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
Dublin - BusConnects
Options
Comments
-
Please tell us how the trams everywhere idea works.
Thanks.0 -
That's ridiculous.
If you can build a dedicated lane for a tram at 100 million a km you can build a dedicated lane for a bus at 50 million (figures used for illustrative points).
How are you going to build a tram from greenhills to the city centre?
Is there some sort of hidden land route everyone else bar yourself is unaware of?
Are you talking about banning cars off the road to make way for the trams? How do you think that will go down with the motoring lobby?
Are you talking about building dedicated tram lanes that require cpoing at at least twice the price of bus connects?
Typical tram costs €40m per km and Busconnects is around €20m per km.
I am suggesting that instead of building 115km of bus lanes (230 is based on per direction) we could build 60km of tram lines for the same price.
That could be:
Lucan Luas
Knocklyon Luas
UCD Luas
Clongriffin Luas
This would replace the CBCs in these areas.
My point again as I have mentioned several times on this thread is that it would be a far better use of resources to build an extensive tram network than develop an extensive CBC network. Trams are far more efficient at transporting large volumes of people.0 -
In London the underground carries 1.3 billion journeys per year, just over half of the London bus' 2.2 billion.
Source: https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/annual-report0 -
In London the underground carries 1.3 billion journeys per year, just over half of the London bus' 2.2 billion.
Source: https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/annual-report
Compare it to km operated though. Obviously if you have more buses than trains it’s bound to carry more passengers. My point is trains (and in Dublin’s case trams) are far more efficient at moving people.
According to the next line in the table, London buses operated 480 million km vs just 85 million km for London Underground. That means despite operating over 5.5 times the number of Kms it is carrying less than 2 times the passengers.
To get a real comparison you need an idea of passengers per km operated.
Bus 2200/480 = 4.625
Underground 1384/85 = 16.282
If you want to bring it back to Dublin and more importantly trams comparing bus and tram passengers vs km operated in 2017 according to the CSO
Bus 138/57= 2.42
Luas 37.6/3.9= 9.64
So Luas is more efficient (almost 4x) than buses... as I said.0 -
Typical tram costs €40m per km and Busconnects is around €20m per km.
I am suggesting that instead of building 115km of bus lanes (230 is based on per direction) we could build 60km of tram lines for the same price.
That could be:
Lucan Luas
Knocklyon Luas
UCD Luas
Clongriffin Luas
This would replace the CBCs in these areas.
My point again as I have mentioned several times on this thread is that it would be a far better use of resources to build an extensive tram network than develop an extensive CBC network. Trams are far more efficient at transporting large volumes of people.
ok lets look at those routes:
lucan:
a qbc is pretty much in place from lucan to the quays already via the n4. This route requires some bus prioritisation (traffic transponders to favour busses, bus gates etc) and some bus dedication at the n4/m50 junction.
lucan luas requires a brand new luas line that wont be any quicker than a dedicated qbc.
winner: bus.
knocklyon luas:
what route are you planning on taking to build the tram?
ucd luas:
ucd is sandwiched in between the green line luas (13min cycle from milltown stop), the dart, (9min cycle from booterstown.
there is a readily accessible qbc at the gate of ucd, this will be upgraded quite easily under bc.
again bus is the winner.
clongriffin
admittedly i know nothing about this route so you can have that one.
look i agree rail is the best answer especially in the greenhills terenure templeogue areas, but there is just no room for a tram, it has to be put underground.
However on the above mentioned routes, the n4 (lucan) and the n11 (ucd) are best placed to take full advantage of bus connects.0 -
Advertisement
-
Compare it to km operated though. Obviously if you have more buses than trains it’s bound to carry more passengers. My point is trains (and in Dublin’s case trams) are far more efficient at moving people.
According to the next line in the table, London buses operated 480 million km vs just 85 million km for London Underground. That means despite operating over 5.5 times the number of Kms it is carrying less than 2 times the passengers.
To get a real comparison you need an idea of passengers per km operated.
Bus 2200/480 = 4.625
Underground 1384/85 = 16.282
If you want to bring it back to Dublin and more importantly trams comparing bus and tram passengers vs km operated in 2017 according to the CSO
Bus 138/57= 2.42
Luas 37.6/3.9= 9.64
So Luas is more efficient (almost 4x) than buses... as I said.
thats all very well when you have the space and money to build a tram...............0 -
ok lets look at those routes:
lucan:
a qbc is pretty much in place from lucan to the quays already via the n4. This route requires some bus prioritisation (traffic transponders to favour busses, bus gates etc) and some bus dedication at the n4/m50 junction.
lucan luas requires a brand new luas line that wont be any quicker than a dedicated qbc.
winner: bus.
knocklyon luas:
what route are you planning on taking to build the tram?
ucd luas:
ucd is sandwiched in between the green line luas (13min cycle from milltown stop), the dart, (9min cycle from booterstown.
there is a readily accessible qbc at the gate of ucd, this will be upgraded quite easily under bc.
again bus is the winner.
clongriffin
admittedly i know nothing about this route so you can have that one.
look i agree rail is the best answer especially in the greenhills terenure templeogue areas, but there is just no room for a tram, it has to be put underground.
However on the above mentioned routes, the n4 (lucan) and the n11 (ucd) are best placed to take full advantage of bus connects.
Again my point of Lucan and UCD is that it would be far more efficient to build a tram than Busconnects.
Lucan Luas effectively follows the Liffey valley CBC not the Lucan one btw.
I’m looking at the overall cost per km and if we assume that we go with all teams instead of all buses we have 55km of trams to build. Lucan is one area which is crying out for public transport so gets a line.
Even if it doesn’t have any real time benefits, the capacity benefits as I have pointed out and you agree are huge.
UCD is essentially a small town at this stage so the suggestion that it is well served by a Luas 30 minutes walk and a train 20 minutes walk is nonsense. These are also gate to gate times not gate to lecture room. You’re right it is sandwiched between the dart and eventually metro line which is why I’m suggesting upgrading it to a Luas over a CBC. It’s only 4km from Harcourt to UCD so the cost isn’t that significant.
I would suggest college green - Christchurch - Harold’s cross - Terenure - right at the dodder - Templeogue - Knocklyon.
I’m not suggesting a fully segregated route but segregation as much as possible. It’s only 5km from the dodder to college green so even an average speed of 15kmph would do that in 20 minutes (far far quicker than any bus especially at peak). It would be segregated from other traffic between Leonard’s corner and Christchurch so even allowing for lights and stops it should be pushing 25kmph along that stretch. This would replace the 3 CBCs along here.
To put it in perspective the costs again are
Busconnects 20m per km stop ever 400m
Luas 40m per km stop every km
Metro approx. 130m stop every 2km
While I appreciate it’s difficult to get your head around building less (km of infrastructure) is giving more, the reality is that Dublin is the perfect sized city for trams and investing now would be a sensible investment.0 -
-
Again my point of Lucan and UCD is that it would be far more efficient to build a tram than Busconnects.
There was a plan to build the LUAS out to Lucan. It was dropped at some point.
If LUAS cross city is any indicator than shared space tramlines are basically a waste of time and you might as well build a covered tunnel that people can walk along without getting wet.0 -
There was a plan to build the LUAS out to Lucan. It was dropped at some point.
If LUAS cross city is any indicator than shared space tramlines are basically a waste of time and you might as well build a covered tunnel that people can walk along without getting wet.
Are there any issues with luas cross city other than College Green? I always notice the Dominick Street section running fairly fast and uncongested.0 -
Advertisement
-
We’re spending €3bn to create space for buses?!?
€2bn for all of next gen ticketing, transition to hybrid buses, network redesign, new bus stops etc
If you actually look at the estimated costs in the background reports for the routes a lot of them are €30m/€40m of I remember correctly.
Another obvious point is that your trams do nothing for the Northside.
If the demand on any of your corridors justifies a luas they should get one though, for example Lucan is to get a Luas by 2035 - Swords is getting a Metro by 2027 and still gets a bus corridor because you need both.
Also, what do your team's do for cycling? It's 230km of bus lanes and segregated cycle paths.
Like I'm sure everyone here would love more luas lines but you still need bus systems and cycle tracks.0 -
There was a plan to build the LUAS out to Lucan. It was dropped at some point.
If LUAS cross city is any indicator than shared space tramlines are basically a waste of time and you might as well build a covered tunnel that people can walk along without getting wet.
If you want to walk then work away but I think I’d rather get the Luas and wait for you at the other end. There is no way that anyone could beat Luas Cross City through town at normal walking pace.
Google maps suggests Dominick to Harcourt would take 30 minutes to walk vs 17 minutes by tram during Monday AM peak for example0 -
€2bn for all of next gen ticketing, transition to hybrid buses, network redesign, new bus stops etc
If you actually look at the estimated costs in the background reports for the routes a lot of them are €30m/€40m of I remember correctly.
Another obvious point is that your trams do nothing for the Northside.
If the demand on any of your corridors justifies a luas they should get one though, for example Lucan is to get a Luas by 2035 - Swords is getting a Metro by 2027 and still gets a bus corridor because you need both.
Also, what do your team's do for cycling? It's 230km of bus lanes and segregated cycle paths.
Like I'm sure everyone here would love more luas lines but you still need bus systems and cycle tracks.
Has Clongriffin moved from the Northside?
Ive also assumed that dart expansion and Metrolink will go ahead. If they don’t then the whole of Dublin and in particular the north side is in trouble.
I don’t agree with you statement that certain corridors need both a Luas/ metro and a bus corridor. A Luas has sufficient capacity to serve the majority of corridors in Dublin with the exception of Swords- Sandyford which requires metro. Yes buses will still be required to serve the gaps between the tram/rail lines but this is not on the same scale as proposed under Busconnects.
I also think it’s safe to assume that the Busconnects plan for a Liffey valley cbc effective kills the plans for a Lucan Luas before 2035 despite the fact this completely contradicts the GDA strategy. The reason I say this is because if we look at the time lines, Busconnects goes for planning some time in 2020 (presumably Q4) ABP take a year to decide. Assuming it is in the first batch to go to construction, the earliest it will start is 2022. 2 years construction means it will open early 2024 at best. Now if we were to have a Luas in place by 2035, assuming 4 years construction, 1 year with ABP and 2 years design then the CBC would be open for a maximum of 4 years before plans are being developed to replace it. Could you imagine the public outcry about why we spent €Xm on a cbc only to replace it a few years later.
Cycling has a modal share of around 10%. On some of the corridors, private cars have a modal share of up to 70% and public transport around 10%. If we are to get serious about reducing congestion then we need to convert private cars into public transport and therefore priority needs to be given to public transport investment. As I have shown, trams are far more efficient than buses and therefore we should be investing in developing a tram network rather than Busconnects.0 -
Has Clongriffin moved from the Northside?
Ive also assumed that dart expansion and Metrolink will go ahead. If they don’t then the whole of Dublin and in particular the north side is in trouble.
I don’t agree with you statement that certain corridors need both a Luas/ metro and a bus corridor. A Luas has sufficient capacity to serve the majority of corridors in Dublin with the exception of Swords- Sandyford which requires metro. Yes buses will still be required to serve the gaps between the tram/rail lines but this is not on the same scale as proposed under Busconnects.
I also think it’s safe to assume that the Busconnects plan for a Liffey valley cbc effective kills the plans for a Lucan Luas before 2035 despite the fact this completely contradicts the GDA strategy. The reason I say this is because if we look at the time lines, Busconnects goes for planning some time in 2020 (presumably Q4) ABP take a year to decide. Assuming it is in the first batch to go to construction, the earliest it will start is 2022. 2 years construction means it will open early 2024 at best. Now if we were to have a Luas in place by 2035, assuming 4 years construction, 1 year with ABP and 2 years design then the CBC would be open for a maximum of 4 years before plans are being developed to replace it. Could you imagine the public outcry about why we spent €Xm on a cbc only to replace it a few years later.
Cycling has a modal share of around 10%. On some of the corridors, private cars have a modal share of up to 70% and public transport around 10%. If we are to get serious about reducing congestion then we need to convert private cars into public transport and therefore priority needs to be given to public transport investment. As I have shown, trams are far more efficient than buses and therefore we should be investing in developing a tram network rather than Busconnects.
Good post on fairness.
One thing I'd say is that cycling really is the only scalable alternative to private cars we have. Cycling from outside the canals to inside the canals carries the same number of people as the Luas currently. In Copenhagen and Utrecht they're getting 50% cycling commuting modal share. Does anyone think we'll get 50% public transport modal share all over Dublin with the GDA plan? Will 4 Luas lines make a massive difference? If we had safe cycling everywhere and less cars so people would feel safe cycling would absolutely explode - look at the grand canal cycle route.
Also where do these lines go in the city centre? We hardly have enough road space to segregate them do we? Can we just have no buses anymore on city-centre streets to preserve luas that only serves your 4 corridors? Or else it's unsegregated and now your frequency is down to 15 trains per hour. Tbh as I said above, we're supposedly one of the richest countries in the world, if you can propose places for these trams to effectively go in the centre then they should be built as long as there is the demand, I suspect the modelling doesn't work out for these or we would have heard more about them. Say UCD, I think the car modal share is only about 20% right now.0 -
Good post on fairness.
One thing I'd say is that cycling really is the only scalable alternative to private cars we have. Cycling from outside the canals to inside the canals carries the same number of people as the Luas currently. In Copenhagen and Utrecht they're getting 50% cycling commuting modal share. Does anyone think we'll get 50% public transport modal share all over Dublin with the GDA plan? Will 4 Luas lines make a massive difference? If we had safe cycling everywhere and less cars so people would feel safe cycling would absolutely explode - look at the grand canal cycle route.
Also where do these lines go in the city centre? We hardly have enough road space to segregate them do we? Can we just have no buses anymore on city-centre streets to preserve luas that only serves your 4 corridors? Or else it's unsegregated and now your frequency is down to 15 trains per hour. Tbh as I said above, we're supposedly one of the richest countries in the world, if you can propose places for these trams to effectively go in the centre then they should be built as long as there is the demand, I suspect the modelling doesn't work out for these or we would have heard more about them. Say UCD, I think the car modal share is only about 20% right now.
I don’t agree with you regarding cycling. There are a significant number of people who will not cycle for a variety of reasons including not feeling safe and/or no shower facilities at work. It’s these people we need to get onto trams/buses. While I know you could see an increase in cycling with improved facilities, the reality is we are never going to develop a network on every street or achieve the same success as the Dutch with the investment we are currently making in public transport. 4 Luas lines would make a massive difference especially when you look at the success of the current Luas lines and therefore in my opinion be a far better investment. That’s not to say we shouldn’t invest in cycling at all. Personally I think we need far more investment in particular projects such as extending the grand canal cycle way to suir road and ideally an N/S line from Portobello - Heytesbury St - Parliament st - Capel St - Blessington St basin - Royal canal. However, and here is the crucial point, this should not be at the expense of mass transport. This is the problem we have; the car lobby want more roads - simple. The public transport lobby want more Luas, more buses more trains, more cycling lanes etc etc and when it comes to funding the money is split between all of the above. The most sensible investment for Dublin now is the one which gives the greatest return in terms of reducing congestion. This is of course tram lines. This should be made a priority and once we have developed a network, we can focus on other areas such as cyling etc.
I’m the city centre, I would envisage the following
Lucan: tie in with LCC at college green
Knocklyon: tie in with Lucan at Christchurch
UCD: supersedes green line (upgraded to metro) from Harcourt
Clongriffin: ties in with LCC at Parnell
This would naturally put a lot of pressure on LCC but not all trams would have to use it. Christchurch, college green and SSG could become terminus stops for some services for example.
With regards to UCD (commuting survey here - https://ucdestates.ie/commuting/survey/2015-16-results/), car modal share amongst students is 20% but amongst staff it’s 46%. Its almost the exact opposite when it comes to buses so you get to around 60% modal share for both. So that’s 18,000 trips. 55% are via N11 entrance and 49% of them are during AM peak so around 4,500. Even assuming a modal shift from cars of half if Luas was built, you’d still be looking at around 4,000 passengers during the AM peak. That’s either 40 buses (1 every 90 seconds - impossible for buses) or 14 trams (1 every 4 minutes - Luas green line is up around 20 per hour). I know my analysis above is quite simplistic and yes assumed everyone is coming from the city centre to UCD which is obviously not true but it is also assuming that it is just UCD on the line. If the green line was extended from Harcourt to UCD, I have no doubt it would be viable.
In relation to the other lines, well the NTA have already done that work for me on the Knocklyon and Lucan corridors where the GDA strategy is clear that buses will not meet demand. Now they suggest BRT which the NTA have since dropped as they (unsurprisingly) discovered would cost around the same as Luas for an inferior service. So that is why both of these corridors warrant tram lines.
Clongriffin was on the BRT network too and makes sense to serve a significant portion of the north eastern area not within reach of DART.0 -
I don’t agree with you regarding cycling. There are a significant number of people who will not cycle for a variety of reasons including not feeling safe and/or no shower facilities at work. It’s these people we need to get onto trams/buses. While I know you could see an increase in cycling with improved facilities, the reality is we are never going to develop a network on every street or achieve the same success as the Dutch with the investment we are currently making in public transport. 4 Luas lines would make a massive difference especially when you look at the success of the current Luas lines and therefore in my opinion be a far better investment. That’s not to say we shouldn’t invest in cycling at all. Personally I think we need far more investment in particular projects such as extending the grand canal cycle way to suir road and ideally an N/S line from Portobello - Heytesbury St - Parliament st - Capel St - Blessington St basin - Royal canal. However, and here is the crucial point, this should not be at the expense of mass transport. This is the problem we have; the car lobby want more roads - simple. The public transport lobby want more Luas, more buses more trains, more cycling lanes etc etc and when it comes to funding the money is split between all of the above. The most sensible investment for Dublin now is the one which gives the greatest return in terms of reducing congestion. This is of course tram lines. This should be made a priority and once we have developed a network, we can focus on other areas such as cyling etc.
I’m the city centre, I would envisage the following
Lucan: tie in with LCC at college green
Knocklyon: tie in with Lucan at Christchurch
UCD: supersedes green line (upgraded to metro) from Harcourt
Clongriffin: ties in with LCC at Parnell
This would naturally put a lot of pressure on LCC but not all trams would have to use it. Christchurch, college green and SSG could become terminus stops for some services for example.
With regards to UCD (commuting survey here - https://ucdestates.ie/commuting/survey/2015-16-results/), car modal share amongst students is 20% but amongst staff it’s 46%. Its almost the exact opposite when it comes to buses so you get to around 60% modal share for both. So that’s 18,000 trips. 55% are via N11 entrance and 49% of them are during AM peak so around 4,500. Even assuming a modal shift from cars of half if Luas was built, you’d still be looking at around 4,000 passengers during the AM peak. That’s either 40 buses (1 every 90 seconds - impossible for buses) or 14 trams (1 every 4 minutes - Luas green line is up around 20 per hour). I know my analysis above is quite simplistic and yes assumed everyone is coming from the city centre to UCD which is obviously not true but it is also assuming that it is just UCD on the line. If the green line was extended from Harcourt to UCD, I have no doubt it would be viable.
In relation to the other lines, well the NTA have already done that work for me on the Knocklyon and Lucan corridors where the GDA strategy is clear that buses will not meet demand. Now they suggest BRT which the NTA have since dropped as they (unsurprisingly) discovered would cost around the same as Luas for an inferior service. So that is why both of these corridors warrant tram lines.
Clongriffin was on the BRT network too and makes sense to serve a significant portion of the north eastern area not within reach of DART.
I would like to focus on your hypothetical Knocklyon line. I really don’t see where you are going to put the tram tracks, and/or ban cars?
Can you give a street by street breakdown please.
I’m not knocking the idea, I just don’t see the space.0 -
I don’t agree with you regarding cycling. There are a significant number of people who will not cycle for a variety of reasons including not feeling safe and/or no shower facilities at work. It’s these people we need to get onto trams/buses. While I know you could see an increase in cycling with improved facilities, the reality is we are never going to develop a network on every street or achieve the same success as the Dutch with the investment we are currently making in public transport. .
I think you could, Copenhagen's often low quality infrastructure and still very high modal share show that we could have huge cycling numbers taking cars off the roads. Cycling is actually a more preferable replacement for car journeys for a lot of people compared to public transport. Cycling is often much, much handier as it's door to door which public transport isn't, it's almost free, which public transport isn't, it's good for your health and it's very reliable whereas even the Luas gets caught in traffic some of the time. Given you're talking about return on investment and either ors, saying €2bn on luas > €2bn ón cycling or even €200m ón cycling is wrong given evidence do far in Ireland - not that I would oppose either going ahead.
Also, of course, you can't put any more trams on LCC it's chaos already. Putting turnbacks to allow terminated trams on LCC would be even worse0 -
I would like to focus on your hypothetical Knocklyon line. I really don’t see where you are going to put the tram tracks, and/or ban cars?
Can you give a street by street breakdown please.
I’m not knocking the idea, I just don’t see the space.
Christchurch - Harold’s cross - reducing cars to 1 lane in each direction
Harolds cross - Terenure - 1 car lane and a 1 way system incorporating Brighton square
Terenure - shared running similar to Dawson st.
Terenure cross - dodder - proposed widening under Busconnects so widened here too
Dodder - rathfarnham shopping centre - through park beside dodder so completely segregated.
From here there are two options - via templeogue village or turn left at the shopping centre. Both options meet at the blue haven.
And then onto Knocklyon road.
Yes there is obviously disruption to cars but probably less than under Busconnects0 -
I think you could, Copenhagen's often low quality infrastructure and still very high modal share show that we could have huge cycling numbers taking cars off the roads. Cycling is actually a more preferable replacement for car journeys for a lot of people compared to public transport. Cycling is often much, much handier as it's door to door which public transport isn't, it's almost free, which public transport isn't, it's good for your health and it's very reliable whereas even the Luas gets caught in traffic some of the time. Given you're talking about return on investment and either ors, saying €2bn on luas > €2bn ón cycling or even €200m ón cycling is wrong given evidence do far in Ireland - not that I would oppose either going ahead.
Also, of course, you can't put any more trams on LCC it's chaos already. Putting turnbacks to allow terminated trams on LCC would be even worse
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on the cycling one. I genuinely think if you were to invest the €2bn from Busconnects on either cycling or trams, trams would offer a far greater reduction in motor traffic but you obviously don’t.
I have suggested increasing the number of trams on LCC but of course that assumes a reduction in the number of buses as a number of “spines” as proposed under Busconnects would be replaced. To avoid congestion a number of trams could terminate a stops before they enter LCC e.g. college green, SSG or Christchurch. Even this would be a significant improvement on the current system. Long term I would envisage capacity enhancements to LCC to allow a greater throughout such as double length stops or additional turnbacks at the likes of Parnell or Westmoreland.0 -
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on the cycling one. I genuinely think if you were to invest the €2bn from Busconnects on either cycling or trams, trams would offer a far greater reduction in motor traffic but you obviously don’t.
I have suggested increasing the number of trams on LCC but of course that assumes a reduction in the number of buses as a number of “spines” as proposed under Busconnects would be replaced. To avoid congestion a number of trams could terminate a stops before they enter LCC e.g. college green, SSG or Christchurch. Even this would be a significant improvement on the current system. Long term I would envisage capacity enhancements to LCC to allow a greater throughout such as double length stops or additional turnbacks at the likes of Parnell or Westmoreland.
Strongly disagreeing with you here simply because you may be underestimating just how far €2bn would stretch for cycling.
When the NI minister for transport announced a network of greenways criss-crossing the entirety of Northern Ireland the total outlay was 600 million for the whole thing (Obviously city costs are greater but given the minuscule land take comparatively for good cycling provision...).
Spending 2 billion on a Dublin cycle network would utterly transform how people get around the city, if done following a Dutch model. You'd be talking about being able to fully segregate every core corridor, many feeder corridors, high quality greenways through most parks.
Cost to benefit cycling is WAY out in front of the others, I'm not suggesting it would suit all people and obviously a strong public transport network is a must to compliment cycling, but if we ever had €2 billion to play with for cycling the city would be radically different.0 -
Advertisement
-
Investment in BusConnects does not prelude later upgrading to tram or BRT.
The opposite in fact - it paves the way by establishing PT-only corridoors of sufficient width to accommodate buses and or trams along paths where we know there is demand for PT. You're going to have to knock trees, CPO gardens, divert traffic, change junctions, etc. for a tramway anyway - so it's not like the investment is wasted if you later add trams or BRTs to the mix.
Multi-modal segregated-from-cars on-street PT corridoors are common enough in continental European cities: there is one a block away from where I live at the moment - it carries diesel busses (from outer suburbia), electric buses/trollybuses and also trams - sharing roadspace and stops/platforms.
I view BusConnects as the first step in establishing these types of corridoors in Dublin. Even if a new route is already at capacity using battery/hybrid buses from the start, there is a much simpler upgrade path for trams or BRT.0 -
Investment in BusConnects does not prelude later upgrading to tram or BRT.
The opposite in fact - it paves the way by establishing PT-only corridoors of sufficient width to accommodate buses and or trams along paths where we know there is demand for PT. You're going to have to knock trees, CPO gardens, divert traffic, change junctions, etc. for a tramway anyway - so it's not like the investment is wasted if you later add trams or BRTs to the mix.
Multi-modal segregated-from-cars on-street PT corridoors are common enough in continental European cities: there is one a block away from where I live at the moment - it carries diesel busses (from outer suburbia), electric buses/trollybuses and also trams - sharing roadspace and stops/platforms.
I view BusConnects as the first step in establishing these types of corridoors in Dublin. Even if a new route is already at capacity using battery/hybrid buses from the start, there is a much simpler upgrade path for trams or BRT.
This sounds good, but I presume heavier foundations would be needed for a tramway as opposed to a qbc? I presume this will be taken into account for bus connects.........0 -
riddlinrussell wrote: »Strongly disagreeing with you here simply because you may be underestimating just how far €2bn would stretch for cycling.
When the NI minister for transport announced a network of greenways criss-crossing the entirety of Northern Ireland the total outlay was 600 million for the whole thing (Obviously city costs are greater but given the minuscule land take comparatively for good cycling provision...).
Spending 2 billion on a Dublin cycle network would utterly transform how people get around the city, if done following a Dutch model. You'd be talking about being able to fully segregate every core corridor, many feeder corridors, high quality greenways through most parks.
Cost to benefit cycling is WAY out in front of the others, I'm not suggesting it would suit all people and obviously a strong public transport network is a must to compliment cycling, but if we ever had €2 billion to play with for cycling the city would be radically different.
While I appreciate your stance I can’t agree. To deliver the GDA cycle strategy in full (around 2000km) would cost in the region of €2bn. Yet the GDA transport strategy includes this and targets a 10% modal share... ie no increase from current levels . Yes cycling would be safer but it wouldn’t have an impact on congestion levels.
Therefore to suggest that spending €2bn on cycling over €2bn on trams would be a better investment cannot be justified.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t invest in cycling but if we have a finite amount of money (€2bn) and are keen to get the biggest reduction in congestion then tram lines are clearly the way forward0 -
I agree with your assessment but you’re missing the point. Busconnects plans on building 16 corridors, I argue that you could deliver a better service using 4 corridors. Therefore while you’re correct in your statement that along certain corridors Busconnects can be used as a stepping stone to trams, along others especially in the south west, it is a wasteful use of limited resourcesInvestment in BusConnects does not prelude later upgrading to tram or BRT.
The opposite in fact - it paves the way by establishing PT-only corridoors of sufficient width to accommodate buses and or trams along paths where we know there is demand for PT. You're going to have to knock trees, CPO gardens, divert traffic, change junctions, etc. for a tramway anyway - so it's not like the investment is wasted if you later add trams or BRTs to the mix.
Multi-modal segregated-from-cars on-street PT corridoors are common enough in continental European cities: there is one a block away from where I live at the moment - it carries diesel busses (from outer suburbia), electric buses/trollybuses and also trams - sharing roadspace and stops/platforms.
I view BusConnects as the first step in establishing these types of corridoors in Dublin. Even if a new route is already at capacity using battery/hybrid buses from the start, there is a much simpler upgrade path for trams or BRT.0 -
I don't know tbh but I'd imagine that they do just enough groundwork to support buses/trollybuses until there's a definite plan to lay rails. Otherwise you front-load significant cost - for example for utility diversion - which would badly damage the cost/benefit justification for any QBC or trollybus route.This sounds good, but I presume heavier foundations would be needed for a tramway as opposed to a qbc? I presume this will be taken into account for bus connects.........0 -
I don't know tbh but I'd imagine that they do just enough groundwork to support buses/trollybuses until there's a definite plan to lay rails. Otherwise you front-load significant cost - for example for utility diversion - which would badly damage the cost/benefit justification for any QBC or trollybus route.
Yes but imagine building a load of radial qbc’s, 3 years later 4 or 5 of them have to be dug up to improve the foundations for trams, as the extra expense wasn’t frontloaded to allow for this.
Now that would be scandalous.0 -
I don't see why it would cost so much more to dig up the road and divert utilities later when you've decided that you want to upgrade to a tram line? The road surface for a QBC or a trollybus route is pretty much just normal road surface which would have to be maintained anyway even if the QBC wasn't there.Yes but imagine building a load of radial qbc’s, 3 years later 4 or 5 of them have to be dug up to improve the foundations for trams, as the extra expense wasn’t frontloaded to allow for this.
Now that would be scandalous.0 -
I don't see why it would cost so much more to dig up the road and divert utilities later when you've decided that you want to upgrade to a tram line? The road surface for a QBC or a trollybus route is pretty much just normal road surface which would have to be maintained anyway even if the QBC wasn't there.
It’s not so much the cost but the hassle and the media attitude. I doubt they will divert many of the utilities in existing bus lanes as part of Busconnects which would require diversion as part of a tram line.
Where you’re CPOing etc as part of Busconnects, you’re effectively digging up the street for 2 years, then coming along 5 years later and digging it up again (and Ona bigger scale) for up to 4 years its a big waste of resources and doesn’t go down well with the public.
However what would be even worse is it the 16 corridors were built (gardens CPOed, trees cut down etc.) and then they “realised” that you could have a tram line on one on the corridors which would negate the need for another or several other corridors. During a time when climate change is an increasing issue/problem that would be criminal.
A good carpenter has a motto “measure twice cut once” because you can’t reattach a piece you’ve cut and it’s the same here. Once you’ve put in a bus lane you’re stuck with it regardless of whether 20 buses or 1 bus uses it. Given the media attention to date and the arguments for alternatives, I would be very sceptical of this getting planning. The numbers will have to stack up and from what I’ve seen, on a number of corridors namely;
Lucan
Liffey Valley
Ballymun
Rathfarnham
Kimmage
Terenure
Bray (at least UCD to city centre)
UCD
the demand far exceeds that which can be achieved by a QBC. To prove my point, if we look at the BRT study (https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Bus-Rapid-Transit-Core-Network-report11.pdf) it found that Blanch to UCD and in particular city centre to UCD required 30 BRTs per hour at peak. Even at that in 2030 with no investment, demand would exceed capacity. The project which would reduce demand most is Dart underground which sure as hell isn't getting built by 2030. Therefore to suggest that a glorified bus lane is appropriate is total nonsense and I cannot see how they can stand over their proposals.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
It’s a bit ironic to say the heart and soul of Templeogue Village will be lost considering the main pub is called The Morgue.0
Advertisement