Luas Link-up/Metro North overlap

D.L.R.

Simple question here: the two lines cover the same area between Stephens Green and O'Connell, so why not save money by taking the best bits from both and combining them. Here is a map of the current plan:





And here is the simpler idea without the luas, and with differrent metro stops:




I don't understand the point of having both lines, and especially the looping luas section. Seems like a waste of good money.

loyatemu

its to make the system more useable - the Luas line is useful for getting around the city centre and means green line users can transfer to the Metro, Red Line and both Dart lines (once the Luas is extended to Liffey Jct) with just one change.

Without it someone going from ranelagh to (say) Connolly, or Maynooth would have to change twice. With the economy tightening though, I'd say it'll be the first project to face the knife...

of course the obvious thing is to extend the metro underground to meet the Green line and have a single line running from Bray to swords which is what was originally proposed before the existing fudge was built.

strassenwolf

The LUAS link-up is the easier project, and less likely to be subject to delays, so it should be started as soon as possible.

However, for some reason, the RPA have chosen a ludicrous plan for the link-up. A plan which, on the face of it, looks likely to make the construction of it almost impossible and certainly subject to appeals and delays.:mad: I honestly can't see what the problem was with the straightforward College Green/O'Connell Street option.

Having said that, D.L.R., you're probably right about the eventual metro stations that we should have. A station at College Green makes a lot of sense - I still have no idea why it was dumped from the original plan - and a station on O'Connell Street with a better connection to the LUAS red line than is currently proposed would make lots of sense.

I think, though, you should place the Parnell Square station further north. Ideally, this station would be more towards the North Frederick Street end of things.

If we were to place the Parnell Square station further north, and the Drumcondra station further south, i.e. between the two rail lines, it might well be possible to get rid of the Mater hospital stop entirely. I think this would make a lot of sense.

You've got to remember that most of the people using that stop will be perfectly healthy individuals. Doctors, nurses, visitors, etc., all well capable of walking a couple of minutes from either of the above stations. I'd be interested to see just how many sick people are expected to use that station.

Certainly one of the weaker arguments that I have seen advanced in favour of the metro west is that both Tallaght and Blanchardstown hospitals are along the route. You'd have to ask how much travel is likely between the two locations. I mean, who is unfortunate enough to have to visit two hospitals in one day?

And if you were a patient in one, and had to be moved (e.g. for treatment) to the other, is a tram really the best way to make the move? Wouldn't an ambulance be more appropriate?

spacetweek

loyatemu wrote: »

With the economy tightening though, I'd say it'll be the first project to face the knife...

True, but they aren't reducing spending on transport, so there should be no effect on T21.

strassenwolf wrote: »

If we were to place the Parnell Square station further north, and the Drumcondra station further south, i.e. between the two rail lines, it might well be possible to get rid of the Mater hospital stop entirely. I think this would make a lot of sense.

You're completely missing the point of the Drumcondra stop, which is to allow interchange between the Maynooth line (eventually DART) and the Metro. The stop can't be moved, unless it's to get it even closer to the Maynooth Line Drumcondra station - I think that integration between them will not be tight enough.

strassenwolf wrote: »

Certainly one of the weaker arguments that I have seen advanced in favour of the metro west is that both Tallaght and Blanchardstown hospitals are along the route. You'd have to ask how much travel is likely between the two locations. I mean, who is unfortunate enough to have to visit two hospitals in one day?

I don't really think they actually thought anyone would ever be doing that! Everyone will be going from somewhere else to one of the hospitals or vice versa. Also thankfully most people are lucky enough that they don't have to make their way to a hospital in an ambulance and can go on their own on public transport!

That said, I agree, the hospital access is a weak enough selling point. The main thing the Metro will be used for is commuting, from residences to workplaces and retail areas, and for helping tourists move around. They should be concentrating on those.

strassenwolf

spacetweek wrote: »

You're completely missing the point of the Drumcondra stop, which is to allow interchange between the Maynooth line (eventually DART) and the Metro. The stop can't be moved, unless it's to get it even closer to the Maynooth Line Drumcondra station - I think that integration between them will not be tight enough.

I don't think I'd missed the point. I was aware that one of the main advantages of the Drumcondra station would be that it would provide an opportunity for interchange with the Maynooth line. (The other, as far as I can see, would be that it provides improved transport options for people in Drumcondra and the surrounding area).

I can't see how the integration which is proposed in the arrangement given in the link could not be achieved by placing the station on the other side of the Maynooth line. It could be just as good, no?

(What we're looking at in the link is a situation where people will walk to one end of a metro platform if they wish to get to the Maynooth line. I agree that it would certainly be better if the whole thing was directly under the Arrow station, but for some reason this is not being done. (I strongly suspect that the real reason for this is fear of causing traffic disruption. In many ways this would be no bad thing - what a great way of advertising the metro.:D) By placing the station on the other side of the Maynooth line, you'd have much the same arrangement - people walking to one end of the platform to access the Maynooth line.)

One possible advantage of placing the station further south would be this: if, for example, Victor's recent proposal (or some other similar idea) about use of both the east-west rail lines through Drumcondra were ever to come to pass -and I'm aware that they are both being used at the moment - then a station south of the Maynooth line might be adapted to have access to both. As it is, the currently proposed metro station would be very remote from the line beside the canal.

It's of course very possible that the presence of the Mater Hospital stop in such close proximity militated against placing the Drumcondra stop south of the Maynooth line. However, if the Mater Hospital stop were not to exist, this would no longer be a factor.

Victor

A stop has to be put at Drumcondra, for connection purposes.

The particular site picked happens to have very little construction on it at the moment, making it useful from a construction point of view.

Straddling the Metro Station with the Maynooth line means more difficult construction and potentially more disruption to the Maynooth line. Having the station to one side doesn't really cause any difficulties for operations and in fact gives an easier run for the eascalators.

strassenwolf

Victor wrote: »

A stop has to be put at Drumcondra, for connection purposes.

Victor, I'm not arguing against the stop at Drumcondra. The stop at Drumcondra is useful for connection purposes, as you say, and it has the added plus that it improves the public transport options for people in Drumcondra and the surrounding area. I'm questioning the need for the stop at the Mater Hospital.

Victor

strassenwolf wrote: »

Victor, I'm not arguing against the stop at Drumcondra. The stop at Drumcondra is useful for connection purposes, as you say, and it has the added plus that it improves the public transport options for people in Drumcondra and the surrounding area. I'm questioning the need for the stop at the Mater Hospital.

Its the main hospital in the Taoiseach's constituency and it just so happens they have a large car park.

BendiBus

Victor wrote: »

Its the main hospital in the Taoiseach's constituency and it just so happens they have a large car park.

And a new childrens hospital in a controversial location that needs to be justifiable in terms of access.

loyatemu

report in yesterdays SBP
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055172792

line BX now has no completion date. I expect it to be long-fingered and then dropped.

spacetweek

loyatemu wrote: »

line BX now has no completion date. I expect it to be long-fingered and then dropped.

The status of BX is that it is now part of a combined Line D/Line BX project. This combined project has a completion date of 2012.

If BX isn't completed, D can't be built, which would be untenable. I think BX will go ahead, but the DB unions will probably try to slow it as much as possible. It will probably end up taking the full 5 years to 2012.

loyatemu

spacetweek wrote: »

If BX isn't completed, D can't be built, which would be untenable.

why is that untenable - there isn't even a proposed route for line D on the RPA's website. Its only in very preliminary stages of planning and the suggested route using the old broadstone line is probably going to lead to a dispute with Irish Rail.

Lines BX and D could be dropped without much public outcry - they don't serve large population areas in their own right and are by far the most dispensable elements of Transport21. Don't get me wrong - I'd like to see these built, but I think they are vulnerable to any sort of cuts in the programme.

Prof_V

loyatemu wrote: »

why is that untenable - there isn't even a proposed route for line D on the RPA's website. Its only in very preliminary stages of planning and the suggested route using the old broadstone line is probably going to lead to a dispute with Irish Rail.

Lines BX and D could be dropped without much public outcry - they don't serve large population areas in their own right and are by far the most dispensable elements of Transport21. Don't get me wrong - I'd like to see these built, but I think they are vulnerable to any sort of cuts in the programme.

I agree with you to a point, but there's a commitment to extend to Finglas in the longer term, which would be very difficult without BX/D (though you could go back and do the whole thing in one go at some future date), not to mention DIT at Grangegorman. Also, IÉ's Broadstone proposal would really need a Luas link to be credible, so - even if it took over the Liffey Junction end of line D's alignment, it could make it more difficult to drop the city end.

Maskhadov

D.L.R. wrote: »

And here is the simpler idea without the luas, and with differrent metro stops:




I don't understand the point of having both lines, and especially the looping luas section. Seems like a waste of good money.

This looks great, lets go ahead with this idea.

Propellerhead

Great. Now, what do you propose to do about Broadstone?

Ianrod Eireann propose to reuse the terminus by 2010 for Navan and Western Commuter services.

Victor

The route of line D is fairly clear from Broadstone to Liffey Junction, there are limited choices from Broadstone to O'Connell Street, so it isn't all that much up in the air.

As regards the turf war, trains can be put in the current cutting, with trams overhead at street level (only 3 streets crossed at most).

Propellerhead

Well, the OP does suggest cutting the trams out altogether from the O'Connell Street axis. Riddle me that.

D.L.R.

Propellerhead wrote: »

Great. Now, what do you propose to do about Broadstone?

Ianrod Eireann propose to reuse the terminus by 2010 for Navan and Western Commuter services.

Well, I think underground is the best solution in the long term, and coupled with upgrading the green line to Metro, with a possible underground section replacing Stephens Green to Ranelagh, this would be a viable way to connect Broadstone with the network. The Green Line would run from Broadstone/L.J. to the south side as full metro. The line could be shared between O'Connell and SSG (common on underground networks in other cities).

strassenwolf

D.L.R., the following link might give you (and others) some food for thought:

http://www.dubchamber.ie/Uploads/FrankAllen.pdf

If you look at the diagram of the O'Connell Bridge stop, it is not difficult to see that, what is effectively being proposed is the construction of two massive stations either side of the river - linked by a section of station which includes the platforms. The platforms do not, in themselves, form a large part of either of the two stations either side of the river.

If that resembles anything like the final product, then you would have to ask whether the city might not be better served by building two similar constructions - which might not need to be as large - in the locations you have suggested. By this I mean stations in which the tram platforms are better integrated into each station than currently appears to be proposed with the O'Connell Bridge colossus. That is, the tram platforms would lie at the bottom of each station. (The platforms would probably end up being a bit longer than the concourse area, but that is not unusual).

It would certainly be interesting to see, just how much cheaper construction of the "one" station at O'Connell Bridge will be, over construction of two separate stations in those separate locations.

There are certainly obvious flaws with the diagram given in the above link, though I'd imagine that this could be put down to poor draughtsmanship. I can't, for example, believe that the RPA intend all passengers entering or exiting the "southern" station having to use the lift - there doesn't appear to be a set of stairs to/from the street, let alone an escalator. And I also doubt if it's a great idea to have wheelchair-bound passengers having to travel such a long distance between the LUAS (on Abbey Street) and the lift into and out of the "northern" station.

Having said that, for all the talk that this arrangement will provide good access to points both north and south of the river, it wouldn't be a great cop if you wanted to access the Abbey Street LUAS stop from the wrong end of a northbound tram, or if you wanted to get to (say) Trinity from the wrong end of a southbound tram.

The whole thing would take forever.:rolleyes:

D.L.R.

That's my whole point. The T21 crowd trumpet the "integration is key" line, but I just don't see it on O'Connell Street. Don't get me wrong, the prospect of any network expansion in Dublin is good news, but we can only build this pricey stuff once so why not get it right for the few extra quid.

Lamentably, Dublin at the moment is merely being upgraded from a mess to a bigger mess.

carlmango11

I get the impression that the goverment has a distorted view on integration. They seem to think integration is placing one thing within walking distance of another. These Metro's and Darts and Luases have to be placed together, within the same building/station. Even if they're right beside one another. People don't like the thought of entering a station, using a train, metro whatever, leaving the station then walking for a few minutes then buying a new ticket. going back into another station blah blah blah. It gives the mentality that for example the Luas line is designed for people who want to go from somewhere on the line the somewhere else on the line, rather than anywhere. I reckon even using the same logo and ticketing type would make a massive difference (I know the ticketing is harder than it sounds). But even in regards a common logo. If they were to use the bus logo (it's well known and recognisable) in different colours for all the modes of transport then people would feel like they're under the one system. Black and yellow for buses, purple and silver for the luas, green and yelloe for darts, dunno about the metro . Even this whole thing they seem to be doing of building 2 lines of every mode then rather than expanding it building something different. Why cant we just expand the luas or the dart. I doesnt have to be the same just operate as one system. as in one map, one ticket, one look. I dont mean like expand the luas to the airport as tram that run on the street. Make the trams wider and underground whatever, it doesnt have to be identical, just one whole system.

Wow, once i start rambling I just can't stop! :D:D:D:D

strassenwolf

D.L.R. wrote: »

we can only build this pricey stuff once so why not get it right for the few extra quid.

But, in this case, would it even cost the extra few quid?

I know that that was much of the reasoning behind linking the Trinity and O'Connell Street stops which had been envisaged prior to the public consultation. However, it's hard to see that it actually will be any cheaper, and it can't certainly end up being much cheaper.

To be honest, it would be an absurdity to have a "station" like that on what is supposedly a slimmed-down metro.