[Article] Metro work to begin in April

Metrobest

What are these "failures", exactly, SeanW? The 39 sets of traffic lights on the Red Line and 13 on the Green Line were known about when the lines and route alignment were being planned - before 2001.

It was a good idea to lower the alignment on that section of Green Line. It made the tram more accessible to passengers and is less visually disruptive. Beechwood station looks very well at-grade. There is no road through Cowper; the at-grade running has not affected the tram's performance.

The luas is a tale of two halves. I'm on record on this forum as saying that the Red Line section from James' to Connolly is a shambles. Could a worse alignment possibly have been chosen? I doubt it.

Would you please provide some reference to the RPA's quote that P11's concern was "nonsense."? I think you're quoting out of context. You persist, despite facts and statistics confirming the luas success story, in viewing the RPA as "the enemy". Therefore don't be surprised when, likewise, the RPA is not fond of your organisation. In a vacuum of hard fact, it's unwise to jump to rash conclusions. I suggest you wait and see exactly what the plan for the metro contains. You might just be in for a pleasant surprise

GallicProphet

I must say it seems to me that connecting the airport to the Dart by the east to the rest of the dart network seems a much better, faster and cheaper solution than drilling a single metro line thru city center.

is there any other reason to do it other than RPA goggles from the government ?

Winters

Metrobest wrote:

In the business case for the metro, RPA estimated a demand ratio of 4:1 peak/off-peak. In the light of our experienecs with luas (very high all-day demand), it's fair to say that this ratio is conservative. Luas's busiest day is friday - it's used for commutes to work in the morning, and for shopping/going out in the evening. !

Luas's busiest day is actually Saturday according to Michael Sheedy of the RPA.

BendiBus

GallicProphet wrote:

I must say it seems to me that connecting the airport to the Dart by the east to the rest of the dart network seems a much better, faster and cheaper solution than drilling a single metro line thru city center.

is there any other reason to do it other than RPA goggles from the government ?

To serve areas other than the airport perhaps? You know, places in Dublin where people live, work and study? It's not just for bring tourists to Temple Bar and foreign businessmen to Stephens Green.

MarkoP11

10-05-2006 wrote:

On May 7th Platform11 issued a press release, that expressed concern over the shorter trams that will be used on LUAS Line A to Tallaght. We stated that 40 metre trams like those on Line B to Sandyford, should be allocated to the Tallaght line so as to maximise the passenger carrying ability on the route. Mr. Ger Hannon of the RPA (Railway Procurement Agency) dismissed our press release as "nonsense".

Mr Ger Hannon, Newstalk 106 13:10 23-01-2006 in response to the previous demand for 40 m trams on the Tallaght line and Mr Hannons pervious claims of it being nonsense

"it was nonsense then and if it came out today, I'd still say it was nonsense."

RPA have since stated they have ordered the 10m sections for the trams though this is not confirmed by a contract award notice. Thats fact on record I'm sure newstalk have a tape if you really really want to know

These guys have no clue what they are doing, they have 13 at grade crossings on the supposedly metro upgradeable line B1 extension, apparently level crossings are fine. There are continuing rumours of level crossings on all sections of the proposed metro, can't be proven but is a serious cause for concern.

The RPA where talking about 40-50 m trains for the metro last year and are now talking about 60-90m trains or should I say trams for the metro

The RPA in November deleted a link on there homepage which quoted this

Metro achieves this vision by offering a fully segregated, high performance, high capacity rail line without any at-grade interfaces with pedestrians, road traffic or other rail services. The Metro line would travel in tunnel through the city centre. Outside the city centre the Metro would be elevated for much of its length, where there was no existing rail corridor, to avoid at grade interfaces. This dedicated line with full segregation allows a fast, frequent, and reliable service.

The url is still active if you know what it is, I've attached a screen shot to prove it is a reality that some time in the not so distant past the RPA where building a metro

They deny there where wrong about the 30m trams, called it nonsense but have ordered the 10m sections anyway while still screaming it is nonsense

They think that level crossings are acceptable on a metro alignment and on alignments which are planned for later upgrade to metro status.

Beechwood is interesting case, the alignment was dropped, clearly an economy measure. Charlemont, Ranelagh, Dundrum, Balally and Stillorgan are all fully accessible despite not being at grade so clearly it could have been retained and come the day the plans to convert the Green line to metro people will again visit the question.

The RPA can't make up there mind on anything they never get it right, nor can they admit they got it wrong. When the public consultation opens later this week there will be a huge shock

aliveandkicking

Metrobest wrote:

What are these "failures", exactly, SeanW? The 39 sets of traffic lights on the Red Line and 13 on the Green Line were known about when the lines and route alignment were being planned - before 2001.

It was a good idea to lower the alignment on that section of Green Line. It made the tram more accessible to passengers and is less visually disruptive. Beechwood station looks very well at-grade. There is no road through Cowper; the at-grade running has not affected the tram's performance.

The luas is a tale of two halves. I'm on record on this forum as saying that the Red Line section from James' to Connolly is a shambles. Could a worse alignment possibly have been chosen? I doubt it.

Would you please provide some reference to the RPA's quote that P11's concern was "nonsense."? I think you're quoting out of context. You persist, despite facts and statistics confirming the luas success story, in viewing the RPA as "the enemy". Therefore don't be surprised when, likewise, the RPA is not fond of your organisation. In a vacuum of hard fact, it's unwise to jump to rash conclusions. I suggest you wait and see exactly what the plan for the metro contains. You might just be in for a pleasant surprise

The red lind from James' to Conolly is a shambles and yes it was designed by CIE not the RPA. However if you see the RPA plan's for the green line extension to Cherrywood you would realise they are about to make the same mistakes as the red line.

Metrobest I and a many other posters on here have had many discussions in the past about the metro. Many times you have said the DART is not a metro because it has level crossings and shared trackspace with diesel rail. So now what do you think of the RPA's proposal for level crossings on the newly built Metro with the possibility of Luas sharing trackspace with it. Is this still a metro in your eyes?

For the record I agree with you that P11's constant criticism of the RPA is counter productive and they should be more constructive than to brand the RPA "a bunch of clowns." However the fact remains, twice on national radio (once last year and once recently) the RPA spokesman Ger Hannon dismissed the idea of 40 metre trams on the red line as nonsense. This made my blood boil as i have to on a daily basis endure chronic overcrowding on 30 metre trams on the red line. No need for documentary evidence of this Metrobest I heard it with my own ears.

Winters

MarkoP11 wrote:

The url is still active if you know what it is,

http://www.rpa.ie/?id=65

MarkoP11

Winters wrote:

http://www.rpa.ie/?id=65

:mad: Now they now which one it is they will take it down :mad:

I'm more than happy to admit where the RPA get it right, line C1 to the Point for instance is more or less perfect, could be made better if they had some serious crowd control at the point stop, that will be on the record of the public inquiry

The RPA have done nothing to gain the trust of Dublin first it was the 30m v 40m tram issue, there management of the Luas project was a mess. It will be metro next week when Dublin discovers that its nothing more than a tram in a tunnel not what they where sold, a high quality segregated mass transit system, remember the CGI video of the train flying out of the tunnel. I even remember the days of the Japanese wanting to build a DART spec metro to the airport with full segregation and high frequency

Transport21 Fan

I can confirm that Ger Hannon said that - in fact it was broadcast on news bulletins all day long. It pissed me off too at the time, but not as much as Bohs being beaten by Shels in Tolka that same week.

However... since then, the RPA said they will order the extra 10m sections.

I honestly do not know why the RPA cannot run 40m trams at peak hours on and 30m off peak on both lines which is what I orginally suggested to them.

I suspect this shortie tram issue to be resolved with the Bx line completion and who knows, it might result in Green Line trams servicing Hueston. It all depends on what the RPA are planning for the actual track junction of the two lines. They are on record as saying the have "something major" planned for the O'Connell street stop.

dr zoidberg

MarkoP11 wrote:

The RPA in November deleted a link on there homepage which quoted this ...

Unbelievable. It's like some sort of Communist régime. If they spent half as much time on doing their job rather than destroying statements which show them to be hypocrites we could have had a metro by now. It's like 1984 ffs.

SeanW

Don't worry, I took a save-archive.

You'll need Internet Explorer to view this.

Maskhadov

Metro achieves this vision by offering a fully segregated, high performance, high capacity rail line without any at-grade interfaces with pedestrians, road traffic or other rail services. The Metro line would travel in tunnel through the city centre. Outside the city centre the Metro would be elevated for much of its length, where there was no existing rail corridor, to avoid at grade interfaces. This dedicated line with full segregation allows a fast, frequent, and reliable service.

So this is what WERE NOT GETTING??. What a farce and they havent even started boring those holes for the geology yet.

LUAS was the biggest farce in Western Europe. Metro seems like the follow on slap stick act.

ad hoc

Such a shower of rabble-rousers.

The RPA haven't deleted or obscured any such information from their site. You'll find that exact page on a fully segregated Metro in three clicks from the main page - no need to know the URL. Just follow these simple instructions:

Go to www.rpa.ie

1) Click on the Metro section.
2) Click on About Us.
3) Click on Overview.

Now, that wasn't too difficult, was it? There it is - verbatim as archived.

MarkoP11

The Metro section was changed in late October quite a few pages where chopped and links removed, the front page was changed and links removed thence why I could no longer get to the page the way I first did which was as I recall from the homepage of the metro project, its by no means easy to find unless you know exactly how to get there

The page was always there it was not deleted (well not yet) it was how to get to it changed

Its not the first page thats a was obscured remember the Line B1 plans, remember how quickly they disappeared when someone here found them?

Whats the bets the page will be removed/edited etc within the next 48 hours as it is very very far from the truth

So on one hand a metro is a fully segregated high performance system with no at grade interfaces and then level crossings are OK ?

I'm confused are we building a metro or a tram system?

jd

Does anybody have details of the 3 routes to be examined? Also when are the specs of the metro??/luas?? being released?
jd

MarkoP11

Route 1 West is via Liffey Junc, the orignal DTO route more or less, not actually possible given Luas to Liffey Junction but you never know

Route 2 Central is more or less the route known as 3B/3A which is Stephens Green College Green O'Connell Street (Gresham) Mater, Botanic Ave, DCU, Ballymun, Metropark, Airport then Swords

Route 3 East goes through Drumcondra

The hot money is on route 2, the central route as it is the one the RPA have been pushing and it does make some sense if the connectivity is done correctly, eg Glasnevin

Full details should be released this afternoon, but don't expect hard details

Victor

SeanW wrote:

Don't worry, I took a save-archive.

You'll need Internet Explorer to view this.

This page, the page I dowloaded in October 2004 and the page I looked at last night appear to be all the same.

MicraBoy

Some more details. I likes pictures.

The Irish Examiner wrote:

Metro to be running by 2012: Cullen

Dublin’s Metro should be up and running by 2012 carrying 80,000 passengers a day from St Stephen's Green to Swords, via the airport, it was claimed today.

As the three route options were unveiled, transport minister Martin Cullen claimed the 18km Metro North line would cut car journeys in the capital by 15 million a year.

Mr Cullen said the project will take four years to construct and will be paid for out of the Government's €34bn Transport 21 plan.

Minister Cullen refused to predict exactly how much the metro would cost.

“I’m not going to go out in the market with predicted figures opening up a mugging for the state. We know in broad terms what the project will cost,” the minister said.

All three routes start at Stephen’s Green running under Trinity College and the River Liffey before crossing beneath O’Connell Street.

Proposals on a central, west and east line are being put forward.

All three include underground sections, several kilometres at street level and an elevated section.
Plans for the central line, which the Railway Procurement Agency believes is the best, have included options for stations at stops including O’Connell Street, Mater Hospital and Botanic Road.

The line would come above ground before running onto Ballymun, out to the airport and onwards to Swords.

The west route has possible stops at Tower Street, the Rotunda and Broadstone before crossing the Cabra Road, running on to Finglas crossing the M50 near the exit for the N2 and onto the airport and Swords.

The east line includes possible stations at Hawkins Street, O’Connell Street, Mater Hospital, Drumcondra and Griffith Avenue before coming above ground near Whitehall. This line would then stop at Santry, the Clonshaugh Road before heading on to the airport.

A public consultation process began today giving businesses and residents along the proposed routes a chance to give their opinions. Public meetings will also take place between now and July for people to voice their concerns.

It is hoped the Metro will remove 41,000 cars a day from Dublin’s streets, with a train running at least every four minutes. Journey times from the city centre to the airport will take 17 minutes while commuters travelling to Swords will spend 26 minutes on the Metro.


Plans are already underway to ensure this system integrates with other services in the city including Luas, bus services and inter-city rail networks.

“Metro will reduce travel times and congestion, improve the reliability, availability and quality of public transport, and make public transport more attractive to car users,” Mr Cullen said.

“Reducing car journeys can only have a beneficial effect on the net air quality in Dublin. Metro is set to improve the quality of life for the people of Dublin and for those visiting the capital on business or as tourists.”

Padraic White, RPA chairman, said: “While the Metro would serve the airport it was estimated that 80 per cent of passengers would be commuters living on Dublin’s north side.”

He revealed the RPA would choose the preferred route in July and a formal railway order would be submitted to the minister in 2007.

Work on the Metro, which will last for at least four years looks set to begin in 2008 with the RPA overseeing the project with the help of Dublin City Council, Fingal County Council and the Dublin Airport Authority.

Tests on underground conditions throughout the city are due to begin in the coming weeks but the RPA insisted Metro North would not run into many of the problems and controversies which surrounded the over-budget, behind schedule Dublin port tunnel.

Officials revealed the Metro tunnel would be at least half the size at 5.5 metres, built between 20 to 50 metres below the surface for some eight-nine kilometres.

Mr White also said the RPA was committed to giving residents and businesses their say on the massive project.

“Consultation is an essential part of the process in the delivery of Metro North and we are determined to make this process of consultation as extensive as possible whilst sticking to a very ambitious deadline,” he said.

Mr Cullen and the RPA also said plans and proposals for Metro lines in the west of the city serving Clondalkin, Tallaght and Blanchardstown would also be published in the coming months with a view to begin construction in the next five years.

ad hoc

RPA Metro North announcement: http://www.rpa.ie/?id=27
RPA Metro North Newsletter: http://www.rpa.ie/?id=289

MarkoP11

Compare this

RPA will consider the main route options taking account of views submitted by those who participate in public consultation. Contact details of participants will be entered on a database and participants will be notified of
the route option finally selected. Following selection of the best overall route option the emphasis will then focus on consultation relating to the design and possible construction methods of the tunnels & portals, track
layout, stations etc. along the chosen route. An Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared for the chosen route.

Dublin Metro will be a modern, attractive and highly accessible mass transit system for the commuters of Dublin. It will be similar in concept to Metro systems in many European cities of similar size to Dublin. In essence, Metro will operate as a fully segregated line in congested city centre areas, using a mix of tunnelling, cuttings and elevated structures as appropriate, and operate more like a light rail system in the less congested outer suburban environment where less capacity is needed.

To the promise

Metro achieves this vision by offering a fully segregated, high performance, high capacity rail line without any at-grade interfaces with pedestrians, road traffic or other rail services. The Metro line would travel in tunnel through the city centre. Outside the city centre the Metro would be elevated for much of its length, where there was no existing rail corridor, to avoid at grade interfaces. This dedicated line with full segregation allows a fast, frequent, and reliable service.

maxheadroom

And, if you look at the cover image, its of a bombardier flexity outlook tram from the porto 'metro'. Now, go look at the porto metro page. Looks an awful lot like the luas to me...

It looks like we won't even get a 'SnelTram', just a normal tram, except in a tunnel in the city centre.

murphaph

A tram in a tunnel may be just what Dublin needs. Let's face it, the Green Line is very good because it's segregated, the Red Line is very good from James's to the Square because it's segregated.

If we can somehow incorporate those bits into this metro we'll be on to a winner. My main concern is the number of at grade crossings on the Cherrywood extension more than th metro being a tram in a tunnel.

Using low floor units capable of running under 750Vdc opens up many more possibilities in my mind. There will be large amounts of segregated Luas line that can all be knitted together with tunneling leaving a metro level of service across the city.

I like the idea of the metro being like the Porto one. I think it'll work for Dublin like it works for other cities of similar size and of much higher density come to think of it (Cologne).

If we were to go heavy rail (it's gonna be european standard gauge, that is not gonna change now) we'll have 3 incompatible systems, if we go the light-metro route a-la Porto, we'll have just 2 and can create many more 0 change journeys (Ballymun-Citywest, Ballymun-Square, Ballymun-Fatima and possibly on underground in 10 years).

Looking at the route map, it struck me that if we go premetro we can later incorporate the Luas track from Broadstone to Liffey Junction into another metro quality line running from Finglas to Broadstone and tunneling on to Fatima, linking to the Red line and creating an almost entirely segregated route.

There just seem to be many more options with premetro than heavy rail IMO. The Tallaght line will be totally underutilised by keeping it the way it is. It could be so much more useful if plugged into segregated alignment from Fatima onwards.

jd

murphaph wrote:

A tram in a tunnel may be just what Dublin needs. .

Are you serious? Serving Swords AND the Airport?

aliveandkicking

Maybe Murphaph should have phrased it "a high capacity tram in a tunnel may be just what Dublin needs" which is what it will be. We are talking double length Luas trams every three minutes.

Personally I have an open mind. The RPA's ideas for the metro are beginning to make some sense however I believe any at grade level crossings on the metro will be a disaster and I sincerely hope there won't be any.

SeanW

Well, in addition to now seeming to be a glorified tram with an M sticker on the side, the RPA, in the preferred Central Route.

http://www.rpa.ie/cms/download.asp?id=105

Although Glasnevin Junction was listed as an interchange point in T21s tacky looking flyer, the RPA now seems to have forgotten all about it drafted the line to be nearly as far away from the Junction as they can manage while putting the station in the area a good deal North-East at Botanic Road.

I'd sure love to see the RPAs cheerleaders committee here explain THAT one.

GerardKeating

murphaph wrote:

If we were to go heavy rail (it's gonna be european standard gauge, that is not gonna change now)

Why ???

murphaph wrote:

we'll have 3 incompatible systems, if we go the light-metro route a-la Porto, we'll have just 2 and can create many more 0 change journeys (Ballymun-Citywest, Ballymun-Square, Ballymun-Fatima and possibly on underground in 10 years).

Unless the Metro is DART compatable, we will have three different incompatable systems

• DART/Arrow
• Luas
• Metro

A Luas might be able to run over a Metro line, but the Metro will not be able to run over Luas lines, hence the mention by the RPA of the need to "upgrade" the Sandyford line to Metro.

The origional DTA plan for the Metro Airport was to continue the line to Tallaght via Harrolds Cross and Link into Metro West. If Metro west was DART and was extended so that it continued from where it join Metro North to Howth junction and onward to Howth.

The could give 5 DART Lines when Transport 21 is finished.

1. Greystones to Maynooth
2. Kildare to Balbriggan
3. Tallaght to Airport/Swords
4. Tallaght to Howth (Metro West)
5. Dublin to Pace/Navan

And with suitable junction, more options, like

• Howth-Spenser Dock-Kildare,
• Tallaght-Leixlip-Maynooth
• Howth-Leixlip-Maynoth

The current DART is not 100% Metro, but there is no reason why the new "Metro" lines cannot be build as DART. It will not effect costs much and a 8 car DART will have a lot more capacity than the proposed 3 car Metro trams.

Winters

GerardKeating wrote:

A Luas might be able to run over a Metro line, but the Metro will not be able to run over Luas lines, hence the mention by the RPA of the need to "upgrade" the Sandyford line to Metro.

The RPA 'metro' will be interoperable with Luas. It will have the same gauge and 100% low floor. It is modelled on the Metro Do Porto. The upgrading that the RPA talk about is in fact platform extensions. You will notice that space has been left on most green line stops for just that.

Transport21 Fan

Having seen the flyer now, I am more excited about the MetroNorth than I was before. The metro in Porto is a sweet system and bringing this to Dublin a city about the same size and population, makes a lot of sense. I think this is going to be fantastic and I would say the Central Option is already a done deal. The other options also give rise to future metro routes and possibilites as pointed out by Phillip.

I am pleasently surprised to see the metro terminate so far north of Swords and the M1 interchange is a great idea. This would keep huge numbers of cars out of the city centre as people driving in from north of Swords could just park their cars there and metro into An Lar. Sweet.

I wonder will a predestrian access be made between the Metro station at Drumcondra and the IE commuter station? Be stupid if not as there is the link with the Maynooth, Sligo, Mullingar and Navan lines right there. P11 could be a great help in pushing this at this early stage. Getting DCU involved in lobbying for this interchange might be a good idea as well.

on a side note...regarding the crush loads on the Red Line between Connolly and Heuston - this could be reduced in the morning if IE ran a peak time service from Connolly to Kildare. This is another reason to run commuter services on the Park Tunnel route. Again, P11 could add this equation as I suspect that a lot of the crushed commuters on the trams are going to Kildare.

Either way, I must say I am very happy with the way the Metro is panning out and personally I can't wait for it. The interopertion with the Luas holds tremendous promise for the future. Bring is on!

aliveandkicking

Transport21 Fan wrote:

I wonder will a predestrian access be made between the Metro station at Drumcondra and the IE commuter station? Be stupid if not as there is the link with the Maynooth and Navan lines right there. P11 could be a great help in pushing this at this early stage.

The central (blue) route doesn't go through Drumcondra. The nearest it gets to the Sligo/Maynooth/Navan line is Botanic Road which is a good 400metres away. Not exactly good integration.

Apart from that I am pleased with the proposals. M1 park and ride is a great idea.

T21fan, great idea about Conolly Kildare service relieving congestion on Luas. Thats what I call joined up thinking!

Transport21 Fan

aliveandkicking wrote:

T21fan, great idea about Conolly Kildare service relieving congestion on Luas. Thats what I call joined up thinking!

Of course it is. I have always been good at this stuff. Just because I left P11 does not mean I don't still think about this stuff. You were telling me I was past my sell-by date there other day. I expect an apology at least, but baring that a few cans of stout mailed to me in the post would be better.

Pity about the Botanic station being so far from Drumcondra...this is not good from an integration point of view. This is what rail lobbying is for.

Transport21 Fan

MetroWest details coming in the next few months (bottom of article). Perhaps the conenction between the MaynoothSligo/Navan lines and the Aiport will be in that? I suspect it will be how these lines will have a one-change airport link.

Personally, I am more facinated by the MetroWest proposals that MetroNorth as we have had no information so far really - let's hope there are more pleasent surprises like the M1 link outlined today in it.:)

http://www.sbpost.ie/breakingnews/breaking_story.asp?j=3704445&p=37x446x&n=3704537&x=

Metro to be running by 2012: Cullen
28/02/2006 - 3:52:04 PM

Dublin’s Metro should be up and running by 2012 carrying 80,000 passengers a day from St Stephen's Green to Swords, via the airport, it was claimed today.

As the three route options were unveiled, transport minister Martin Cullen claimed the 18km Metro North line would cut car journeys in the capital by 15 million a year.

Mr Cullen said the project will take four years to construct and will be paid for out of the Government's €34bn Transport 21 plan.

Minister Cullen refused to predict exactly how much the metro would cost.

“I’m not going to go out in the market with predicted figures opening up a mugging for the state. We know in broad terms what the project will cost,” the minister said.

All three routes start at Stephen’s Green running under Trinity College and the River Liffey before crossing beneath O’Connell Street.

Proposals on a central, west and east line are being put forward.

All three include underground sections, several kilometres at street level and an elevated section.
Plans for the central line, which the Railway Procurement Agency believes is the best, have included options for stations at stops including O’Connell Street, Mater Hospital and Botanic Road.

The line would come above ground before running onto Ballymun, out to the airport and onwards to Swords.

The west route has possible stops at Tower Street, the Rotunda and Broadstone before crossing the Cabra Road, running on to Finglas crossing the M50 near the exit for the N2 and onto the airport and Swords.

The east line includes possible stations at Hawkins Street, O’Connell Street, Mater Hospital, Drumcondra and Griffith Avenue before coming above ground near Whitehall. This line would then stop at Santry, the Clonshaugh Road before heading on to the airport.

A public consultation process began today giving businesses and residents along the proposed routes a chance to give their opinions. Public meetings will also take place between now and July for people to voice their concerns.

It is hoped the Metro will remove 41,000 cars a day from Dublin’s streets, with a train running at least every four minutes. Journey times from the city centre to the airport will take 17 minutes while commuters travelling to Swords will spend 26 minutes on the Metro.


Plans are already underway to ensure this system integrates with other services in the city including Luas, bus services and inter-city rail networks.

“Metro will reduce travel times and congestion, improve the reliability, availability and quality of public transport, and make public transport more attractive to car users,” Mr Cullen said.

“Reducing car journeys can only have a beneficial effect on the net air quality in Dublin. Metro is set to improve the quality of life for the people of Dublin and for those visiting the capital on business or as tourists.”

Padraic White, RPA chairman, said: “While the Metro would serve the airport it was estimated that 80 per cent of passengers would be commuters living on Dublin’s north side.”

He revealed the RPA would choose the preferred route in July and a formal railway order would be submitted to the minister in 2007.

Work on the Metro, which will last for at least four years looks set to begin in 2008 with the RPA overseeing the project with the help of Dublin City Council, Fingal County Council and the Dublin Airport Authority.

Tests on underground conditions throughout the city are due to begin in the coming weeks but the RPA insisted Metro North would not run into many of the problems and controversies which surrounded the over-budget, behind schedule Dublin port tunnel.

Officials revealed the Metro tunnel would be at least half the size at 5.5 metres, built between 20 to 50 metres below the surface for some eight-nine kilometres.

Mr White also said the RPA was committed to giving residents and businesses their say on the massive project.

“Consultation is an essential part of the process in the delivery of Metro North and we are determined to make this process of consultation as extensive as possible whilst sticking to a very ambitious deadline,” he said.

Mr Cullen and the RPA also said plans and proposals for Metro lines in the west of the city serving Clondalkin, Tallaght and Blanchardstown would also be published in the coming months with a view to begin construction in the next five years.

A Dub in Glasgo

Having looked at the PDF of Metro North routes, I think it will be an absolute travesty that a structure on stilts is proposed through large parts of the route

Maskhadov

Personally I dont really mind what the rail cars look like. If it has the capacity to carry as many people as a motorway per hour, be able to run at 90 second intervals and is 100% segregated then I havent anything to complain about.

I think the blue line is the best route and hope its picked.

In the future when (if) the two metro lines are completed future lines will be added. Something like Chicago would be excellent

hopefully

MarkoP11

Of course if anyone bother to do the maths they will realise that running Kildare Spencer Dock will do absolutely zilch to reduce the demand for Luas at Heuston as the number of passengers going through Heuston is set to double by 2010 as a result the numbers on Luas (even allowing for a significant in increase service levels) will continue to climb even if there are fully loaded trains travelling through the Park Tunnel

The use of this route was put to the Kildare Route public inquiry both in written form and by oral submission. Iarnrod Eireann are also on record as saying it will be done The only way to totally solve the issue is the interconnector tunnel giving most people a direct journey which in turn releases a huge amount of Luas capacity on the Red line as well as the planned Lucan line. This is not really a consideration in the Metro planning

The RPA have once again made a total mess of the integration, where is the stop in Glasnevin on the T21 map, the one that was shown as a interchange location? The one the O'Reilly report said should be investigated further, I know the RPA didn't bother, not enough trains passing through was the excuse, hmm 12 an hour not enough its fine for Stephen Green. Why does the preferred route miss the main airport building? If you live in Maynooth, Clonsilla or on the proposed Navan and Pace line you are pretty screwed if you want to get to the airport, DCU etc. What of the later extension of the metro towards Cherrywood without Glasnevin it would require 2 changes (Cherrywood-Green-Pearse-Maynooth or Cherrywood-Green-Liffey Junc-Maynooth) with Glasnevin it would be only one

The Drumcondra option isn't going to happen since it misses the Metropark development, Ballymun and DCU, of course the RPA missed Drumcondra station by at least 200m. It should be noted that services from Maynooth/Navan will most likely use the Midland line which doesn't pass through Drumcondra station

Where two routes cross you have a interchange station thats fairly basic transport planning have a look at the London Underground map is a web of interconnecting lines

maxheadroom

Maskhadov wrote:

Personally I dont really mind what the rail cars look like. If it ... is 100% segregated then I havent anything to complain about.

It won't be - they've as good as admitted they're building a tram in a tunnel, with standard light rail features in the outlying parts and 'metro' features in the middle bit

RPA Flyer wrote:

In essence, Metro will operate as a fully segregated line in congested city centre areas, using a mix of tunnelling, cuttings and elevated structures as appropriate, and operate more like a light rail system in the less congested outer suburban environment where less capacity is needed.

I don't understand how the standard problems that a tram system has when trying to stick to a 'once every X minutes' frequency (interfaces with other road vehicles, waiting at lights / signals, pedestrians walking out in front of it) will suddenly dissapear on the outer sections of this 'metro' and allow th middle section to run at high frequency, high reliability. After all, the system is only as reliable as its weakest link.

Winters

In fact NONE of the three route options integrate with the Maynooth/Navan line. Am I missing something?

maxheadroom wrote:

I don't understand how the standard problems that a tram system has when trying to stick to a 'once every X minutes' frequency (interfaces with other road vehicles, waiting at lights / signals, pedestrians walking out in front of it) will suddenly dissapear on the outer sections of this 'metro' and allow th middle section to run at high frequency, high reliability. After all, the system is only as reliable as its weakest link.

My understanding so far will be that from the tunnel inbound the system will run under conventional signalling. This will enable trams to be run at much higher frequencies. If indeed that it is fully segregated as far as metropark then the signalling could be pushed further outbound.

If the option of tunnelling under Dublin Airport is chosen then the signalling could be extended as far north as there thus offering high frequency from St. Stephen's Green to Dublin Airport. Not too sure about Swords yet.

This talk to outer suburban line of sight running will be more prevalent on the Belgard to Ballymun sections on the metrowest.

Signalling can achieve 90sec headways while the most line of sight can realistically achieve would be 3min headways. The system will start off with possibly 60m units running at 4 to 5 min intervals.

dr zoidberg

The west option has a stop at Tara St. station, integrating with the Maynooth DART line. Intercity trains from Maynooth terminate at Connolly and would not integrate with it.

Of course the original plan according to T21 was to have the Metro stopping at a new Glasnevin station to integrate with the Maynooth line but none of the proposed Metro stations are close enough to the existing rail line, with a walk of at least 100 m required.

The LUAS spur from Connolly to Drumcondra will also integrate directly with the Maynooth line, and the Metro itself if the west option is chosen as it proposes a Tara St. metro station at the existing DART station. The O'Connell St stops could also allow passengers on the other proposed routes to change to the Maynooth line, with a short walk to Middle Abbey St. Luas station.

Bill McH

maxheadroom wrote:

they've as good as admitted they're building a tram in a tunnel, with standard light rail features in the outlying parts and 'metro' features in the middle bit

Well it appears they have actually admitted it...

Central (Blue) route option wrote:

Possible locations for a depot for maintenance and TRAM storage are in the vicinity of the Ballymun Road/M50 interchange, etc., etc.

MarkoP11

Firstly the West option is not happening, its too long and too expensive thats why it got dropped nearly 2 years ago. The RPA have to provide at least 3 routes to satisfy legal requirements its there to make up the numbers.

There is no Luas to Drumcondra its going to Broadstone and Liffey Junction using the old railway alignment. So clearly the two can't coexist (metro woudl be at 90 sec frequency at that point), its one of the other. The plan long term is to extend that Luas line to Finglas. As the map shows there isn't a direct rail connection at Liffey Junc anyway.

The key location on the map is where the blue alignment crosses both Maynooth line tracks, the Drumcondra pair (in use) and the Midland pair (for Spencer Dock 2007), if the metro alignment was shifted slightly the metro would pass underneath Glasnevin Junc where the lines touch thus affording a perfect connection opportunity taking in Longford/Maynooth/Clonsilla/Pace/Navan and any rail services coming through the Park Tunnel allowing a change between 3 lines at one place, more trains will pass through Glasnevin than Stephens Green at peak times

Lennoxschips

wouldn't it make sense to continue the tunneling from stephen's green to the harcourt line and upgrade and integrate the green line with the metro?

of course, then all the on-street tram lines around stephen's green wouldn't be needed anymore and everyone would have egg on their face...

mackerski

The more I look at this, the more I think that we need to get our TD's out shouting about these plans before they get firmed up. I'm not (yet) worried about the fact that the vehicles look likely to be trammish (though total length of each train is unlcear to me, anybody know what it is in Porto?). If the trains are long enough, frequent enough, fast enough and undisturbed by external traffic, then by all means let them be light instead of heavy.

I'm also not worried about level crossings - I would be worried if I thought there were any, but the plans don't suggest that's the case. On the non-elevated surface stretches, they refer to it running along roads, not on them. This needs to be clarified, though, because, especially if the vehicles are of lowish capacity, the frequency has to be maintained.

No, my big problem is station placement. For integration, it's crap. For providing a useful service to airport users, the smart money is on an alignment which, unless it gets the proposed detour, leaves customers at the front gate of the airport instead of at a terminal.

The RPA site (for now) aknowledges about the impotance of integrating with other transport modes. Let's see how well the central line does:

* Luas at Stephen's Green: fine

* DART at city centre: fine via interconnector at Stephen's Green. Lack of Tara St. not a problem and line's own city-centre stations probably better for most travellers.

* Luas at O'Connell St: crap Abbey St. is half way between two stations and a long walk from either.

* DART (future) on Maynooth line: Absent. DART line lies half way between two metro stations and there's no likely site for a future DART station on the crossing point (you'd have to choose between the two CIE lines at this point).

The other lines are little better, and suffer from the further drawback that they'll never be built. The eastern line may have a station at Drumcondra, but not, inexplicably, at the existing Drumcondra station even though it could be. The Western line has a station it calls Liffey Junction, but it's placed away from the CIE tracks that it should be connecting to.

Do the RPA think we won't notice? Somebody please prove them wrong.

Dermot

BendiBus

I can't belive the RPA is seriously considering dropping airport bound passengers at the GSH. If that's the case then it shows a shocking contempt for customers. Or complete stupidity - not sure which.

I'm guesing they're offering a number of proposals where only 1 is actually acceptable. I note there's a possible alternate central route which follows the west route alignment under the airport and serves the passenger terminal.

Presumably this is what they actually intend. It requires tunnelling and more expense I suppose, hence they have to offer an alternative. A lucicrous alternative forces the selection of the correct option.

The lack of integration with the Maynooth line is also very poor. Crossing such an important rail line without offering an interchange makes no sense. It would surely add to the RPA passenger numbers as well as IÉ.

Pfungstadter

Not impressed with the "intergration" that I can see on the route map.
There is no station near the Tallaght LUAS line?

And why spend over €100,000,000 on connecting the two LUAS lines when you can extend the Metro to the old harcourt allignment for probably the same money?

The platforms should be long enough to cater for 90m (6carriages) trains minimum!!!!
The DART trains are 120m (8 carriages) and they are packed. Having crappy 30 (2 carriages) or 45 (3 carriages) metre trains is a joke. To my knowledge that's what happened in Lisbon and they had to spend a fortune extending the platforms underground.

The fact that the LUAS was built to a different track gauge baffles me when all rail in Ireland has been broad gauge even the old tram system.

Having an undergound terminus is silly and expensive, it should run through to the Harcourt line.

Sorry but I really feel that there should be a FULL Metro system and not trams underground. We need the capacity in this city for 50 years time not now or ten years time. Some forward thinking would help!!!

Sorry if I seem grumpy about it but I get the feeling so much that people in these jobs don't think laterally about the future for the infrastructure that they are building

GerardKeating

Winters wrote:

The RPA 'metro' will be interoperable with Luas. It will have the same gauge and 100% low floor. It is modelled on the Metro Do Porto. The upgrading that the RPA talk about is in fact platform extensions. You will notice that space has been left on most green line stops for just that.

It this is true, then which is more important, Interopertion with DART or Luas. The DART network is still bigger than the Luas network, and has much higher capacity.

Maskhadov

One of the biggest bones of contention for me is as mentioned above the lack of vision. Anything delivered like LUAS or MetroLITE is grand for today but Dublin will grow (upwards) in the coming decades and dubliners will just look back at the bad planning and complete failure to think BIG.

Along the route there is planning for high dentisty accomodation. If Dublin ever becomes a 6 story (as opposed to 2) sky line then there will be a far bigger demand put on LUAS (already at near capacity) and MetroLITE. Has ANY though gone into this ?

gobdaw

Listing out base-line requirements for Metro North, and their provision in the consultation process (assuming the Central route) would look like the following:

1 Facility to extend Metro south from Stephan’s Green – Not Known

2 Interchange at Tara for Dundalk/Greystones - Yes

3 Interchange at Glasnevin junction for Maynooth services to Spencer Dock or Connolly and Kildare via Park tunnel – No

4 Ballymun served – Yes

5 DCU served – No

6 Mater Hospital served – Yes

7 Airport terminals served - No

8 Swords served – Yes

9 Park n ride facilities - Yes

In view of the relatively short distance from Lissenhall to connect with (say) Donabate, and possibly more relevant, the reserved rail alignment which would make possible the extension of Metro west to the northern rail line at Kilbarrack, the use of compatible rail gauges and power supplies seem sensible even if now forlorn:

10 Compatible rail gauge and specification with Dart – No

11 Compatible power supply with Dart – No

BendiBus

gobdaw wrote:

2 Interchange at Tara for Dundalk/Greystones - Yes

Only on the West Route. Central & East serve Trinity (College Street/D'Olier St.?) instead. Levaing Stephens Green as the only heavy rail interchange. And then only post-interconnector.

SeanW

I would add to that "compatible rail guage and power supply with Luas" and again, a big fat NO.

It's a bit of a Jack Sprat case.

On the one hand the power supply will be DART 1500VDC AFAIK. You couldn't run much of a Metro on 750VDC nor could the present Luas wiring deal with a Metro. You will never see a Luas on Metro track or a Metro on Luas track unless serious investments are made in onboard voltage transformers which could be a huge mess.

On the other hand, with 1500 VDC OHLE, Metro could gain operational economies of scale with DART and heavy rail, use the same facilities, such as heavy engineering and maintenance facilities, but the RPA has to introduce more Luas Tram rail gauge presumably to go with the Luas Tram platforms and Luas Tram Level Crossings every 5 metres.

And looking at the Central Line map it's really scary - the RPA intends to build the Central line IN A CURVE underneath the heavy railway lines at Glasnevin Junction.

That means that it will be impossible to build an interchange station for the Glasnevin area lines as the safety people and legislation would never allow for a new station platform on a curve.

MarkoP11

I am told and in writing that the metro will use 1500V DC and that response did mention the sharing of track with Luas

And DCU is served by the preferred blue alignment

On capacity the proposal put forward has twice the capacity as was first proposed by the RPA in the O'Reilly report thus its looking ok

Metrobest

I'm haven't seen the maps yet (can't bring up PDFs here) but from what I'm getting from the posts, it seems there aren't any big surprises. At least not for me.

The metro cannot do everything; it's just one line. But just look what it does do. It integrates with all rail modes, in particular at Stephen's Green, but also possibly at Tara Street. The underground walkways are one of the easiest solutions to put in place; they are common in metro systems the world over. If needed/desired, there can be walkways at Glasnevin and at Tara Street. This obsession with Glasnevin Junction and integration with the Maynooth line has to end. Right now! If you truly believe DART is "metro", then what's the problem with making a change of station en route? For example, Singapore's amazingly efficient MRT systems requires passengers to change once en route from the city centre to the super-modern Chiangi airport. No problem: the connections are easy, the trains frequent. That's what matters more than anything else.

I now want to pour a huge bucket of cold water on some of the wilder speculation smouldering through this thread. Check out this link from the DoT website. According to it (dated March 1), the overground section of metro will be fully segregated from traffic!!!!!

http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=7326&lang=ENG&loc=1887