Marlborough Street Public Transport Priority Bridge

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

For goodness sakes now you are dealing in semantics - you effectively said it did not happen elsewhere - I am saying it does.

It's not semantics, and you're now putting words in my mouth.

lxflyer wrote: »

I think you are really stretching things here - it is not an attractive street full stop.

Not at all, the parked buses are part of the problem and makes the street harder to be made attractive. It makes the street more cramped, less open, and darker.

lxflyer wrote: »

Indeed it can - but your original post made no practical suggestion of how it could be delivered without affecting PVR. And you have to take those sort of things into account. You were frankly dismissive of DB and put it down to them "choosing" to terminate there, without any knowledge of how urban bus services operate in my opinion.

Also - the high frequency Malahide Road routes no longer terminate there, but hey don't let that stop you!

Yes, bus services are chosen and planned, they did choice to park buses there because it suits them to do so. You can try to claim otherwise but what suits Dublin Bus is not what is always the best thing for the city or even transport in the city.

Even in terms of bus transport, Dublin Bus is not what the city needs.

And you continue to think posters here have to write each post to the standard of a railway order or something along those lines. It's a discussion board, not choosing a submission form for An Bord Pleanala for fast tracking planning permission.

Even if we're talking about moving around the current routes that use the streets or even moving where they park -- it should not be a huge deal, the flexibility of buses is supposed to be one of their strong points.

lxflyer wrote: »

I think that is a very subjective post - LUAS is never going to have 200km. I'd suggest the DB network is far in excess of that given there are many routes off QBCs. Therefore the whole comparison is ludicrous. I suspect that you would find LUAS would not be making an operational profit - in fact this year it's quite possible they will make a loss.

You're missing the wider point: Luas is more important because it carries more people per km its routes take up. In terms of the amount of passengers carried, the fact that the DB network is far in excess of 200km is worse, not better.

Why do you not think that a larger Luas network travelling around the same kind of areas would make a loss?

Why do you think Luas will make a loss this year?

lxflyer wrote: »

Capacity and reality are two completely different things. There is not a chance in my view that IE will ever carry anything close to 100m passengers.

Why isn't there a change of that happening?

LXFlyer

I'm not expecting an EIS but I would expect you to come up with a practical alternative rather than somewhat sweeping statements.

As to LUAS making an operating loss:

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/RPA-Luas-fares-approval-Dec-2011.pdf

The RPA has been experiencing deficits between Luas revenue and operating costs and is forecast to have an operating deficit, including asset refurbishment costs, in 2011 and a further deficit which is expected to be higher in 2012. This has resulted in them having to deplete their accumulated cash reserve which was intended for necessary maintenance work.

robd

lxflyer wrote: »

As to LUAS making an operating loss:

True unfortunately. The extensions have put them into the red in operating terms. There's a lesson to be learned there in terms of building tram (or heavy rail) lines in low population density out lying areas.

Other than that, could the 2 of you (lxflyer and monument) please stop bickering about bus stops. It's somewhat of a side argument.

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm not expecting an EIS but I would expect you to come up with a practical alternative rather than somewhat sweeping statements.

The practical alternative is to move the buses. The detail and decision making behind the choices of how to move them is EIS level and even beyond EIS level with discussion between all parties.

In any case, asking me or anybody else here to explain how we're going to move the parked buses seems strange when the RPA already plans on having a Luas stop where the buses park:


North >

lxflyer wrote: »

As to LUAS making an operating loss:

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/RPA-Luas-fares-approval-Dec-2011.pdf

Thanks, I had not seen that.

monument

robd wrote: »

True unfortunately. The extensions have put them into the red in operating terms. There's a lesson to be learned there in terms of building tram (or heavy rail) lines in low population density out lying areas.

Other than that, could the 2 of you (lxflyer and monument) please stop bickering about bus stops. It's somewhat of a side argument.

Back on topic:

The Luas BXD drawings seem to suggest that there is room for Luas tracks going both ways on Marlborough Street (and from College Green to Marlborough Street). The only notable problem on the ground seems to be the (currently very low quality) building on the corner of Parnell Street and Marlborough Street.

• Grafton Street to Eden Quay(05_BXD_RO_29_A-B).pdf (0.67MB)
• Eden Quay to Cathal Brugha Street(06_BXD_RO_29_B-C).pdf (0.82MB)
• Cathal Brugha Street to Dominick Street Lower(07_BXD_RO_29_C-D).pdf (0.62MB)

Fitting the set of tracks down the street isn't a huge issue.

The question is: Is more disruption at and post construction from College Green to Parnell Street via Marlborough better or worse than disruption on O'Connell Street?

And will the RPA do without their loop?

dublinman1990

Quote from Ixflyer

London, Barcelona and Sydney are three examples I can immediately think of where there are city centre bus stands, generally on side streets where buses layover between journeys. It is a basic element of any city bus service in cities where no public transport interchange station is not provided.

Going off topic - London's Victoria Station has a wide range of bus, rail and tube services to offer there, including an air terminal :eek:, for passengers travelling by train to Gatwick Airport.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Victoria_station

Imagine if you had Connolly or Heuston like that. We wouldn't know ourselves.

trluk

.
LOCATION GUIDELINES FOR NEW BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION IN HISTORIC CITIES


Case Study - Dublin:

.




I can't BELIEVE we're making the spacing mistake for the second time in less than 10 years @_@

dowlingm

robd wrote: »

True unfortunately. The extensions have put them into the red in operating terms. There's a lesson to be learned there in terms of building tram (or heavy rail) lines in low population density out lying areas

What a bunch of tosh. Developer-contribution is the saving of the railways. Hansfield is thriving and sure Crusheen will be the crown jewel of Irish Rail.

robd

dowlingm wrote: »

What a bunch of tosh. Developer-contribution is the saving of the railways. Hansfield is thriving and sure Crusheen will be the crown jewel of Irish Rail.

What the heck are you talking about? What has Crusheen got to do with operating of the Luas?

The cost of operating the Luas in less dense areas (Saggart and Bridge Glen) has pushed Veolia into the red (loss making). Thus RPA have increased the fares to push Veolia back into the black (profit making).

Developer contributions pay for construction of, not the running of a service.

Also, I was giving justification for fare increase not criticizing it.

dowlingm

Dude. Sarcasm. Seriously.

Rsc12

trluk wrote: »

.
LOCATION GUIDELINES FOR NEW BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION IN HISTORIC CITIES


Case Study - Dublin:

.




I can't BELIEVE we're making the spacing mistake for the second time in less than 10 years @_@

James Joyce Bridge was a stoopid place for a new bridge. Adding new bridges is fine but they have to be spaced properly.

We do so many dumbass things these days in the name of "infrastructure" it's unreal. It's like the city was handed to a bunch of amatuers, and the country for that matter.

monument

Rsc12 wrote: »

I can't BELIEVE we're making the spacing mistake for the second time in less than 10 years @_@

James Joyce Bridge was a stoopid place for a new bridge. Adding new bridges is fine but they have to be spaced properly.

We do so many dumbass things these days in the name of "infrastructure" it's unreal. It's like the city was handed to a bunch of amatuers, and the country for that matter.[/Quote]

Are you guys for real?

Why does matter? The gods looking down on us? The views from future high rises? The view from your helicopter?

James Joyce Bridge was put there for very good reasons (bus routes etc).

Rsc12

Oh help!!! The aerial view simply ILLUSTRATES the bad location. As you are moving along the Quays there is a muddle of three bridges in quick succession around Queen Street. The grand, classical spacing is lost. Everybody notices this, even if unconsciously. It's illegible, it's bad city-making, it's ............... I give up.

FreudianSlippers

It's also a bridge to half-nowhere with very poor angles for bus traffic. I actually think that the Joyce Bridge makes traffic worse at peak periods of the day.

monument

Rsc12 wrote: »

Oh help!!! The aerial view simply ILLUSTRATES the bad location. As you are moving along the Quays there is a muddle of three bridges in quick succession around Queen Street. The grand, classical spacing is lost. Everybody notices this, even if unconsciously. It's illegible, it's bad city-making, it's ............... I give up.

You still have yet to say why this matters, expect for the gods, or the few who have helicopters.

Far more important is the people level of how things work for people.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

It's also a bridge to half-nowhere with very poor angles for bus traffic. I actually think that the Joyce Bridge makes traffic worse at peak periods of the day.

But the bridge does a lot for buses which uses it.

FreudianSlippers

monument wrote: »

You still have yet to say why this matters, expect for the gods, or the few who have helicopters.

Far more important is the people level of how things work for people.

It's not aesthetically pleasing from the ground, nor is it good city design.

But the bridge does a lot for buses which uses it.

Does it? I would have to disagree with you on that one. Poor turning angle, poor traffic light pattern and a nightmare during peak periods.

monument

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

It's not aesthetically pleasing from the ground, nor is it good city design.

Good city design is making good connections even if it upsets a few aesthetics extremists.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Does it? I would have to disagree with you on that one. Poor turning angle, poor traffic light pattern and a nightmare during peak periods.

Not sure what routes the buses using Blackhall Place use to use, but all of the alternative routes between Manor Street and O'Connell Street are worse than the bridge.

Rsc12

monument wrote: »

You still have yet to say why this matters, expect for the gods, or the few who have helicopters.

Far more important is the people level of how things work for people.

If I can't explain it perhaps the paragraph below will.

'Dublin is one the great European cities. Its development in the 19th and
early 19th centuries made it far more than a mere provincial capital cast in
the shadow of London. The design and grandeur of its public buildings,
the nobility of its domestic architecture and the beauty of its town plan –
with its squares, riverside terraces and generous streets – makes it a city
second to none. It stands alongside Venice, Rome, Amsterdam and Bath
as a supreme example of the city as a corporate work of art. And this is
still true of Dublin, even after years of heart-destroying demolitions.'
- Dan Cruikshank, Observer Magazine, 1988

monument

Rsc12 wrote: »

monument wrote: »

You still have yet to say why this matters, expect for the gods, or the few who have helicopters.

Far more important is the people level of how things work for people.

If I can't explain it perhaps the paragraph below will.

'Dublin is one the great European cities. Its development in the 19th and
early 19th centuries made it far more than a mere provincial capital cast in
the shadow of London. The design and grandeur of its public buildings,
the nobility of its domestic architecture and the beauty of its town plan –
with its squares, riverside terraces and generous streets – makes it a city
second to none. It stands alongside Venice, Rome, Amsterdam and Bath
as a supreme example of the city as a corporate work of art. And this is
still true of Dublin, even after years of heart-destroying demolitions.'
- Dan Cruikshank, Observer Magazine, 1988

Well, if he does not mind heart-destroying demolitions, I'm sure he won't mind the odd out of place bridge.

Cities are for the people living in them. Great architecture is good to have too, but planning where bridges go or not based on some unexplained "classical spacing" over what works for a city and its people is downright madness.

While there must be respect for history, but a city is not a museum and demanding "classical spacing" of bridges is far from balanced.

dubhthach

I wouldn't mind but most of the quays particularly the North Quays were destroyed anyways and replaced by a pastiche behind which sit box-apartments.

LXFlyer

The whole point of James Joyce bridge was to facilitate the large numbers of 37, 39, 39a and 70 buses with a direct turn off the South Quays onto Blackhall Place.

If you had ever seen the buses making the right turn onto Rory O'More bridge (as it was two way), coupled with another right turn and then finally a left turn onto Blackhall Place, you'd realise why it was necessary. It was far too convoluted and a very difficult turn. Imagine trying it with the tri-axle VT type buses. When the articulated buses were on the 39b they had to go all the way up to Frank Sherwin bridge and come back again as the turn was too tight for them.

So sorting all that is really "stoopid". Right!

Rsc12

A minor bus-turn improvement is frankly pitiful justification for building a bridge in the wrong place.

@monument, you need to improve your standard of posting. You complained about the aerial view illustrating the bad spacing of James Joyce Bridge, so I explained the situation on the ground instead and why it matters. You then said "You still have yet to say why [spacing] matters ..." Since you weren't getting it I posted the Observer Magazine quote in the hope of conveying the idea of Dublin as a great relic of urban civilisation and again you react dismissively. Please.

LXFlyer

It was hardly minor given the large volume of bus traffic using it.

The alternative was for buses to have to go up to Heuston Station and back every outbound journey.

monument

Rsc12 wrote: »

A minor bus-turn improvement is frankly pitiful justification for building a bridge in the wrong place.

@monument, you need to improve your standard of posting. You complained about the aerial view illustrating the bad spacing of James Joyce Bridge, so I explained the situation on the ground instead and why it matters. You then said "You still have yet to say why [spacing] matters ..." Since you weren't getting it I posted the Observer Magazine quote in the hope of conveying the idea of Dublin as a great relic of urban civilisation and again you react dismissively. Please.

Can you please try to reply to my points rather than dismissing them as being dismissive? In that regard, I would contend that you are the one who needs to improve your standard of posting. You are wholly unconvincing and you're dismissively of my honest opinion -- back with given reasons -- that your points aren't convincing.

My main point is that: Cities are for people living in them, the view the gods and rich people who own or can afford to use helicopters is irrelevant. I would add to that the few people who notice on the ground and the even fewer who care (ie a few aesthetics extremists). The importance of aesthetics has to be balanced -- things like making places more liveable and making connections are more important than aesthetics. Aesthetics at the level you're talking about (where few people notice or care), can't override making connections, making a city more liveable, and more sustainable.

The James Joyce Bridge is actually a major bus service improvement -- from the ability to use articulated buses without a notable diversion, to a more direct and more reliable route. Knocking off a regular near 1.2km diversion with three extra sets of traffic lights on a urban bus journey is far from minor.

The idea of a classical spacing seems like a modern day invention, by you. The spacing of older bridges seem more about making connections.

The quote from the Observer Magazine is at best vague and little can be take from it about bridge spacing -- it is the kind of thing both you or I could claim supports our arguments.

trluk

Consistent spacing of bridges is not some esoteric idea. It's really simple. The bridges of Dublin were always beautifully spaced - until this modern-day nonsense of bunging new bridges inbetween existing ones.

*Wince*, I still can't believe Dublin City Council are about to commit this civic crime again at Marlborough Street X_X

monument

trluk wrote: »

Consistent spacing of bridges is not some esoteric idea. It's really simple. The bridges of Dublin were always beautifully spaced - until this modern-day nonsense of bunging new bridges inbetween existing ones.

*Wince*, I still can't believe Dublin City Council are about to commit this civic crime again at Marlborough Street X_X

Yeah, actually, it is a esoteric idea. It's also a bit eccentric. You might not be able to see it but it is. The vast majority of people don't care that the Loopline, Talbot, Sean O'Casey, Millennium, Joyce etc bridges don't fit in with the "classical" spacing.

Are the Butt and Loopline bridges beautifully spaced? Never any spacing "problems" before Dublin City Council came along!

As for modern-day nonsense of building new bridges inbetween existing ones... Err.. You'll find that's been happening for more than 100 years! Not very modren.

trluk

The turkey bridges are James Joyce Bridge and this new one that's about to be built. I don't know what you're getting at with most of the others cited.

The Loopline bridge is an acknowledged historical blunder of the city. Running across in front of the Custom House, it could not be more insensitive. However it's a product of the Orwellian powers of the railway companies at the time. During the boom period, there was a plan to remove and replace the Loopline with a transparent bridge which would largely restore the Venetian vista of riverside terraces leading into the Custom House, as seen in the picture below. It was a designated "Millennium Project". But we couldn't even do that with all the money sloshing around. Where is that sense of hope and ambition for the city gone? Instead we're just about to further f**k up the 18th century river vista from O'Connell Bridge with this unnecessary, badly-planned, transport engineer bridge at Marlborough Street. Wow. Words fail me.

D.L.R.

trluk wrote: »

*Wince*, I still can't believe Dublin City Council are about to commit this civic crime again at Marlborough Street X_X

You can't believe it? You've heard of Wood Quay right?

monument

trluk wrote: »

The turkey bridges are James Joyce Bridge and this new one that's about to be built. I don't know what you're getting at with most of the others cited.

Starting at Heuston going east the classical spacing is: 516m > 240m > 308m > 320m > 276m > 303m > 260m > 249m > (and the apparent error of the Loopline at) 12m. For the record starting at Islandbridge, it's 273m > 815m > 516m etc.

Now Beckett seems to confirm roughly the old spacing. It's 440m from the last bridge (Sean O'Casey) and the 900m or so left between Beckett and the Eastlink and allows for another bridge to be put in half way and still keep to that that roule of having around 450m between bridges.

The placment of the Talbot Memorial Bridge broke this rule. It has only 176m between it and Loopline. The Sean O'Casey Bridge placment also broke this rule at only around 230m from Talbot.

Same goes for the Millennium Bridge -- at only 126m from the Ha'penny and only 168m from Grattan.

The Frank Sherwin Bridge also breaks the spacing at only about 50m from the now tram and ped only bridge, the Sean Heuston.

So, the Loopline Bridge, Frank Sherwin Bridge, Talbot Memorial Bridge, Sean O'Casey Bridge, and the Millennium Bridge all broke the apprent rule. It's not just Joyce or the Marlborough Street Bridge.

trluk wrote: »

The Loopline bridge is an acknowledged historical blunder of the city. Running across in front of the Custom House, it could not be more insensitive. However it's a product of the Orwellian powers of the railway companies at the time. During the boom period, there was a plan to remove and replace the Loopline with a transparent bridge which would largely restore the Venetian vista of riverside terraces leading into the Custom House, as seen in the picture below. It was a designated "Millennium Project". But we couldn't even do that with all the money sloshing around. Where is that sense of hope and ambition for the city gone?

I would agree that the Loopline could be improved, but I would say that if you go about where the photo was taken today and look, you'll see trees, those silly flag polls the council has dotted along the river bank, and buses and HGVs are far more insensitive to the view than the Loopline ever was. Have a look on Google Street View:

Street View from around where the photo you posted was taken showing trees, polls, HGVs etc in the way of the view.

Street View from around the centre of the bridge (currently showing buses in the way of the view).

Street View only showing the Loopline Bridge vs trees.

trluk wrote: »

Instead we're just about to further f**k up the 18th century river vista from O'Connell Bridge with this unnecessary, badly-planned, transport engineer bridge at Marlborough Street. Wow. Words fail me.

Please do explain how an street-level bridge will any way compare to the elevated Loopline.

There isn't an 18th century river vista any more. A picture today from the same spot, even with the exact same lens and framing, would include the IFSC, the Liberty Hall, the Ulster Bank Building, the Convention Centre. You'll also have no sailing ships, but you would have lots of more people, and cars, buses and trucks. There may be good and bad bits, but Dublin is a city for today and tomorrow, not just a museum.

trluk

Look man I think we'd better leave it because you're just not in tune with the overall point. You're trying to argue a load of details there which are not relevant to the overall point.

Not dissing you. I just don't think you should be having this conversation because you're so far out of tune with the sentiments.

Respect.

Wild Bill

trluk wrote: »

T During the boom period, there was a plan to remove and replace the Loopline with a transparent bridge which would largely restore the Venetian vista of riverside terraces leading into the Custom House, as seen in the picture below.


Wow. Words fail me.

They fail me when I see this described as a "Venetian vista" :rolleyes:

Sir, I know Venice and this is no Venetian vista!

monument

trluk wrote: »

Look man I think we'd better leave it because you're just not in tune with the overall point. You're trying to argue a load of details there which are not relevant to the overall point.

Not dissing you. I just don't think you should be having this conversation because you're so far out of tune with the sentiments.

Respect.

Even people with very subjective views can define them at least somewhat, you don't seem to be able to thst, so while I'm not dissing you, your view on this seems completely impossable to definable and thus seems airy fairy at best.

[Jackass]

It just pains me that no one identified that the problem is largely to do with the size of buses being run on narrow routes.

Smaller buses, much, much more frequent service, and proper congenstion control. Our (Dublin) transport system is an ongoing joke, with no possible solution we can find from what the Brits left us with, and any attempt at improving this infrastructure within a confide city enviornment, almost without fail, has been an absolute disastor. Compared to early 1900's Dublin, the level of public transport in the city has been one of almost complete collapse, and our incompetence has really ruined one of Europes finest cities of the day.

LXFlyer

[Jackass] wrote: »

It just pains me that no one identified that the problem is largely to do with the size of buses being run on narrow routes.

Smaller buses, much, much more frequent service, and proper congenstion control. Our (Dublin) transport system is an ongoing joke, with no possible solution we can find from what the Brits left us with, and any attempt at improving this infrastructure within a confide city enviornment, almost without fail, has been an absolute disastor. Compared to early 1900's Dublin, the level of public transport in the city has been one of almost complete collapse, and our incompetence has really ruined one of Europes finest cities of the day.

Look, the right turn onto Rory O'More Bridge off the south quays (as was) is not suitable for double deck buses of any variety. There were numerous accidents there and all of this led DCC to the decision that a new bridge was needed.

The peak frequency on the combined routes using that bridge is a bus every 2.5 minutes and that is using tri-axle buses on many of them. You want more buses using a smaller bridge that is patently not suitable for that purpose?

cgcsb

don't see any point in worrying our little heads about bridge spacing from an architectural point of view. As if Dubliners will be walking around with their cloth measuring tapes and then righting subsequent letters of complaint. The only problem I see with James Joyce Bridge is that it narrows in the middle and it was not designed originally to accommodate a cycle lane. Of course it is better to place road bridges where there can be straight though traffic(like Marlborough-Hawkins st). Still, Joyce Bridge cut 5 minutes off my journey home, 10 at rush hour, I can't complain. I don't care how close they are together, If the liffey was completely tunnelised, I wouldn't care.

Joko

Buses carry the bulk of public transport passengers in Dublin and the bridge will allow Dublin Bus to further revise their network in the City Centre.

http://www.dublincity.ie/RoadsandTraffic/MajorTransportProjects/Documents/Marlborough_Street_Bridge_Synopsis_-_Aug_2011[1].pdf

What bus routes are planned to use this bridge? The plans only have south bound bus lanes.

darkman2

These pictures were posted on Skyscrapercity forum

Wild Bill

darkman2 wrote: »

These pictures were posted on Skyscrapercity forum

Hmmmm... this photo stream would fall foul of the photo restrictions being proposed for the weather threads!

Joko

Wild Bill wrote: »

Hmmmm... this photo stream would fall foul of the photo restrictions being proposed for the weather threads!

Spamming a thread with photos is annoying for users on mobiles.

Actually annoying for everyone.

Wild Bill

Joko wrote: »

Spamming a thread with photos is annoying for users on mobiles.

Actually annoying for everyone.

Depends on the photos and the context. I'm not annoyed, ergo, it isn't annoying for everyone :cool:

I would also oppose reducing the visual experience of PC readers just to facilitate mobile users.

Mr Simpson

Joko wrote: »

Spamming a thread with photos is annoying for users on mobiles.

Actually annoying for everyone.

Eh not really, some people may be interested to see how a project is progressing, and may not be passing it on a daily basis, somebody providing photos every now and then is great.

cgcsb

hardly spamming with perfectly relevant photos.

Typewriter

Joko wrote: »

Spamming a thread with photos is annoying for users on mobiles.

Actually annoying for everyone.

"Sit down! Sit down, you’re ruining it for everyone!"

:cool:

L1011

Joko wrote: »

Spamming a thread with photos is annoying for users on mobiles.

Actually annoying for everyone.

Use the mobile version of the site, which does not load images in-line.

BowWow

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0427/metro-and-dart-preparatory-works-on-hold.html

Carawaystick

monument wrote: »

Starting at Heuston going east the classical spacing is: 516m > 240m > 308m > 320m > 276m > 303m > 260m > 249m > (and the apparent error of the Loopline at) 12m. For the record starting at Islandbridge, it's 273m > 815m > 516m etc.

Now Beckett seems to confirm roughly the old spacing. It's 440m from the last bridge (Sean O'Casey) and the 900m or so left between Beckett and the Eastlink and allows for another bridge to be put in half way and still keep to that that roule of having around 450m between bridges.

The placment of the Talbot Memorial Bridge broke this rule. It has only 176m between it and Loopline. The Sean O'Casey Bridge placment also broke this rule at only around 230m from Talbot.

Same goes for the Millennium Bridge -- at only 126m from the Ha'penny and only 168m from Grattan.

The Frank Sherwin Bridge also breaks the spacing at only about 50m from the now tram and ped only bridge, the Sean Heuston.

So, the Loopline Bridge, Frank Sherwin Bridge, Talbot Memorial Bridge, Sean O'Casey Bridge, and the Millennium Bridge all broke the apprent rule. It's not just Joyce or the Marlborough Street Bridge.

I held my whist for a while but the idiocy of some ``classical'' spacing rule unexplained by the complainer has got to me.

I don't think the railway bridge at Heuston is listed, nor the defunct railway bridge near westlink.

Or even the two bridges at west link with their ``classical meter and a half spacing''



Anyway how is this bridge gonna be built? are sections gonna be cantilevered/arched from the structures in the Liffey?

At least there is work afoot on Hawkins st to get the bridge to align with the street, unlike the Millennium, Seán O' Casey, or Beckett bridges.

youcancallmeal

BowWow wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0427/metro-and-dart-preparatory-works-on-hold.html

There was some fella from the corpo on the news tonight trying to emphasise the new bridge is still 'badly' needed due to the bus congestion on Eden quay. Absolute nonsense, the old system worked fine!

bk

BowWow wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0427/metro-and-dart-preparatory-works-on-hold.html

Hmm, it seems incredibly short sighted to build LUAS BXD without preparatory works for DART and Metro, or to use one of the alternative LUAS BXD routes instead, even if the DU and MN don't start in the next 10 years, they will very likely start at some time in the future as they are good and needed projects.

Also 19 million to retrofit all red line trams to not use overhead cables seems very reasonable to avoid wires in the city center, I thought it would be much more, I really hope ABP force them to do this.

dowlingm

Wireless trams means exclusivity of vendor unless it involves energy storage (batteries/supercapacitors), has implications for future tenders if a ground power system (APS) chosen.

L1011

Carawaystick wrote: »

I don't think the railway bridge at Heuston is listed, nor the defunct railway bridge near westlink.

Not a railway bridge. Private foot/cart/electrical cables bridge.