lucernarian wrote: » The on-ground transportation in Dublin is going to suffer more and more thanks to the Luas especially, and the increased economic activity in the city centre.
monument wrote: » This is isn’t true — car priority is going to suffer but ground transport, in terms of bus and trams are going to be able carry more people.
lucernarian wrote: » I highly doubt that, regarding buses. Until I can take a tram to Coolock, Crumlin, Templeogue etc., there will be lots of bus transport used to go from the city centre to the suburbs. I do get that if private cars could be completely banned then it would give buses more on the remaining road space, but increasingly I see large numbers of taxis and it would take a brave politician to finally clamp down on taxis using any bus lane.
LXFlyer wrote: » Whatever about capacity, from my observations, bus journeys in south Dublin are taking longer as a result of traffic diverting away from the Quays. Journey times are getting longer than I have ever noticed before at peak times, and with little scope for road widening (despite what the NTA claim about continuous bus lanes in their plans), I don't see how they're going to improve.
marno21 wrote: » Yes, but in the case of trams especially, the drivers of the cars are affected as only a small portion of the drivers will benefit from the new Luas opening. Needs more than the BXD carrot to encourage these drivers off the roads. No point in a stick without an alternative.
monument wrote: » I said buses too. The taxi argument might hold some water but not half as much as people seem to think. Little scope for road widening but still ton of scope for relocation of priority (relocation of existing space and time). There’s a few points on capacity vs speed — there’s a lot more to do, capacity is overall more important, and speed is relative, and you have to look at the whole network, and not just some routes. There’s no mistake that these are big changes and such will make some ripples which will need to settle down and the leftover issues fixed. More buses on the way, priority on the quays for existing buses, the Phoenix Park Tunnel now in use, hopefully sometime soon 10 minute Darts etc
monument wrote: » I said buses too. The taxi argument might hold some water but not half as much as people seem to think.
MJohnston wrote: » I think the new BusConnects network review might lean in favour of utilising the Luas network to distribute passengers cross city, rather than attempting to have the buses themselves make that trip. Ultimately I think that's one of the only workable solutions to congestion heading towards the city centre. Simplified ticketing will obviously need to be part of this.
LXFlyer wrote: » Not so sure I share your confidence Monument especially in the central south part of the city - most roads simply aren't wide enough for more than three lanes which means there are limits to what priority can be and the notion of CPOing everything in sight is frankly fantasy. Speed is relative, but with respect Monument if virtually every route in the south central section of the city is now taking longer, with little scope for additional priority, then we have a big problem.
LXFlyer wrote: » While the Quays undoubtedly have improved and I very much welcome that, we are now facing a situation where the delays have now shifted further out from the city onto roads where it's going to be much more difficult to implement additional priority.
antoinolachtnai wrote: » Speed and capacity are directly linked. 10 percent more speed will increase capacity by 10 percent, and opposite is true too. The best way to fix the bus problem it seems to me is to reconfigure cross city bus routes so that each route crosses the Luas in only one place. Ultimately we are running out of road space. There are only a limited number of north-south lanes and BXD has reduced this number considerably.
lucernarian wrote: » The reasons you've given so far in thinking that bus capacity will improve, haven't convinced me at all. The only avenue I saw was doing something about throngs of taxis, and if that won't do much then I don't see alternatives to creating more space for buses on streets, even by a blanket ban on private motorists. I'm aware you said buses, I'm able to read that for myself, but we have already seen the impact on Dublin Bus since the works began in earnest.
lucernarian wrote: » Dublin Bus have had to allocate new drivers and vehicles to routes like the 46A so that the existing frequency of buses could be maintained. Not only does it show that running times increased directly because of Luas BXD and in spite of mitigating actions, but that there is an opportunity cost for improving other kinds of route (orbital) etc as the core bus routes are fundamental revenue generators and pax carriers and need to be supported instead.
lucernarian wrote: » There's far more to the 46A route than the NCR? What about Parnell Square? O'Connell Street? Dawson Street?
LXFlyer wrote: » Some of the pressure should come off the 46a when the route changes happen on Sunday 1st October - but you are right, many routes have had to have their Peak Vehicle Requirement (PVR) increased just to maintain the existing schedules despite mitigating measures. The opportunity cost of this has been that scope for expanding schedules during the LUAS construction period has been very limited. The changes on the Quays will improve some routes, especially those from the Navan and Lucan Roads, but others are now suffering - especially anything serving the SCR or Rathmines which are encountering the increased congestion in those areas as traffic shifts around.
Sam Russell wrote: » The Luas Xcity is not taking passengers yet. Maybe when the trams are full, maybe things will ease.
Deedsie wrote: » The luas cross city will hopefully discourage people from driving into the city centre. They may move to the bus or cycle to avoid the increased traffic congestion.
Deedsie wrote: » Even further dealys getting to work. More expense. DCC have finally prioritised Public and active transport on the quays to facilitate the luas project and improve the bus network. More buses coming, more efficiency. Why wouldnt at least some of them change?
donvito99 wrote: » Seeing as DU seems to be very much on the back burner for cost reasons above all else, forgive me a few questions;
donvito99 wrote: » - Why the station at Christchurch? Is DU not about connecting the existing infrastructure and allowing people to get into the city and/or change onto another mode quickly and easily? Why try to do what metro/light rail does better?
donvito99 wrote: » - Why the SSG -> Pearse alignment? With Luas Green Line now reaching the O'CS/Tara Street area, why not dig a station box between O'Connell Bridge and Butt Bridge? Both future Dart lines, both Luas lines and a future Metro North are all right there, requiring just one change for all modes. That would truly be An Lár. Now that all presumes that digging up rivers is easier/less costly than digging up SSG.
strassenwo!f wrote: » donvito99 wrote: » Seeing as DU seems to be very much on the back burner for cost reasons above all else, forgive me a few questions; Cost is certainly one of the reasons. But the earlier version of this proposed underground east-west rail route didn't have anything like the route proposed in the time after the LUAS was to be terminated at St. Stephen's Green. The earlier route was much straighter. Now that the LUAS penetrates much deeper into the city, the circuitous route via St. Stephen's Green becomes harder to justify. donvito99 wrote: » - Why the station at Christchurch? Is DU not about connecting the existing infrastructure and allowing people to get into the city and/or change onto another mode quickly and easily? Why try to do what metro/light rail does better? I think the station at Christchurch makes a lot of sense, as a reasonably busy location somewhere about halfway between a station location on the St. Stephen's Green-Parnell Monument axis and the proposed station at Heuston. It would be a very long gap on the route without it. While you are quite correct that one of the (two) objectives of the DART Underground project was to integrate all rail-based transport in the city, I think it is unlikely that Dublin is going to do that and then stop. It seems probable to me that the success of the initial metro and the DART Underground project, if they happen, will lead to calls for a similar level of service in other areas of the city. I have stated before on this board that it is thus likely that we will eventually see a second metro line in Dublin, and that this is where a Christchurch station could eventually play another role. donvito99 wrote: » - Why the SSG -> Pearse alignment? With Luas Green Line now reaching the O'CS/Tara Street area, why not dig a station box between O'Connell Bridge and Butt Bridge? Both future Dart lines, both Luas lines and a future Metro North are all right there, requiring just one change for all modes. That would truly be An Lár. Now that all presumes that digging up rivers is easier/less costly than digging up SSG. I doubt if it's easier, or less costly, to do that. St. Stephen's Green would be a relative doddle, and surely much cheaper, than trying to build a station under the river in the location you suggest. But where St. Stephen's Green falls down is that it is a compromised location, beside a 22-acre park with no commuters, with another 8/9-acre park (The Iveagh Gardens) almost adjacent, also with no commuters. And getting to St. Stephen's Green would be a longer route, so there would be extra tunnelling expense. It would have very poor passenger uptake from one side of the line for much of the day, and almost none at weekends. While your river suggestion would not be compromised by the passenger uptake problems of St. Stephen's Green, being right in the centre of the city and surrounded on all sides by potential passengers, it would be a much more difficult project.
antoinolachtnai wrote: » Difficult, but I'd say Liberties or St Patrick's Cathedral, meet the Luas at St James's and link with Heuston rail services on a platform under the west end of Heuston station.
antoinolachtnai wrote: » The business case indicates that as designed DART Underground would bring 38 million people onto DART/suburban rail per year 15 years after completion. It would attract 36 million of these people from DART and Dublin Bus. It is unbelievable how far the project travelled with such weak justification. The report summarises the transport modelling as follows: "As would be expected, there is a substantial increase (of around 55%) in DART demand. Most of this is a result of mode shift from suburban rail, Luas and bus. There is also a small amount of public transport trip generation (around 1-1.5%)." I think DU needed some significant reengineering to make it really work. The frequency of services needs to be a lot higher and to make this work, the line needs to have linkage with more heavily populated areas, i.e, with the western line, as well as or instead of the Northern Line.. The service also needs to overlap less with Luas, i.e., Christchurch station should be replaced with a station a lot further south.
lucernarian wrote: » I don't know what extra "linkage" you could envisage, short of relocating the existing rail network. But the 1.5% figure seems quite pessimistic. The frequency of trains would be doubled compared to now, closer to 6x the amount on the Western Commuter line. The commuter services towards Newbridge would serve areas poorly served by Dublin bus or not served by them at all. Is there a chance they also took modal share for hypothetical luas lines into account? Ones that would be expected to open at the time of the Dart Underground, like the Lucan luas?
