Luas in Waterford

Partizan

This is what I think shoudl happen regarding public transport to Waterford:

Commuter Rail:

Kilmacthomas - Waterford South
Stations at Kilmacthomas (P&R), Kilmeaden/Ballyduff (P&R), WIT Carriganore, Waterford South. 5 trains each way every day. 3 in the morning and 2 in evening.

Shuttle buses from Waterford South to Waterford Plunkett, Waterford Bus Station. Buses from Waterford South to city routes.

Clonmel - Waterford Plunkett
Stations at Clonmel, Kilsheelan, Carrick-on-Suir, Fiddown/Piltown, Waterford Plunkett. Regular trains at 2 hourly intervals to/from Clonmel & Limerick Junction. Link up with trains to/from Dublin. Shuttle buses to/from Waterford South, Bus Station and Tramore.

Wexford - Waterford Plunkett

All Intermediate Stations to/from Wexford. 2 hourly service from 06.30. Link up with trains to/from Dublin and Limerick Junction. Shuttle buses to/from Waterford South, Bus Station and Tramore

Bus:

Bus Lanes to be introduced in Waterford City. Regular bus services for city services and for services from Waterford to Tramore, Dungarvan, Dunmore East, Ballygunnar and Passage. Interconnecting buses to rail stations.

Only major costs would be reopening of line to Kilmac (allignment already there). Halts and loops at Kilmac, Kilmeaden, WIT Carriganore, new station at Waterford South on Bilberry side. 3-4 extra trains, 6-8 sets of 3 car 27k's and extra buses.

wellbutty

For me, step one would be mass pedestrianisation of the city center, possibly the area inside Gladstone Street, The Quay, The Mall, Parnell Street, Castle Street, Stephen Street. The exception would be deliveries and direct access to car parks.

This would then force people to look at alternatives. Then we can talk public transport. I think Park and rides with buses would suffice for a city of Waterford's size. Ferrybank, Newrath, Knockboy, Ballindud, Kilmeaden.

Trains and trams are expensive to build and maintain and in a city center that might employ 15000 people coming from all directions, I think it would be impossible to design a service that people would find interesting. Also, our city center is tiny and the thought of trams and dedicated bus lanes mixed up with car lanes is scary.

dayshah

Feck it, lets go the whole hog and get a 10 line metro

Also have an outdoors escalator up Patrick St. I'm fed up of having to walk up to Ballybricken.

dayshah

wellbutty wrote: »

Trains and trams are expensive to build and maintain and in a city center that might employ 15000 people coming from all directions, I think it would be impossible to design a service that people would find interesting. Also, our city center is tiny and the thought of trams and dedicated bus lanes mixed up with car lanes is scary.

Not as scary as bike lanes and bus lanes together. From the Quay to WIT is fairly broad. Just add 1.5m to the footpath on one side and make it a cycle-lane separated from the road. This would be safe for cyclists and take cars off the road.

Similarly around the old ring road.

kingstapler

WIT definetly. Mmm...well seen as this is all fanciful, maybe a circular route around the city, with sputs to WIT and the Ardkeen area. It would be ideal to have a spur linking the railway station as well but getting overhead wires onto a lifting bridge might present a bit of a challenge...

giles lynchwood

abouttobebanned wrote: »

Will someone address my bridge concerns...

Build a Martin Cullen tunnel under the river :cool:

merlante

giles lynchwood wrote: »

Build a Martin Cullen tunnel under the river :cool:

Yeah, because Cullen really bankrupted the country on Waterford investment...

Dum_Dum

giles lynchwood wrote: »

Build a Martin Cullen tunnel under the river :cool:

Yawn.

Can't mention any kind of investment in Waterford without Martin Cullen being brought up. People seem to think he brought a disproportionate amount of investment into Waterford; I wish he did - then all this labourious ridicule would be worth it.

merlante

dayshah wrote: »

Not as scary as bike lanes and bus lanes together. From the Quay to WIT is fairly broad. Just add 1.5m to the footpath on one side and make it a cycle-lane separated from the road. This would be safe for cyclists and take cars off the road.

Similarly around the old ring road.

I actually think that cycle lanes on footpaths are a disaster. I think you need the lanes to be on the road, like on the Old Kilmeaden rd. Even though motorists often disrespect cycle lanes on the road, there are not as bad as dog walkers, joggers, etc.

People who commute on a bike are pretty serious about getting somewhere and having to slow down for or go around random people wandering between the cycle lane and the footpath is pretty annoying and potentially dangerous.

Best solution is to have the cycle lanes on the road, but with a separator or curb of some kind. Ideally a few trees!

Cabaal

merlante wrote: »

Best solution is to have the cycle lanes on the road, but with a separator or curb of some kind. Ideally a few trees!

Fully agree, cycle lanes on footpaths are retarded and clearly thought out by people who don't cycle

bluesfan

Cabaal wrote: »

Fully agree, cycle lanes on footpaths are retarded and clearly thought out by people who don't cycle

or walk

dayshah

merlante wrote: »

Best solution is to have the cycle lanes on the road, but with a separator or curb of some kind. Ideally a few trees!

I think on-road with a barrier works. As for on footpath, do you use a bell? I'm fond of the on-path lane.

Personally I think having a no-car cyclelane on a road is like having a no-pi$$ing area in a swimming pool.

tonc76

IE and BE have no money to expand either service and will have no money for the foreseeable future. Both have been running at a loss for years at this stage.

The cycletrack along the Mall won't work either as in order to do this car parking spaces would be lost leading to a loss of revenue for WCC. Same applies to the Quay. There is also no room on Parnell St for a cycletrack so it would start and end on the Mall and as a result would not be used..

On road cycletracks are far more dangerous for the cyclist than off road. Segregated cycletracks/footpaths (white marking) only work if both cyclists and pedestrians know how to use them. Shared cycletracks/footpaths however are a disaster as no one knows who has "right of way".

dayshah

tonc76 wrote: »

The cycletrack along the Mall won't work either as in order to do this car parking spaces would be lost leading to a loss of revenue for WCC. Same applies to the Quay. There is also no room on Parnell St for a cycletrack so it would start and end on the Mall and as a result would not be used..

I can't see how you can say it 'won't work' when the only downside you point out is a reduction in parking spaces. That could be made up for elsewhere.

As for Parnell St., how wide do you think bikes are? Sure we lose a few car spaces, but its just about priorities.

tonc76

dayshah wrote: »

I can't see how you can say it 'won't work' when the only downside you point out is a reduction in parking spaces. That could be made up for elsewhere.

As for Parnell St., how wide do you think bikes are? Sure we lose a few car spaces, but its just about priorities.

It won't work because one of WCC's priorities is to generate revenue

merlante

tonc76 wrote: »

It won't work because one of WCC's priorities is to generate revenue

But sure the spaces removed can appear elsewhere. The council/Waterford Crystal/the government are building a large extension to the car park off Lombard st. as part of the new Waterford Crystal showroom/factory. These spaces with increase revenue. Having car parking on Mall has had its day, imho. Looks bad and it's not even easy or desirable to park there. The Mall should be the 'showey' st. of Waterford.

merlante

dayshah wrote: »

I think on-road with a barrier works. As for on footpath, do you use a bell? I'm fond of the on-path lane.

Personally I think having a no-car cyclelane on a road is like having a no-pi$$ing area in a swimming pool.

Speed limits are in the same category, but those get enforced don't they? All it would take would be a couple of penalty points, etc. for cars parked, or driving through, cycles lanes and people would learn the difference.

Besides, in countries that are better at these things, a small barrier or curb is put in to separate the two. In those places, I suspect that people actually put themselves in the mindset of the cyclist and say, would I feel comfortable cycling there giving such and such a setup for a cycle lane. Whereas in Ireland, any oul thing on a path or road, marked or not marked, ticks the box. All very fine, but it it's just a token attempt, nothing changes. We should look to places like London, where cycling is now prevalent, normal and widely accepted.

I used to commute in the Old Kilmeaden road for a good while. When they built the road first, the cycle lane that ended with the new section of road literally led into a pit. As in, if you cycled beyond the end of the marked area, and it was dark, which it is on that part of the road in the night, you could have flown off the road into a big hole. Nice. This is the reason I don't like cycling in Waterford. No cop on.

Also, I remember when half the footpath/so-called-cycle lane on the ORR outside TK Maxx was halved overnight to accommodate the entry/exit lane for the centre. Sure the cycle-lane was only for fun anyway, serious people have to drive to TK Maxx. I mentioned this to Mary Roche and she told me it was in the Co. Council area (which presumably meant she wasn't interested in talking to them). So Waterford Co. Co. in Dungarvan are on charge of most of the cycle lane on the ORR...

dayshah

merlante wrote: »

Speed limits are in the same category, but those get enforced don't they? All it would take would be a couple of penalty points, etc. for cars parked, or driving through, cycles lanes and people would learn the difference.

Besides, in countries that are better at these things, a small barrier or curb is put in to separate the two. In those places, I suspect that people actually put themselves in the mindset of the cyclist and say, would I feel comfortable cycling there giving such and such a setup for a cycle lane. Whereas in Ireland, any oul thing on a path or road, marked or not marked, ticks the box. All very fine, but it it's just a token attempt, nothing changes. We should look to places like London, where cycling is now prevalent, normal and widely accepted.

I used to commute in the Old Kilmeaden road for a good while. When they built the road first, the cycle lane that ended with the new section of road literally led into a pit. As in, if you cycled beyond the end of the marked area, and it was dark, which it is on that part of the road in the night, you could have flown off the road into a big hole. Nice. This is the reason I don't like cycling in Waterford. No cop on.

Also, I remember when half the footpath/so-called-cycle lane on the ORR outside TK Maxx was halved overnight to accommodate the entry/exit lane for the centre. Sure the cycle-lane was only for fun anyway, serious people have to drive to TK Maxx. I mentioned this to Mary Roche and she told me it was in the Co. Council area (which presumably meant she wasn't interested in talking to them). So Waterford Co. Co. in Dungarvan are on charge of most of the cycle lane on the ORR...

I fully support the little kerb thing. I suppose it would be cheap too

merlante

tonc76 wrote: »

IE and BE have no money to expand either service and will have no money for the foreseeable future. Both have been running at a loss for years at this stage.

Any fool can make a loss on a potentially profitable service. Can we really and honestly say that there is no real world business case for IE and BE or is it more to do with the way they're running it?

Why is it that we are so quick to say that such and such a service or improvement is not viable and so slow to point out that IE and BE are in all likelihood grossly inefficient. There's no incentive there for them to report a profit because then the government will give them less cash.

A public service should be run like a public service rather than turning a department into a sham business.

tonc76 wrote: »

On road cycletracks are far more dangerous for the cyclist than off road. Segregated cycletracks/footpaths (white marking) only work if both cyclists and pedestrians know how to use them. Shared cycletracks/footpaths however are a disaster as no one knows who has "right of way".

Are they really far more dangerous? I wonder. More serious accidents on the road but a lot more minor accidents on the footpath I'd say. Or else a lot of slowing down for pedestrians, which is unacceptable and will drive 99% of cyclists out onto the road. For example, I never cycles on the ORR "cycle lane". Commuters want to get places. Footpaths are joggers and dog walkers who are going nowhere.

tonc76

merlante wrote: »

But sure the spaces removed can appear elsewhere. The council/Waterford Crystal/the government are building a large extension to the car park off Lombard st. as part of the new Waterford Crystal showroom/factory. These spaces with increase revenue. Having car parking on Mall has had its day, imho. Looks bad and it's not even easy or desirable to park there. The Mall should be the 'showey' st. of Waterford.

The car parking on the Mall is always full and generating revenue as a result. WCC are not going to give up that revenue even if there is a new expanded car park around the corner. The point I made about no start or end to a cycletrack along the Quays or Parnell Street remains. To bring it one step further there is no space available at all to construct a cycletrack along Manor Street thereby making the whole cycletrack through town impossible. On top of that a cycletrack has to be bidirectional in order for it to be of any use.

dayshah

tonc76 wrote: »

The car parking on the Mall is always full and generating revenue as a result. WCC are not going to give up that revenue even if there is a new expanded car park around the corner. The point I made about no start or end to a cycletrack along the Quays or Parnell Street remains. To bring it one step further there is no space available at all to construct a cycletrack along Manor Street thereby making the whole cycletrack through town impossible. On top of that a cycletrack has to be bidirectional in order for it to be of any use.

Now manor St aswell?

Just how wide is your bike?

merlante

tonc76 wrote: »

The car parking on the Mall is always full and generating revenue as a result. WCC are not going to give up that revenue even if there is a new expanded car park around the corner. The point I made about no start or end to a cycletrack along the Quays or Parnell Street remains. To bring it one step further there is no space available at all to construct a cycletrack along Manor Street thereby making the whole cycletrack through town impossible. On top of that a cycletrack has to be bidirectional in order for it to be of any use.

What you're saying doesn't make any sense, if people want to park in the city centre, and the spaces on the Mall are gone, they will have to park somewhere else. I would personally prefer to park in a proper carpark (a surface carpark at least) than on the Mall, where it is difficult to get in and out and there is a higher chance of your car getting damaged (possibly). Besides, even the new car park is not as popular as the Mall, the fact that there will be so many more spaces means that they will make a killing at peak times.

I don't get the point about it not being worthwhile just because the cycle lane has to end somewhere. When it ends, cyclists will just join the rest of the traffic, just like when a bus lane ends. I wouldn't be so pessimistic about the width of Manor st. either.

tonc76

dayshah wrote: »

Now manor St aswell?

Just how wide is your bike?

No wider than any other bike.

However a cycletrack has to be a minimum of 1.5m wide.

Now multiply that by 2 = 3m

Where are you going to find an extra 3m on Manor Street between Muldoon's and Mason's?

tonc76

merlante wrote: »

What you're saying doesn't make any sense, if people want to park in the city centre, and the spaces on the Mall are gone, they will have to park somewhere else. I would personally prefer to park in a proper carpark (a surface carpark at least) than on the Mall, where it is difficult to get in and out and there is a higher chance of your car getting damaged (possibly). Besides, even the new car park is not as popular as the Mall, the fact that there will be so many more spaces means that they will make a killing at peak times.

I don't get the point about it not being worthwhile just because the cycle lane has to end somewhere. When it ends, cyclists will just join the rest of the traffic, just like when a bus lane ends. I wouldn't be so pessimistic about the width of Manor st. either.

So the Council will make money anyway from the new car park so they should remove the spaces on the Mall? Council's all over the country have had their budgets slashed so any revenue generators that they currently have will be kept - plain and simple.

"When it ends, cyclists will just join the rest of the traffic"

Why then will the Council splash out money that they don't have when cyclists can just remain with the rest of the traffic?

dayshah

tonc76 wrote: »

No wider than any other bike.

However a cycletrack has to be a minimum of 1.5m wide.

Now multiply that by 2 = 3m

Where are you going to find an extra 3m on Manor Street between Muldoon's and Mason's?

I don't agree that you need two lanes. I lived in a city that only ever had one on a street and it worked well (it was a line painted on a footpath too). People were ringing their bells at people walking on the cycle lane.

I agree its better to have cyclelanes that go places. There are 2 reasons for cyclelanes.
1) To allow cyclists get to the front of the queue
2) Safety

For me safety is the most important. I don't want to be mixed up in traffic with artics or 22 year old girls who think that because they drive a Nissan Micra they own the world, and are on their mobiles telling people of this at the same time.

My choice would be first, on road cyclelane, but with a good barrier to keep the traffic away. Second choice would be on path cyclelane with the footpath painted for cyclists.

If people are stupid enough to walk in the wrong place I say give em a slap off a D-Lock, that'll learn 'em.

merlante

tonc76 wrote: »

So the Council will make money anyway from the new car park so they should remove the spaces on the Mall? Council's all over the country have had their budgets slashed so any revenue generators that they currently have will be kept - plain and simple.

Councils are always strapped for cash, that doesn't mean that they don't spend money improving amenities and making streets more pleasant. Waterford city council have a very good record in this respect (e.g. park improvements, JR square, William Wallace plaza, etc., etc.). All we're talking about here is effectively relocating parking spaces from the mall to behind the ESB. Okay, they would make *even* more money if they also kept parking on the Mall, but that doesn't mean that they automatically would (if a plan were presented to them).

tonc76 wrote: »

"When it ends, cyclists will just join the rest of the traffic"

Why then will the Council splash out money that they don't have when cyclists can just remain with the rest of the traffic?

Well, they wouldn't have been part of the traffic for the portion of the road that they were in the cycle lane, would they?

Are you arguing that just because we can't have cycle lanes the length of every street in the city that there's not point having them at all?

Bus lanes in Dublin only extended for relatively short distances when they were introduced, but they did allow buses to speed up on those sections, and later on bus lanes were often extended. With cycle lanes there is the additional issue of increase safety for the cyclist. Also, the more cycle lanes in general, the more motorists get used to idea that cyclists are a legitimate form of traffic.

giles lynchwood

Dum_Dum wrote: »

Yawn.

Can't mention any kind of investment in Waterford without Martin Cullen being brought up. People seem to think he brought a disproportionate amount of investment into Waterford; I wish he did - then all this labourious ridicule would be worth it.

Actually i am a supporter of Martin Cullen who was a big help to me during a family illness.My post was humor based concerning Cork and Jack Lynch,or do you remember him.:D

tonc76

dayshah wrote: »

I don't agree that you need two lanes. I lived in a city that only ever had one on a street and it worked well (it was a line painted on a footpath too). People were ringing their bells at people walking on the cycle lane.

I agree its better to have cyclelanes that go places. There are 2 reasons for cyclelanes.
1) To allow cyclists get to the front of the queue
2) Safety

For me safety is the most important. I don't want to be mixed up in traffic with artics or 22 year old girls who think that because they drive a Nissan Micra they own the world, and are on their mobiles telling people of this at the same time.

My choice would be first, on road cyclelane, but with a good barrier to keep the traffic away. Second choice would be on path cyclelane with the footpath painted for cyclists.

If people are stupid enough to walk in the wrong place I say give em a slap off a D-Lock, that'll learn 'em.

Apologies - having looked at the regs. cycletracks should be a minimum of 1m wide. That still gives 2m to cater for cyclists travelling in both directions.

merlante wrote: »

Councils are always strapped for cash, that doesn't mean that they don't spend money improving amenities and making streets more pleasant. Waterford city council have a very good record in this respect (e.g. park improvements, JR square, William Wallace plaza, etc., etc.). All we're talking about here is effectively relocating parking spaces from the mall to behind the ESB. Okay, they would make *even* more money if they also kept parking on the Mall, but that doesn't mean that they automatically would (if a plan were presented to them).



Well, they wouldn't have been part of the traffic for the portion of the road that they were in the cycle lane, would they?

Are you arguing that just because we can't have cycle lanes the length of every street in the city that there's not point having them at all?

Bus lanes in Dublin only extended for relatively short distances when they were introduced, but they did allow buses to speed up on those sections, and later on bus lanes were often extended. With cycle lanes there is the additional issue of increase safety for the cyclist. Also, the more cycle lanes in general, the more motorists get used to idea that cyclists are a legitimate form of traffic.

I wasn't saying that there's no point having them at all. In order to provide cycletracks that will attract cyclists, or more to the point get people out of their cars and onto bikes, the tracks have to have defined starting and ending points - i.e. Ferrybank to WIT along the Quays, Dunmore Road, The Folly, Cleaboy etc. While a stretch along the Mall would have obvious benefits for cyclists, it wouldn't do much to get people out of their cars and onto bikes. If the infrastructure is properly put in place it will be utilised. People who cycle regularly will remain cycling and there could possibly be a reduction in the number of cars blocking up the city. The benefits of less cars on our streets should then increase pedestrian & cyclist safety as well as numerous environmental benefits to the city and its inhabitants. Some of the above routes may be possible along stretches of roadside land in the Council's ownership. However if the Council wish to provide a coherant unit they will have to purchase land from home owners which will drive the cost through the roof.

MickClince12118

to be honest i dont think its really needed, waterford may be called by the name city but it is much too small for that, u can find the same kind of main street in most towns and many which are bigger towns than waterford city, if you were to talk about waterford getting one then everywhere would need one surely?? i mean we're talking dublin vs waterford here? no chance im afraid lads n ladies as great as it would be

DavidShivers

I think what Waterford needs to do is to get itself a dedicated bus service that run at least every 15mins because the time timetables show at least a gap just under an hour for the tramore bus. Then I think the idea of the seperate cycle lane is a good idea too so I would implement that as well.

With all that done then you can see about trams. I have heard that Bus Eireann are wanting to operate streetcars or BRTs in places such as Waterford, Galway and Kilkenny is being considered. I would definatly think a tram here in kk would be good but its not needed that much but im still open to that idea. Anybody have any ideas on tram lines in Kilkenny? (Stops lines etc.)