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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Luas Development

12357

Comments

  • #202
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Maskhadov wrote:
    Is the rail bridge not just a big extra cost for nothing ? Personally I was in favour of the route which went around Trinity and used existing bridges.
    Dublin City Council are contemplating a pedestrian bridge there anyway to relieve O'Connell Bridge.
    D'Peoples Voice wrote:
    Was all for this once, because I think Stepaside/Loughlinstown(Cherrywood) needs it! However in recent times, I have found that it's extremely difficult to get standing room, yes thats right, standing room on any bloody luas between 8.05 and 8.45 at Miltown. If they add more stops to it, I can't help but think there will be more people fainting!
    So? More trams, more frequency, more transformer stations. Longer trams would however mean lengthening platforms and it might have some other issues.
    maxheadroom wrote:
    Surely they have to go for ALSTOM CITADIS trams again? Otherwise you'd have a crazy situation where some trams on the green line were of one type, some of another, and a new maintenance facility and staff would be needed.
    They could move all the Citadis trams to the red line or vice-versa. However, I suspect the contract for the trams may have had specific requirements regarding compatibility for upgrades and fleet expansion.
    Red Alert wrote:
    Dublin Bus currently have five different classes of double deckers in use - not really a problem!
    At the same time, substantial standardisation has positive reliability aspects.


  • #203
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Victor wrote:
    Dublin City Council are contemplating a pedestrian bridge there anyway to relieve O'Connell Bridge.
    That's odd. The City Council wants to essentially pedestrianise Parnell Square all the way to St. Stephen's Green. They've published plans and all :confused:


  • #204
    strassenwolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭strassenwolf


    This is from today's Sunday Business Post. (looks like Martin Cullen spent his summer doing a "speed reading" course ;) )
    Rail agency to finalise Luas link plan this week

    02 October 2005 By Neil Callanan

    The Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) expects to finalise plans this week to extend the Luas rail system to Cherrywood in south Dublin.

    The RPA is expected to submit a railway order for the extension to the Department of Transport later this week. The order had been held up because a construction company had delayed the proposed extension of the Luas green line, which currently terminates in Sandyford.

    A spokesman for the RPA said the standoff had been resolved, and that it hoped to finalise plans early this week.

    Minister for Transport, Martin Cullen, has said that he would approve the public inquiry into a Cherrywood extension “within seconds'‘ of it being placed in front of him.

    The RPA has already prepared an environmental impact statement and maps on the scheme. It has also started consultations with some residents' groups about the plan.

    Half of the cost of the 7 km extension will be met by the state, with the remainder coming from Rathdown Light Rail, a consortium of property developers who own land along the route.

    They include Liam Carroll's Dunloe Ewart, Carrickmines Properties, Park Developments, Treasury Holdings and William Neville and Sons.

    Carroll in particular will benefit from the Cherrywood extension, because his plans to develop a new town centre at Cherrywood depend largely on improved public transport links. Cullen said last week that he was in favour of a second extension to the Luas green line, which would link it to the red line on the north side of the city. The red line connects Tallaght to Connolly Station. Plans are also being drawn up to expand that line from Connolly Station to Spencer Dock.


  • #205
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    murphaph wrote:
    Blanch has a proper railway. Under the Dublin Rail Plan a massive increase in frequency would materialise. Even without the DRP, the new station at Spencer Dock will allow a very frequent service on this line.
    what about Lucan then :p


  • #206
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Jakkass wrote:
    what about Lucan then :p
    Under the DRP Lucan would be partially served in two ways. 'Lucan North' used to have a station. It was located on the raliway line to Maynooth. It is approximately 2km north of Lucan village on the road to Clonee, just before the Royal Canal. This station is not included in the actual DRP but theoretically could easily reopen.

    Lucan south will be served by Adamstown Station which lies approximately 2km south of Lucan village. It is planned and I believe under construction right now. It lies just West of the humpback bridge over the railway on the Newcastle Road.

    The village of Lucan and points in between could be served by shuttle buses running from Adamstown Station, via Lucan Village to Lucan North Station, thus providing not only a service to Lucan residents but also to potential travellers who wish to travel between the two lines but need not travel all the way in to Pearse Station to change trains. It is actually a short distance between the Sligo and Cork railway lines at Lucan, and I believ it was proposed to link them there a number of years ago.

    A Luas is proposed for Lucan, however I believe in the medium term (assuming the DRP is funded) the bus/DART solution outlined above is a winner. There is ample room on many of Lucan's arterial routes to widen them and add dedicated bus lanes, feeding in to the two railway stations mentioned above.


  • #207
    BrianD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    I believe the old Lucan "North" station is actually a private residence ar present.

    I think Lucan is to far out for a tram line. Opening one or more stations with local bus services would be the best solution.


  • #208
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    BrianD wrote:
    I believe the old Lucan "North" station is actually a private residence ar present.
    Indeed it is Brian, nothing that can't be fixed with a little CPO'in of course. Potentially the station could just be built to the west of the overbridge, there's nothing there other than fields.
    BrianD wrote:
    I think Lucan is to far out for a tram line. Opening one or more stations with local bus services would be the best solution.
    Certainly in the context of the full DRP it would. The Luas can serve areas of similar density that are nowhere near a rail line. There's a finite pot o' cash to build with. Luas to Lucan perhaps, but not for some time and certainly not before the DRP which so many things will hang off.


  • #209
    strassenwolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭strassenwolf


    I was looking through this thread and I came across this
    Sunday Business Post - 31 July 2005 wrote:
    By Niamh Connolly
    Six possible routes linking Dublin's two Luas lines will be released to the public for consideration in September, according to the Rail Procurement Agency (RPA), the state body responsible for the city's tram system.
    It's October now. So what happened?


  • #210
    dazberry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,151 ✭✭✭dazberry


    strassenwolf wrote:
    It's October now. So what happened?

    About 2 weeks ago there was a guy from the RPA on the Luas travelling to work. Beyond him wearing his RPA id around his neck (bit of a giveaway that), he was reading thru' a small A4 booklet which listed the 6 routes, each with a map, length and textual description, A to F if I remember correctly. Although it looked like a finished document (not a proof or draft) it did appear that the guy was making corrections to it.

    D.


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    I have to admit that I have thought very long and hard about this subject and come to the conclusion that in the midst of all the metro plans being brandied about a route should be chosen that is sustainable and can be incorporated into the future network.

    The best way of linking the Green line to the Red Line is to go from Peter Place down onto Adelaide Road and for every 2nd tram to continue on to St. Stephen's Green down Harcourt Street as usual while the other tram continues straight along Harcourt Road - Harrington Street - South Circular and turns into Clanbrassil Street Lower to head north to Patrick Street to meet High Street (Connection with DART) and crosses the Liffey to meet the red line behind the four courts.

    This route utilises both the Lucan to Docklands and the Sillogue to Dundrum alignments as outlined in PFC.

    In creates a larger 'Figure of 8' for Dublin than the DCC Gleeson one and opens up new areas of Dublin.

    It does not become superfluous in the case of either the metro or the Interconnector being built.

    The stops would be located as indicated in the PFC.

    When the above lines are built they will simple join up with the track that is in place.

    Dont forget that a headway of 3 minutes could be achieved on the Green line without any added infrastructure (RPA quoted). That would mean 10 trams per hour (Every 6mins) to Connolly (Or Further towards Broadstone/Phibsborough/Sillogue) and 10 trams per hour to the green.

    See map for details:

    http://www.geocities.com/bishlit/mapll_masterpp12.jpg

    The stops would be as follows:

    Harcourt

    Kelly's Corner

    Clanbrassil

    Warrenmount

    New Street

    Patrick Street

    Cornmarket

    Fourcourts

    See http://www.dto.ie/fig7.pdf for more details regarding the PFC planned network.

    (My post as above taken from P11 boards

    http://platform11.hyperboards3.com/index.cgi?action=display&cat=welcome&board=NIR&thread=1109203826)
    Victor wrote:
    Got anymore like that mister?
    That map is diagrammatic only. There was an assumption for some link.


    He got that from me Victor, looking for more?

    - Mark


  • #212
    Sarsfield
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,359 ✭✭✭Sarsfield


    Could a tram climb Bridge St? I find it a challenge to walk up it!


  • #213
    Maskhadov
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭Maskhadov


    not a bit out of the way ?


  • #214
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    Sarsfield wrote:
    Could a tram climb Bridge St? I find it a challenge to walk up it!

    Its much steeper than Steevens Lane I think. The downside is that the area around Christchurch is one of the highest points in the city centre.

    Alternatively by putting the tram station under the roadway and atop of the Christchurch Interconnector Station located under High Street the tram could avoid the climb and traffic. All depends on joined up thinking but we all know our government and civil servants dont understand that phrase.


  • #215
    strassenwolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭strassenwolf


    At last...
    today's Indo wrote:
    On track: : Missing link will cost €100m

    THE PLAN to join up the unconnected Luas lines in Dublin will finally being unveiled tomorrow. The link from St Stephen's Green to O'Connell Street is expected to cost up to €100m.

    The route expected to be favoured will run from the Green down Dawson Street, left into Nassau Street and right down the front of Trinity Collge, before crossing O'Connell Bridge.

    A public inquiry will first have to be held before the project gets underway.

    Meanwhile, Andrea Roche and Junior Minister for Transport Ivor Callely, right, yesterday posed with a tram at the Red Cow Luas Park-and-Ride site to promote the use of public transport over Christmas.


  • #216
    strassenwolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭strassenwolf


    Irish Independent Breaking News wrote:
    Cullen unveils five possible LUAS link-up routes

    12:49 Thursday November 24th 2005

    The Department of Transport has unveiled five possible routes to link the two LUAS tram lines in Dublin.
    Three of the proposed routes cross the Liffey at O'Connell Bridge and continue down Westmoreland Street and College Green, while the others would require the construction of a new bridge.

    The Government is now inviting views from the public before deciding on which option to choose.

    Transport Minister Martin Cullen has said he expects construction on the line to begin at the end of next year and be completed by 2009.

    The Government had been widely criticised for constructing two unconnected LUAS lines in the first place.

    I've had a look at the RPA website but there's no sign of the routes. I hope they put them up.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    strassenwolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭strassenwolf


    Well, the options for the link-up are now on view at:

    http://www.rpa.ie/cms/download.asp?id=79


  • #218
    Bluetonic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,588 ✭✭✭Bluetonic


    Option B for me.


  • #219
    Maskhadov
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭Maskhadov


    Option B looks the option with least hassle. Probably the most expensive as well .

    B i suppose


  • #220
    gjim
    Registered Users Posts: 1,228 ✭✭✭gjim


    I'm for option A. Option b is almost a km longer which will add nearly ten minutes to the trip between Stephen's Green and O'Connell St.. If that's your thing then why not have the line twist and turn and loop all over the city - every area will have "coverage" but no one will want to use it as it will take an inordinate amount of time to get to where you want to go. What's wrong with just bringing people to where they want to go in a straight, cheap to build, fast route?


  • #221
    morlan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭morlan


    Option A is the quickest and cheapest. Option C looks interesting as well, linking the lively George's St area into the network.

    The problem with option B is that it’d probably be quicker to get off at Stephen's Green and then walk down to Abbey St. It does have the advantage of linking with Pearse Station but the interconnector will link Pearse to Stephen’s Green in the future. No need for duplication.

    I really don’t like the idea of having a bridge between O'Connell bridge and the loop line. I think it would spoil this stretch of river. It’s likely that the new bridge would be fairly cheap and nasty too.

    My money is on Option A.


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    dowlingm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,337 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    morlan

    indeed - the last thing we need is Olivia Mitchell screeching that we don't need the interconnector when we have LUAS Pearse-SSG.

    The Dame St route is there for the Lucan LUAS by the looks but that still seems a bit crap.

    E just means digging up more streets. That leaves A or D, but presumably D means going up Marlborough St - can't recall how wide it is, doesn't look very in Google Earth, especially with a view to triangular junction at Middle Abbey St. - also, would it end up carrying the line north to the Maynooth line and west to Lucan from a College Green junction, the northbound bit looks like a very tricky proposition without some demolition and the line between Middle Abbey St and College Green would need short headways to accommodate the traffic, probably involving making Marlborough St luas only?


  • #223
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,986 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    What I can't understand is why don't they extend the line as far as Henry Street. You would then be connecting the two main shopping streets, it would be very convenient for shoppers and probably boost the attractiveness of the city centre for shopping over Blanchardstown, etc.

    Even better extend it up the length of O'Connel St., that way it could help with the revitilisation of O'Connel St and Parnell St.

    I agree A looks like the most attractive option.


  • #224
    Bluetonic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,588 ✭✭✭Bluetonic


    bk wrote:
    What I can't understand is why don't they extend the line as far as Henry Street.

    The Red Line already serves Henry Street from the Jervis stop.


  • #225
    BrianD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    Why not loop it around Parnell Sq?

    However, this whole project is typical of political ineptidude and not seeing the big picture. The correct approach would be to extend the green line to a destination on the northside and intersect the red line in the process. Not some misguided notion that the two lines should be connected.

    In fact, I only see one reason to link the two lines - engineering and maintinance. At the moment all the maintinance facilities are duplicated. Sure it would be benificial for green line users to be able to get 'deeper' into the CBD. There seems to be some strange logic suggesting that tram users of either line will want to switch to another tram and not another mode of transport.

    Cullen suggests that there would be another 5 million passenger journeys accomodated by the extension - I presume he means that the new section of the Green Line would accomodate an average 5 million journeys?

    The indirect routes would serve more parts of the city but will the average green line enjoy a scenic route?


  • #226
    Iób
    Closed Accounts Posts: 61 ✭✭Iób


    Shortest distance between two points and all that. There used to be cars on it after all. Trams go down much narrower streets in other countries. And then pedestrianise more streets in the area, College Green etc. No imagination as usual


  • #227
    Maskhadov
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭Maskhadov


    Actually A might be more logical


  • #228
    SeanW
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,875 ✭✭✭SeanW


    A would be the most logical were it not for the Metro. That raises the spectre of duplicate tramway. which could end up being abandoned. At least thats what happens in other cities (such as Munich and Berlin) when Metros are built where there was tramway.

    Of course they already had extensive tram networks and add to their U-Bahn systems piece-by-piece.

    Dublin is nearly virgin territory, so there's no reason to be duplicating new projects.

    C gets my vote, I like the idea of the Georges St.-O'Connell bridge route.


  • #229
    loyatemu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,108 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    why aren't they combining this with the rest of the line to glasnevin junction?
    so they're gonna come back in a couple of years and do the other little bit (no more than a couple of kilometres)

    or will they get the route approvals seperately and then build them together?


  • #230
    MicraBoy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 916 ✭✭✭MicraBoy


    loyatemu wrote:
    why aren't they combining this with the rest of the line to glasnevin junction?
    so they're gonna come back in a couple of years and do the other little bit (no more than a couple of kilometres)

    or will they get the route approvals seperately and then build them together?

    The Transport 21 plan set the timetable for completion of this part at 2008. The extension to Glasnevin is due in 2012.
    BrianD wrote:
    The correct approach would be to extend the green line to a destination on the northside and intersect the red line in the process. Not some misguided notion that the two lines should be connected.

    Isn't this what they are doing?:confused:


  • #231
    strassenwolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭strassenwolf


    SeanW wrote:
    A would be the most logical were it not for the Metro. That raises the spectre of duplicate tramway. which could end up being abandoned. At least thats what happens in other cities (such as Munich and Berlin) when Metros are built where there was tramway.

    Of course they already had extensive tram networks and add to their U-Bahn systems piece-by-piece.

    Dublin is nearly virgin territory, so there's no reason to be duplicating new projects.

    C gets my vote, I like the idea of the Georges St.-O'Connell bridge route.
    A lot of good points there. A and B both involve duplication of underground routes which have yet to be built but which would render either choice of tram link fairly redundant. There had also been some mention on this board that the bridge at Westland Row would be a problem as it's too low. They must have figured out how to deal with that obstacle.

    C is good as it won't be duplicated by our underground plans. Though I'd prefer if it went along York Street instead of South King Street. SKS is a nice pedestrianised street which would be largely lost if there was a tram running along it. There's not much happening on York Street, especially now that it's much more difficult to get to than it used to be.

    I suppose the reason they put C and D together is that the option of going over a new bridge between Burgh Quay and Eden Quay is still possible for route C, even though it's not shown that way.


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    MicraBoy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 916 ✭✭✭MicraBoy


    I'm not sure I buy into this "duplication is a bad thing" argument when it comes to choosing a route. If you take the Green Luas line as running from Bray to Glasnevin and the Metro being from St. Stephens Green to Swords, the amount of duplication is a very small.

    The only users who will have duplicated services will be people making the short hop from St. Stephens Green to O'Connell St (lazy fecks ;) ) And I would describe this has having choice not duplication.

    I just don't see it as strong argument against a particular route. I would have thought it was more important to have the Green Line connect with Pearse St. station and obviously the Red Line.


  • #233
    dRNk SAnTA
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 777 ✭✭✭dRNk SAnTA


    MicraBoy wrote:
    The only users who will have duplicated services will be people making the short hop from St. Stephens Green to O'Connell St (lazy fecks ;) ) And I would describe this has having choice not duplication.

    Spot on. The reasons for joining the lines are blindingly obvious. It's not being built simply so that people in stephens green can get to o'connell street. It's so that people anywhere along the line can get to o'connell street (and hopefully in the future the broadstone line).

    Therefore because it shouldn't simply be a convenient link between two city centre streets, I don't think it should have to take the shortest route. Theres an opportuniy to try to liven up a pretty dull part of the city around pearse street with route B.

    By the way, whichever route is chosen, I hope 'disruption to traffic' is not a major consideration in it. Its a short sighted view. Proper public transport should always take the priority. (just tired of hearing people moaning on the radio about disruption to their city centre car journeys.)


  • #234
    mackerski
    Registered Users Posts: 2,281 ✭✭✭mackerski


    dRNk SAnTA wrote:
    By the way, whichever route is chosen, I hope 'disruption to traffic' is not a major consideration in it. Its a short sighted view. Proper public transport should always take the priority. (just tired of hearing people moaning on the radio about disruption to their city centre car journeys.)

    Joining the two existing lines doesn't provide "Proper public transport", except to two very specific corridors. This lessens the legitimacy of slashing the car carrying capacity of, say, Pearse Street for this scheme. It's easy to claim that reduced capacity will encourage people onto the public transport. It's a lot harder to demonstrate what public transport they should be taking. Given that "disrupted traffic" is the very evil that our public transport improvements are trying to tackle, you'd be very foolish not to consider carefully any plan that will lead to more of it.

    Dermot


  • #235
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=7125&lang=ENG&loc=1852
    Cullen Launches Consultation On Luas Link Route
    25 November 2005

    Transport Minister, Martin Cullen T.D., today (Thursday, 24th November 2005) launched a public consultation process on five potential routes for a new Luas line connecting the Tallaght and Sandyford Luas Lines. This is one of the first steps in the implementation of the project for which funding is being provided under Transport 21. The new connecting line is expected to attract an additional 5.5 million new Luas passengers a year.

    The Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) has carried out a significant amount of technical work looking in particular at various route options. The All five routes run from St. Stephen's Green to O'Connell St. The routes are outlined in a newsletter that the RPA will be distributing widely.

    Luas passengers and businesses and homes along the five routes will receive the newsletter informing them about the project. They will be invited to provide their comments to the RPA as part of the selection of a preferred route.

    Dublin City Council, together with the Dublin City Centre Business Association, has indicated strong support for such a link.

    Minister Cullen said: "I welcome this public consultation process as further evidence of the rapid implementation of "Transport 21". This is the third Luas project on which significant progress has been made since the launch of Transport 21 only three weeks ago. The linking of the two Luas lines will increase the number of passengers using the Luas by 25% and will be an important segment in the overall public integrated transport system announced in Transport 21."

    ENDS


  • #236
    Zaph0d
    Closed Accounts Posts: 756 ✭✭✭Zaph0d


    mackerski wrote:
    Given that "disrupted traffic" is the very evil that our public transport improvements are trying to tackle, you'd be very foolish not to consider carefully any plan that will lead to more of it.
    Do you think that public transport improvements are being carried out with the aim of reducing car congestion?


  • #237
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    http://www.breakingnews.ie/story.asp?j=161774958&p=y6y775664&n=161775718&x=
    Luas extension application marks start of transport overhaul
    07/11/2005 - 18:10:17

    Ireland’s new €34.4bn transport plan got underway tonight, with an application for the first Luas extension submitted to the Government.

    Transport Minister Martin Cullen said he had received a Railway Order application from Padraic White, chairman of the Rail Procurement Agency, for an extension of the Luas network from Sandyford to Cherrywood.

    Mr Cullen said it meant the first of seven new Luas projects had started the necessary statutory process required, which will include a public consultation and inquiry before a decision is reached by the Transport Minister.

    “Without in any way prejudging the outcome, I very much welcome the fact that the RPA has been so pro-active in advancing the Luas extension to Cherrywood.

    “It augurs well for the speedy and effective implementation of Transport 21,” Mr Cullen said.

    But there is still controversy over the plan, with the Green Party calling for the Cherrywood line to be built to a Metro standard.

    Green Party Transport spokesperson Eamon Ryan TD said: “I welcome the application for a railway order for the Luas line extension from Sandyford to Cherrywood, which will provide a much needed and long delayed service for the people of Ballyogan, Stepaside and Carrickmines.



    “However the Green Party wants this railway order process to consider the extension of the proposed Metro from Swords to link to the south side of the city.”

    Mr Ryan said it made no sense to stop the Metro at St Stephen’s Green, where a terminal would require four platforms, instead of the two needed for a through station.

    He also said connecting the Metro to the southside would provide much-needed increased capacity and the costs of upgrading the existing line would be minimal compared to the benefits of a north-south link.

    Under the Green Party plan the Metro would share the Luas track from Cherrywood to the city centre, but would head down on an underground spar shortly before Ranelagh, while trams would travel on to St Stephen’s Green and then north on the planned extension.


  • #238
    jd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,709 ✭✭✭jd


    Victor wrote:
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/story.asp?j=161774958&p=y6y775664&n=161775718&x=
    Under the Green Party plan the Metro would share the Luas track from Cherrywood to the city centre, but would head down on an underground spar shortly before Ranelagh, while trams would travel on to St Stephen’s Green and then north on the planned extension.

    Now that is nuts. Unless they mean an underground tram


  • #239
    mackerski
    Registered Users Posts: 2,281 ✭✭✭mackerski


    Zaph0d wrote:
    Do you think that public transport improvements are being carried out with the aim of reducing car congestion?

    I'm saying that the correct goal is a reduction of road congestion. Cars are a large part of road congestion.

    Dermot


  • #240
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Victor wrote:
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/story.asp?j=161774958&p=y6y775664&n=161775718&x=
    Luas extension application marks start of transport overhaul
    07/11/2005 - 18:10:17
    <snip>
    Under the Green Party plan the Metro would share the Luas track from Cherrywood to the city centre, but would head down on an underground spar shortly before Ranelagh, while trams would travel on to St Stephen’s Green and then north on the planned extension.
    In relation to the bold section, they obviously just looked at a map and came up with a few nice ideas without looking into it more deeply. To list just a few problems with this idea: platform height, track gauge, extra tracks.

    I always thought the idea of upgrading the Green line to Metro would mean the elimination of Luas services on it. The Luas would run from Ranelagh to Stephen's Green (to O'Connell St to Liffey Junction). People heading south on the luas would need to change either at Ranelagh or at Stephen's Green to Metro to continue their journey.

    A shared Luas/Metro line is a non-runner.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    spacetweek wrote:
    A shared Luas/Metro line is a non-runner.
    Depends on what is used. If gauges, voltage and boarding height are the same, it doesn't make much difference.
    jd wrote:
    Now that is nuts. Unless they mean an underground tram
    And what wrong with underground trams? :p


  • #242
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Victor wrote:
    Depends on what is used. If gauges, voltage and boarding height are the same, it doesn't make much difference.
    Boarding height definitely won't, for one.


  • #243
    gobdaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 137 ✭✭gobdaw


    Victor wrote:
    Depends on what is used. If gauges, voltage and boarding height are the same, it doesn't make much difference.

    spacetweek wrote:
    Boarding height definitely won't, for one.

    Nor voltage


  • #244
    jd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,709 ✭✭✭jd


    Victor wrote:

    And what wrong with underground trams? :p
    Just don't call it a metro!


  • #245
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Newsletter http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/Line%20BX%20Newsletter.pdf

    http://www.rpa.ie/?id=13
    City Centre Link Between Green and Red Luas Lines

    The final Luas Open Day on selecting the best route for linking the Luas Green Line and Red Line has been arranged for Wednesday, February 15th at Civic Offices, Wood Quay, Dublin 8.

    The public consultation document which has already been issued indicates five route options for linking the two lines. The document was drawn up as a result of pre-feasibility studies which were carried out by RPA. This document has formed the basis for discussion and consultation with residents, business and commercial interests, Luas customers, stakeholders and the general public aimed at developing a preferred route for linking the two lines. Many submissions have already been received and this event is the last public Open Day before a final route is chosen.

    Joining the two Luas lines is projected to increase Luas passenger numbers by 5.5 million per annum.

    Transport 21 provides for a city-centre link between St. Stephen’s Green and the Luas Red Line and subsequent extension of this line northwards serving Broadstone/Grangegorman and connecting with the Maynooth suburban rail line.

    A copy of the public consultation newsletter is available to download here.

    For further information contact Tom Manning at +353874100199 or Ger Hannon at +353879091229.


  • #246
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Luas / Metro Parliamentary Questions

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054854833&highlight=Luas+BX


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    strassenwolf wrote:
    Well, the options for the link-up are now on view at:

    http://www.rpa.ie/cms/download.asp?id=79
    Anyone got the original of this. Link broken.


  • #248
    MarkoP11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    Thats the Luas - Important Notice pdf with the 5 options pdf ?

    http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/Luas%20-%20Important%20Notice.pdf

    Little bit of thought solves that, the RPA website doesn't acually delete documents


  • #249
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    MarkoP11 wrote:
    Thats the Luas - Important Notice pdf with the 5 options pdf ? http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/Luas%20-%20Important%20Notice.pdf Little bit of thought solves that, the RPA website doesn't acually delete documents
    Thanks, I didn't recognise the front page and the different file name threw me.


  • #250
    strassenwolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭strassenwolf


    The Irish Times wrote:
    Failure to link Luas lines very costly - Mitchell

    Michael O'Regan

    The failure to join the two Dublin Luas lines was costing the company five million passengers annually, Fine Gael's transport spokeswoman Olivia Mitchell said.

    "Failure to join the lines was not just an inconvenience to passengers. We must always be conscious of the opportunity lost by not doing things or changing them," she said. Criticising the Government's Transport 21 initiative, Ms Mitchell said she knew nothing about the list of projects involved. She did not know the cost, or how the projects were prioritised.

    She said that Transport 21 was too big a project for secrecy. "We must make decisions based on hard information and not on intuition. We need transparency, openness and the hard-nosed professional cost-benefit analysis of the network and individual projects to common criteria."

    Labour spokeswoman Róisín Shortall said that in a modern society and economy, which we claim to have, it was intolerable that we were on such a knife-edge that a little rain could bring traffic to a standstill.

    "We know from accident statistics that trucks are disproportionately involved in fatal accidents and have an environmental cost in terms of wear and tear of the roads. The Government needs to draw up a policy on how we can encourage industry to switch from road transport to rail freight."

    Another matter ignored by Transport 21 was the traffic congestion associated with the school run, said Ms Shortall.

    Green Party spokesman Ciarán Cuffe claimed the Government would be remembered for "its guff and fluff" relating to transport. The Navan rail link, for example, had been promised on the eve of elections in 1997 and 2002, but had not been delivered.

    "It was promised again during the byelection campaign in Co Meath a couple of years ago. When I stood on the rail bed of the Navan line last Saturday, I noticed that grass was growing up through the tracks." Seán Crowe (SF, Dublin South West) said that many people in his consituency were suffering because of the M50, which was "a giant car park".

    It was an issue which divided people, he said. "The lucky people who are not stuck in traffic every day do not really understand the grief and frustration suffered every morning, day in, day out, by those who are trying to get on with their lives by going to work, dropping their kids to school, or going to the shops."

    Joe Callanan (FF, Galway East) said that Transport 21 provided for investment in transport infrastructure in excess of €34 billion over a 10-year period, covering the areas of national roads, public transport and regional airports.

    "Never in my lifetime have I seen such investment in infrastructure, and I congratulate the Minister, Mr Cullen, in this regard. This investment is shared all over the country."

    Cecilia Keaveney (FF, Donegal North East) claimed the northwest had often failed "to have lines on maps recognised, particularly in respect of transport infrastructure".

    Unfortunately, a simple and clear reason for that was that most access to Donegal was through a jurisdiction over which the Republic could not legislate or plan.

    © The Irish Times

    It would be nice to know what progress is being made with the link-up. Especially since so many people contributed at the open days.


  • #251
    OTK
    Closed Accounts Posts: 556 ✭✭✭OTK


    It would be nice if they put the funds for the linkup into joining the green line and the metro by extending the tunnel south of Stephen's Green. Otherwise, if the luas is extended overland, the buses will go even slower in the city centre and we'll have two overlapping lines covering the same city centre route on the same gauge of track that don't actually connect.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement