Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Luas Cross City (Line BX/D) [now open]
Options
Comments
-
Those buses are a bigger blight on the landscape than any overhead wires.
I think not.
I know many people think these are beautiful buses - I've yet to hear anyone say that about overhead wires - even one of the taste-challenged philistines. :cool:
I think we should convert the Luas trams to something more interesting than the bland grey colour in synch with opening the BXD line (assuming it ever actually happens). The current colour is straight out of a Celtic Tiger car showroom; we need something more colourful and continental for these grim times.0 -
To_be_confirmed wrote: »I've already referred to this; you can't make a delivery to a shop or pub by dart for example.
So your argument boils down to facilitating deliveries from southside to north and vice versa? Given that majority of deliveries originate from Dublin Port I expect this to be minimal...0 -
but there's no major junctions where traffic would cross the line
The junction of Pearse St and Tara St? The Luas would continue straight on towards Hawkins St past the Garda station but traffic would turn right. I can see that being a major junction. Though of course, thinking about it, if the Luas can be kept to the south side of the road towards the existing bus lane rat run outside the Garda Station it might be ok. The problem then is that how do you bring the line back east on Westland Row without crossing traffic at junction Pease St and Westland Row, since presumably you want the station at Pearse to be on the east side of the road, directly outside the existing station facade, so passengers don't have to cross the road to interchange.0 -
I've made several relevant points and the various attempts to "summarise" them rather than address them directly serves nothing other than to obfuscate the arguments and indeed discredit any other arguments those concerned might make.So your argument boils down to facilitating deliveries from southside to north and vice versa? Given that majority of deliveries originate from Dublin Port I expect this to be minimal...
I genuinely have no agenda here other than as a resident of the southeast inner city for a number of years. On a purely selfish basis, as a pedestrian dependent on public transport or bikes, the LUAS' routing down Westland Row would suit me. This doesn't mean that I will argue for it as if it's for the greater good.
For the record, the type of businesses in the area are often the small retail or newsagent sort or else white-collar industry headquarters etc. and between couriers (in particular), food and drink deliveries, newspapers and so on most deliveries would come from some warehouse on the outskirts of Dublin before coming to that part of the world. But that was not the only point I was trying to make.0 -
I think more people would use the LUAS coming from Trinity and the dental hospital rather than go from the Dart, at least initially. Though that may change. I doubt an bord plenala would look closely at that given the throngs of people that often have to wait for a green light to cross the light at Pearse St./Westland Row.The junction of Pearse St and Tara St? The Luas would continue straight on towards Hawkins St past the Garda station but traffic would turn right. I can see that being a major junction. Though of course, thinking about it, if the Luas can be kept to the south side of the road towards the existing bus lane rat run outside the Garda Station it might be ok. The problem then is that how do you bring the line back east on Westland Row without crossing traffic at junction Pease St and Westland Row, since presumably you want the station at Pearse to be on the east side of the road, directly outside the existing station facade, so passengers don't have to cross the road to interchange.0 -
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,665 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 22261
I'm sorry To_be_confirmed but your points are very weak and you just sound like a person who would be directly effected by this and is looking for excuses to stop it from happening.
The delivery argument is particularly weak. Most deliveries in Dublin City are made by night time, very early morning. You could even allow delivery vehicles to use the tram lines at night time.
monument is right, every single time in the past that a road was to be closed for pedestrianisation or bus/tram lines we have heard the same excuses about how it couldn't be done and it would be the end of the world.
Yet each time it doesn't end up being the end of the world and ends up being a brilliant success.
People in Dublin really need to get use to the idea that a city center is not a place for cars and that increasingly moves will be made to make the city less attracive for cars and more attractive for pedestrians and commuters.0 -
To_be_confirmed wrote: »I think more people would use the LUAS coming from Trinity and the dental hospital rather than go from the Dart, at least initially. Though that may change. I doubt an bord plenala would look closely at that given the throngs of people that often have to wait for a green light to cross the light at Pearse St./Westland Row.
If DartU is built Pearse will become a massive underground interchange as it will be the only point where the two new DART lines(Malahide-Hazelhatch and Maynooth-Bray) will cross. A BXD stop there should be built to expect large demand, as it enables journeys(though of course you can make all the same connections at SSG).0 -
Not a particularly mature response. Nor is the conceited apology particularly welcome. If you think I have an axe to grind with this, why don't you back the assertation up with something substansive?? There is an undercurrent of bias seeping out in this thread, with comments like "motorists" being the reason the existing LUAS faces any delays at all. I have made it abundantly clear that my own life would be made easier were LUAS to run down Westland Row. I would live 10 minutes away from the LUAS compared to the 25 minutes I live currently. I could cross Westland Row without immediate and continual danger of being knocked down or the 2 minute wait just to use a pedestrian crossing. I don't have anything to lose by this except through what I see is a waste of everyone's taxes and a severe impact on cars and bus passengers (I use the 4/7 occasionally) at peak times.I'm sorry To_be_confirmed but your points are very weak and you just sound like a person who would be directly effected by this and is looking for excuses to stop it from happening.
The delivery argument is particularly weak. Most deliveries in Dublin City are made by night time, very early morning. You could even allow delivery vehicles to use the tram lines at night time.
monument is right, every single time in the past that a road was to be closed for pedestrianisation or bus/tram lines we have heard the same excuses about how it couldn't be done and it would be the end of the world.
Yet each time it doesn't end up being the end of the world and ends up being a brilliant success.
People in Dublin really need to get use to the idea that a city center is not a place for cars and that increasingly moves will be made to make the city less attracive for cars and more attractive for pedestrians and commuters.
So now we've reached the point where various points I make will be ignored, beginning with my being misquoted, then comes the focus on a couple of minor aspects firstly where a poster basically makes up stuff about deliveries coming from the docks and now where we have a situation of writing arbitrary rules just to allow trucks to drive down Westland Row and Pearse St.! As if that's even the main issue at stake here. I know and see the businesses in this area daily and for the most part deliveries do take place during regular business hours. Certainly during LUAS operating hours. We can't continually suppose what goes on and not account for all the contingencies involved. A half baked idea is a half-baked idea no matter how many other problems will be solved by it.
And the crux of this is that after pointing out the realities of the streets and roads in the area and answering the points made thereof, we're still at the same auld craic of comparing Westland Row to Grafton St. No one can colour this any other way, when a LUAS operates via this route the bus services already using it will suffer. And for what? To join two dots together on a map, through an area heavily served by buses and when we already have planning permission to build a tunnel on the same route! But on the topic of the specific alignment, there is a far more subdued impact on the overall landscape of Dublin by building the LUAS via College Green rather than an extra km or so around Trinity and affecting a whole plethora of one way systems and bus lanes in the process. (And I've no problem with the route north of the river but would rather Marlborough St be used for both lines)0 -
Double-decker neon yellow busses are worse.Those buses are a bigger blight on the landscape than any overhead wires.
It might then interest you to know that the single greatest reason for choosing that livery on both buses and stops was to improve the visibility of the fleet and stops for the visually impaired community.
This followed discussions between Dublin Bus and representatives groups from the visually impaired community.
But hey don't let something practical such as that taint your judgement on this.0 -
I've never bought into the "disruption to Dublin Bus" arguement.
If anybody has noticed, road works on the river side of Eden Quay have denied the use of the area for stops, as a parking area and a contra-flow bus lane.
All services relocated, parking gone, bus lane closed and you wouldn't even have known it had happened.
We have to see beyond the status quo and see the bigger picture.0 -
Advertisement
-
It might then interest you to know that the single greatest reason for choosing that livery on both buses and stops was to improve the visibility of the fleet and stops for the visually impaired community.
This followed discussions between Dublin Bus and representatives groups from the visually impaired community.
But hey don't let something practical such as that taint your judgement on this.
And, ironically, they are disliked by the visually aesthetically impaired community!
I was just thinking that there might be less Luas collisions if they weren't coloured Irish Grey that blends so perfectly into the background on days such as today.
Yellow or a metallic blue/green might be good colours.
(Personally I dislike reds/orange on vehicles)
As BXD will be part of the green line we could maybe have the trams a bright green - that would be a good colour; red (perhaps with yellow piping) for the Red Line.0 -
But hey don't let something practical such as that taint your judgement on this.
No need to be so condecending. What have I done to offend you?
I think it's great that the busses stand out to the visually impaired. Keep the yellow colour. I don't know the ins and outs of whether double-deckers or single-deckers make more sense financially or in terms of service, but I still think that the double-decker busses block views of the buildings in town much more than wires would.0 -
I've never bought into the "disruption to Dublin Bus" arguement.
If anybody has noticed, road works on the river side of Eden Quay have denied the use of the area for stops, as a parking area and a contra-flow bus lane.
All services relocated, parking gone, bus lane closed and you wouldn't even have known it had happened.
We have to see beyond the status quo and see the bigger picture.
Indeed they have relocated, but every location that they have moved to is likely to be lost to LUAS BXD.0 -
But hey don't let something practical such as that taint your judgement on this.
No need to be so condecending. What have I done to offend you?
I think it's great that the busses stand out to the visually impaired. Keep the yellow colour. I don't know the ins and outs of whether double-deckers or single-deckers make more sense financially or in terms of service, but I still think that the double-decker busses block views of the buildings in town much more than wires would.
Nothing personal, but sometimes I get frustrated by what I certainly perceive as anti-Dublin Bus rants here which often have no basis in fact. They have their failings, but I don't think they are quite the bad guys some people make them out to be. If You were offended, I apologise, but the fact is that the livery was chosen for entirely the right reasons.
As a daily multiple Dublin Bus customer who (like many others) will not be facilitated by any of the rail based solutions (good and all as some may be) I am annoyed by the proposals in the BXD EIS because I will lose at least three city centre stops with no proposed alternatives to facilitate fewer passengers than do or will still use the bus through the city.
I just wish people would actually recognise that there are negative aspects to this and that a full impact study of the effects of the changed on the bus service be carried out.0 -
-
Well said. I'd also like to add that the comparisons with Eden Quay are a little disingenuous as the side of Eden Quay that is closed serves exclusively as the terminus for various bus routes IIRC. It's much easier to relocate the start or finish of a route to somewhere nearby rather than be forced to divert a route around an obstacle and allocate new stops for that and then bring the diversion back to the original route aswell.Nothing personal, but sometimes I get frustrated by what I certainly perceive as anti-Dublin Bus rants here which often have no basis in fact. They have their failings, but I don't think they are quite the bad guys some people make them out to be. If You were offended, I apologise, but the fact is that the livery was chosen for entirely the right reasons.
As a daily multiple Dublin Bus customer who (like many others) will not be facilitated by any of the rail based solutions (good and all as some may be) I am annoyed by the proposals in the BXD EIS because I will lose at least three city centre stops with no proposed alternatives to facilitate fewer passengers than do or will still use the bus through the city.
I just wish people would actually recognise that there are negative aspects to this and that a full impact study of the effects of the changed on the bus service be carried out.0 -
Indeed they have relocated, but every location that they have moved to is likely to be lost to LUAS BXD.
And they'll just move them again. No problem. The city is changing and bus routes are something that should not be set in stone.
All those buses going through College Green and up Nassau St - no problem, reroute them.
We did it when the when the red line was built - all the Abbey St. services relocated.
Everything had to be moved around when the "one way" system on the quays reversed decades ago.
There is no problem here that can not be solved.
For starters are the current stops and routing convenient for everybody who uses them, more than likely not.0 -
The same old muck is being trotted out by BXD proponents. Crayon-wise BXD looks lovely, that's why dribbling politicians like it.
My primary objection is the wrecking of the bus network. To those who say that rerouting is of course possible, yes it is. All of the previous line constructions had good bypass options.
The College green, nassau st, dawson st axis, OCS and Marlborough St can't be easily bypassed, either temporarily or permanently, and all so that a couple of crayon lines can meet.
There's a reason BXD was the last of the projects, no-one ever thought it would get funded, Interconn or Dart Underground are the coherent projects that don't get in the way of building a proper public transport system. BXD should be taken out the back and put out of its misery.0 -
Even an Bord Pleanala have had an outbreak of common sense :
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0206/luas.htmlAn Bord Pleanála has expressed concern that the proposed Luas link-up in Dublin city centre would interfere with future development of the DART Underground and Metro North projects.
Construction of the LUAS link line BXD was originally scheduled to take place after completion of the two underground lines.
The board points out that the LUAS line will be above three planned Metro stations and one for the DART Underground.
In a letter to the Rail Procurement Agency (RPA), the board states it is not clear how future works can be carried out while keeping the BXD line open.
It would also have reservations about any proposal to suspend or replace this Luas service.
The Metro North and Underground DART projects have been given the go-ahead by An Bord Pleanála.
But these plans were shelved in the Government's spending review last November because of the combined cost estimated at €5bn.
The Government said it would go-ahead with BXD, which is estimated to cost €300m.
An oral hearing on the BXD application was completed before the Government announced the suspension of the underground projects.
A decision on BXD was expected soon, but in its request for further information the board warns that any modification of existing plans would need fresh approvals.
It also wants the National Transport Authority to approve the response of the RPA.
A spokesman for the RPA said it was confident that the concerns of the board could be addressed. It has until the end of March to respond.0 -
To_be_confirmed wrote: »I think the problem is that you are point-blank refusing to look at all the facts of this. Clearly there are differences in the local environment of Westland Row and Pearse St. compared to Grafton St. and Dame St. Again you are comparing apples and oranges.
I don't think we're going to get much movement on this from me or you, but...
Once any new scheme (bus gate, tram line, bus lane, QBC network, cycle lanes, pedestrianisation etc) is proposed or even suggested there's always people who will say the same things as you. They say the suggestions are impossible and they will -- like you have -- claim that the suggestions are different from those that has happened elsewhere.
For example with pedestrianisations: In Copenhagen shop keepers groups said that the people are Danish, and not the Italians, and that the Danish would never take to street living and sitting outside. Now other people say we are not Danish. Galway's pedestrianisation blocked off or hindered some major routes but yet one of the papers in Killarney reported that a councillor said it "did not have the infrastructure to go with pedestrianisation, such as Galway, where it worked very well."
The bus gate was also imposable, motorists would never survive we were told.
All we're talking about on Westland Row is the loss of one of the current two general traffic lanes.To_be_confirmed wrote: »I ask you again to look at a map and show me where existing traffic would go rather than wistfully talk about cars and particularly lorries and trucks not being used in city centres.
Some people would switch to Luas, the bus, the Dart, or a mix of them; some would switch to walking or cycling; some people would keep using Westland Row one-way; some people would use the nearby routes; some people would go a little further around; and some people would go a long way around.
People will sort themselves out. I don't care much for traffic -- I care about people and keeping people moving.To_be_confirmed wrote: »After the luas is built, there would still be substantial traffic volumes in the area.
So what if there is still substantial traffic in the area. What's your point here?
If you are honestly particularly interested in helping delivers and other commercial traffic the aim should be to reduce all traffic and particularly through traffic in the city centre.To_be_confirmed wrote: »It seems you want to put words in my mouth.
What words did I put in your mouth? You are advocating keeping Westland Row open to private traffic both directions and against the suggestion of sacrificing one traffic lane in one direction for a buses and trams. Advocating to this extent against pubic transport is advocating for current and future congestion.To_be_confirmed wrote: »So what then of the times when pedestrians and cyclists would want to travel a route intersected by a LUAS route? I mean, it's not like motorists are the root of evil here.
Nobody said motorist are the root of all evil, but motorists often block the Luas at peak times along the red lineTo_be_confirmed wrote: »Ah here now, it was clear what I was talking about. I was talking about the 10 to 15 minute walk from St. Steph's green to Abbey St. Look at what I said:
I never discussed the merits of a LUAS to Broombridge, something I wouldn't question. I rather think it's of very questionable value to have a LUAS from Grafton St. to O'Connell St. I think a LUAS link via Westland Row is simply unacceptable however. O'Connell St. to Broombridge would be fine with me.
The project isn't one or the other. It's not BX or D, it's BXD. The cost–benefit analysis of joining the lines speaks for it self.
More to the point here, we're talking about extending the green line into the northside and a new thread would be more suited to discussing why this should be done.To_be_confirmed wrote: »I have previously said that some sort of bus priority route might work through Westland Row but the extra impact at having to dedicate one or two lanes to a LUAS would be very unwelcome. Going on what I see on James' St., a lot of congestion can happen just from traffic sharing a lane with the LUAS.
And, in the context of buses and trams being able to share space, I have previously asked, what are you talking about dedicated to Luas?The junction of Pearse St and Tara St? The Luas would continue straight on towards Hawkins St past the Garda station but traffic would turn right. I can see that being a major junction. Though of course, thinking about it, if the Luas can be kept to the south side of the road towards the existing bus lane rat run outside the Garda Station it might be ok. The problem then is that how do you bring the line back east on Westland Row without crossing traffic at junction Pease St and Westland Row, since presumably you want the station at Pearse to be on the east side of the road, directly outside the existing station facade, so passengers don't have to cross the road to interchange.
The junction of Pearse St and Tara St is already bus only and trams can be added to this. No general traffic would cross the line. Secure parking should be provided for anyway for private cars owned by the gardai based at the station and that would make extra room.
No, have the Luas stop on Westland Row on the west side of the street, it's better not to have the Luas and traffic crossing each other. Provide decent crossing points for people going from Luas-Dart / Dart-Luas and there should not be any major problems.To_be_confirmed wrote: »For the record, the type of businesses in the area are often the small retail or newsagent sort or else white-collar industry headquarters etc. and between couriers (in particular), food and drink deliveries, newspapers and so on most deliveries would come from some warehouse on the outskirts of Dublin before coming to that part of the world. But that was not the only point I was trying to make.
There's city centres around the same size or smaller than ours with far more tram and bus ways and far heaver restrictions on general traffic. They somehow manage, but Dublin is different -- as I touched on in my last post, this is a recurring theme in Ireland and elsewhere in the world.To_be_confirmed wrote: »And the crux of this is that after pointing out the realities of the streets and roads in the area and answering the points made thereof, we're still at the same auld craic of comparing Westland Row to Grafton St. No one can colour this any other way, when a LUAS operates via this route the bus services already using it will suffer. And for what? To join two dots together on a map, through an area heavily served by buses and when we already have planning permission to build a tunnel on the same route! But on the topic of the specific alignment, there is a far more subdued impact on the overall landscape of Dublin by building the LUAS via College Green rather than an extra km or so around Trinity and affecting a whole plethora of one way systems and bus lanes in the process. (And I've no problem with the route north of the river but would rather Marlborough St be used for both lines)
The impact on the bus network would be far greater if BXD is routed via College Green.0 -
Advertisement
-
Put a tunnel in from Dawson St to Hawkins St, under Trinity, to immediate west of Arts building to avoid basement and be done with it.
Routing directly up/down Marlborough St also. Would give a fast and reasonably segregated route.
NB. Ignoring cost.0 -
-
-
Where would it surface and connect to Green Line? Doesn't seem a runner to me.0
-
I did not purely advocate for keeping the street open for private traffic as is. I wouldn't particularly mind the street being converted to public transport/cycling use entirely and make some sort of alternative arrangements or other for private cars and trucks but for the sake of an unnecessary linking up of two points of a network 1 km apart? No way in hell would I justify the extra expense and cost to Dublin Bus commuters for the Lucan QBC and the 4/7/8 users who will not be served by LUAS if this happens, private business in the area, the residents of Sandwith St. and Erne St. and Cumberland St who will inevitably face increased noise pollution until we get to the long term endgame of less conventional car usage.I don't think we're going to get much movement on this from me or you, but...
Once any new scheme (bus gate, tram line, bus lane, QBC network, cycle lanes, pedestrianisation etc) is proposed or even suggested there's always people who will say the same things as you. They say the suggestions are impossible and they will -- like you have -- claim that the suggestions are different from those that has happened elsewhere.
For example with pedestrianisations: In Copenhagen shop keepers groups said that the people are Danish, and not the Italians, and that the Danish would never take to street living and sitting outside. Now other people say we are not Danish. Galway's pedestrianisation blocked off or hindered some major routes but yet one of the papers in Killarney reported that a councillor said it "did not have the infrastructure to go with pedestrianisation, such as Galway, where it worked very well."
The bus gate was also imposable, motorists would never survive we were told.
All we're talking about on Westland Row is the loss of one of the current two general traffic lanes.
Some people would switch to Luas, the bus, the Dart, or a mix of them; some would switch to walking or cycling; some people would keep using Westland Row one-way; some people would use the nearby routes; some people would go a little further around; and some people would go a long way around.
People will sort themselves out. I don't care much for traffic -- I care about people and keeping people moving.
So what if there is still substantial traffic in the area. What's your point here?
If you are honestly particularly interested in helping delivers and other commercial traffic the aim should be to reduce all traffic and particularly through traffic in the city centre.
What words did I put in your mouth? You are advocating keeping Westland Row open to private traffic both directions and against the suggestion of sacrificing one traffic lane in one direction for a buses and trams. Advocating to this extent against pubic transport is advocating for current and future congestion.
Nobody said motorist are the root of all evil, but motorists often block the Luas at peak times along the red line
The project isn't one or the other. It's not BX or D, it's BXD. The cost–benefit analysis of joining the lines speaks for it self.
More to the point here, we're talking about extending the green line into the northside and a new thread would be more suited to discussing why this should be done.
And, in the context of buses and trams being able to share space, I have previously asked, what are you talking about dedicated to Luas?
The junction of Pearse St and Tara St is already bus only and trams can be added to this. No general traffic would cross the line. Secure parking should be provided for anyway for private cars owned by the gardai based at the station and that would make extra room.
No, have the Luas stop on Westland Row on the west side of the street, it's better not to have the Luas and traffic crossing each other. Provide decent crossing points for people going from Luas-Dart / Dart-Luas and there should not be any major problems.
There's city centres around the same size or smaller than ours with far more tram and bus ways and far heaver restrictions on general traffic. They somehow manage, but Dublin is different -- as I touched on in my last post, this is a recurring theme in Ireland and elsewhere in the world.
The impact on the bus network would be far greater if BXD is routed via College Green.
I'm very suprised that you cited claims from a councillor in Killarney regarding the success of the Eyre Square partial pedestrianisation. The end result has been the loss of zebra crossings and and a net increase in the amount of time it takes pedestrians (thanks to the new traffic lights) to navigate the squar, from reports here!
Goods and deliveries need to be kept moving too, and were there to be even low levels of traffic increases on Sandwith St. and Macken St at peak times, severe congestion would result. And there's no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the existing traffic using those routes from Grand Canal St/Hogan Place/Fenian St./Holles St. would fall if the LUAS was routed via Westland Row. So when you refuse to acknowledge this as being an issue, it is exasperating and I must question the underlying reasons for why one would not address concerns I have raised several times now. The latest response is "people will sort themselves out". Not a useful mantra when proposing an extra expense to the state so people can get a luas from Stephen's green to Abbey street rather than "sort themselves out".
I still maintain that where a bus lane must share the space with a tram track, both services will have to incur some sort of compromise and congestion at times will result.
I think discussing the merits of the combined "BXD" project rather than allowing just a "D" aspect are clearly within the remit of this thread. It's a repugnant waste of money and an offence to good planning if this goes ahead without the necessary Metro North preparation works going ahead first. The o'connell St. station boxes for example. I think Metro North is the clear solution to linking the transport hub at Stephen's green with O'Connell St. and Abbey St and Parnell Sq. Therefore, I think the LUAS over the same section is excessive. From what I remember of the cost-benefit-analysis, it did not address the issue of the Metro North coexisting alongside it so I would argue its conclusions were deeply flawed.
In theory - having a significant loss of private-use road space in the city centre would result in significant social benefits. But they would need radical redesign of most thoroughfares through the city centre and around and significant investment in public infrastructure to boot. And we in Ireland are not at a point yet of allowing that to happen. Everything from the weather to taxi drivers to An Bord Pleanala would be a thorn in the side of a more radical change in thinking. So I urge anyone to look instead to maximising the use of what we have and make clear strides in the direction of new infrastructure rather than trying to force compromises between LUAS and bus routes over the same stretch of road.
P.S. I haven't heard it mentioned but there could be some feasibility in using Kildare St and then simply cutting across trinity's cricket and rugby pitch and the Pearse St. residences and Natural Sciences building (which they eventually plan to rebuild from the ground up anyway.) But it would never happen for all sorts of reasons. And a tunnel, even under greenfield area, would probably be too expensive.0 -
To_be_confirmed wrote: »I did not purely advocate for keeping the street open for private traffic as is. I wouldn't particularly mind the street being converted to public transport/cycling use entirely and make some sort of alternative arrangements or other for private cars and trucks but for the sake of an unnecessary linking up of two points of a network 1 km apart? No way in hell would I justify the extra expense and cost to Dublin Bus commuters for the Lucan QBC and the 4/7/8 users who will not be served by LUAS if this happens, private business in the area, the residents of Sandwith St. and Erne St. and Cumberland St who will inevitably face increased noise pollution until we get to the long term endgame of less conventional car usage.
All your points on traffic are mute points if you're suggesting you would be in favor of a bus/cycle only street.To_be_confirmed wrote: »I'm very suprised that you cited claims from a councillor in Killarney regarding the success of the Eyre Square partial pedestrianisation. The end result has been the loss of zebra crossings and and a net increase in the amount of time it takes pedestrians (thanks to the new traffic lights) to navigate the squar, from reports here!
Galway pedestrianisation = Shop Street etc.To_be_confirmed wrote: »Goods and deliveries need to be kept moving too, and were there to be even low levels of traffic increases on Sandwith St. and Macken St at peak times, severe congestion would result.
The vast bulk of goods can be transported at any time.To_be_confirmed wrote: »And there's no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the existing traffic using those routes from Grand Canal St/Hogan Place/Fenian St./Holles St. would fall if the LUAS was routed via Westland Row.
I actually already said that some traffic is likely to transfer to nearby routes at peak times,
So, what? What's the big deal?To_be_confirmed wrote: »So when you refuse to acknowledge this as being an issue, it is exasperating and I must question the underlying reasons for why one would not address concerns I have raised several times now. The latest response is "people will sort themselves out".
It's fairly well documented the world around that people adapt to these things.
Just as people have adapted to the other Luas lines, the QBC network, the bus gate etc.To_be_confirmed wrote: »Not a useful mantra when proposing an extra expense to the state so people can get a luas from Stephen's green to Abbey street rather than "sort themselves out".
Business case supports the linkup as having a postive return for the state.
If there was no case for the Luas Green Line to be extended into the northside including the linkup, then bus routes could also forego using the city centre -- the whole core city centre could be pedestrianized overnight. But we all know there is a large value in having routes intersect the city centre, both bus and tram.To_be_confirmed wrote: »I still maintain that where a bus lane must share the space with a tram track, both services will have to incur some sort of compromise and congestion at times will result.
A compromise? Sure. No big deal. Still 20x better than bus or tram sharing with traffic.
Enough congestion to justify the term congestion compared to your adverage Dublin congestion? Very much so highly unlikely.To_be_confirmed wrote: »I think discussing the merits of the combined "BXD" project rather than allowing just a "D" aspect are clearly within the remit of this thread.
Maybe. But you're needlessly blurring the lines between 'it should not use X route' and 'the linkup should not happen at all'.To_be_confirmed wrote: »It's a repugnant waste of money and an offence to good planning if this goes ahead without the necessary Metro North preparation works going ahead first. The o'connell St. station boxes for example. I think Metro North is the clear solution to linking the transport hub at Stephen's green with O'Connell St. and Abbey St and Parnell Sq. Therefore, I think the LUAS over the same section is excessive.
I'm sure we can agree that if it is being built before MN, the O'Connell Street routing should be avoided.To_be_confirmed wrote: »From what I remember of the cost-benefit-analysis, it did not address the issue of the Metro North coexisting alongside it so I would argue its conclusions were deeply flawed.
It's advailable online if you are unsure of anything it.To_be_confirmed wrote: »In theory - having a significant loss of private-use road space in the city centre would result in significant social benefits. But they would need radical redesign of most thoroughfares through the city centre and around and significant investment in public infrastructure to boot. And we in Ireland are not at a point yet of allowing that to happen. Everything from the weather to taxi drivers to An Bord Pleanala would be a thorn in the side of a more radical change in thinking. So I urge anyone to look instead to maximising the use of what we have and make clear strides in the direction of new infrastructure rather than trying to force compromises between LUAS and bus routes over the same stretch of road.
Sometimes maximising what you have includes compromises for the greater good.To_be_confirmed wrote: »P.S. I haven't heard it mentioned but there could be some feasibility in using Kildare St and then simply cutting across trinity's cricket and rugby pitch and the Pearse St. residences and Natural Sciences building (which they eventually plan to rebuild from the ground up anyway.) But it would never happen for all sorts of reasons. And a tunnel, even under greenfield area, would probably be too expensive.
Doing something like that -- above ground or maybe cut and cover --- would be more than feasible from a design aspect, but as you say there's too many reasons why it won't happen and why it was never even publicly considered at the route options stage.0 -
I cannot repeatedly debate this but I will respond to some other things: I have mentioned more than once that a "bus lane only" westland row would be preferable to me over running dual-track LUAS down it. I also thought I had made it clear by now that I had more than just concerns for the impact of traffic on Westland Row.
The points about deliveries are unrealistic and show a lack in understanding of several typical examples of retail or tertiary sector industries. There will be costs incurred by shoving deliveries to graveyard shifts and even if it's not so bad a problem, it's still an issue that has to be addressed.
If you take measures against private traffic in one area, the problem will move somewhere else in the short and medium term. That's not a real solution in an area that is predominantly residential in nature (and with the added problem of clearances under the railway line). It may be a case of "you can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs" but negatives do exist and to not address them is not an honest way to approach this discussion.
I'm not actually sure i subscribe to the notion of cross city routes, be it LUAS or bus but that is far too complicated to go into further detail here.
And what in all honesty was the point of telling me the CBA report was available online if I was unsure of something?! I mean, if you want clarity on the matter you could just request me to provide it, or as you blithely put it, you could just find it on the internet yourself.0 -
Indeed they have relocated, but every location that they have moved to is likely to be lost to LUAS BXD.
And they'll just move them again. No problem. The city is changing and bus routes are something that should not be set in stone.
All those buses going through College Green and up Nassau St - no problem, reroute them.
We did it when the when the red line was built - all the Abbey St. services relocated.
Everything had to be moved around when the "one way" system on the quays reversed decades ago.
There is no problem here that can not be solved.
For starters are the current stops and routing convenient for everybody who uses them, more than likely not.
Yes the current stops and routing ARE convenient. All the routes operating from Rathmines will lose three city centre stops as a result of these proposals. And that is the key point - they are city centre stops where people want to go.
I don't want to have a longer journey via George's Street or Westland Row. And yes they are both longer - I can say that having taken both options on other occasions.
As a bus user for whom LUAS is not an option I strongly object to all the LUAS supporters suggesting that it's not a problem to re-route buses.
Why should my journey and those of other bus users be made even longer to improve the lot of fewer LUAS users?0 -
To_be_confirmed wrote: »I cannot repeatedly debate this but I will respond to some other things: I have mentioned more than once that a "bus lane only" westland row would be preferable to me over running dual-track LUAS down it. I also thought I had made it clear by now that I had more than just concerns for the impact of traffic on Westland Row.
Yes, but that shows your bias here. A bus lane only street would cause far greater impact to the street and have less return that having tram/bus lanes and one general traffic lane.To_be_confirmed wrote: »The points about deliveries are unrealistic and show a lack in understanding of several typical examples of retail or tertiary sector industries. There will be costs incurred by shoving deliveries to graveyard shifts and even if it's not so bad a problem, it's still an issue that has to be addressed.
Unrealistic for Dublin but so many other cities can manage? This is the 'our city is different' mindset again.
And I don't see how this would push all deliveries to graveyard shifts.To_be_confirmed wrote: »If you take measures against private traffic in one area, the problem will move somewhere else in the short and medium term. That's not a real solution in an area that is predominantly residential in nature (and with the added problem of clearances under the railway line). It may be a case of "you can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs" but negatives do exist and to not address them is not an honest way to approach this discussion.
Nobody denied that negatives exist. Your problem is that you're claiming that the negatives outweigh the benefits but you have yet to show how this is so.
You know how gridlocked the nearby streets can be like at rush hour and you're still trying to make out that residents will notice a few extra cars in one direction?
Half of the major routes in Dublin are predominantly residential and many other residential streets are used as official and unofficial rat runs -- both are major problems. The focus needs to be on long term traffic reduction by upping public transport (like Luas), walking and cycling provisions.
If you want honest discussion you'll stop adding in tiny issues like clearances under the railway line which does not affect the vast bulk of private trafficTo_be_confirmed wrote: »And what in all honesty was the point of telling me the CBA report was available online if I was unsure of something?! I mean, if you want clarity on the matter you could just request me to provide it, or as you blithely put it, you could just find it on the internet yourself.
Because you were making unfounded claims about a document which is freely and easily accessible.
You quite shockingly said: "From what I remember of the cost-benefit-analysis, it did not address the issue of the Metro North coexisting alongside it so I would argue its conclusions were deeply flawed."
But a quick glance at the easily accessible online document and you'd see that the the issue of both lines coexisting alongside each other is covered in detail and that Metro North is referred to in the business case for BXD at least 58 times by name.0 -
Advertisement
-
Where would it surface and connect to Green Line? Doesn't seem a runner to me.
Tunnel length would be approx 500m. Certain sections could be done as cut and cover. Other sections would need to be mined under buildings. Luas would run along Marlborough St and Hawkins St only, not O'Connell St. Tunnel (with some street closures) could remove interaction with traffic except for Burgh Quay and Eden Quay.
It's merely a proposal to get around College Green problems.
Also I reckon they are going to have to build a bridge at Stephen's green, to bridge in advance over station that will be built when Dart Underground and Metro North go ahead. To the casual observer it will just look like a road, until soil is removed for station. Else they'll need to build station now which would be more expensive.0
Advertisement