Luas Central - Which Route?

Luas Central - Which Route? I would prefer...

Route A
114
37%
Route B
127
41%
Route C
25
8%
Route D
27
9%
Route E
14
5%
 
Total votes : 307

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Peter Fitz » Tue Mar 21, 2006 12:41 am

please ! running luas up o'connell street is just wrong, all wrong !!!!!!!!! running it as far as abbey is bad enough, but the full length of the street - aaaaaaggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh

1. it will ill have to share the lane with traffic or else the street will have to be reduced to one traffic lane, either way it will be forced to move at a snales pace ...
2. We'll have some bloody clunky raised platform on the median, and just a stones throw from the stop at abbey.
3. Severely damage the aesthetics & coherence of the IAP; poles, lines, wires, median trees removed - the street is starting to look cluttered enough as it is. (i know they can run wires from buildings & existing supports, but while they might be able to minimise the supports, we'll still have wires running the length of the street.)
4. Disturbance to the red line while they 'engineer' this 'cross' or whatever the hell they are planning.
5. All the while when they are actually building a tunnell from the green to o'connell steet.
6. Beautifully timed to conincide with the end of the IAP works.

NO NO NO NO NO NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :( :( :( :( :(
Peter Fitz
 

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby a boyle » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:31 am

Peter FitzPatrick wrote:please ! running luas up o'connell street is just wrong, all wrong !!!!!!!!! running it as far as abbey is bad enough, but the full length of the street - aaaaaaggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Well then please PLEASE send an email or write to the rpa about the current route selection for the metro and for the luas link up.

Whatever you think about tara , the one thing to learn is that once a course of action is decided , those with power will shit all over anyone who disagrees.

I would suggest that running the lulu up o'connell street to abbey street and then turning left or right (to jervis /abbey stops ) might be a really good thing for o'connell street if it meant that the rest of the street was pedestrianised on that side of the road.

BUT remember if you don't write to somebody no one will listen. the old nappy campaign over the grocers orders shows that the powers that be do listen. sometimes

info@rpa.ie tom.manning@rpa.ie
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby PVC King » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:20 pm

A Boyle can you give one example of the RPA listening?

30m trams on the red line
numerous missed completion dates
integrated ticketing
Red Cow roundabout
Blackthorn Drive

I agree with Peter on this putting Luas onto O'Connell St would be a big mistake with the longer the route on O'Connell St the worse.
PVC King
 

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby The Denouncer » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:32 pm

Ah yes trams running down O'Connell St. just like the olde days to be sure!
I'm sure they'll read the card I sent them and say "hmm yes, maybe the Metro shouldn't stop at the Great Southern Hotel"
The Denouncer
Member
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:20 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby a boyle » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:38 pm

Thomond Park wrote:A Boyle can you give one example of the RPA listening?
No i can't , but again if you don't give your opinion you can't complain if noone listens. Even though it's is probably pointless i implore you and everyone reading this to email the rpa and give your opinion , whatever it may be ! info@rpa.ie
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm


Re: O' Connell Street

Postby a boyle » Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:17 pm

Thomond Park wrote:[url]http://www.rpa.ie/404/404.asp?404]




I am a bit confused, what exactly is your point ?
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby PVC King » Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:22 pm

The RPA present themselves as being in consultation yet all of the links for submission are broken.

The point is that the RPA have redefined incompetance and continue to redefine it year on year; despite repeated mistakes not one RPA member has ever been censured despite the €100's of millions they have squandered.
PVC King
 

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby a boyle » Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:51 pm

[quote="Thomond Park"]The RPA present themselves as being in consultation yet all of the links for submission are broken.

The point is that the RPA have redefined incompetance and continue to redefine it year on year]

The links are not broken , you just don't understand how to copy the links properly ! If you had read the plaform11 link you would have read "http://www.rpa.ie/?id=78 once you understand the RPA site its easy as the original url can't exist http://www.rpa.ie/metro/ndp_ppp/content.asp?id=78" . The links that you copied were created automatically by a server and cannot be copied.

I think you criticism of the RPA is wholly misguided. Prior to the opening all politicians roundly laughed at the RPA achieving its break even number of 20 million , given that this is the number of people carried by the dart which has 3 times the capacity. However it has done and is the only public transport mode that makes money.

To the people who complain that it cost more that it was supposed to well, perhaps a little knowledge would help. The green line between sandyford and the canal was build to be able to take full length heavy metro trains. This involved engineering bridges that could cope with 100's of tones instead of 40. All the land has been aquired for long platfoms . The power lines can cope with all the demand of longer trains ( remember the cost of upgrading the dart ). And the cutting between dundrum and sandyford was blasted wider to fit wider metros. We will be very gratefull when this stretch is upgraded to metro in decades to comes without any disruption! (Just ask the dart users )

The chaos at the red cow never happened ( because the trams only move in front of stopped traffic )

The longer red line routing was supported by all the consultants as a good compromise between current needs and the ability for future development.

Nothwithstanding this Mr. Park proposes that given the luas is more popular than expected and is doesn't require a subsidy it's a failure.

I might add that electronic ticketing is operating on the luas and was doing so within a year. Is it not up to dublin bus to do their bit ( no obviously it's the rpa)

I propose that Mr. Park has the worst irish blinkered attitude : where can i find a problem where ? As something that is delivering what it set out to do , surely it is a roaring success ? I have no doubt Mr. Park would complain just as much if it wasn't carrying enough passengers.

Stop whinging!
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby murphaph » Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:05 pm

Personally I believe the Luas runnng the full length of O'Connell St and on up to Broadstone will be what happens and will be great. I don't find the wires obtrusive once suspended carefully from the buildings. Many prestigious streets in Europe have trams on them. Cars will be banned from O'Connell St in the long term, and Dublin Bus is supposedly going to completely overhaul it's route network (to tie into enhanced rail services) which will see far fewer buses penetrate the city centre (and hence O'Connell St). Luas may just take one carriageway and the oher may be made two-way for the buses which remain. I have seen trams operate very well in pedestrianised areas and believe it would be be no different here. O'Connell St offers something no other north-south street on the northside can; it's wide and can be made to have no crossing vehicular movements. This is a massive benefit for the trams which will get free reign from one end of the street to the other, delivering predictable journey times.
murphaph
Member
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 1:46 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby PVC King » Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:18 pm

a boyle wrote:I propose that Mr. Park has the worst irish blinkered attitude : where can i find a problem where ? As something that is delivering what it set out to do , surely it is a roaring success ? I have no doubt Mr. Park would complain just as much if it wasn't carrying enough passengers.

Stop whinging!


Sorry to pass your post Philip,

Aboyle I suggest that you have the attitude of an EMU whereby you bury your head in the sand as hard earned tax receipts are squandered.

As you have previously accepted the Red Cow is being put on concrete stilts and if it is functioning so well why is this being done?

Yet again the taxpayer gets fleeced
PVC King
 

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby a boyle » Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:31 pm

Thomond Park wrote:Sorry to pass your post Philip,

Aboyle I suggest that you have the attitude of an EMU whereby you bury your head in the sand as hard earned tax receipts are squandered.

As you have previously accepted the Red Cow is being put on concrete stilts and if it is functioning so well why is this being done?

Yet again the taxpayer gets fleeced
I am not sure that i said that the lulu is going on stilts ,because it is not . It is the rest of the junction that is changing. Could you pehaps identify which choices made by the rpa have squandered our money ? could you put a rough estimate on the cost of each mistake made by the rpa ( mistakes made by the transport minister don't count )

Even allowing for ( a "huge" squander ) how is something that is more popular than expected , and making money within 12 months of operation a failure ? to have missed something somewhere
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby PVC King » Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:50 pm

Luas phase 1 €400m overspend
Years late
RPA ticketing not-intergated with CIE system; all machines will need to be rejigged at a future date
The Luas makes a very small operating profit €?? but to say that Luas makes money is not true for Luas to make money it would need to generate an annual return of 4% p.a. or €32m

If Luas came in on budget at €400m it would need to make a lower figure of €16 p.a. to break even

The fact that Luas is popular is not a guide to financial or infrastructure delivery skills
PVC King
 

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby a boyle » Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:17 pm

[quote="Thomond Park"]Luas phase 1 €400m overspend
Years late
RPA ticketing not-intergated with CIE system]

Again you are totally ignoring what i have said above. The lateness of delivery is not the rpa's fault. (it took 3 years to build as intended )

It cost 400 million extra because the original estimate was for two trams lines. The plans were changed and 1 tram line was built and a metro line was built. Given that on a discussion for the green line extension you called for the extension to use the old harcourt line to improve segregation and allow for a metro.Are you suggesting that you would rather they had designed the green line to tram spec , so that in the future the entire length had to be bug up for heavier foundations and new bridges built.A large chunk of that extra 400 mill was wisely spent building a more powerfull power system, heavier foundations ( to support 100's of tonne weight instead of 40) , reinforced bridges , etc .

Ok have it your way. Had the green line been built as originally costed how much would it cost to upgrade it so that it could be upgraded to a metro ? Remember it cost 180 mill to updgrade the dart's power systems and platforms. ooooohh i don't maybe a few hundred million ?

when i said popular it is quite clear that i meant that the tram system is used by more people than originally envisaged , that it has exceeded al it's own "targets" and that it makes money. Where is the failure ?

Do you reject that building the green line to metro standard would easily have cost an extra 400 mill , given that the rough estimate for the northern metro is 3/4/5 billion. ? Again what specific things did the rpa do that are so bad.

Is the red cow a disaster ? is 40 thousand people per day on the red line a disaster ? Is up to 90 thousand a day on the green line a disaster.
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby adhoc » Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:35 pm

Take your handbags outside gentlemen/ladies

Posts regarding CIE/RPA/Luas/Metro bashing/supporting have become excruciatingly boring/repetitive/mind-numbing of late. [delete options as appropriate]



(edited so as not to appear gender biased)
adhoc
Member
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 9:50 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ctesiphon » Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:22 am

adhoc wrote:Take your handbags outside gentlemen/ladies

Posts regarding CIE/RPA/Luas/Metro bashing/supporting have become excruciatingly boring/repetitive/mind-numbing of late. [delete options as appropriate]

Heh. Agreed. Or at the very least use one of the Luas threads on here. When I open this thread I want to read about O'Connell Street- if the Luas debate is part of that debate, then fine.
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby PVC King » Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:33 pm

woops
PVC King
 

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby PVC King » Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:33 pm

a boyle wrote:Do you reject that building the green line to metro standard would easily have cost an extra 400 mill , given that the rough estimate for the northern metro is 3/4/5 billion. ? Again what specific things did the rpa do that are so bad.


Yes,

the green line had the new Taney bridge re-specified and little else on the route as they inherited a Victorian track bed built to accomodate two braod gauge lines.

I like your use of 3/4/5bn it aptly describes just how clear it is that figures are just being plucked from the air; far from business like.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas Central - Which Route?

Postby a boyle » Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:38 pm

[quote="Thomond Park"]Yes,

the green line had the new Taney bridge re-specified and little else on the route as they inherited a Victorian track bed built to accomodate two braod gauge lines.

I like your use of 3/4/5bn it aptly describes just how clear it is that figures are just being plucked from the air]

Yes but no. The foundations had to be fully dug up so to allow for diversion of telephone,gas,electricity pipes. Following that the foundation had to be redone.The foundations are just a start with reinforced track to lay down.Third the electric system is very expensive. The new electric system put in for the DART cost 170 million, and the dart doesn't come near to the level of electricity required for a fully fledged metro. So it is easy to see how 400 could be spent on the green line. To say that only the taney bridge required redoing is plain wrong, everything on the route had to be upgraded. Trams fully loaded weigh 30/40 tonnes. Metros can weigh hundreds of tonnes. The RPA's forward thinking is something that we will be very very grateful for when we can progressively move to a metro on the green line with a minimum of fuss.

As per plucking figures out of the sky , I have to agree with you ! Experienve has shown that all large engineering projects like tunnels and metros and the like always over run. The reality is that it's not possible to cost say the port tunnel until it has been done, as every tunnel is completely different and has to be designed from scratch. That is not to say that great waste doesn't occur but with respect to the luas the money has been well spent. Mr park if you don't accept this fine let's stop this and agree to disagree.
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: Luas Central - Which Route?

Postby PVC King » Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:24 pm

I think that any agency charged with procuring anything need to be experts in securing value for money; the RPA do not run railways all they do is procure the infrastructure and tender the operation of same. If one of my clients sent me out to acquire a building and I had a budget for £40m and I came back having spent £83m I would rightly be replaced by someone who could do the job.

In relation to the costs above the costs for excavation, relaying utilities and electricity had to be done anyway bearing in mind that phase 1 Luas was not intended to be horse drawn.

In relation to the progressive move to metro; there is a higher probability of moving to underground Luas than any change in gauge occuring. Looking at 10 carriage trains on both DART and the Tube really does display what is possible but likely to be ignored.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas Central - Which Route?

Postby a boyle » Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:49 pm

Thomond Park wrote:... If one of my clients sent me out to acquire a building and I had a budget for £40m and I came back having spent £83m I would rightly be replaced by someone who could do the job. ...

In relation to the costs above the costs for excavation, relaying utilities and electricity had to be done anyway bearing in mind that phase 1 Luas was not intended to be horse drawn.



Again you have missed my point , so one final time. All the original costings were for tram grade. The final product is a combination of tram and metro grade.Your example should read: if one of my clients gave me a budet for 40 million and i came back and suggested that in the long run it might be better to spend 83 million.

With respect the to the point of having to divert utilities , you have completely shot through your previous suggestions of the "vitorian line" and only the taney bridge requiring a change of spec. By excavating the track , it meant there were no old foundations on which to build. No foundations, no track, no bridges. The only thing that was left was a right of way. You are wrong to complain that because the line previously coped with trains it was an easy job.

another thing to consider is that while other countries might appear to have much cheaper tram systems , the cost of diverting utilities is borne by each company involved , or diversion doesn't occur. In ireland diversions are payed by the rpa. (economically it makes no difference , but on paper it does). This additional cost is also part of the metro price tag.

While it would be nice to be an expert in costing , it is simply not possible to do it to an accuracy that would satisfy you ! For example , the jubilee undeground ended up costing 425 million euros per kilometre due to tunnelling difficulties. The madrid extension that every paper talks about cost 50. the rpa are hoping that it will come in around 80 million per kilometre.They simply can't and won't be able to come up with a more accurate figure.
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: Luas Central - Which Route?

Postby PVC King » Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:00 pm

Best handbag out:

Are you really trying to say that a luas line wouldn't have required.

1> Acquisitions
2> Excavation
3> Utility diversion
4> Trackbed assessment and strengthening work
5> Electrical cable support system

The only real difference was that the deck of the Taney bridge had to be constructed to a wider specifiaction;

all of the track and rolling stock and power set up is specified to tram standard and unlike metro standard the green route has a number of at grade crossings which could have been eliminated if an extra 100% was available for the budget.

The other costs associated with its future proofing were negligible as all specs were governed to the standards laid down in accordance with rail safety legislation which only considered broad gauge. The money was simply squandered by extremely poor project managment skills or lack thereof.


I would be very worried if the RPA discover large scale utilities at 50-100m below ground.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas Central - Which Route?

Postby a boyle » Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:36 pm

You just can't get enough abuse can you ?

1 excavation: the foundations for the tracks , would have to cope with hundreds of tonnes. (Compare foundation for a ten story appartment block to a bungalow and you get the picture).
2.utilities diversion , this requires digging up everything up, leaving you to start from scratch , not with an old rail line, that has just had it's tracks taken up.
3. In the same way as a winding road in the wicklow hills will occasionally have gravel spread over it's length as surfacing , while a motorway has purpose designed tarmacadam to a high spec in order to cope with lorries. The same thing applies to the metals tracks and everything below : two grades , one cheaper , one not so cheap.
4.The electric system. : why did they need change the dart electric system using your logic ? (the dart upgrade cost 170 million). I will tell you why. if there are metros comming every 90 seconds at peak time, and each metro weight 10 to 20 times a tram , then you have to be able to deliver a whole lot more electricity safely. So you wouldn't suggest that the wiring in a home was sufficient for a factory , would you ?.
5. Bridges: deciding you need a bridge that can cope with a lorry instead of pedestrians is NOT simply changing the specs.
6. between sandyford and the canal there are 2 at grade junctions. They will simply be closed. total cost : no euros!
7. a large part of additional expense went into blasting the rock cutting between stillorgan and ballaly stops, so that it could accomodate the much wider metro.

as someone with an ego the size of robert maxwell , i know how hard it is to be wrong, but it is ok thomond.honestly
a boyle
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:18 pm

Re: Luas Central - Which Route?

Postby weehamster » Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:17 am

I just want to point out that the so called metro upgrade on the green line will not be a real metro (ie a heavy rail line) but will be a Light Rail system (ie a tram, based on the Porto system) which has been branded as a metro, probably to fool the people into thinking they're getting a metro system.

Also this so called metro will run through streets, so you can forget the 90 sec frequency. This also will apply to the current RPA Cherrywood extension proposal. So all the extra effort regarding the green line been able to be upgraded to a (heavy line) metro has gone to waist.
weehamster
Member
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 1:02 pm
Location: Cathair Bhaile Átha Cliath

Re: Luas Central - Which Route?

Postby PVC King » Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:16 am

WH,

on the money as always;

now time to take the handbag, why am I thinking a 1989 film about advertising?:


a boyle wrote: You just can't get enough abuse can you ?

1 excavation: the foundations for the tracks , would have to cope with hundreds of tonnes. (Compare foundation for a ten story appartment block to a bungalow and you get the picture).


What does a fully laden Luas weigh, what does a proposed and promised fully laden 50m Luas weigh? We are not talking about a Nissan Micra here.


a boyle wrote:2.utilities diversion , this requires digging up everything up, leaving you to start from scratch , not with an old rail line, that has just had it's tracks taken up.


Are you trying to say that if this were Luas alone that the utilities could have stayed in-situ?

a boyle wrote:3. In the same way as a winding road in the wicklow hills will occasionally have gravel spread over it's length as surfacing , while a motorway has purpose designed tarmacadam to a high spec in order to cope with lorries. The same thing applies to the metals tracks and everything below : two grades , one cheaper , one not so cheap.


What are you talking about the same width of trackbed had to be accomodated]4.The electric system. : why did they need change the dart electric system using your logic ? (the dart upgrade cost 170 million). I will tell you why. if there are metros comming every 90 seconds at peak time, and each metro weight 10 to 20 times a tram , then you have to be able to deliver a whole lot more electricity safely. So you wouldn't suggest that the wiring in a home was sufficient for a factory , would you ?. [/QUOTE]

The power units run at Luas spec; the poles are the same regardless of voltage what is your point or more to the point where is the Dart spec equipment on the Luas network, is it on planet RPA?

a boyle wrote:5. Bridges: deciding you need a bridge that can cope with a lorry instead of pedestrians is NOT simply changing the specs.


There is little civil engineering spec difference between a Luas and a Dart in terms of load bearing capacity as stated ad naseum the rail safety rules are the same and the number of bridges low.

a boyle wrote:6. between sandyford and the canal there are 2 at grade junctions. They will simply be closed. total cost : no euros!


Then why have additional at grade crossing been proposed on the extension? Either the RPA are as stupid as they look or Cullen is telling lies about an upgrade to metro on this route.

a boyle wrote:7. a large part of additional expense went into blasting the rock cutting between stillorgan and ballaly stops, so that it could accomodate the much wider metro.

as someone with an ego the size of robert maxwell , i know how hard it is to be wrong, but it is ok thomond.honestly



The expenditure at this point was flagged in the original EIS it was a known cost; your nit picking has led you to forget that your theory relies on a hypothesis that the Red line was delivered on budget i.e. €225m and that the Green line came in at €600m or 3.5 times its original budget.

You certainly have Maxwells capacity for figures and I think that Seamus Breananns admission that the sums over the past 5 years have been done on the back of a cigerette box are equally valid.

Why are you an apologist for this type of group?
PVC King
 

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland