Marlborough Street Public Transport Priority Bridge

FreudianSlippers · 26-01-2012 10:14am

It's typical odd shortsightedness and lack of understanding of economics yet again. Because there is a perceived decrease in traffic now it means it will never increase in the future? We should build all of these things now when they're cheap, we need the jobs and we are increasing our infrastructure before it is crippled.

dubhthach · 26-01-2012 12:29pm

Mod

I've merged the two threads

AngryLips · 26-01-2012 12:40pm

mmcn90 wrote: »

The bottleneck could possibly be solved by having buses stop on Parnell Street & Talbot Street, with them terminating at Hawkins Street (in the great void created by blowing Hawkins House to smithereens (I wish))

Or it could be solved by Luas running in both directions down one carraigeway of O'Connell Street and busses up/down the other carraigeway.

Personally, I would prefer to see the money spent on doing something with O'Connell Street bridge. It's in such a sorry state. It's unsightly when compared to some of the other bridges (Capel Street bridge) and it must be straining under the weight of so many resurfacings...

robd · 26-01-2012 12:54pm

Just remember guys. Construction work has started on this bridge. They've removed the quay wall where they bridge will go.

Next I guess is the foundations.

It's a steal span bridge so it's probably been built already in some foundry and will arrive on the back of a truck when foundations are built.

monument · 26-01-2012 1:13pm

trluk wrote: »

The City Council are pressing ahead with this. It seems daft ...

It does not seem daft at all.

Traffic is not down that much in the city. There's often still gridlock conditions on large parts of many routes in and out of and around the city.

And what's wrong with the James Joyce Bridge (besides maybe its cycle lanes to nowhere)?

Winters wrote: »

I don't believe that Marlborough is wide enough to take both tram lines in addition to the many buses that terminate along Marlborough Street.

Then move the buses.

Marlborough Street is far more suited to trams than buses. If Dublin Bus wants to terminate buses in the city centre, they can find somewhere else to do so rather than public street space in short supply.

AngryLips · 26-01-2012 1:38pm

monument wrote: »

And what's wrong with the James Joyce Bridge (besides maybe its cycle lanes to nowhere)?

The problem with the James Joyce bridge is mostly aesthetic. It's height blocks sight lines down the Liffey in much the same way the Loop-line bridge does by Custom House. This is further aggrevated by the fact that it bridges the Liffey where the river is at its narrowest. That the south-end of the bridge adjoins a T-junction instead of a through-road going south (one that ought to align with Blackhall Place on the north) is also against the conventions of bridge design and placing. Of course, some might place a lesser value on these criticisms because there's no practical application to these points but I think it's ruined the Liffey and it's relationship with the Phoenix Park quite a bit.

monument wrote: »

If Dublin Bus wants to terminate buses in the city centre, they can find somewhere else to do so rather than public street space in short supply.

100% agree. But it should be noted that Network Direct has resulted in more through services and fewer routes terminating in the city centre. I've never understood why DB don't run the city-centre terminating busses, especially those that terminate along the quays, further down towards the Docklands. This is a neighbourhood that has seen an increase in its residential population since the boom without a corresponding increase in public bus services. DB seem to always be behind the curve in this respect.

LXFlyer · 26-01-2012 1:49pm

AngryLips wrote: »

100% agree. But it should be noted that Network Direct has resulted in more through services and fewer routes terminating in the city centre. I've never understood why DB don't run the city-centre terminating busses, especially those that terminate along the quays, further down towards the Docklands. This is a neighbourhood that has seen an increase in its residential population since the boom without a corresponding increase in public bus services. DB seem to always be behind the curve in this respect.

There are already five routes going to the Docklands - 53, 53a and 151 on the Northside (and 90 in morning peak) and the 15a and 15b on the southside. The 56a and 77a also operate to Ringsend Depot along Pearse Street. Given they are fairly high frequency, I'm not sure they need much more?

There are far fewer routes terminating in the city centre near O'Connell Street now.

After Network Direct is finished you will be left with:

Abbey Street: 29, 31, 31a, 32, 33, 41, 41b, 41c and 130.
Eden Quay: 27a, 42, 43, 53 and 53a.
Hawkins Street: 65, 65b, 68, 68a and 69.
Pearse Street: 47, 49 and 54a
D'Olier Street: 84x
Parnell Street: 40b, 40d and 120

Other routes have moved to Mountjoy Square and Merrion Square.

monument wrote: »

Marlborough Street is far more suited to trams than buses. If Dublin Bus wants to terminate buses in the city centre, they can find somewhere else to do so rather than public street space in short supply.

That's all well and good, but every time you lengthen a route it means longer running time and therefore more resources required to operate it. Bus stands are a fact of life in most cities - I think you need to be somewhat more realistic than just saying "move them somewhere else". You have to remember that even with the LUAS extension the bus will still be the dominant form of public transport in Dublin. That surely doesn't suggest to me that they should be consigned to being an afterthought as you suggest.

monument · 26-01-2012 3:18pm

lxflyer wrote: »

That's all well and good, but every time you lengthen a route it means longer running time and therefore more resources required to operate it. Bus stands are a fact of life in most cities - I think you need to be somewhat more realistic than just saying "move them somewhere else".

Turning streets into unattractive dead space because Dublin Bus want to park buses on them is no longer good enough. I'm not going to come up with a plan in this thread.

lxflyer wrote: »

You have to remember that even with the LUAS extension the bus will still be the dominant form of public transport in Dublin. That surely doesn't suggest to me that they should be consigned to being an afterthought as you suggest.

Nobody said anything about moving buses being an afterthought, but...

Going down the route of who is the dominant does not have any logical conclusion that favours buses. Pedestrians are the dominant road users* in Dublin City, followed by car drivers. Do pedestrians get much space or priority given their dominant position?

Luas carried 29 million passengers (with a daily average of 80,000) on under 37km of track. How many passengers does Dublin Bus carry in how many km?

* The census shows that in Dublin City (Council) area walking is more popular than any other commute (almost 28% of Dublin City area commuters) and in the city centre huge amounts of other types of commuters (rail, tram, bus and car users as well as cyclists) become pedestrians to complete their trips. The densely populated areas within the canals also have some of the highest percentages of residents who just walk to work.

LXFlyer · 26-01-2012 3:41pm

I think you do need to accept that bus stands are a fact of life in every city whether you like it or not. You need them to operate an efficient service without requiring additional resources or providing a city centre bus station (which is unlikely in today's climate).

Let's be honest that stretch of Marlborough Street is not particularly strikingly attractive, buses or no buses.

Frankly it seems to me that you have a definite bias (and I'm not saying it is a bad thing) in favour of trams over buses. That's your perogative. My own view is that if you are coming up with a plan for trams, then at the same time you have to explain what will happen the displaced bus routes. The two cannot be looked at in isolation. They have to be looked at together. Both complement one another. It's not that Dublin Bus "want" to park them there - that happens to be the most efficient way of operating the service!!

My point is that you cannot just willy-nilly dismiss the bus service as all your posts appear to do.

Most of your ideas seem to be about removing buses from the city centre, yet as I say they carry far more passengers that either DART or LUAS ever will.

Incidentally, my statement was that buses will remain the dominant form of public transport in Dublin. That would tend to exclude pedestrians and private cars as I was not referring to them.

Dublin Bus carried 119m passengers in 2010 and operated over 61.8m km.

cgcsb · 26-01-2012 4:09pm

I think that luas should travel both ways down Marlborough st with a stop at the Abbey and a stop at Cathal Bruagh Street. This would avoid further disruption to O'Connell st, it would result in greater separation of modes, it would mean a much better connection between the 2 lines. It would also bring some life to the area, it'd also be cheaper because there'd be less utility diversion works involved. Dublin bus should be working to reduce the amount of routes that terminate in the core CBD as much as possible. If it were up to me it'd only be Mountjoy square, Merrion Square and possibly Fitwilliam square that accommodate bus terminals.

trluk · 26-01-2012 5:17pm

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Because there is a perceived decrease in traffic now it means it will never increase in the future?

No, it never will. All plans plans are for further reduction of traffic in the centre. That's what the city centre has been working towards for years. That's what it's all about these days, here and all over Europe.

This bridge is nuts. It's barmy. It was a reaction to frenzied tiger traffic pressure. It's from a time when everyone was out of their tree.

Since Bus Gate north-south traffic has evaporated out of the O'Connell Street area and went to Winetavern Street, Church Street and the Docklands instead. You could play a game of volleyball on O'Connell Bridge.

As well as the Marlborough St. bridge being beside the widest bridge in the country there is another massive bridge the other side of it - Butt Bridge.

cgcsb · 26-01-2012 5:26pm

trluk wrote: »

No, it never will. All plans plans are for further reduction of traffic in the centre. That's what the city centre has been working towards for years. That's what it's all about these days, here and all over Europe.

as you have stated clearly, this proposed bridge is designed to carry public trandport not private traffic, so how does your point about the slight decrease in the length of the rush hour due to economic factors have to do with it?

Also the article you quoted from says that it is unlikely that major public transport projects such as metro and DART are unlikely to go ahead in the next ten years. So how can the amount of economic activity increase while decreasing private traffic and not providing any public transport alternatives. How do you envisage that being possible?

trluk wrote: »

This bridge is nuts. It's barmy. It was a reaction to frenzied tiger traffic pressure. It's from a time when everyone was out of their tree.

sensationalism doesn't really help in these sorts of threads.

trluk wrote: »

Since Bus Gate north-south traffic has evaporated out of the O'Connell Street area and went to Winetavern Street, Church Street and the Docklands instead. You could play a game of volleyball on O'Connell Bridge.

That's simply not true. In fact the opposite is true, the majority of drivers ignore bus gate.

monument · 26-01-2012 5:44pm

lxflyer wrote: »

I think you do need to accept that bus stands are a fact of life in every city whether you like it or not. You need them to operate an efficient service without requiring additional resources or providing a city centre bus station (which is unlikely in today's climate).

No, I don't need to accept it and it's not a part of city life in most of the cities that I've been in. It seems to be more of a sign of an inefficient bus service that anything.

Overall efficient use of street space comes before Dublin Bus' needs. Parking buses on the street next to the city's main street is not efficient use of street space.

lxflyer wrote: »

Let's be honest that stretch of Marlborough Street is not particularly strikingly attractive, buses or no buses.

Parked buses make it far worse and hinder any attempts at improvements.

lxflyer wrote: »

Frankly it seems to me that you have a definite bias (and I'm not saying it is a bad thing) in favour of trams over buses. That's your perogative.

I have a definite bias against bus? Me? The person who in a recent thread put forward the idea of having highly segregated BRT in the city?

Do I have a definite bias over high quality, high capacity, high frequency and highly reliably public transport which pays for its operating costs over lower capacity and less attractive transport? Yes, I do.

Try attacking the post rather than the poster, thanks.

lxflyer wrote: »

My own view is that if you are coming up with a plan for trams, then at the same time you have to explain what will happen the displaced bus routes. The two cannot be looked at in isolation. They have to be looked at together. Both complement one another. It's not that Dublin Bus "want" to park them there - that happens to be the most efficient way of operating the service!!

Finer details can be worked out -- if everybody posting here about transport and other things always had to have such detail there'd be little discussion. The promoters of poor bus services always say that one of the advantages of buses is that they can be moved easily -- so it should not be too much of a problem?

And the most efficient way for Dublin Bus to operate its service is not always what is best for the city, never mind what is best for transport in the city.

lxflyer wrote: »

My point is that you cannot just willy-nilly dismiss the bus service as all your posts appear to do.

Most of your ideas seem to be about removing buses from the city centre, yet as I say they carry far more passengers that either DART or LUAS ever will.

Incidentally, my statement was that buses will remain the dominant form of public transport in Dublin. That would tend to exclude pedestrians and private cars as I was not referring to them.

Again, have a search for one of my recent posts on BRT (bus rapid transit). :pac:

Dart Underground would see Dart and Commuter capacity go up to 100m. Dublin Bus is 119m and falling, is it?

lxflyer wrote: »

Dublin Bus carried 119m passengers in 2010 and operated over 61.8m km.

The question was on km, not operating km. Can you answer how many km does Dublin Bus routes service?

You're not referring to them because it does not suit your simplistic argument that public transport parking should be able to take over prime city centre space.

Cool Mo D · 26-01-2012 6:12pm

I think it's definitely time to build a big bus station under Hawkins House, as mentioned in another thread - would link the DART, Luas BXD, and all city centre on-street bus termini could be moved there. Also, all cross-city buses, which would not go into the bus station, should stop outside a train or Luas stop somewhere along their route.

robd · 26-01-2012 6:36pm

Cool Mo D wrote: »

I think it's definitely time to build a big bus station under Hawkins House, as mentioned in another thread - would link the DART, Luas BXD, and all city centre on-street bus termini could be moved there. Also, all cross-city buses, which would not go into the bus station, should stop outside a train or Luas stop somewhere along their route.

LXFlyer · 27-01-2012 10:52am

monument wrote: »

No, I don't need to accept it and it's not a part of city life in most of the cities that I've been in. It seems to be more of a sign of an inefficient bus service that anything.

Overall efficient use of street space comes before Dublin Bus' needs. Parking buses on the street next to the city's main street is not efficient use of street space.

Parked buses make it far worse and hinder any attempts at improvements.

I have a definite bias against bus? Me? The person who in a recent thread put forward the idea of having highly segregated BRT in the city?

Do I have a definite bias over high quality, high capacity, high frequency and highly reliably public transport which pays for its operating costs over lower capacity and less attractive transport? Yes, I do.

Try attacking the post rather than the poster, thanks.

Finer details can be worked out -- if everybody posting here about transport and other things always had to have such detail there'd be little discussion. The promoters of poor bus services always say that one of the advantages of buses is that they can be moved easily -- so it should not be too much of a problem?

And the most efficient way for Dublin Bus to operate its service is not always what is best for the city, never mind what is best for transport in the city.

Again, have a search for one of my recent posts on BRT (bus rapid transit). :pac:

Dart Underground would see Dart and Commuter capacity go up to 100m. Dublin Bus is 119m and falling, is it?

The question was on km, not operating km. Can you answer how many km does Dublin Bus routes service?

You're not referring to them because it does not suit your simplistic argument that public transport parking should be able to take over prime city centre space.

Well you obviously haven't looked very hard!

London, Barcelona and Sydney are three examples I can immediately think of where there are city centre bus stands, generally on side streets where buses layover between journeys. It is a basic element of any city bus service in cities where no public transport interchange station is not provided.

As for being parked "on the street next to the city's main street" - what difference does that make? Marlborough Street is hardly a major thoroughfare - in fact it is a pretty dingy backstreet surrounded by large office blocks. Not having buses there is not going to change that.

Moving the buses away from there is not a "finer detail". It is a major point, because lengthening the route means requiring a higher peak vehicle requirement (PVR) to maintain the existing service levels - that is a fundamental issue because of resource availablity.

And I don't have the details of how many km there are in the Dublin Bus network. I have no access to that information. Why don't you ask Dublin Bus?

Given that IE carried 38.2m passenger journeys in 2010 over the entire network, I think that any concept of them carrying 100m on DART/Suburban alone is pie in the sky.

Ben D Bus · 27-01-2012 1:21pm

cgcsb wrote: »

In fact the opposite is true, the majority of drivers ignore bus gate.

That's not really correct in fairness. I know some drivers do ignore the gate, but the number of private cars I see on College Green in the evening peak is tiny. They're annoying, but relatively insignificant.

Regarding the bridge, one of the problems on OCB is buses turning right from Bachelors Walk. Causes a lot of problems with buses getting from their stops on BW, into the correct lane, then getting onto the bridge. And there are a lot of routes do this.

It might be very helpful to traffic flow if these routes cross onto Eden Quay and take the new bridge to Hawkins St and onto College Green?

monument · 27-01-2012 2:41pm

lxflyer wrote: »

Well you obviously haven't looked very hard!

London, Barcelona and Sydney are three examples I can immediately think of where there are city centre bus stands, generally on side streets where buses layover between journeys. It is a basic element of any city bus service in cities where no public transport interchange station is not provided.

I don't remember saying there were no buses parked up on any streets in any cities -- I disagreed with your claim that it is a "fact of life in most cities".

It is simply not a fact of life in most cities. When somebody says anything is "a fact of life", there's usually a different way.

lxflyer wrote: »

As for being parked "on the street next to the city's main street" - what difference does that make? Marlborough Street is hardly a major thoroughfare - in fact it is a pretty dingy backstreet surrounded by large office blocks. Not having buses there is not going to change that.

It is planned to be a thoroughfare for Luas.

And, yes, not having buses there will change the street -- the buses or more so the amount of buses are part of the problem of the street. The parked buses take up a huge part of the street, make it seem like a smaller space, more closed in space and blocks out the light the street has.

lxflyer wrote: »

Moving the buses away from there is not a "finer detail". It is a major point, because lengthening the route means requiring a higher peak vehicle requirement (PVR) to maintain the existing service levels - that is a fundamental issue because of resource availablity.

A finer detail can be a major point, but it can still be worked out.

As many low frequency bus routes as there is now have no place in the city centre in the future.

For example, half decent BRT on the Malahide Road corridor would get rid of most or all of those buses which park there. I believe Dublin Bus' contract is up in 2014, while construction of BXD only gets going in 2015.

lxflyer wrote: »

And I don't have the details of how many km there are in the Dublin Bus network. I have no access to that information. Why don't you ask Dublin Bus?

Look at it this way, the QBN office says there's about 200kms QBCs and Dublin Bus serves far more than just QBCs.

Luas has under 37km. If Luas had even 200km of lines it would be carrying far more than Dublin Bus does and it would likely be doing so with an operating profit.

The point is that not all public transport is equal.

lxflyer wrote: »

Given that IE carried 38.2m passenger journeys in 2010 over the entire network, I think that any concept of them carrying 100m on DART/Suburban alone is pie in the sky.

You can think "pie in the sky" all you want but that is the capacity they should have if or when the stalled works on Dart Underground project is resumed.

With a benefit/cost ratio of 2.4 the project has a far greater chance of been resumed in the future than other large projects (ie metro). And with without the Dart Underground tunnel the Kildare line four tracking will never be used right, the bottlenecks around the loop line will remain and current lines will remain underused compared to their potential.

Their entire Intercity network would be insignificant compared to the Dart and Commuter network post the stalled Dart project.

cgcsb · 27-01-2012 2:44pm

Ben D Bus wrote: »

That's not really correct in fairness. I know some drivers do ignore the gate, but the number of private cars I see on College Green in the evening peak is tiny. They're annoying, but relatively insignificant.

I see it a lot and there's very little enforcement, maybe a camera system should be put in place and drivers sent a fine through the post for doing so.

I also see a lot of bad driving in general in Dublin, drivers casually sale through red lights, don't indicate and change lanes suddenly, especially taxis.

Ben D Bus wrote: »

Regarding the bridge, one of the problems on OCB is buses turning right from Bachelors Walk. Causes a lot of problems with buses getting from their stops on BW, into the correct lane, then getting onto the bridge. And there are a lot of routes do this.

It might be very helpful to traffic flow if these routes cross onto Eden Quay and take the new bridge to Hawkins St and onto College Green?

agreed, since network direct, the blanch area buses 39,37,70 etc. use O'Connell Bridge, where as they used to use Gratten

LXFlyer · 27-01-2012 3:10pm

monument wrote: »

I don't remember saying there were no buses parked up on any streets in any cities -- I disagreed with your claim that it is a "fact of life in most cities".

It is simply not a fact of life in most cities. When somebody says anything is "a fact of life", there's usually a different way.

For goodness sakes now you are dealing in semantics - you effectively said it did not happen elsewhere - I am saying it does.

monument wrote: »

It is planned to be a thoroughfare for Luas.

And, yes, not having buses there will change the street -- the buses or more so the amount of buses are part of the problem of the street. The parked buses take up a huge part of the street, make it seem like a smaller space, more closed in space and blocks out the light the street has.

I think you are really stretching things here - it is not an attractive street full stop.

monument wrote: »

A finer detail can be a major point, but it can still be worked out.

As many low frequency bus routes as there is now have no place in the city centre in the future.

For example, half decent BRT on the Malahide Road corridor would get rid of most or all of those buses which park there. I believe Dublin Bus' contract is up in 2014, while construction of BXD only gets going in 2015.

Indeed it can - but your original post made no practical suggestion of how it could be delivered without affecting PVR. And you have to take those sort of things into account. You were frankly dismissive of DB and put it down to them "choosing" to terminate there, without any knowledge of how urban bus services operate in my opinion.

Also - the high frequency Malahide Road routes no longer terminate there, but hey don't let that stop you!

monument wrote: »

Look at it this way, the QBN office says there's about 200kms QBCs and Dublin Bus serves far more than just QBCs.

Luas has under 37km. If Luas had even 200km of lines it would be carrying far more than Dublin Bus does and it would likely be doing so with an operating profit.

The point is that not all public transport is equal.

I think that is a very subjective post - LUAS is never going to have 200km. I'd suggest the DB network is far in excess of that given there are many routes off QBCs. Therefore the whole comparison is ludicrous. I suspect that you would find LUAS would not be making an operational profit - in fact this year it's quite possible they will make a loss.

monument wrote: »

You can think "pie in the sky" all you want but that is the capacity they should have if or when the stalled works on Dart Underground project is resumed.

With a benefit/cost ratio of 2.4 the project has a far greater chance of been resumed in the future than other large projects (ie metro). And with without the Dart Underground tunnel the Kildare line four tracking will never be used right, the bottlenecks around the loop line will remain and current lines will remain underused compared to their potential.

Their entire Intercity network would be insignificant compared to the Dart and Commuter network post the stalled Dart project.

Capacity and reality are two completely different things. There is not a chance in my view that IE will ever carry anything close to 100m passengers.

At the end of the day I am saying that you need to think things through and suggest practical alternatives if these schemes are to happen. Not doing so leaves gaping holes in your argument.

monument · 27-01-2012 3:44pm

lxflyer wrote: »

For goodness sakes now you are dealing in semantics - you effectively said it did not happen elsewhere - I am saying it does.

It's not semantics, and you're now putting words in my mouth.

lxflyer wrote: »

I think you are really stretching things here - it is not an attractive street full stop.

Not at all, the parked buses are part of the problem and makes the street harder to be made attractive. It makes the street more cramped, less open, and darker.

lxflyer wrote: »

Indeed it can - but your original post made no practical suggestion of how it could be delivered without affecting PVR. And you have to take those sort of things into account. You were frankly dismissive of DB and put it down to them "choosing" to terminate there, without any knowledge of how urban bus services operate in my opinion.

Also - the high frequency Malahide Road routes no longer terminate there, but hey don't let that stop you!

Yes, bus services are chosen and planned, they did choice to park buses there because it suits them to do so. You can try to claim otherwise but what suits Dublin Bus is not what is always the best thing for the city or even transport in the city.

Even in terms of bus transport, Dublin Bus is not what the city needs.

And you continue to think posters here have to write each post to the standard of a railway order or something along those lines. It's a discussion board, not choosing a submission form for An Bord Pleanala for fast tracking planning permission.

Even if we're talking about moving around the current routes that use the streets or even moving where they park -- it should not be a huge deal, the flexibility of buses is supposed to be one of their strong points.

lxflyer wrote: »

I think that is a very subjective post - LUAS is never going to have 200km. I'd suggest the DB network is far in excess of that given there are many routes off QBCs. Therefore the whole comparison is ludicrous. I suspect that you would find LUAS would not be making an operational profit - in fact this year it's quite possible they will make a loss.

You're missing the wider point: Luas is more important because it carries more people per km its routes take up. In terms of the amount of passengers carried, the fact that the DB network is far in excess of 200km is worse, not better.

Why do you not think that a larger Luas network travelling around the same kind of areas would make a loss?

Why do you think Luas will make a loss this year?

lxflyer wrote: »

Capacity and reality are two completely different things. There is not a chance in my view that IE will ever carry anything close to 100m passengers.

Why isn't there a change of that happening?

LXFlyer · 27-01-2012 4:10pm

I'm not expecting an EIS but I would expect you to come up with a practical alternative rather than somewhat sweeping statements.

As to LUAS making an operating loss:

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/RPA-Luas-fares-approval-Dec-2011.pdf

The RPA has been experiencing deficits between Luas revenue and operating costs and is forecast to have an operating deficit, including asset refurbishment costs, in 2011 and a further deficit which is expected to be higher in 2012. This has resulted in them having to deplete their accumulated cash reserve which was intended for necessary maintenance work.

robd · 27-01-2012 4:28pm

lxflyer wrote: »

As to LUAS making an operating loss:

True unfortunately. The extensions have put them into the red in operating terms. There's a lesson to be learned there in terms of building tram (or heavy rail) lines in low population density out lying areas.

Other than that, could the 2 of you (lxflyer and monument) please stop bickering about bus stops. It's somewhat of a side argument.

monument · 27-01-2012 4:29pm

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm not expecting an EIS but I would expect you to come up with a practical alternative rather than somewhat sweeping statements.

The practical alternative is to move the buses. The detail and decision making behind the choices of how to move them is EIS level and even beyond EIS level with discussion between all parties.

In any case, asking me or anybody else here to explain how we're going to move the parked buses seems strange when the RPA already plans on having a Luas stop where the buses park:

North >

lxflyer wrote: »

As to LUAS making an operating loss:

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/RPA-Luas-fares-approval-Dec-2011.pdf

Thanks, I had not seen that.

monument · 27-01-2012 4:51pm

robd wrote: »

True unfortunately. The extensions have put them into the red in operating terms. There's a lesson to be learned there in terms of building tram (or heavy rail) lines in low population density out lying areas.

Other than that, could the 2 of you (lxflyer and monument) please stop bickering about bus stops. It's somewhat of a side argument.

Back on topic:

The Luas BXD drawings seem to suggest that there is room for Luas tracks going both ways on Marlborough Street (and from College Green to Marlborough Street). The only notable problem on the ground seems to be the (currently very low quality) building on the corner of Parnell Street and Marlborough Street.

Grafton Street to Eden Quay(05_BXD_RO_29_A-B).pdf (0.67MB)
Eden Quay to Cathal Brugha Street(06_BXD_RO_29_B-C).pdf (0.82MB)
Cathal Brugha Street to Dominick Street Lower(07_BXD_RO_29_C-D).pdf (0.62MB)

Fitting the set of tracks down the street isn't a huge issue.

The question is: Is more disruption at and post construction from College Green to Parnell Street via Marlborough better or worse than disruption on O'Connell Street?

And will the RPA do without their loop?

dublinman1990 · 27-01-2012 5:14pm

Quote from Ixflyer

London, Barcelona and Sydney are three examples I can immediately think of where there are city centre bus stands, generally on side streets where buses layover between journeys. It is a basic element of any city bus service in cities where no public transport interchange station is not provided.

Going off topic - London's Victoria Station has a wide range of bus, rail and tube services to offer there, including an air terminal :eek:, for passengers travelling by train to Gatwick Airport.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Victoria_station

Imagine if you had Connolly or Heuston like that. We wouldn't know ourselves.

trluk · 12-02-2012 9:38am

.
LOCATION GUIDELINES FOR NEW BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION IN HISTORIC CITIES

Case Study - Dublin:

.

I can't BELIEVE we're making the spacing mistake for the second time in less than 10 years @_@

dowlingm · 12-02-2012 2:33pm

robd wrote: »

True unfortunately. The extensions have put them into the red in operating terms. There's a lesson to be learned there in terms of building tram (or heavy rail) lines in low population density out lying areas

What a bunch of tosh. Developer-contribution is the saving of the railways. Hansfield is thriving and sure Crusheen will be the crown jewel of Irish Rail.

robd · 12-02-2012 2:52pm

dowlingm wrote: »

What a bunch of tosh. Developer-contribution is the saving of the railways. Hansfield is thriving and sure Crusheen will be the crown jewel of Irish Rail.

What the heck are you talking about? What has Crusheen got to do with operating of the Luas?

The cost of operating the Luas in less dense areas (Saggart and Bridge Glen) has pushed Veolia into the red (loss making). Thus RPA have increased the fares to push Veolia back into the black (profit making).

Developer contributions pay for construction of, not the running of a service.

Also, I was giving justification for fare increase not criticizing it.

dowlingm · 12-02-2012 10:36pm

Dude. Sarcasm. Seriously.

Marlborough Street Public Transport Priority Bridge

Comments