nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Dublin Metrolink - future routes for next Metrolink

strassenwo!f

marno21 wrote: »

You are talking approx 1bn extra to do Charlemont-Firhouse. The money isn't there no matter how many times its said Dublin SW needs a Metro line, nor is it policy to build a Metro to SW Dublin before 2035.

No further talk of a SW Dublin line in this thread unless concrete evidence of it being considered comes about. A new thread is the place for this discussion. Anyone with sufficient interest is free to start one.

Thank you, marno21, for your post on p421 of the 'Dublin Metrolink' thread. I would like to do that.

I am from Dublin, and I visit the city regularly, but I live elsewhere. As I have said on other threads, I don't feel it would be appropriate for me to make any submission about this project, as I don't have to pay for the project and I don't have to live with the consequences.

I see some things which may be flawed with this current proposal for a metro line in Dublin.

Firstly, on the northside of the city. I am concerned that this proposed metro, which comes very close to the LUAS Green line at Phibsborough, will cannabilise the catchment of the Green line in that area. after a lot of investment, for no obvious benefit.

Building the interchange at Drumcondra would remove or reduce any cannabilising of the Green LUAS line, and would also give the northside a nice separation of three corridors in/out of the city between the Northside DART, the Metrolink and the LUAS Green line.

I saw this post, in relation to this point:

Dats me wrote:

Strassenwolf, if you care about interchange, which in the light of deprioritisation of DART Underground you really should, then Whitworth is clearly the superior option.

The fact that building a station between the two lines at Drumcondra and having a five minute walk at either end to the two rail lines is possible doesn't mean they're equally good options.

If you think a slightly shorter route would reduce cost, surely having a huge mined station at Drumcondra with tunneled links to both rail lines would massively increase cost? If you don't have these links to the lines, then it's not really a proper interchange.

Not to mention the disruption that would be caused by trying to create Drumcondra as an interchange. The disruption has been the main problem with the Whitworth alignment, surely this massive mined station trying to link two rail lines a kilometre apart would cause absolute uproar.

Whitworth is an incredible idea as regards interchange and it's vital to the whole alignment, from the poster [/Q]Dats me[q]:

Strassenwolf, if you care about interchange, which in the light of deprioritisation of DART Underground you really should, then Whitworth is clearly the superior option.

The fact that building a station between the two lines at Drumcondra and having a five minute walk at either end to the two rail lines is possible doesn't mean they're equally good options.

If you think a slightly shorter route would reduce cost, surely having a huge mined station at Drumcondra with tunneled links to both rail lines would massively increase cost? If you don't have these links to the lines, then it's not really a proper interchange.

Not to mention the disruption that would be caused by trying to create Drumcondra as an interchange. The disruption has been the main problem with the Whitworth alignment, surely this massive mined station trying to link two rail lines a kilometre apart would cause absolute uproar.

Whitworth is an incredible idea as regards interchange and it's vital to the whole alignment.

I looked again at google maps this morning, and it's not 1 kilometre which separates these two lines. It's about 130 metres. It should hardly be difficult to arrange a connection between the underground metro and the overground Maynooth line at one end and the PPT line, in a burrow, at the other.

There are obviously issues with the houses in the area, but I think it would be well worth looking at the costs involved, given the investment which has gone into the Green line on the Northside, and the long-term advantages of a good separation between the northside DART, the Metrolink and the LUAS Green line.

With regard to the city centre we will have to wait for the report from the consultants about the DART Underground project.. It was, as I understood it, supposed to have been delivered last year, but we are still waiting.

On the southside of the city,the proposed upgrade of the LUAS Green line seems to be an upgrade whose time has not yet come, because the city hasn't even tried running trams at a higher frequency. I said on the 'Dublin Metrolink' thread, that they should try this first, before expecting people to fork out for an upgrade.

I am broadly in favour of a line towards the southwest of the city because it delivers more to the city.

If there are, say, 16 stations on the LUAS Green Line southside of the river, even building two stations towards the south-west of the city (Harolds's Cross - Walkinstown would be my preference) would add 32 paths for rapid transit between suburbs of Dublin, with one change.

In terms of improving the transport situation for most Dubliners, the upgraded route along the Green line delivers nothing.

I am thus in favour of Dublin building a metro between Swords and the southwest of the city, probably Swords - Walkinstown via Drumcondra, the City Centre, St. Stephen's Green and the Bleeding Horse and Harold's Cross.

(I am also in favour of an eventual route via Rarhmines, Rathgar, Terenure, etc. but most of that can surely be done by cut-and-cover methods.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121844103#Comment_121844103

Luas opened in 2004

In 2003 DB carried 149 million in 2005 they carried 146 million.

Today DB + GAI carry 157 million.

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121843048#Comment_121843048

It took time for most of the changes to happen rather than it happening straight away and a lot of the changes happened as part of Network Direct which saw some routes merging with others.

Green Line:

No routes cancelled initially, but frequency dropped on both the 11 and 48a, substantially on the latter.

The 48a was withdrawn and replaced by the 61 between the city and Dundrum as part of Network Direct some years later, with the 14/14a replacing it between Ballinteer and Dundrum.

Route 13b from City Centre to Palmerston Park via Ranelagh was withdrawn subsequently, removing the bus service along much of Palmerston Road, but this was already a low frequency route.

The 14a was also merged with the 14 as part of Network Direct, and replaced by the 128 serving Upper Rathmines Road (although there was no drop in combined 14/14a frequency when compared with the new 14). This change removed the bus service along Lower Churchtown Road and Dartry Road.

Route 44c to/from Ballyogan was withdrawn some years later as well, and there were service cutbacks on the 44 as well at certain times.

Red Line:

No routes cancelled initially, but the 56/56a frequency was cut significantly after some time.

Route 50 was withdrawn subsequently as part of Network Direct - this removed the bus service from Mayberry Road in Kilnamanagh.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121844587#Comment_121844587

And just to add to these numbers, last year Luas carried over 48 million passengers! Equivalent of 1/3rd of the entire Dublin City Bus network on just two lines! Imagine how screwed we would be if we didn’t have them!

LXFlyer

Dublin City bus fleet is about 1,200 vehicles.

It's about 1,279 now since the latest BusConnects phase (186 at GAI and 1,093 at DB).

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121844083#Comment_121844083

It's not majorly narrow really, the biggest pinchpoint that you'd have to negotiate is +/-500m at Donnybrook stadium, south of that its 6-8 lanes basically till the motorway, north of that it's never narrower than 4 lanes, with it more often being 5 or more.

spillit67

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121846588#Comment_121846588

It is narrow right up Morehampton Road though.

Yes is clears beyond the Church.

spacetweek

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121844913#Comment_121844913

What is GAI?

TheSunIsShining

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121851285#Comment_121851285

Go Ahead Ireland I'd assume

murphaph

I wonder if more radial Luas lines are really the best way forward at all. I know it's tempting to look at a wide dual carriageway and assume a Luas is the best option but a part of me thinks we will just end up revisiting all these radial Luas lines and upgrading them to metro at even greater expense. Luas has a role to play but is it in radial transport? I'm not sure. A SW metro to fill in that large gap combined with more orbital Luas feeder lines (initially bus routes of course) has a certain appeal. I think all the radial routes need to be high capacity fully automated rapid rail transit to be honest.

KrisW1001

Plan the type of transport based on expected demand. If a radial route is far too busy for bus, then a tram is the next step. If it's far to busy for trams, then either add branching services to spread passengers, or upgrade to metro, or both.

A denser tram network in the city would do a lot to make the longer-distance services more attractive.

Most similar sized European cities have very large tram networks (and of course Metro too). Amsterdam has 19 trams lines, Berlin 22, etc. Basically the norm is an extensive tram network supported by key Metro lines that tie the network together.

Sure, it would be nicer to have a dozen Metro lines, but would be hard to justify the 100 Billion or so that it would cost.

Sam Russell

Running a Luas line along from Rialto mainly along the South Circular to Grand Canal Dock would provide an excellent orbital route.

By connecting with the GL at Harcourt allow trams from both Rialto and GCD to divert to SSG and onto OCS and beyond. At Rialto, trams could go onto Heuston, or out towards Tallaght.

Think of the number of tram lines that would allow - with frequency driven by demand.

spillit67

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121853746#Comment_121853746

I am of the belief that this will actually be the next line- perhaps as a Metro or DART Tunnel.

It provides the most utility for the most people & can be “sold”.

murphaph

In German cities at least, tram lines tend to either supplement the metro and heavy rail networks (Berlin, Munich, Frankfurt) or function as pre-metro (so tunneled in the city centres to avoid all the on street conflicts, eg Cologne, Stuttgart). Running trams as primary radial routes without city centre segregation only happens in much smaller towns and cities (eg Potsdam, Bielefeld, not really comparable with Dublin). If we were prepared to go pre-metro I'd accept that trams can "do the job" but that also means no automation in future. I see the Red Line as something we really should not be looking to replicate. But hey, I know the political reality means we'll probably build nothing. I still don't really believe Metrolink will be built. I'll believe it when I see it as they say.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121854659#Comment_121854659

But hey, I know the political reality means we'll probably build nothing

I genuinely don't understand what political reality people think means this.

It is a popular project that will only reward people who get it in motion.

DaBluBoi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121854659#Comment_121854659

I see the Red Line as something we really should not be looking to replicate

Apologies if this doesn't relate well to the main topic, but could you elaborate on this point? Are you referring to the non-direct it takes from Heuston to Tallaght, with the amount of turns it takes? Otherwise, it does have very good patronage.

KrisW1001

There's nothing wrong with Red for what it is. The Red Line is a classic tram service, typical of continental cities: primarily on street with stops every 500-800 metres. The southern end of Green Line is more like a pre-Metro: running on its own segregated way, with wider spacing between stops.

The type of stop is also different: Red has on-street stopping, typical of a tram system, but the Charlemont-Sandyford Green line has "stations" separated from the surrounding streets.

Demand from South-west Dublin would justify higher capacity than Red can deliver, but that does not automatically mean replacing it with a Metro: The goal of meeting passengsr demand could also be achieved with a couple more on-street tram lines serving different parts of the city's southwestern suburbs.

tom1ie

The more I look at google maps the more I come to the conclusion, that if a LUAS was the only option on the table for the SW it would have to have a core route into/out of the cc and split at Ballyboden Rd- one leg going east towards Glencairn GL stop and one leg going west towards tallaght P+R stop on the red line.

The route from the red line P+R stop would be roughly:

tallaght P+R

Old Bawn rd

Killinininy road

st colmcilles way

scholarstown rd

Ballyboden way

The roundabout at Ballyboden way/ Taylor’s lane/ Ballyboden road/ Edmondstown rd- this is where the LUAS can either continue along Taylor’s lane towards glencairn GL stop which would create an orbital route from tallaght to sandyford, or the LUAS can continue on towards the cc via:

Ballyboden road

Willbrook rd (quite narrow here, car traffic reduced to one way)

Rathfarnham rd

Terenure rd north

Harold’s cross rd

clanbrassil street upper

Clanbrassil street lower

New street

patricks street

Christ church sq

The other leg splitting at the the roundabout at Ballyboden way, heading towards glencairn GL stop would be:

Taylor’s lane

Grange rd

Brehon field rd

The link road that runs parallel with the M50- no name on google maps

Leopardstown rd

Murphystown way

Glencairn GL stop

riddlinrussell

I'd argue the red line from Rialto out to Belgard operates like a _very slow_ metro with some at grade crossings, either on segregated track or in the central median of the road, there is probably an argument to be made for a few underpasses and improvements to separation along that section, and then tunnel from there under the city for a cheaper "metroisation" of the outer red line.

The stub line from James's could extend out to Blackhorse via Inchicore for interchange and operate more like other European trams, rather than the very large distances which are quite unusual for our system.

gjim

The annoying thing with the Green line is that you have pre-metro sections (south of Charlemont and north of Broadstone) with an on-street bottleneck section in the middle which capacity constrains the line as a whole and "wastes" the highly segregated sections. The ML extension will - if it ever happens - unlock the potential of the old Harcourt alignment. When that happens, I would continue the Green Luas south as a primarily on-street tram by heading out to Terenure or East to Ringsend from Harcourt.

Street trams play an important part of a PT network; ideally you have a reasonably dense network of street trams in the core that distributes commuters around the core, whether arriving via metro or heavy rail to a "central" station or whether arriving at the fringe of the core via buses.

Dublin has a very strange take on the hierarchy of public transport modes. We have bus capacity concentrated in the core, very little core/central through-running metro/heavy rail capacity, and tram lines that extend through far outer suburbs. The lack of high capacity access to the core will be addressed somewhat with ML and hopefully DART underground gets dusted off too. But there doesn't seem to be a plan for the first issue. I would confine all new tram construction to within the canals or thereabouts.

murphaph

Yup. The primary problem with the Red Line is that it just takes far too long to cover a fairly short distance. It's built now and I think that there should be a series of works to eliminate conflicting movements in the outer suburbs (underpasses, overpasses) and really in the city from possibly the Black Lion it should go underground or at the latest around Rialto. The city centre on street running doesn't match the outer suburban off street sections. The capacity is killed in the city. We should not build any more radial routes like this. The least we should aspire to is pre-metro tunneled trams in the city centre if we can't go full metro. You'd be better off building fewer radial metro routes fed by orbital bus corridors than several radial tram lines like the Red line. That's my take on it.

murphaph

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121854675#Comment_121854675

I left Ireland in 2009. Virtually nothing on rails has been built since then. Plenty of reports and whatnot. I guess it's made me cynical.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121859136#Comment_121859136

Well we all know what happened around 2009 and on!

The least we should aspire to is pre-metro tunneled trams in the city centre if we can't go full metro.

That isn't really realistic. It is the tunnelling that makes Metros expensive, not tram versus Metro. There would be relatively very little cost difference between a tunnelled Luas line and a tunnelled Metro line.

So the question isn't really Luas v Metro, it is tunnelled or not tunnelled. If you are going to tunnel, it might as well be a Metro.

You'd be better off building fewer radial metro routes fed by orbital bus corridors than several radial tram lines like the Red line.

I'm not sure I agree, the thing is you could build Luas lines on all the radial routes for the cost of just one Metro line. We built both the Green and Red lines for a total of 750 million combined, of course costs have increased, so lets say the price has doubled, so 750 million per line. A Metro, is about 5 to 10 billion. You could build 6 to 12 Luas lines for the cost of one Metro line!

I also not sure you are right by the lack of utility of such street running tram lines. The Green line can carry up to 8,000 people per hour per direction, despite it's street running sections. That would be a massive upgrade over the 1,700 or so a double decker bus at 3 minutes frequency can carry. That is like a 5 fold increase in capacity and far more reliable. That really would be a fantastic increase in capacity for all these radial routes.

Those of us who life on the likes of the Swords road corridor would give our right arm to have Luas.

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860036#Comment_121860036

There is only so far that you can go developing LUAS lines along suburban roads given the roadwidth and the need to retain a reasonable network of roads accessible to all.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860083#Comment_121860083

But most of the radial routes are QBC bus corridors and with the BusConnects infrastructure work, they will be even more so. That is plenty of space to replace these with mixed Luas/Bus routes.

I mean you'd easily put a Luas down the Swords road and that would be true for at least half of the radial routes.

Sure there maybe some pinch points on other routes, shrug, there are various approaches to help deal with that, one way streets, etc. This isn't rocket science, most other European cities have been doing this for decades. There are plenty of tram only roads in cities all over Europe. There really isn't anything special about Dublin in this regard.

We just have to be willing to prioritise public transport.

Fian

Can I ask a question about how a green line luas upgrade would work? I live near dundrum luas station and was pretty outraged at the decision to stop the metro at charlemont rather than continue it on the green line, seemed like such a stupid waste of money and ambition to placate a few loud voices.

However something that had not occurred to me is whether this would mean the loss of stops? Would a metro stop at all the existing luas stops or would it stop far less frequently as it seems to do north of charlemont? This would be very unlikely to directly impact me, since Dundrum is kind of a no-brainer stop and would be very unlikely to be dropped, if I take the luas to work I exit at stephen's green now and the new station owuld actually be closer to my office. I cycle to work anyway unless it is icy or something. But I can see it impacting others and it strikes me that a luas line with frequent stops and connecting to the metro in Charlemont might be preferable than a metro line with a third the number of stations.

murphaph

I wouldn't agree that pre-metros cost the same as metros because of the city centre tunnelling required. If that were true then pre-metros in places like Cologne, Stuttgart etc. simply wouldn't exist, they'd all be full metros. The pre-metro is a tram network with underground central running only. All the other (initial) costs are saved: line of sight running with very basic signalling, conflicts with road traffic in the suburbs (where there's more room) are allowed and don't require full grade separation. It's the city centre traffic that limits the Red Line's capacity though, not so much the traffic on the Naas Road or Belgard Road.

There would be a massive price difference between the red line put underground from Rialto + a bit of grade separation at busier junctions (eg Long Mile Road/Naas Road) and putting entire Red line underground or otherwise fully grade separated. The Red line is actually a really good candidate to be converted to pre-metro IMO. Beyone Rialto there are nice long stretches of free running and the pinch points mentioned above could be tackled one by one to bring the service up to something much closer to a metro service, both in speed and frequency. I kind of expect this to happen if we ever get comfortable with actually building railways in tunnels.

I could actually live quite happily with radial pre-metro too I guess. I just don't think radial tram lines that snake all the way through city streets before getting out to more free running sections in the suburbs make any sense. The Red Line is undoubtedly popular, because it's the best there is on offer, but I don't think it should serve as a template for future projects. With some clever design you could funnel several suburban street running trams through a pair of north/south and east/west tunnels in the city. You wouldn't have to tunnel every single line right across the city individually. The lines could share the core city centre tunnels.

loyatemu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860208#Comment_121860208

I don't think they were planning to close any stops - the upgrade process from the original plan is in this post

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860208#Comment_121860208

I’d refer you to the graphic that I posted on page 53.

You'd still have the same number of stops as far as Beechwood, but then you would change to LUAS there if needs be.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860214#Comment_121860214

TII actually looked into this. Back in 2017 they considered building Metrolink as a Luas line that went underground in the city center versus a Metro. The report found very little cost difference between the two, but much lower capacity with the Luas option, thus Metrolink, the report is online if you are interested.

By far the highest cost of these projects is the actual tunnelling, the TBM, followed by building the station box. Obviously it wouldn't matter if it was a tram or a Metro, those two costs would be similar.

Signalling would be a rounding error in a project like this.

Sure, if you wanted to save some money, you could have it built in the suburbs as non-segregated. You could still do that as a Metro, the only difference would be the height of the platforms. Obviously the Metro would need to be driver operated [1] rather then fully operated, which would save you some money on full automation and platform screen doors.

But you are still talking about multi billion euro projects either way, with maybe saving a few hundred million here or there.

[1] Siemens actually has a fully automated tram running in Potsdam that has non-segregated running, so if that continues to develop it might be an option.

BTW The reason I suggest high floor Metro rather then low floor Luas, well with the Green line, we now see the issues with upgrading it from low floor operations to high floor. If you want to build a pre-metro that you think you want to upgrade to Metro in the future, then better to start off all high floor, makes for an easier upgrade path. And yes, if you want there are high floor trams too.