Should the Metrolink project include an upgrade of the Luas Green Line?

marno21 · 30-11-2018 08:31PM

not1but4 wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rethink-metrolink-steps-up-fight-to-retain-green-line-luas-1.3715788

You'd almost think they were all from the same constituency trying to get the metro to their voters. ..Oh wait!

Funny how that article mentions how the line is going to be closed for up to two years (I cannot find anything to back this up) but don't mention how it would double the cost of the construction.

Where were these ***** when the NTA had a public consultation on the GDA Transport Strategy back in 2015?

Kellyconor1982 · 30-11-2018 08:53PM

D.L.R. wrote: »

This is a much more sensible solution than a slow street tram meandering through West Dublin.

Absolutely. Luas style transport is a great addition to a city with top class options. In european cities it works nicely alongside metro systems. We need heavy rail options in all directions of the city. Especially for a heavilly populated area like Lucan where you could also conceivably also have a gigantic park and ride for commuters coming from kildare.

marno21 · 30-11-2018 09:04PM

Kellyconor1982 wrote: »

Absolutely. Luas style transport is a great addition to a city with top class options. In european cities it works nicely alongside metro systems. We need heavy rail options in all directions of the city. Especially for a heavilly populated area like Lucan where you could also conceivably also have a gigantic park and ride for commuters coming from kildare.

Or why not provide good rail into Kildare and save them having to drive at all. After all there is a 4 track railway to Kildare which just needs something to tie into on the Dublin side.

Alkers · 30-11-2018 10:38PM

What will be the operational impact to the green line Luas of the upgrade to metro? I'm hearing rumours (could be ill founded) of a two year period with no Luas running. This would be a complete disaster for the areas on the green line

marno21 · 30-11-2018 10:56PM

Simona1986 wrote: »

What will be the operational impact to the green line Luas of the upgrade to metro? I'm hearing rumours (could be ill founded) of a two year period with no Luas running. This would be a complete disaster for the areas on the green line

I will leave someone else answer the length of time required. However if I lived along the line I could put up with a year's closure in order to have significantly improved capacity post-upgrade.

The NIMBYs and their lovely representatives need to learn the cold, hard reality that they have two choices:

1. A lengthy closure of the line, and alterations at the line crossings at Beechwood, Stillorgan and the pedestrian crossings in exchange for improved capacity, improved frequency, faster journey times to the city centre, direct connections to the DART, 2 heavy rail lines, the Airport and other areas, and faster city centre journey times vs the existing Green Line north of Charlemont.

2. Retain the Luas line as is but face being left on the platform after 2027 when the Luas Green Line reaches capacity especially with significant additions of passengers at Cherrywood.

CatInABox · 30-11-2018 11:10PM

Simona1986 wrote: »

What will be the operational impact to the green line Luas of the upgrade to metro? I'm hearing rumours (could be ill founded) of a two year period with no Luas running. This would be a complete disaster for the areas on the green line

Ah yes, that's the number being thrown around by the likes of Rethink Metrolink. They're taking the length of time that works on the green line will be ongoing and disingenuously saying that it'll be closed that entire time.

To be honest, we don't really know the plans yet, but there's no way that it'll be closed for any length of time. Most likely, there'll be multiple weekends where the Green Line is closed, but I'd say that the majority of the work will take place beside the track during the week, with works that involve the track during the weekend.

Alkers · 01-12-2018 12:40AM

CatInABox wrote:

Ah yes, that's the number being thrown around by the likes of Rethink Metrolink. They're taking the length of time that works on the green line will be ongoing and disingenuously saying that it'll be closed that entire time.

Yes agreed I'm sure that figure isn't realistic, that's why I asked about the likely duration. I know a lot of people in that area who I'd like to inform of the actual likely disruption so this kind of rumour doesn't gain traction.

CatInABox · 01-12-2018 10:16AM

Simona1986 wrote: »

Yes agreed I'm sure that figure isn't realistic, that's why I asked about the likely duration. I know a lot of people in that area who I'd like to inform of the actual likely disruption so this kind of rumour doesn't gain traction.

Until we know the final tie in plans, no one can give an exact figure.

I will say that the NTA know exactly how important the Green Line is, as everyone does, so I can assume that, where possible, they will cater construction os minimise disruption. This could involve building a temporary set of tracks beside the current tracks so that work on the line won't close the Luas.

As Marno said though, this needs to happen regardless. I think that the NTA are optimistic in the figures, and that the Green Line will be at capacity long before 2027. Once overcrowding starts happening, people will be getting the Luas out of town to get the Luas into town, just so they can get on at an earlier station.

cgcsb · 01-12-2018 10:54AM

Simona1986 wrote: »

What will be the operational impact to the green line Luas of the upgrade to metro? I'm hearing rumours (could be ill founded) of a two year period with no Luas running. This would be a complete disaster for the areas on the green line

The tie in works with the luas red-green junction were timetable to take 4 months but were completed in 6 weeks as far as I can remember. In that time trams were terminating in Smithfield. I'd expect something similar for tie in, 2 years is rubbish. After it's complete green line passengers will have much bigger trains, operating at 90 second peak frequency, taking them to the north city centre much faster and to the airport in minutes. Also they'll be able to avail of 24hr service provided by driverless trains. I'd happily get the bus for 6 weeks for that trade off.

Alkers · 01-12-2018 11:46AM

cgcsb wrote:

The tie in works with the luas red-green junction were timetable to take 4 months but were completed in 6 weeks as far as I can remember. In that time trams were terminating in Smithfield. I'd expect something similar for tie in, 2 years is rubbish. After it's complete green line passengers will have much bigger trains, operating at 90 second peak frequency, taking them to the north city centre much faster and to the airport in minutes. Also they'll be able to avail of 24hr service provided by driverless trains. I'd happily get the bus for 6 weeks for that trade off.

Yes I don't think anymore would complain with a six week disruption, but they absolutely would for two years...

Sam Russell · 01-12-2018 12:29PM

What has to be done for the upgrade:

1: St Raephaela's Road needs a bridge to take the Luas/Metrolink over the road. The published plans show a temporary link rail using the existing car park while the bridge is built. That could happen before any work on Metrolink starts as it is needed anyway. The temporary structures could be put in with only one weekends disruption of services.

2: The decision of where exactly the Metrolink will arrive blinking into the daylight. If it is south of Beechwood, then there is no problem with Donore Ave.

3: If high floor vehicles are chosen, then the platforms will need to be raised for the existing GL platforms. The solutions for this could be to have steps in the trains to accommodate both high and low level platforms. Alternatively, temporary structures could be used while permanent structures are put in place. Neither solution would cause any great delay.

4: The actual tie in. Well, that could take a few months, but it would involve a cut of services around Beechwood (if that is the tie location). I think that would not be an excessive time scale to construct. If the priority is to minimise the disruption, then the closure time could be quite short.

Two years is nonsense.

Bray Head · 01-12-2018 12:48PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

3: If high floor vehicles are chosen, then the platforms will need to be raised for the existing GL platforms. The solutions for this could be to have steps in the trains to accommodate both high and low level platforms. Alternatively, temporary structures could be used while permanent structures are put in place. Neither solution would cause any great delay.
.

Modern mobility policy is for entrances flush with the platform.

Steps would be difficult for people with mobility issues. They would also slow everyone down. And they would be a magnet for compensation claims.

This option is a non starter.

Sam Russell · 01-12-2018 12:57PM

Bray Head wrote: »

Modern mobility policy is for entrances flush with the platform.

Steps would be difficult for people with mobility issues. They would also slow everyone down. And they would be a magnet for compensation claims.

This option is a non starter.

Well, yes, I see your point. It is a possible solution, but not if it causes compo. The mobility issue could be dealt with by an elevated section of the platform for the first door of the train. Anyway, it is a possible solution, but the temporary structure solution is probably better.

Bray Head · 01-12-2018 01:21PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

The mobility issue could be dealt with by an elevated section of the platform for the first door of the train.

It's not feasible or practical to insist that people with mobility issues use one door of the carriage. Raised platform sections generate other safety issues too, not least that someone in a wheelchair or a buggy could accidentally roll down and onto the tracks.

Your idea is a complete non starter.

Qrt · 01-12-2018 02:07PM

cgcsb wrote: »

The tie in works with the luas red-green junction were timetable to take 4 months but were completed in 6 weeks as far as I can remember. In that time trams were terminating in Smithfield.

'twas Jervis actually, they put a temporary turnaround on Middle Abbey Street:P

CatInABox · 01-12-2018 04:54PM

Bray Head wrote: »

It's not feasible or practical to insist that people with mobility issues use one door of the carriage. Raised platform sections generate other safety issues too, not least that someone in a wheelchair or a buggy could accidentally roll down and onto the tracks.

Your idea is a complete non starter.

It's not a complete non-starter, most likely they'll raise half the platform before running metro trains, work on the other half, and then swap it around. This isn't a major problem that can't be engineered around.

prunudo · 01-12-2018 06:04PM

I just hope that they are working on their pr and have every eventuality worked out and answers for every possible crank.
They need to have a serious charm offensive to sell this to the locals, luas users and general public.
No point in just having a hand full of boards users thinking its a great idea when everyone else cant see its benefits through the haze of nimby voices.

tom1ie · 01-12-2018 07:01PM

jvan wrote: »

I just hope that they are working on their pr and have every eventuality worked out and answers for every possible crank.
They need to have a serious charm offensive to sell this to the locals, luas users and general public.
No point in just having a hand full of boards users thinking its a great idea when everyone else cant see its benefits through the haze of nimby voices.

Bloody ridiculous that they have to sell anything to anyone.
If the project is crucial to the future growth of this fine city then sorry locals but your not going to be allowed dictate and make yourselves feel important for 15 mins.
That's the way it should work not the nonsense we have now.

Bray Head · 01-12-2018 07:14PM

CatInABox wrote: »

It's not a complete non-starter, most likely they'll raise half the platform before running metro trains, work on the other half, and then swap it around. This isn't a major problem that can't be engineered around.

Perhaps, but the other poster was suggesting platforms at double heights in perpetuity.

As for temporary solutions, I am not sure the footprint is there at stops like Ballaly and Cowper

Sam Russell · 01-12-2018 07:22PM

Bray Head wrote: »

Perhaps, but the other poster was suggesting platforms at double heights in perpetuity.

As for temporary solutions, I am not sure the footprint is there at stops like Ballaly and Cowper

No, all such solutions are pro tem. Once the Metro is running, the full engineering solutions will be put in place asap and any temporary solutions phased out.

prunudo · 01-12-2018 07:52PM

tom1ie wrote: »

Bloody ridiculous that they have to sell anything to anyone.
If the project is crucial to the future growth of this fine city then sorry locals but your not going to be allowed dictate and make yourselves feel important for 15 mins.
That's the way it should work not the nonsense we have now.

I agree but unfortunately thats the way it is. Its becoming common place where important infrastructure projects are being held up. Maybe it was always the way, just seems to be more prevalent lately.
Having a clear fact based pr campaign is important when the consultation process starts again.

marno21 · 01-12-2018 09:59PM

Eamon Ryan now talks of tunnelling to UCD and using the Eastern Bypass land reservation to continue to Sandyford.

At least the suggestions are moving in the right direction of being less idiotic

CatInABox · 01-12-2018 10:24PM

marno21 wrote: »

Eamon Ryan now talks of tunnelling to UCD and using the Eastern Bypass land reservation to continue to Sandyford.

At least the suggestions are moving in the right direction of being less idiotic

Not by much though. UCD is well served by the N11, which has the one well functioning bus corridor in the city. On either side of it is the Dart and the Luas?

It's a bizarre choice of route, the kind that you come up with when your original suggestion has been ridiculed, and you don't want to admit that you were wrong that time.

Still doesn't address the Green Line capacity needs either.

prunudo · 01-12-2018 10:29PM

marno21 wrote: »

Eamon Ryan now talks of tunnelling to UCD and using the Eastern Bypass land reservation to continue to Sandyford.

At least the suggestions are moving in the right direction of being less idiotic

Why sacrifice that parcel of land when by upgrading the greenline you are optimising its use and future proofing it. Surely it be better to keep the eastern bypass land for the eastern bypass or a totally seperate project.

And surely this short sightness is what happened with them not being able to put a station under Stephens Green west.

marno21 · 01-12-2018 10:30PM

CatInABox wrote: »

Not by much though. UCD is well served by the N11, which has the one well functioning bus corridor in the city. On either side of it is the Dart and the Luas?

It's a bizarre choice of route, the kind that you come up with when your original suggestion has been ridiculed, and you don't want to admit that you were wrong that time.

Still doesn't address the Green Line capacity needs either.

I agree with everything you say there and I still believe this UCD plan is better than routing it SW then looping back around via Milltown and onto Booterstown. They're both idiotic but I think the new one is less idiotic, but still idiotic.

Dats me · 01-12-2018 10:40PM

marno21 wrote: »

I agree with everything you say there and I still believe this UCD plan is better than routing it SW then looping back around via Milltown and onto Booterstown. They're both idiotic but I think the new one is less idiotic, but still idiotic.

He's also suggesting routing it underground along a protected parcel of land for a road project, surely the Green Party would see A) Building the metro and

using up a corridor that would become a motorway as a win-win if it was really a serious suggestion.

He said in his Dáil speech that this would take pressure off the Green line, and that it could loop back around to Sandyford. Could it take pressure off the line while serving new areas? If it could be built overground would it be a reasonable solution at reasonable cost?

CatInABox · 01-12-2018 11:29PM

Dats me wrote: »

He's also suggesting routing it underground along a protected parcel of land for a road project, surely the Green Party would see A) Building the metro and using up a corridor that would become a motorway as a win-win if it was really a serious suggestion.

The problem with suggesting building the Metro at ground level is that he'd lose votes. That's why he's creating this fuss in the first place, he just wants to be seen as "doing something, anything". If he thought that this was a good idea, he'd contact the NTA or TII about it, not stand up in the Dail with crayons in his hand.

Dats me wrote: »

He said in his Dáil speech that this would take pressure off the Green line, and that it could loop back around to Sandyford. Could it take pressure off the line while serving new areas? If it could be built overground would it be a reasonable solution at reasonable cost?

The new areas that it'd serve are already pretty well served between Dart, Bus and Luas. There may be a reduction on the Green Line, but I wouldn't say it'd be massive. Sandyford station would be a lot more complicated, as instead of being inline interchange, it'd need to be a full interchange.

Bray Head · 02-12-2018 09:03AM

UCD is already well connected to the CC by bus.

It needs better connection to the west of the city - and that is what Bus Connects will hopefully achieve.

Ryan's Plan (Part deux) would be needless duplication.

Lord Glentoran · 02-12-2018 11:47AM

Bray Head wrote: »

UCD is already well connected to the CC by bus.

It needs better connection to the west of the city - and that is what Bus Connects will hopefully achieve.

Ryan's Plan (Part deux) would be needless duplication.

Is UCD to City Centre and the reverse by bus free of traffic disruption at all times? Genuine question.

Bray Head · 02-12-2018 12:02PM

Lord Glentoran wrote: »

Is UCD to City Centre and the reverse by bus free of traffic disruption at all times? Genuine question.

No. But it is very good bus lane all the way, frequent service, and doesn't suffer from overly frequent stopping.

Should the Metrolink project include an upgrade of the Luas Green Line?

Comments