wrote: »

Bringing bus lanes up to certain junctions will work.

It can be made work at almost all junctions. Not sure what the issue is besides a few small areas we have already covered and all know about.

Godge wrote: »

But it won't be possible everywhere. Neither will it deal with the issue of smaller roads or private houses.

Are we still stuck on the Old Cabra Road or have you somewhere else in mind?

In such locations as the Old Cabra Road, local access only / no through access / limited access will work wonders. We have back and forward disagreemnet on this already and there's no point covering it again until we see the NTA's detail designs.

Godge wrote: »

It will be ignored in the Blanchardstown Centre as it is at the moment.

Which BRT can deal with in many ways -- and this has also already been covered in detail.

And while the Old Cabra Road might be a larger issue, Blanch is another example of you making a big deal out of little or nothing.

Godge wrote: »

Luas gets away with it because it is not BRT, it is Luas, properly segregated.

Defending BRT by saying something works for Luas is strange when BRT is certainly not Luas standard.

You're just not reading what I said -- I clearly said Luas in the city centre deals with bicycles and police cars getting in the way.

How does that link up with you saying that its "properly segregated"?

Godge wrote: »

So if you live on say the 37 or 38 route, you might have to feed into BRT or you might lose frequency?

That's all possible. It would be crazy if such joint up redesigning of routes was not part of the project.

In the case of your two examples, 90% population along the 38 route and 80-90% along the 37 route live directly along the BRT route and most of the rest live a close walk to it.

Godge wrote: »

If you want to interchange with BRT, you will have to walk because the regular stops won't be in the same place.

Just like Luas and accepted world wide for high frequency services such as BRT.

Godge wrote: »

Dart Underground will be delayed by BRT, that much is certain.

We'll take the word of the poster who can't be bother to read the thread or the key or even the short reports on the topic at hand... no, thanks.

Godge · 03-03-2014 02:15AM

monument wrote: »

Err, no. That's nothing new.

That bit of my post was directed at people who are not bothered reading the thread or the reports and presentations online and linked to about Dublin's planned BRT.

If it was not so tragic, it would be funny that you only now think we are not getting top-level BRT (which requires four lanes reserved for BRT and isn't as far as I know used in any EU BRT project).

You know I have posted a few times on this topic and it is not new to me. However, a few posters have come along here (including yourself) and proclaimed that this new BRT is the new solution to all of Dublin's transport problems.

When it is pointed out that when the traditional unchanged ways of dealing with bus transport in Ireland is finished with the idea, it will have no relation to BRT, all pretend that this won't happen and it will be sweetness and light in the new buses speeding their way into town. No commuter believes this. That is the issue.

We will be back here in a few years to talk about the bendy-buses being sold off before their useful life has expired.

monument wrote: »

That's not the real question at all.

National, regional and local policy is to give priority to public transport and other sustainable transport. You seem to have a problem with this, and that's your choice to hold such views, but don't be mixing your views with the requirements of successful public transport.

And you can talk about Foxrock all you like but Foxrock is beyond the BRT route -- places like Ongar, Blanch, Cabra and Drumalee are directly on the BRT route. But those examples don't seem to fit what ever class agenda you have here.

Your comments about speeding up road travel into and out of Dublin City Centre are not facing up to the reality of an ever increasing population and workforce and more priority which will have to be given over to sustainable modes.

.

No problem with giving priority to buses - it just hasn't worked properly for most of Dublin and is difficult to work given the architecture of the city.

If by sustainable modes, you mean cycling, again no problem with that where appropriate. It would be great if the cycling infrastructure was actually used, but that is another story.

You misquote or misunderstand me on the business of speeding up road travel. I am interested in speeding up commuter journeys, a different thing. If that means park and ride on a metro or extended DART great. If it means more inappropriate cycle lanes and bus lanes that result in increased journey times, then no.

Unlike many others, I don't have an ideological position that everyone should walk, cycle, drive or use public transport or any other mode. I just want to see commuter journey times reduced. When you make that the objective, you support what is appropriate to the particular case in point.

Knowing the Blanch corridor like I do, the underutilisation of the Phoenix Park for commuter journeys is the real crime.

monument wrote: »

It can be made work at almost all junctions. Not sure what the issue is besides a few small areas we have already covered and all know about.

In the case of your two examples, 90% population along the 38 route and 80-90% along the 37 route live directly along the BRT route and most of the rest live a close walk to it.

Not at almost all junctions, certainly not in the morning school-run traffic, perhaps in the evening.

You are way out with your figures or else you don't know where the 37 or 38 go.

monument · 03-03-2014 10:08AM

Godge wrote: »

However, a few posters have come along here (including yourself) and proclaimed that this new BRT is the new solution to all of Dublin's transport problems.

Again this shows that you are (a) not reading the thread or (b) selectively reading the thread, or (c) it's a very poor blind attack on me.

Because:

-- nowhere have I stated anything like that "solution to all of Dublin's transport problems"

-- I have made clear that I'm very surportive of Dart Underground and pointed to the reality that Dart is also being pushed (by Leo etc)

-- I have said my preference would be surface Luas over BRT

-- I have made reference to other sustainable modes which are key to keeping the city moving.

In short: Your point does not stand up.

Godge wrote: »

No problem with giving priority to buses - it just hasn't worked properly for most of Dublin and is difficult to work given the architecture of the city.

.....

Knowing the Blanch corridor like I do, the underutilisation of the Phoenix Park for commuter journeys is the real crime.

QBCs -- for what they are -- have worked fairly effectively in most of Dublin to keep buses moving faster than private cars.

I've put these two quotes side-by-side to show your "problem with giving priority" is real and notable.

First you claim the "architecture of the city" is a barrier issue (otherwise why bring it up) yet Amsterdam and many other European cities give sustainable transport priority when those cities have far more restrictive city road networks.

Than you think the school run is (a) an issue BRT can't deal with or (b) something which should get more priority.

All of that shows that your will for more bus priority is at best lackluster.

Godge wrote: »

If by sustainable modes, you mean cycling, again no problem with that where appropriate. It would be great if the cycling infrastructure was actually used, but that is another story.

Political speak translation: "I'm not supportive of decent infrastructure for cycling where it affects traffic flows at all."

Godge wrote: »

You misquote or misunderstand me on the business of speeding up road travel. I am interested in speeding up commuter journeys, a different thing. If that means park and ride on a metro or extended DART great. If it means more inappropriate cycle lanes and bus lanes that result in increased journey times, then no.

I'm not misquoting anything. You're again giving an example of providing for private motor transport (which park and ride needs) while being again generally unsupportive of priority or space for cycling and buses.

Godge wrote: »

Unlike many others, I don't have an ideological position that everyone should walk, cycle, drive or use public transport or any other mode. I just want to see commuter journey times reduced. When you make that the objective, you support what is appropriate to the particular case in point.

My ideological view is if anything a view that there should be an effective and sustainable transport system.

You clam that you want "commuter journey times reduced" but you also see an issue with BRT having priority over school run traffic...

Godge wrote: »

Not at almost all junctions, certainly not in the morning school-run traffic, perhaps in the evening.

Yes, almost all junctions. And certainly for at least all the hours buses are running.

This is central to your half baked wishes for public transport priority -- according to your rules high frequency public transport should not get priority over school run traffic!

Godge wrote: »

You are way out with your figures or else you don't know where the 37 or 38 go.

I know exactly where they go. I also know where the highest and some of the lowest population density is in Dublin.

I know how one of those routes mendaders down congested roads and how the other mendaders where there's a comparably low population to the city section of the route.

And I know how the BRT plans nearly mirror most of the two routes and intersect with them.

cgcsb · 03-03-2014 02:40PM

Filibuster wrote: »

Is it?? What about the ZOO (1 million visitors a year), the Garda Depot, McKee Barracks, OSI etc. Not to mention the 1,000's who want to run, walk and cycle around the Park everyday.

the Zoo has a million people per year = 2,740 per day, mostly on weekends and outside of rush hour, if half of them use public transport(optimistic) that's about 1,500 a day. Hardly justifies it really. The other institutions attract a negligible amount of journeys. By routing through the Park you completely miss the Cabra catchment, population 22,000.

AlekSmart · 04-03-2014 12:42AM

cgcsb wrote: »

the Zoo has a million people per year = 2,740 per day, mostly on weekends and outside of rush hour, if half of them use public transport(optimistic) that's about 1,500 a day. Hardly justifies it really. The other institutions attract a negligible amount of journeys. By routing through the Park you completely miss the Cabra catchment, population 22,000.

BUT...on the other hand....If,by routing through the Park,you cut the overall journey time significantly,then you add greatly to the ability of Swiftway to attract NEW business from it's outer terminus catchment area...

The ability of a BRT to deliver visitors to the Zoo's gates would also be of great commercial importance to the Zoo's marketing people in attracting NEW business from both ENDS of the Swiftway line....:)

I'm suggesting that Cabra might be better served by a little tweaking of existing non-BRT routes ?

To my mind the Swiftway proposal HAS to be about attracting NEW users to Public Transport,anything else is doomed to flop.

The NTA need to realize they have only ONE bite at this cherry !

Godge · 04-03-2014 01:15AM

AlekSmart wrote: »

BUT...on the other hand....If,by routing through the Park,you cut the overall journey time significantly,then you add greatly to the ability of Swiftway to attract NEW business from it's outer terminus catchment area...

The ability of a BRT to deliver visitors to the Zoo's gates would also be of great commercial importance to the Zoo's marketing people in attracting NEW business from both ENDS of the Swiftway line....:)

I'm suggesting that Cabra might be better served by a little tweaking of existing non-BRT routes ?

To my mind the Swiftway proposal HAS to be about attracting NEW users to Public Transport,anything else is doomed to flop.

The NTA need to realize they have only ONE bite at this cherry !

But you are missing the point. As monument has put it in long form, the objective of the exercise is not to make life easier for commuters, the objective is to drive cars off the road.

If you were making life easier for commuters you would use the Park.

Aard · 04-03-2014 01:25AM

The Phoenix Park is run by the OPW so it wasn't a runner from the start.

Swiftway - Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Comments