Luas BXD

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:20 pm

That routing is clearly predicated on a scenario that Luas will not be extended in a northerly direction and provides the perfect loop removing the need for a turnback. As Luas will be extended further North albeit route unknown the removal of the turnback is no longer required; could one suggest The Black Church, Mounjoy St & Blessington Streetas the loop and ensure that Luas services Dublin Central/Cathal Brugha St in both directions from its extended northerly footprint.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby gunter » Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:46 pm

jimg wrote:The proposed route is terrible (splitting the line and building an new Liffey bridge). Soon after this emerged as the preferred route (after a public consultation which didn't include this route at all), the RPA published some cost estimates on their website (which I cannot find anymore). This preferred route was estimated to cost 70% more than the simple and direct route via Westmoreland St. and lower O'Connell St. The RPA should be forced to publish their evaluation of the routes; this route is worse than all the others in terms of cost, disruption during construction, operational efficiency or utility. Linking the Luas lines is a very worthwhile project but it's hard to have enthusiasm for such an illogical and convoluted route.


I agree with jimg completely on this. Splitting the lines is always undesirable as it duplicates much of the infrastructure cost, and the disruption during construction phase and it makes the system less legible permanently, but to do it here on O'Connell St./Westmoreland St [or D'Olier St.], the one boulevard route in the city centre that could take a two-way tram system effortlessly, is just daft, pure and simple.

The motivation at the time seemed to about getting ourselves another fancy new bridge, rather than about solving any perceived route problems, but even then the resultant bridge looked like a bit of a plank if I recall and in no way did it make up for the stupidity of trying to squeeze one branch of the Luas down Marlborough St.

I also don't see how a convoluted swing around at Parnell St. is any more efficient than the dead-end turn back that we've had on the other lines since day one.

People will get angry that we always seem to be negative on archiseek, but for christ sake can somebody not spot these howlers at draft design stage and stop at least some of the money going down the drain?
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Luas BXD

Postby missarchi » Fri Jun 25, 2010 4:57 am

missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1795
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:03 am

gunter wrote:I also don't see how a convoluted swing around at Parnell St. is any more efficient than the dead-end turn back that we've had on the other lines since day one.



Loops are more efficient for 2 general reasons and in the case of O'Connell St another site specific reason. Firstly trains are automatically on the right platform and no crossing clearance needs to be built into the timetable; secondly the trams don't stop for anything other than a setdown as the drivers stay at the front of the tram at all times.

The site specific reason for taking it further out is that you get construction disturbance out of the CC in one hit; just imagine if the three Luas lines were built as per the original plan then all of the construction disturbance would be behind the City now...
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby missarchi » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:38 am

parnell square loop fesiable? guess we have to get the writers to write about that...
you would even wonder if you could do 180 in oconell st?
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1795
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby gunter » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:46 am

PVC King wrote:Loops are more efficient for 2 general reasons and in the case of O'Connell St another site specific reason. Firstly trains are automatically on the right platform and no crossing clearance needs to be built into the timetable; secondly the trams don't stop for anything other than a setdown as the drivers stay at the front of the tram at all times.


Pretty marginal advantage though, especially when it's fairly inevitable that the line will eventually be extended northwards, to Broombridge, or wherever.

PVC King wrote:The site specific reason for taking it further out is that you get construction disturbance out of the CC in one hit . . .


Sorry, I don't understand that

missarchi wrote:parnell square loop fesiable? guess we have to get the writers to write about that...
you would even wonder if you could do 180 in oconell st?


But we just don't need a loop at all, or a turn-table, or a swing-around, there are dead-end turn-backs at Tallaght, College Green, Connolly, the Point and wherever that Green Line ends, what's the problem?
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:56 pm

Pretty marginal advantage though, especially when it's fairly inevitable that the line will eventually be extended northwards, to Broombridge, or wherever.

I wouldn't call 2 mins per tram reversal marginal; the frequency difference would be 4 minute versus 2 minute headways. Twice the capacity due to elimination of a major health and safety concern of trams crossing.


The site specific reason for taking it further out is that you get construction disturbance out of the CC in one hit . . .


Sorry, I don't understand that


Once the loop is built beyond Parnell Square and Dorset Street it ensures that the core City Centre has its current planned routes completed; if you go to OCS and stop then in a few years when Luas is extended to Ballymun etc then the disturbance takes place in a less public transport sensitive area; a extra little distance now has the capacity to dramatically reduce future negative externalities.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby cgcsb » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:03 pm

PVC King wrote:Once the loop is built beyond Parnell Square and Dorset Street it ensures that the core City Centre has its current planned routes completed; if you go to OCS and stop then in a few years when Luas is extended to Ballymun etc then the disturbance takes place in a less public transport sensitive area; a extra little distance now has the capacity to dramatically reduce future negative externalities.


Are you familliar with transport21? non of what you say is happening, The line BXD is a combination of the city centre link up and the Broombridge line. There will be no luas service to Dorset Street or Ballymun.
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:14 pm

As you well know MN is unaffordable and will not happen; a line will be built going north but it will be on street. BXD's route via Dominick Street makes no sense whatsoever given the straighter line up Parnell Sq....
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby cgcsb » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:14 pm

PVC King wrote:As you well know MN is unaffordable and will not happen; a line will be built going north but it will be on street. BXD's route via Dominick Street makes no sense whatsoever given the straighter line up Parnell Sq....


that may be your opinion, but that's not what's happening, the railway order application is for a line connecting Stephen's Green to Broombridge. It may not make sense to you, but that is what's happening.
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:19 pm

It may not make sense to you, but that is what's happening.


There is no railway order for BXD; it is for the flawed unnecessary bridge route of the simplistic Ciaran Cuffe inspired join the dots route which will be revised to make sense or simply conditioned by a higher authority; no doubt Dick Gleeson will present an opinion of urbanity involving full OCS exposure at DCC level extoling the virtues of redeploying the wasted bridge funds towards his figure of eight.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby cgcsb » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:27 pm

PVC King wrote:There is no railway order for BXD; it is for the flawed unnecessary bridge route of the simplistic Ciaran Cuffe inspired join the dots route which will be revised to make sense or simply conditioned by a higher authority; no doubt Dick Gleeson will present an opinion of urbanity involving full OCS exposure at DCC level extoling the virtues of redeploying the wasted bridge funds towards his figure of eight.


the railway application will be submitted on June 30th, as far as I know, the railway order application is for line BXD. A change of mind at this point is unlikely and would result in a whole new order and delay completion beyond 2020. The application is for the line displayed below:

Image
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:33 pm

Plans for Luas link-up being finalised
Tuesday, 22 June 2010 10:57
Plans are being finalised for the long-awaited link up between the two Luas lines in Dublin city centre. The cost is estimated at up to €170m.

The Rail Procurement Agency is due to make an application to An Bord Pleanála for the new line running from St Stephen's Green to Parnell Street.


The Luas link line is planned to run from St Stephen's Green by Trinity College and up O'Connell Street before doubling back down Marlborough Street and across a new bridge over the Liffey.


It would connect the Green line, which terminates at St Stephen's Green, to the Red Line which runs along Abbey Street. It would also form part of a new Line D that will connect Luas services with a suburban rail station at Broombridge near Cabra.


However, business leaders in the city are anxious that work on the new line is completed at the same time as work on Metro North which is due to start in 2012.


It is understood that the RPA wants to build them separately but the Dublin Chamber of Commerce says this would add two years to construction and consequent disruption in the city centre.


The RPA advertised its plans in the national press this morning and is due to deliver its Railway Order on June 30.
http://www.rte.ie/business/2010/0622/luas.html



http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=%5EVIX

I'm a touch lost on this as the article claims it will go to Parnell Square on the one hand but to Broombridge on the other; clear as mud as they say; the cost to Broombridge is €170m yet the estimated cost to Lucan was €1bn; why can't the route intersect with Maynooth Dart at Phibsboro and continue to Ballymun? Take out the pointless new bridge and cost falls further to certainly sub €100m if the route goes to Parnell Square prior to a proper northern route being devised.

The myth of Aircoach slow journey times from the airport to the outer CBD has been exposed......
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby EIA340600 » Sat Jun 26, 2010 1:13 pm

PVC King wrote:[


The article is confusing.I take it to mean that the loop section(BX) will be completed first with the D part to be built later, though it never actually says that.Costs could be slashed if the line simply crossed O'Connell Bridge went straight up O'Connell street and stopped at Parnell Square.If the RPA still wanted their loop, they could send it around the square instead of having a traditional turnback.
EIA340600
Member
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Luas BXD

Postby jimg » Sat Jun 26, 2010 6:19 pm

Yes the 170 million was the original estimate is for the link up to Parnell Sq from what I recall (which was estimated to cost less than 100 million for the straight forward link up).

We've gone over all this before a number of times but there is no operational benefits to the loop, you are not going to get 30 trams an hour in an on-street system no matter how you terminate the lines. The extra cost of building a loops only make sense for systems which have older tram stock (with doors on one side only). Even if there was operational benefit, it is temporary as it becomes useless once the line is extended.

I don't like being negative about public transport either but this is such a mess of a proposal: double the stops, double the disruption, double the utility diversion, an extra bridge at almost double the cost while delivering a confusing mess: Westmoreland, O'Connell St Lower, O'Connell St Upper (which has ZERO utility as a pick-up stop) are northbound only while Trinity, Marlborough and Parnell (a little over 150m from O'Connell St Upper - i.e. less than a 2 minute walk apart) southbound only.
jimg
Member
 
Posts: 480
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 9:07 pm
Location: Zürich

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Sun Jun 27, 2010 8:28 am

jimg wrote:Yes the 170 million was the original estimate is for the link up to Parnell Sq from what I recall (which was estimated to cost less than 100 million for the straight forward link up).


Those costs are pre recession and given that the works excluding the bridge are virtually all labour intensive i.e. digging up roads and fixing overhead cables to buildings the proportionate saving on the direct logical route would be higher and therefore more likely to see cuts than for a bridge where concrete prices have not fallen as much as labour costs.

jimg wrote:We've gone over all this before a number of times but there is no operational benefits to the loop, you are not going to get 30 trams an hour in an on-street system no matter how you terminate the lines. The extra cost of building a loops only make sense for systems which have older tram stock (with doors on one side only). Even if there was operational benefit, it is temporary as it becomes useless once the line is extended.


You are probably right that 30 trams per hour is ambitious but once Luas goes down College Green that will be the end private car use at that location; post port tunnel the strategic value of the quays as a freight route is no longer a consideration and the North South car axis will be split into three versus the current 'I feel like zipping accross town through the Main Street' arrangement. Clearly journey times will be slower on the on-street section but with a clear priority given to Luas frequencies can be higher than on the Red Line where car traffic considerations are higher by virtue of crossing very busy routes such as Amiens St, Gardiner St, O'Connell St, Capel St, Church St, Parkgate St and at Hueston.


If College Green were substantially calmed Dorset Street would become busier as drivers use Capel Street as a substitute for O'Connell Street Southbound and either Gardner Street or North Kind St/Chuch Street Southbound.

What I would hate to see happen is that Luas would terminate at the North end of O'Connell Street and that in a few years when it is extended that a new programme of works would create disruption in Dublin 1 again. Regardless of which direction Luas is to be extended it will certainly clear Parnell Square and enter a North West Axis into Dublin 7. I would suggest that the current phase enter a point in Dublin 7 to get construction disturbance out of the City Centre and from where the network could be extended either to Grangegorman and or Ballymun/Finglas.

I don't like being negative about public transport either but this is such a mess of a proposal: double the stops, double the disruption, double the utility diversion, an extra bridge at almost double the cost while delivering a confusing mess: Westmoreland, O'Connell St Lower, O'Connell St Upper (which has ZERO utility as a pick-up stop) are northbound only while Trinity, Marlborough and Parnell (a little over 150m from O'Connell St Upper - i.e. less than a 2 minute walk apart) southbound only.


I totally agree that the length of the line in comparison to the distance seperated makes no sense whatsoever; whilst favouring a turn back loop arrangement it needs to be girrafe (neck and head) proportioned if done to minimise costs; there are also a lot less utilities and traffic to divert once you leave the immediate core central area.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby OisinT » Tue Jun 29, 2010 8:26 pm

missarchi wrote:it all starts here...
It's a shame metro north will reduce people crossing the bridge.

*snip*

http://www.vrdublin.co.uk/dublin-ireland-tour/source/oconnorstbridge.html

http://www.archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=6703&page=2


Metro North =/= Luas BXD

Might be just a slip, but I've noticed on a lot of forums that people are confusing MN with BXD quite often.
OisinT
Member
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:20 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby OisinT » Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:50 am

Railway order documents are now available online: http://www.dublinluasbroombridge.ie/
OisinT
Member
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:20 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby StephenC » Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:03 am

What a mess this would be. There is absolutely no design input into how the heart of the city centre should look. Its seems to me that nearly every statue in the city centre will have to be relocated. There is no corresponding plan to redesign the streets in a more orderly fashion. O'Connell Street will be ruined in my view, trees removed, pavement removed, wirescape right in front of the GPO.

An absolute joke!
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Luas BXD

Postby missarchi » Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:19 pm

Although the issues have been explored in more detail it has a bus gate/metro north/dartu generic feel about it so much so these projects all look like they have been designed by the same person. Any of these stations stops would not look out of place anywhere in the world. Is there a DCC development plan? What does gehl have to say? I think the poles in the middle of the bridge should follow the centre line of spire street not the centre line of the bridge it looks odd.
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1795
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby OisinT » Wed Jun 30, 2010 1:01 pm

StephenC wrote:What a mess this would be. There is absolutely no design input into how the heart of the city centre should look. Its seems to me that nearly every statue in the city centre will have to be relocated. There is no corresponding plan to redesign the streets in a more orderly fashion. O'Connell Street will be ruined in my view, trees removed, pavement removed, wirescape right in front of the GPO.

An absolute joke!

It doesn't look like they're narrowing the median or removing any trees and/or statues from OCS from this plan: http://www.dublinluasbroombridge.ie/Downloads/PlanofProposedWorks/02-STRUCTURES/07_BXD_ST_29_B-C1.pdf

Could be wrong, but to me it looks like they are just putting the track in the right lane (northbound)
OisinT
Member
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:20 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Wed Jun 30, 2010 6:37 pm

StephenC wrote:What a mess this would be. There is absolutely no design input into how the heart of the city centre should look. Its seems to me that nearly every statue in the city centre will have to be relocated. There is no corresponding plan to redesign the streets in a more orderly fashion. O'Connell Street will be ruined in my view, trees removed, pavement removed, wirescape right in front of the GPO.

An absolute joke!


Stephen's reaction is exactly what the RPA wanted, the RPA want Metro North built at all costs and never wanted to build the Luas link up; god knows they have had 10 years to do it and haven't turned a screw. The esaiest way to prevent the link up from happening and so aid their supremely flawed MN case is to present a scheme for planning consideration with insensitive properties which will be thrown out on heritage grounds. I suggest the minister clear the deadwood from the RPA its not as if there aren't enough unemployed planners to get it right first time.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby OisinT » Wed Jun 30, 2010 6:53 pm

PVC King wrote:Stephen's reaction is exactly what the RPA wanted, the RPA want Metro North built at all costs and never wanted to build the Luas link up; god knows they have had 10 years to do it and haven't turned a screw. The esaiest way to prevent the link up from happening and so aid their supremely flawed MN case is to present a scheme for planning consideration with insensitive properties which will be thrown out on heritage grounds. I suggest the minister clear the deadwood from the RPA its not as if there aren't enough unemployed planners to get it right first time.

This may be not appropriate or possible, but I was wondering why they don't build the BXD as planned, but change the Metro North so that it begins at Grangegorman and goes from there underground to Mater and follow the rest of the planned MN line.
Does that make sense? It would cut quite a bit off the price I'd imagine. They could presumably use the same tracks but the BXD trains would continue on to Boombridge and the MN would go to airport.
OisinT
Member
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:20 pm

Re: Luas BXD

Postby PVC King » Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:20 pm

Getting the route to Phibsboro on surface is not a problem as there is the former canal bed which runs from basically Broadstone to the Royal Canal and is used as a linear park; the real problem is the section between Cross Guns Bridge and the start of Botanic Avenue from which point N2 has seperated and you are back to 3 bed semi densities and more critically traffic loadings should the bus network be tweaked to feed Luas vs An Lar.

The costings for a cut and cover tunnel from the end of the dried out canal bed to the start of Botanic Avenue would be interesting. Once the stations were located at either end of the tunnel there would be no expensive underground levels or concourses.
PVC King
 

Re: Luas BXD

Postby StephenC » Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:59 pm

The railway order documents are complex and I havent even looked at the EIS yet but the urban design statement makes me seriously wonder what the fuck is going on in this banana republic (excuse my French). What an astonishingly poor document! This is meant to be the vision for the transformation of the city centre. It is meant to redefine all the great spaces of the city for ever! (or at least for many years to come). I challenge anyone to really consider this document and really consider how it will impact the quality of the city centre. What strikes me:

  • Who are the architects who are "transforming" the city;
  • Where is the input and direction of the many over paid officials of Dublin City Council who are paid and given responsibility to manage the city - I mean you John Tierney, Dick Gleeson, Michael Stubbs and Ali Grehan et al;
  • How has this design been assessed in the context of the existing and new development plans;
  • How has it been devised in the context of the soon to be published "Public Realm Strategy" for the city centre;
  • How after all the "public consultations" which have taken place has this design been arrived.


Dontget me wrong: I completely support a Luas link. But not on these terms.

Interested parties have 5 weeks to consider this mess and make their views known to An Bord Pleanala. Do you care enough?
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

PreviousNext

Return to Irish Planning Matters