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

cgcsb

Donohue handled that well, and with a high degree of transparency and fairness. Most TDs in that situation would just 'have a quiet word' with the NTA and either the whole thing would be scrapped or there'd be some convoluted work around.

ignorance is strength

My guess would be that he was asked at a general press conference, or somesuch, and said what he said. The language used by the reporter — “intervened”, “demanded”, “must” — is almost certainly sensationalised.

Remember that, as minister for finance and minister for public expenditure and reform, he would have been involved extensively in the plans for Ireland 2040, including Metrolink. He’s unlikely to play parish pump politics to hinder a project that’s central to the plans for Dublin.

bk

He also needs to walk a delicate line here. While he maybe a member of the club, many, if not most of the residents of the surrounding area which make up his constituency aren't members of the club and probably don't care much about it. They would however care about getting a Metro on their doorstep and the effect it would have on the value of their homes, plus improved transport options for them.

He could find himself in very hot water with the wider local community if he was seen to be blocking a Metro coming to the area.

monument

markpb wrote: »

God forbid a minister might act in the interests of the country or even the capital and leave the parish politics aside for five minutes!

Isn’t it possible that the best interest of the city and country to be a bit more pragmatic in terms of station locations?

For example, Albert College Park rather than the GAA pitches for the TBM site, the street at Tara Street rather than knocking a swimming pool and an apartment block in a housing crisis, and a relatively large site at Parnell Square east rather than the very edge northern edge of upper O'Connell Street which is congested with tracks etc.

bk

monument wrote: »

Isn’t it possible that the best interest of the city and country to be a bit more pragmatic in terms of station locations?

For example, Albert College Park rather than the GAA pitches for the TBM site, the street at Tara Street rather than knocking a swimming pool and an apartment block in a housing crisis, and a relatively large site at Parnell Square east rather than the very edge northern edge of upper O'Connell Street which is congested with tracks etc.

Why do you think it would be better to take out Albert College Park?

It would result in three sports clubs losing grounds, rather then just one! And it would mean a public park that is open to the entire community all week being taken out compared to a private GAA grounds that is largely closed off to the local community.

I don't get why people think that would be a better option!

And the Na Fianna grounds are the pragmatic location as they are half way between the stops before/after it.

The Apartments lost at Tara St are no big deal, I'm sure the site will end up getting a much larger apartment building built there after the works are complete. Great opportunity for densification.

Being the only stop on O'Connell St, OCS North makes far more sense then Parnell Square, as OCS would be closer to both the Luas lines.

jd

bk wrote: »

Why do you think it would be better to take out Albert College Park?

It would result in three sports clubs losing grounds, rather then just one! And it would mean a public park that is open to the entire community all week being taken out compared to a private GAA grounds that is largely closed off to the local community.

The thing is they already went through consultations for Metro North using ACP as a tunnel boring site, and a railway order was granted for it. I didn't hear too much about that site being a problem back then. Perhaps Homefarm or Na Fianna would allow a construction of a station on either of their pitches. Alternatively it may be possible to have the station on Griffith Ave and swing back to Cross Guns.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out (and as I said launching from Northwood is still an option being considered - according to an engineeer I questioned)

ignorance is strength

monument wrote: »

Isn’t it possible that the best interest of the city and country to be a bit more pragmatic in terms of station locations?

...the street at Tara Street rather than knocking a swimming pool and an apartment block in a housing crisis.

I don’t know it, but there has to be a pragmatic reason for choosing to CPO and demolish a 70-unit apartment block and one of few pieces of community infrastructure in the inner-city, instead of excavating a street. And where exactly by Tara Street? By my reckoning, the junction at Tara Street is one of the busiest in the city, so that’s obviously out. And I imagine that the apartment block site is to be the location of a portal for spoil removal - where is there space for that?

Shedite27

bk wrote: »

Being the only stop on O'Connell St, OCS North makes far more sense then Parnell Square, as OCS would be closer to both the Luas lines.

One of the best suggestions I heard on this thread was to use the Ambassador as a DU stop. That would be a very cool stop

monument

bk wrote: »

Why do you think it would be better to take out Albert College Park?

It would result in three sports clubs losing grounds, rather then just one! And it would mean a public park that is open to the entire community all week being taken out compared to a private GAA grounds that is largely closed off to the local community.

I don't get why people think that would be a better option!

And the Na Fianna grounds are the pragmatic location as they are half way between the stops before/after it.

In no orderr:

— larger site
— all of the park won’t be gone for years
— It already had permission for use as a TBM site, so, unlikely too many issues will come up.
— larger scope up have the dig site further away from homes
— it’s not beside a GAA club house
— it’s not beside two schools,
— the wider and less steep road of the Ballymun Road is more suitable than the Mobhi Road in terms of both safety and traffic management for HGV movements.

bk wrote: »

The Apartments lost at Tara St are no big deal, I'm sure the site will end up getting a much larger apartment building built there after the works are complete. Great opportunity for densification.

That’s not the plan at the moment and there’s fairly high density there now, and there’s the housing crisis and the major effect this could happen on renters.

It’s also a public swimming pool.

bk wrote: »

Being the only stop on O'Connell St, OCS North makes far more sense then Parnell Square, as OCS would be closer to both the Luas lines.

A Parnell Square stop would be about the same distance to the southbound stop on Parnell Street as the OCS stop would be and it would be hardly any distance to the north OCS Luas stop.

The difference is, there would be a lot less disruption to Luas, buses, pedestrians and cyclists at construction; less potential disruption to buses after construction and more scope for a decent future cycle route on OCS.

ignorance is strength wrote: »

I don’t know it, but there has to be a pragmatic reason for choosing to CPO and demolish a 70-unit apartment block and one of few pieces of community infrastructure in the inner-city, instead of excavating a street. And where exactly by Tara Street? By my reckoning, the junction at Tara Street is one of the busiest in the city, so that’s obviously out. And I imagine that the apartment block site is to be the location of a portal for spoil removal - where is there space for that?

Most of the time, it’s busy mainly with speeding cars.

There’ll be a lot of disruption on St Stephen’s Green and that will have a further effect on car capacity in this area.

With a street as wide as Tara Street, they should be able to keep some lanes open most of the time.

Another alternative is work with the developer who recently was rejected planning permission for the tower they planned.

citizen6

bk wrote: »

Why do you think it would be better to take out Albert College Park?

It would result in three sports clubs losing grounds, rather then just one! And it would mean a public park that is open to the entire community all week being taken out compared to a private GAA grounds that is largely closed off to the local community.

I don't get why people think that would be a better option!

I wouldn't characterise Na Fianna's pitches as closed to the public. They're not a member's-only golf club requiring big fees and secret handshakes. Anyone can join at minimal cost, and a huge number of locals use the facilities, albeit as members of the club.

The bit of Albert College Park proposed as an alternative is pitches as well, but not all-weather, not beside anyone's clubhouse, and not beside two schools.

LeinsterDub

citizen6 wrote: »

I wouldn't characterise Na Fianna's pitches as closed to the public. They're not a member's-only golf club requiring big fees and secret handshakes. Anyone can join at minimal cost, and a huge number of locals use the facilities, albeit as members of the club.

You can try dress it up with nonsense about golf but the fundamental fact is they are a members only club

citizen6

LeinsterDub wrote: »

You can try dress it up with nonsense about golf but the fundamental fact is they are a members only club

They are, but how hard is it to join? If you land up there on a Saturday morning with your eight year old kid, will they tell you to get lost?

LeinsterDub

citizen6 wrote: »

They are, but how hard is it to join? If you land up there on a Saturday morning with your eight year old kid, will they tell you to get lost?

Will rugby club, soccer club etc. What's your point?

citizen6

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Will rugby club, soccer club etc. What's your point?

I agree, most sports clubs are the same. They are technically private clubs but they are generally open to the public, at little or no cost, and are good for the community.

The TBM site has to go somewhere. Why not put it where it inconveniences the fewest number of people, especially kids, within reason? I think Albert College Park is within reason, and I think the pros and cons are worth discussing, including the financial costs and the social costs. The social costs should not be ignored just because those affected happen to all be members of particular clubs, or attend particular schools. In my opinion.

Spanish Eyes

Oh FGS will people please stop talking about GAA Na Fianna.

They should have the whole community's interest at heart really. There are thousands more going to use this metro than are GAA members.

I will leave it at that, because this is only the start of the objections. They got in there first.

Give it fifteen years minimum before all this is sorted. Sorry to be so despondent.

blanch152

citizen6 wrote: »

I agree, most sports clubs are the same. They are technically private clubs but they are generally open to the public, at little or no cost, and are good for the community.

The TBM site has to go somewhere. Why not put it where it inconveniences the fewest number of people, especially kids, within reason? I think Albert College Park is within reason, and I think the pros and cons are worth discussing, including the financial costs and the social costs. The social costs should not be ignored just because those affected happen to all be members of particular clubs, or attend particular schools. In my opinion.

Albert College Park inconveniences many more people than Na Fianna.

monument

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Oh FGS will people please stop talking about GAA Na Fianna.

No. This isn’t a dictatorship and this isn’t wont just go away, and it’s isn’t just a GAA club, it’s needlessly have a TBM site on a more confined site which is beside two schools when there’s a better alternative available less than 1km away.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

They should have the whole community's interest at heart really. There are thousands more going to use this metro than are GAA members.

They do. The club and anybody I’ve heard speaking on their behalf support MetroLink but want alternative TBM sites to be looked at. It would be different it it was the only possible site.

But it’s not the case that it’s the only site available and Albert College Park would be a far better choice in terms of impact on houses, impact on schools, impact on traffic and road safety.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I will leave it at that, because this is only the start of the objections. They got in there first.

And more understandable objections will follow as the NTA foolishly think knocking a public swimming pool and a large apartment block in a housing crisis is a good idea.

marno21

monument wrote: »

And more understandable objections will follow as the NTA foolishly think knocking a public swimming pool and a large apartment block in a housing crisis is a good idea.

This is a very here and now argument. The amount of land that becomes viable for housing when Metrolink opens vastly exceeds the amount of housing that will be demolished for Metrolink. The land at Tara Street will also be redeveloped post Metrolink which means there will be zero net loss of houses by the end of the project.

If anything there should be uproar about how Dublin City Council foolishly think carpeting the Docklands area with 6-10 storey buildings in a housing crisis and then wonder why there's no accomodation and people are driving in from Kildare, Meath and Wicklow every day.

citizen6

Maybe Johnny Ronan will put a public pool and some affordable apartments in his Tara St tower, out of the goodness of his heart.

CatInABox

monument wrote: »

They do. The club and anybody I’ve heard speaking on their behalf support MetroLink but want alternative TBM sites to be looked at. It would be different it it was the only possible site.

But it’s not the case that it’s the only site available and Albert College Park would be a far better choice in terms of impact on houses, impact on schools, impact on traffic and road safety.

The problem is that the Na Fianna grounds are the ideal site for a station serving that area, construction of which will mean Na Fianna losing their pitches for three years.

Everything decision here has downsides, but using the Na Fianna location is actually the one with the least amount of downsides.

If the Na Fianna location is used for both TBM and station, they'll lose their pitches for 6 years, along with a large increase in traffic during construction. At the end, the community will be served by a high frequency train line.

If the Na Fianna location is used for a station, and the Albert College Park grounds are used for a TBM, Na Fianna will lose their ground for three years, with the Albert College Park will be out of action for six years.

If the Na Fianna location is not used for either, then a large area will have a high frequency metro line going under it, but with no station to get on, which would be a bit silly.

You could move the station north to the Albert College Park grounds too, but the gap between that station and Whitworth Rd would be too large, and make the DCU stop somewhat redundant. Moving the DCU stop would then have an impact further up the line, etc, etc. It'll be a mess if it doesn't go at Na Fianna. It can be done, but it'd be less than ideal.

dan1895

Someone may be able to confirm or deny this but I heard recently that Na Fianna had been in some financial trouble a few years back and the Government/council bought the pitches off them to bail them out.

CarlosHarpic

The Irish have a love affair with mediocrity and being fifth rate. The Irish are terrified of anything new.

Basically all the irish want are impressive GAA stadiums that are 98% empty during the year.

A metro? "Thems from foreign."

loyatemu

CarlosHarpic wrote: »

The Irish have a love affair with mediocrity and being fifth rate. The Irish are terrified of anything new.

Basically all the irish want are impressive GAA stadiums that are 98% empty during the year.

A metro? "Thems from foreign."

enough of the self-loathing. If they were building a new tube line that involved digging up Wimbledon you can be damn sure the All-England Club would object and try to get politicians on their side.

Na Fianna aren't trying to derail the entire project, they just don't want their club destroyed. I've little interest in GAA, but I can see their point, if there's somewhere else to put the works site they're obviously going to lobby for that.

Sam Russell

loyatemu wrote: »

enough of the self-loathing. If they were building a new tube line that involved digging up Wimbledon you can be damn sure the All-England Club would object and try to get politicians on their side.

Na Fianna aren't trying to derail the entire project, they just don't want their club destroyed. I've little interest in GAA, but I can see their point, if there's somewhere else to put the works site they're obviously going to lobby for that.

Or somewhere else for Na Fianna to play while their pitches are being used as a depot and then a station. It is not all their pitches as if it were all their pitches, they would be smaller than they claim.

A solution will be found.

cgcsb

citizen6 wrote: »

Maybe Johnny Ronan will put a public pool and some affordable apartments in his Tara St tower, out of the goodness of his heart.

ABP said no to the tower because that is too moderns n stuff.

Shedite27

citizen6 wrote: »

They are, but how hard is it to join? If you land up there on a Saturday morning with your eight year old kid, will they tell you to get lost?

If you land up there on Saturday morning with 10 mates and want to play jumpers-for-goalposts they will tell you to get lost.

Albert Park will not

plodder

jd wrote: »

Pascal gets his spoke in

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/finance-minister-demands-solution-to-metrolink-row-with-members-of-his-own-gaa-club-36796002.html

Rather than "demanding" a solution, he is in a good position to help create it, being a local TD, club member and the minister responsible for finance/public expenditure.

ignorance is strength

loyatemu wrote: »

enough of the self-loathing. If they were building a new tube line that involved digging up Wimbledon you can be damn sure the All-England Club would object and try to get politicians on their side.

Na Fianna aren't trying to derail the entire project, they just don't want their club destroyed. I've little interest in GAA, but I can see their point, if there's somewhere else to put the works site they're obviously going to lobby for that.

Comparing Na Fianna to the pristine and historic courts of Wimbledon is patently ridiculous.

It’s contradictory to say they don’t want to derail the project but want to stop it “destroying” their club. So far, they have made no mention of alternative sites in the area. It seems that, were Na Fianna unequivocally the only possible site, they would still be protesting — i.e. threatening to derail the project.

There seems to be a growing belief on this thread, previously a sanctuary of sanity, that planners chose Na Fianna’s grounds without care; that there’s little difference between Albert Park and Na Fianna, and that Na Fianna was chosen, perhaps, because the planners have no concern for the local community.


Re. Na Fianna being an easily joinable club, I think that misses the point. When you join a club, you endorse their particular culture, commit to participating, deanonymise yourself, and so on — the finiancial barrier may be small, but there’s an emotional one too, including just general inertia. I had a spontaneous game of tennis with my sister a while ago. There are easily joinable clubs in the area, but if there hadn’t been free courts, we wouldn’t have gone. Also, I would be dubious that they wouldn’t kick someone off their pitches, as someone above suggested, because, looking at their fixtures list, they seem to reserve it for senior team use only — especially if it weren’t Gaelic games.

murphaph

loyatemu wrote: »

enough of the self-loathing. If they were building a new tube line that involved digging up Wimbledon you can be damn sure the All-England Club would object and try to get politicians on their side.

Na Fianna aren't trying to derail the entire project, they just don't want their club destroyed. I've little interest in GAA, but I can see their point, if there's somewhere else to put the works site they're obviously going to lobby for that.

Your All England club comparison is a bit of a stretch in fairness. It's a local sports club we're talking about, not Jones' Road.

If it's the better site technically and long term the better station location then the short term "pain" should be endured (first world pain, the lorries coming out of that site will be sprayed and I expect a dust tent will be erected over the whole thing. It'll be a lot "cleaner" than your average apartment block development if you ask me.)

The metro is to last a couple of centuries. The main factor of consideration is where the best location for the station is. Putting the TBMs in somewhere else just creates two large building sites instead of one

roadmaster

I think a lot of yee or way over reacting to this Na Fianna issue. When any club, business or home owner is effected by a major project they are going to shout as loud as they can to get the best deal for themselves .

The Na Fianna PDF said nothing to bad about the metro because they are smarter than going mouthing off. Has anyone heard an official protest to stop this project by the club?. They know they can get a good deal. When i used to work on road projects i had major confrontations with local community groups and farmers where they said they would block the road. What did we do we negotiated with them and said we would do x y and z. Then everybody was happy.

The way some people here are talking you seem to think that the locals should not be aloud express any views or feelings on the metro unless its in line with your own. So everyone relax a deal will be struck and the metro will be built