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

Alternative to Metro North, Metro West and Dart Underground (pictures)

Options
  • 14-10-2010 1:33am
    #1
    mgmt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭


    I believe the current proposals for Metro North, West and the Dart underground will not get a green light for a LONG time, if at all. So the proposal by Shane Hayes caught my attention (well worth a read).

    This is his vision:
    Slide2.JPG

    Basically using Bus Trams on the M1 and M50 as replacement for metro North and West.


    As Shane points out Bus Rapid Transport has been successfully implemented on motorways in Bogata, Columbia by the transmilenio system. This is an example of the passenger stops they use:

    bog-bus-transmilenio-bus-passing-stn-pax-ohd-20081200-cameo_Absolut-Colombia.jpg


    As you can see, the passengers are segregated from the roadway by the bus stop design.

    An example of how this would work on the M50 can be seen here:
    67315959.jpg

    Build a footbridge across the M50 connecting the two segregated bus-stops for the "metro west" bustram. This stop would feed in the Parkwest train station. This type of stop could be copied along the M1 and the rest of the M50.
    Tagged:


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,678 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Terrible idea, for a multitude of reasons
    1: There is no space for a segregated busway on the M50, or most of the M1 to Swords (all of it after its impending widening)
    2: Introducing stopping/starting buses to the existing M50 would cause phantom traffic jams.
    3: The M50 is already down to having no H/S over the bridge just south of your proposed site, there is no space for entry to a pull in bay. Meaning the buses would have to come to a dead stop in the intermediate lane. See point 3 again
    4: The intermediate lane at that locaiton can get completely blocked during rush hour, meaning any bus "rapid" transit would suddenly become very unrapid. Same problem repeated all over.
    5: Barring at Park West & Liffey Valley, the M50 itself doesn't actually run very near where people want to go... north of the N4 it runs through residential areas, alongside a dump, past mostly undeveloped parts of north Finglas, alongside a golf course, etc. South of Park West it runs through Tymon Park, through residential areas, etc, etc.
    6: This is an alternative to Metro West - which is long fingered - only. How does it provide an alternatived to MN and DART Underground? The "heavy rail or metro" line running from The Point to the Kildare line along the south side effectively *IS* DART Underground, just so far removed from the city centre that it'd never make a profit.

    If there was ever a case for crying "crayons!" about a plan, this is it.


  • Options
    #3
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    I think it is an idea to hold for a future where car journeys permanently drop freeing up road space. However it is an express intra dublin region play now if anything.

    If you did this in a limited stop way connecting maybe Parkwest-Airport or Sandyford - Tallaght - Parkwest - Liffey Valley Ashtown -Airport....ONLY .....I would consider exploring it. Sadly it does have a whiff of the "Frank McDonalds" about it....meaning a Dublin only viewpoint and an idiot idea .....both.

    Having buses weaving in and out on a motorway every 0.5-1km (which is the stop spacing on a tram system like Metro North or Metro West) is a grim idea....more so when these stops do not serve population centres very muchly.

    But as an intraregional semiexpress system with limited stops.....maybe.


  • Options
    #4
    paulm17781
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭paulm17781


    I'm not sure Columbia is a country we should base any policies on or aspire to copy.


  • Options
    #5
    mgmt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭mgmt


    paulm17781 wrote: »
    I'm not sure Columbia is a country we should base any policies on or aspire to copy.

    Why not, our country is on par with a Banana Republic. Our Minister for Finance gets laughed at when talking to the international money lenders. We have to rely on charity to build a children's hospital, I doubt there will be a cent given to the white elephants that is metro west and north. This proposal offers a cheap, viable alternative.


  • Options
    #6
    Propellerhead
    Closed Accounts Posts: 394 ✭✭Propellerhead


    mgmt wrote: »
    Why not, our country is on par with a Banana Republic. Our Minister for Finance gets laughed at when talking to the international money lenders. We have to rely on charity to build a children's hospital, I doubt there will be a cent given to the white elephants that is metro west and north. This proposal offers a cheap, viable alternative.

    It's certainly cheap looking.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    mgmt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭mgmt


    MYOB wrote: »
    Terrible idea, for a multitude of reasons
    1: There is no space for a segregated busway on the M50, or most of the M1 to Swords (all of it after its impending widening)

    It is not a segregated busway.
    2: Introducing stopping/starting buses to the existing M50 would cause phantom traffic jams.

    Japan can manage it:
    http://wikimapia.org/1267907/Fukakusa-Bus-Stop

    3: The M50 is already down to having no H/S over the bridge just south of your proposed site, there is no space for entry to a pull in bay. Meaning the buses would have to come to a dead stop in the intermediate lane. See point 3 again
    There is plenty of open land beside the M50.

    5: Barring at Park West & Liffey Valley, the M50 itself doesn't actually run very near where people want to go... north of the N4 it runs through residential areas, alongside a dump, past mostly undeveloped parts of north Finglas, alongside a golf course, etc. South of Park West it runs through Tymon Park, through residential areas, etc, etc.

    Yes it does. It runs beside the Business park at Blancharsdtown, the maynooth railway line at castleknock, sandyford, Airport, etc.

    If there was ever a case for crying "crayons!" about a plan, this is it.
    Fair enough, I think its an interesting proposal.


  • Options
    #8
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,956 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Sponge Bob wrote:
    I think it is an idea to hold for a future where car journeys permanently drop freeing up road space. However it is an express intra dublin region play now if anything.
    This will never happen; the petrol car will give way to the electric/biofuel/hybrid whatever car, but there will relentlessly be more traffic. I'm convinced of it having read around on the subject. We've no choice but to plan for that.
    Sponge Bob wrote:
    If you did this in a limited stop way connecting maybe Parkwest-Airport or Sandyford - Tallaght - Parkwest - Liffey Valley Ashtown -Airport....ONLY .....I would consider exploring it.
    This is actually quite a good idea and could be achieved without any busstops-on-a-motorway nonsense. Leopardstown Dual Carriageway-Belgard Rd/Tallaght Bypass junction-Northside of N4 at Liffey Valley-N3 Junction @ Blanch Centre-Airport. Not bad, there's nothing really stopping it happening right now really.


  • Options
    #9
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,956 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    I am quite honestly getting sick and tired of hacks like this smug ("8. Admire Handiwork" - vomit) Shane chap taking out crayons and going "I can do better." We have no shortage of plans in Dublin. What we have is a set of transportation plans which we have consistently failed to implement on a large scale through both boom and bust while lesser countries have overtaken us.

    What we need is not to repeatedly reimagine and redesign these projects, with the resulting analysis paralysis, but to just get the shovels out and get bloody moving on building these things. We've had cost benefit analysis after cost benefit analysis (I count 3) for Metro North and still people are questioning its benefits. We've had projected opening dates pushed out over and over: first 2006 (Platform for Change), then 2012 (T21), then 2013, then 2014, and most recently 2016. We've had "Funding is uncertain", then "The project is going ahead" then "Funding is not guaranteed" then "The project will proceed as planned" then "The PPP model may not work for this" then "The project is on track."

    Can we please stop dithering like my senile granny and just get the finger out.


  • Options
    #10
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,678 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    mgmt wrote: »
    It is not a segregated busway.

    And hence useless. These only work when they're segregated.
    mgmt wrote: »
    Japan can manage it:
    http://wikimapia.org/1267907/Fukakusa-Bus-Stop

    Guarantee you that road has a lower AADT per lane than the M50.
    mgmt wrote: »
    There is plenty of open land beside the M50.

    You've missed the point that your proposed stop is BESIDE A BRIDGE. The land is irrelevant - you'd need to remove the existing bridge and part of the motorway enbankment to widen it!

    mgmt wrote: »
    Yes it does. It runs beside the Business park at Blancharsdtown, the maynooth railway line at castleknock, sandyford, Airport, etc.

    First two are in the middle of a junction far lower than the surrounding land. No way in hell can a stop be put here.

    It runs along the southern extreme of a business park and its *nowhere* near the airport. Only access to the airport is along extremely clogged roads.
    mgmt wrote: »
    Fair enough, I think its an interesting proposal.

    I think its childish crayons.


  • Options
    #11
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,245 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    spacetweek wrote: »
    Calculating the cost of this is quite easy. We know the current going rate for building a Luas line is €40 million per Kilometer. After the 30% recession induced discount that this will be 30 million per kilometre which means the overall cost of the Grand Canal line will be €330 million.

    The job of costing bus trams has been made easy by the Instituted for Transportation and Development Policy (www.itdp.org) who have created a handy excel cost calculator for BusTram implementations. It is available at http://bit.ly/c66Aaf

    The cost is dependent on how fancy you make your bus stations and how separated from other traffic you make the route. I have assumed a rapid implementation with separation similar to Dublin’s current bus lanes and taken a figure of €2 million per kilometre which gives a cost of €22 million for the Heuston – St Stephen’s Green – Point – Airport bustram.

    I have assumed €200K per Kilometer for the M50 Shoulder Bus lane which at 40 Kilometers Long gives a cost of €8 million. I have also added 10 interchange stations at a million Euro each to give a total cost for this of €18 million.

    And finally to Iarnrod Eireann. I have assumed four new stations at €3 million each and €10 million to enhance Park West station.

    This gives a total budget of 392 million.

    How about buying the actual buses? And running the system for X years?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Irish and Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,735 ✭✭✭Irish and Proud


    mgmt wrote: »
    It is not a segregated busway.



    Japan can manage it:
    http://wikimapia.org/1267907/Fukakusa-Bus-Stop



    There is plenty of open land beside the M50.




    Yes it does. It runs beside the Business park at Blancharsdtown, the maynooth railway line at castleknock, sandyford, Airport, etc.



    Fair enough, I think its an interesting proposal.

    OK, you do have examples from Japan and Colombia of how a BRT on a motorway/dual carriageway might work, but it would still work out very expensive - with a 3m verge and 2.5m hard shoulder most of the way, you could create another lane each side which in turn would enable the two centre lanes to be converted to BRT. However, you don't have this convenience through the interchanges, and where the hard shoulder breaks, you would need parallel bridges - even on the Westlink (mind you, new Westlink bridges will probably be needed anyway). Regarding M50 traffic, you would need continuous uninterrupted BRT lanes which would be completely segrated from all general traffic - mainline, merging or exiting.

    I also can't see any real advantage to local areas of creating BRT stops on the M50 - you might be better off looking at the R113 (Belgard and Fonthill Roads etc) where you would still have a rail interchange at Fonthill but yet, get much closer to the local people and have much less need for pedestrian bridges. OK to get to the Northside, the Liffey is a problem, but IMO new bridge capacity is going to be needed for Dublins transit/traffic in the not too distant future anyway.

    In the event of new all-purpose bridges in parallel to the West Link, an extra 3 lanes each way could be created - 2 for general traffic and 1 for BRT over the Liffey. Then you strike while the iron is hot and plan for a new direct BRT link (from Fonthill Road to the Westlink) right by the Liffey Valley Shopping Centre (reservation could be a planning condition in connection with any retail expansion there). Once on the Northside, the BRT could then go directly to Blanchardstown Shopping Centre via Carpenterstown, Coolmine etc.

    We do need good public transport, but we also need the M50 - it's just been done up after many years of painful works for 30+km.


Advertisement