Luas Cross City (Line BX/D) [now open]

KC61 · 24-06-2010 2:17pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Luas BXD Line is 5.6km long and Metro North is over 18km long. BXD only duplicates MN for a few hundred metres from St Stephens Green to O'Connell Street and those two places are the only places they will both have stations. That can hardly be considered duplication for "most of the route". From O'Connell Street they then run in completely different directions and will serve different communities. Line BXD is not just a link up.

MN would not provide adequate links between the two existing Luas Lines when you consider metro stations will be >30m below the ground. It could not be considered an integrated network if after getting on the Luas you have to get off at a metro stop, go 30m below ground, travel one stop on the metro and go back above ground to get another Luas to complete your journey.

The bus may be more popular now but that is because of the poor state of rail/light rail in the city. Once Luas extensions, MN and Interconnector are complete, rail will soon become a lot more popular than buses. Rail and light rail are higher capacity, more reliable and more sustainable then bus transport and that is why we should be moving away from bus transport. Just because the majority of people use buses at the minute does not mean we should focus on buses as the main mode of transport in Dublin city centre. That would be a very short sighted view.

How can you possibly suggest that the bus will not be still the major form of transport. Huge areas of the city will remain unserved by rail and the bus will still be the major form of transport in Dublin.

As it is along the DART lines the bus service still carries huge numbers despite the DART. The Stillorgan, Templeogue, Rathfarnham, Greenhills, Lucan, Finglas, Malahide Road and some of the Swords QBC routes will still be primarily bus based. That will not change.

The sheer notion that the bus service can be swept under the carpet is nonsense.

I honestly do not think that there are such huge numbers that would require changes from red line to green line that would warrant building line BXD in addition to the Metro. The 92 bus (or higher frequency 145 after network direct implementation) does much of the job as it is and is already consistently faster than the LUAS in the city centre.

The section of BXD that is unique is from Parnell Square to Broadstone. Does that in itself warrant a LUAS line when there are a wide range of alternatives there already?

I just feel that this is an unnecessary spending of resources when the benefits are not that huge.

markpb · 24-06-2010 2:21pm

KC61 wrote: »

Much of those journeys that you quote can already be done by bus without changing

Perhaps the Network Direct will make a difference but travelling by bus through the city centre is still terribly slow. My 19 from Camden St to O'Connell St took 25 minutes yesterday at 7pm.

Anyone using the LUAS to go from Tallaght to Charlemont would want their head examined. They would use the 65/65b as the LUAS would be far slower.

It might not make sense but it's well documented that people are more likely to make the switch from car to train/tram than car to bus. The waiting time is well known, the simplicity of the route makes it more attractive, the ride is generally more comfortable, it's easier for old people and people with bags or luggage to board, etc. The train is better perceived than the bus - whether this is correct or not (ie whether the 92 is faster than the Luas or not) is irrelevant -people prefer trains to buses.

To the people who are saying sod Dublin Bus and move the services away from the city centre, I would make the point that even with the Interconnector, Metro North, and the various LUAS extensions, the bus will still remain the largest mode of public transport in the city. So should the majority of people be discommoded to facilitate a minority?

It will only be a problem if DB don't re-organise themselves again once MN, Interconnector and BXD are completed. If they did, it should drastically reduce the number of buses passing through the city centre. There should be very few areas that won't have a train service and they should be served by feeder buses.

KC61 wrote: »

Just to add to my post above, I've not seen anywhere that trams will switch between the two lines or that there will be connecting tracks between the two. We'll have to wait until the EIS comes out to see.

According to the RPA, the lines will be connected but only for stock movement, not for passenger service.

noelfirl · 24-06-2010 2:27pm

KC61 wrote: »

I still remain totally unconvinced that a city centre link up of the LUAS is necessary given that it duplicates Metro North for much of the route.

There are other examples of this - Barcelona for example has two completely unconnected tram lines that are linked by metro. Why cause mayhem in construction when there will be a subsurface metro linking the two lines - with an integrated ticket allowing changeovers.

That's quite different though, the Trambaix and Trambesos are two self-contained networks of three lines each at either end of the city, and they are going to be connected to one another along the Diagonal anyway at a later date.

I'm all for integrated transport, but Metro North will deliver the linkage between the two LUAS lines, and the Green Line and Irish Rail at Drumcondra. This absolute need to build line BX has always mystified me.

It's the 'D' part of it that is more important in the long term, between the two of BX and D there will be a 2nd cross city line that is only partially duplicated by Metro North. I wouldn't prioritise BXD over the Metro being as the Metro will serve as an indirect link, but I wouldn't long finger it either. As for the whole "Broombridge (and thusly Finglas) is a urine soaked hell hole", if you're only going to invest in public transport in the affluent and maturly developed areas in the city then we may as well all give up now. You dont just rollover and leave areas of the city to fester for all time.

KC61 · 24-06-2010 2:35pm

markpb wrote: »

Perhaps the Network Direct will make a difference but travelling by bus through the city centre is still terribly slow. My 19 from Camden St to O'Connell St took 25 minutes yesterday at 7pm.

If the bus gate hours were further extended that would substantially improve that journey time.

markpb wrote: »

It might not make sense but it's well documented that people are more likely to make the switch from car to train/tram than car to bus. The waiting time is well known, the simplicity of the route makes it more attractive, the ride is generally more comfortable, it's easier for old people and people with bags or luggage to board, etc. The train is better perceived than the bus - whether this is correct or not (ie whether the 92 is faster than the Luas or not) is irrelevant -people prefer trains to buses.

It is an unfortunate misconception but some decent marketing needs to change that viewpoint once the bus network is redesigned, along with the implementation of RTPI and more bus priority which will deliver a much better bus service at a fraction of the cost of line BXD. The reality is that from Heuston Station to O'Connell Bridge the bus wins every time in terms of journey time, yet people are like sheep still using LUAS.

markpb wrote: »

It will only be a problem if DB don't re-organise themselves again once MN, Interconnector and BXD are completed. If they did, it should drastically reduce the number of buses passing through the city centre. There should be very few areas that won't have a train service and they should be served by feeder buses.

There are 7 out of the 13 QBC routes that will still see dominant bus usage and where people will still need to get to the city centre by bus. On the Blanchardstown, Howth Road and Rock Road QBC routes where there is a rail alternative, bus usage is still very high. I don't see line BXD making any real change to this.

markpb wrote: »

According to the RPA, the lines will be connected but only for stock movement, not for passenger service.

Thanks for that link!

But as I say I've not seen anything in your posts that tells me that line BXD is essential. I view Metro North and the Interconnector as the two vital links of the various transport routes. The redesigned bus network with additional on street priority and real time information will (in my opinion) deliver a huge improvement that far outweighs anything line BXD can. As it is there is going to be a large decrease in buses going up/down O'Connell Street by virtue of Network Direct.

trellheim · 24-06-2010 2:36pm

This is ridiculous. People are seriously applauding this. As KC61 and myself have said, where do people plan on putting the buses ? Check out the number of routes dropping into the City Centre that would be messed up by this.

Either RPA have been eating the crayons, or this crapola will be funded instead of MN.

markpb · 24-06-2010 2:51pm

KC61 wrote: »

If the bus gate hours were further extended that would substantially improve that journey time.

The bus gate had nothing to do that with that delay, it was all on Camden St and Georges St. Even with the bus gate and turning restriction onto Dame St, the bus journey was unreliable. I use DB all the time but that's not going to attract anyone.

There are 7 out of the 13 QBC routes that will still see dominant bus usage and where people will still need to get to the city centre by bus. On the Blanchardstown, Howth Road and Rock Road QBC routes where there is a rail alternative, bus usage is still very high. I don't see line BXD making any real change to this.

I think the fact that bus usage along the Dart line is still high speaks volumes about the Dart service (as well as the population density and work patterns). If a train line is built and a good service provided, there's no reason for DB to provide a good bus service - it's a waste of money. Buses should be pulled from those areas and re-deployed as feeder buses or to other areas with less rail coverage.

Look at this map - if all the T21 components happen, the only area missing a decent rail service is Terenure. There's no reason for lots of buses to be heading to Phibsboro, Santry, Swords, Beaumont, Ballymun, Blanchardstown or anywhere near the Dart line.

KC61 · 24-06-2010 3:12pm

markpb wrote: »

I think the fact that bus usage along the Dart line is still high speaks volumes about the Dart service (as well as the population density and work patterns). If a train line is built and a good service provided, there's no reason for DB to provide a good bus service - it's a waste of money. Buses should be pulled from those areas and re-deployed as feeder buses or to other areas with less rail coverage.

Look at this map - if all the T21 components happen, the only area missing a decent rail service is Terenure. There's no reason for lots of buses to be heading to Phibsboro, Santry, Swords, Beaumont, Ballymun, Blanchardstown or anywhere near the Dart line

With due respect stand any morning on Nassau Street and watch the loadings going out on routes 4, 4a and 7/a. They are huge. All those people are not going to fit onto the DART.

With the development of Pace more people will move to rail, but the Maynooth line itself is already chronically overloaded - are you suggesting that all the passengers on the buses coming from Blanchardstown are going to switch? Some will, but with passengers switching at Pace from outer areas I'm not sure that there will be huge capacity increases. The entire Corduff, Hartstown/Huntstown areas will still rely on the bus. That is not going to change.

Rail can deliver real benefits but it is not going to deliver a one-stop solution to all our transport needs. Bus and rail need to both be developed and the bus will still have a major role in Dublin. There are only so many feeder bus services that can be developed before you put strain on the capacity of the rail service.

You cannot say that Terenure is the only area not served by rail:

Each of the following areas are not served by a rail service:
Stillorgan QBC (from Leeson Street to Stillorgan Village)
Rathfarnham QBC (Entire)
Templeogue QBC (Rathmines to Tallaght Village & Firhouse/Knocklyon)
Lucan QBC (Heuston to Palmerstown/Liffey Valley)
Blanchardstown QBC (Corduff/Hartstown/Huntstown)
Finglas QBC (Phibsboro to Finglas)
Swords QBC (Whitehall to Santry)
Malahide Road QBC (Fairview to Kinsealy)

Those people using the QBCs are not going to disappear.

Fundamentally I am not seeing what line BXD is going to do to change any of this.

Pete_Cavan · 24-06-2010 4:13pm

KC61 wrote: »

With the development of Pace more people will move to rail, but the Maynooth line itself is already chronically overloaded - are you suggesting that all the passengers on the buses coming from Blanchardstown are going to switch? Some will, but with passengers switching at Pace from outer areas I'm not sure that there will be huge capacity increases. The entire Corduff, Hartstown/Huntstown areas will still rely on the bus. That is not going to change.

When Luas extensions, MN and Interconnector are complete people travelling from Pace will have many more options. They can stay on the train until Connelly, Pearse Street or all the way out to Bray, they can get off at Broombridge and take Luas into O'Connell Street or St Stephens Green or they can get off at Drumcondra and take MN north to airport/Swords or south to St Stephens Green. And thats just with one change, a second chage provides many more options. My point here is that a fully integrated and connected rail network with only five lines (2 Luas, 2 Dart, 1 Metro) is a much better option for city travel than having thousands of buses travelling over a hundred routes and clogging up the city.

KC61 wrote: »

Rail can deliver real benefits but it is not going to deliver a one-stop solution to all our transport needs. Bus and rail need to both be developed and the bus will still have a major role in Dublin. There are only so many feeder bus services that can be developed before you put strain on the capacity of the rail service.

Fully agree with the above statement but rail and light rail are higher capacity, more reliable and more sustainable then bus transport and should be prioritised.

KC61 wrote: »

Fundamentally I am not seeing what line BXD is going to do to change any of this.

Line BXD, in all honesty, is not going to make a huge difference to transport in Dublin. However it is another step in creating a fully functioning city wide rail network. It should be built as soon as possible, and should have been built before some of the other Luas extensions. I accept that not all areas can be served by rail and where rail is not possible buses are the only option. Buses can also be used as feeder and supplementary services for the rail services.

trellheim · 24-06-2010 4:18pm

Also, if trams end up on OCS and Marlborough St, where will the buses go ?

( for example the 15 route could not travel up Harcourt and now has to go down Hatch st )

So : Marlborough is narrow enough so that will not have buses on it ( especially during construction ) - so that's out.

Next easterly north-south axis ( Gardiner St ) would require buses to pass up Tara St being the nearest junction to OCS. If all the routes went here to drop off at Butt Bridge (which is one of the busiest commuter axes now that OCS is mostly blocked off for cars ) there will be massive congestion

Westerly there is no real axis ( Jervis St even if a bridge was built at that point is useless ) until Capel St which has been narrowed and has no buses.

So.... Nothing really until O'Donovan Rossa bridge which is just crayoning again.

KC61 · 24-06-2010 4:35pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

When Luas extensions, MN and Interconnector are complete people travelling from Pace will have many more options. They can stay on the train until Connelly, Pearse Street or all the way out to Bray, they can get off at Broombridge and take Luas into O'Connell Street or St Stephens Green or they can get off at Drumcondra and take MN north to airport/Swords or south to St Stephens Green. And thats just with one change, a second chage provides many more options. My point here is that a fully integrated and connected rail network with only five lines (2 Luas, 2 Dart, 1 Metro) is a much better option for city travel than having thousands of buses travelling over a hundred routes and clogging up the city.

I do not disagree with any of the fact that the expanded rail network through LUAS, DART and Metro will deliver a massive benefit. But there are limits on the capacity, especially on DART south of the river due to level crossings. There will still be a huge need for the bus service, and it is going to continue to deliver the majority of passenger journeys.

The network direct project at Dublin Bus is all about de-clogging the streets and delivering a far more efficient bus network.

I just do not think that the BXD option delivers any worthwhile benefits that the bus service will do - it is a case of huge upheaval for something that is not really needed.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Fully agree with the above statement but rail and light rail are higher capacity, more reliable and more sustainable then bus transport and should be prioritised.

Absolutely and that is why I support the Interconnector and Metro North, but I do not see that line BXD offers sufficient benefits in Dublin other than causing massive disruption to the city bus service and majority of transport users while benefitting far fewer people.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Line BXD, in all honesty, is not going to make a huge difference to transport in Dublin. However it is another step in creating a fully functioning city wide rail network. It should be built as soon as possible, and should have been built before some of the other Luas extensions. I accept that not all areas can be served by rail and where rail is not possible buses are the only option. Buses can also be used as feeder and supplementary services for the rail services.

There are only so many feeder services that can be provided before you start making people's journeys longer. Most of the list of QBC's above would not gain any improvement in journey time by utilising feeder buses.

There is a trade-off here and I am afraid that I do not see the value that BXD is delivering other than offering an alternative to Metro North at a huge cost when the bus service can do that far more cheaply and probably faster too.

trellheim · 24-06-2010 5:04pm

Now, if BXD went underground like DLR to Bank - then we'd be onto something tunnel down @ SSG and surface at Granby Place or Constitution Hill

Zebra3 · 24-06-2010 6:38pm

http://www.rpa.ie/Maps/Luas%20Line%20BXD/Luas%20Broombridge%20EIS%20Map_reduced.pdf

The more I look at the above map, the more I'd like to see the Luas line from SSG to Dominick take a more westerly route than the proposed one.

Better value for money imo by avoiding duplication.

BluntGuy · 24-06-2010 9:08pm

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/NA0004.htm

Due to be decided by 16th December.

astrofool · 24-06-2010 10:01pm

KC61 wrote: »

It is an unfortunate misconception but some decent marketing needs to change that viewpoint once the bus network is redesigned, along with the implementation of RTPI and more bus priority which will deliver a much better bus service at a fraction of the cost of line BXD. The reality is that from Heuston Station to O'Connell Bridge the bus wins every time in terms of journey time, yet people are like sheep still using LUAS.

The bus existed before the LUAS came along, and now exists after, what does this tell you? People prefer on time, comfortable trams compared to buses.

Trams get the car people off the roads, buses do not.

KC61 · 24-06-2010 11:07pm

astrofool wrote: »

The bus existed before the LUAS came along, and now exists after, what does this tell you? People prefer on time, comfortable trams compared to buses.

Trams get the car people off the roads, buses do not.

Indeed but the bus network is about to be completely changed, along with a vast improvement in the levels of information available to customers including real time information, and extra bus priority measures - that is a fundamental change that will (in my opinion) transform the bus service in this city.

As for people not being prepared to use the bus - I must have imagined all of those people who left their cars to use the Stillorgan QBC.

Zebra3 · 25-06-2010 12:48am

astrofool wrote: »

The bus existed before the LUAS came along, and now exists after, what does this tell you?

What does the bit I've bolded mean?

bg07 · 25-06-2010 1:02am

Will staying on the Luas from Stephen’s Green from Stephen’s Green to O’Connell Street be much faster? The Luas would have to negotiate 90 degree turns and 2 intermediate stops. Plus its speed would be low due to number of pedestrians and junctions along the route. Whereas on the metro north there would no stops and it would be able to travel relatively fast and a high frequency service should reduce platform dwell time.

BXD may be slightly faster but will it be worth 1 or 2 hundred million, preventing buses from getting into the city centre and scuppering any possible future attempts to further improve cross city bus services. In my opinion no, especially considering that probably only a minority of Green line passengers would want to continue to the north side. Furthermore providing Broombridge with a second rail link wouldn’t be a huge priority for me considering the respect with which some of the locals treat the existing rail link there.

I think the money for this project would be spent being put towards linking metro north to the existing green luas line or extending metro north to Rathfarnham thereby creating a proper fast cross city rail link.

monument · 25-06-2010 3:09am

KC61 wrote: »

I still remain totally unconvinced that a city centre link up of the LUAS is necessary given that it duplicates Metro North for much of the route.

It's no more a city centre link up than than Metro North is an airport Luas, trying to make such out is the same as trying to claim Metro is just for the airport.

About 1.5km is the distance of duplication. And Metro and Luas are chalk and cheese here: From the Green to the Grand Canal, Metro is planned to have four stops in the same area Luas would have ten stop (if you take each two-directional stop as one).

Metro goes north from Parnell Square to the Matter and on to Drumcondra, Ballymun etc, while the proposed Luas would go from Parnell west to Broadstone and on to Phibsborough, Cabra, Broombridge beside south Finglas. If somehow counts as duplication we need to close a lot of bus routes.

BXD is likely to continue on into Fingal at some point.

KC61 wrote: »

more bus priority which will deliver a much better bus service at a fraction of the cost of line BXD.

BXD will go under the major bottlenecks buses serving the parts of Cabra, Phibsborough and south Fingal which would be served by BXD. There's still major congestion for buses at Harts Corner, Phibsborough, and the North Circular Road which there are no plans to solve. Bus priority at traffic lights can't work when the buses can't get to the lights because there's so many cars in the way. What happened with Berkeley Street / Road does not bode well for any possible QBC plans in the area.

KC61 wrote: »

To the people who are saying sod Dublin Bus and move the services away from the city centre, I would make the point that even with the Interconnector, Metro North, and the various LUAS extensions, the bus will still remain the largest mode of public transport in the city. So should the majority of people be discommoded to facilitate a minority?

You're seem to be the one making out it's one or the other.

KC61 wrote: »

I'm all for integrated transport, but Metro North will deliver the linkage between the two LUAS lines, and the Green Line and Irish Rail at Drumcondra. This absolute need to build line BX has always mystified me.

There's absolute need to do little. However, building a tram line in an old railway alignment to serve areas without great public transport coverage is quite logical.

monument · 25-06-2010 3:46am

darkman2 wrote: »

I said it before but im against a line to Broombridge on the simple basis that it would be trashed by elements of the locals and because of a link up with the other lines, by proxy, it will make the other lines more unsafe for commuters. In a perfect world it is a good idea but I think the line would be unsafe for commuters. And if anyone has any doubt catch a train at Broombridge station one day to find out! I think this one line would be much worse then parts of the red line.

darkman2 wrote: »

lol - you obviously have not seen the fare dodging by the young thugs on the red line who think it's a free taxi to the Children's Court yet?

Im telling you now - you can make up all the excuses - this line will be unsafe. Mark my words. It does not matter where the scumbags are coming from. I hope the RPA look forward to all the broken in windows on trams as they get to O'Connell St. Ever had your train bricked?

Im of the opinion that the leftist nonsense does not work. Whatever you give an area like this a sh*t will be made of it quick time. It's unfair to the genuine locals who would like the service but it is reality. Just give them a few extra buses - they can trash them if they want, as they do. NOT 170m € of yours and my money.

I have a strangely good memory when it comes to strange things, when I remember what to google too, all goes well...

On DublinBikes, you said: [in Paris] "Most of the bikes were stolen or vandalised. The question now is how likely is it that this scheme in Dublin will be abandoned within months when the local gurriers get their hands on them"

I'm not trying to personalise this, it's just your prediction skills seem to be a bit off

KC61 · 25-06-2010 9:39am

monument wrote: »

It's no more a city centre link up than than Metro North is an airport Luas, trying to make such out is the same as trying to claim Metro is just for the airport.

About 1.5km is the distance of duplication. And Metro and Luas are chalk and cheese here: From the Green to the Grand Canal, Metro is planned to have four stops in the same area Luas would have ten stop (if you take each two-directional stop as one).

Metro goes north from Parnell Square to the Matter and on to Drumcondra, Ballymun etc, while the proposed Luas would go from Parnell west to Broadstone and on to Phibsborough, Cabra, Broombridge beside south Finglas. If somehow counts as duplication we need to close a lot of bus routes.

BXD is likely to continue on into Fingal at some point.

BXD will go under the major bottlenecks buses serving the parts of Cabra, Phibsborough and south Fingal which would be served by BXD. There's still major congestion for buses at Harts Corner, Phibsborough, and the North Circular Road which there are no plans to solve. Bus priority at traffic lights can't work when the buses can't get to the lights because there's so many cars in the way. What happened with Berkeley Street / Road does not bode well for any possible QBC plans in the area.

You're seem to be the one making out it's one or the other.

There's absolute need to do little. However, building a tram line in an old railway alignment to serve areas without great public transport coverage is quite logical.

The point that I am making is that I have no problem with line D to Broombridge or Finglas or whereever, and no problem with Metro North linking it and the green line, but I think that the disruption that the construction of line BX will cause to the city's bus services, which are and will remain the backbone of the public transport network in this city (irrespective of what people have posted here) is totally unwarranted.

I think if there is a rapid alternative in the form of Metro North in the city centre then use that instead. Given that there will be integrated ticketing between the two, what is the problem?

trellheim · 25-06-2010 10:50am

You see we cannot agree on anything here !

But that is debate I suppose. Grand scheme though BXD is down the list of priorities ( and should remain so )

Finish KRP
Finish Saggart and Cherrywood extensions
Interconnector
then MN

then and only then look at BXD and put it underground.

Look at it like this : if Interconnector and MN are both built that's SSG out of action for 3/4 years or so.

Zebra3 · 25-06-2010 11:27am

You seemed to have missed the whole point of digging up the city centre twice....

markpb · 25-06-2010 11:33am

trellheim wrote: »

Grand scheme though BXD is down the list of priorities ( and should remain so )

Finish KRP
Finish Saggart and Cherrywood extensions
Interconnector
then MN
then and only then look at BXD and put it underground.

Doing the list your way would be waste of resources. Firstly, the Interconnector has nothing to do with the RPA so, apart from government funding, they're not even on the same list of priorities. Secondly, we should always be planning one or more new tram lines while we're constructing extensions. Otherwise the planning staff would sit about doing nothing for years on end and then the PMs and construction supervisors would sit about doing nothing while APB are looking at planning applications.

Getting BXD designed and approved while the extensions are being built is exactly what the RPA should be doing - they're not even proposing to start construction for years.

monument · 25-06-2010 11:56am

KC61 wrote: »

The point that I am making is that I have no problem with line D to Broombridge or Finglas or whereever, and no problem with Metro North linking it and the green line, but I think that the disruption that the construction of line BX will cause to the city's bus services, which are and will remain the backbone of the public transport network in this city (irrespective of what people have posted here) is totally unwarranted.

It's all one project now, but D was never going to happen until after BX.

I agree that buses will remain the backbone of the transport system (look at London etc) but I think the disruption is wildly overstated. Maybe you're right and the level of disruption will be too much, it depends on how they do it and how much of each stage is done at once. Wait until we see the traffic plan at least.

But at the same time the bus services can't be untouchable, one of their main benefits is that they are supposed to be flexible where needed. For buses problems like dwell times because of case fares and parking buses in the city centre need to be sorted anyway, Metro North and this is all the more reason to do it.

KC61 wrote: »

I think if there is a rapid alternative in the form of Metro North in the city centre then use that instead. Given that there will be integrated ticketing between the two, what is the problem?

If BXD and Metro count as duplication we need to close a lot of bus routes right now. Your logic here could extend to blocking many cross city routes and asking people to get on one bus around the Green and take it to just over the river and switch again.

trellheim · 25-06-2010 1:08pm

I'm more talking about SSG digups. No I didn't miss the point of digging it up 3 times. BXD, Interconnect, MN.

Dig once. RPA and CIE, NTA DOT must all get involved because everyone would like to throw in a track.

Who is the arbiter here ? Who decides whether Bus,Car,heavy rail MN, tram should have priority for next 30-40 years ?

BXD as a radial feeder will only supply Dundrum line and finglas/cabra line.

What about all the other QBCs mentioned above ? where on earth do people plan to put them ? If people are seriously suggesting a single tramline can replace all those radials then I'm in the wrong forum

My plan was to put BXD subsurface while building MN and IC box in SSG but that doesn't seem to suit you guys.

monument · 25-06-2010 1:13pm

trellheim wrote: »

What about all the other QBCs mentioned above ? where on earth do people plan to put them ? If people are seriously suggesting a single tramline can replace all those radials then I'm in the wrong forum

Who said anything about replacing them?

trellheim wrote: »

My plan was to put BXD subsurface while building MN and IC box in SSG but that doesn't seem to suit you guys.

The support for BXD is limited enough as it is, it really does not look like the support is there to pay for what you're suggesting.

trellheim · 25-06-2010 3:23pm

Yes I know the moola isn't there. But it isn't there for MN and IC either, bigger ticket and higher priority Now I take markpb's argument - of course we need to plan now

RPA should not be allowed plan this in a vacuum. DCC,DLR,Fingal,SDCC, DB, private operators, IE, DOT, Bus Eireann should all have a stake ;and yes I know that's some camel right there. But if we don't do this we'll end up just steadily getting worse.

BXD at street level if buses (and taxis) are erased from the map is a runner.

What about diving it at SSG, coming up at Pearse St Garda Station, and crossing both lines at the new Marlboro bridge, both lines up marlboro st ( although that doesn't solve the problem of deconflicting with buses unless you run lines up North Great Georges St ( An taisce would love that )

monument · 25-06-2010 4:55pm

trellheim wrote: »

Yes I know the moola isn't there. But it isn't there for MN and IC either, bigger ticket and higher priority Now I take markpb's argument - of course we need to plan now

That money isn't there. But the support for such a project will unlikely every be there. Look at the amount of bashing done on the Broombridge station idea already on this thread.

The money can be got for Metro and the Dart, and it can be got for this project too, but on the surface and not the way you want it.

trellheim wrote: »

RPA should not be allowed plan this in a vacuum. DCC,DLR,Fingal,SDCC, DB, private operators, IE, DOT, Bus Eireann should all have a stake ;and yes I know that's some camel right there. But if we don't do this we'll end up just steadily getting worse.

What should be happening is the NTA taking full control of CIE (inc DB, Irish Rail, and BE) and the RPA, as well as full control of the bus licensing. The NTA should be setting the agenda -- not DB or the RPA. But that's another days work and for another thread.

But it's worth noting the process already includes consultation with stake holders, and the Railway Order process will allow for this.

trellheim wrote: »

BXD at street level if buses (and taxis) are erased from the map is a runner.

I'm not buying the argument BXD will have such an affect on buses one bit. Because no such argument is been made in any real way.

The bus gate is likely to be made 24 hours for Metro North construction anyway, and it was originally (or at least at one point) planned to be such. And further bus-only restrictions should be welcomed by all providers. Removing private cars off streets which should be for public transport will improve things more, so will fixing the problems with dwell time, parking buses in the city centre etc already mentioned.

As for taxis, some restrictions may need to be put on taxis. As it is taxis are parked everywhere, most days I'm in the city centre I've seen at least one taxi blocking a ped crossing, taxis parking everywhere becoming too big of a problem to ignore any longer.

trellheim wrote: »

What about diving it at SSG, coming up at Pearse St Garda Station, and crossing both lines at the new Marlboro bridge, both lines up marlboro st ...

First there's not enough space at Pearse Street to do that. Secondly the pinch point at the junction of Nassau / Grafton / Suffolk streets would not justify it, nor would College Green. You'd also be digging up much more of the same spaces for longer times at each side of TCD which the buses can't live without for a second.

Rock of Gibraltar · 25-06-2010 5:00pm

I'd be much more in favour of the D line being built as a spur off the Metro North line, diverting at Parnell Square going undergound for the 750m until Broadstone and then above ground into the old railway cutting to Broombridge. Also for it to be built to rapid transit standard, none of this light rail nonsense. I think Luas as a mass transit project has been discredited, its bursting at the seams and I don't think adding more to its network will get more cars off the roads.

It simply doesn't make any sense to duplicate the metro and lines through the city centre, especially since the proposed Luas route will cause so much distruption. Lots of people scoff at the distruption costs, but thats the real economic cost of the project and those costs are enormous and for no real extra benefit, yeah sure you'll be able to stay on a luas and get to O'Connell but the proposed route will be prepostrously slow.

I'd also be in favour of reopening Broadstone as a mainline station as well as a rapid transit station. That would require some dual guaging somewhere if the metro north is to be built to standard guage. But would add significant extra capacity to the heavy rail network, while most people will say that that extra capacity is not required seeing as the docklands statioin is now permanent but wouldn't the extra capacity help to future proof the Dublin suburban rail network?

markpb · 25-06-2010 5:04pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

I'd be much more in favour of the D line being built as a spur off the Metro North line, diverting at Parnell Square going undergound for the 750m until Broadstone and then above ground into the old railway cutting to Broombridge.

No-one is going to put a TBM into the ground for 750m - the cost would be horrendous because most of the cost of tunnelling is in the entry and exit points. Also, if you look at the route between Parnell and Broadstone, bar a few crossings (Dorset and Phibsboro), it's not a very high trafficed route anyway.

Also for it to be built to rapid transit standard, none of this light rail nonsense. I think Luas as a mass transit project has been discredited, its bursting at the seams and I don't think adding more to its network will get more cars off the roads.

I'm not sure who thinks it's discredited except rail enthusiasts - passengers numbers are quite high, there is room for growth and the costs are a decent compromise. As the network grows, there will be less reason to listen to the complains from motorists as they are displaced from city centre streets.

GeneHunt · 25-06-2010 5:08pm

IMO the Green Line should have gone underground from day one at Peters Place (before Adelaide Rd) and continued on to Stephen St. Green with a large underground station there. Then as phase two continue from SSG with the Metro North line, however have a spur on this line after the O’Connell St. Station to the west and have this spur line surface at Broadstone for the Luas Line D to Finglas.

GeneHunt · 25-06-2010 5:19pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

I'd be much more in favour of the D line being built as a spur off the Metro North line, diverting at Parnell Square going undergound for the 750m until Broadstone and then above ground into the old railway cutting to Broombridge.

I should refresh before posting my posts!;)

Rock of Gibraltar · 25-06-2010 5:27pm

markpb wrote: »

No-one is going to put a TBM into the ground for 750m - the cost would be horrendous because most of the cost of tunnelling is in the entry and exit points. Also, if you look at the route between Parnell and Broadstone, bar a few crossings (Dorset and Phibsboro), it's not a very high trafficed route anyway.

I'm not sure who thinks it's discredited except rail enthusiasts - passengers numbers are quite high, there is room for growth and the costs are a decent compromise. As the network grows, there will be less reason to listen to the complains from motorists as they are displaced from city centre streets.

I don't have figures but I suspect the costs would be less than the cost of turning some of the main through fares of the city into construction sites for such a long time, and not just the accounting cost but the real economic cost.

I'm neither a rail enthusiast nor a motorist, passenger numbers for the luas are high as high as passenger numbers can comfortably go given the capacity. Far more people would use the Luas if the carriages were bigger and it was faster, ie rapid transit standard. The Luas at rush hour is horrible, I live roughy equidistant between a luas and a QBC even though its longer I always go with the bus at busy times just because the luas is so uncomfortable.

Rock of Gibraltar · 25-06-2010 5:31pm

GeneHunt wrote: »

I should refresh before posting my posts!;)

Great minds

monument · 25-06-2010 5:35pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

I don't have figures but I suspect the costs would be less than the cost of turning some of the main through fares of the city into construction sites for such a long time, and not just the accounting cost but the real economic cost.

And who will pay for it?

Rock of Gibraltar · 25-06-2010 6:25pm

monument wrote: »

And who will pay for it?

Well ideally everyone who would benefit from having no on street destruption, which would be pretty much everyone who would have even indirect interaction with the construction.
But in reality, like the Luas extensions, a combination of benefitial landowners along the proposed route, the taxpayer and the end user.

monument · 25-06-2010 6:31pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

Well ideally everyone who would benefit from having no on street destruption, which would be pretty much everyone who would have even indirect interaction with the construction.
But in reality, like the Luas extensions, a combination of benefitial landowners along the proposed route, the taxpayer and the end user.

That's unlikely.

The public private partnership model works*, but it's unlikely it would fund your idea.

* It's not flawless, but for now it works.

Pete_Cavan · 25-06-2010 6:35pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

It simply doesn't make any sense to duplicate the metro and lines through the city centre, especially since the proposed Luas route will cause so much distruption. Lots of people scoff at the distruption costs, but thats the real economic cost of the project and those costs are enormous and for no real extra benefit, yeah sure you'll be able to stay on a luas and get to O'Connell but the proposed route will be prepostrously slow.

First of all Luas BXD Line is 5.6km long and Metro North is over 18km long. BXD only duplicates MN for a few hundred metres from St Stephens Green to O'Connell Street and those two places are the only places they will both have stations. From O'Connell Street they then run in completely different directions and will serve different communities. This does not count as duplication, the lines have to meet at some point to allow people to transfer between lines and extend their journey. The same was MN and Interconnector will both meet at Stephens Green, the same way as line BXD will meet Dart at Broombridge, the way as IC will meet Dart at Pearse Street. It allows for a more integrated system with more options and destinations.

If you want to talk about the economic cost/benefits of a project you also have to factor in the employment generated by it, most of these would otherwise be unemployed therefore reducing social welfare payments and then there is the indirect benefits, those employed spending their earnings in the wider economy. Then there are the benefits from the existence of the line after construction

trellheim wrote: »

I'm more talking about SSG digups. No I didn't miss the point of digging it up 3 times. BXD, Interconnect, MN.

Most of the work for Line BXD will be done at the same time as MN, well where they share a route (between College Green and O'Connell Street) offering better value for money in project delivery. From the top of O'Connell Street Line BXD only shares bus route for little more than 100m to Parnell Square West and then from Broadstone on it is in an existing rail cutting. Basically there will be very little disruption caused by BXD to buses, MN will cause the disruption anyway and BXD will be done at the same time.

SSG will only be dug up once because afaik MN station will be deeper then IC station so both tunnels will be dug out at the same time and TBM will be left in IC station area to allow further tunnelling for IC at a later date (not 100% sure which is to be deeper but definitely read the TBM will be left in position).

trellheim wrote: »

Yes I know the moola isn't there. But it isn't there for MN and IC either, bigger ticket and higher priority

MN and IC are going to be built as PPPs so the winning consortium will pay the capital costs so it will not cost the government anything initially. They will then pay the consortium over the next 25 years to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the line.

Rock of Gibraltar · 25-06-2010 7:00pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

First of all Luas BXD Line is 5.6km long and Metro North is over 18km long. BXD only duplicates MN for a few hundred metres from St Stephens Green to O'Connell Street and those two places are the only places they will both have stations. From O'Connell Street they then run in completely different directions and will serve different communities. This does not count as duplication, the lines have to meet at some point to allow people to transfer between lines and extend their journey. The same was MN and Interconnector will both meet at Stephens Green, the same way as line BXD will meet Dart at Broombridge, the way as IC will meet Dart at Pearse Street. It allows for a more integrated system with more options and destinations.

If you want to talk about the economic cost/benefits of a project you also have to factor in the employment generated by it, most of these would otherwise be unemployed therefore reducing social welfare payments and then there is the indirect benefits, those employed spending their earnings in the wider economy. Then there are the benefits from the existence of the line after construction

Most of the work for Line BXD will be done at the same time as MN, well where they share a route (between College Green and O'Connell Street) offering better value for money in project delivery. From the top of O'Connell Street Line BXD only shares bus route for little more than 100m to Parnell Square West and then from Broadstone on it is in an existing rail cutting. Basically there will be very little disruption caused by BXD to buses, MN will cause the disruption anyway and BXD will be done at the same time.

SSG will only be dug up once because afaik MN station will be deeper then IC station so both tunnels will be dug out at the same time and TBM will be left in IC station area to allow further tunnelling for IC at a later date (not 100% sure which is to be deeper but definitely read the TBM will be left in position).

MN and IC are going to be built as PPPs so the winning consortium will pay the capital costs so it will not cost the government anything initially. They will then pay the consortium over the next 25 years to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the line.

I'm not suggesting that we should scrap the D line, i'm just saying that in the sections of the line that would duplicate with the metro north, which is about 1.5 km by my ruler, that we shouldn't go through the pain of above ground construction and that we should use what will be existing infrastructure at the time of the BXD construction and route it undergound instead, while also upgrading it to rapid transit.

According to this report the BXD line won't be started until the Metro North is completed, 2015 at the earliest.
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/euro170m-luas-city-linkup-plans-finally-unveiled-with-13-new-stops-on-way-2229973.html

D.L.R. · 25-06-2010 7:49pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that we should scrap the D line, i'm just saying that in the sections of the line that would duplicate with the metro north, which is about 1.5 km by my ruler, that we shouldn't go through the pain of above ground construction and that we should use what will be existing infrastructure at the time of the BXD construction and route it undergound instead, while also upgrading it to rapid transit.

The idea of multiplexing underground routes is just not something I see our country as having the wherewithal or mindset to pull off. Too much low level bureaucracy going on, everyone wants investment for their own county/parish/street. Getting MN and IC through as it is seems difficult enough.

There is little or no appetite in building up a highly efficient, densely populated capital city here. Decentralisation is the prevailing minset. Until that changes, there won't be the level of ambition for Dublin's transport infrastructure that you advocate. Pity.

Pete_Cavan · 25-06-2010 7:55pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that we should scrap the D line, i'm just saying that in the sections of the line that would duplicate with the metro north, which is about 1.5 km by my ruler, that we shouldn't go through the pain of above ground construction and that we should use what will be existing infrastructure at the time of the BXD construction and route it undergound instead, while also upgrading it to rapid transit.

BXD cannot go underground. MN works because SSG station is over 20m below ground and comes above ground beyond Ballymun. IC goes underground at docklands and comes above ground at Inchicore (or vice verse). The point is you need a large area of open ground to get the levels for the tunnel to fall to the required depth. This cannot happen in the city centre where there is very little open ground and you have to contend with foundations and buildings without foundations that would be undermined by large scale excavation nearby.

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

According to this report the BXD line won't be started until the Metro North is completed, 2015 at the earliest.

MN will be built first but enabling works will be completed at the same time to remove the need to dig up the city centre twice.

However, Mr Dempsey has insisted that the Metro must be built before the Luas link-up can proceed, but has agreed for the excavation and utilities work to be done earlier.
The route of the underground Metro and overground Luas link follow very similar paths.
By applying for the railway order yesterday, Luas chiefs plan to carry out the digging work in tandem with the Metro excavations.
The alternative is to dig up the city centre, build the Metro, and then come back and dig up the city in the exact same locations for the Luas link-up line.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/capital-braced-for-five-years-of-traffic-chaos-from-luas-and-metro-2230811.html

Rock of Gibraltar · 25-06-2010 8:36pm

D.L.R. wrote: »

There is little or no appetite in building up a highly efficient, densely populated capital city here. Decentralisation is the prevailing minset. Until that changes, there won't be the level of ambition for Dublin's transport infrastructure that you advocate. Pity.

I don't know about that, I don't have the info to hand (and I could be way off) but wasn't the Broadstone/Philsborough area ear marked for medium highrise development in the Dublin Development Plan? Which would make off road public transport very attractive seeing as the area is already congested.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

BXD cannot go underground. MN works because SSG station is over 20m below ground and comes above ground beyond Ballymun. IC goes underground at docklands and comes above ground at Inchicore (or vice verse). The point is you need a large area of open ground to get the levels for the tunnel to fall to the required depth. This cannot happen in the city centre where there is very little open ground and you have to contend with foundations and buildings without foundations that would be undermined by large scale excavation nearby.

I'm not an engineer but the Broadstone site is enormous, surely there's enough space to bring a railway tunnel above ground here. The Abercrombie report in the 20's even siad that Broadstone was the ideal site to begin a railway tunnel, which at the time advocated tunneling to Harcourt St. station.

sdanseo · 26-06-2010 11:27pm

Empire o de Sun wrote: »

Dublin Bus Objected to two tram lines.

Seriously, the only acceptable answer to that objection should have been for Dublin Bus to take a long walk of a short pier etc etc. O'Connell Street has more than enough room for buses.

The taxi rank right in the middle of it needs to go bye byes though, sackville place is more than adequate.

trellheim · 28-06-2010 12:17am

well isn't that a well thought out reasoned answer; I'll counter it with my magic 5th dimension that the buses the LUAS will displace will use to get up O'Connell st [ or somewhere nearby ]

sdanseo · 28-06-2010 12:27am

trellheim wrote: »

well isn't that a well thought out reasoned answer; I'll counter it with my magic 5th dimension that the buses the LUAS will displace will use to get up O'Connell st [ or somewhere nearby ]

O'Connell St is huge. Plenty of room in the central median for two lines without displacing ANY buses. The only possible interference would be at a stop where surely an island platform wort sort the space issue.

None of that would ruin the street either, it's pure common sense!

Edit: Just did the google earth research: The median on O'Connell St is 8m wide, tram plus island platform (one line either side) needs 9m looking at Busáras stop. Surely they could find 50 cm from the footpath on either side, plus a tiny bit of resurfacing and new lines?

Victor · 28-06-2010 12:48am

sdonn wrote: »

O'Connell St is huge. Plenty of room in the central median for two lines without displacing ANY buses. The only possible interference would be at a stop where surely an island platform wort sort the space issue.

None of that would ruin the street either, it's pure common sense!

Um, remind me whats on the median.

http://www.tropicalisland.de/ireland/dublin/river_liffey/pages/DUB%20Dublin%20-%20O%20Connell%20Bridge%20and%20O%20Connell%20Street%203008x2000.html

sdanseo · 28-06-2010 1:54am

Victor wrote: »

Um, remind me whats on the median.

http://www.tropicalisland.de/ireland/dublin/river_liffey/pages/DUB%20Dublin%20-%20O%20Connell%20Bridge%20and%20O%20Connell%20Street%203008x2000.html

So don't put the island stop there and put the rails either side of it. Easy peasy. :rolleyes:

By the way I know there's underground access to it, that might be tricky, but I'm going by what we plebs can see on the surface.

BluntGuy · 30-06-2010 8:16am

Railway Order Documents available online now:

http://www.dublinluasbroombridge.ie/

rameire · 30-06-2010 10:44am

cheers for the Luas Pórn Bluntguy.

I have had a quick gander over a few of the docs.
there is a lot of road sharing for the tracks.
so even though there is a luas track there is still a road lane that can be used by motorists.

There is a lot more link-up-age.
The green line continues on into the new line, there are no end buffers between the lines, due to this there is a rest area for the luas just after the stephens green stop at the top of dawson street.
there is a link up with the red line heading towards Jervis so in theory trams can go all over the place.
there is also a link up at the top of O Connell street to go back around to go back towards the liffey instead of heading towards Boombridge.
they even have the location of the Metro stations on the drawings to show the space that will be left after all is built.
it all looks good so far.

markpb · 30-06-2010 10:48am

rameire wrote: »

there is a link up with the red line heading towards Jervis so in theory trams can go all over the place.

I haven't looked at the new documents yet but the article RPA published last week said that the BXD/Red linkup was for out of service trams only.

Luas Cross City (Line BX/D) [now open]

Comments