Luas Cross City (Line BX/D) [now open]

Jamie2k9

AngryLips wrote: »

That doesn’t really make any sense

There are locations where trams are to long for junctions to clear and/or holding points for trams would be reduced. One example is longer trams would mean you could no longer have a tram waiting to cross OCS after leaven Abbey stop and one at the stop in Abbey Street. At peak times you often have a tram before/at/after Abbey street longer trams would reduce that overall capacity.

Edit- There is the scope for a returned of increase freq on the Red Line with existing fleet.

AngryLips

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

There are locations where trams are to long for junctions to clear and/or holding points for trams would be reduced. One example is longer trams would mean you could no longer have a tram waiting to cross OCS after leaven Abbey stop and one at the stop in Abbey Street. At peak times you often have a tram before/at/after Abbey street longer trams would reduce that overall capacity.

Edit- There is the scope for a returned of increase freq on the Red Line with existing fleet.

How many places along the line experience such issues though? I feel like some of this could be resolved by repositioning team stops. For example move the Abbey Street stop to the other side of OCS and relocation Jervis to a stop before the junction with Capel Street

LeinsterDub

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

There are locations where trams are to long for junctions to clear and/or holding points for trams would be reduced. One example is longer trams would mean you could no longer have a tram waiting to cross OCS after leaven Abbey stop and one at the stop in Abbey Street. At peak times you often have a tram before/at/after Abbey street longer trams would reduce that overall capacity.

Edit- There is the scope for a returned of increase freq on the Red Line with existing fleet.

Shift the Abbey street stop 20 meters?

Jamie2k9

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Shift the Abbey street stop 20 meters?

20m, as in before marlborough junction? Then you have to shift the crossovers and that's not possible. You will have the sane issues at Smithfeild, Heuston, Crossing the Liffy etc You can't move them all!

LeinsterDub

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

20m, as in before marlborough junction? Then you have to shift the crossovers and that's not possible. You will have the sane issues at Smithfeild, Heuston, Crossing the Liffy etc You can't move them all!

No to the other side of the Junction but your right there isn't any space

ncounties

AngryLips wrote: »

How many places along the line experience such issues though? I feel like some of this could be resolved by repositioning team stops. For example move the Abbey Street stop to the other side of OCS and relocation Jervis to a stop before the junction with Capel Street

How would an extended tram fit outside Heuston?

donvito99

ncounties wrote: »

How would an extended tram fit outside Heuston?

There's about 10m on the Northern end of the platforms that's usable, but only for the Southbound and turnback platforms, the Northbound alignment isn't straight at that point, but a slight curve hardly impedes level boarding to any great extent.

AngryLips

ncounties wrote: »

How would an extended tram fit outside Heuston?

The stop is abutted both ends by roads, but it need not be that way, just ditch the access road to the north

Beta Ray Bill

ncounties wrote: »

How would an extended tram fit outside Heuston?

I think the Rosie-Hackett Bridge is a the bigger Elephant in the room!

In any case there is plenty of space to extend the platform there. (See attached)

AngryLips wrote: »

The stop is abutted both ends by roads, but it need not be that way, just ditch the access road to the north

Where the buses pull in and the Irish Rail staff access the car park?
I can't see that happening. I can't see Dublin bus making any more concessions for Luas development. they've already moved 1/3 of bus routes off College green because the poor design that's been put in place.

If College Green issue has thought us one thing it's that serious planning needs to be done before extending the length of the Luas.

bk

grahambo wrote: »

In any case there is plenty of space to extend the platform there. (See attached)

Yes, measuring the distance on Google Maps there is clearly plenty of space in front of Hueston for 55m trams with just some minor adjustments to footpaths, etc.

grahambo wrote: »

I can't see that happening. I can't see Dublin bus making any more concessions for Luas development. they've already moved 1/3 of bus routes off College green because the poor design that's been put in place.

I agree with you that no such adjustment would need to be made. But Dublin Bus don't get to decide to make concessions or not anymore. They are contracted and paid to operate services by the NTA, then it is up to the NTA to tell them how and where to operate from (within reason, obviously taking into account safety and staff roistering, etc.).

Beta Ray Bill

bk wrote: »

Yes, measuring the distance on Google Maps there is clearly plenty of space in front of Hueston for 55m trams with just some minor adjustments to footpaths, etc.

Do they even use that siding in the middle? I've never seen anything parked on it

bk wrote: »

I agree with you that no such adjustment would need to be made. But Dublin Bus don't get to decide to make concessions or not anymore. They are contracted and paid to operate services by the NTA, then it is up to the NTA to tell them how and where to operate from (within reason, obviously taking into account safety and staff roistering, etc.).

Let me rephrase that, It's parent company CIÉ would not be overly happy about curtailments to the infrastructure it uses to the benefit of a private operator (and competitor at that too). Surely management at CIÉ have to be taken seriously.
I'm open to correction on this, but as I understand it, CIÉ is profitable at the moment. Which is the first time in years. Clearly the management at CIÉ (And the Unions) will object to any reduction/transfer in usable infrastructure to the benefit of a private operator?

markpb

grahambo wrote: »

Let me rephrase that, It's parent company CIÉ would not be overly happy about curtailments to the infrastructure it uses to the benefit of a private operator (and competitor at that too). Surely management at CIÉ have to be taken seriously.

If any manager in CIE thinks like the contents of your post, they should never be taken seriously. I don't know which part is worse. The idea that CIE and Luas are in competition should have been taken out and shot when the PDs left the government. The idea that the ownership of the operator of the services is somehow relevant is event more childish. The idea that the unions should get involved in the positioning of a bus stop is laughable.

Beta Ray Bill

markpb wrote: »

If any manager in CIE thinks like the contents of your post, they should never be taken seriously.

Hang on a sec, CIÉ is profitable now right? Surely management there must be doing something right? It's been a black hole for taxpayers money for years.

Digging into it, Irish Rail made a loss of just €2.9 million ins 2016 (2017 report isn't out yet). That's incredible for a Railway as they usually make huges losses.
Note: Irish rail got €133m in subvention but also contributed to the exchequer €115.9m
It doesn't say what the revenue was from journeys but based on Revenue/#Journeys the average ticket price was €5.70 er journey.

It doesnt say whether revenue includes subvention or not.
If it doesn't then average ticket price is €2.65... which actually does add up a bit as the DART (Their busiest service) is around €2.30 a journey

Jamie2k9

Off Topic - Why are the digital advertising boards not switched on yet, almost 3 months since launch.

Jamie2k9

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Off Topic - Why are the digital advertising boards not switched on yet, almost 3 months since launch.

Maybe there are no ads to light up!

AlmightyCushion

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Off Topic - Why are the digital advertising boards not switched on yet, almost 3 months since launch.

This must be the first time in the history of mankind that someone is complaining that they aren't seeing enough ads. :pac:

bk

grahambo wrote: »

Let me rephrase that, It's parent company CIÉ would not be overly happy about curtailments to the infrastructure it uses to the benefit of a private operator (and competitor at that too). Surely management at CIÉ have to be taken seriously.
I'm open to correction on this, but as I understand it, CIÉ is profitable at the moment. Which is the first time in years. Clearly the management at CIÉ (And the Unions) will object to any reduction/transfer in usable infrastructure to the benefit of a private operator?

CIE is 100% owned by the government, the Minister of Transport and Department Of Transport are the sole owners of CIE:

http://www.cie.ie/about-us

The NTA, reports to the Department of Transport and Minister of Transport:

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/about-us/

Luas is 100% owned by Transport Infrastructure Ireland, which in turn reports to the Minister of Transport and the Department of Transport also.

In other words Luas is as much government owned and public as is CIE. Now Transdev operate Luas on the behalf of TII and thus the government. But that doesn't mean it is private. No more then Irish Rail is private because they have a private company operating the food service on trains, etc.

In fact all fares on Luas are collected by NTA and they then pay Transdev from this money on a contracted basis. If the fare money collected is less then the contracted price, then government have to subsidise it from tax money, if they collect more fare revenue then the fixed contract price, then the exchequer gets to keep the difference.

Interestingly Luas has been the most consistently profitable form of government owned public transport over the past 15 years, usually making money most years.

So it is the Minister of Transport who gets to tell Dublin Bus what to do, within reason.

BTW speaking of unions, Luas drivers are in the same union as Dublin Bus drivers, so that is also much of a muchness.

BBTW buses are also heading towards the same model as Luas. A private company, Go Ahead, has won the competition to operate 10% of the Dublin City Bus network. Same as the Luas, NTA will own the buses and collect the fares and pay Go Ahead a fixed price for operating the routes. It is likely DB will also go the same way over the next few years.

I see from the news today that DB are now dropping their objection to the College Green Plaza as long as they can use Parliament St. Thus following the NTA's lead.

LXFlyer

AngryLips wrote: »

The stop is abutted both ends by roads, but it need not be that way, just ditch the access road to the north

I don't see that happening.

The access route to the north provides access to the public car park at Heuston Station from both directions (i.e. the South Quays and St John's Road).

Removing it would mean withdrawing access to the car park from the South Quays and therefore many of the feeder routes onto them west of the city centre.

As already mentioned it would also mean the access to the bus terminus from the city would be removed - on a variety of fronts that access route is pretty important.

This is purely looking at it from a practical perspective.

LXFlyer

Idbatterim wrote: »

there are so many junctions that are small, where luas waits and I dont understand why! A prime example being where hatch street upper intersects with Harcourt st! then from harcourt to stephens green, why cant a sensor trip something when the luas pulls off, so that it can cross the junction moving?

There could be massive improvements made to existing system, also the 10kmph limit on college green! There could be massive improvements made, until Dublin metro is up and running...

I think need to look at the impact of what you're suggesting a bit more, and the general traffic flows in the area and in particular the impact on bus speeds.

The junction at Hatch St and Harcourt St has a significant impact on traffic flows around that area, importantly along Charlotte Way, Camden Street, Harrington St/SCR and South Richmond Street/Rathmines Road.

The latter two are major bus corridors, and without some degree of regular traffic flows through the Hatch St/Harcourt St junction the impact of giving LUAS total priority could be significantly negative on bus speeds through that area. They are already the lowest in the city and that area is already a nightmare in the morning peak.

While it might not appear obvious, there's a balancing act to be struck between the various modes, and you do need to look at the extended effects of giving greater priority.

Jamie2k9

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

This must be the first time in the history of mankind that someone is complaining that they aren't seeing enough ads. :pac:

Well 3 months revenue lost already.

bk

Looking at Google Maps and using the measuring tool, it really doesn't look like there would be much issue with lengthening the platforms in front of Hueston without needing to close the road.

The issue may well lie between O'Connell St and Marlborough St, looks like just about 107m of usable pace there. So you couldn't fit two 55m trams there.

Perhaps they could increase the red line to 50m trams. Two of those would just fit. Give you some extra capacity on the line. About 15% increase.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

I see from the news today that DB are now dropping their objection to the College Green Plaza as long as they can use Parliament St. Thus following the NTA's lead.

I think you will find that DB's position hasn't really changed.

Dublin Bus actually came up with the original proposals (which focussed on using Parliament Street as an alternative route) jointly with the NTA - the two organisations are working together on this - it's not one or the other. People need to get less hung up on who is doing what in this as far as the NTA and the public transport operators are concerned.

But I'll point out that DB objected to the Plaza (and rightly so) once DCC councillors removed the option of the northbound contra-flow bus lane on Parliament Street as originally proposed.

The main reason for their objection was the consequent lack of any reasonable alternative route for routes 9, 16 and 122. The revised routings suggested by DCC either took the northbound buses away from the core stops along the SCR and Camden St/Georges St and sent them via Clanbrassil St, Winetavern St and the North Quays, or sent them on a massive loop from Georges St via Christchurch and the North Quays to get to O'Connell Street that would have destroyed the viability of those three important cross-city routes.

DCC also suggested sending southbound buses on those routes from O'Connell St to the South Quays around in a loop via D'Olier St, College St and Westmoreland St, rather than the original direct right turn from O'Connell Bridge onto the Quays - again reducing the attractiveness and reliability of three core cross-city routes.

DB were quite correct to object to the Plaza on behalf of their customers after that decision was taken by DCC- removing the option of using Parliament Street really meant that there was no other realistic route for those buses to take.

Personally, I think part of the problem is that DCC seemingly did a solo run on this, and just assumed that virtually all of the bus routes currently going east/west along College Green would have to use Parliament St, when in reality it would only be needed for certain routes - some can use Winetavern St to access the Quays) and others Bridge St, while some of the Rathmines routes could revert to St Stephen's Green.

There are solutions to this, but it requires all of the bodies to work together on this (and that includes TII/Transdev too) to come up with a solution that recognises the critical importance that the bus service provides and which doesn't unnecessarily penalise those bus users who don't have the option of using LUAS or rail options.

ozzy jr

When the original underground section was proposed by Gareth Fitzgerald (?), where was it going to start and finish?

donvito99

ozzy jr wrote: »

When the original underground section was proposed by Gareth Fitzgerald (?), where was it going to start and finish?

Harcourt Street line to Broadstone. Exactly where on the southside, I don't know. And AFAIK Fitzgerald was not the originator of this idea.

Stephen15

bk wrote: »

Luas is 100% owned by Transport Infrastructure Ireland, which in turn reports to the Minister of Transport and the Department of Transport also.

In other words Luas is as much government owned and public as is CIE. Now Transdev operate Luas on the behalf of TII and thus the government. But that doesn't mean it is private. No more then Irish Rail is private because they have a private company operating the food service on trains, etc.

Luas is de-facto just a brand name of The NTA and TII it is not really a stand alone semi state company like CIE or DB/IE/BE.

Interestingly Luas has been the most consistently profitable form of government owned public transport over the past 15 years, usually making money most years.

Only because it runs over a highly profitable route. If CIE ran the Luas we would probably it would still be highly efficient and highly profitable. Contray to popular if CIE was equipped with proper resources and funding it would provide the exact same service that a private operator is capable of.

BTW speaking of unions, Luas drivers are in the same union as Dublin Bus drivers, so that is also much of a muchness.

Not quite a fairly large proportion but not the majority of DB drivers are in the NBRU. Luas is represented exclusively by SIPTU. Also the DB drivers that are in SIPTU are in a different branch with different representives and shop stewards who would have a different approach and different demands

BowSideChamp

donvito99 wrote: »

Harcourt Street line to Broadstone. Exactly where on the southside, I don't know. And AFAIK Fitzgerald was not the originator of this idea.

Proposed a 100 years ago by Patrick Abercrombie.

https://issuu.com/hugohickey/docs/hickey_hugo_10345459_disconnected_d

AngryLips

LXFlyer wrote: »

I don't see that happening.

The access route to the north provides access to the public car park at Heuston Station from both directions (i.e. the South Quays and St John's Road).

Removing it would mean withdrawing access to the car park from the South Quays and therefore many of the feeder routes onto them west of the city centre.

As already mentioned it would also mean the access to the bus terminus from the city would be removed - on a variety of fronts that access route is pretty important.

This is purely looking at it from a practical perspective.

If you got rid of the north access to the station you would still be left with south access, all it takes is some changes to that junction to allow inbound and outbound traffic to access that. Busses would probably need to loop around down in the direction of platform 10 though.

LXFlyer

AngryLips wrote: »

If you got rid of the north access to the station you would still be left with south access, all it takes is some changes to that junction to allow inbound and outbound traffic to access that. Busses would probably need to loop around down in the direction of platform 10 though.

I can’t really see that working - it would cause mayhem putting in a right turn just after the road crosses the LUAS and would make the traffic situation even worse.

bk

LXFlyer wrote: »

I think you will find that DB's position hasn't really changed.

Dublin Bus actually came up with the original proposals (which focussed on using Parliament Street as an alternative route) jointly with the NTA - the two organisations are working together on this - it's not one or the other. People need to get less hung up on who is doing what in this as far as the NTA and the public transport operators are concerned.

Yes, it was definitely a good plan, probably came up with by both NTA/DB and also probably DCC planners. As usual it was the city councilors who almost bottled it.

However DB did seem to lose their nerve about it. NTA were very clear the entire time that the College Green Plaza needed to go ahead and the redirection of buses up Parliament St. DB seemed to prevaricate a bit about it and seemed to panic for a while there. Fortunately they seem to have regained their nerve and they and the NTA seem to be singing out of the same hymn book now.

LXFlyer wrote: »

Personally, I think part of the problem is that DCC seemingly did a solo run on this, and just assumed that virtually all of the bus routes currently going east/west along College Green would have to use Parliament St, when in reality it would only be needed for certain routes - some can use Winetavern St to access the Quays) and others Bridge St, while some of the Rathmines routes could revert to St Stephen's Green.

Yes, plus with BusConnects, I suspect we will see a big reduction in the numbers of cross city routes. JW seems to not like them from what I've read.

Services that turn around and back out seems to be the norm for him. I can see a lot of services ending up turning around at College Green and D'Olier St/Wetmorland St.

Stephen15 wrote: »

Luas is de-facto just a brand name of The NTA and TII it is not really a stand alone semi state company like CIE or DB/IE/BE.

It is far more then just a brand. TII own the following:

- The tram lines
- The trams
- The overhead cables
- The stops and all their infrastructure
- The depots and control centers

NTA collect the fares.

In some ways Luas is actually more directly owned by the government and public then CIE is as they are semi-state companies.

Stephen15 wrote: »

Only because it runs over a highly profitable route. If CIE ran the Luas we would probably it would still be highly efficient and highly profitable. Contray to popular if CIE was equipped with proper resources and funding it would provide the exact same service that a private operator is capable of.

Luas was originally being designed by CIE, but the government took the design team out of CIE and put them in the RPA, which eventually became TII. The government simply don't trust CIE companies with any major new projects.

Stephen15 wrote: »

Not quite a fairly large proportion but not the majority of DB drivers are in the NBRU. Luas is represented exclusively by SIPTU. Also the DB drivers that are in SIPTU are in a different branch with different representives and shop stewards who would have a different approach and different demands

True, but they are still union represented, that is the point.

Stephen15

bk wrote: »

It is far more then just a brand. TII own the following:

- The tram lines
- The trams
- The overhead cables
- The stops and all their infrastructure
- The depots and control centers

I was talking about the Luas brand. Luas is a just a brand name of TII the same way DART is an IE brand name or Expressway is a BE brand name or City Swift was a DB brand name.