Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

AngryLips

strassenwo!f wrote: »

OCD - where's that?
stn - are you sending a text?
box - should be "boxes".

So condescending :rolleyes:

The problem is that if Metro North is left on the shelf for any period of time then the chances are, whenever the country is in a position to go ahead with it, the requirements will most likely be revised and a new plan developed. This would be fairly consistent with the history of transport infrastructure planning in this city.

You only need to look back to 2001 to see that Metro North wasn't even part of the transport agenda for Dublin as recently as that.

cgcsb

robd wrote: »

If their's any sanity in ABP, they'll stipulate that the Luas Extension should not run up O'Connell Street at all, due to extensive disruption that works will cause, the historic nature of the street and the silliness of ripping of a street that was completely relaid to a high standard (materials wise, e.g. granite) only a few years ago. It will also cause havic to current public transport services (bus) which make extensive use of street.

The Luas should run up 1 street not 2, as 2 streets is twice the disruption. So Malborough Street is the only sane option IMO.

the bridge costs 80mil. There is an existing, very wide bridge more than capable of accommodating it within spitting distance. However Marlborough st is more convenient for changing at the abbey st stop, also it would mean less disruption and might spark a much needed regeneration of Marlborough and Hawkins streets.

cgcsb

strassenwo!f wrote: »

For one who is accusing me of sloppy thinking, you might look at yourself first:

I made no such accusation

strassenwo!f wrote: »

OCD - where's that?
stn - are you sending a text?
box - should be "boxes".

maybe you should focus on the issue rather than pontificating on spelling and grammar.

bk

cgcsb wrote: »

the bridge costs 80mil. There is an existing, very wide bridge more than capable of accommodating it within spitting distance.

There is questionable, I've heard recent rumblings that O'Connell Bridge is in serious need of reinforcing and repair. That is is already carrying loads well beyond what it should be.

I hope that ABP will force them to change the route to the B option. Which has the LUAS BXD completely avoiding O'Connell St and College Green, instead going up and down Marlborough St and around the back of Trinity:

http://www.rpa.ie/Maps/Luas%20Line%20BX/Luas%20City%20Centre%20Link%20Up%20Line%20BX%20Route%20Option%20B.map.jpg

This has a number of advantages:
1) Completely avoids the problem of building over the station box locations for Metro North.
2) Avoids issues with wires and other unsightly poles etc. in front of our most important and historic buildings on O'Connell St and College Green
3) Maybe cheaper to build. While it is a longer route, it has one station less and it will allow for the sharing of plant, wiring poles, etc. on Marlborough St.
4) Definitely cheaper to the economy, as it will be far less invasive to the city then digging up and closing O'Connell St, O'Connell Bridge and College Green. With the negative knock on effect to buses, shops along these streets and tourism.
5) Will help with Metro North is being built as Luas BX can be used to provide transfers between bus services on the North and South Side of the city when Metro North construction eventually closes O'Connell St.
6) Added bonus of it integrating with the Dart at Pearse.

Frankly I think the current proposed route is the worst route possible and complete madness. The only reason I can think for it originally being chosen, was that it is so crazy, that the RPA hoped it would delay it's construction, to make sure it didn't effect the much more important Metro North product. Nothing else makes sense.

Route B is a vastly better option. It just makes far better sense on so many levels. Hopefully ABP will see this and make the right decision and force route B to be selected.

NuMarvel

bk wrote: »

Route B is a vastly better option. It just makes far better sense on so many levels. Hopefully ABP will see this and make the right decision and force route B to be selected.

Just curious, can ABP order a material change to the route like this if plans haven't been submitted?

AngryLips

AngryLips wrote: »

if Metro North is left on the shelf for any period of time then the chances are, whenever the country is in a position to go ahead with it, the requirements will most likely be revised and a new plan developed. This would be fairly consistent with the history of transport infrastructure planning in this city

I agree. I'm sick to the teeth of successive Irish government's shambolic, peacemeal transport planning with no sense of integration or long term investment.

A ten year transport strategy for Ireland (such as the now defunct transport 21) is a complete joke. Given that we've seen major projects like BXD and Metro North taking five to seven years of "planning" before a brick is laid on them, or worse, before they're "postponed" indefinitely, it's utterly pointless to expect any meaningful change to our transport system to occur in a ten year period. Our country needs a FIFTY year transport plan that will trancend the four to eight year term of our governments, and a step-by-step cross-party supported framework for getting to where we want to be in half a century instead of a decade. No more moving the goalposts every time there's an election.

We have one of the worst and most under-funded and over-utilised transport systems in Europe, a dreadful public transport system in our capital, and a congested and under funded urban road network stuffed with expensive, inefficient, environmentally unfriendly, over-taxed private cars, and it's all as a DIRECT result of our lack of long term planning and investment strategy.

It's all very well to say "we're broke" and kick the can down the road to the next government, but what's to stop them doing the same thing in 5-10 year's time? And in the meantime nothing gets done to improve our woeful transport network.

Short sightedness and lack of prudent planning throughout our government and public service has wrecked many aspects of life in this country for generations to come. A long term transport plan has to be put in place, along with a proper financial framework that involves earmarking revenue annually for real infrastructural investment in the long-term. If we don't get that, we'll never get anywhere. We'll be left going around in circles while politicians talk and public service officials spend taxpayer's money planning projects that never see the light of day and are cancelled as soon as there's a changing of the guard.

cgcsb

bk wrote: »

There is questionable, I've heard recent rumblings that O'Connell Bridge is in serious need of reinforcing and repair. That is is already carrying loads well beyond what it should be.

I hope that ABP will force them to change the route to the B option. Which has the LUAS BXD completely avoiding O'Connell St and College Green, instead going up and down Marlborough St and around the back of Trinity:

http://www.rpa.ie/Maps/Luas%20Line%20BX/Luas%20City%20Centre%20Link%20Up%20Line%20BX%20Route%20Option%20B.map.jpg

This has a number of advantages:
1) Completely avoids the problem of building over the station box locations for Metro North.
2) Avoids issues with wires and other unsightly poles etc. in front of our most important and historic buildings on O'Connell St and College Green
3) Maybe cheaper to build. While it is a longer route, it has one station less and it will allow for the sharing of plant, wiring poles, etc. on Marlborough St.
4) Definitely cheaper to the economy, as it will be far less invasive to the city then digging up and closing O'Connell St, O'Connell Bridge and College Green. With the negative knock on effect to buses, shops along these streets and tourism.
5) Will help with Metro North is being built as Luas BX can be used to provide transfers between bus services on the North and South Side of the city when Metro North construction eventually closes O'Connell St.
6) Added bonus of it integrating with the Dart at Pearse.

Frankly I think the current proposed route is the worst route possible and complete madness. The only reason I can think for it originally being chosen, was that it is so crazy, that the RPA hoped it would delay it's construction, to make sure it didn't effect the much more important Metro North product. Nothing else makes sense.

Route B is a vastly better option. It just makes far better sense on so many levels. Hopefully ABP will see this and make the right decision and force route B to be selected.

I agree with you, Marlborough st/Hawkins st is the preferable option in terms of less disruption, ease of construction, better red line connection and avoiding the OCS station box issue. In fact it'll be cheaper because it'll avoid the station box issue.

however in the short sighted view, it costs an extra 80mil, .....which we're paying anyway for the bridge in having the north and south bound tracks separated.

cgcsb

NuMarvel wrote: »

Just curious, can ABP order a material change to the route like this if plans haven't been submitted?

they did alter metro north, so I think they do have the power.

cgcsb

I would say the government will

-delay metro north for 6 years approx.
-rebrand it as Swords Luas or Blue Line luas
-replace the proposed cut and cover tunnel between DCU and M50 Ballymun ext. with surface track in the central reserve of Ballymun rd. to save €€€'s
-replace the deep bore tunnel under the airport with surface or elevated tracks to save a few €€€€'s

NuMarvel

cgcsb wrote: »

they did alter metro north, so I think they do have the power.

But those changes were to eliminate three propopsed stops, and to move the depot and park and ride facilities to other proposed stops, so they were still working within the application submitted by the RPA. Would they have the power to recommend an alternative route if the application didn't include details, drawings, etc of that route?

NuMarvel

cgcsb wrote: »

I would say the government will

-delay metro north for 6 years approx.
-rebrand it as Swords Luas or Blue Line luas
-replace the proposed cut and cover tunnel between DCU and M50 Ballymun ext. with surface track in the central reserve of Ballymun rd. to save €€€'s
-replace the deep bore tunnel under the airport with surface or elevated tracks to save a few €€€€'s

I'm goiong to go out and trademark those names, as well as LUAS Underground .

bk

I've just followed Route B via Google Street view and it seems to be an absolutely perfect route. Almost designed for LUAS, with a minimum of disruption to traffic.

Other turning Marlborough St into a LUAS only street (not a bad thing, pretty much only has a minor effect on Dublin Bus who use it to park up buses), most of the streets along the route are minimum four lanes wide and six lanes in some cases (including on street parking!!) and are one way, meaning they are way under utilised and could easily fit LUAS with a minimum impact on traffic.

Please someone stop this madness and make this change now. Either ABP, NTA or the government.

dynamick

bk wrote: »

http://www.rpa.ie/Maps/Luas%20Line%20BX/Luas%20City%20Centre%20Link%20Up%20Line%20BX%20Route%20Option%20B.map.jpg

This has a number of advantages:
1) Completely avoids the problem of building over the station box locations for Metro North.
2) Avoids issues with wires and other unsightly poles etc. in front of our most important and historic buildings on O'Connell St and College Green
3) Maybe cheaper to build. While it is a longer route, it has one station less and it will allow for the sharing of plant, wiring poles, etc. on Marlborough St.
4) Definitely cheaper to the economy, as it will be far less invasive to the city then digging up and closing O'Connell St, O'Connell Bridge and College Green. With the negative knock on effect to buses, shops along these streets and tourism.
5) Will help with Metro North is being built as Luas BX can be used to provide transfers between bus services on the North and South Side of the city when Metro North construction eventually closes O'Connell St.
6) Added bonus of it integrating with the Dart at Pearse.

Here's the RPA's comparison matrix from when they looked at different routes 5 years ago: http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Luas%20Line%20BX/BX%20News/BX%20News%20Letters/January%202007%20-%20Luas%20Line%20Bx%20Route%20Options%20New.pdf.pdf

The big negative about route B seems to be the journey time. As the route is 1km longer it takes 14 rather than 8 minutes to cross the city centre. Worse, the RPA warns that route B journey times will be unpredictable due to the length of roadspace shared with cars.

If I were standing at Stephen's Green I know I'd be reluctant to catch a tram that would take longer to cross the city than going on foot.

cgcsb

NuMarvel wrote: »

But those changes were to eliminate three propopsed stops, and to move the depot and park and ride facilities to other proposed stops, so they were still working within the application submitted by the RPA. Would they have the power to recommend an alternative route if the application didn't include details, drawings, etc of that route?

well during the design process, several route options were considered and ther was some design work on all of them. If they can tell the RPA to move the metro depot to a location that they haven't planned for, I don't see why they couldn't tell the RPA to move one track to a location the have planned for, at least to some extent.

cgcsb

dynamick wrote: »

Here's the RPA's comparison matrix from when they looked at different routes 5 years ago: http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Luas%20Line%20BX/BX%20News/BX%20News%20Letters/January%202007%20-%20Luas%20Line%20Bx%20Route%20Options%20New.pdf.pdf

The big negative about route B seems to be the journey time. As the route is 1km longer it takes 14 rather than 8 minutes to cross the city centre. Worse, the RPA warns that route B journey times will be unpredictable due to the length of roadspace shared with cars.

If I were standing at Stephen's Green I know I'd be reluctant to catch a tram that would take longer to cross the city than going on foot.

nobody would seriously support option B, the RPA were just filling up paper with that one, I think he's referring to option D, that was eliminated for some bizzar reason.

EDIT:

oh so he was, never mind.

What's wrong with option D?

Victor

Jack Noble wrote: »

Given the State contribution to Metro North PPP is rumoured to be between €700m and €1bn

More like €500m.

cgcsb wrote: »

80mil could be saved by abandoning the marlborough st section and the new bridge that comes with it.

It probably isn't anywhere like that amount of money. The bridge is needed anyway to improve bus services.

cgcsb wrote: »

a typically Irish, ah sure it'll be grand anyway attitude. The problem is that if not built before BXD, the OCD metro stn box will require that significant sections of BXD be ripped up and replaced at significant cost and disruption.

Obsessing much? :pac:

cgcsb wrote: »

the bridge costs 80mil. There is an existing, very wide bridge more than capable of accommodating it within spitting distance. However Marlborough st is more convenient for changing at the abbey st stop, also it would mean less disruption and might spark a much needed regeneration of Marlborough and Hawkins streets.

Where did you get this information from? Samuel Beckett Bridge cost €60 million, I can't see how Marlborough Street will cost even more. http://www.google.ie/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=samuel+beckett+bridge+cost+%E2%82%AC&pbx=1&oq=samuel+beckett+bridge+cost+%E2%82%AC&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=19999l19999l1l20257l1l1l1l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=1c4bee88b24f71b1&biw=1680&bih=892

NuMarvel wrote: »

Just curious, can ABP order a material change to the route like this if plans haven't been submitted?

They can order some change, but it would need to be largely consistent with the original application. They could of course refuse permission for certain elements, like they did with Metro North.

bk

dynamick wrote: »

The big negative about route B seems to be the journey time. As the route is 1km longer it takes 14 rather than 8 minutes to cross the city centre. Worse, the RPA warns that route B journey times will be unpredictable due to the length of roadspace shared with cars.

If I were standing at Stephen's Green I know I'd be reluctant to catch a tram that would take longer to cross the city than going on foot.

But you are looking at it from the point of view of LUAS BX, rather then LUAS BXD.

The reality very few people are going to pay to get from Grafton Street to Henry St on the Luas, it really isn't that far of a walk.

Looking at it from the point of view of LUAS BXD, of people coming in from far outside the city, then it the extra time makes little difference.

And I don't understand what they are saying about it sharing more roads with cars. While yes this is true, these are relatively quiet streets, due to being very wide and mostly one way, versus O'Connell St, O'Connell Bridge, Westmoreland Street and College Green!!! Come on these ar the busiest streets in the city!!

gjim

It's the worst of both worlds digging up both O'Connell and Marlborough streets at an estimated cost of 70m over some other options. My strong preference is route A but I can see that B has some advantages (the link with Dart at Pearse, for example) and think it far superior than option F which was only revealed after a long public consultation phase had finished; what was the point of wasting money on public consultation when the winning option could not even be commented on? I hope the government questions this extra spend; just pick option A or B and use the savings to extend the line a km or so.

DWCommuter

bk wrote: »

The reality very few people are going to pay to get from Grafton Street to Henry St on the Luas, it really isn't that far of a walk.

That really depends on your circumstances. Personally, with child in tow, its a no brainer. On my own its also a no brainer. Disabled/elderly passengers may also beg to differ. Public transport is about more than one individuals preference to walking.

Should have been done since day one. Its called joined up thinking. If you want a history lesson on why the lines weren't connected, let me know, but I'm sure you know already.

I find it amazing that time convinces people that stupid decisions are right. Maybe its the Irish way. Accept it, if its around long enough and forget about it, when the ineptitude has been forced down your throat.

Victor

bk wrote: »

The reality very few people are going to pay to get from Grafton Street to Henry St on the Luas, it really isn't that far of a walk.

Perhaps. but people will pay for Harcourt-Abbey Street or Dundrum-Heuston. They are less likely to pay to use the tram for Dundrum-Heuston if they have to walk in the middle.

NuMarvel

Victor wrote: »

Perhaps. but people will pay for Harcourt-Abbey Street or Dundrum-Heuston. They are less likely to pay to use the tram for Dundrum-Heuston if they have to walk in the middle.

In the case of both routes, passengers will have to walk a small distance to the Abbey stop to change trams for Heuston.

It's a pet peeve of mine that LUAS BXD is being billed as connecting the LUAS lines, which gives the impressions that trams on the Green Line can change to the Red Line, and vice versa. It won't so much connect the lines as just intersect at a few points.

Victor

NuMarvel wrote: »

In the case of both routes, passengers will have to walk a small distance to the Abbey stop to change trams for Heuston.

It's a pet peeve of mine that LUAS BXD is being billed as connecting the LUAS lines, which gives the impressions that trams on the Green Line can change to the Red Line, and vice versa. It won't so much connect the lines as just intersect at a few points.

they will be able to do that, but they are unlikely to do so operationally.

However, you have to admit a 100m walk is better than a 1km one. http://maps.google.ie/maps?saddr=Abbey+Street,+Dublin&daddr=Grafton+St&hl=en&sll=53.343122,-6.260748&sspn=0.020856,0.055747&geocode=FVYILgMds36g_ymzN_VWhA5nSDGY6ci2XHjTHw%3BFTXmLQMd_nag_w&mra=dme&mrsp=1&sz=15&dirflg=w&vpsrc=0&z=15

NuMarvel

Victor wrote: »

they will be able to do that, but they are unlikely to do so operationally.

However, you have to admit a 100m walk is better than a 1km one. http://maps.google.ie/maps?saddr=Abbey+Street,+Dublin&daddr=Grafton+St&hl=en&sll=53.343122,-6.260748&sspn=0.020856,0.055747&geocode=FVYILgMds36g_ymzN_VWhA5nSDGY6ci2XHjTHw%3BFTXmLQMd_nag_w&mra=dme&mrsp=1&sz=15&dirflg=w&vpsrc=0&z=15

I think I misunderstood your previous post. I thought you meant it in the context of comparing routes A and B for the BXD line. In the context of no BXD line vs any BXD line, then yes BXD wins hands down. Especially with the weather in this country!

AngryLips

I think the point is that the central routing was decided in the context of a line that terminated in the city centre (hence, the decision to go with a loop line around O'Connell Street and Marlborough Street made more sense). The time saving was important in order to cater for the type of north city centre to south city centre journeys that would make the line more viable.

Now what's under consideration is a cross city line where, in addition to the suburb to city centre journey types, there'll also be northside to southside cross city journey types. Good planning encourages these longer journey types over the short hop such as the south city centre to north city centre journey. The fact that BXD is cross city makes time saving on the central routing less significant a factor in the decision making process because the time saving will be marginal in the context these longer journeys. It also calls into question the logic of the O'Connell Street/Marlborough Street loop.

cgcsb

AngryLips wrote: »

I think the point is that the central routing was decided in the context of a line that terminated in the city centre (hence, the decision to go with a loop line around O'Connell Street and Marlborough Street made more sense). The time saving was important in order to cater for the type of north city centre to south city centre journeys that would make the line more viable.

Now what's under consideration is a cross city line where, in addition to the suburb to city centre journey types, there'll also be northside to southside cross city journey types. Good planning encourages these longer journey types over the short hop such as the south city centre to north city centre journey. The fact that BXD is cross city makes time saving on the central routing less significant a factor in the decision making process because the time saving will be marginal in the context these longer journeys. It also calls into question the logic of the O'Connell Street/Marlborough Street loop.

whatever way you look at it, a routing via Pearse station is a non runner. The only benefit is a connection to Pearse this is irrelevant though because the proposed BXD stop at trinity is a 3min walk from Tara St DART. Running BXD entirely down Marlborough st is my preferred option because of the saving on disruption. It would also add about 10 minutes to the journey time and it'll frustrate passengers. It'd also add an extra km of track and overhead wires to the price tag.

What's the point of it?

bk

Thank you so much AngryLips for explaining exactly what I was trying to say.

DWCommuter I'm not saying the lines shouldn't have been connected up from the start, of course they should be, nor am I saying that people won't use LUAS as a cross city service. What I am saying is that this route was selected under the requirements of LUAS BX, but I believe the requirements of LUAS BXD are quiet different from LUAS BX.

The primary objective of LUAS BX was to just connect the two lines and get people from one side of the city to the other. Under these circumstances then of course journey time is important.

However under LUAS BXD this becomes the secondary objective, the primary objective becomes getting people into and out of the city from the suburbs. For such passengers, an extra 6 minutes is terribly important.

Actually under the context of LUAS BXD, the RPA will actually want to discourage short hop inner city travel, as they do on the Red Line with more expensive short journey tickets (per mile). So the extra journey time will actually be an advantage.

cgcsb again the advantages of Route B are:
1) Avoids O'Connell St, therefore avoiding the cost of either having to create the Metro North station now, or dig the LUAS all up again in a few years time.
Either will make Route F far more expensive then Route B.
2) Avoids the issue of wires in front of our must historical buildings.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if An Board Pleanala rule that they have to go wireless for Route F. If this happens, then Route F will become much more expensive then route B which would completely avoid this issue.
3) Integrates with the DART literally outside the door of Pearse Station. This is true integration. A 5 to 6 minute walk (it definitely isn't 3 minutes) from Tara to Trinity isn't integration.
4) Will cause much less chaos and disruption to the city in terms of traffic and buses, then digging up most of O'Connell St, Bridge, Westmoreland St and College Green. This will just be mayhem and will have to be done all over again when Metro North is eventually built.

paulm17781

I always thought it should go by Pearse station, solely to integrate with the DART. Obviously DART underground would do this better but I don't think we'll see it.

monument

paulm17781 wrote: »

I always thought it should go by Pearse station, solely to integrate with the DART. Obviously DART underground would do this better but I don't think we'll see it.

Oh, whatever about Metro, we likely are going to see Dart Underground in the future. Utilising the Kildare line four tracking and the other lines depends on it.

Cool Mo D

I'm sorry, but 15 minutes to get from the Green to O'Connell street is ridiculous. If anything long distance commuters will be much more sensitive to an extra 5 minutes than short distance journeys, since the crawl through the city will contrast so badly with the decent speed north of Broadstone and south of Harcourt.
Also, the short distance trips will be shoppers, who are not watching the clock, and long distance will be regular commuters who actually care about how long it takes to get to work.

If necessary, send the Luas up and down Marlborough street, but sending it to Pearse makes no sense unless the plan is to run it down Tara street, and Butt bridge before meeting the Red line at Beresford Place and taking over the terminus at Connolly. That makes it hard to continue the line to Broadstone though.

The correct answer is to go ahead and build BXD with accommodations for metro north in the future. Whatever disadvantages it has are minor compared with the consequences of introducing more changes, and delaying the project for years.

dynamick

See also chapter 6 of this document for a discussion of route alternatives.
http://www.dublinluasbroombridge.ie/Downloads/EIS/BXD_EIS_Book_1/Luas%20Broombridge_EIS_Book_1_Part_1_(Chapters_1-7).pdf

Hardwiring in a 1km diversion into the main cross city route would be crazy. Dublin buses and other traffic have been hampered in the city centre by slow and variable running speeds for years. With priority signalling and dedicated roadspace, Luas might finally provide short predictable north-south cross city journey times. No mean feat. Any passenger will tell you that a bus from Parnell square to the Green could take 45 mins on a 'bad day' but 14 minutes on a good one. That kind of variability leads people to give up on buses and has left o'connell street flooded with near empty vehicles trundling along at walking pace.