Luas docklands line to open 2nd week of December

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

But the docklands station is a temporary station, surely? It wouldn't have made sense to construct a building to a special spec if the station was only going to have a ten year lifespan, would it?

Quite so.

I really think the imperative here is that the Interconnector station is not far from the LUAS stop. Docklands overground station has seven trains per day at present - the cost/benefit may not be that great. It is quite possible that only peak hour services will use that station in the longer term, with other trains serving Connolly or Pearse.

Also, passengers on a Docklands bound service can transfer to a Connolly/Pearse bound service at any station en route.

strassenwolf

KC61 wrote: »

That is true, but the LUAS as planned by the RPA for Terenure and Rathfarnham was madness from start to finish. It would have been completely on street, travelling through approximately 30 traffic controlled junctions from Nutgrove to Christchurch.

There is insufficient roadspace as it is on most of that route for four lanes of traffic let alone two lanes of track and two lanes of road space. The costs and inconvenience of having every front garden south of Terenure cut back was ludicrous.

The lack of priority that the LUAS given it would be completely on-street means that it failed to offer any significant improvement in terms of travel time over the existing bus services.

The reality remains in my view that the only realistic alternative for a rail based solution in the south central area of the city is an underground metro. Anything else would cause far too much disruption in construction, and operationally would not deliver tangible benefits to the city.

I think there is a great deal of sense in what you say.

(I need your help here. I'm trying to find this elusive "Thanks" mechanism. but I can't find it.:o Along with a number of other posts I've seen from people on the board over the last few months I would have "thanked" you for the above post had I known how to do so. I'd be grateful for some guidance).

You are, in my opinion, quite correct.

An underground metro through the south City Centre would be the best solution for delivering high quality public transport to some of the highest density areas in the Dublin area.

I have previously argued that any extension of the Metro North project towards Shankill would be - and I think one needs to start getting fairly blunt here - an unmitigated disaster for Dublin, as it would then render it practically impossible for a largely one-change underground network, incorporating most Southside and Northside areas of high density, to ever be developed.

In order to retain the possibility of an efficient, largely one-change, system, ever coming about, it should be crystal-clear that if the metro north (if built) is ever extended southwards, it must go broadly westwards through the South city.

I would favour a line from in or around Tallaght, and a line from in or around Walkinstown, the two lines sharing track in and through the city centre.

As you correctly point out, construction of any LUAS line between the City Centre and Terenure would be fraught with difficulties.

These difficulties are probably not insurmountable, and with some compulsory purchase a LUAS line might be achievable. It is, as you say, not the best option, but it would have been interesting to see what the RPA's planners might have come up with, had they not been so engrossed with developing lines to outlying areas like citywest and Cherrywood.

Or, should I say, outlying low-density areas like citywest and Cherrywood.

Unfortunately, the easier alternative, which the Government has taken, is to focus of being "seen to do something" - to build lines to areas like Cherrywood and citywest, with all the manpower and design effort which these projects entail - and to avoid focusing on delivering better public transport for higher density areas of the city.

armada104

strassenwolf wrote: »

These difficulties are probably not insurmountable, and with some compulsory purchase a LUAS line might be achievable. It is, as you say, not the best option, but it would have been interesting to see what the RPA's planners might have come up with, had they not been so engrossed with developing lines to outlying areas like citywest and Cherrywood.

They did do some work on it.

dowlingm

strassenwolf wrote: »

(I need your help here. I'm trying to find this elusive "Thanks" mechanism. but I can't find it.:o Along with a number of other posts I've seen from people on the board over the last few months I would have "thanked" you for the above post had I known how to do so. I'd be grateful for some guidance).

At the bottom right of each post there should be some buttons - one of them has a hand making a "thumbs up"

Lollymcd

Will it not be possible to connect the Docklands station with the interconnector and the Luas extension via an underground passage as has been done in cities all around the world? In NYC for example you can walk for well over the estimated four minutes it takes to get from Docklands to Spencer Dock Luas stop while transfering between lines. Times Square is one example, an underground maze of pedestrian tunnels.

Judgement Day

I was Dublin last Friday (still didn't manage my first trip on the Docklands Luas extension) but I did note that around 1pm when I was heading back to Connolly that a lot of people were getting off at Busaras Stop and dragging suitcases across the exceptionally busy road to the station, while the lightly loaded tram proceeded to the Point. This is what I suspected would be the situation and I wonder has anybody else noted anything with regards to loadings etc.etc?

markpb

I've used the new extension a few times (off-peak) and it's always busy enough. I've never seen many people wait at the Connolly stop.

Lollymcd

Judgement Day wrote: »

I wonder has anybody else noted anything with regards to loadings etc.etc?

I live in the docklands area so use the extention regularly, seen lots of others using it too, normally fairly packed at peak times. Off peak it is usually much the same as the rest of the service.

FlameoftheWest

strassenwolf wrote: »

I have previously argued that any extension of the Metro North project towards Shankill would be - and I think one needs to start getting fairly blunt here - an unmitigated disaster for Dublin, as it would then render it practically impossible for a largely one-change underground network, incorporating most Southside and Northside areas of high density, to ever be developed.

Yes you are correct. If they are extending the MN from the Green south it should at least go in an arc via terenure and then to Shankill.

or forget Shankill completely and send it out to Naas via Tallaght. If MN went from Donebate to Naas via the City Center as underground-overground it would be like another Interconnector.