Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Sam Russell

roadmaster wrote: »

The material that is excavated by a TBM is it brought to the surface at short distance intervals or what does it work

I assume the spoil comes back by conveyor to the start point (Na Fianna's ground). For the whole project, I would guess about 1 million cubic metres of spoil that would need to be moved out. That is a lot of trucks full of dirt and rocks.

Of course they could start nearer the airport, but the conveyors would be much longer.

roadmaster

Sam Russell wrote: »

I assume the spoil comes back by conveyor to the start point (Na Fianna's ground). For the whole project, I would guess about 1 million cubic metres of spoil that would need to be moved out. That is a lot of trucks full of dirt and rocks.

Of course they could start nearer the airport, but the conveyors would be much longer.

Could you start the tbm on the south side and it would solve the na fianna problem but in saying that it probably cause a million more problems there

Sam Russell

roadmaster wrote: »

Could you start the tbm on the south side and it would solve the na fianna problem but in saying that it probably cause a million more problems there

St Stevens Green? or perhaps Dardistown or Northwood?

roadmaster

Sam Russell wrote: »

St Stevens Green? or perhaps Dardistown or Northwood?

Is it surfacing in Stephens green I taught it was near charlemont. How is the actual tie in going to be done between the new line and the existing line?

jd

Sam Russell wrote: »

Of course they could start nearer the airport, but the conveyors would be much longer.

They could start in Albert College Park, as per what was specified in the original railway order for Metro North. The residents close to this site already went through a consultation process.
http://www.tii.ie/tii-library/railway-orders/eis-metro-north/EIS%20Metro%20North%20Volume%201%20Book%201%20of%201%20Part%201%20(Chapters%201%20to%2010).pdf

Albert College compound 12 and 12A
Establishment of this compound will be a critical
activity in order to facilitate an early launch of the
main TBMs and allow as much time as possible for
completion of the bored tunnels. This compound
will provide the support facilities required for
tunnelling. Access to the compound will be from a
new signal controlled junction on Ballymun Road.
The tunnel portal area will be retained by walls
installed from ground level. On completion of the
bored tunnel works, the tunnel box will be cast in
structural concrete. Compound No. 12 will take
approximately three months to establish.
Bored Tunnels
Two TBMs will be launched and serviced from
the main tunnelling worksite at Albert College
Park as described in Section 6.5.3.10. It is expected
that the bored tunnels will take some three to
four years to complete, depending on the ground
conditions encountered.

Instead of Na Fianna, it should be possible to have a stop on Griffith avenue near Courtlands, and swing back again towards Cross Guns.
It would have 8,250 Potential Trip Demand (trips/24 hours) within 1,000m2 vs
9,500 Potential Trip Demand (trips/24 hours) within 1,000m2 for the Na Fianna stop.

Or perhaps Na Fianna would be persuaded to give over their main pitch for construction of the station (2 years?).

jd

Sam Russell wrote: »

St Stevens Green? or perhaps Dardistown or Northwood?

At the back of the booklet I got at the consultation surfacing at Dardistown and going over the M50, to descend again just past Northwood. It would take longer (12 months or so?) to start the second pair there so perhaps they would just cart over the northern pair and reassemble them again.

I think they want to avoid using Stephen's Green, even if it is just to keep Frank McDonald quiet

They plan to surface at Charlemont anyway..

jd

Sam Russell wrote: »

Looking at the route and distance, it should be possible to do the tunnel in one year of actual tunnelling, with another year to tidy up, so the three year minimum quote for Na Fianna disturbance should be possible. .

The time given for "Original" Metro North was 3-4 years between Albert College Pk and St Stephen's Green

ignorance is strength

jd wrote: »

Instead of Na Fianna, it should be possible to have a stop on Griffith avenue near Courtlands, and swing back again towards Cross Guns.
It would have 8,250 Potential Trip Demand (trips/24 hours) within 1,000m2 vs
9,500 Potential Trip Demand (trips/24 hours) within 1,000m2 for the Na Fianna stop.

Or perhaps Na Fianna would be persuaded to give over their main pitch for construction of the station (2 years?).

Ironically, Na Fianna use the pitches in Albert Park.

LongboardPro

Line 12 of the Madrid Metro was built and opened in just under 3 years and that was 41km of tunnels so saying that this line needs 6 years to be built is way too long. Something isn't right. Éire.

Idbatterim

That rail users website hasn’t been updated in over a year and a half...

jd

LongboardPro wrote: »

Line 12 of the Madrid Metro was built and opened in just under 3 years and that was 41km of tunnels so saying that this line needs 6 years to be built is way too long. Something isn't right. Éire.

That line is a circular line that links suburban towns south of Madrid. How many tbms and associated launch sites were used? Were tunnels cut and cover? It may not be comparing like with like.

(edit) Just came across this
http://mindroutes.blogspot.ie/2008/10/lessons-from-madrid-metro.html

I can think of someone who would love this
""Station architecture is an important factor, too. It should never be handed over to world-renowned architects. A transport project is a serious engineering work that should not be confused with a museum or an emblematic building for a city. Several million passengers/day may move through metro stations, so their design must take into account this fact by giving easy access from the street to the trains, via wide escalators and corridors and shallow station platforms."

monument

LongboardPro wrote: »

Line 12 of the Madrid Metro was built and opened in just under 3 years and that was 41km of tunnels so saying that this line needs 6 years to be built is way too long. Something isn't right. Éire.

Construction costs are usually cheaper and faster there, with a simplified planning system etc and Line 12 is all away from the city. It’s also not 41km of tunnels, it’s a mix of tunnels and cut-and-cover.

Meanwhile in Amsterdam, the North South line started construction in 2002 and was due to be finished in 2011, but construction is still on-going.

plodder

I was just reading about the latest line in Düsseldorf

Construction began in February 2008, and is scheduled for completion by the middle of 2014. The line will be approximately 3.6km long, with six sub-surface stations in the two-track tunnels and the two above-ground terminals. The line is estimated to cost €650m and serve around 60,000 passengers a day.

6 years to go 3.6km. Conditions were particularly difficult afaik, with very soft unstable ground underneath historic and important commercial buildings. So, it's hard to make direct comparisons between projects.

But, you can see why costs are naturally higher here, with all the hullabaloo with GAA clubs and knee-jerk reactions of residents against it.

MJohnston

Yes, the problem with Irish infrastructure is rarely the cost, it's rarely the time to completion, it's rarely the quality of the built infrastructure, and it's rarely the quality of the plans. It is nearly always a problem with the political foresight required to implement those plans, or the duration of the bureaucratic portion of the planning process.

prunudo

MJohnston wrote: »

Yes, the problem with Irish infrastructure is rarely the cost, it's rarely the time to completion, it's rarely the quality of the built infrastructure, and it's rarely the quality of the plans. It is nearly always a problem with the political foresight required to implement those plans, or the duration of the bureaucratic portion of the planning process.

Which is one reason politician's shouldnt be let near important infrastructure projects. We now have the possible confliction of a minister of finance who surely can see the demand and benefits of the project for the advancement of Dublin in the long-term with the fact that himself and constituents will be inconvenienced in the short-term by the construction phase.

plodder

jvan wrote: »

Which is one reason politician's shouldnt be let near important infrastructure projects.

Where is the money going to come from, to pay for these projects, if politicians shouldn't be let near them?

prunudo

plodder wrote: »

Where is the money going to come from, to pay for these projects, if politicians shouldn't be let near them?

Didn't realise the politicians were paying for it.

plodder

jvan wrote: »

Didn't realise the politicians were paying for it.

They control the purse strings. That's what they are elected to do.

Dyr

murphaph wrote: »

Sorry this is na. Na Fianna have already mobilised to block metro if it affects them. Other affected parties will too. We've seen this before. If the various state agencies and government departments were genuinely serious about metro, they would have launched a media campaign to counter these groups.

News to me that Na Fianna want to block the Metro

There will be no countering them, because Na Fianna will have a strong case to force the NTA to pull their horns in. The Stalinist bulldozer approach might fly well with a few transport anoraks but no one in government will back it regardless of media campaigns

ignorance is strength

Bambi wrote: »

News to me that Na Fianna want to block the Metro

There will be no countering them, because Na Fianna will have a strong case to force the NTA to pull their horns in. The Stalinist bulldozer approach might fly well with a few transport anoraks but no one in government will back it regardless of media campaigns

Won’t be many bulldozers on a tunnel project.

prunudo

plodder wrote: »

They control the purse strings. That's what they are elected to do.

The senior civil servants do that, the politicians are just the public face.

Elessar

Na Fianna have said publicly they don't want people mobilising unofficially against the metro - but I'm not sure of their official policy.

That said I did come across the Facebook comments of said club and it was mentally scarring (the metro is overpriced and not needed, its a disgrace, rabble rabble). Only in Ireland could a bloody sports club derail a critical national infrastructure project - and that looks like exactly what they want. It's as if the poor creatures couldn't carry on without all of their GAA pitches (temporarily mind you, and it's not even all the pitches!). Sadly I fear the strength of the GAA and the political unwillingness to go against it will mean this will eventually have to be moved somewhere else, no doubt meaning some poor unfortunates will have to be moved from their homes or something.

You couldn't make it up.

MayoSalmon

plodder wrote:

Where is the money going to come from, to pay for these projects, if politicians shouldn't be let near them?

Where it comes from now and always has...the people's pocket.

Sam Russell

Elessar wrote: »

Na Fianna have said publicly they don't want people mobilising unofficially against the metro - but I'm not sure of their official policy.

That said I did come across the Facebook comments of said club and it was mentally scarring (the metro is overpriced and not needed, its a disgrace, rabble rabble). Only in Ireland could a bloody sports club derail a critical national infrastructure project - and that looks like exactly what they want. It's as if the poor creatures couldn't carry on without all of their GAA pitches (temporarily mind you, and it's not even all the pitches!). Sadly I fear the strength of the GAA and the political unwillingness to go against it will mean this will eventually have to be moved somewhere else, no doubt meaning some poor unfortunates will have to be moved from their homes or something.

You couldn't make it up.

How does a GAA sports club know whether an infrastructure project is overpriced and not needed? The costs are not even known because the route is just 'the preferred route'. Not only do their kids play GAA, the club members are experts on urban infrastructure planning and costing.

Also, if it is to be scuppered by the loss of a hectare or so of ground for a few years then it really is a sorry sort of club. It should be campaigning for access to replacement grounds and be glad of the new facility of a Metro station next to their club house.

Perhaps they should demand naming rights - Na Fianna Station - that will be worth more and last longer than a few years disruption cause by the loss of the use of a few pitches. [How much did Aviva pay for their name over the Landowne Road Stadium?]

Dyr

Sam Russell wrote: »

How does a GAA sports club know whether an infrastructure project is overpriced and not needed?

I assume you're going to now going to show where Na Fianna made that claim?

You think a GAA club the size of Na Fianna is going to accept being turfed out of their catchment area for a playing generation just because the NTA fancy their grounds as the handiest option then you're deluded

The plan will be changed to it's original site or the dept of defence land next door, this is the real world not a Hornby set up in the attic.

MJohnston

Bambi wrote: »

I assume you're going to now going to show where Na Fianna made that claim?

You think a GAA club the size of Na Fianna is going to accept being turfed out of their catchment area for a playing generation just because the NTA fancy their grounds as the handiest option then you're deluded

The plan will be changed to it's original site or the dept of defence land next door, this is the real world not a Hornby set up in the attic.

This level of debate is why infrastructure projects never get built in this country. Unbelievable.

Peregrine

Bambi wrote: »

The plan will be changed to it's original site or the dept of defence land next door, this is the real world not a Hornby set up in the attic.

Are you taking about Whitehall College? Do you even know the area and the community?

It's rather amusing that you point out, correctly, that it is the real world and not a Hornby set up in the attic. Right after authoritatively stating that the plan will be moved to a site fit for a Hornby and not a real world metro.

Lord Glentoran

Elessar wrote: »

Na Fianna have said publicly they don't want people mobilising unofficially against the metro - but I'm not sure of their official policy.

That said I did come across the Facebook comments of said club and it was mentally scarring (the metro is overpriced and not needed, its a disgrace, rabble rabble). Only in Ireland could a bloody sports club derail a critical national infrastructure project - and that looks like exactly what they want. It's as if the poor creatures couldn't carry on without all of their GAA pitches (temporarily mind you, and it's not even all the pitches!). Sadly I fear the strength of the GAA and the political unwillingness to go against it will mean this will eventually have to be moved somewhere else, no doubt meaning some poor unfortunates will have to be moved from their homes or something.

You couldn't make it up.

Its grist to the mill for the Grab All Association. I haven't forgotten the rearguard action by one club against Tallaght Stadium attempting to scupper it for Shamrock Rovers, which went all the way to the Supreme Court. It's their country, the rest of us just live in it :mad:

plodder

jvan wrote: »

The senior civil servants do that, the politicians are just the public face.

The smaller the amounts of money involved that might be true, but when it comes to budget time, it's the ministers sitting round the cabinet table who make the big decisions, and particularly with massive capital projects like this, where serious amounts of money have to be found, it's unthinkable that politicians wouldn't be involved.

plodder

Elessar wrote: »

Na Fianna have said publicly they don't want people mobilising unofficially against the metro - but I'm not sure of their official policy.

Actually, I think that's a good sign - that some of the knee-jerk reactions weren't really representing the club. I think they'll sit down with the NTA and work something out.