Luas Development

Judgement Day

In the unlikely event that the Luas Green line was to be turned into a Metro it would only be possible if the original Harcourt Street line alignment beyond the Sandyford depot were to be used. For the life of me I cannot understand why it was not used with the extension of the Luas - utter madness!!

Wild Bill

Certainly not madness in terms of the tram option. The line past Foxrock goes through such low-density housing as to be virtually unpopulated. It also parallels the 46a Bus corridor on the N11.
The current route goes through a rapidly growing area of relatively dense population with poor public transport options (ironically, till it rejoins the old line when it is into empty countryside).
What would have been daft would have been to miss the opportunity to service Sandyford, Stepaside, Boghall.

BrianD

Carawaystick wrote: »

a city called Dublin.....

Very funny. Look at the population density and potential for density increase. It is ironic that in Dublin that within 1km of the city centre you have 2 story semi d housing with back gardens. This type of population density does not support high capaity high frequency metro services. Therefore light rail/tram is a suitable service.

My point is that north of Dundrum you have Dartry, Ranelagh, Rathmines where most of the housing stock is 2/3 story red bricks. You just aren't going to see see swaths of Ranelagh demolished for higher density apartment blocks.

crocro wrote:

lengthen stations as done with the DART.

On the green line you don't have stations you just have stops. These could be lengthened but I don't see how most of these "stops" could be converted into high capacity stations that would cater for large volumes of passengers. You'd have to start putting in bridges to cross tracks etc.

KC61 wrote:

If there was to be a Metro upgrade it would only be to Sandyford - the line south of there is built as to tram spec.

No part of the green line north or south of Dundrum is built to metro spec.

Heres a question. Does anyone know what the spacing between the tracks on the red line is where it is segrated e.g. along the canal or where it runs along the M50?

BrianD

Judgement Day wrote: »

In the unlikely event that the Luas Green line was to be turned into a Metro it would only be possible if the original Harcourt Street line alignment beyond the Sandyford depot were to be used. For the life of me I cannot understand why it was not used with the extension of the Luas - utter madness!!

I believe that there are some very expensive houses built on or very close to the alinement at Leopardstown Racecourse. If you are in the stand at the course you'll see them on the other side of the course.

Plus as another poster pointed out there was an opportunity to serve higher density areas and this makes more sense in the modern age.

SeanW

Judgement Day wrote: »

In the unlikely event that the Luas Green line was to be turned into a Metro it would only be possible if the original Harcourt Street line alignment beyond the Sandyford depot were to be used. For the life of me I cannot understand why it was not used with the extension of the Luas - utter madness!!

For a starters, as said before, there are a lot of higher density areas not served well by public transport atm. Secondly, the old alignment has been destroyed/built over in places. Some houses around Leapordstown have been built on it, and the alignment was totally rotivated around J16 on the M50 junction with the R118 dual carriageway.

Another key address is 50 Quinn's Road, Shankill:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=53.230495,-6.118843&spn=0.001445,0.003449&t=h&z=18
From there to the old Shanganah Junction, the alignment has been built over.

Judgement Day

Yes, I know the rationale for diverting the Luas extension from Sandyford was to service areas of high population but given the stated aim was for converson to Metro at some stage it was a bit thick. There appears to be more gardens than buildings between Quinn's Road and the site of Shanganagh Junction and a CPO would deal with them - as it would at Leopardstown Racecourse. It is all really so short sighted as even in the mid-1980s the site of Foxrock station was still complete clear of any from of development.

strassenwolf

BrianD wrote: »

Very funny. Look at the population density and potential for density increase. It is ironic that in Dublin that within 1km of the city centre you have 2 story semi d housing with back gardens. This type of population density does not support high capaity high frequency metro services. Therefore light rail/tram is a suitable service.

My point is that north of Dundrum you have Dartry, Ranelagh, Rathmines where most of the housing stock is 2/3 story red bricks. You just aren't going to see see swaths of Ranelagh demolished for higher density apartment blocks.

This issue has been discussed before on the board, and indeed on this thread. The density of the DCC area doesn't seem be a problem - for example, German cities like Frankfurt and Munich, which have metro lines have densities which are actually lower than the DCC area.

To focus specifically on the areas which you mention, the Rathmines electoral areas combined have a population density of around 6,500 people per square kilometre.

Of course you will get isolated roads where density is lower or higher, but overall densities in this area are good and, taking the aforementioned German cities as a benchmark, would appear to be well capable of supporting a metro line.

The problems with density in County Dublin overall are in the other three administrative regions.

The most appropriate approach, in my opinion, is to focus on construction of LUAS or metro lines from the centre out, in much the same way that Munich and Frankfurt built their systems.

This would allow higher density areas to have access to transport solutions which would be appropriate to their density. And these LUAS or metro lines could then be extended to other areas as densities reach suitable levels.

One would have hoped that a portion of the products of the boom might have been used to provide LUAS or metro lines to places like Finglas or Terenure, which also have respectable densities and from which taxes have been patiently paid for decades.

Instead the main focus was on facilitating developers. In addition, the authorities in Ireland are terrified of causing any disruption to anybody.
Building lines through low density areas to areas being developed is therefore win-win as far as both developers and authorities are concerned.

Thus, current LUAS development is mainly now focussed on building extensions/spurs to Cherrywood and Citywest where densities are currently low (i.e. minimal disruption caused) and are likely to remain so for some considerable time.

So we will soon have a situation where low density areas quite remote from the city will have LUAS services, while higher density areas nearer the city have the bus.

Could you even make it up?:(

Carawaystick

BrianD wrote: »

Very funny. Look at the population density and potential for density increase. It is ironic that in Dublin that within 1km of the city centre you have 2 story semi d housing with back gardens. This type of population density does not support high capaity high frequency metro services. Therefore light rail/tram is a suitable service.

Immediately North of Connolly or south of Pearse you have 2 storey terrace housing too, with back gardens in Connolly's case.

BrianD

Carawaystick wrote: »

Immediately North of Connolly or south of Pearse you have 2 storey terrace housing too, with back gardens in Connolly's case.

The same applies here. Can a metro be justified?

On the topic of light rail, I see the overhead power lines have gone up from the O2 to Spencer Dock on the Red line extension (may be up further but I can't see that far!).

mackerski

strassenwolf wrote: »

The density of the DCC area doesn't seem be a problem - for example, German cities like Frankfurt and Munich, which have metro lines have densities which are actually lower than the DCC area.

I can only speak for Munich, but I'd have said that low-density areas served by U-Bahn are rare. The only example I can think of is U6 north of Studentenstadt, and this is somewhat justified by the fact that the emptier area contains the main depot, that there is a large P+R nearby and that the line (now) provides access to the Allianz Stadium. Furthermore, extending the line through open country (which was fairly cheap) provided access to Garching, which is a population centre (besides, Garching paid for the extension IIRC).

The typical area served by the Munich U-Bahn has apartment blocks of between 4 and 6 stories and plenty of them.

Carawaystick

BrianD wrote: »

The same applies here. Can a metro be justified?

When the Dart Started ( 25 years ago as they're so fond of telling us) it was a metro. with close to metro frequencies.

If the signalling between Pearse and Connolly gets upgraded to 20 tphpd and you have Dart Underground running then this will be a metro again.

SeanW

What's taking the C1 extension so long? I was in Dublin last week and I got a few snaps of the line from Connolly to the Mayor St. canal crossing ... I think they've been at this for a couple of years now and it doesn't look they're that far along.

No wiring between the limits of the junction and at least the Mayor St. canal bridge.

First pic - From Ameins St. looking towards Connolly.
Second pic - From Excange place(?) looking towards Busarus.
Third pic - looking at the new canal bridge. I like it
Fourth pic - from line C1 looking towards Busarus & Ameins St.

Carawaystick

I thought they had a big ho-ha about that canal bridge being opened a while ago?

strassenwolf

mackerski wrote: »

I can only speak for Munich, but I'd have said that low-density areas served by U-Bahn are rare. The only example I can think of is U6 north of Studentenstadt, and this is somewhat justified by the fact that the emptier area contains the main depot, that there is a large P+R nearby and that the line (now) provides access to the Allianz Stadium. Furthermore, extending the line through open country (which was fairly cheap) provided access to Garching, which is a population centre (besides, Garching paid for the extension IIRC).

The typical area served by the Munich U-Bahn has apartment blocks of between 4 and 6 stories and plenty of them.

Mackerski, I'd agree with almost everything which is in your post.

(My one quibble would be with your possible implication that only 4-6 storey apartment blocks can deliver the necessary density for a metro line or, indeed, a LUAS line, in several parts of Dublin. The required densities do appear to already be present in at least most parts of the DCC area, but these densities have not yet led to a sustained effort by the relevant authorities to deliver appropriate transport services to these areas. Instead, the focus over the last few years has been on delivery of this more expensive infrastructure to outlying areas on the basis of a perceived future density, which may now not be achieved for many years).

Low-density areas served by Munich's U-Bahn are indeed rare: the line out to Garching is possibly the only serious example to be found.

And that is an extension which has only recently been developed. The central section of this line was developed many years ago. (By and large, simultaneously, with the construction of the city centre tunnels for the other U-Bahn lines - Munich's transport map may look a lot different than it did 20 years ago, but the basic structure of the city's U-Bahn network remains the same).

Extension out to areas of high density, through areas of lower density, happened in Munich only after many years during which construction of lines through pretty well all of the higher density areas closer to the city had been a priority, and had been achieved.

A different approach to that attempted in Dublin, N'est-ce pas?

Wild Bill

Strassenwolf re "Could you make it up". I don't know but someone did and I see nothing wrong with it. It is the OLD Harcourt St line that goes through virtually unpopulated space from the Sandyford Industrial Estate to Bray. The "detour " actually takes the line through reasonably high density urban areas, before rejoining the countryside at Carrickmines where it rejoins the old line.
We are not talking about "proposed" developments; we are talking about lots of recent 4 to 8 story apartment blocks (the sort the Nimbys won't allow between the canals in the DCC area in many cases). Plus extensive moderate density semi-d estates from the 80s and early 90s.

strassenwolf

Wild Bill wrote: »

Strassenwolf re "Could you make it up". I don't know but someone did and I see nothing wrong with it. It is the OLD Harcourt St line that goes through virtually unpopulated space from the Sandyford Industrial Estate to Bray. The "detour " actually takes the line through reasonably high density urban areas, before rejoining the countryside at Carrickmines where it rejoins the old line.

We are not talking about "proposed" developments; we are talking about lots of recent 4 to 8 story apartment blocks (the sort the Nimbys won't allow between the canals in the DCC area in many cases). Plus extensive moderate density semi-d estates from the 80s and early 90s.

Bill, I don't think anyone is in any doubt that there are pockets of high density development in the DLR, SDCC and Fingal areas.

You've highlighted a good example of one such area.

However, I still can't see why areas within DCC control - with much higher densities - are not being prioritised for LUAS or metro development. High density DCC Areas like Finglas and Terenure are nowhere near a LUAS, metro or DART line.

Yet work still progresses on bringing LUAS lines to outlying areas.:mad:

I've also yet to understand your comment about locations in the area between the two canals.

If the place is full of NIMBYs, how did it manage to become the highest density area in the entire country?

DWCommuter

strassenwolf wrote: »

Bill, I don't think anyone is in any doubt that there are pockets of high density development in the DLR, SDCC and Fingal areas.

You've highlighted a good example of one such area.

However, I still can't see why areas within DCC control - with much higher densities - are not being prioritised for LUAS or metro development. High density DCC Areas like Finglas and Terenure are nowhere near a LUAS, metro or DART line.

Yet work still progresses on bringing LUAS lines to outlying areas.:mad:

I feel the same way. I made this point here a while back and was told to basically stop moaning about developers paying for it. And herein lies the problem. Developer money is linked with all current luas extensions. Our Government in its wisdom has allowed large parts of the city to wallow in abysmal public transport facilities, while it prioritises luas projects that developers were only too willing to throw money at in the good days.(to drive the price of their development up) So while we build this luas line through "new" sprawling housing estates and into the never to be completed Cherrywood, via the stix, Finglas and many other heavily populated areas can basically go and get stuffed, because they were already built and not invited to the building boom party of the 00s to any great degree. Its all just another example of how Government literally built a nation:D on the whims of the construction industry and their banker buddies. If you had 20,000 people in Finglas begging for a luas, the 200 people in the newly built development in leafy Co. Dublin would get it first.

Fortunetly its the last of it for a long time. Unfortunetly other established areas continue to wait and will do for a long time.

The very essence of this society can be attributed to the frenzied Developer/Bank/Government relationship and the best bit......
....our kids will still be paying for it after we've all dropped off the planet.

Wild Bill

Stop moaning! I'm NOT saying Finglas shouldn't have a Luas - I'm saying Sandyford should. The Green Line goes along the old Harcourt St line; it takes a detour away from empty areas to populated areas, then rejoins the line. (Somebody built the original through empty countryside from Milltown to Bray in the 19th century, probably developers, same as built the entire rail network). And as for "developers paying" - the alternative would be...no Luas. Would Finglas be happier if Tallaght didn't have the Luas? :mad:

strassenwolf

From reading your most recent post, it sounds like Friday night was fairly wild, Bill.:)

Wild Bill wrote: »

Stop moaning! I'm NOT saying Finglas shouldn't have a Luas - I'm saying Sandyford should.

Bill, the question about whether Sandyford should have a LUAS line has been pretty much answered.

It already does have a LUAS line - a sensible situation, in my opinion - and it's a line along which I'd like to see greater traffic in the future.

The question which is currently being addressed on this thread is the issue of LUAS construction to lower density areas like Carrickmines and Cherrywood - i.e areas beyond Sandyford - prior to development of similar public transport in higher density areas nearer to the city.

Such as Finglas, Terenure, Walkinstown, etc.

And as for "developers paying" - the alternative would be...no Luas.

Not really true.

The red and green lines were built with public funds, not developer contributions.

These things can be done with public funds.

(Or, at least, projects to deliver LUAS to high density parts of the city could have been done if the money from the boom had not been squandered).

Would Finglas be happier if Tallaght didn't have the Luas? :mad:

Bill, I'm puzzled with this bit, so maybe you might be kind enough to make this somewhat clearer?

i.e. could you try and remember your train of thought when you posted this last Friday night.:)

Hockney

sliabh wrote: »

Woops, sorry, I meant the distance between track centres. I can never remember what that is called.

So the gauge is identical between Red and Green, but the distance between the track centres is different: is the width of the rails themselves therefore different between red and green lines?

There seems to be a few Urban Myths floating around on this one, so here's a question: If the Green and Red lines were hypothetically joined up, would it be possible for a green tram to operate on a red line if the need was there?

Zebra3

When people talk about the Luas lines joing up do they actually mean them physically joining up so the two lines in effect become one huge one?

I always thought the problem was the distance between the two lines (and maybe no crossover) as opposed to a physical link up.

crocro

Hockney wrote: »

If the Green and Red lines were hypothetically joined up, would it be possible for a green tram to operate on a red line if the need was there?

Trams have in the past been transferred from one line to the other.

Zebra3 wrote: »

When people talk about the Luas lines joing up do they actually mean them physically joining up so the two lines in effect become one huge one?

Most people mean that the two lines should intersect-not that trams should transfer from one line to the other.

Cool Mo D

Hockney wrote: »

So the gauge is identical between Red and Green, but the distance between the track centres is different: is the width of the rails themselves therefore different between red and green lines?



There seems to be a few Urban Myths floating around on this one, so here's a question: If the Green and Red lines were hypothetically joined up, would it be possible for a green tram to operate on a red line if the need was there?

No, both lines are the exact same gauge, and trams from one line can and have run on the other.

There are two types of rail gauge: usually by gauge people mean the gap between the two rails the train runs on. For the Luas, both lines run on international standard gauge rails, unlike the rest of the Irish rail network, which runs on broad gauge rails.

The other gauge people refer to is the loading gauge, which refers to the physical envelope around the track, limiting the size of the train. A larger loading gauge means that taller and wider trains can be run. It is said, and I'm not sure if it's actually true, that the loading gauge on the green line is larger than that of the red line, which would make it possible for trams wider than the current luas models to run on the green line. It is not possible for wider trams to run on the red line.

dowlingm

In theory it would be nice to have Red and Green interlining so you could go from Sandyford to Spencer Dock or Connolly but it would mean the shared track would be a single point of failure. Intersecting is as good as we can hope for, with Green extending into Line D.

D.L.R.

dowlingm wrote: »

In theory it would be nice to have Red and Green interlining so you could go from Sandyford to Spencer Dock or Connolly but it would mean the shared track would be a single point of failure. Intersecting is as good as we can hope for, with Green extending into Line D.

Yes but Dublin's overall rail plan is being built backwards. We are busy extending light rail lines through semi-rural suburbs, while the city centre is still a mess.

There is too much dancing around the real problems and we need to just get the Interconnector built ASAP. The Metro/Luas overlap needs to be reexamined in the meantime because duplicating lines does not represent the best value for money.

Cool Mo D

D.L.R. wrote: »

Yes but Dublin's overall rail plan is being built backwards. We are busy extending light rail lines through semi-rural suburbs, while the city centre is still a mess.

There is too much dancing around the real problems and we need to just get the Interconnector built ASAP. The Metro/Luas overlap needs to be reexamined in the meantime because duplicating lines does not represent the best value for money.

It does provide value in this case however, because it is not practical to use a deep level metro to travel one stop. For passengers from Stephen's Green to O'Connell street, it would likely be as quick to walk to the red line (~15 mins) as transfer to the metro (~5mins, due to the deep level, stairs, and barriers), travel 1 stop (~5 mins, including waiting), and ascend (~5 mins).

Also, the expensive utility diversions for the Luas link will be done anyway for Metro North, so it will be quite cheap, and while the city is dug up, you might as well lay tram tracks across the top of the works site.

The Luas linkup also allows the Luas to be extended out on the existing alignment by Broadstone, and provides a place to terminate the proposed Lucan Luas.

In fact, if serious budget cuts come about, a budget option for Metro North might be to build the Luas to Broombridge as proposed, and extend the Luas to the airport via Finglas village in the dualler median, and above ground form there to the airport, and on to Swords.

Victor

Cool Mo D wrote: »

It does provide value in this case however, because it is not practical to use a deep level metro to travel one stop. For passengers from Stephen's Green to O'Connell street, it would likely be as quick to walk to the red line (~15 mins) as transfer to the metro (~5mins, due to the deep level, stairs, and barriers), travel 1 stop (~5 mins, including waiting), and ascend (~5 mins).

Not quite.

SSG to the platforms is a relatively short journey - 2 minutes. Wait 2 minutes (at peak). Travel 1-2 minutes. Ascend - 3 minutes (exiting is always slower than entering due to surge effect). Thats 6.5 minutes average against your 15. Now, if you are south of SSG, it would make sense to get the Metro, but if you were at the north end of Grafton Street or further north, it would make more sense to walk.

Also, the expensive utility diversions for the Luas link will be done anyway for Metro North, so it will be quite cheap, and while the city is dug up, you might as well lay tram tracks across the top of the works site.

Not quite. Metro North only needs utility diversions in the immediate areas around stations (yes, some strategic diversions will be needed). Luas BXD would need diversions the whole way along the two alignments.

dowlingm

D.L.R. wrote: »

Metro/Luas overlap needs to be reexamined in the meantime because duplicating lines does not represent the best value for money.

All decent size systems have non-revenue tracks (such as Adelaide and Richmond streets here in downtown Toronto's streetcar network). The ability to shuttle trains between yards won't go astray.

Wild Bill

OK?

strassenwolf

Are there any guidelines here about how to post?

(Wild Bill, I do realise that you are new to the board, and the early days on a message board are not easy:)).

I'd like to respond to the comments in your most recent post, but it is difficult to place things in context, given the way in which they have been presented.

It is important to present your views, and my views, in a readable way.