Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Luas Finglas

1…78101213…23

Comments

  • #272
    Alvin Holler
    Registered Users Posts: 383 ✭✭Alvin Holler


    Not all trams that cross o'Connell bridge go to broombridge currently. Not sure what the ratio is but some turn around at the top of o'Connell st.
    That's a lot of capacity available without adding additional trams.


  • #273
    piuswal
    Registered Users Posts: 1,785 ✭✭✭piuswal


    MJohnston wrote: »
    I don't think you're envisioning this correctly. O'Connell Bridge doesn't have to see any additional tram frequency for the Finglas extension to exist. There will be more trams on the line, but the line will also be longer, so the frequency at any one place will likely remain the same.

    That said, even if frequency needed to increase, it shouldn't be prevented just because motorists are inconvenienced.

    While agreeing with your second paragraph, are you sure about the second line of the first one? Surely the length is irrelevant,it is the number of trams moving its length that determine the frequency at any point?


  • #274
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,222 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    piuswal wrote: »
    While agreeing with your second paragraph, are you sure about the second line of the first one? Surely the length is irrelevant,it is the number of trams moving its length that determine the frequency at any point?

    It all plays into it, you can't really take one in isolation.

    Let's say, for ease of use, that a line was 60k in length, with a single tram taking 1 hour to go from one end to the other. With 6 trams, you have a frequency of ten minutes.

    Now double the length to 120k, with a single tram taking 2 hours to go the length. In order to maintain an even frequency, you now run your 6 trams every 20 minutes, otherwise you'll have 6 trams going one direction, and nothing going the other way for well over an hour, and then the other direction will have no service.

    Increasing the number of trams will obviously solve this problem, i.e. 12 trams will bring you back to a ten minute frequency; however, if you pick a single point on the line and count the trams per hour going past, you wouldn't see a difference between the 60k/6 trams line, and the 120k/12 trams an hour line.


  • #275
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,222 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    paulbok wrote: »
    There is only one tight point just after Aldi with residential houses one side and a takeaway the other before opening up again all the way to the terminus.

    Looks like they're just taking the car parking spaces from the front and moving it around to the back of those four houses.
    paulbok wrote: »
    How they traverse from Cappagh Rd to Mellowes Rd and park might be more controversial when the time comes as it looks to follow Mellowes crescent, an estate Rd so will have to share road space as no real scope to widen.

    Looks like there's enough room there, only one garden going to suffer a CPO, and even then it's probably less than a metre squared. The rest of the time it looks to be running on what is currently grass strips.


  • #276
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,846 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Is there any plans for a bus service from Charlestown to the airport?


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,480 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    Not really likely to see any bus service plans for a long time when the Luas line is still 11 years away.


  • #278
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,535 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    MJohnston wrote: »
    Not really likely to see any bus service plans for a long time when the Luas line is still 11 years away.

    The 8 is part of Busconnects and will link the two.


  • #279
    annfield1978
    Registered Users Posts: 564 ✭✭✭annfield1978


    Tenders for planning stage of this go in at end of August


  • #280
    Kevtherev1
    Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭Kevtherev1


    annfield1978 wrote: »
    Tenders for planning stage of this go in at end of August


    Poorly worded, can please be more specific and clearer to what you mean.

    Do you mean tender is going out to hire engineer consultants to do detailed design of emerging route. Or something else and where is the source


  • #281
    Shedite27
    Registered Users Posts: 9,355 ✭✭✭Shedite27


    Kevtherev1 wrote: »
    Poorly worded, can please be more specific and clearer to what you mean.

    Do you mean tender is going out to hire engineer consultants to do detailed design of emerging route. Or something else and where is the source
    Ironic post


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    Kevtherev1
    Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭Kevtherev1


    Found a short youtube video by shannon images limited. On the extending of the 26 green line luas trams to 55 meters by January 2021.


    The video link is here to view.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm_CBTGU-bk


  • #283
    petronius
    Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭petronius


    extending the finglas luas from charelsetown to the airport bridging the m50 seems on a map to be viable.
    Maybe a bit of a roundabout way to get to the terminal but surely in the scheme of things not that expensive
    and could be an alternative while the MetroNorth/Link is being deferred again and again


  • #284
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,328 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    petronius wrote: »
    extending the finglas luas from charelsetown to the airport bridging the m50 seems on a map to be viable.
    Maybe a bit of a roundabout way to get to the terminal but surely in the scheme of things not that expensive
    and could be an alternative while the MetroNorth/Link is being deferred again and again

    The Finglas extension to the airport would suit a number of people. Not everyone wants to go to the city centre.


  • #285
    AngryLips
    Registered Users Posts: 2,676 ✭✭✭AngryLips


    Well it would be well placed for a future terminal 3 perhaps if it goes the other side of the airport...


  • #286
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,436 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    I'd want to see MetroLink built first, or at least started digging.

    While extending the Luas to Finglas would certainly be useful for some people to get to the Airport. It would certainly not serve the VAST majority of Metrolink users.

    The danger of extending Luas to the Airport first, is that it would give an excuse to crappy politicians to scrap the desperately needed Metrolink.


  • #287
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,040 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    bk wrote: »
    I'd want to see MetroLink built first, or at least started digging.

    While extending the Luas to Finglas would certainly be useful for some people to get to the Airport. It would certainly not serve the VAST majority of Metrolink users.

    The danger of extending Luas to the Airport first, is that it would give an excuse to crappy politicians to scrap the desperately needed Metrolink.

    100% this. You can practically hear them shouting 'We shouldn't be wasting billions on a rail link to the airport when the luas already goes there'. It would doom Metrolink.


  • #288
    Pete_Cavan
    Registered Users Posts: 6,693 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Yes Metrolink is the priority and should be operational before Green Line extension to Finglas. With Metrolink in place, a further Green Line extension to the airport is really just a direct airport link for the people of Finglas. Anyone else will take Metro directly or switch to it. Finglas will have good interchange options for Metrolink anyway, lots of buses passing Glasnevin station, bus to Metro station at Collins Ave, Luas to BB + DART to Glasnevin. We have lots of other pt projects which should be higher on the priorities list than Luas from Finglas to the airport.


  • #289
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users Posts: 19,609 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Ive always thought it should eventually go in to the airport. If there were to be a P&R just north of the M50N2 junction then from that point the airport is only about 3kms away and theres an easy route there running in a straight line parallel with the runway towards the terminal buildings.

    But it shouldnt be done as a main link, rather to supplement Metrolink itself. Metrolink needs to be built not only for the airport traffic but also for Swords itself which is now Irelands fastest growing town with a population of 35,000+ that is growing even further. But would agree with bk that if the Luas went into the airport now it would give the politicians an 'out' on Metrolink altogether.

    Theres no way a Luas could handle the volume of demand from the airport anyway with some 30 million passengers a year normally going through there. If the Finglas Luas were the only rail link it would be packed on departure at the terminal and no-one else would be able to get on it along the route, especually not with tourists wheeling suit cases. Heavy rail like a Metro is the only solution for that kind of demand.


  • #290
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Finglas Luas shouldn't go to the Airport , link with ML north of Ballymun. A 6 km extension across green fields makes no sense


  • #291
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,516 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Finglas Luas shouldn't go to the Airport , link with ML north of Ballymun. A 6 km extension across green fields makes no sense

    It does if you hope to get some "reward" from the green fields.


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,503 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Terminal 3 is never, ever, ever happening and the McEvaddys are unlikely to ever sell for another use as they convinced it is. So there's nothing to use those for.

    Once there's the ability to link to ML at Ballymun, that is sufficient.


  • #293
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    GerardKeating wrote: »
    It does if you hope to get some "reward" from the green fields.

    Most of the fields are in the airport exclusion zone , I believe


  • #294
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,480 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Finglas Luas shouldn't go to the Airport , link with ML north of Ballymun. A 6 km extension across green fields makes no sense

    Agree with this very much. You can't build on most of those green fields, as you say, because of the airport (of course, I suppose those rules could change at some point), and there's no real reason to go any further than Ballymun with the Luas.


  • #295
    Peregrine
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    The deadline for submissions is 5pm today.
    https://www.luasfinglas.ie/#/haveyoursay


  • #296
    specialbyte
    Registered Users Posts: 230 ✭✭specialbyte


    I've seen a few submission go up online.

    Dublin Commuter Coalition (https://t.co/VLGW0N55Io?amp=1) want to see the line extended via IKEA to meet the Northwoods MetroLink stop and better links to Finglas village, among other things.

    The Dublin Cycling Campaign want to see the cycle route be safe for people of all ages and all abilities and good cycle parking at all Luas stops. They also have concerns about the P&R being inside the M50, as that will bring hundreds of cars into the future residential area at Charlestown. (https://www.dublincycling.com/cycling/submission-finglas-luas-extension)


  • #297
    riddlinrussell
    Registered Users Posts: 974 ✭✭✭riddlinrussell


    specialbyte wrote: »
    I've seen a few submission go up online.

    Dublin Commuter Coalition (https://t.co/VLGW0N55Io?amp=1) want to see the line extended via IKEA to meet the Northwoods Luas stop and better links to Finglas village, among other things.

    The Dublin Cycling Campaign want to see the cycle route be safe for people of all ages and all abilities and good cycle parking at all Luas stops. They also have concerns about the P&R being inside the M50, as that will bring hundreds of cars into the future residential area at Charlestown. (https://www.dublincycling.com/cycling/submission-finglas-luas-extension)

    I hope the P+R suggestions are taken seriously, it is total madness to have it inside the m50, fighting for space when there's green fields minutes away, the additional cost of an M50 bridge I feel would be well worth it.


  • #298
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,570 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I would presume the planners have taught about this but Pre Covid The Luas stop at brombridge would be packed at peak times with the commuter trains letting off large volumes of people .

    When you look at the amount of apartments going up in Charlestown and potentially more along the route in order not to have the trams over capacity straight away i wonder should they consider not having a park & ride in Charlestown to deter extra people from using it and having it mainly as a public transport for people living along the route and commuters using other public transport to get there .

    As unless trams are going to leave every minute by the time it gets in to brombridge there wont be room for anyone else.


  • #299
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,535 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    roadmaster wrote: »
    I would presume the planners have taught about this but Pre Covid The Luas stop at brombridge would be packed at peak times with the commuter trains letting off large volumes of people .

    When you look at the amount of apartments going up in Charlestown and potentially more along the route in order not to have the trams over capacity straight away i wonder should they consider not having a park & ride in Charlestown to deter extra people from using it and having it mainly as a public transport for people living along the route and commuters using other public transport to get there .

    As unless trams are going to leave every minute by the time it gets in to brombridge there wont be room for anyone else.

    You have to remember that under the current timetable, a maximum of 50% of trams are going to/from Broombridge - the rest turn at Parnell, so plenty of scope for extra services on the northern branch.

    There’s also nothing to stop a turnback facility being created at Broombridge in the future to allow for trams to start there rather than Finglas and slot in like the starters at Sandyford do on the southside.


  • #300
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,535 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Also remember that the 26 existing trams will very shortly all have been extended from 43m to 55m thereby increasing capacity even further.

    There’s plenty of scope for capacity increases on the north side.


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,570 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    You have to remember that under the current timetable, a maximum of 50% of trams are going to/from Broombridge - the rest turn at Parnell, so plenty of scope for extra services on the northern branch.

    There’s also nothing to stop a turnback facility being created at Broombridge in the future to allow for trams to start there rather than Finglas and slot in like the starters at Sandyford do on the southside.

    Fair enough , i was just in Charlestown on Friday and was looking at all the apartments going up and then i believe there is developers trying to rezone the industrial units as you go in to the city beside the circle K along with the industrial units across from brombridge to residential in the long term . But from your saying with longer trams etc capacity shouldn't be an issue


Advertisement