[Article] RPA recommends Luas lines be linked at O’Connell Street

bk

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2007/03/25/story22170.asp

The Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) is in favour of a route linking the Sandyford and Tallaght lines along O’Connell Street in a loop that would run east along Cathal Brugha Street and south along Marlborough Street before crossing the Liffey over a new bridge.

Looks fairly good, I hope they put a stop at the top of O'Connell St, near Parnell St, and also eventually continue unto Parnell St as it will greatly help to rejuvenate these areas.

Also, with this sort of setup Dublin Bus should seriously consider stopping across city center routes and replacing them with circular routes starting from the top of O'Connell St and Stephens green, linked by both the Metro and LUAS in between. Of course this will require a fair integrated ticketing system.

Ste.phen

Ok, correct me if i'm wrong here:
LUAS route from / to Stephen's green:

Stephen's Green

{This part isnt specified, but i presume it to be the opposite of the southbound route, which is:}
Dawson St
Nassau St

College Green
Westmoreland St
O Connoll Bridge
O Connoll St
Right turn across O Connoll St median onto Cathal Brugha St
Right turn onto Marlborough St
Across Eden Quay, and over a new bridge yet-to-be-constructed
Hawkins St
College St
College Green
Nassau St
Dawson St
Stephen's Green

Problems i see with that:
- Marlborough St currently clogged up with Dublin bus using it as parking, it's pracically at a stnadstill most of the time
- Cutting across Eden Quay, which is quite busy
- Boardwalk...? (or does it start slightly to the east of the proposed bridge?)
-Turning distance in the for both the O Connoll St - Cathal Brugha St turn and the Cathal Brugha St to Marlborough St turn?

Skyhater

I really can's see the benefit of this line.......

It would be OK if it was and extension to the Green Luas line........., but it's not!!!
All it does is link the Green and Red Luas lines.... This Job will be done by Metro North!!!

Typical Ireland....we put two pieces of Infrastructure on top of each other, doing more or less the same thing.

The money would be far better spend starting with a New Luas Line from Parnell Square (Beside the Proposed Metro Stop), to Grangegorman (new DIT campus) and onto Liffey Junction, where it would connect with the Maynooth (& soon to be Pace) Commuter Line (....will be Dart1 once interconnector is built??)

Ste.phen

Path:

Ste.phen

Skyhater wrote:

Typical Ireland....we put two pieces of Infrastructure on top of each other, doing more or less the same thing.

Well right now neither is in place or likely to be finished any time soon.

The money would be far better spend starting with a New Luas Line from Parnell Square (Beside the Proposed Metro Stop), to Grangegorman (new DIT campus) and onto Liffey Junction, where it would connect with the Maynooth (& soon to be Pace) Commuter Line (....will be Dart1 once interconnector is built??)

Better still, they could have the Green line continue onwards to grangegorman instead of turning around mid-O' Connell st?

lostexpectation

have they solved the problem of tightness on dawson street

bk

There was a map in the SBPost article, it was similar to Igy's picture above, but it turns right onto Cathal Burgha St, unlike Igys picture which has it lower down.

Igy wrote:

- Marlborough St currently clogged up with Dublin bus using it as parking, it's pracically at a stnadstill most of the time

Well I honestly think that DB need to get their act together and adjust their routes to co-operate with LUAS, Metro and Dart.

-Turning distance in the for both the O Connoll St - Cathal Brugha St turn and the Cathal Brugha St to Marlborough St turn?

Turning onto Cathal Brugha should be fine, plenty of turning space where the Taxi rank and 123 Bus turn right onto Cathal Burgha.

Not sure about turning onto Marlborough St, but I assume it would be fine, not a particularly busy road and right turns are relatively easy.

Skyhater wrote:

It would be OK if it was and extension to the Green Luas line........., but it's not!!!

Looking at the map on the SBPost, it looks like it will actually be an extension of the Luas Green Line.

markpb

It seems like a funny route, notwithstanding the duplication of Metro North.

If they're trying to avoid making a mess of O'Connell St, why would one tram line make any less of a mess than two tram lines? Surely there'll be less distruption if the work is on one street instead of two.

Also, how on earth are DB going to function with a tram line interfering with them on O'Connell st, Cathal Brugha St, Marlborough st and college green? I appreciate what bk is saying but it would be a complete network re-organisation for them to remove most of their buses from the city centre zone.

Assuming those streets are going to be blocked by construction work and later by a tram line, how should those buses cross the city and where will buses lay-up before taking up duty?

bk

markpb wrote:

Assuming those streets are going to be blocked by construction work and later by a tram line, how should those buses cross the city and where will buses lay-up before taking up duty?

If we are going to improve public transport then we are going to have to suffer some pain, no one send it would be painless.

It really isn't that hard to fix, DB need to stop laying up in the city centre, I can't think of any other major city where buses lay-up in the city centre, it is mad when you stop and think about it.

I keep coming back to my time in Prague, they have an incredible public transport system, all cars and buses are banned from the city centre, only Trams and Metro serve the city centre. The buses operate from the Metro and Tram stations outside the city centre to serve outlying areas.

Also in Prague many of the tram routes follow Metro routes, likewise in San Francisco. Basically if you are coming from far out and want to get somewhere fast you take the Metro, if you are fluting about the shopping and historical areas of the city centre or just going a short distance you jump on the trams.

Slice

It's disappointing that in effect the two lines will still not be linked as such - they'll simply pass nearby each other. They won't even share the same stops. Is this what the Government meant when they promised that the two lines will be joined up?

Would it not make more sense to feed the Green line eastbound into the red line and have it sharing the Abbey Street and Busaras stops with the red line then going on to terminate at Connolly; while the red line can terminate at the Point Depot without serving Connolly at all. That would be better integration in that Green line passengers could change for the red line at the same stop while the red line wouldn't need to backtrack the short distance at Connolly. Or perhaps there's some technical barrier to this... though I don't understand what it would be since there's older tram systems doing far more in terms of sharing tracks in other cities.

Skyhater

markpb wrote:

It seems like a funny route, notwithstanding the duplication of Metro North.

If they're trying to avoid making a mess of O'Connell St, why would one tram line make any less of a mess than two tram lines? Surely there'll be less distruption if the work is on one street instead of two.

Also, how on earth are DB going to function with a tram line interfering with them on O'Connell st, Cathal Brugha St, Marlborough st and college green? I appreciate what bk is saying but it would be a complete network re-organisation for them to remove most of their buses from the city centre zone.

Assuming those streets are going to be blocked by construction work and later by a tram line, how should those buses cross the city and where will buses lay-up before taking up duty?

It's all MAD...............mad I tell you!!!!
I'd love to see a cost benefit analysis for this rout!!!

bk wrote:

Looking at the map on the SBPost, it looks like it will actually be an extension of the Luas Green Line.

I read an artical (can't remember where) a few months ago, and it said that it was going to be a city centre circle rout.....
It would be more useful if it was an extension of the green line (saving people having to change onto Metro @ Stephens green), but still low on my Integrated Transport Priority List.

And if i had to design the rout.... I'd bring to down towards Connolly station and cross the Liffey east of the customs house.
The RPA have managed to design a City Centre Rout that doesn't integrate with any of the 3 IE City Centre stations!!!

Ste.phen

bk wrote:

There was a map in the SBPost article, it was similar to Igy's picture above, but it turns right onto Cathal Burgha St, unlike Igys picture which has it lower down.

Apologies, I confused Cathal Brugha St and North Earl St when tracing out the map route.

Well I honestly think that DB need to get their act together and adjust their routes to co-operate with LUAS, Metro and Dart.

As others have said here, they need more routes that go to destinations other than the general O Connell St . area. There are simply too many buses terminating in that area

gjim

This is the worst possible route - it looks like a Frankenstein's monster. Double the disruption and probably double the cost and for what? I wouldn't have minded a more roundabout route if it linked with Pearse or Tara but this just looks daft. I could imagine justifying building a bridge if the goal was to keep the Luas off O'Connell Bridge/Street but this is achieves nothing at great extra cost and with almost double the amount of road disruption. It also makes the planned extension to Liffey Junction more difficult (which has become more important than ever given the chosen metro route).

What is the point of the huge loop around Cathal Brugha Street? Is there going to be a stop there? That wouldn't make any sense given that Abbey Street is fairly close and if there's no stop past Abbey why drag the Luas up around a 500m loop? There is no operational benefit given that Luas is bidirectional and every other existing terminus works perfectly well without a loop at the end. Why not use the "wasted" track to bring the line up to Parnell Square?

Why no junction with the red line? Even just for operational benefits like being able to share stock between the lines but more importantly to be able to offer routes like Cherrywood to Heuston or Cherrywood to Connolly for example.

I really hope that the SBP has it completely wrong or that this is an RPA ploy to make the council drop it's well publicised objections to the straightforward original Westmoreland Street/O'Connell Street plan by proposing something so ludicrous that no-one could support it.

I would prefer ANY of the original options proposed by the RPA than this hybrid mess.

bk

gjim wrote:

This is the worst possible route - it looks like a Frankenstein's monster. Double the disruption and probably double the cost and for what? I wouldn't have minded a more roundabout route if it linked with Pearse or Tara but this just looks daft.

What would be the point of that, the LUAS will eventually integrate in with the DART at Stephens Green.

gjim wrote:

I could imagine justifying building a bridge if the goal was to keep the Luas off O'Connell Bridge/Street but this is achieves nothing at great extra cost and with almost double the amount of road disruption.

It seems to be due to all the complaints from DB and DCC about the LUAS taking up two lanes on O'Connell St taking up too much space and causing too much disruption. So this is the compromise.

It will cause much less disruption as Marlborough St, is a very quiet street compared to O'Connell and is really only used by DB as a lay-up location for their buses.

On the positive side this should lead to the regeneration of Upper O'Connell St, Cathal Burgha St and Marlborough St.

gjim wrote:

It also makes the planned extension to Liffey Junction more difficult (which has become more important than ever given the chosen metro route).

Why would it, the map specifically indicates an extension for the Liffey Junction line? This actually makes the Liffey Junction extension even more likely.

gjim wrote:

What is the point of the huge loop around Cathal Brugha Street? Is there going to be a stop there?

Yes

gjim wrote:

That wouldn't make any sense given that Abbey Street is fairly close and if there's no stop past Abbey why drag the Luas up around a 500m loop?

On the Map there is also a stop proposed for Upper O'Connell St, just before the turn off for Cathal Burgha St.

gjim wrote:

Why no junction with the red line? Even just for operational benefits like being able to share stock between the lines but more importantly to be able to offer routes like Cherrywood to Heuston or Cherrywood to Connolly for example.

I can understand why they want to avoid doing this. Trams are supposed to be simple point to point jobs, they probably want to keep it simple and not have all the confusion of people getting on wrong trams etc.

bk

Actually just found the map published on the SBPost:
http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/Line%20BX%20Route%20Option%20F.jpg

It was one of the original options.

Looking at it here, I'd say only option A (Up and Down O'Connell St) was better then it.

Tadhg17

Why on earth don't they just connect the metro to the luas by bringing the metro to Beechwood and then coming out of a tunnel to join the green line?. This would bring increased capacity which will defo be needed when the cherrywood extension opens. This loop line option is a crazy waste of money not to mention o connell street will be a construction site for another three years again and it duplicates the metro route more or less. Is there anyone working in the RPA with a bit of vision at all?? guess not

Skyhater

bk wrote:

gjim wrote:

I wouldn't have minded a more roundabout route if it linked with Pearse or Tara but this just looks daft.

What would be the point of that, the LUAS will eventually integrate in with the DART at Stephens Green.

It will link with "Dart Line2" @ Stephens Green. I would definitely be an advantage to link with "Dart Line1" at Connolly, Tara, or Pearce..... My preference would be Connolly as it would also link in with Northern Commuter services and the Enterprise Service

gjim

What would be the point of that, the LUAS will eventually integrate in with the DART at Stephens Green.

I actually agree with you. However, the B option integrated with DART which provided some reason to deviate from the obvious, simple and cheapest option which was A.

It will cause much less disruption as Marlborough St, is a very quiet street compared to O'Connell and is really only used by DB as a lay-up location for their buses.

How will it cause "much less disruption"? You still have to dig up O'Connell Street and move all the utilities - the fact that you've 5 foot less width to worry about will hardly make a huge difference. At the same time you've to do the very same thing about 100m in parallel along the length of Marlborogh Street. You'll have two intersections on both sides of the quays and Abbey Street instead of one and another crossing of O'Connell Street as the northbound leg has to swing accross O'Connell Street from the west side to go down Caghal Brugha Street. The result will unnecessarily choke the quays in both directions by having 2 Luas crossing 100m apart. This is even before you consider the logistics of digging up Hawkins Street and Pearse Street at the junction with D'olier Street. I can't imagine a more disruptive plan especially when it comes to buses. This is a dogs dinner of an arrangement in terms of disruption.

On the Map there is also a stop proposed for Upper O'Connell St, just before the turn off for Cathal Burgha St.

I've just seen the map and don't understand this at all. Why have two stops 50m from each other?

I can understand why they want to avoid doing this. Trams are supposed to be simple point to point jobs, they probably want to keep it simple and not have all the confusion of people getting on wrong trams etc.

Nonsense - they should be building flexibility into the system from the word go. Any properly "trammed up" city I've been in like Zurich have lots of track sharing between lines without causing confusion.

Why on earth don't they just connect the metro to the luas by bringing the metro to Beechwood and then coming out of a tunnel to join the green line?

Well the idea was to continue the Luas through the city centre but head towards Phibsboro or Finglas - places the metro won't go near.

strassenwolf

bk wrote:

Actually just found the map published on the SBPost:
http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/Line%20BX%20Route%20Option%20F.jpg

Thanks for sticking up the link.

It was one of the original options.

It wasn't. Option F seems to be a mixture of a couple of the options, which was added in after the public consultation phase.

This makes it quite interesting. The public were asked to give their views on 5 options, though the original documentation did state that the possibilities were not limited to these five, should something else emerge after the public consultation. That seems to have happened.

I'm not really convinced by the whole idea. It's going to increase the costs by quite a lot (because of the duplication and the bridge, as has been pointed out), it's not going to stop O'Connell Street being dug up again, and "urban regeneration" would probably happen on Marlborough Street anyway, given that the LUAS link-up would only be about 100 metres away from it. It's hard to understand why such a complex solution is necessary.

Looking at it here, I'd say only option A (Up and Down O'Connell St) was better then it.

I agree, and of course if the original LUAS system had been built as intended, it wouldn't be necessary to dig up O'Connell Street again. It could have been in place before the street was renovated. Which would probably have made sense.

bk

gjim wrote:

I actually agree with you. However, the B option integrated with DART which provided some reason to deviate from the obvious, simple and cheapest option which was A.

I can certainly see that, but that route looks much longer (therefore slower) and it would be less preferable for shoppers and tourists in the city. I just don't think having LUAS interconnect with DART line 1 at Tara or Pearse serves any purpose. Remember you will be able to change from DART line 1 to DART line 2 (the interconnector) at Pearse and head to Stephens Green. So the LUAS at Tara and Pearse would serve no purpose, all the likely destinations would already be served.

From the point of view of tourists and shoppers, route A would be the best option, but route F would be preferable to route B or the other routes.

gjim wrote:

How will it cause "much less disruption"? You still have to dig up O'Connell Street and move all the utilities - the fact that you've 5 foot less width to worry about will hardly make a huge difference.

I'm not a civil engineer but I'd assume digging up both sides of O'Connell St would cause more disruption as you probably need to close more then just one line to get the work done.

gjim wrote:

At the same time you've to do the very same thing about 100m in parallel along the length of Marlborogh Street. You'll have two intersections on both sides of the quays and Abbey Street instead of one and another crossing of O'Connell Street as the northbound leg has to swing accross O'Connell Street from the west side to go down Caghal Brugha Street. The result will unnecessarily choke the quays in both directions by having 2 Luas crossing 100m apart. This is even before you consider the logistics of digging up Hawkins Street and Pearse Street at the junction with D'olier Street. I can't imagine a more disruptive plan especially when it comes to buses. This is a dogs dinner of an arrangement in terms of disruption.

I don't disagree with you, but no matter where they go it is going to cause massive disruption. But what we learned from the first Luas lines is that in the end it is worth it.

I suppose I'm just happy that I'll be going up the length of O'Connell St rather then just stopping at Abbey St. I've always seen this as an important point as it will lead to the rejuvenation of the whole of O'Connell St.

bk

Ok, looking at all the options again and all your arguments, I agree with everyone that option A is by far the best option. It would probably be the cheapest to do, cause the least disruption in the long term (only one crossing of the quays rather then 2) and would be the best for tourists, shoppers, etc.

The only thing that I'd change is that it would go up and down the length of O'Connell St with stops at the end of O'Connell St (and possibly extended on to Liffey Junction in future).

Option B is awful IMO, absolutely no point in connecting with Tara and Pearse, this route just doesn't go where people want to go.

Option C and D are both fairly weak.

Option E being a small variant of A would be fine.

Option F is a weird variant, that is 50% ok, but 50% not so great.

One thing that I noticed in all the maps, it isn't obvious that there will be a stop at the top of O'Connell St, I assume there will be? It would be stupid not to.

I suppose if we want option A, then we should indicate this to the RPA and our local politicians, while criticising DB and DCC for forcing the issue on O'Connell St.

It is a pity this can't be developed at the same time as the Eastern Bypass, I'd love to see O'Connell St, Bridge, etc. closed to all traffic but Luas, Bus, Taxi and Bike and eventually have buses banned.

wwhyte

I don't like the surface link up. It doesn't seem to me to do anything to add capacity, when you take into account the disruption that'll be caused to the bus services. I know that in an ideal world we wouldn't have bus services into town, but unfortunately it isn't an ideal world. Once there's good capacity underground with the Metro and interconnector it might be appropriate to start looking at building more surface lines in the city centre. Until then this doesn't seem like the best use that could be made of that amount of money.

Slice

Nonsense - they should be building flexibility into the system from the word go. Any properly "trammed up" city I've been in like Zurich have lots of track sharing between lines without causing confusion.

Exactly - there is the argument for simplicity in the lay-out of routes but at the same time the majority of people using it aren't totally stupid - there are plenty of stations on the IE network that are serviced by more than one route with differing destinations yet how often does it happen that people get on the wrong train? Linking the Luas like this without linking it at all in the literal sense is madness.

I also think another bridge over the Liffey as proposed in that area will only add to the visual congestion of that part of the river - if CIE ever chose to replace the loop line bridge with something more slender there'd still be this new one unnecessarily poking out in the same area.

markpb

Slice wrote:

I also think another bridge over the Liffey as proposed in that area will only add to the visual congestion of that part of the river - if CIE ever chose to replace the loop line bridge with something more slender there'd still be this new one unnecessarily poking out in the same area.

I assume the new Luas bridge will be at the same height as the roads around it. It won't be as visually intrusive as the Dart bridge because its not grade separated.

That said, it's a pity to spend all that money building a new bridge, destroying part of the boardwalk and the quay walls when O'Connell bridge is more than wide enough to take two luas lines without affecting traffic or pedestrians all that much.

The plan stinks of compromise.

strassenwolf

bk wrote:

Ok, looking at all the options again and all your arguments, I agree with everyone that option A is by far the best option. It would probably be the cheapest to do, cause the least disruption in the long term (only one crossing of the quays rather then 2) and would be the best for tourists, shoppers, etc.

Tourists and Shoppers? Only? There are a lot of people who work on O'Connell Street - collectively, the businesses on the street are probably one of the bigger employers in the city.

It's easy to forget that O'Connell Street is not just a street full of burger joints - though that is the impression that one gets walking along the street. There are lots of offices upstairs, and the burger shops, etc. also employ people. Off the top of my head, I can't readily think of any street, of a similar length, in the entire city, where more people are employed.

bk

strassenwolf wrote:

Tourists and Shoppers? Only? There are a lot of people who work on O'Connell Street - collectively, the businesses on the street are probably one of the bigger employers in the city.

I was thinking that people who commute in will typically use the Metro as it would be much faster. Of course there are many journeys besides shoppers/tourists where Luas would be preferable.

I wonder if you were coming in on the Luas green line heading to O'Connell St, would you stay on the Luas or transfer to the Metro?

strassenwolf

bk wrote:

I was thinking that people who commute in will typically use the Metro as it would be much faster. Of course there are many journeys besides shoppers/tourists where Luas would be preferable.

I'd imagine that people will. as you say, typically use the metro if they live/work along its route. But the LUAS line along O'Connell Street is planned to eventually come in, on the northside, from a different direction, so the people along that route would be using the LUAS. But obviously, if you were on O'Connell Street and wanted to get quickly to St. Stephen's Green, or vice versa, you'd almost certainly take the metro. Unless you were a bit claustrophobic.:D

I wonder if you were coming in on the Luas green line heading to O'Connell St, would you stay on the Luas or transfer to the Metro?

As above, if I was coming into the city from the northside, I would use the metro if I lived close to the metro route, and I would use the LUAS if I lived close to the LUAS route. It's only in the centre of town that there's likely to be an overlap between the two routes. In the northern suburbs, it's likely to be one or the other, and I honestly can't see many people changing from tram to metro once they reach a location where they start to overlap, just to save a minute or two. You'd spend that just getting down onto the metro platforms.

If I was coming from the southside on the LUAS, I'd guess it's unlikely that I would change onto the metro at St. Stephen's Green if all I wanted to do was go to O'Connell Street or the area around College Green. But I probably would change at St. Stephen's Green if I wanted to go to the airport, Swords, DCU, Ballymun or Drumcondra.

And then there's always the possibility that the green LUAS line will be upgraded to a joint metro/LUAS line, so that both LUAS and metro would run together along much of the same line. And that'll open a whole new can of worms.:p

gjim

bk wrote:

Ok, looking at all the options again and all your arguments, I agree with everyone that option A is by far the best option.

Absolutely. It's simple, it causes the least amount of disruption possible, it's the shortest (i.e. most direct and fastest), the cheapest and it's obvious. E or this newly proposed F are the most stupid - splitting the line in two at great expense in terms of finance and disruption for no obvious benefit.

Slice wrote:

I also think another bridge over the Liffey as proposed in that area will only add to the visual congestion of that part of the river

I agree with this also but it might be reasonable to ask whether the aesthetic damage was worth it if there were compelling benefits to routing the Luas over a new bridge. But there aren't any benefits at all besides greatly increasing the cost and complexity of the project.

markpb wrote:

The plan stinks of compromise.

This plan is completely daft.

casey jones

:rolleyes: This is farcical. Duplicating overhead cables in parallel streets for no benefit. They should run the tracks together either up O'Connoll St or along Marlborough St, not both, and continue on up along Parnell Square and it's a very short run to the Broadstone station where you have dedicated trackbed all the way to Liffey Junction and the Maynooth line.

OTK

bk wrote:

I wonder if you were coming in on the Luas green line heading to O'Connell St, would you stay on the Luas or transfer to the Metro?

Both choices are rubbish: either you stay on the tram while it follows a roundabout route through at-grade junctions on congested streets, completing your journey in much the same time as walking straight down grafton street or you get off the tram, go through ticketing gates and down escalators to the metro north station where you wait for the next train. All so you can travel one or two stops.

So we are building two half-assed non-integrated parallel systems rather than making a single north-south underground. Genius.

Victor

casey jones wrote:

:rolleyes: This is farcical. Duplicating overhead cables in parallel streets for no benefit. They should run the tracks together either up O'Connoll St or along Marlborough St, not both, and continue on up along Parnell Square and it's a very short run to the Broadstone station where you have dedicated trackbed all the way to Liffey Junction and the Maynooth line.

I don't see the loop at that bad. They did something similar in Croydon.

Marlborough St. isn't wide enough for 2 trams + stops + delivery bays, etc. O'Connell Street is grossly oversubscribed already. The city council want to build a bridge at Marlborough St. - Hawkins Street to reduce congestion on O'Connell
Bridge. Doing a loop means not having and on-street turn back facility.

That said, Broadstone - Liffey junction is quite simple and could be built in 18 months total.