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

mickmmc

The reality is: at the end of the day it is a political decision to grant funding to NTA for Swords BRT.

I read last year that, with regard to implementing Network Direct for Swords, the Managing Director of Dublin Bus said bus services for Swords were complex due to the various bus routes operating in the area. DB understand the difficulties in trying to make any changes.
Do the NTA?

Operating a BRT service on Swords bypass is not going to meets for public transport in Swords Main Street. Are people going to carry bags etc from Pavilions shopping centre to the bypass when existing bus services stop outside the door? Even Swords Express operates via Malahide Road to access Pavilions.

The BRT is next to useless for anyone living in Rivervalley, which is served by the 41C.

The BRT stop for the Airport is outside ALSAA. That is at least a 5-8 min walk to Terminal 2 and longer for terminal 1. Realistically, a shuttle service will be required from ALSAA to the Airport, which is a joke.

There is a new town planned between Swords and Rolestown (41B route). Again, the BRT is next to useless for passengers for that area.

BRT is of little benefit to people living in Hollywell, Kinsealy and Drynam.

In my opinion a BRT for Swords is a white elephant.

LXFlyer

mickmmc wrote: »

The reality is: at the end of the day it is a political decision to grant funding to NTA for Swords BRT.

I read last year that, with regard to implementing Network Direct for Swords, the Managing Director of Dublin Bus said bus services for Swords were complex due to the various bus routes operating in the area. DB understand the difficulties in trying to make any changes.
Do the NTA?

Operating a BRT service on Swords bypass is not going to meets for public transport in Swords Main Street. Are people going to carry bags etc from Pavilions shopping centre to the bypass when existing bus services stop outside the door? Even Swords Express operates via Malahide Road to access Pavilions.

The BRT is next to useless for anyone living in Rivervalley, which is served by the 41C.

The BRT stop for the Airport is outside ALSAA. That is at least a 5-8 min walk to Terminal 2 and longer for terminal 1. Realistically, a shuttle service will be required from ALSAA to the Airport, which is a joke.

There is a new town planned between Swords and Rolestown (41B route). Again, the BRT is next to useless for passengers for that area.

BRT is of little benefit to people living in Hollywell, Kinsealy and Drynam.

In my opinion a BRT for Swords is a white elephant.

Firstly people using Bus Eireann route 101 manage to walk to/from Swords bypass easily enough, so I don't think that is a huge issue. This is about providing rapid transit - that won't happen if you send it along Swords Main Street. Realistically there will still be normal buses operating along Swords Main Street albeit at a lower frequency.

Secondly there is planned to be a separate BRT route to the airport and by that I mean the airport campus - I don't know why you think it will terminate at ALSAA.

The major failing I see with this plan is the lack of Park & Ride facilities to facilitate other parts of Swords. We also don't know whether feeder buses will be part of the plan.

The difficulties with implementing changes to the subsidised bus networks linking Swords with the city lie primarily with the fact that there is a significant private operator serving the town.

But again, people need to realise that this is not just about serving Swords. It's about serving the entire Swords Road QBC and all the areas along that road.

Carawaystick

lxflyer wrote: »

Firstly people using Bus Eireann route 101 manage to walk to/from Swords bypass easily enough

Or because they have to. I don't think the 101 takes people from Swords south though.

lxflyer wrote: »

The major failing I see with this plan is the lack of Park & Ride facilities to facilitate other parts of Swords. We also don't know whether feeder buses will be part of the plan.

These are serious failings. It should be reasonably simple to balance a route from Drynam to Rivervalley with an interchange at Airside/Boroimhe - i.e. have a route the same time either side of the r132. The frequency of the feeder would need to be high to have short dwell times for interchange

lxflyer wrote: »

The difficulties with implementing changes to the subsidised bus networks linking Swords with the city lie primarily with the fact that there is a significant private operator serving the town.

The way the private service is non accessible probably further reduces any pso related compromises for a swords express transport to the city centre.

LXFlyer

Carawaystick wrote: »

Or because they have to. I don't think the 101 takes people from Swords south though.

I didn't say it did take people from Swords south. Really this part of your post is really pedantic and misses the point entirely. What does it matter what direction people are travelling?

A reasonable number of people use the 101 to get to Swords from north of Swords. The point I was making was that those people manage to cope with walking to/from the by-pass where the 101 stops.

The walk from the Pavillions to the by-pass is 4 minutes - suggesting that people won't be able to do that (which is what the previous poster was doing) when they manage to do it all over Dublin is just ridiculous.

end of the road

lxflyer wrote: »

I didn't say it did take people from Swords south. Really this part of your post is really pedantic and misses the point entirely. What does it matter what direction people are travelling?

A reasonable number of people use the 101 to get to Swords from north of Swords. The point I was making was that those people manage to cope with walking to/from the by-pass where the 101 stops.

The walk from the Pavillions to the by-pass is 4 minutes - suggesting that people won't be able to do that (which is what the previous poster was doing) when they manage to do it all over Dublin is just ridiculous.

they do it because they have to. doesn't mean they manage or are okay with it, rather then they may have no other option if they want to use public transport. if i knew i had to walk for a good bit off a bus to get to the airport i wouldn't bother with it.

syklops

The point I was making was that those people manage to cope with walking to/from the by-pass where the 101 stops.

This sums up the Irish attitude to public transport perfectly. "Sure, they can just walk the extra distance".

It amazed me getting the BART in San Francisco last week from the Airport. You come out of baggage claim go down one flight of steps and the Bart Station is right there inside the same building. You just go through the barrier and get into the car. There was no 4-5 minute walk to get the next transport link

LXFlyer

syklops wrote: »

This sums up the Irish attitude to public transport perfectly. "Sure, they can just walk the extra distance".

It amazed me getting the BART in San Francisco last week from the Airport. You come out of baggage claim go down one flight of steps and the Bart Station is right there inside the same building. You just go through the barrier and get into the car. There was no 4-5 minute walk to get the next transport link

So do you think BRT could in any way shape or form be "rapid" if it went through Swords Main Street?

As I said above in all likelihood a regular bus (albeit at a lower frequency) will still serve the Main Street.

This project is about providing a rapid form of public transport along the entire corridor - people need to get that into their heads.

Aard

BRT could be "rapid" through Swords Main St if modelled on Dutch BRT e.g. In Haarlem. Cars would have to be largely removed which apparently is not politically expedient.

LXFlyer

Aard wrote: »

BRT could be "rapid" through Swords Main St if modelled on Dutch BRT e.g. In Haarlem. Cars would have to be largely removed which apparently is not politically expedient.

The by-pass has sufficient space to facilitate the services while causing minimum disruption to everyone else.


Routing it through the middle of Swords village would cause massive disruption and frankly is unnecessary.


I really don't see what the issue that some posters seem to have about this, bearing in mind that there would still be a bus service through the village..

cgcsb

end of the road wrote: »

they do it because they have to. doesn't mean they manage or are okay with it, rather then they may have no other option if they want to use public transport. if i knew i had to walk for a good bit off a bus to get to the airport i wouldn't bother with it.

It's a very short walk. In Dublin airport you'll typically have a 20 minute walk to your point of departure anyway.

LXFlyer

Just to clarify - I am talking about the fact that BRT will operate along Swords by-pass, which is a short walk from the main street.


I don't know why Dublin Airport is being brought into this - it will have it's own BRT route which will serve the airport itself.

cgcsb

If we had metro in Swords as planned, it'd be very practical to have feeder buses connecting it to most of North Dublin. However the notion of having feeder buses connecting to a slightly improved(at great cost) Xpresso service that will be operating above capacity the day it opens is nonsensical.

Can you imagine people getting 'feeder buses' to a bus stop with several buses going past them full?

BRT is great but it's certainly not an alternative to high capacity rail, of which there is unfortunately very little in Dublin.

Aard

lxflyer wrote: »

The by-pass has sufficient space to facilitate the services while causing minimum disruption to everyone else.


Routing it through the middle of Swords village would cause massive disruption and frankly is unnecessary.


I really don't see what the issue that some posters seem to have about this, bearing in mind that there would still be a bus service through the village..

I myself don't prefer or disprefer BRT through Main St versus the bypass. Just saying that it is possible to route it down Main St, and certainly not unprecedented with BRT/BHLS internationally.

schemingbohemia

syklops wrote: »

This sums up the Irish attitude to public transport perfectly. "Sure, they can just walk the extra distance".

It amazed me getting the BART in San Francisco last week from the Airport. You come out of baggage claim go down one flight of steps and the Bart Station is right there inside the same building. You just go through the barrier and get into the car. There was no 4-5 minute walk to get the next transport link

This ties in with the idiotic comment the other day for a spur to Tara Street from Luas CrossCity. There is nothing wrong with a 4 - 5 minute walk! This type of attitude is actually what's wrong here, lambasting every proposed development because it means someone may have to walk a few minutes.

AngryLips

schemingbohemia wrote: »

This ties in with the idiotic comment the other day for a spur to Tara Street from Luas CrossCity.

You realise I meant that as a joke right?

LXFlyer

AngryLips wrote: »

You realise I meant that as a joke right?

I'd have to say it appeared to me that you were being serious - humour doesn't always come across on message boards.

schemingbohemia

AngryLips wrote: »

You realise I meant that as a joke right?

No I didn't actually. The lack of an emoji or whatever they're called made me think you were serious.

end of the road

schemingbohemia wrote: »

This ties in with the idiotic comment the other day for a spur to Tara Street from Luas CrossCity. There is nothing wrong with a 4 - 5 minute walk! This type of attitude is actually what's wrong here, lambasting every proposed development because it means someone may have to walk a few minutes.

if removing a long walk encourages more use then it should be considered where possible

AlekSmart

schemingbohemia wrote: »

This ties in with the idiotic comment the other day for a spur to Tara Street from Luas CrossCity. There is nothing wrong with a 4 - 5 minute walk! This type of attitude is actually what's wrong here, lambasting every proposed development because it means someone may have to walk a few minutes.

Few people realize,or perhaps refuse to realize,that Cycling AND Walking are integral elements of ALL Urban Development & Planning processes these days.

http://dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/RoadsandTraffic/Traffic/Documents/FINALFINALFAQS.pdf

Will these proposed changes have an impact on the city’s pedestrian network?

The need to grow the city’s public transport network will result in increased pedestrian flows in the city centre.
This will necessitate additional footpath space. A core pedestrian network, as outlined in the Dublin City Development Plan,is proposed. This would prioritise the ease of pedestrian movement and activity.

The Study proposes:

Develop a defined strategic pedestrian network in the city centre
An image can be
viewed on
http://www.dublincity.ie/TransportStudy

Wider footpaths at key locations and pedestrian priority at junctions

Link key Dublin tourist destinations into a pedestrian network

Ensure the needs of mobility impaired and disabled pedestrians are considered

Good signage, surfaces and lighting

The removal of unnecessary street clutter

Develop pedestrian friendly areas of open public space, as identified in the city’s Public Realm Strategy,where possible

Perhaps the first element of this which will be visible to all,will be the rationalization of Bus Stops within the City Centre post BXD.

KD345

One of the major flaws of the NTA with this project has been how BRT has been presented on its own with no other information on the current services it will affect.

If you look through the posts on this thread, and on the replies to the consultation, it's clear that many people are unsure of what impact BRT will have on existing bus routes. While the NTA does briefly reference changes to other bus services, there really should be full information provided as detailed as the BRT. The Swords area should be viewed as one transport project, to include BRT and regular bus services (Dublin Bus, Airport Services, Swords Express and Xpresso etc).

For many people in Swords and surrounding areas, they're actually quite happy with their bus service, so to suddenly be told BRT is coming near you and may impact on your current service can cause concern and confusion.

I would really like to think that the NTA have full plans designed for all bus services in the area, not just BRT. If they do, then why not make them public so everyone can see how their routes are being affected. Maybe their proposals will improve services for some, maybe they won't, but at least make it clear what their changes involve.

Right now, people in Swords are looking at a really detailed map of a fancy BRT with great glossy images, but really, the questions they want answered are simple things, like, if the 41 will still serve the Airport, will the 33A/B run to the Airport, what impact will BRT have on the Swords Express and 41X, what links will there be to Swords Village etc.

I know it might seem like a lot of information at an early stage, but BRT isn't just about one route, it should be about all transport services and right now that's not too clear. I sometimes feel the people of Swords don't want to be short changed and who can blame them, they've been promised so many different things over the years that it's hard to know what is what. The NTA are responsible for all transport services in the area, so why not tell people what changes are involved now.

Inquitus

mickmmc wrote: »

The reality is: at the end of the day it is a political decision to grant funding to NTA for Swords BRT.

I read last year that, with regard to implementing Network Direct for Swords, the Managing Director of Dublin Bus said bus services for Swords were complex due to the various bus routes operating in the area. DB understand the difficulties in trying to make any changes.
Do the NTA?

Operating a BRT service on Swords bypass is not going to meets for public transport in Swords Main Street. Are people going to carry bags etc from Pavilions shopping centre to the bypass when existing bus services stop outside the door? Even Swords Express operates via Malahide Road to access Pavilions.

The BRT is next to useless for anyone living in Rivervalley, which is served by the 41C.

The BRT stop for the Airport is outside ALSAA. That is at least a 5-8 min walk to Terminal 2 and longer for terminal 1. Realistically, a shuttle service will be required from ALSAA to the Airport, which is a joke.

There is a new town planned between Swords and Rolestown (41B route). Again, the BRT is next to useless for passengers for that area.

BRT is of little benefit to people living in Hollywell, Kinsealy and Drynam.

In my opinion a BRT for Swords is a white elephant.

BRT is a waste of Space for Swords, huge expense for a service that offers little or nothing more than the existing Swords express.

LXFlyer

Inquitus wrote: »

BRT is a waste of Space for Swords, huge expense for a service that offers little or nothing more than the existing Swords express.

Again, this is NOT just about Swords. It's about the entire Swords Road corridor (Swords, Airport, Santry, Whitehall and Drumcondra) which (apart from Swords) Swords Express does not serve.

People have to get this notion that this is just about Swords and the Airport out of their heads.

AlekSmart

lxflyer wrote: »

Again, this is NOT just about Swords. It's about the entire Swords Road corridor (Swords, Airport, Santry, Whitehall and Drumcondra) which (apart from Swords) Swords Express does not serve.

People have to get this notion that this is just about Swords and the Airport out of their heads.

100% Pure True.

Swords Express is just that,essentially a Point to Point service and will remain so in the medium term.

The REAL focus of BRT and the associated alterations to other North County Dublin Bus Services,is the extensive County Development Plan for Fingal and environs.

Swiftway,is perhaps the very first occasion where a Public Transport focus has been Included as an integral part of the Planning Process....Long Long Overdue in Ireland,and VERY threatening to some elements of Local Administration in these areas.

Is it Progress ...?

DEFINITELY !!! :eek:

xper

Just looking at those plans recently released by Dublin City Council, I think this picture illustrates just how BRT is not a tram without rails, let alone a metro, but a much inferior transport system.

cgcsb

xper wrote: »

Just looking at those plans recently released by Dublin City Council, I think this picture illustrates just how BRT is not a tram without rails, let alone a metro, but a much inferior transport system.

The broken white line is quite alarming alright. Are cars going to be cutting accross/queing in the brt lane? certainly nowhere near light rail spec or even your average brt standard internationally.

schemingbohemia

end of the road wrote: »

if removing a long walk encourages more use then it should be considered where possible

How is a 5 minute walk "long"? Moving a route through or into an area with congestion issues just doesn't make sense to appease a small amount of people who won't walk 5 minutes. And the whole plan for these is to do it "where possible" the benefits and dis-benefits are weighed up you know, they're not doing it just for kicks.

loyatemu

cgcsb wrote: »

The broken white line is quite alarming alright. Are cars going to be cutting accross/queing in the brt lane? certainly nowhere near light rail spec or even your average brt standard internationally.

that pic is presumably from the recent proposal for the city centre - in that proposal there would be no private cars (or taxis for that matter) on Westmoreland St, so no real need to segregate the BRT.

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

that pic is presumably from the recent proposal for the city centre - in that proposal there would be no private cars (or taxis for that matter) on Westmoreland St, so no real need to segregate the BRT.

Not quite right. Cars could access Westmoreland Street via D'Olier Street and College Street as could taxis, but they would be fairly small in number I would imagine.

cgcsb

loyatemu wrote: »

that pic is presumably from the recent proposal for the city centre - in that proposal there would be no private cars (or taxis for that matter) on Westmoreland St, so no real need to segregate the BRT.

There'll still be cars using D'Olier/Westmoreland st as a work around and to access fleet st car park.

lucernarian

lxflyer wrote: »

Not quite right. Cars could access Westmoreland Street via D'Olier Street and College Street as could taxis, but they would be fairly small in number I would imagine.

Taxis?! Westmoreland Street?! Fairly small in number?! I very much doubt it.

loyatemu

lucernarian wrote: »

Taxis?! Westmoreland Street?! Fairly small in number?! I very much doubt it.

they won't be able to drive straight through from Dame Street so unless there's a rank on the street it won't be on the way to anywhere else, they'll have no reason to be there.

Aard

loyatemu wrote: »

they won't be able to drive straight through from Dame Street so unless there's a rank on the street it won't be on the way to anywhere else, they'll have no reason to be there.

Sounds a bit like the current state of the top of Grafton Street / Stephen's Green area wrt taxis.

LXFlyer

lucernarian wrote: »

Taxis?! Westmoreland Street?! Fairly small in number?! I very much doubt it.

The only available route would be the one described in my post above.

They won't be able to come from either Dame Street or Pearse Street.

I can't imagine that it would be anything like it is now as a result.

monument

cgcsb wrote: »

There'll still be cars using D'Olier/Westmoreland st as a work around and to access fleet st car park.

There have been at least one, if not two, draft designs of the street layot which show that the Westmoreland St access to to the Temple Bar section of Fleet St will be blocked off.

Telchak

monument wrote: »

There have been at least one, if not two, draft designs of the street layot which show that the Westmoreland St access to to the Temple Bar section of Fleet St will be blocked off.

The Metro North railway order had it that way too.

bk

cgcsb wrote: »

There'll still be cars using D'Olier/Westmoreland st as a work around and to access fleet st car park.

The same report also suggests moving the car parks out of the core "pedestrianised" city center, to larger facilities just outside the core city.

It doesn't go into details of which car parks will be moved or to where (I'm sure negotiations with car park owners will be required), but the Fleet Street car park is an obvious candidate. Having cars driven down Temple Bar is simple madness!

cgcsb

monument wrote: »

There have been at least one, if not two, draft designs of the street layot which show that the Westmoreland St access to to the Temple Bar section of Fleet St will be blocked off.

Really? what of the car park so? That's really interesting. If that happens it'd set a precedent that Brown Thomas could possibly be next.

AlekSmart

bk wrote: »

The same report also suggests moving the car parks out of the core "pedestrianised" city center, to larger facilities just outside the core city.

It doesn't go into details of which car parks will be moved or to where (I'm sure negotiations with car park owners will be required), but the Fleet Street car park is an obvious candidate. Having cars driven down Temple Bar is simple madness!

This is one HUGE issue,which has both framed and undermined Dublin Corporation/City Council policy for decades now.

Every single Traffic Plan for the City Centre has had buried deep within it a line or two about "maintaining access to Car Parks at all times".

Make no mistake,the High and Supreme Courts beckon knowingly at ANY City Authority daring to challenge these Car Park Providers !

cgcsb

bk wrote: »

The same report also suggests moving the car parks out of the core "pedestrianised" city center, to larger facilities just outside the core city.

It doesn't go into details of which car parks will be moved or to where (I'm sure negotiations with car park owners will be required), but the Fleet Street car park is an obvious candidate. Having cars driven down Temple Bar is simple madness!

I did read that but assumed it was fluff that'd be 'negotiated' away. Would love to see it happen though.

bk

AlekSmart wrote: »

Make no mistake,the High and Supreme Courts beckon knowingly at ANY City
Authority daring to challenge these Car Park Providers !

I wouldn't imagine it would be a CPO, rather a negotiation with them.

Either to convert the car park planning permission to be used for other, perhaps more profitable uses (retail/hotel/etc.), something Brown Thomas maybe very interested in.

Or a straight swap for another new multi-storey car park, a little further out (for instance in the case of the Drury Street Underground car park).

Yes there would be an element in this of buying off the owners, but I think it is a nettle that finally most be grasped.

Given that it is the NTA saying this rather then DCC, I think there well may be a lot more political will behind it this time.

AlekSmart

bk wrote: »

I wouldn't imagine it would be a CPO, rather a negotiation with them.

Either to convert the car park planning permission to be used for other, perhaps more profitable uses (retail/hotel/etc.), something Brown Thomas maybe very interested in.

Or a straight swap for another new multi-storey car park, a little further out (for instance in the case of the Drury Street Underground car park).

Yes there would be an element in this of buying off the owners, but I think it is a nettle that finally most be grasped.

Given that it is the NTA saying this rather then DCC, I think there well may be a lot more political will behind it this time.

Given the era in which virtually all of Dublin's Multi-Story car parks stem from,it will indeed be interesting to get a sense of the various leases,conditions and assorted other elements which developers of that time were facilitated with.

It is a nettle long overdue a good grasp,but as you suggest the Political will was never there....perhaps the reasons for that lack of will may become apparent via this current process.

A valid use for at least one of these locations would be a Taxi Holding point,where vehicles over and above On Street Rank capacity would be held.

The advances in CCTV in addition to GPS and other vehicle tracking systems now makes such marshalling far easier than before...and it would give the Taxi fraternity someplace to share anecdotes and relax...:D

Riskymove

cgcsb wrote: »

Really? what of the car park so? That's really interesting. If that happens it'd set a precedent that Brown Thomas could possibly be next.

if Fleet st is blocked off at Westmoreland street, flows could be redesigned to allow access form South Quays or Dame Street instead.

cgcsb

Riskymove wrote: »

if Fleet st is blocked off at Westmoreland street, flows could be redesigned to allow access form South Quays or Dame Street instead.

Unlikely, There's to be no private cars on college Green which means no private cars on a good stretch of Dame Street. The South quays will be under pressure to become more ped friendly given how traffic on the north quays will be greatly reduced. If traffic were to access the car park via Aston Place it'd mean cutting across several bus stops, not a very holistic approach.

lucernarian

Aard wrote: »

Sounds a bit like the current state of the top of Grafton Street / Stephen's Green area wrt taxis.

Exactly Aard, I find it hard to imagine somewhere as central as the likes of Westmoreland St. with an absence of taxis - unless there was no rank, official or otherwise.

Regarding the car parks, is there enough of a notice period that could be given to shut off private car access to a multi-story car park without compensation or a buyout being required? Twenty years perhaps? This isn't a solution for the Fleet Street one but perhaps worth looking at for long-term projects.

Riskymove

cgcsb wrote: »

Unlikely, There's to be no private cars on college Green which means no private cars on a good stretch of Dame Street. The South quays will be under pressure to become more ped friendly given how traffic on the north quays will be greatly reduced. If traffic were to access the car park via Aston Place it'd mean cutting across several bus stops, not a very holistic approach.

there are a number of roads from Dame street around central Bank etc well away for college green

Cars could go down the side of Blooms Hotel and turn onto fleet street with minimum impact

LXFlyer

lucernarian wrote: »

Exactly Aard, I find it hard to imagine somewhere as central as the likes of Westmoreland St. with an absence of taxis - unless there was no rank, official or otherwise.

Regarding the car parks, is there enough of a notice period that could be given to shut off private car access to a multi-story car park without compensation or a buyout being required? Twenty years perhaps? This isn't a solution for the Fleet Street one but perhaps worth looking at for long-term projects.

I didn't say that there would be no taxis, but if there is no through route other than coming from O'Connell Street or Burgh Quay around via D'Olier Street and College Street, then, coupled with the left turn ban onto Aston Quay, it's fairly inevitable that there will be a sizeable drop in taxi numbers passing along that street.


The current through routes from Pearse Street and College Green will be removed which account for most of the traffic.

lucernarian

lxflyer wrote: »

I didn't say that there would be no taxis, but if there is no through route other than coming from O'Connell Street or Burgh Quay around via D'Olier Street and College Street, then, coupled with the left turn ban onto Aston Quay, it's fairly inevitable that there will be a sizeable drop in taxi numbers passing along that street.


The current through routes from Pearse Street and College Green will be removed which account for most of the traffic.

I know you didn't. Still, I'd find their absence - or the absence of most of them, hard to imagine. The number of taxis currently seem to dwarf any other type of vehicle - private motorist, goods van, buses in that part of Dublin. It will have an impact but in a game where they might patiently wait half an hour or longer for a guaranteed fare from a rank rather than drive around, I can foresee a still substantial number taxis taking a circuitous route to reach the choicest spot for customers.

Carawaystick

Seems this will have a large impact on nightlife in Dublin, taxis will have to divert via Christchurch arch to get to O'Connell St from Wexford st.

Or will public transport run longer at night?

cgcsb

Carawaystick wrote: »

Seems this will have a large impact on nightlife in Dublin, taxis will have to divert via Christchurch arch to get to O'Connell St from Wexford st.

Or will public transport run longer at night?

Posters here are suggesting that we may get some 24 hour bus routes but that's going to be a challenge. On the one hand you have the taxi industry remaining competitive because their peek hours are hours when there is no public transport and the skeleton nitelink service has artificially inflated fares and no route/real time information available on line.

On the other hand you'll no doubt be getting grumbles from NBRU for rostering drivers on weekday nights. I suspect we'll be left without a night bus for a long time yet.

LXFlyer

cgcsb wrote: »

Posters here are suggesting that we may get some 24 hour bus routes but that's going to be a challenge. On the one hand you have the taxi industry remaining competitive because their peek hours are hours when there is no public transport and the skeleton nitelink service has artificially inflated fares and no route/real time information available on line.

On the other hand you'll no doubt be getting grumbles from NBRU for rostering drivers on weekday nights. I suspect we'll be left without a night bus for a long time yet.

There are already full agreements in place between management and unions at Dublin Bus for 24 hour working, but let's not get that in the way of a rant.