Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

13567165

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,845 ✭✭✭trellheim


    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


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,823 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


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

    Due to be decided by 16th December.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,422 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,823 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    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? :confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 247 ✭✭bg07


    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.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    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.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    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 :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    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?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,845 ✭✭✭trellheim


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,823 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


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


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,219 ✭✭✭markpb


    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.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,845 ✭✭✭trellheim


    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.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,845 ✭✭✭trellheim


    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 )


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭Rock of Gibraltar


    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?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,219 ✭✭✭markpb


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 838 ✭✭✭GeneHunt


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 838 ✭✭✭GeneHunt


    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!;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭Rock of Gibraltar


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭Rock of Gibraltar


    GeneHunt wrote: »
    I should refresh before posting my posts!;)

    Great minds


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    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?


  • Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭Rock of Gibraltar


    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.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,649 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭Rock of Gibraltar


    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


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    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.


Advertisement