Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study

Bray Head

The Irish Times has an editorial on this today.

It suggests MN would be disruptive and highly expensive. But then goes on to propose BRT through the Port Tunnel or diverting the Dublin-Belfast line via the Airport. How's that for internal logic?!

Whatever the outcome of this review, the Minister should make clear that the wildly expensive and enormously disruptive Metro North is no longer on the agenda. Merely shelving the project, leaving open the prospect of dusting it down at some stage in the future, is not sufficient. There are other, more realistic ways of serving Dublin Airport and Swords.

It always struck me as bizarre that a newspaper that gets at least half its revenues from people who live within 40km of Tara Street would be so opposed to infrastructure spending in Dublin.

Estimates of the Galway bypass cost are at €500 to €750m - easily a higher per capita spend than Metro North never mind Dart Underground.

cgcsb

I'll eat my hat if half a billion gets blown on bypassing a 75k population town, that'd benefit more from a €100m-€200m BRT system +park 'n' ride + car ban

Van.Bosch

cgcsb wrote: »

Also will there be a detailed route consultation?
If so perhaps the route can be changed to make the best of a bad situation:

Instead of a tunnel under Glasnevin, tunnel between St Mobhi Road and Royal Canal Bank, put the route through the park there and join it to BXD at the top of Dominick street, with provision for a new interchange station at crossguns bridge. That way the curves are reduced, stops are reduced, you'd easily shave 10 minutes off the journey and include an interchange with the Maynooth line. The extra costs would be 1 underground station and a few extra metres of tunnel, i.e. not that much.

Also get a better deal for the airport station instead of that people mover rubbish.

With all that done, it's not Metro North, but you could probably still get from Swords to the north end of the City Centre in about the same time. You'd have a high degree of segregation.

Yes - the key is that if it is built it is modified, I would have it merge with BXD closer to O'Connell Street, dominic street might do but i was thinking temple street or down by the garden of remembrance (although that may not be feasible). I would then let it share the loop element of BXD and then after it goes around by Trinity it can go out to the RDS or else have it turn down westland row to serve ringsend/Grand canal. If we really wanted to get the crayons out it could go up dame street and form the start of Lucan Luas.

At least then you are adding an extra line to the project which will increase its appeal, it will serve an extra area and it will join up with the DART at pearse station. (if going to RDS it could have an interchange at the side of the current platform at Pearse).

It goes without saying the "people mover" should be eliminated. I mean isnt the Luas itself a people mover?

cgcsb

I thought about a tunnel to Parnell square, but for the amount of tunnel, you may as well just build metro north. Although there's the possibility of cut and cover through Griffith Park.

Van.Bosch

cgcsb wrote: »

I thought about a tunnel to Parnell square, but for the amount of tunnel, you may as well just build metro north. Although there's the possibility of cut and cover through Griffith Park.

I think if we are to be stuck with this "solution" the route to the city needs to be more direct, tunnelling wont happen i believe so another road needs to be found.

McAlban

Van.Bosch wrote: »

Yes - the key is that if it is built it is modified, I would have it merge with BXD closer to O'Connell Street, dominic street might do but i was thinking temple street or down by the garden of remembrance (although that may not be feasible). I would then let it share the loop element of BXD and then after it goes around by Trinity it can go out to the RDS or else have it turn down westland row to serve ringsend/Grand canal. If we really wanted to get the crayons out it could go up dame street and form the start of Lucan Luas.

At least then you are adding an extra line to the project which will increase its appeal, it will serve an extra area and it will join up with the DART at pearse station. (if going to RDS it could have an interchange at the side of the current platform at Pearse).

It goes without saying the "people mover" should be eliminated. I mean isnt the Luas itself a people mover?

Eh. Ok. So Up Parnell Sq. E, Frederick St. and then Where??

All your outher suggestions are for a line that will not be built on the southside.

hardy_buck

Bray Head wrote: »

The Irish Times has an editorial on this today.

It suggests MN would be disruptive and highly expensive. But then goes on to propose BRT through the Port Tunnel or diverting the Dublin-Belfast line via the Airport. How's that for internal logic?!



It always struck me as bizarre that a newspaper that gets at least half its revenues from people who live within 40km of Tara Street would be so opposed to infrastructure spending in Dublin.

Estimates of the Galway bypass cost are at €500 to €750m - easily a higher per capita spend than Metro North never mind Dart Underground.

I can't for the F*cking life of me understand why the media in this country has such an axe to grind against progressive projects like this..
Even the coverage of this travesty has been minimal. Ask most people on the street about DU and they haven't a clue of what it is or where it was to go, MN then is seen as some 'Celtic Tiger' Project that 'we're not big enough for'.
Compare this to London where Crossrail 1 and 2 dominate the agenda, HS2 is regularly in the news, delays at London bridge station are the front page news etc..

I'm starting to hope that the transport situation collapses in Dublin, I think that it is the only thing the will slap the electorate into action.
Decisions like this are completely and utterly exasperating.

Van.Bosch

McAlban wrote: »

Eh. Ok. So Up Parnell Sq. E, Frederick St. and then Where??

All your outher suggestions are for a line that will not be built on the southside.

Its tight i know and probably not feasible but going via the route proposed is too long and will lead to a slower service from the airport than the current buses.

cgcsb

The focus should be on trying to get the route as direct and segregated as possible to try and preserve some of the good points offered by metro north.

DART underground being dumped will probably mean an end to the dockalnds SDZ going ahead. Many of the developers are relying on it to provide access for their office schemes. Without the SDZ we'll have no new office space and multi nationals will cease locating here.

McAlban

Van.Bosch wrote: »

Its tight i know and probably not feasible but going via the route proposed is too long and will lead to a slower service from the airport than the current buses.

I know. Luas Line D2 is a shambles. The Best Route for it is probably to go up the N1 and then the Old Swords Road, but the Disruption this will cause is unfathomable.

Basically It's Luas Line D as Proposed in 1997/8. Which was shot down as unworkable even then.

Van.Bosch

McAlban wrote: »

I know. Luas Line D2 is a shambles. The Best Route for it is probably to go up the N1 and then the Old Swords Road, but the Disruption this will cause is unfathomable.

Basically It's Luas Line D as Proposed in 1997/8. Which was shot down as unworkable even then.

Yeah - maybe they could get some consultants to look at it? Off the top of my head i reckon the best bet would be to tunnel all the way up through DCU, the back of Santry, under the airport and then on to Swords. It would be pretty fast almost like a metro or something...im not good with catch names but perhaps something like "north bound metro".

Brian CivilEng

In August 2.6 million passengers passed through Dublin airport. That is approx 84,000 a day.

In the busiest hour you easily had 7,000 people arriving or departing at the airport. 7,000 people an hour is enough to fill 17 of the 43m Luas units on the green line!

Now of course all 7,000 wouldn't have taken the metro in any case. If we assume that 40% would take public transport (reasonable looking at other european airports), and of the 40% half of them would take the metro. That means 1400 airport passengers could have used the metro in an hour last August. More than 3 and a half full Luas carriages! That is now, that doesn't take any future growth into account.

Luas units I'm assuming can take approx 400 passengers, so at a 5min frequency that is 4800 per direction per hour. Seems like loads. Now, the luas will stop elsewhere, not just the airport. So if we take that the airport will be the busiest stop responsible for half of all patronage, that's 2400 per direction, per hour available to the airport. Assume 80% of that 1400 is heading to the city centre, that's 1120 of the 2400 already filled, in 2015, not including any airport staff or the new office park being built at the airport. Being conservative, call it an extra 150 luas passengers for staff, that's 1270 per hour heading to the city centre.

Now here is the fun part. Those are 2015 numbers. The airport Luas is just a line on a map, a 2025 opening date is optimistic, but we'll assume that's when it'll open. Over the past 10 years, including the recession, the average growth at Dublin airport was around 5%. So extrapolating today's figures to the opening date you'll find that 2070 passengers need to use the Luas. 86% occupancy on opening day. Extrapolate 5 more years and you'll find 2514 pax want to use the Luas. Over the promised capacity by 2030, less than 5 years after opening.

Some people call the Luas Green line leaving passengers behind in the morning a sign of it's success. I call it underspecced and obsolete.

TL:DR - On current projections, the Airport Luas would be over capacity less than five years after opening.

Idbatterim

I the numbers would be much worse than that! Swords alone is a big town... airport numbers like you say will be way higher by the time its open 35-40,000,000 is conceivable. What about all the new development in that area of Dublin also... Its a total and utter sham!

Swords was the 8th most populous town in the country in the 2011 census, it was less 2,000 away from being 6th most populous.

We have a massive housing shortage and a Mn or heavy rail solution could provide a great service for thousands or tens of thousands of high density developments along the line... Joined up thinking, LOL!

Some people call the Luas Green line leaving passengers behind in the morning a sign of it's success. I call it underspecced and obsolete.

It was factored in, that it could be changed to metro in the future, maybe it is time to start thinking about that and have it go underground in city centre, with longer higher capacity trams... so basically MN but as luas as it is currently known. Or maybe the line would then be called Dublin Metro etc, they also need to build the link from Cherrywood to Bray...

Sam Russell

How does that compare to the Clongriffin Airport Dart spur?

Say you assume a fifteen minute frequency with eight coach Darts.

Idbatterim

How does that compare to the Clongriffin Airport Dart spur?

Say you assume a fifteen minute frequency with eight coach Darts.

IF the luas ends up being built, this will likely be the fix that they come up with, even further down the road...

Sam Russell

Idbatterim wrote: »

IF the luas ends up being built, this will likely be the fix that they come up with, even further down the road...

I would think the Clongriffin spur could be built quickly and be operational before the Luas line construction even started. It is over open countryside with just a few bridges to get over the motorway and a few minor roads.

Idbatterim

exactly, what in gods name are they up to! that would have served the airport, been relatively cheap and would have kicked the MN are few years down the line...

short of MN or heavy rail line following same alignment. The problem with Luas is, surely it would follow such a similar alignment that it will potentially bury MN for good?

Ren2k7

This country is a joke as are FGLAB. Disgusting behaviour by this govt who wants everything on the cheap. You can't put a price on Ireland's economic prosperity and if spending c.€3 billion is needed to ensured Dublin's prosperity then there should be nothing to think about. This is as close to economic sabotage as it gets and FGLAB are ensuring Ireland remains a gombeen infested backwater with this latest stunt.

Sam Russell

What is even worse, it could qualify for large EU funding, and with current interest rates and QE, it could have been built on the cheap (for the Government).

We built all these motorways when the EU was paying for them and then could not stop. Most of the recent ones are empty most of the time with the PPP tunnels (Limerick) and motorways (M6 and M3)) now being fully funded by the Gov because there are not enough punters to pay the basic costs through tolls.

MN and DU are both guaranteed full subscription from the start.

Ren2k7

Speaking of EU funding what will happen to the 500 million Euro loan from the EIB now? Well done FGLAB.

Carawaystick

Sam Russell wrote: »

How does that compare to the Clongriffin Airport Dart spur?

Say you assume a fifteen minute frequency with eight coach Darts.

Dart carriage capacity is 250

8car dart capacity is car : 250 x 8 at crush load : 2000
x 4 is 8k pax per hour.

The original green line trams had a two ninety something capacity. have they been lengthened since? The red ones have.

Sam Russell

Carawaystick wrote: »

Dart carriage capacity is 250

8car dart capacity is car : 250 x 8 at crush load : 2000
x 4 is 8k pax per hour.

The original green line trams had a two ninety something capacity. have they been lengthened since? The red ones have.

That 8k each direction by say 10 hours worth or 80k per day or 20 million par year (using 250 days per year).

If 50% of people travel by Dart Ext, then it would work up to 40 million airport passengers per year.

Makes you think it is a no brainer to build it now.

1huge1

I see that the Luas trams have a top speed of 70km/hr. This appears to be a lot lower than a lot of the top speeds of many metro systems across Europe, (I read some of the trains on the London Underground are capable of speeds of 100km/hr for example), assuming they would acquire new trams for this extension to the airport (still hoping for DU but anyway), would new ones have a higher top speed or would it not make a difference with the short distances between stops.

Idbatterim

the stops are so close to one another, probably no point in higher top speed than 70 kmh... Hell 7kmh will be adequate for some of the city centre running, pathetic!

Schadenfreudia

Idbatterim wrote: »

the stops are so close to one another, probably no point in higher top speed than 70 kmh...

Haven't seen a map, but in the absence of a redundant rail line to follow this will twist and turn like a dying snake...never mind all the stops.

70kph will be a rare treat on that line:(

McAlban

Lets just put it all underground... on a 1600mm gauge

L1011

Sam Russell wrote: »

That 8k each direction by say 10 hours worth or 80k per day or 20 million par year (using 250 days per year).

If 50% of people travel by Dart Ext, then it would work up to 40 million airport passengers per year.

Makes you think it is a no brainer to build it now.

If passengers came evenly spread across the days, weeks and months maybe. However you can't fix the fact that it's heavily loaded to summer, mornings, and specific days of the week by using simple calculations

Sam Russell

L1011 wrote: »

If passengers came evenly spread across the days, weeks and months maybe. However you can't fix the fact that it's heavily loaded to summer, mornings, and specific days of the week by using simple calculations

I assumed 10 hrs worth of capacity per day. That is spreading it across the mornings, and specific days. The airport is open for at least 18 hours per day.

The transport study does the same thing - talking about capacities based on 'green running' or 'double yellow running'. You can use 'the busiest hour' but that is hard to gauge with an airport, because people arrive and leave allowing different periods ahead of their flights. Workers are more predictable and there are plenty of them.

L1011

The airport is open 24/7 and the busiest period is 4 hours in the morning. Nothing that doesn't work for that demand is sufficient

Sam Russell

L1011 wrote: »

The airport is open 24/7 and the busiest period is 4 hours in the morning. Nothing that doesn't work for that demand is sufficient

Currently there is capacity only for cars. No train. No Luas. No bendy buses. Coaches carry 70 or so passengers per coach so one Dart carries 2,000 at crush load, but say 1,200 per Dart. That is equal to 17 coaches. If Darts run every 15 mins at peak, that would be equal to one coach every minute.

The spur could be built NOW - certainly starting within 12 months - if the political will was there to do so. Most is across open countryside.

No other solution, apart from bendy buses could be up and running quicker - and who wants bendy buses?