[Article] City to get six new Luas lines under €20bn transport plan

murphaph

City to get six new Luas lines under €20bn transport plan

A €20bn public transport plan that will introduce six new Luas routes in Dublin will be officially announced by the Government next month.

The unprecedented 10-year plan, details of which have been seen by the Irish Independent, will also include the development of a metro system linking Dublin airport with the city centre.

The plan will have three major components targeting Dublin, the commuter regions serving the capital, and the rest of the country with a particular focus on the Border Midlands and Western (BMW) region.

Up to six new Luas routes will form the basis of the scheme with the light rail system criss-crossing Dublin, providing more services to commuters in outlying areas of the city.

The Luas system will be upgraded to link the existing red and green lines between St Stephen's Green and O'Connell Street.

An extension of the Sandyford line to Cherrywood at Loughlinstown to serve areas like Glencairn, the Gallops, Ballyogan Woods, Leopardstown Racecourse and Carrickmines will be developed.

The Tallaght line will be extended to Citywest, Clondalkin, and Lucan. A brand new service in the docklands with an extension from Connolly Station to the docks is also believed to form part of the plan.

The Irish Independent has learned that the Government and the Rail Procurement Agency (RPA) are in the process of securing deals with private developers to ensure they contribute to meeting the cost of the extensions.

It is also expected that new 40-foot Luas trams will be introduced to increase capacity on the system.

Under the plan, the M50 will be finished to complete the ring around Dublin city. And the eastern bypass - which is seen as the final segment in this project - will link the port tunnel to the M50.

A metro system to link Dublin airport with the city centre will start at Swords to serve the town's growing population.

It is understood that the plan is being developed to work in tandem with the National Spatial Strategy which is intent on balancing development throughout the regions.

The plan also contains proposals for an 'inter-connector' rail line, which would travel under the River Liffey to link Heuston Station with Connolly Station via Westland Row Dart station.

This would act as a link between all modes of transport in the city, allowing commuters to access Luas, Dart, inter-city rail links, and Dublin Bus. Details are more sketchy for proposals at a national level, but it is thought the plan includes a focus on completing all the road links between Dublin and major cities with a focus on the BMW region.

The plan will be launched by Transport Minister Martin Cullen later this year.

"What I and the Government are now in a position to do is bring forward an ambitious, integrated plan for developing all elements of our transport infrastructure," he said.

"The plan which we will publish will not be a collection of disjointed projects with no connecting logic. The timescale and resources made available by Government has allowed us to take an integrated approach to infrastructure planning," he said.

"The objective is to achieve a high quality transport system in tune with the economic and social needs not of today but of the decades ahead," Mr Cullen said.

The minister said that within the capital city and its hinterland, the provision of more roads was not the solution to transport needs.

"A high quality, high capacity transport infrastructure which will eradicate existing congestion and cater for further rapid population growth must rely on public transport," he said.

"Implementation of this plan will have a major and positive impact not only on economic activity but also on the attractions of the city as a place to live and to work."

The new 10-year transport plan to be unveiled by the Government proposes:

* Up to six new Luas routes.

* Linking the existing red and green lines between St Stephen's Green and O'Connell Street.

* Extension of the Sandyford line to Cherrywood (serving Glencairn, the Gallops, Ballyogan Woods, Leopardstown Racecourse, and Carrickmines).

* Extension of the Tallaght line into Citywest.

* Extension of the Tallaght line to Clondalkin.

* New service in Docklands (extension from Connolly Station to docks)

* A Metro system linking Swords with the City Centre via Dublin airport.

* Completion of the M50 to form a complete ring around Dublin city.

* Infrastructual road links between Dublin and major cities, to be completed with focus on Border, Midlands and Western region.

* Inter-connector rail line linking Heuston Station with Connolly Station via Westland Row Dart station under the River Liffey.

Kathy Donaghy

© Copyright Unison.ie

Emboldening performed by murphaph

Interesting times ahead. Some lazy journalism though. 'Westland Row DART Station' ffs? Everyone know's it's called 'Pearse Station' (though I would prefer a return to naming stations for their locations rather than after historical figures) and it's not just a DART station. How many times do they have to be told it's 'Spencer Dock' ad not 'Connolly' that the Interconnector will run to. People aren't stupid. They keep dumbing things down to a level where they are factually incorrect.

Note the 40m trams the RPA said were neither necessary nor technically possible on the Red Line.

At least the metro is apparently going to Swords. Would have been nice if they'd had more details on that.

Overall, it's positive stuff, if true of course

mackerski

What a useless article. A soundbite-esque reference to six new Luas lines, but the only details given refer to either an extension to either end of the existing lines or a line between the two.

We'd better hope that they don't really mean it about the 40ft trams or there'll be some bad squeezes ahead...

Dermot

strassenwolf

Just a couple of things.

Linking the existing red and green lines between St Stephen's Green and O'Connell Street.

If this is what is going to be unveiled, do we really need to go through all the stuff about the 6 possible routes, e.g., Merrion Square + Westland Row, Kildare Street-Exchequer Street, Dame Street-Parliament Street, etc. (Though I think it would be a real pity if we never get a chance to see the Kildare Street-Exchequer Street route) :eek:

A Metro system linking Swords with the City Centre via Dublin airport

I don't really know anything about the metro. But in some other cities I've been in their metros split up outside of the city centre and go in two different directions at either end of the line. Should we not be doing something similar with the Airport and Swords, i.e., building the metro line to Santry (or around there) and then dividing it up into two separate lines - one to the airport and one to Swords. I'm sure it would be more expensive, but it might be more efficient. I mean, at morning peak times, it would be quite difficult to get on the metro at the Airport if it was full of commuters from Swords. But if trains coming out from town were to go to the Airport or to Swords there would not be a clash. Trains coming to the Airport would then be completely empty for Airport passengers trying to get into the city. There may be a very good reason (cash?) why we can't do this here, I don't know.

murphaph

Splitting the line to the airport and Swords would be counterproductive. Lots of commuters coming from Swords may disembark at the airport and go to work there, freeing up space for travellers. Splitting the line would mean these airport workers would have to change trains to get a fairly short distance. The solution to this problem is not to build a cheap-ass RPA proposed 2/3 car metro and instead to build platforms etc. to 6 or 8 car capacity, running shorter trains in the off-peak like they do elsewhere.

MarkoP11

The original metro proposal had a line from the city to Liffey junction through Finglas at the M50/N2 it split in two, one half turning for the airport and Swords the second turning for Blanchardstown Clondalkin Tallaght then turning back for Harold's Cross and Stephen's Green, that was the orbital metro

The current 3 car set upon paper is sufficient to cope with Swords Stephen's Green (assuming we don't have a repeat farce in the style of low frequency 30m trams) If/When the orbital metro is ever built (given it serves Tallaght and Blanchardstown realistically its when not if) you are in real and massive trouble. 90 second interval service into a dead end terminus doesn't work at best 34 trains an hour not 40 so even the capacity of the Swords line is over stated. Passenger estimates as we all well know under estimate the realised demand (the Metro report has concerns over the RPA ignoring future development on the metro alignment in demand figures)

Longer trains require fewer staff, have lower operating and capital costs (fewer cabs, fewer drivers) yet leave the door open to tighten frequencies in the future

I'm sick to my teeth of leaks about the 10 year plan, the poor reporting standard and lack of verification of facts 40 foot vs 40m tram

The fav line has to be

? Completion of the M50 to form a complete ring around Dublin city.

Though it already happened, or is this a new way to describe the eastern bypass ?

Thomond Pk

Not quite as good as Dick Roche's description of incineration as 'heat treatment' which could lead arson as being described as 'a heat event'

I have little problem with the M50 being extended as far as the N11 at UCD in the short term, however no-one seems to know either the cost or the routing of the route after this point. Another point that has occured to me what the configuration of the port tunnel entrance is at Dublin Port, how much the cost would be or what level of disruption would be casued attempting to merge the Northern Port Tunnel with a proposed southern leg?

I don't think as Phillip has said that this is the place to discuss metro routings either RPA or Dart unless Luas routings would be directly affected.

In my opinion two of the Metro routes under discussion will be directly affected by proposed Luas routes leading to un-necessary cost duplication in one case and prevention of metro specification in the absence of duplication in the other.

Cherrywood

Cherrywood represents one of Irelands best Strategic Development Zone opportunities as the site is large by any standards and is not elevated enough to cause significant amenity damage to the Dublin Foothills. Over a ten year period both a significant population and workforce are likely to be using this place. The routing chosen to Cherrywood by the RPA is both short-sighted and problematic if one has two medium term objectives;

1> Developing a medium density transport corridor
2> Maintaining access to Luas for existing Luas users

The reason why it is problematic is that so much of this route is on street and can never be converted to Metro, this routing is a short-term solution to a long term problem as the areas involved do not require a level of service above a feeder service due to them being almost exclusively 3-bed semi's built between 1985-1999 at a density of 16 to the acre. Traversing through these housing estates at on-street speeds will significantly slow up journey times to the City Centre and it is almost possible that the section from Cherrywood to Sandyford will take as long as the section from Sandyford to Charlemount.

The solution for this line is to stick to Existing Harcourt St Alignment with all specs to Metro build and with 100m saved introduce 2 feeder routes one from Stepaside to Foxrock to the station at the racecourse and onwards to Seapoint via the 46A QBC giving connection to both Luas and Dart. The second route to Sandyford from areas further to the West of the racecourse with a connection to Blackrock Dart Station via the 46A and 17 QBCs.

Citywest

Population densities on this route are not sufficient to merit a Luas line, the route beyond the Square or Cookstown Ind Est (whichever is chosen) is similar in density to Sandyford at 16 to the acre. Beyond this point The National Digital Park is entered, the DP is a sprawling campus type development featuring a mix of office, industrial and logistics sites all of which are on very large land-holding which drive densities down. There are also some housing estates here that are acheiving densities of 18-20 per acre set between the logistics park and the industrial units. The proposed extension is set to terminate at The Citywest Hotel and Country Club which is best known for its hosting of events such annual ard fheis and sports events. This site is unlikely to ever acheive a high density given the high level of low intensity leisure use and site planning history which has a higher number of retentention applications turned down along with other refusals than I have ever seen.

The Solution; maximise the benefit of the four-tracking to Hazelhatch by running regular feeder buses from Celbridge- Hazelhatch-Newcastle-Saggart-Citywest Hotel & Country Club- National Digital Park (with integrated services to Tallaght from Citywest on the No. 65A)

PandaMania

"90 second interval service into a dead end terminus doesn't work at best 34 trains"

The Number 1 and 9 subway lines in New York end in an incredibly tight underground loop underneath Battery Park. The MTA subway cars are much longer that the three car jobs the RPA is proposing for the Dublin Metro. Would something like this be possible for Stephens Green (and perhaps Swords as well)? - ie: a return loop to avoid a dead-end terminus(i)?

I have always though that Tallaght should be the main LUAS hub for West Dublin rather than a branch from the city centre. This is good thinking by the RPA and gets away from An La-ism. If CIE were to design a Luas branch from Tallaght to Citywest they would have it go by O'Connell Street.

Thormond, there is no way in hell the Green Line is ever going to be upgraded to Metro. That whole idea is a dead as Dublin Bus' ability to recognise Bolton, Marlborough and Gardiner Streets as possible crosstown bus corridors.

Great to see no mention of the Western Rail Corridor in the plan. Lets hope some money is put aside for viable commter rail expansion in the Galway and Limerick commuter regions. Better focus the spending were it will generate passengers rather than blow it all on a crackpot grand trunk route through the land of one-off housing.

MARKO P11 - CHECK YOUR PMs.

murphaph

PandaMania wrote:

The Number 1 and 9 subway lines in New York end in an incredibly tight underground loop underneath Battery Park.

Hmmm, Munich's trams also end in loops and it has the added benefit of requiring no doors on one side of the tram, leaving more room for seating.

Sarsfield

MarkoP11 wrote:

90 second interval service into a dead end terminus doesn't work

I've seen it work flawlessly in Moscow. I was a regular commuter through Alexandrovsky Sad. When a train arrives at the terminus, the driver of the previous train has walked the platform and is ready to take the train out immediately. The driver of the arriving train takes the next train out and so on. Dwell times were no more than any other station. The Russians know how to do Metro!

MarkoP11

The metro in Moscow is amazing they mange 90 second intervals on basic signaling.

34 tph (105 sec) is based on the London Underground experience operating in a very similar regulatory enviroment to what Dublin would operate.

The accepted approch to maximise capacity is for a train to arrive, empty then pull away from the platform into a headshunt beyond. The train then reverses and proceeds back to the departure platform loads and leaves. (Sandyford Luas stop for example) The headshunt would typically be long enough for 2 trains and normally two are provided this approach avoids the crowd management issue for arriving and departing passengers sharing the same platform

A lot of questions have to be asked before we can be satisfied that we are getting the right solution.

antoinolachtnai

The gap between trains isn't really anything to do with the regulatory environment. It's just a question of how aggressively you manage the platforms. To make small intervals work, the big issue is to make the dwell-time at the platform absolutely uniform.

Obviously, the signalling system will have an influence as well. The system has to be quite flexible (which costs more, but everything costs more when you are running on rails).

It's hard to see how you could economically justify intervals this short with Dublin's population density, but I could be wrong.

strassenwolf

I'm not sure that too much can be read into all of this.

The Indo wrote:

A €20bn public transport plan that will introduce six new Luas routes in Dublin will be officially announced by the Government next month. The unprecedented 10-year plan, details of which have been seen by the Irish Independent, will also include the development of a metro system linking Dublin airport with the city centre.

Okay, they've seen the plan - was it leaked?

The Indo wrote:

The plan will be launched by Transport Minister Martin Cullen later this year.

"What I and the Government are now in a position to do is bring forward an ambitious, integrated plan for developing all elements of our transport infrastructure," he said.

etc., etc., etc.

Why is he commenting on a leaked document? And why are none of the other newspapers carrying this story if it was more of an "announcement"?

Anyway, weren't we supposed to be getting the Germans in before we decided what we were going to do? That was only last week.

I wouldn't hold out much hope that much will come of all this. After all, we had the DTO's plan with LUAS lines "crisscrossing" the city, a metro and the interconnector. And whatever happened to that?

I'd much prefer if they'd just announce a LUAS line to somewhere, build it and then repeat the process. At least then we'd get something built, rather than having these grandiose plans every few years followed by no construction.

murphaph

MarkoP11 wrote:

The accepted approch to maximise capacity is for a train to arrive, empty then pull away from the platform into a headshunt beyond. The train then reverses and proceeds back to the departure platform loads and leaves. (Sandyford Luas stop for example) The headshunt would typically be long enough for 2 trains and normally two are provided this approach avoids the crowd management issue for arriving and departing passengers sharing the same platform

In Munich the S-Bahn 'Interconnector' stations like Marienplatz (perhaps the busiest city centre station) have their east- and westbound tunnels stacked on top of each other. Each track pases between a pair of platforms and passengers are instructed (this is Germany!) to alight the train to the right hand platform as passengers board from the left hand platform. It works pretty darn well too.

A similar solution to empty and refill trains could be used at the Swords terminus with the two tracks merging just before passing between the two terminus platforms. As above, passengers alight to the right hand side as others board from the left hand side before the train returns from the direction it came. Would possibly have to use the last driver drives the next train, as in Moscow.

Personally I find the idea of 90 second headways way OTT. I'd be happy with long trains every 5 mins at peak and short 7.5-10 mins off peak. It'd be a lot cheaper to run considering the wage bill will be shocking for all these drivers on a 90 sec headway!!

Edit: I've attached a pic of Marienplatz S-Bahn station with it's dual platforms. It comes from a very interesting document which aims to identify good public transport practice. Unsurprisingly Munich's example is cited at length. Here's the document:Fundamentals of successful transit.

MarkoP11

antoinolachtnai wrote:

It's hard to see how you could economically justify intervals this short with Dublin's population density, but I could be wrong.

Exactly, what we need is something that can scale easily, the maths say do Luas but it can't cope, the international view says Metro but its not cheap, the reality is some class of DART setup which can plug into the existing infrastructure works and scales to beyond the capcity of the RPA metro

The regulatory enviroment has a major effect they set the rules with respect to overlaps (the safe distance beyond a signal when its at danger). That can have a massive impact on frequency. They set the rules about needing ATP or not. There is no ATP in Moscow its all human which would never be allowed here It is accepted that 90 second intervals are as tight as you can realistically sustain, modern signaling to do this costs a lot, the closer you get to 90 seconds the price sky rockets. You more or less are looking a system that either drives itself or one that has adaptive and continous speed control aka distance to go (which the DART ATP has not)

Thomond Pk

PandaMania wrote:

"Thormond, there is no way in hell the Green Line is ever going to be upgraded to Metro. That whole idea is a dead as Dublin Bus' ability to recognise Bolton, Marlborough and Gardiner Streets as possible crosstown bus corridors.

I disagree the long term goal has always been to upgrade the Green line to metro and significant sums were spent over-specifying the route as a luas line so that it could be converted at a later time.

If the Green line cannot be converted to Metro then it should not be extended as it is almost at capacity and many future property developments are planned along its existing route that will push the Sandtford to the Green section over capacity. Luas is not like Dart in that when capacity is reched you can't extend the platforms and the trains from 4 to 6 and 8 and possibly in the future 10 car sets.

Call me consevative but I don't believe in the construction of services that rely on frequency; particularly those that rely on 90 second frequency when an alternative exists to run at 3 to 5 minutes on a much expanded capacity.
One elderly or disbled person with difficulty getting off the train and everything backs up 5 trains back. With 3 minute intervals these issues don't arise.

Thomond Pk

Kathy Donaghy wrote:

It is also expected that new 40-foot Luas trams will be introduced to increase capacity on the system.

Any thoughts?

murphaph

Well spotted!

Flukey

Get more Luas lines first, and then worry about joining them. If anything, the red and green lines should be joined by a line between Sandyford and Tallaght. The Sandyford line should go past Cherrywood, right out to the Bray line and they should have an M50-styled line going right around the city, of which the Sandyford - Tallaght link would be a part of.

John R

Any system running at 90 second intervals isn't that way by design, they are pushed to the limits to cope with demand. Building a new system like that is absolute madness, if the expected demand is x then x should be catered for with4-5minute headways max. That leaves room for expansion rather than building the bare minimum to cope with current demands creating a future expansion bottleneck.

SeanW

The article is full of innacuracies that make it barely comprehensible.

A €20bn public transport plan

It's a "PUBLIC TRANSPORT PLAN" no of course not - the 20bn 10 year plan will be at leat E10bn on roads and that's a wildly conservative guess. It will probably end up being closer to an announced E15 on roads (or E25bn after the NRA get its mitts on them) with E5b spent on all the other stuff.

It is also expected that new 40-foot Luas trams will be introduced to increase capacity on the system.

Damn that's tiny.

Inter-connector rail line linking Heuston Station with Connolly Station via Westland Row Dart station under the River Liffey.

Lazy journalism at its worst.

dermo88

This is all getting to be a complete pain in the tits.

We've been looking at proposals for Dublin since the Voorhees report of 1975.

30 years later, we are still "Getting there"

No DART extensions to Maynooth, or Kildare yet.

Luas was late and over budget.

DART of 1984 was on time and on budget. CIE know what they are doing most of the time when they are given the resources.

Whats proving to be a huge mistake, is the mixing of DART, Commuter and Intercity services on the Northern line, and to a lesser extent the South Eastern line.

Dear Mr Cullen

Can you please stop issuing meaningless announcements and false promises about Luas lines, Metro and linking up Heuston and Connolly.

Just in case you have not noticed yet, there is already a link between Heuston and Connolly going from Islandbridge under the Feeno, thrugh Cabra and on to Connolly.

Now I know theres no space for more trains at Connolly. Solve that. Build a new station at Spencer Dock.

While you are at it, just build a line from the DART Northern line to the Airport. But you can't do that, it passes through some former Taoiseachs land, and it would look a bit dodgy if you guys paid for it with an inflated compulsory purchase order. I mean whos going to notice the odd 10 or 20 million Euro go missing here and there. Know what I mean (nudge nudge, wink wink)

Now, keep it simple. Luas and DART. Thats all we need. Nothing too fancy. Get us from A to B without resorting to Dublin Bus.

Oh, while your at it, can you get them to run until 3am at weekends, just like they do in any other sane, modern European city.

Thanks.

Now get to work. Theres not enough done, and lots to do.

murphaph

dermo88 wrote:

Now, keep it simple. Luas and DART. Thats all we need. Nothing too fancy. Get us from A to B without resorting to Dublin Bus.

If Dublin's transport system was planned properly, ridership on buses would increase dramatically and overall journey times would fall. Dublin simply does not get anywhere near the capacity out of it's 1000 odd buses that it could, with some minor improvements-some of which are inextricably tied in with rail interchanges. In any sane city the 39 as we know it wouldn't exist-there would be multiple routes (but no more buses required) running into stations along the Maynooth line, feeding a high frequency DART. The guts of the infrastructure is there now! It takes planning.

The radial route system (an-lar mentality) was known to be flawed in the 60's and we're still fretting about where to PARK buses in the city's streets in 2005. Cop the fcuk on and introduce a real bus network, not another fcuking spoke here and there!

Of course we need TfD for any of this to actually happen because CIE's arse hasn't met it's elbow in 50 years-it's unlikely to do so as the subsidiary companies move further apart.

PandaMania

"Of course we need TfD for any of this to actually happen because CIE's arse hasn't met it's elbow in 50 years"

and it never will mainly because of the CIE Unions. Here are two examples of why CIE is a disaster as an overall body allegedly charged with integrated transport. Two cities - Sligo and Waterford. Both have train stations and both have bus services; local services and provincial.

Sligo: the BE services integrate with the train station, but the local services nearest stop is several streets away and a good 15 min walk from the station. All these services are run by CIE. Found out that the reason the local services do not call at the BE/IE station is because they have a different union agreement and that the BE drivers voted AGAINST this happening. No reason, no public explanation for it but the public transport users of Sligo can basically go **** themselves and that's that because the unions said so. I was told later that the BE drivers did not want the local service drivers using their rest room and toilets. (so much for union solidarity and brotherhood!)

Waterford: The train station does not have a bus connection of any kind and the walk from the station to the bus and city centre is across a bleak windswept bridge. If there was ever a place in Ireland more hostile to public transport then it has to be Waterford and guess who comes from there... Anyways, the CIE unions demanded extra pay for driving across the river to the train station. End result, get used to the wind come down the mouth of the Suir.

This is just two examples if were CIE have essentially waged war on intergrated transport either by idiot managers who have simply have no clue that buses and trains should connect, to out of control unions.

You could probably start a whole thread on locations around the country with the public transport run by CIE and nothing connects with nothing and in many cases in recent years such as Drogheda were new bus stations were built on the other side of town from the main train station and a carpark was built at the station were a former goods yard was located and could have been the site of the new bus depot. I am not kidding.

Anybody who thinks that CIE can deliver integrated public transport is really hoping against hope and those who think the CIE unions went on strike last year to "save public transport" need their heads examined.

Look at the London Underground this week. The tube drivers who drove the trains which were bombed are back at work on the same routes even though Al Queada have said more attacks coming. Now that is a dedicaited public transport worker. Compare that to our own IE heroes who each got a pay raise of €11,000 each (after a series of lightning strikes) so they would not suffer from "stress" driving a train around Bray Head when the Greystones DART extention was opened.

I won't even going to the ILDA strike.

The whole semi-state, crybaby selfish union agenda to providing public transport in this country has to end. If it takes a big Maggie type poltician to take them on and destroy the CIE unions then so be it. Our economy is far too dependent on public transport these days to have the likes of ILDA and Tobins holding the Irish economy to randsom when they feel like it.

John R

murphaph wrote:

If Dublin's transport system was planned properly, ridership on buses would increase dramatically and overall journey times would fall. Dublin simply does not get anywhere near the capacity out of it's 1000 odd buses that it could, with some minor improvements-some of which are inextricably tied in with rail interchanges. In any sane city the 39 as we know it wouldn't exist-there would be multiple routes (but no more buses required) running into stations along the Maynooth line, feeding a high frequency DART. The guts of the infrastructure is there now! It takes planning.

Interesting that you mention planning. How any public transport can adequately serve that monstrosity of an area is beyond me. The developers (including the local authorities) have been allwed free reign in building several square miles of random single entrance housing estates in an area without any proper support facilities and then bus/rail operators are blamed for not being able to provide good links.

I would love to know how you would provide a better service for the 39 catchment area using several routes without substantially increasing the bus allocation.

The fact is the 39 runs right by Clonsilla station, residents of Huntstown/Hartstown/Blakestown and Ongar can just as easily get the 39 towards Clonsilla and transfer to the railway there. The 39 is full to the city every morning because alot of people would rather use the bus all the way as the rail doesn't serve the part of the city they want. These people deserve a good service also.

Your rail-centric views are workable as long as the rail services are there to provide the core, currently they are not.

murphaph wrote:

The radial route system (an-lar mentality) was known to be flawed in the 60's and we're still fretting about where to PARK buses in the city's streets in 2005. Cop the fcuk on and introduce a real bus network, not another fcuking spoke here and there!

Until there are proper rail lines to connect to it is a ridiculous arguement, the Maynooth line services are bursting at the seams in peak hour. You cannot be seriously suggesting that City-Blanchardstown routes should be cut back and more people be forced onto the relatively infrequent, overcrowded commuter rail.

The Luas is a perfect example of the fine line between rail solutions as an end in themselves and rail as a central corridor to feed connecting services. The green line is quick and efficient, it has cut the journey time from Dundrum dramatically. As a result the bus traffic on the 48a route has dropped drastically and much of the traffic on the route from Ballinteer is now to Dundrum rather than the city centre. As a result DB has proposed cutting the route and diverting the buses to connecting routes to/from Dundrum while still maintaining a direct bus link to the city.

The red line on the other hand has not provided a big improvement on journey times from Tallaght to the city and consequently the bus services are still busy, as most bus services in Tallaght stop right beside the Luas terminus they already provide convenient connections, those that wish to can change quickly and those that wish to use the bus for the whole journey still have the same services.

murphaph wrote:

Of course we need TfD for any of this to actually happen because CIE's arse hasn't met it's elbow in 50 years-it's unlikely to do so as the subsidiary companies move further apart.

We need a regulatory framework that will provide an environment for proper transport solutions encompassing every mode and every ancilliary. It is not nearly as simple as connecting the different operators, the other half-dozen groups that stick their oar in to every planning decision need to be brought under the control of one group. The CIE companies are operating under a government directive to "compete". Any overt co-operation is considered anti-competition and is no longer the done thing. Feeder buses have to be paid for by IE.

mackerski

John R wrote:

I would love to know how you would provide a better service for the 39 catchment area using several routes without substantially increasing the bus allocation.

[...]

Until there are proper rail lines to connect to it is a ridiculous arguement, the Maynooth line services are bursting at the seams in peak hour. You cannot be seriously suggesting that City-Blanchardstown routes should be cut back and more people be forced onto the relatively infrequent, overcrowded commuter rail.

The big problem that murphaph highlights is the fact that, by and large, wherever you are in the suburbs you can get to the city centre and only the city centre. The routes and, to a large extent, the ticketing regime makes it very complicated if your chosen journey doesn't have one of its ends in town.

I think we can all agree that, in a world where you have high-capacity trains that belong to a network with broad reach, the buses should look to feed passengers into the train stations and to help passengers alighting from trains to complete their journeys. We also all know that we are not there yet, so we still do need routes like the 39 to provide a long-distance, no-changes service from a suburb to what is, after all, a very common destination. However, consider the following:

Many many people are stuck taking two buses, often over a very silly routing, in which case they also take up valuable space on an already congested route into town, a place where they have no need to be. A colleague of mine has to commute by bus from Chapelizod to Dublin 15. He needs two buses to do it, changing at O'Connell Street. His routing goes via Finglas. Why should this be? If you stripped 10% of the buses that serve the old radial routes and rigged up some strategic suburb-suburb services would that not make a lot more sense? And yet it doesn't seem to be anybody's job to take these kinds of measures.

In principle, spotting an opening for routes like this is something a private operator could do. However, it's an uphill struggle, since these operators are currently denied any fare-pooling arrangement with Dublin Bus, so the private service is only attractive for commuters that can make their journey without a travel leg on DB. Who wants to buy two bus passes?

Is this really so non-obvious? The problem - our public transport is in a mess because we're mostly restricted to buses. The solution - get a rail strategy underway that will be complemented by buses. The workaround until then - make creative use of the buses you already have.

Dermot

murphaph

John R wrote:

Interesting that you mention planning. How any public transport can adequately serve that monstrosity of an area is beyond me. The developers (including the local authorities) have been allwed free reign in building several square miles of random single entrance housing estates in an area without any proper support facilities and then bus/rail operators are blamed for not being able to provide good links.

John I almost completely agree. I know you weren't refering to me when you said that public transport providers get all the blame because I didn't do so nor would I. I say 'almost' because although the city has sprawled horribly, the same sprawl happened in Edmonton, Canada. This city however took the problem on head on, with 'timed-transit' centres, especially at it's suburban malls. It works for them. It might work for us but we don't know because it's never been tried.

John R wrote:

I would love to know how you would provide a better service for the 39 catchment area using several routes without substantially increasing the bus allocation.

I'd run the buses in short (2 mile) north south runs along the relatively wide (easily bus-laned) roads of greater Blanchardstown, where the buses would not be caught up in city congestion, hence there are more buses available to passengers to use, without there being any more actual buses. Money would need to be spent in places on bus lanes and bus priority measures, but that's small money in comparison to Luas, for example.

John R wrote:

The fact is the 39 runs right by Clonsilla station, residents of Huntstown/Hartstown/Blakestown and Ongar can just as easily get the 39 towards Clonsilla and transfer to the railway there. The 39 is full to the city every morning because alot of people would rather use the bus all the way as the rail doesn't serve the part of the city they want. These people deserve a good service also.

I live in Hartstown and you're right, most people just take the bus the hour and a half into town even though I live a 4 minute drive from Clonsilla station. I totally agree that the 39 serves areas like Manor Street and the western quays and the train doesn't. The key point I see you make is that a good service is delivered by having no change. This is a major error in transport planning. Succesful networks, by their very nature force the vast majority of users to make at least one change. The upside to this apparent downside is that users have many more choices they don't have under the radial system where they are left with either towards town, or away from town. I can't even get to Clondalkin Village or Tallaght in any practical way on public transport and I live just a few miles from these large centres in another large centre.

John R wrote:

Your rail-centric views are workable as long as the rail services are there to provide the core, currently they are not.

John, I really don't have a rail-centric view. I believe that buses are more important than rail in Dublin and will be for a very long time, probably forever. The bus has flexibility that can't be beat. I also clearly stated that the transfers to Maynooth line rail would need to be to a high frequency DART, and clearly that doesn't exist right now but the bulk of the infrastructure (track, stations) are there. All that's needed is will because P7 at Connolly could take a DART frequency service from the Maynooth line.

John R wrote:

Until there are proper rail lines to connect to it is a ridiculous arguement, the Maynooth line services are bursting at the seams in peak hour. You cannot be seriously suggesting that City-Blanchardstown routes should be cut back and more people be forced onto the relatively infrequent, overcrowded commuter rail.

John, did you read my post? I said the Maynooth DART would need to be in place first for this to work!

John R wrote:

We need a regulatory framework that will provide an environment for proper transport solutions encompassing every mode and every ancilliary. It is not nearly as simple as connecting the different operators

John, please, I never said it was easy. I said it was doable and blinding people with smartcards etc. was a diversionary measure, preventing people from seeing the serious problems with our outdated view of Dublin as an overgrown village with O'Connell Street as the main street.

John R wrote:

the other half-dozen groups that stick their oar in to every planning decision need to be brought under the control of one group. The CIE companies are operating under a government directive to "compete". Any overt co-operation is considered anti-competition and is no longer the done thing. Feeder buses have to be paid for by IE.

Agreed, however CIE were once a single entity and they integrated their railways with their town and country bus services about as well then as they do today.

murphaph

mackerski wrote:

The big problem that murphaph highlights is the fact that, by and large, wherever you are in the suburbs you can get to the city centre and only the city centre. The routes and, to a large extent, the ticketing regime makes it very complicated if your chosen journey doesn't have one of its ends in town

Exactly Dermot. Here's an extract from that document I refered to (please see the attached diagram and read the related section quoted below, bearing in mind that it will apply more and more to Dublin as the suburban centres like Cherywood, Tallaght, Citywest, Blanchardstown and the airort/Swords become more important for employment);

This slide summarizes what we have been saying. Transit systems that successfully attract passengers make it possible for people to travel from “here to there” that is from many points of origin to many points of destination throughout the metropolitan area. Once into the system, the passenger can relatively easily and conveniently continue directly to his or her objective.

Both the grid and timed transfer concepts accomplish this multi-destination objective, and they have both demonstrated success in attracting passengers. The grid has high area coverage with criss-crossing routes offering frequent service. It relies on random transfers between routes. It also has high density corridors which may become rapid transit.

The timed transfer system has timed connections at off-street bus centers. These may be tied into land use planning, and some may be slated as future rail stations.

In contrast, most cities have systems that "grew" into "downtown radial” patterns. Most routes run downtown directly. Riders can conveniently use transit to get downtown, but they can't easily get to other places.

You can appreciate the limited passenger appeal of a downtown radial system by considering the distribution of travel in a typical metropolitan area. In most metropolitan areas, the downtown is doing well if 10 percent of regional trips go there.

Several transit routes competing for only 5 to 10 percent of the total trips are assured of low patronage. They probably will not have enough ridership per line to warrant conversion to rail transit. In areas with weak downtowns, the percentage might be less.

Downtown radial systems will, of course, pick up some additional travel consisting of people transferring from one route to another, but this potential is rather limited because of the circuitous routes involved.

In contrast to the grid or timed transfer systems, a downtown radial system cannot hope to attract a large percentage of metropolitan travel.

Thomond Pk

So are you suggesting that a Tallaght to Lucan via Clondalkin route should be built as a precursor to a more comprehansive orbital route? If that were the case both the Airport Spur and the DTO version of the Metro via Finglas would be the correct choice. That would only leave the Finglas to Lucan section to acheive an alignment equal to the M50 c2004

SeanW

Unfortunately, John R has a point - the rail system in Dublin isn't good enough to be the destination of "feeder buses" at least not the Maynooth Line anway. Even the DART has some overcrowding issues and there are large gaps in the timetable to facilitate long-distance trains. The Maynooth line is busting at the seams in rush hour, but in off peak times, there are gaps of over an hour - which is not exaclty "turn up and go" frequency At Heuston there's another problem - the current twin track arrangement does not work for a lot of Commuter trains and a lot of Intercity trains. Commuter trains are so much slower than Intercity trains that before an IC train can leave Heuston, or arrive in Kildare, the line has to be free of Commuter trains for the previous 25 min - so again big gaps.

So I'd have to agree that there is little point in DB trying to make "feeder" routes for the Maynooth (and Kildare) lines - and even the Luas Red line which is really slow.

mackerski

Thomond Pk wrote:

So are you suggesting that a Tallaght to Lucan via Clondalkin route should be built as a precursor to a more comprehansive orbital route? If that were the case both the Airport Spur and the DTO version of the Metro via Finglas would be the correct choice.

If we were to build the route with buses it would be reasonably easy, though, wouldn't it?

Dermot

Bill McH

Thomond Park wrote:

Cherrywood represents one of Irelands best Strategic Development Zone opportunities as the site is large by any standards and is not elevated enough to cause significant amenity damage to the Dublin Foothills. Over a ten year period both a significant population and workforce are likely to be using this place. The routing chosen to Cherrywood by the RPA is both short-sighted and problematic if one has two medium term objectives;

1> Developing a medium density transport corridor
2> Maintaining access to Luas for existing Luas users

It's certainly going to be big.

Between the hours of 7 am and 8 pm M-F there are 62 DART trains from the City Centre to Bray and 11 "other" trains from the City Centre to Bray. So, an average of 4.8 DARTs per hour to Bray and an average of 5.6 trains in total per hour.

If the Dublin Rail Plan happens, there will be scope for a lot more trains, perhaps 10-12 per hour, depending on the situation with the level crossings along the route.

Perhaps someone would be able to explain the advantages of building the LUAS to Cherrywood rather than building the DART to Cherrywood - it's only about a mile away from the DART line at present.

jlang

Interesting idea, haven't heard anyone mention a spur off the Dart before Bray before.

MarkoP11

On the service level question

From my prospective from Blackrock between 8 and 9am, everything after the 8:40 has seats (BTW the 8:40 arrives to within 2 minutes of right time day in day out, it was only 20 seconds out today)

8:04 8:14 8:21 8:28 8:36 8:40 8:45 8:50 8:54

8 Dart + 1 surburban, 6.6 minutes there is still plently of space between 8 and 8:20 to fit in a further suburban and another Dart

Outbound from Pearse 5pm and 6pm, typically seats can be had on most

17:11 17:20 17:35 17:41 17:46 17:54 17:59

7 Darts 8.5 minute there is a suburban at 17:29 which doesn't call in Blackrock, space for a further train between 17:00 and 17:20

Thats pretty damn good, when the screw is turned the system can run lots of trains, what is now needed is a regular interval off peak with 4 Darts/hour 2 to Maynooth and possibly 2 to Drogheda. Up to about 7:45am its very very quiet its only then do the trains start to fill up. The pattern of services has evolved to match the demand

murphaph

Thomond Pk wrote:

So are you suggesting that a Tallaght to Lucan via Clondalkin route should be built as a precursor to a more comprehansive orbital route? If that were the case both the Airport Spur and the DTO version of the Metro via Finglas would be the correct choice. That would only leave the Finglas to Lucan section to acheive an alignment equal to the M50 c2004

I'm not really suggesting anything should be built. The doument I linked to cites Toronto as one of the world's best transport networks. The city abandoned he radial bus pattern it had in the 1920's and opted for a grid network wherey people would have many more destination choices, but have to change at least once. The key to this was high frequency buses. They had some tram lines, but not many and no metro. Their system was successful and only the bus routes with heaviest patronage were converted to tram or metro (which appeared much later, c.1954).

Bottom line is that we are not making the best use of our buses. I still can't get on a bus, pay one fare for 1 journey unless that journey requires 0 changes. I have to buy a ticket in a newsagent. This is a highly inconvenient system and baffles foreigners who are used to buying tickets from ticket machines located at the bloody transport stops.

We need a comprehensive overhaul of bus routes, eliminating the an-lar forever. The DRP should go ahead asap. There should be an airport rail connection. Luas should be linked but while these more obvious measures are undertaken, the bus network we have needs scrapping and replacement with something that serves us Dubs properly.

John R

PandaMania wrote:

Sligo: the BE services integrate with the train station, but the local services nearest stop is several streets away and a good 15 min walk from the station. All these services are run by CIE. Found out that the reason the local services do not call at the BE/IE station is because they have a different union agreement and that the BE drivers voted AGAINST this happening. No reason, no public explanation for it but the public transport users of Sligo can basically go **** themselves and that's that because the unions said so. I was told later that the BE drivers did not want the local service drivers using their rest room and toilets. (so much for union solidarity and brotherhood!)

Or could it be that the town services are mainly used by locals for commuting/shopping etc and as they operate from one side of the town to the other it is more logical to have them stop in the centre of the town where most people want to go rather than the train station. As for a good 15min walk, O'Connell St is more like five minutes from the station. The last time I was in Sligo I went from the bus station to O'Connell St, had a bite to eat and walked back to the station in less than half an hour.
Considering all the drivers in that tale work out of the same small depot for the same company and regularly switch between town and provincial duties it sounds like someone has been spoofing you.

PandaMania wrote:

Waterford: The train station does not have a bus connection of any kind and the walk from the station to the bus and city centre is across a bleak windswept bridge. If there was ever a place in Ireland more hostile to public transport then it has to be Waterford and guess who comes from there... Anyways, the CIE unions demanded extra pay for driving across the river to the train station. End result, get used to the wind come down the mouth of the Suir.

A walk across a bridge and 200 yards down the quays, what a terrible ordeal. :rolleyes:
And FYI there are bus connections to the city centre from just outside the train station, AFAIR both Bus Eireann and Keneally's operate a city route past the station.

What is all this rubbish about unions refusing to go across the bridge? Until a few years ago all express and regional services terminated at the train station. They were moved to the current bus station because there was not enough room for buses or passengers in the cramped station compound. During busy times it was dangerous with the whole area crowded with passengers and buses trying to reverse in and out of the area.

The new bus station is a huge improvement on the previous arrangement. It is a 5 min walk max between the two, how would a bus transfer be of any use? The distance is far too short for there to be any need for a bus transfer.

PandaMania wrote:

This is just two examples if were CIE have essentially waged war on intergrated transport either by idiot managers who have simply have no clue that buses and trains should connect, to out of control unions.

PandaMania wrote:

You could probably start a whole thread on locations around the country with the public transport run by CIE and nothing connects with nothing and in many cases in recent years such as Drogheda were new bus stations were built on the other side of town from the main train station and a carpark was built at the station were a former goods yard was located and could have been the site of the new bus depot. I am not kidding.

OTHER side of town??? Don't you mean that they built the bus station in the centre of the town rather than a 10 minute walk away on the edge of town, up a steep hill on a site with a very difficult sharply angled entrance off what at the time was a very busy main road?

All that even though the vast majority of rail passengers don't wish to transfer to any bus services.


<Snip>

Blah blah blah.
More cliched anti-union rhetoric.

enterprise

What do u expect from Pandamania? Nearly as bad as Metrobest.

Waterford: All train services except the 09.30 Heuston / Waterford has a connecting bus service in the form of the 360 Waterford / Tramore service. Then again it is only a 5 mins walk max from one of the main streets in Waterford to the train station.

Pandamania: get your facts right first!

Bill McH

MarkoP11 wrote:

...From Blackrock...

8:04 8:14 8:21 8:28 8:36 8:40 8:45 8:50 8:54

8 Dart + 1 surburban, 6.6 minutes there is still plently of space between 8 and 8:20 to fit in a further suburban and another Dart

Outbound from Pearse 5pm and 6pm, typically seats can be had on most

17:11 17:20 17:35 17:41 17:46 17:54 17:59

7 Darts 8.5 minute there is a suburban at 17:29 which doesn't call in Blackrock, space for a further train between 17:00 and 17:20

Thats pretty damn good, when the screw is turned the system can run lots of trains, what is now needed is a regular interval off peak with 4 Darts/hour 2 to Maynooth and possibly 2 to Drogheda. Up to about 7:45am its very very quiet its only then do the trains start to fill up. The pattern of services has evolved to match the demand

It certainly is an excellent service. Nobody along the southside route could have any quibble with the level of service, especially given that there is only a catchment area on one side of the line.

As the above times show, there is room for running a lot of trains and plenty of trains do run at peak times. At off peak times, 4-5 trains per hour is perfectly adequate along the southside route.

My point in the previous post was solely that the room is there, or will be there, to add another destination (Cherrywood, and maybe beyond) along the Southside DART line.

murphaph

Got a copy of Dublin Bus' newsletter today. Proudly trumpetting their radial network, long since abandoned by more advanced cities. Makes me quite sad to see such a nice fleet not being used to it's full capacity.

dowlingm

murphaph

without continuity of fare, either single pay or zone, there's little point in promoting cross-radial services. Toronto has very good bus/light rail/subway integration but that's because they have a single operator (TTC), a transfer system and single zone across the city. They are also (gradually) improving links with commuter rail (GO Transit) by building stations where heavy rail and other modes intersect.

murphaph

dowlingm wrote:

murphaph

without continuity of fare, either single pay or zone, there's little point in promoting cross-radial services.

I know. That's why I said it wouldn't happen if we wait for the CIE group of companies to implement it and we'd need a TTC/TfL/MVV type of organisation to crack skulls together. I think it goes without saying at this stage that we need a zoned fare system or some fare system whereby journeys are chrged for based on the journey, not the modes used.

People seem to think I'm deluding myself into thinking this is easy. It takes effort and commitment to get proper integration and those two things are lacking in Dublin.

spacetweek

jlang wrote:

Interesting idea, haven't heard anyone mention a spur off the Dart before Bray before.

This is the eventual aim. When the Green Luas is extended to Cherrywood a further phase will fill in the remaining ~3 km as far as Woodbrook, between Bray and Shankill. However, this phase is a long way off (10 years) as it isn't crucial in the short term.

MarkoP11

It would be Luas not DART anyway, metro if you are really lucky. Though the proposed Luas line to Cherrywood makes it virtually impossible to get to the original alignment to Shankill and Shanaganagh Junction. Friends First have a nice new office building in the way

Its all very very fishy

dowlingm

no disagreement then!

Here, few buses operate along the subway lines - it is handy though as they can then massively increase frequency on the route when there is a problem with the subway. The Yonge St bus operates to 30min headway but when the subway breaks down they ramp up - this is also the case during streetcar line maintenance.

The vast majority of Toronto buses are interconnecting. Imagine a bus that started from a terminus at a DART line and went west to connect to the Green Line, and possibly onwards to terminate at the Red Line or the Kildare line. Many bus platforms attached to subway stations have no public access except via the subway turnstiles to reduce the need for fare or transfer collection on the buses. There is scope for radial buses but these should be in the main QBC buses where light rail is not capable of reaching technically or economically, and in Toronto express downtown buses attract double fare or a surcharge on monthly passes. Streetcars mostly use transfers as they don't have stations except where they intersect subway lines.

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.dublinbus.ie/news_centre/press_releases.asp?action=view&news_id=339

Revenue – Dublin Bus has posted a trading surplus of €7.3m, up from €3.4m in the year before. Turnover was up by an impressive 8.5% over 2002 figures to €173m. Dublin Bus received a state subvention of €53.8m this was down from €56m in 2002 and is one of the lowest levels of public service obligation payments made to a bus operator in Europe.

Revenue growth remained strong despite traffic congestion costing Dublin Bus an estimated €49million per year due to large infrastructural works in the city including the Luas, Port Tunnel and the O’Connell St. regeneration.

Passenger Numbers – the increase in passenger numbers by 2.3% brought the number carried for 2003 to 149million and was a main driver of the revenue figures. The numbers carried by Dublin Bus equates to 500,000 passengers per day which is equivalent to one third of the population of the Greater Dublin Area (GDA) using buses every day.

So DB turnover is € 173m (and €53.8m) and it moves 1/3 of Dubliners every day. So wouldn't € 680m be enough to provide free Buses for a year for all of Dublin ?? If so then the €20Bn would keep us going for the next 30 years.

One way of looking at it is that the (~ one in three) people who depend on buses (the young/old, poor, disabled etc.) are getting subsidised to the tune of €53.8 per year, the others who in many cases choose not to use public transport will only get a subsidy of € 2,000 per year (ten times what it would cost to provide existing bus users with free transport)

antoinolachtnai

Well, the interest alone on 20 billion would be 600 million per year (if you put it on deposit at rabobank).

I don't think that we should seriously consider having free public transport.

But there's very little reason not to have a flat non-cash fare of (say) 75 cents and a cash fare of one euro, and plough the rest into capital grants for buses. The bus companies would get bonuses for increasing ridership and keeping the buses full.

If you did this you could probably get 3000 extra buses on the road. (3000 x EUR 200,000 per year per bus to cover depreciation, maintenance, bus lane acquisition/improvements and network operating costs = 600m).

You could get this up and running within 3 years and the benefits would be very great and very immediate.