Luas Finglas

Also there'll be fewer people switching at Broombridge once the connection with Metro is built at Glasnevin

Fantastic news. Has properly pissed off the NIMBYs which is the cherry on top.

densification wrote: »

Interesting to see Nimbys decry lack of transport when it will be right next to Finglas Luas (Green Line) and is on loads of BusConnects routes including F1 which will bypass Finglas village like the 140 does today giving an almost express route (at least by a Dublin bus standard). Also will be a short bus ride or cycle from Ballymun metro station.

They will have ignored the reality of the proposal as usual. On the Journal they're trotting out the "the traffic is bad enough already" and "there's no infrastructure for these people" lines. Meanwhile on the next article, decrying the lack of affordable housing...

Anything to protect the status quo of higher prices for me and lower prices for other people.... somewhere else.

donvito99 wrote: »

Anything to protect the status quo of higher prices for me and lower prices for other people.... somewhere else.

I’m not sure many of them are concerned about house prices at all. They fear change, they fear that new people will change their neighbourhood, they fear extra traffic. A lot of it comes from listening to politicians and activists who tell them how bad it will be if anything gets built near them. A cranky neighbour of mine just straight up hates apartments. No reason really, they’re just horrible places.

There’s no fixing these people. They need to be ignored in the interests of the greater good. We live in a republican democracy, we can do that, our elected representatives just need the balls.

densification wrote: »

Do they realise that Building high density housing massively strengthens the case for infrastructure? Between the charlestown car park and this industrial estate there’ll be an extra 2700 households on the line.

They also used the “schools are full” line when there’ll be a school built on this site ...

To be fair, our history with this is really poor. It’s not even that we built infrastructure after the houses are built - we have a history of building it many years later or not at all. There is a shortage of school spaces in several parts of Dublin, it’s been that way for years and the increased supply is only slowly coming now. Our history of transport infrastructure building is even worse. I can totally understand peoples scepticism when it comes to this.

Peregrine wrote: »

They're also opposing 400 apartments on this brownfield site 1km away from the Luas stop.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/wnXQQEhAeaV9P7ct8

The area around Charlestown will be one of the highest density areas outside the Canals at this rate. The population density map from this is a few years old and the has been a lot of development there lately. https://busconnects.ie/media/1783/fullreport_chapter_3.pdf

I’d love to see the theoretical Metro West have stations inside the M50 such as Charlestown-Hampton Wood-Northwood.
Having them outside the M50 would be a nightmare for walkability imo.

Anyone know where the site is that they now intend for the Luas terminus. Says it is not in front of Charlestwon shopping centre but somewhere to the east of it but also inside the m50.

I still think they are making a mistake not putting it outside the M50 and beside the M2 with a park and ride. I was in Charlestown last week and traffic is as bad as ever. Whats worse they have reduced the traffic light sequencing drastically on the road to get from the shopping centre to turn right to the M50/M2 junction. It used to allow about 12-15 cars out, now it is 4 or 5 at best. Was stuck there in a jam for almost 12 minutes just to get through one set of lights. It would have been quicker to turn left and go all the way down to the roundabout at Lidl and back up the road again, which I'll do in future. So when the Luas does come to Charlestown no-one on the M2 corridor commuting into Dublin is going to use it because the traffic to get in and out of there is just too heavy, you would waste a chunk of time sitting in it to then transfer to a Luas and the same on the way home.

I think it will be a wasted opportunity by not locating it outside the M50, it will limit passengers to those who live in the area only rather than take city bound cars off the road. If there is ever a congestion charge to get into the city there needs to be viable park and ride alternatives. Whereas with this you would either pay the congestion charge and keep driving or not pay it and end up sitting in traffic congestion in Charlestown, it would become a running joke.

Yeah but Ashbourne is a growing town plus there is a ton of land between there and Finglas which has good motorway and airport connectivity and will have housing on it eventually. A park and ride outside the M50 would at least be future proofing it as an alternative to cars going into the city centre.

Will be interesting to see where they now put the terminus if its not going outside the front of Charlestown SC as per the previous plan. If the line lurches to the east of there then the opportunity for P&R outside the M50 and next to the M2 is essentiallly gone unless they later created a spur heading off to it.

ah right then I suppose that will just be a terminus with a platform, two tracks and little else. Presumably there is already enough storage for any extra trams at the Broombridge site so they dont need a big amount of space for the Finglas terminus.

Muahahaha wrote: »

Anyone know where the site is that they now intend for the Luas terminus. Says it is not in front of Charlestwon shopping centre but somewhere to the east of it but also inside the m50.

I still think they are making a mistake not putting it outside the M50 and beside the M2 with a park and ride. I was in Charlestown last week and traffic is as bad as ever. Whats worse they have reduced the traffic light sequencing drastically on the road to get from the shopping centre to turn right to the M50/M2 junction. It used to allow about 12-15 cars out, now it is 4 or 5 at best. Was stuck there in a jam for almost 12 minutes just to get through one set of lights. It would have been quicker to turn left and go all the way down to the roundabout at Lidl and back up the road again, which I'll do in future. So when the Luas does come to Charlestown no-one on the M2 corridor commuting into Dublin is going to use it because the traffic to get in and out of there is just too heavy, you would waste a chunk of time sitting in it to then transfer to a Luas and the same on the way home.

I think it will be a wasted opportunity by not locating it outside the M50, it will limit passengers to those who live in the area only rather than take city bound cars off the road. If there is ever a congestion charge to get into the city there needs to be viable park and ride alternatives. Whereas with this you would either pay the congestion charge and keep driving or not pay it and end up sitting in traffic congestion in Charlestown, it would become a running joke.

Truth is P&R is a bit of a sop to the car industry. Existing P&R stops have typically much lower usage than normal stops. This isn't unique to Dublin either, that's generally how it is across Europe. P&R was to be the USA's solution to all congestion woes but in reality once you are I your car, not much can get you out and building these sites tends to promote unsustainable commuting and development.

In reality more people will walk and cycle to this stop than drive to it.

cgcsb wrote: »

Truth is P&R is a bit of a sop to the car industry. Existing P&R stops have typically much lower usage than normal stops. This isn't unique to Dublin either, that's generally how it is across Europe. P&R was to be the USA's solution to all congestion woes but in reality once you are I your car, not much can get you out and building these sites tends to promote unsustainable commuting and development.

In reality more people will walk and cycle to this stop than drive to it.

+1

TfL have a policy of rejecting any calls for new P&R sites. They take up enormous amounts of land, generate traffic jams on local/access roads in the mornings and internal traffic jams in the evenings and usually drivers have to pay twice, once for the parking and a second time for the transport. This is fine in London because the alternative means paying the congestion charge (or whatever it's called today). Lastly and maybe most importantly, they're usually completely empty in the evening and at weekends, compounding the waste of space.

This is worth reading: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/car-park-usage-at-london-underground-report.pdf

cgcsb wrote: »

Truth is P&R is a bit of a sop to the car industry. Existing P&R stops have typically much lower usage than normal stops. This isn't unique to Dublin either, that's generally how it is across Europe. P&R was to be the USA's solution to all congestion woes but in reality once you are I your car, not much can get you out and building these sites tends to promote unsustainable commuting and development.

In reality more people will walk and cycle to this stop than drive to it.

While I agree in principle, the N2 between the M50 and the city centre is surely one of the most congested routes into the city. It's generally awful all the way from Tesco Clearwater to the Quays, a solid 5km. That journey can often be nearly an hour long at peak times, and it's very unpredictable. Luas Finglas could do that journey in 30 minutes, with no unpredictability.

It's very much worth putting a P+R here imo, but outside of the M50 where there's unlikely to be any other development.

Sam Russell wrote: »

That is an average of 10 km/hr. Is that how slow the Luas is?

A bike can do 5 km in 15 mins.

Bikes have a tremendous advantage in usually only having one passenger who gets on and stays on for the duration on the journey.

cgcsb wrote: »

Truth is P&R is a bit of a sop to the car industry. Existing P&R stops have typically much lower usage than normal stops. This isn't unique to Dublin either, that's generally how it is across Europe. P&R was to be the USA's solution to all congestion woes but in reality once you are I your car, not much can get you out and building these sites tends to promote unsustainable commuting and development.

In reality more people will walk and cycle to this stop than drive to it.

I agree with everything you said, have passed the M3 park and ride a few times and the place is like a ghost town.

But I would have thought that in order to have less cars going into the city centre a carrot and stick approach is needed with P&R and a congestion charge inside the canals. People in cars have shown a remarkable ability to sit in slow moving traffic so the sheer congestion isnt making them consider alternatives.

Maybe there will never be a congestion charge in future but without one its hard to see how people are going to be incentivised to not drive into or through the city centre. We could have BusConnects, Metro, etc fully built out but many people will still insist on driving. If there were to be a congestion charge to solve that then there would have to be alternatives to help people avoid it, especially those coming from commuter towns further out.

Muahahaha wrote: »

Maybe there will never be a congestion charge in future but without one its hard to see how people are going to be incentivised to not drive into or through the city centre. We could have BusConnects, Metro, etc fully built out but many people will still insist on driving. If there were to be a congestion charge to solve that then there would have to be alternatives to help people avoid it, especially those coming from commuter towns further out.

They need to make public transport cheaper in general, tax saver tickets/ full season tickets don't work for everyone at all. Another thing that could be done is focus car related costs to distance travelled rather than annual costs, don't penalise owning a car, penalise using it everyday