Swiftway - Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

paddyland

If the people who design this 'BRT' are going to be the same people who 'designed' the QBCs, I would say, save the money, and don't bother.

Similarly, if good BRT designs are going to be allowed to be scuttled by some council officials somewhere, the way some QBCs were, again, I would say don't bother.

annfield1978

Issued via an NTA Framework

cgcsb

i.e. it has not yet gone out to tender.

Banjoxed

Interesting thread about the Cambridge - St Ives busway here: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=95061

Unsurprisingly the off road sections are reliable while the town sections are not. Any BRT in Dublin will need to be properly designed far in excess of the so-called "QBC" spec to have any usefulness at all.

MGWR

monument wrote: »

When I think of BRT, as in France etc, this is the kind of layout I think of...

Enormous footprint for a comparatively low volume. The greens won't be happy at Drumcondra Road having the big increase in emissions.

cgcsb

MGWR wrote: »

Enormous footprint for a comparatively low volume. The greens won't be happy at Drumcondra Road having the big increase in emissions.

How exactly will there be increased emissions? compared to the existing road?

monument

MGWR wrote: »

Enormous footprint for a comparatively low volume. The greens won't be happy at Drumcondra Road having the big increase in emissions.

What exactly are you talking about?

Yggr of Asgard

While I like monument's example, I think this will lead to a massive increase in road death and accidents, imagine people in Ireland simply walking over the car drive lane to reach the bus shelter. I'm sure that the design will include pedestrian traffic lights at the stops, but in reality who is going to use them, everybody is just going to run across.

Plus even if we ever get a reliable bus system, unless the transit shelter is configured to cope with our "no bus for a while than 3 in row" for the passenger queues it is going to be dangerous to stand there.

I would love a BRT with dedicated physically separated bus lanes and quality stops but the bus stop might need to move to the pedestrian pathway.

ArmaniJeanss

dublin-texas wrote: »

While I like monument's example, I think this will lead to a massive increase in road death and accidents, imagine people in Ireland simply walking over the car drive lane to reach the bus shelter. I'm sure that the design will include pedestrian traffic lights at the stops, but in reality who is going to use them, everybody is just going to run across.

That's the way our tram lines are designed, trams on the inner, cars on the outer (prime example would be on the Naas road section of the Red Line) and it hasn't caused pedestrian mayhem.

Carawaystick

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

That's the way our tram lines are designed, trams on the inner, cars on the outer (prime example would be on the Naas road section of the Red Line) and it hasn't caused pedestrian mayhem.

Because there are hardly any tram stops on the Naas rd
And it it a completely different road type to drumcondra ( pubs, shops, students)

monument

Carawaystick wrote: »

Because there are hardly any tram stops on the Naas rd
And it it a completely different road type to drumcondra ( pubs, shops, students)

There's tram stops around every 600-500 meters, with BRT distance can go to higher or lower -- generally more than normal bus stops but still can drop to 250m (as tram stop can).

On the former N1, between Collins Ave and the NCR, I'd expect min/max 5-7 stops -- seven would be pushing it. Heading towards town, I'd expect something like this: 600m - 640m - 150m - 500m - 300m (further out likely longer distances and in the city centre low distances). Even with the 600m gaps there's no where on the road further than 300m from a stop.

The different road type is a positive for the designs pictured: It will make it easier and quicker to cross the road which is shown to reduce jaywalking; the speed limit is 50km/h rather than 60km/h near many of the Luas stop; the design is likely to bring off-peak speeds closer to that limit; the design would mean people are only crossing one lane of general traffic which is safer than the current set up when things go wrong.

ArmaniJeanss

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

That's the way our tram lines are designed, trams on the inner, cars on the outer (prime example would be on the Naas road section of the Red Line) and it hasn't caused pedestrian mayhem.

Carawaystick wrote: »

Because there are hardly any tram stops on the Naas rd
And it it a completely different road type to drumcondra ( pubs, shops, students)

Well at the moment anyone on the Drumcondra Road who wants to get a bus, roughly 50% of the time they are going to have to fully cross from one side of the the road to the other anyway (seems a logical assumption that ~50% of such trips will currently start from a pub/shop/school/house on the 'wrong' side). And still there is no pedestrian mayhem.

I think you are overestimating this as a problem, people are generally pretty good at not getting knocked down.

cgcsb

dublin-texas wrote: »

While I like monument's example, I think this will lead to a massive increase in road death and accidents, imagine people in Ireland simply walking over the car drive lane to reach the bus shelter. I'm sure that the design will include pedestrian traffic lights at the stops, but in reality who is going to use them, everybody is just going to run across.

Plus even if we ever get a reliable bus system, unless the transit shelter is configured to cope with our "no bus for a while than 3 in row" for the passenger queues it is going to be dangerous to stand there.

I would love a BRT with dedicated physically separated bus lanes and quality stops but the bus stop might need to move to the pedestrian pathway.

ridiculous

Carawaystick

monument wrote: »

There's tram stops around every 600-500 meters, with BRT distance can go to higher or lower -- generally more than normal bus stops but still can drop to 250m (as tram stop can).

On the former N1, between Collins Ave and the NCR, I'd expect min/max 5-7 stops -- seven would be pushing it. Heading towards town, I'd expect something like this: 600m - 640m - 150m - 500m - 300m (further out likely longer distances and in the city centre low distances). Even with the 600m gaps there's no where on the road further than 300m from a stop.

The different road type is a positive for the designs pictured: It will make it easier and quicker to cross the road which is shown to reduce jaywalking; the speed limit is 50km/h rather than 60km/h near many of the Luas stop; the design is likely to bring off-peak speeds closer to that limit; the design would mean people are only crossing one lane of general traffic which is safer than the current set up when things go wrong.

The r110/810/Naas rd, from the M50 towards the city centre is dual carriageway until after the Bluebell tramstop.

The r132 from shortly after the tunnel mouths south to the city centre, is single carriageway, all the way to Quinns pub.
South of Griffith Avenue, putting any obstacle in the way of crossing the swords road is not preventing jaywalking, but impeding the residents of their liberty.
Jaywalking is only illegal within certain (<15m ) limits of pedestrian crossings.
If a person is crossing the swords rd, they are at present going to cross (apart from the pinch point at the cat&cage) going to cross a bus lane, a traffic lane, a traffic lane and a bus lane.

If the bus lane gets discarded, and you have a traffic lane and two magic brt lanes, and a traffic lane, then I can't see how the situation is improved.
People will cross to the middle of the road, and unless the brt can get about them, block both brt lanes. Unlike now where non-public traffic is put out.

monument

This is the middle of the road BRT set up in Nantes in France, it's much the same as I'm suggesting for Dublin:



The above is far more in keeping with the street use of the roads we're talking about compared to this:



In any case, for this section of road, the Manual For Urban Roads and Street demands about double the amount of crossing (mainly due to lack of crossing at all arms of junctions) and with crossing at both sides of most/all BRT stops you'd end up with around 30 crossing compared to something like 11 now. Also, if the manual was followed, all staggered crossing would be straightened.

Carawaystick wrote: »

The r110/810/Naas rd, from the M50 towards the city centre is dual carriageway until after the Bluebell tramstop.

The r132 from shortly after the tunnel mouths south to the city centre, is single carriageway, all the way to Quinns pub.

That section of the R132 is mostly four lanes or more -- there's a few dual carriageways which are easier to cross!

Carawaystick wrote: »

South of Griffith Avenue, putting any obstacle in the way of crossing the swords road is not preventing jaywalking, but impeding the residents of their liberty.

What's currently "impeding the residents of their liberty" is

Carawaystick wrote: »

Jaywalking is only illegal within certain (<15m ) limits of pedestrian crossings.
If a person is crossing the swords rd, they are at present going to cross (apart from the pinch point at the cat&cage) going to cross a bus lane, a traffic lane, a traffic lane and a bus lane.

If the bus lane gets discarded, and you have a traffic lane and two magic brt lanes, and a traffic lane, then I can't see how the situation is improved.
People will cross to the middle of the road, and unless the brt can get about them, block both brt lanes. Unlike now where non-public traffic is put out.

Having to deal with crossing two lanes of BRT or Luas in the middle of a road is far easier than having to deal with crossing two lanes of general traffic with bus lanes on the edge. It would look something like the narrow section of Nass Road (plus cycle paths)...

Aard

Plus busses (and of course, trams) come along at much longer intervals than cars do. Busses in BRT are kept to a single lane, while a two-lane carriageway allows cars to change lanes, which increases unpredictability.

monument

Rapid bus almost as fast as Metro North, says NTA
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-almost-as-fast-as-metro-north-says-nta-1.1676924


Rapid bus scheme for Dublin ‘could cut journey times by 40%’
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-scheme-for-dublin-could-cut-journey-times-by-40-1.1676911

stop

Swiftway seems to be the name for this new project:


whois info

domain: swiftway.ie
descr: Dublin Transportation Office
descr: Statutory Body
descr: Discretionary Name
admin-c: ARS104-IEDR
tech-c: AAM456-IEDR
registration: 09-October-2013
renewal: 09-October-2016
holder-type: Billable
wipo-status: N
ren-status: Active
in-zone: 1
nserver: ns1.blacknight.com
nserver: ns2.blacknight.com
source: IEDR

person: John Doyle
nic-hdl: ARS104-IEDR
source: IEDR

person: Blacknight.ie Hostmaster
nic-hdl: AAM456-IEDR
source: IEDR

Sam Russell

Would it use the tunnel?

Davy

Sam Russell wrote: »

Would it use the tunnel?

Route maps suggest no, but final routes wouldn't be decided.

Cool Mo D

How would ticketing work - part of the Dublin Bus network, or the Luas? It's propably too much to expect having properly integrated ticketing by then.

petronius

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-scheme-for-dublin-could-cut-journey-times-by-40-1.1676911

While i think rapid dependable buses are an essential component of a city transport system, I see no evidence that they would not gradually become just like the existing buses and realities make them less efficient.

How would it differ from the QBC's or Aircoach would it improve capacity or integration with other public transport providers.

I recall previous suggestions of a Luas-like bus rather than the extension to the Point Depot! rather than a fixed line Light Rail

the only benefit I like about this proposal is the pay fair at the station and not have the bottleneck (and time delay) of paying the driver. Many european cities have integrated ticketing with validatiors(stamps) at stations and on carriages and it works

TheBandicoot

Crap name.

petronius

Blue Line was the name of another rapid bus/ luaslike bus option proposed http://dublinobserver.com/2010/10/dublin-blue-line-video-and-map/

monument

Sam Russell wrote: »

Would it use the tunnel?

It's expected to be on-street.

Serving a large population; some high density areas; very high, high and mid level trip generators, and a train station before the city centre -- it seems like a good idea.

cgcsb

Agree, crap name and it adds another brand. It should be referred to as luas and use the same ticket zones, with the option to upgrade to lrt as demand increases.

Mr Pseudonym

petronius wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-scheme-for-dublin-could-cut-journey-times-by-40-1.1676911

While i think rapid dependable buses are an essential component of a city transport system, I see no evidence that they would not gradually become just like the existing buses and realities make them less efficient.

How would it differ from the QBC's or Aircoach would it improve capacity or integration with other public transport providers.

I recall previous suggestions of a Luas-like bus rather than the extension to the Point Depot! rather than a fixed line Light Rail

the only benefit I like about this proposal is the pay fair at the station and not have the bottleneck (and time delay) of paying the driver. Many european cities have integrated ticketing with validatiors(stamps) at stations and on carriages and it works

Their lanes would be segregated from traffic, and they would receive preference at traffic lights.

Sam Russell

petronius wrote: »

Blue Line was the name of another rapid bus/ luaslike bus option proposed http://dublinobserver.com/2010/10/dublin-blue-line-video-and-map/

Same thing I would think. Looks like a tram but goes like a bus. Advantage is that it can be like a tram but then divert/extend as a bus.

December2012

Can anybody find a good image of the blanchardstown route? Particularly the Dublin 15 end?

cgcsb

December2012 wrote: »

Can anybody find a good image of the blanchardstown route? Particularly the Dublin 15 end?

I don't think an exact route has been determined, however on the face of it, there will be significant sharing between the brt vehicles and private cars on the Blanchardstown and Tallaght routes.

cgcsb

December2012 wrote: »

Can anybody find a good image of the blanchardstown route? Particularly the Dublin 15 end?

heres a basic

mackerski

cgcsb wrote: »

heres a basic

They'd better have a good plan for how the bus will get from the Blanchardstown Centre onto the N3 via the Snugborough Road. Today that would leave you in gridlock as you negotiate one of the most contended junctions in the area. No amount of signal priority will fix that.

And the funny thing is that there is a freeflow loop onto the N3 citybound that they could readily use via the new contraflow bus lane at the NW corner of the centre.

But frankly, if the plan is to connect D15 to the city centre, and ignoring the fact that such buses would get snarled up at various parts of that route either way, the trick is to have a shuttle service to THE RAILWAY STATION that's already there on the Navan Road, having first tackled the poor timetable. Buses should complement rail, not compete with it.

cgcsb

Agreed. 2 or 3 bus routes connecting the sprawl to Castlenock, Coolmine and Clonsilla stations, with each service timed to meet trains and an improvement in train frequency on the line, would achieve the same objectives most probably at lower cost. However, this is Ireland so we'll build an expensive parallel bus route, that's bound to run into rush hour congestion at several parts of it's route. Obviously this is a better solution than 2 state owned branches of the same state owned company communicating with each other.

Dyr

Articulated busses dont really work in dublin

markpb

Bambi wrote: »

Articulated busses dont really work in dublin

They can if the route is well planned.

As an aside, I see that the NTA (or at least the Indo) are drawing similarities between what's being proposed here and the existing busway in Los Angeles, nicely ignoring the crucial fact that their busway was built atop an old train line (like our Green line was) giving them lots of segregation and a fairly direct route to start with.

Dyr

markpb wrote: »

They can if the route is well planned.

As an aside, I see that the NTA (or at least the Indo) are drawing similarities between what's being proposed here and the existing busway in Los Angeles, nicely ignoring the crucial fact that their busway was built atop an old train line (like our Green line was) giving them lots of segregation and a fairly direct route to start with.

they'd wanna plan a route with no bumps in the road so, be a bit like the james joyce challenge of walking across dublin without passing a pub

TheBandicoot

Personal opinion- D15 route doesn't really help me. I would have to take a normal bus to the centre to get it(~15 minutes at peak), then the BRT would only bring me to St Stephens Green, so I'd have to walk to get to work in the Docklands area. Versus just walking to the rail station and heading to the Docklands Station or Pearse.

The route also doesn't seem to connect with Luas Red line, or at least not easily.

EDIT: Also have no idea how they will fit this onto what is basically the current 39a route along the Navan Road/Prussia St without massive disruption and closing stretches off to private cars and removing bus lanes for Dublin Buses. As long as the alignment can be upgraded to a light rail route in future I suppose it is worth doing.

Dyr

this might be headbanger stuff, but something like a state version of the Uber car share program (minus the corporate suzzball factor) might work for peoples commutes. Be cheaper to implement than infrastructure changes anyway. Offer tax credits for each lift given or something similar.

ArmaniJeanss

monument wrote: »

Rapid bus almost as fast as Metro North, says NTA
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-almost-as-fast-as-metro-north-says-nta-1.1676924


Rapid bus scheme for Dublin ‘could cut journey times by 40%’
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-scheme-for-dublin-could-cut-journey-times-by-40-1.1676911

"A “BRT only” lane may not be feasible in the city centre,but could be incorporated on major roads on the outer sections of the routes."

That line from the first link is fairly discouraging, there's little point in building something that does 3/4s of the journey at speed only to head into a major traffic black spot. I have a similar bus lane journey each morning where the 38B can whizz from Mulhuddart to Cabra in 20 minutes, only to spend the next 15 minutes crawling from Cabra to Phibsboro down the single lane Cabra Road.

If its a replacement for Metros or Luas's then it should be like them for the whole journey.

LXFlyer

Plans of routes are due to be published on February 17th per the Irish Times today.

Jack Noble

Here's what the NTA had to say about BRT in its Draft Integrated Implementation plan for Dublin 2013-2018.

6.7.2 Analysis
The Authority published areport in October 2012, “Bus Rapid Transit - Core
Dublin Network”, setting out two cross city routes for development as BRT schemes.

These are:
Blanchardstown to N11 (UCD);
and
Clongriffin to Tallaght.

The report recommended the progression of these two routes with further work being required to establish the exact routes and terminal points. In addition, that report also examined the potential for BRT to serve the Swords/ Airport to City Centre corridor. It identified that while BRT does not have sufficient capacity to serve this link over the longer term, it would provide
an interim transport solution in the shorter term, pending the development of
a higher capacity rail solution, such as a metro, on this corridor. It would complement any rail-based solution in the long term, and continue to perform strongly in terms of passenger usage. Further work carried out since the publication of that report has confirmed the feasibility and likely usage of a BRT from Swords/Airport to City Centre.

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Draft-Intergrated-Implemation-Plan-2013-2018.pdf

Page 30

When you examine the 2012 study Bus Rapid Transit - Core Dublin Network document from the NTA, it has this to say about demand on the Swords-Airport-City Centre line:

The AM peak passenger loads on the Swords to Tallaght BRT service are given in Figure 37 and Figure 38.
From Figure 37, it can be seen that demand in the Base Year AM peak will likely be strong in this direction, with a peak lineflow of approximately 3,500 passengers at Drumcondra. This far exceeds the capacity of a 15vph service and is also very close to the ultimate capacity of 3,600 ppdph. In the absence of Metro North, the 2030 Current Infrastructure scenario shows a peak
lineflow of approximately 5,900 at St. Patricks College. This far exceeds the ultimate capacity of 3,600ppdph.
The 2030 draft NTA Strategy scenario shows a lower level of demand for the service, which is due primarily to the presence of Metro North in this scenario. In this case the peak lineflow is approximately 4,000, again at St. Patricks College. This also exceeds the ultimate capacity of 3,600ppdph.

In the opposite direction (Figure 38), all scenarios show a demand for BRT that will again exceed the service capacity of 15 vph and 20 vph. In both the Base Year and 2030 NTA Strategy scenarios the peak lineflow exceeds 3,000 ppdph at approximately 3,100ppdph and 3,300ppdph respectively but are below the ultimate capacity of the BRT system, while the 2030 Current Infrastructure scenario has a peak lineflow of approximately 4,200 at St. Stephen’s Green.
It is on the northern section of this corridor – between Swords and the City Centre – that the high levels of demand arise. The southern section – Tallaght to City Centre – is within BRT capacity. This section of the corridor is common to the Clongriffin to Tallaght proposal which is dealt with in subsequent paragraphs. Overall, the link between the city centre and Swords
has demand levels that exceed the capacity of a moderate capacity BRT system, in the longer term. While BRT may provide an interim partial transport solution in the shorter term, a higher capacity rail solution, such as a metro system, will ultimately be required on this corridor. In light of this, the Swords to City Centre BRT section has not been progressed to the later costing and appraisal sections of this feasibility study report.


http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Bus-Rapid-Transit-Core-Network-Report.pdf

Pages 53 and 54

So, according to the NTA's own study in 2012, A Swords-City Centre BRT does not have the capacity to cope with peak demand from day one - and thus it was not progressed to more detailed study.

The NTA also tells us that such a Swords-CC BRT would only be an 'interim' solution pending the construction in the longer-term of a higher capacity rail system, ie Metro North.

Yet now the Irish Times tells us the NTA is going to proceed to planning with a BRT line it only two years ago deemed not capable of meeting demand.

So why has something that did not meet projected demand and deemed not feasible to proceed to planning in 2012 suddenly become feasible in 2014?

And why has the Irish Times failed to point out these rather important points?

It took me a few minutes to find and read the relevant documents on the NTA website - could the IT reporter not have done the same?

Copyerselveson

Jack Noble wrote: »

Here's what the NTA had to say about BRT in its Draft Integrated Implementation plan for Dublin 2013-2018.



When you examine the 2012 study Bus Rapid Transit - Core Dublin Network document from the NTA, it has this to say about demand on the Swords-Airport-City Centre line:



So, according to the NTA's own study in 2012, A Swords-City Centre BRT does not have the capacity to cope with peak demand from day one - and thus it was not progressed to more detailed study.

The NTA also tells us that such a Swords-CC BRT would only be an 'interim' solution pending the construction in the longer-term of a higher capacity rail system, ie Metro North.

Yet now the Irish Times tells us the NTA is going to proceed to planning with a BRT line it only two years ago deemed not capable of meeting demand.

So why has something that did not meet projected demand and deemed not feasible to proceed to planning in 2012 suddenly become feasible in 2014?

And why has the Irish Times failed to point out these rather important points?

It took me a few minutes to find and read the relevant documents on the NTA website - could the IT reporter not have done the same?

You would think so. Unless they are planning to have dedicated bus only streets in the city centre this is a very poor substitute for a rail based transport solution for Swords etc.

Jack Noble

Copyerselveson wrote: »

You would think so. Unless they are planning to have dedicated bus only streets in the city centre this is a very poor substitute for a rail based transport solution for Swords etc.

The more I look at this, the more it appears to be the NTA delivering a political project to a political timetable and a political budget.

It smacks of a short-term scheme so ministers can say 'Look - we're doing something' and also giving them a ribbon to cut on a shiny something - without any considerations for the medium to long-term.

What I really can't get my head around is that in the DTO's Platform for Change study of 2000, a 'metro' was deemed necessary to serve the Sword-airport-city centre corridor because LRT/Luas did not have the capacity to serve the projected demand.

In PFC, the population of the GDA in 2016 was estimated at 1.75 million. In the 2011 Census, the actual GDA population was 1.85m.

But somehow, what required a metro in 2000 - the Sword-airport-CC-Tallaght route - can now be served by a BRT with one third the capacity.

Can someone please explain this to me because it doesn't compute in my head.

cgcsb

Jack Noble wrote: »

The more I look at this, the more it appears to be the NTA delivering a political project to a political timetable and a political budget.

It smacks of a short-term scheme so ministers can say 'Look - we're doing something' and also giving them a ribbon to cut on a shiny something - without any considerations for the medium to long-term.

What I really can't get my head around is that in the DTO's Platform for Change study of 2000, a 'metro' was deemed necessary to serve the Sword-airport-city centre corridor because LRT/Luas did not have the capacity to serve the projected demand.

In PFC, the population of the GDA in 2016 was estimated at 1.75 million. In the 2011 Census, the actual GDA population was 1.85m.

But somehow, what required a metro in 2000 - the Sword-airport-CC-Tallaght route - can now be served by a BRT with one third the capacity.

Can someone please explain this to me because it doesn't compute in my head.

The nta still concludes that brt has insufficient capacity to serve swords, however it is proposed as an interim measure. In other words its political

Jack Noble

cgcsb wrote: »

The nta still concludes that brt has insufficient capacity to serve swords, however it is proposed as an interim measure. In other words its political

Indeed. Thing is, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar in 2020 may end up cursing some of Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar's decisions of 2011-2014.

The IT somehow missed out on that 'insufficient capacity' bit from the NTA's own studies.

Are there no editors in Tara St capable of asking basic questions of reporters?

Or was it deliberately ignored?

Godge

cgcsb wrote: »

heres a basic

This does not make any sense at all.

It essentially is the same as getting the train from Clonsilla/Coolmine/Castleknock to Broombridge, switching to the Luas and going to St. Stephen's Green.

If the bus is faster, why are we building the Luas as far as Broombridge?

MrDerp

cgcsb wrote: »

The nta still concludes that brt has insufficient capacity to serve swords, however it is proposed as an interim measure. In other words its political

The thing is though, it might still represent a reasonable medium term strategy, even if it is of insufficient capacity from day one.

Take an example of Vancouver

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vancouver_SkyTrain_Map.svg

I lived in Vancouver during 2004, before the Canada Line was built. There was a similar system called the B-Line which ran along Broadway, right from UBC in the extreme West suburbs over into East Vancouver and beyond. In between, it connected with the Skytrain at Commercial drive.

It was jammers. No matter what time of the day you got on it, it was jammed for most of the journey. But that never stopped people using it.

Now, it connected, in turn with another similar high-frequency, fewer stops, bus line running south to Richmond, which in turn connected with a high frequency shuttle running west from the area roughly around Bridgeport on the above map to YVR airport.

Sure, everyone bemoaned the lack of a skytrain to the airport, but everyone heavily used the bus corridors to get there. The bendy buses servicing the airport (not the B-line) were very frequent and had extra room given over to standing and luggage.

It was under capacity for the demand for airport transfers, but that doesn't mean it was a bad idea. Then, a full 24 years after the Expo line opened, there was finally a sky train to YVR.

I know Vancouver is a very different animal, with its grids and what have you, but the principles remain the same. Prioritize buses and get out and enforce it.

Most people hate a buses, but a good service can work well. You just need smart transfer points, with adequate shelter. Anyone who's been inbound on the red line Luas as it pulls up to Heuston station in the morning will tell you - there's more than enough people who are willing to use a crowded service.

It's the least desirable solution but to be honest its the best we're likely to get in the next few years, as an interim solution.

cgcsb

Jack Noble wrote: »

Indeed. Thing is, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar in 2020 may end up cursing some of Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar's decisions of 2011-2014.

The IT somehow missed out on that 'insufficient capacity' bit from the NTA's own studies.

Are there no editors in Tara St capable of asking basic questions of reporters?

Or was it deliberately ignored?

of that I am unsure but it seems dishonest of the times to present brt as something that is almost the same as metro at a fraction of the cost while ignoring the massive capacity gap between the two. The article only compares the two on journey time. I might add that a 35 min journey time will not be possible, considering the bottle neck in santry. I suspect most Joe publics might now see brt as some sort of viable alternative to metro.

cgcsb

Godge wrote: »

This does not make any sense at all.

It essentially is the same as getting the train from Clonsilla/Coolmine/Castleknock to Broombridge, switching to the Luas and going to St. Stephen's Green.

If the bus is faster, why are we building the Luas as far as Broombridge?

the bus will be slower, the old cabra road section can take 15 mins to complete in rush hour

Jack Noble

cgcsb wrote: »

of that I am unsure but it seems dishonest of the times to present brt as something that is almost the same as metro at a fraction of the cost while ignoring the massive capacity gap between the two. The article only compares the two on journey time. I might add that a 35 min journey time will not be possible, considering the. Bottle neck in santry. I suspect most Joe publics might now see brt as some sort of viable alternative to metro.

There is an anti-metro agenda in the IT and anything that contradicts or undermines that agenda simply does not get reported.

'Dishonest' doesn't cover it at this stage.