[lucernarian]

Originally Posted by donvito99

Trams are suitable for ferrying people into, around and out of a borough of London, that's fine. The same cannot be said for their application to radial commuter routes in South and West Dublin - probably explains why both the Tallaght and Sandyford lines were originally proposed as heavy rail (DART) and then Metro (including tunneling along the Abbey St axis) before the inadequate option was embraced.

The fact that the Green line was designed with an upgrade to Metro in mind tells you all you need to know about the adequacy of trams along the old Harcourt St line.

Sure, but I wanted to set the record straight. It's quite a jump to say this has never been done in any other country. Another one that springs to mind is converting the Hoek van Holland train line to light metro, but that's not being described as a tram so I left that out.

[mfceiling]

Originally Posted by MJohnston

Besides which, a south western route will be held up for years by the unrepentant arseholes of Rathgar and Terenure. I know they keep going on and on about having a Metro instead of BusConnects, but I guarantee they'll complain about a Metro just as much.

I'm one of those terenure "arseholes" and I can assure you there is a lot of support for a metro line through here. Traffic is chronic at times and anything to alleviate that will be welcomed.

[donvito99]

Originally Posted by mfceiling

I'm one of those terenure "arseholes" and I can assure you there is a lot of support for a metro line through here. Traffic is chronic at times and anything to alleviate that will be welcomed.

A metro is unlikely to relieve the traffic though. If there's space for a car to fill, it'll be filled.

[D.L.R.]

Originally Posted by lucernarian

Sure, but I wanted to set the record straight. It's quite a jump to say this has never been done in any other country. Another one that springs to mind is converting the Hoek van Holland train line to light metro, but that's not being described as a tram so I left that out.

The luas system is, and always was, a cheap cop out by a gombeen govt more interested in land banking half of rural Ireland.

[LXFlyer]

Originally Posted by donvito99

A metro is unlikely to relieve the traffic though. If there's space for a car to fill, it'll be filled.

A metro is far more likely to get people out of their cars than buses, particularly when you consider that the area has the worst traffic congestion and the lowest bus speeds in the city, and it has the highest proportion of people commuting by car.

With even more apartment developments being built in Dublin 16 and Dublin 24 this is only going to get worse.

[D.L.R.]

Regards Charlemont as an end point.

To play devil's advocate a bit, if the route were indeed go SW or SE instead of linking into the Green line, then why go to Charlemont at all?

Why not serve a district east or west of it instead, such as Leeson Street or Portobello.

Its all just so half baked. If you're not sure where the line is even headed yet, just stop at SSG until you DO know.

[gjim]

Originally Posted by D.L.R.

Its all just so half baked. If you're not sure where you're even going yet, just stop at SSG until you DO know.

Agree completely - there's absolutely no point progressing past SSG without an actual plan. I presume the TBM can just be left underground a bit south of the station box.

[MJohnston]

Originally Posted by mfceiling

I'm one of those terenure "arseholes" and I can assure you there is a lot of support for a metro line through here. Traffic is chronic at times and anything to alleviate that will be welcomed.

I'm sure there's plenty of support in Terenue and Rathgar — by those arseholes I'm referring to the "communities not corridors" idiots.

[Sam Russell]

I am coming to the conclusion that connecting to the GL north of Charlemont as it solves the problem of the sewer, and the long term closure of the GL. This would mean that all current Luas stops south of Charlemont would become ML stops. Dunville Ave would close and as for St Raphaela's Road, that needs to be bridged, which is needed anyway, and could be done now..

Alternatively, route the ML to Portobello bridge, with a underground station, then take it south to Beechwood, just west of the station, coming to surface just adjacent to the line. The Metrolink station would be just South of the Beechwood Luas, with perhaps an underground station there, or alternatively, a surface station just south. Only one stop from SSG to Beechwood/Cowper.

Basically, SSG would be the interchange for Luas/Metrolink for passengers south of SSG, unless they walk a few hundred metres from Beechwood, or Cowper, or from Harcourt to Charlemomt.

[lucernarian]

Originally Posted by D.L.R.

The luas system is, and always was, a cheap cop out by a gombeen govt more interested in land banking half of rural Ireland.

That's fine, but inaccurate claims are not. Is that hard to understand or what is the issue here?

[MJohnston]

Originally Posted by D.L.R.

Regards Charlemont as an end point.

To play devil's advocate a bit, if the route were indeed go SW or SE instead of linking into the Green line, then why go to Charlemont at all?

Why not serve a district east or west of it instead, such as Leeson Street or Portobello.

Its all just so half baked. If you're not sure where the line is even headed yet, just stop at SSG until you DO know.

Because the future plan is still to upgrade the Green Line. And if you do that, you have to stop the existing Luas line at SSG (with it continuing north to Finglas) as Charlemont wouldn't be able to accommodate all the turnbacks and parking required (SSG is already capable of this and was for years before BXD was completed).

So then, you're leaving Charlemont, which had a Luas stop and has developed as such, without a Luas stop. Harcourt would be impacted too, which is a problem as there are lots of big offices being constructed here.

Whereas, if you terminate the Metrolink at an underground Charlemont station, with a new canal footbridge from the station entrance to Harcourt Terrace, you've provided a solution that let's you remove both Harcourt and Charlemont Luas stops in the future.

[Sam Russell]

Originally Posted by MJohnston

Because the future plan is still to upgrade the Green Line. And if you do that, you have to stop the existing Luas line at SSG (with it continuing north to Finglas) as Charlemont wouldn't be able to accommodate all the turnbacks and parking required (SSG is already capable of this and was for years before BXD was completed).

So then, you're leaving Charlemont, which had a Luas stop and has developed as such, without a Luas stop. Harcourt would be impacted too, which is a problem as there are lots of big offices being constructed here.

Whereas, if you terminate the Metrolink at an underground Charlemont station, with a new canal footbridge from the station entrance to Harcourt Terrace, you've provided a solution that let's you remove both Harcourt and Charlemont Luas stops in the future.

I would think the Luas should go along Adelaide Road as far as Leeson St or even further - maybe as far as Grand Canal Dock. Even if they allow the GL to go as far as Ranelagh, some could go on the Adelaide Rd extension - perhaps 50% or more. GCD is less than 2 km from Charlemont.

[gjim]

Originally Posted by Sam Russell

I am coming to the conclusion that connecting to the GL north of Charlemont as it solves the problem of the sewer, and the long term closure of the GL. This would mean that all current Luas stops south of Charlemont would become ML stops. Dunville Ave would close and as for St Raphaela's Road, that needs to be bridged, which is needed anyway, and could be done now..

Great! I think that makes two of us.

The downsides identified previously by the old MN team are the technical and engineering challenges of cut n' cover along Earlsfort terrace.

But the upsides are compelling for me - never mind the extra tunnelling, you save all the cost and disruption of building/mining underground stations from Charlemont potentially to Milltown. You're talking about 3 to 5 underground stations to replicate the catchment of the existing Luas. And you extract maximum value of the existing alignment for metro.

This leaves the Luas terminating in Harcourt St which offers natural paths for extension for an on-street tram - down Adelaide Rd to Irishtown, Ballsbridge or Donnybrook or west to Terenure - places where I think on street tram makes a lot more sense.

[gjim]

Originally Posted by MJohnston

Because the future plan is still to upgrade the Green Line. And if you do that, you have to stop the existing Luas line at SSG (with it continuing north to Finglas) as Charlemont wouldn't be able to accommodate all the turnbacks and parking required (SSG is already capable of this and was for years before BXD was completed).

Actually when they evaluated connecting the metro to the existing Luas alignment north of Charlemont, they suggested the Harcourt St stop as the new Green Line terminus with turn-back facilities around the corner on Adelaide Rd. So there'd be little/no waste of existing infrastructure.

[Sam Russell]

Originally Posted by gjim

Great! I think that makes two of us.

The downsides identified previously by the old MN team are the technical and engineering challenges of cut n' cover along Earlsfort terrace.

But the upsides are compelling for me - never mind the extra tunnelling, you save all the cost and disruption of building/mining underground stations from Charlemont potentially to Milltown. You're talking about 3 to 5 underground stations to replicate the catchment of the existing Luas. And you extract maximum value of the existing alignment for metro.

This leaves the Luas terminating in Harcourt St which offers natural paths for extension for an on-street tram - down Adelaide Rd to Irishtown, Ballsbridge or Donnybrook or west to Terenure - places where I think on street tram makes a lot more sense.

In fact I would put a new Luas line from GCD to Dolphins Barn following the canal to Portabellow and then the South Circular to meet up with the Red Line, with facilities for trams to go to Parnell from either end.

It would transform travel along that route.