Metro North is in doubt (never voting FF again if they scrap this)

darkman2

Major projects will have to deliver value, says Lenihan

OLIVIA KELLY



MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE projects such as Metro North will have to prove they can deliver value for money before they will be given Government sanction, Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan has said.

Mr Lenihan was speaking at a meeting of Dublin business interests, organised by the Lord Mayor Eibhlin Byrne, where he was asked to give assurances that investment in the city would continue, despite the economic downturn.

Mr Lenihan said the planning of the metro project, the 17km rail line from the city centre to the airport and Swords, was under way, but he stopped short of confirming that the metro would go ahead.

“The Government won’t sign off on something on the basis of a colourful brochure without ensuring it represents value for money,” he said.

Mr Lenihan’s comments reflect a new cautious attitude in Government in relation to the metro project. In recent weeks Minister for Transport,Noel Dempsey said the tender process for the Metro North project would go ahead “as will the project if it is in the budgetary limits we set”.

Dublin Chamber of Commerce chief executive Gina Quin said the city would suffer significant economic damage if the metro and other transportation projects did not go ahead.

“We have been living right throughout the economic boom of the last 10 years with a major infrastructural deficit that’s costing €2 billion a year in traffic congestion. If we don’t proceed now there will be very serious consequences for the future.”

The Lord Mayor said she was asking Mr Lenihan to prioritise Dublin in terms of securing infrastructure and foreign direct investment.

“I’m looking for the recognition of Dublin as an important economic driver, not just for the city region but for the country as a whole.”

Dublin was not currently, in business terms, in a position to compete with other major European capitals such as Copenhagen and Amsterdam, she said, and it should be given the resources to compete for investment and tourism.

“To focus on Dublin is not to the detriment of the west or the south or any other region of the country. They are not in competition with Dublin.” Ms Byrne said the city also needed to tackle litter and alcohol problems.

© 2008 The Irish Times

Its as plain as day to me that they are softening us up for this project to be scrapped. We need proper infrastructure. Borrow if nessacary.:mad: We cannot cut back on infrastructure - we have none - its suicidal.

paulm17781

I get so frustrated time and time again by this country.

meditraitor

I get frustrated time and time again with people who vote FF......

Victor

“The Government won’t sign off on something on the basis of a colourful brochure without ensuring it represents value for money,” he said.

See attachment.

stovelid

You obviously voted them in, OP. If they didn't have the gumption to build the thing during 15 years of plenty, what did you think they were going to do at the first whiff of recession?

I agree with you though: borrow for vital infrastructure if necessary.

markpb

stovelid wrote: »

You obviously voted them in, OP. If they didn't have the gumption to build the thing during 15 years of plenty, what did you think they were going to do at the first whiff of recession?

I have to agree with stovelid - FF did half nothing for public transport during ten years of record tax receipts. Even if the boom had continued, what makes you think they'd turn around and fix all the (transport) problems they created?

FF are quite likely to scrap the metro because, in the minds of a lot of voters:
a) it's only for Dublin, haven't they got the luas and the dart already?
b) borrowing is bad, didn't we borrow loads in the 80s

murphaph

FF (or any of them) haven't the balls to explain to the rest of the country that Dublin is the generator of the wealth (by and large) and must be able to beat and breathe or the whole country (we're a small country-we should all support investment in our capital) will suffer.

We have to get away from trying to dilute down economic activity so every parish gets 'something'. It's funny how people came to expect to find a job in the town they grew up in. This didn't happen anywhere else, even in countries which experienced booms.

Sponge Bob

murphaph wrote: »

FF (or any of them) haven't the balls to explain to the rest of the country that Dublin is the generator of the wealth (by and large) and must be able to beat and breathe or the whole country (we're a small country-we should all support investment in our capital) will suffer.

Metro North has been pushed back to start after the St Stephens Green station has been built for the Interconnector.

The Dept of Finance WILL NOT TOLERATE two contractors working on St Stephens Green at the same time because the turf wars between them will end up costing €Billions.

So the Interconnector goes first , thats it .

Metro North has been pushed back to likely start 2014 or 2015

IIMII

darkman2 wrote: »

Its as plain as day to me that they are softening us up for this project to be scrapped.

No they aren't, they'll never admit that. Infrastructure projects are never scrapped - they just never get built

Sponge Bob

IIMII wrote: »

No they aren't, they'll never admit that. Infrastructure projects are never scrapped - they just never get built

LOL Or they get bits added onto the project that requires a complete redesign, eg when the Galway - Tuam N17 turned into the Galway - Claremorris N17 a month back.

What about an extension southwards to Landsdowne Road via the new Ballsbridge Skyscraper complex ...just to kick the entire Metro North project back by 5 years ...all in a jolly good cause of course

Irish and Proud

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Metro North has been pushed back to start after the St Stephens Green station has been built for the Interconnector.

The Dept of Finance WILL NOT TOLERATE two contractors working on St Stephens Green at the same time because the turf wars between them will end up costing €Billions.

So the Interconnector goes first , thats it .

Metro North has been pushed back to likely start 2014 or 2015

IMO, the Interconnector should go first, plus the DART extensions to Balbriggan, Maynooth, and Celbridge.

We need that Interconnector like NOW!!!

Anyone who hasn't visited the Infrastructure Forum recently, please follow:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055331716

Regards!

Sponge Bob

IMO (too) The Interconnector should go first + The Dart extensions

greyed

Goddamit. When will we know for sure? Is construction not due early 09?

IIMII

You'll never know for sure. Since every project is always delayed and reannounced it is early impossible to know what projects are making any real progress.

Don't mind public consultantions and reports, etc. Until you see broken ground and a railway order, nothing is happening.

Take the WRC. A couple of announcements and hey presto machinery everywhere and new track.

When they move, they can move very fast. When they go slow, they go so slow that they may even be going backwards. Take it from one that has witness slow "progress in (reverse) motion"

strassenwolf

On the plus side, if value for money is to be the main criterion, this means we can now dump the plans for the metro west.

So it's not all bad news.

Hotblack Desiato

darkman2 wrote: »

Major projects will have to deliver value, says Lenihan

I wish they would apply that principle to WRC, decentralisation, and PSO air routes.

murphaph

ninja900 wrote: »

I wish they would apply that principle to WRC, decentralisation, and PSO air routes.

....not to mention e-voting and PPARS. If FF and their assorted cronies hadn't blown so much of OUR money we'd have started or completed much of this major infrastructure.

Ckal

Delighted if this doesn't go ahead. It's such a waste of money.

I'd be all for a metro if it was a proper metro... not just one line. Use the money to build more LUAS lines. We need the line from Dundrum to City Centre via Harold's Cross because the latter has nothing, just buses.

Also, why have 3 forms of half-baked uncompleted transport? Have an extensive DART network and a good LUAS network. Metro West should go ahead, that's more-or-less a LUAS anyway. :cool:

markpb

Ckal wrote: »

We need the line from Dundrum to City Centre via Harold's Cross because the latter has nothing, just buses.

The same could be said about Santry, Glasnevin, Ballymun, the airport and Swords....

Ckal wrote: »

Also, why have 3 forms of half-baked uncompleted transport? Have an extensive DART network and a good LUAS network. Metro West should go ahead, that's more-or-less a LUAS anyway. :cool:

Just out of curiosity, for people who think the Metro is too expensive, could you show me a Luas route from Stephens Green to Swords that isn't below ground and would still be faster than a bus? Preferably one that doesn't involve CPOing the entire route at which point you'd be cheaper going underground anyway.

stiktoir

This and the other 'morning ireland' thread are hilarious tosh.
That spongey bob is a candidate for some sort of therapy - not pontificating about transport. Where does he get this turf wars stuff. A fantasist. There is no such issue, other maybe than in the fevered minds of tea boys in the D of F.The apparent 'uncertainty' re MN is related to confidential funding arrangements/negotiations. Provided there is no huge economic deterioration in the next 6-9 months MN is virtually certain to go ahead. Nothing is ever certian in life until it happens. If you want to buy something at a reasonable price, you do not announce first that you will buy no matter what.............
In fact finance is not a majoe issue with this as it is a PPP project.

murphaph

Ckal wrote: »

I'd be all for a metro if it was a proper metro... not just one line.

You have to build one line first. The network has to begin somewhere!

Ckal wrote: »

Use the money to build more LUAS lines.

Dublin has demonstrated that it is wholly unsuitable to on street tram running. The green line works because it's 90% off street. The red line from the Square to Fatima Mansions works because it's 80% off street. The red line from James' Hospital to Connolly is rubbish because it crosses umpteen junctions and shares most of its running space with road vehicles. It's a joke.

Ckal wrote: »

We need the line from Dundrum to City Centre via Harold's Cross because the latter has nothing, just buses.

You are advocating more city centre style red line-see above.

Ckal wrote: »

Also, why have 3 forms of half-baked uncompleted transport? Have an extensive DART network and a good LUAS network.

MetroNorth will use vehicles of a low floor nature, highly likely to be 100% compatible with Luas as it will connect to metroWest. The RPA are actually boxing clever here-they know branding is important so they go with the 'metro' tag, but really metro=Luas=metro. It's an underground Luas is all. In the future (assuming metro north is built) I imagine it would make sense to tunnel the red line from Fatima (ie, before it turns into a slow ass trundle) under the south inner city to connect to the green line around Charlemont and under the north inner city to connect to the metro at Mater Hospital. Assuming the green line is extended to Stephen's green this would create a three legged star network of high quality metro like tram quite similar to Soviet designs which funtion well.

No more on street tram line should be built in this city-it doesn't have the wide boulevards on which to run them successfully. If we are to return to an extensive on street tram network-be prepared to have most other vehicles banned to allow it to work. We have moved beyond that I hope.

Mayo Exile

According to today's Indo no decision will now be taken until next year on whether to go ahead or not.

Saturday July 26 2008

A DECISION on whether the planned Metro North for Dublin will go ahead is unlikely to be made until early next year, it emerged last night.

The Government has indicated it would not approve the light-rail system until the final cost of building the 17km line was known, despite the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) having already spent €33m on the project.

The company which wins the contract to design, build and operate the system will not be announced until November, after which it will negotiate with the RPA over a final price. This process could run into early 2009, sources said last night.

And any delay to the project could have serious knock-on effects. The Ballymun Regeneration Scheme, expansion of Dublin Airport, development of a new town of 100,000 people in Swords and retail outlets, like Ikea, are all relying on the train route, and if it is put on the long finger it could have a "damaging impact on Ireland Inc", industry sources said last night.

Yesterday, Taoiseach Brian Cowen refused to say if the project, announced with great fanfare in 2006 under the Government's Transport 21 programme, would go ahead.

Proceed

Speaking in Tullamore, he said that major projects had to be "considered and approved at the relevant time on the basis of the fullest possible information available", adding: "There's no suggestion that we made a decision not to proceed with the Metro North."

Metro North will run from St Stephen's Green to Lissenhall, north of Swords, via Dublin Airport, and is expected to cost at least €3bn. Planning permission will be sought in September, and work is due to begin in 2009 with a four-year timetable.

The Department of Transport confirmed at least two cost-benefit analyses had been carried out, one by the RPA and a second by the Department of Finance.

The RPA said it had spent €33m on design, ground investigations, utility mapping and preparing an Environmental Impact Statement, and that the economic case for Metro "greatly exceeded" its costs.

Last night, opposition parties called on the Government to "come clean" on the future of the Metro project, with Fine Gael Transport spokesman Fergus O'Dowd saying there was a "lack of co-ordination" between the departments of finance and transport.

"Up until yesterday, it was assumed Metro North was going ahead, as indicated repeatedly by the transport minister. But now the finance minister is throwing doubt over a number of major infrastructural projects by saying they will only go ahead if it can be proved they will deliver value for money.

"Thousands of commuters and new jobs depend on the planned Metro project and they need clarification on whether or not it will go ahead," he said.

Link: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cost-worry-means-no-decision-on-metro-until-2009-1441324.html

Ckal

markpb wrote: »

The same could be said about Santry, Glasnevin, Ballymun, the airport and Swords....

Just out of curiosity, for people who think the Metro is too expensive, could you show me a Luas route from Stephens Green to Swords that isn't below ground and would still be faster than a bus? Preferably one that doesn't involve CPOing the entire route at which point you'd be cheaper going underground anyway.

You can build a LUAS line to Santry, Glasnevin etc etc and it will cost less. I don't see the obsession of getting to airports and towns in 0.56 seconds. LUAS may be slower, but it is way easier to extend than an underground metro...and cheaper.

murphaph wrote: »

You have to build one line first. The network has to begin somewhere!

Dublin has demonstrated that it is wholly unsuitable to on street tram running. The green line works because it's 90% off street. The red line from the Square to Fatima Mansions works because it's 80% off street. The red line from James' Hospital to Connolly is rubbish because it crosses umpteen junctions and shares most of its running space with road vehicles. It's a joke.


You are advocating more city centre style red line-see above.


MetroNorth will use vehicles of a low floor nature, highly likely to be 100% compatible with Luas as it will connect to metroWest. The RPA are actually boxing clever here-they know branding is important so they go with the 'metro' tag, but really metro=Luas=metro. It's an underground Luas is all. In the future (assuming metro north is built) I imagine it would make sense to tunnel the red line from Fatima (ie, before it turns into a slow ass trundle) under the south inner city to connect to the green line around Charlemont and under the north inner city to connect to the metro at Mater Hospital. Assuming the green line is extended to Stephen's green this would create a three legged star network of high quality metro like tram quite similar to Soviet designs which funtion well.

No more on street tram line should be built in this city-it doesn't have the wide boulevards on which to run them successfully. If we are to return to an extensive on street tram network-be prepared to have most other vehicles banned to allow it to work. We have moved beyond that I hope.

You don't have to build just ONE single line. Cities have built three, four and ever more lines at the very beginning of their metro construction.

I don't think people understand the whole concept of public transport. You DON'T use a car, you use the tram. If everybody used a car then their would be no point for a LUAS. And if people who have cars use the LUAS, then there would be less traffic on the roads and then LUAS wouldn't interfere with people's precious cars. LUAS has over 80,000 people using it a day, that's pretty successful and I think that alone should be a reason to extend the lines and build more.

If Metro had more than one line (I'm excluding MW here because I consider it LUAS) then I'd be happy. Underground Metro is extremely costly and very difficult to extend, so why build one line which costs hundreds of millions that probably won't get extended due to cost and not build more LUAS lines in North Dublin and South Dublin?

I read that Metro North is not the same gauge as LUAS, so LUAS can't use Metro and Metro can't use LUAS. Met West and LUAS are basically the same... same gauge, same design etc.

markpb

Ckal wrote: »

You can build a LUAS line to Santry, Glasnevin etc etc and it will cost less. I don't see the obsession of getting to airports and towns in 0.56 seconds. LUAS may be slower, but it is way easier to extend than an underground metro...and cheaper.

If you spend millions building an on-street Luas that is no faster than the bus, what's the advantage? You've just wasted millions for no improvement.

I read that Metro North is not the same gauge as LUAS, so LUAS can't use Metro and Metro can't use LUAS. Met West and LUAS are basically the same... same gauge, same design etc.

The red line, green line, metro north and metro west will all run on the same gauge and, mostly likely the same stock. The only difference is the number of carriages.

Same question again.... how do you connect Santry, Ballymun, the airport and Swords using on-street running that isn't useless?

Ckal

I don't think you've actually noticed this, but Dublin has bad traffic. I know buses use bus lanes, but they don't actually do anything spectacular. LUAS doesn't sit there with the cars, it simply glides past them.

Bremen in Germany is more-or-less the same size of Dublin, pop-wise. It doesn't have a metro, or t-bahn or whatever you call them there, it has trams. Same set-up as Dublin, but with about 30 more lines. They don't bring traffic to a halt. Infact, people actually use the trams (:eek:).

I've been on LUAS during rush hour many times, and I still get from a to b very quickly. The traffic seemed to be moving nicely. So I don't get all this "LUAS gets in the way" crap that people keep on saying.

murphaph

Ckal wrote: »

I've been on LUAS during rush hour many times, and I still get from a to b very quickly. The traffic seemed to be moving nicely. So I don't get all this "LUAS gets in the way" crap that people keep on saying.

The Luas between Hueston and Connolly is regularly beaten by the 90 bus. What's the point? I'm going under-ground goin underground....:D

Lennoxschips

I agree that projects have to deliver value for money.

But what kind of a government concludes that four almost completely separate motorways between Dublin and Limerick, Dublin and Galway, Dublin and Cork and Dublin and Waterford delivers more value for money than a metro line in one of the most congested areas of the biggest city in the country?

Value for money for landowners and other FF friends is what they mean.

monument

murphaph wrote: »

No more on street tram line should be built in this city-it doesn't have the wide boulevards on which to run them successfully.

Come off it. You're talking as if all tram lines in the world are build on extra large streets - that's simple far from the reality.

murphaph wrote: »

If we are to return to an extensive on street tram network-be prepared to have most other vehicles banned to allow it to work. We have moved beyond that I hope.

Lots of people see removing cars etc as progressive. And I don't get what you mean by moving on since Ireland has no record banning cars from streets, bar very limited areas.

Anyway, since we don't have wide boulevards, maybe it is time to give transports modes with higher loadings more and more space.

armada104

Ckal wrote: »

I don't think you've actually noticed this, but Dublin has bad traffic.

For someone so uninformed, you're being mightily arrogant. The reason the Luas "glides on past" cars and buses is because it doesn't run on the road. This has been explained to you and you're choosing to ignore it. The Green Line runs on the alignment of an old railway and the Red Line runs along a canal and in the middle of a motorway. We don't actually have any old rail lines lying about at this stage (except Liffey Junction to Broadstone, where a Luas line IS planned). And the areas served by the red line aren't exactly bustling (not many people live in industrial estates).

At the sections of Luas sharing road with cars and buses, the Luas doesn't glide past anything, even with priority at traffic lights. On street trams do nothing buses can't. The reason the Red and Green lines work is that they mostly aren't on street.

murphaph

monument wrote: »

Come off it. You're talking as if all tram lines in the world are build on extra large streets - that's simple far from the reality.

Lots of cities have trams which behave like most of our buses-they are slow. That is not what we want. The best tram networks devote a higher proportion of dedicated right of way-including elimination of pedestrian conflict. Dublin would be better served by going premetro-overground in the newer 'burbs where space is available (such as the red line out in Tallaght) and underground in the core of the city. I'm advocating the better tram system. You're advocating a less perfect system (presumably to save money?).

monument wrote: »

Lots of people see removing cars etc as progressive. And I don't get what you mean by moving on since Ireland has no record banning cars from streets, bar very limited areas.

I specifically didn't mention cars because I'm more concerned with buses and delivery vehicles. Go ahead and ban private cars for all I care.

monument wrote: »

Anyway, since we don't have wide boulevards, maybe it is time to give transports modes with higher loadings more and more space.

Well, in that case the FIRST thing to do is ban cars from specific corridors and introduce bus only routes all over the city. Of course because we are a low rise, low density city, you'll need to provide vehicular access somehow. It'd need strict policing.

All I'm saying is this: We have the bare bones of a very good premetro system with the red and green lines. We should not link them overground. We should link them underground (fatima to charlemont) and link them to the proposed metro north. If you remember we also have another old railway alignment coming in from Cabra/Finglas and a dual carriageway (N2) on which to run the tram out to the M50 (P&R) then another city centre tunnel can create a 4 legged HIGH QUALITY premetro for Dublin. Added to DART 1&2 (following interconnector) and you have a good basis to reorient the bus network to feed into the rail network(s). The only relatively long tunnels not already proposed would be towards Rathfarnham and possibly Coolock....but these would follow much later. I'm not being cocky but I wouldn't be surprised if the RPA were thinking along my lines.

Irish and Proud

markpb wrote: »

If you spend millions building an on-street Luas that is no faster than the bus, what's the advantage? You've just wasted millions for no improvement.



The red line, green line, metro north and metro west will all run on the same gauge and, mostly likely the same stock. The only difference is the number of carriages.

Same question again.... how do you connect Santry, Ballymun, the airport and Swords using on-street running that isn't useless?

Use a B-2 or B-52 to clear a path mate!!! :D:D

Ckal

armada104 wrote: »

For someone so uninformed, you're being mightily arrogant. The reason the Luas "glides on past" cars and buses is because it doesn't run on the road. This has been explained to you and you're choosing to ignore it. The Green Line runs on the alignment of an old railway and the Red Line runs along a canal and in the middle of a motorway. We don't actually have any old rail lines lying about at this stage (except Liffey Junction to Broadstone, where a Luas line IS planned). And the areas served by the red line aren't exactly bustling (not many people live in industrial estates).

At the sections of Luas sharing road with cars and buses, the Luas doesn't glide past anything, even with priority at traffic lights. On street trams do nothing buses can't. The reason the Red and Green lines work is that they mostly aren't on street.

You don't know me, so you can't call me arrogant or uninformed from a few posts. I'm having a say in this. It's my opinion. And this is a discussion forum, so people should expect differences. I've lived in Dublin and in the East for 13 years and I visit regularly, so I'm well aware.

The section from Heuston to Connolly is run entirely on road/street, and it is faster than the bus. Maybe that's just the time of day I have traveled on it, but it is faster some times. I've taken the bus, and I've taken the LUAS. LUAS gets my vote by far.

And buses, one problem. People from Sandyford who want to travel to city centre can wait for a bus... wait being the operative word. Some buses which go in the same direction as the LUAS lines can be delayed by 40 minutes or so. I've had that experience. And thank god for the LUAS being there.

murphaph

Ckal wrote: »

The section from Heuston to Connolly is run entirely on road/street, and it is faster than the bus. Maybe that's just the time of day I have traveled on it, but it is faster some times.

That's really not a good enough reason to build more of this 'sometimes beats the bus' tramline. Dublin deserves better as the capital and economic heart of our country.

markpb

Ckal wrote: »

The section from Heuston to Connolly is run entirely on road/street, and it is faster than the bus. Maybe that's just the time of day I have traveled on it, but it is faster some times. I've taken the bus, and I've taken the LUAS. LUAS gets my vote by far.

Sometimes the bus is faster, sometimes the Luas is faster. That's not enough when you compare the costs of bus lane vs. Luas line. There's no point spending millions extra for little or no benefit.

And buses, one problem. People from Sandyford who want to travel to city centre can wait for a bus... wait being the operative word. Some buses which go in the same direction as the LUAS lines can be delayed by 40 minutes or so. I've had that experience. And thank god for the LUAS being there.

No-one is arguing about the Green Luas line, it is fantastic (but could be faster, carry more people, etc) but that's entirely because it runs on an old dedicated train line. [Although saying that, the last time the line was out of service, my 46b took the same length of time as the Luas...] You can't recreate that to Santry or Swords because no train line exists so either we take the cheap option and spend millions making something that isn't faster than a bus or we spend billions going underground, doing it properly, making it worthwhile and carrying lots of people.

It's not a clear cut decision, we can't say the Luas is fine because it has problems, we can't say Metro is too expensive because it has inherent value over the Luas. Either the cost benefit analysis says it's worth it, or we do nothing, there's no point trying to compromise and wasting money.

KC61

Ckal wrote: »

You don't know me, so you can't call me arrogant or uninformed from a few posts. I'm having a say in this. It's my opinion. And this is a discussion forum, so people should expect differences. I've lived in Dublin and in the East for 13 years and I visit regularly, so I'm well aware.

The section from Heuston to Connolly is run entirely on road/street, and it is faster than the bus. Maybe that's just the time of day I have traveled on it, but it is faster some times. I've taken the bus, and I've taken the LUAS. LUAS gets my vote by far.

And buses, one problem. People from Sandyford who want to travel to city centre can wait for a bus... wait being the operative word. Some buses which go in the same direction as the LUAS lines can be delayed by 40 minutes or so. I've had that experience. And thank god for the LUAS being there.

In general since the continuous bus lane opened along the north quays, the bus is now the fastest way of travelling from Heuston to the City Centre - in fact I've never seen the tram beat the bus yet since the bus lane opened.

armada104

Ckal wrote: »

And buses, one problem. People from Sandyford who want to travel to city centre can wait for a bus... wait being the operative word. Some buses which go in the same direction as the LUAS lines can be delayed by 40 minutes or so. I've had that experience. And thank god for the LUAS being there.

Thank God indeed for the green line Luas, which runs on an old rail line. Of course that's going to be better than the bus. I'm trying not to get personal here, but it's difficult when you continue to ignore the fact that the speed and efficiency of the green line CANNOT BE RECREATED anywhere else in Dublin. As I said, it's been explained to you. On-street, trams are glorified buses.

Ckal

I'm not trying to start fights here. And I'm not ignoring anything, I'm reading it all, (just so you know ).

I just think it's stupid to build ONE underground metro line and not two or three, in the long run it will be cheaper to build two or three lines at the very beginning rather than one line with extensions here and there and a new line here and an extension there etc. I'd be happy if the metro north was built with a spur through harold's cross and a spur through the north-west city. And maybe they could do a circle line like most metros have. It could go under the canals. :rolleyes:

murphaph

Ckal wrote: »

I'm not trying to start fights here. And I'm not ignoring anything, I'm reading it all, (just so you know ).

I just think it's stupid to build ONE underground metro line and not two or three, in the long run it will be cheaper to build two or three lines at the very beginning rather than one line with extensions here and there and a new line here and an extension there etc. I'd be happy if the metro north was built with a spur through harold's cross and a spur through the north-west city. And maybe they could do a circle line like most metros have. It could go under the canals. :rolleyes:

So are you advocating more on street Heuston-Connolly style tram or more underground tram?

Ckal

murphaph wrote: »

So are you advocating more on street Heuston-Connolly style tram or more underground tram?

Both, really. I'd like an extensive tram network AND an extensive metro network. It works very well in Oslo, so I think it would work wonders in Dublin.

murphaph

Ckal wrote: »

Both, really. I'd like an extensive tram network AND an extensive metro network. It works very well in Oslo, so I think it would work wonders in Dublin.

Well I wouldn't mind it either but on a practical level, we don't have the dosh for both just now, so which would provide a better starting point to be getting on with? I vote for the underground option myself.

KC61

Ckal wrote: »

Both, really. I'd like an extensive tram network AND an extensive metro network. It works very well in Oslo, so I think it would work wonders in Dublin.

Indeed it might, but I suspect that in Oslo the streets are somewhat wider than is the case in most of the arterial routes in Dublin City.

On most arterial routes in Dublin there is simply not the roadspace for two tram lines and two lanes of traffic - that is the problem here. Look at it now - how many routes have continuous inbound and outbound bus lanes? There's only one and that's the N11 Stillorgan QBC.

The scope for developing an extensive tram network in Dublin, without incurring huge expense relating to property acquisition/demolition, is very limited. In an ideal world I'd be all for it, but it really is not a runner in Dublin. Trams need to have a speed advantage over bus/car. Because of the street design that we have, on-street trams have little potential for delivering that.

I would be a firm supporter of developing a metro along the central spine of south Dublin through Terenure as I think this really is the only option for a rapid rail link to this part of the city.

murphaph

Picture the scene.

Metro North (luas really) complete and connected to the green line delivering premetro standard from Lissenhall all the way to Cherrywood. Call this the north-south spine.

Luas Red line diverted at Suir Road to run elevated over the canal on a slim-deck (more possible these days with modern techniques) and crossing the north-south spine at Charlemont (already an elevated station!) and continuing to Grand Canal Dock DART station where it would terminate. Alternatively (and much more expensively I believe) the canal could be temporarily drained and the trench deepened and an immersed tube tunnel built before recovering and flooding the waterway again.

Luas Red Line is highly segregated as far as Suir Road and this benefit should be capitalised upon. In this time of recession it's wildly optimistic to even imagine we'll get all that's in T21 but in the future I think we should be thinking more premetro and less tram.

monument

murphaph wrote: »

I'm advocating the better tram system. You're advocating a less perfect system (presumably to save money?)...

I'm not trying to come here and advocate one system over another. But I think trams are being given an hard time here.

In general, I'm in favour of the idea of Metro North, the green line Luas being upgraded, and a tunnelled metro to Tallaght via Harold's Cross.

However I'd have questions over the benefit of tunnelling tram lines when they get to the city centre - not only the high cost, but the cost vs benefit. But in saying that, I'm not dismissing the idea off hand. It has the clear benefit of speed, and at least you're proactivly suggesting something rather than just reacting.

And in regards to the red line and on street running of trams I've started a new thread here.

strassenwolf

murphaph wrote:

Well, in that case the FIRST thing to do is ban cars from specific corridors and introduce bus only routes all over the city. Of course because we are a low rise, low density city, you'll need to provide vehicular access somehow. It'd need strict policing.

Of course, in the central area - i.e. the Dublin City Council area, Dublin is not a low density city.

It is the densities which prevail in the other council areas in the county which have led to the view that it's overall a low density city.

This is unfortunate, as it has delayed development of decent public transport projects in the areas of the city which could most efficiently support them.

When you combine this with the FF predeliction for sucking property developer cock, you end up with the current situation where the main public transport developments are on the fringes of the city (e.g Citywest) rather than in the higher density areas where such developments (e.g tunnelling between Fatima and Charlemont, as suggested, or fast-tracking the LUAS to Finglas) would make the most economic sense.

murphaph

Yeah the area surrounded by the canals is of decent density alright (but there are still plenty of houses with gardens in there too ) and having looked a bit more closely at the Fatima-Charlemont idea, I actually think there's plenty of room to just run from Suir Road, following the canal (the way it does from the Black Lion to Suir Road!) all the way to Grand Canal Dock. Short flyovers would be required to get the line up and over each junction but overall it would be very cheap in comparison with tunnelling and being on the surface would be more accessible.

The connections it would add (Charlemont and Grand Canal Dock and numerous bus routes) would really add value to the network. The reason it would work is the segregation afforded. Even if the tram crossed each junction at grade, it would still work well becuase there are limited bridges over the canal. The busier junctions could have a flyover provided.

Pity we've no money left

spacetweek

I don't buy this nonsense about Metro North being cancelled.

If the Metro has this much momentum, then the business community and other players etc (Ballymun Regen, retailers, DCU, Dublin Airport etc.) will have been making all their plans for the last while with the Metro in mind. So they won't let the gov postpone or cancel.

People here are always complaining about the gov letting themselves be unduly influenced by private companies. This is one situation where it actually works in everyone's favour.

Really, the amount of speculative, taxi-driver, Evening Herald/Indo rumour milling that goes on in this forum is shocking.

stiktoir

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Metro North has been pushed back to start after the St Stephens Green station has been built for the Interconnector.

The Dept of Finance WILL NOT TOLERATE two contractors working on St Stephens Green at the same time because the turf wars between them will end up costing €Billions.

So the Interconnector goes first , thats it .

Metro North has been pushed back to likely start 2014 or 2015

WILL NOT TOLERATE......................spoofing?

markf909

stiktoir wrote: »

WILL NOT TOLERATE......................spoofing?

I wish I was as confident as you.

Irish public transport history will show you the Govt are world class at talking about transport.

dodgyme

meditraitor wrote: »

I get frustrated time and time again with people who vote FF......

here here

Sponge Bob

markf909 wrote: »

Irish public transport history will show you the Govt are world class at talking about transport.

Quite, remember Biddy O Rourke anyone ??

"Today marks the start of a process which will "result in the construction of a public transport system which will last for 100 years or more.

The first phase of the metro is to link Dublin Airport, Blanchardstown and Shankill to the city centre. Part of it will run underground.

The DTO hopes the first phase of the metro will be operating by 2007. Phase one development between 2000 and 2006 will cost €1.27bn".

Oh and another Biddy special

"Mr Ahern is to attend a photocall featuring a LUAS carriage in Merrion Square next Sunday.

Today Labour's Eamon Gilmore claimed that the public had been puzzled by the construction of a section of railway line along one side of the square, which transpired to be for the purpose of Sunday's event.


He said that preparation for the photocall had involved much digging, parking restrictions, and disruption to traffic.

Mr Gilmore challenged the Taoiseach to disclose the full cost of the exercise, claiming that when the event was over the carriage would be taken away and the hard pressed Dublin commuter would not see it again for several years."

stiktoir

markf909 wrote: »

I wish I was as confident as you.

Irish public transport history will show you the Govt are world class at talking about transport.

It's not a question of confidence...or trust, markf909
It's knowing the intentions of the key decision makers.
Of course nothing is 100% certain until it happens but some things are close to that...........

as said, amazing to read the spoofing of one or two posters.........