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

BonnieSituation

Or raise the line AND lower the road.

---

That's gonna be some job. Necessary. But some job. And naturally will leave it out if commission fur a good while.

What was the situation like when they reinstated the green line on the trackbed?

What was the layout for the Harcourt line there? Elevated?

EDIT: Had a quick look at the old 25 inch map there.

It's where the original Ranelagh Station was.
The railway remained elevated after coming across the Canal AND the road dropped.

Rechuchote

Around 250 people at the local meeting in Ranelagh last night. Several cited an article by Michael McDowell pointing out that the €3bn to €4bn planned to be used to shut down the 14-year-old Luas for two years (at huge economic cost to Dublin) and build a heavier Metrolink on it would be better spent putting a series of Luas lines throughout areas of the city that need it more:

https://www.michaelmcdowell.ie/chaos-of-the-metrolink-project.html

Observations have to be sent in to the "Public Consultation" website or by post before May 11 - just a week to make your spake! https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/2018/03/metrolink-nta-tii-public-consultation-document.pdf

People were suggesting that those sending in observations should photocopy them and send a photocopy to Eoghan Murphy, TD.

monument

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Or raise the line AND lower the road.

Yes! Going half and half is something that Dutch do very effectively at roads, railways and cycle paths but I have not seen it that much elsewhere.

Rechuchote

One question not addressed either by the engineers or at the meeting - where does the culverted River Swan go? I know it passes along Kenilworth Square North at one stage, and Dartmouth Square in Ranelagh, and eventually escapes into the Dodder at the end of Lansdowne Road Stadium. But will the engineers who dig down find themselves confronted by an angry river?

Pixel Eater

Rechuchote wrote: »

Around 250 people at the local meeting in Ranelagh last night. Several cited an article by Michael McDowell pointing out that the €3bn to €4bn planned to be used to shut down the 14-year-old Luas for two years (at huge economic cost to Dublin) and build a heavier Metrolink on it would be better spent putting a series of Luas lines throughout areas of the city that need it more:

https://www.michaelmcdowell.ie/chaos-of-the-metrolink-project.html

Just read that Micheal McDowell piece: the usual unrelenting negative spiel about transport but not backed-up by one discernible statistic. Even seems to blame engineers for the lack of progress on transport infrastructure when in reality it's budget constraints and narrow minded, meddling politicians of his ilk.

jd

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Just read that Micheal McDowell piece: the usual unrelenting negative spiel about transport but not backed-up by one discernible statistic. Even seems to blame engineers for the lack of progress on transport infrastructure when in reality it's budget constraints and narrow minded, meddling politicians of his ilk.

He's happy with his tram because it gets him to the Seanad and close to King's Inns (if he uses public transport at all)

bk

piuswal wrote: »

Alternative station to Na Fianna. Possible TBM site.

Looks like a bad location for both a TBM site and even a station.

First of all, those are schools right next to it, so if that is your complaint about Na Fianna, then it is equally the case here.

The roads in and around it are only local two lane roads, so wouldn't be suitable for the trucks going to and from the TBM site, Mobhi Road is a wider 3/4 lane road so could better handle it.

Even as a station location it is very out of the way location.

Carlos Orange

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Just read that Micheal McDowell piece: the usual unrelenting negative spiel about transport but not backed-up by one discernible statistic.

The obvious stat from it is "For that kind of money we could build between seven and ten surface Luas lines." A quick google seems to show the cost of the first block of Luas construction was estimated at about 250 million and ended up costing 750 million. Obviously that was a while ago and Luas lines is kind of an arbitrary unit of measure. How many Luas lines would you say the Metro is going to cost?

bk

psinno wrote: »

The obvious stat from it is "For that kind of money we could build between seven and ten surface Luas lines." A quick google seems to show the cost of the first block of Luas construction was estimated at about 250 million and ended up costing 750 million. Obviously that was a while ago and Luas lines is kind of an arbitrary unit of measure. How many Luas lines would you say the Metro is going to cost?

It is a pointless question, there simply isn't the road space for any more Luas lines. Any new Luas lines will simple be extensions of existing one (Finglas, Poolbeg).

And frankly we are now seeing that city center sections of both the RED and Green line should really have been underground anyway.

There is simply no road space for any more real Liuas lines (e.g. North/South), the only choice is to go underground.

antoinolachtnai

psinno wrote: »

The obvious stat from it is "For that kind of money we could build between seven and ten surface Luas lines." A quick google seems to show the cost of the first block of Luas construction was estimated at about 250 million and ended up costing 750 million. Obviously that was a while ago and Luas lines is kind of an arbitrary unit of measure. How many Luas lines would you say the Metro is going to cost?

You can’t build any more overground luas in the south city for any cost is the answer.

The problem is that there are few or no suitable places to put them in the suburbs and there are no streets left in the city centre to put them without completely snarling up the city centre for traffic. There is no capacity on the existing city centre luas lines. Luas lines are not particularly cheap to build because they entail a lot of disruption to underground utilities.

The current project is the one that will have the best CBA outcome as a first metro line because it has very long above ground tails at either end which can be built at low cost.

A tunnel continuing to Templeogue or wherever will have an overall project cost around 50 or 80 percent higher but will have few additional benefits.

The alternative is really upgrading the bus network or else making the overall metro project much bigger and accepting a much weaker CBA.

Rechuchote

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The problem is that there are few or no suitable places to put them in the suburbs

Not really so. One going from Christ Church along New Street, Patrick Street, Clanbrassil Street, Harold's Cross Road, Terenure Road North to Rathfarnham would be on broad road the whole way, and could start at Stephen's Green and go up Dame Street to Christ Church. Broad road all the way from Christ Church!

Tis seldom I'd see eye-to-eye with Michael McDowell on anything, but the idea of putting a Metro station in an out-of-the-way place, right beside a road that has at times been listed as the most expensive house-buying road in Dublin, and splitting that community - I agree with him that this is unwise.

Pixel Eater

psinno wrote: »

The obvious stat from it is "For that kind of money we could build between seven and ten surface Luas lines." A quick google seems to show the cost of the first block of Luas construction was estimated at about 250 million and ended up costing 750 million. Obviously that was a while ago and Luas lines is kind of an arbitrary unit of measure. How many Luas lines would you say the Metro is going to cost?

That wasn't a real stat, merely conjecture on his part. Well we don't know exactly how much the Metro will cost or how much or where there fantastical Luas lines would run so it's pretty difficult to have an answer for that.

Maybe 3 at a stretch and they might possibly have less combined length and less capacity of the Metro. Very, very doubtful 10 lines could be built for the same price. But that's a guess on my part.

Rechuchote

But what McDowell is saying is that we should be spreading out the Luas lines to provide a better range of public transport, rather than concentrating on one vanity project for the most expensive place in Dublin.

specialbyte

I was also at the residents meeting near the Beachwood and Cowper stops in South Dublin last night. The turnout was insane. The small local hall only just about fitted everyone in - standing room only. It was a well run meeting there saw a wide range of views from local residents, local business owners and the principles of two local schools. There was a lot of anger and confusion in the room about how the metro upgrade of the green line and the full segregation will affect them. Many voiced concerns that the green-line tie-in study wasn't detailed enough. When locals asked TII/ARUP engineers at public consultations they got different answers for how access would be maintained across Dunville Avenue and at the Cowper stop. Everything from over bridges with lifts, to underpasses etc. The general consensus being that losing Dunville Avenue would tear their community in two and force all local movements by car and bike into Ranelagh village and down to Milltown.

100s of people filled out public consultation forms last night at the meeting. They started organising and picked a local representative for each road in the area. They talked about fund raising so they can pay a professional planner to help them create submissions for the Railway Order stage if they don't like the results of the public consultation. So anyone who thinks the upgrading of the green line to metro standard is a walk in the park clearly hasn't meet these residents.

There was a general sense that closing Dunville Avenue was madness
There was concern lifts for over/underpasses would be broken or unusable because ...
There was concern that one lift on each bridge wouldn't be enough to cater for peak travel times
There were some who questioned the need for the metro upgrade at all. The money would be better spent serving communities like Terenur, Rathfarnham etc.
There was concern that the new metro vehicles would be heavier and louder
There was a lot of concern about closing the Luas line for a year or even 2 years. (This is the first I heard of two years)
There was concern about how people would be able to cycle in the area or how their kids would get to school

Generally the community want far more information from TII then they have been provided with thus far. There was some mention, mostly from older residents that they should put the Metro on a bridge over Dunville Avenue. Sure that's how the Harcourt rail line work. The over bridge was removed by the RPA in 2003/2004 when the Luas was constructed. The old over bridge was too low and they didn't want to have to raise it. I bet whomever in the RPA made that decision is now regretting it. I got the feeling that if (and it's a big if) the residents accept the need for the Metro upgrade then their preferred solution is either the track passing above or below Dunville Avenue.

To be honest the residents don't benefit hugely from the metro upgrade, particularly. They see the current Luas capacity enhancements and are able to get on peak Luases again. They have a perfectly good working metro system right now. The need for the metro upgrade is mostly because the NTA can't extend the Luas to Bray until the metro upgrade is in place. DLRCoCo can't approve all of the future housing in Sandyford, Cherrywood, Ballyogen, and Carrickmines without a metro upgrade.

After the meeting I realised that TII missed out on a huge opportunity here. There was a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt at that meeting. TII had sent along 100s of copies of the public consultation documents and consultation forms. They could have sent along a well-spoken TII engineer. That engineer would have gotten a bit of a beating because TII don't know all the answers yet. But that engineer could have dispelled some of the myths in the room. That engineer could have made a case for why the metro upgrade is necessary. That engineer could have described the process for how TII can/will come up with better answers for that community.

The minimum that community should expect from TII is a traffic survey of the area between Grand Canal and the Dodder. They also deserve a feasibility study on the four options for achieving grade separation (raise track, lower track, raise road, lower road) at each of their major crossing points.

This community is mobilising and gearing up for a fight. They want answers and they have none.

bk

Rechuchote wrote: »

But what McDowell is saying is that we should be spreading out the Luas lines to provide a better range of public transport, rather than concentrating on one vanity project for the most expensive place in Dublin.

And by doing so, he is showing that he doesn't have a clue about public transport planning!

If you look at any European city of similar size to Dublin (e.g. Amsterdam, Copenhagen), you will see the core city center has two or three high capacity Metro lines which are then feed by a wide network of bus and tram lines further out.

Metrolink is absolutely necessary to unlocking better public transport for the whole city. It will make the backbone on which the whole of Dublins public transport is built.

Zebra3

Rechuchote wrote: »

But what McDowell is saying is that we should be spreading out the Luas lines to provide a better range of public transport, rather than concentrating on one vanity project for the most expensive place in Dublin.

How is it a vanity project?

specialbyte

Rechuchote wrote: »

But what McDowell is saying is that we should be spreading out the Luas lines to provide a better range of public transport, rather than concentrating on one vanity project for the most expensive place in Dublin.

McDowell is talking out his backside if you don't mind me saying. He might not understand why this metro line is going ahead but the idea we'd get 10 Luas lines from the Metro money is laughable.

The reason the Luas Red and Green line work and are so popular is their journey time and comfort. Their journey time is mostly achieved from segregation from other traffic. As we've seen with the cross city section if you put Luas trams in mixed traffic they move just as slowly as the traffic around them. Walking the cross city section of the Luas between Stephen's Green and OCS is only marginally slower than taking the Luas. We can definitely build 10 bad Luas lines with low levels of segregation with the ~3 billion we are spending on the Metro. Getting segregation costs money. Either you have to CPO land, build an elevated structure or tunnel, none of which are cheap. But then we have 10 slow moving Luas lines that are expensive bus routes. We should have spent the money on buses.

Getting segregation for the Luas Red and Green line for most of their routes was relatively easy. For the green line it was the old harcourt rail line. For the Red line it's a combination of hugging the M50, using the median of the large Naas road, following the Grand Canal and using the linear park of the old Grand Canal Spur to Guinnesses. There aren't many more options like those routes left.

If McDowell can point out a mostly segregated route between Swords (the main objective of this metro project) and the City Centre then I'm all ears.

If McDowell also wants to start disclosing that he owns property that is potentially affected by the Metro upgrade of the green line then I'll be slightly more inclined to start listening to what he has to say.

P.S. We are spreading out the public transport spend in Dublin. We are spending 1B on BusConnects upgrades including significant upgrades to all major QBC routes. We are also spending probably 2B on the DART expansion. There is hardly a part of the city that isn't going to see public transport infrastructure improvements. The north corridor from the City Center to Ballymum to Swords will see the largest improvement.

Pixel Eater

Rechuchote wrote: »

But what McDowell is saying is that we should be spreading out the Luas lines to provide a better range of public transport, rather than concentrating on one vanity project for the most expensive place in Dublin.

That's a rather glib and sneery interpretation of the project. And it'll be serving Ballymun and Swords, certainly not some of the most riches parts of Dublin, as well as connecting to the airport.

HatchSt

bk wrote: »

Looks like a bad location for both a TBM site and even a station.

Sinking a TBM involves making a big hole in the ground. It has to happen somewhere. Na Fianna may not be an ideal site, but guess what. There's no such thing as an ideal site. It is inevitable that digging a big hole in the ground will cause disruption to people. But digging it at Na Fianna means you don't have to kick anybody out of their home.

There should be an honest debate about this. If not Na Fianna, then where?

Rechuchote

Pixel Eater wrote: »

That's a rather glib and sneery interpretation of the project. And it'll be serving Ballymun and Swords, certainly not some of the most riches parts of Dublin, as well as connecting to the airport.

I don't mean that the Metro from Dublin Airport to Dublin city centre is a vanity project, not at all. Just that extending it south to [Stepaside] (correction) Sandyford…

Instead of that southwards re-edit of a good Luas line (which does need more trams running on it), it would seem far better to extend to other areas where trams would be a big advantage to commuters.

https://www.facebook.com/harolds.cross/videos/232333250852202/?hc_ref=ARQxSBWElMi-0xENKduJHPrZy-X5AeJl-BPG_Ct4uUZzYSn8O7zs9aLUxNhq-H0Ge1Q

Sam Russell

When they built the Green Line, they penny pinched on the at-grade crossovers at Donore Ave and St Raephaela's Rd. This is now coming back to bite them.

We will see the same results in the Na Fianna situation. Moving the TBM portal will cost extra. Moving the station will be a permanent mistake. The TBM could be moved the Northwood, but that would mean longer tunneling using only two TBMs instead of four, and moving the spoil by conveyor the whole length of the tunnels rather than halfway. Now Northwood Stn is just south of the M50, so moving the spoil from thee might be easier, but that would be a small benefit.

bk

HatchSt wrote: »

Sinking a TBM involves making a big hole in the ground. It has to happen somewhere. Na Fianna may not be an ideal site, but guess what. There's no such thing as an ideal site. It is inevitable that digging a big hole in the ground will cause disruption to people. But digging it at Na Fianna means you don't have to kick anybody out of their home.

There should be an honest debate about this. If not Na Fianna, then where?

Your commenting me, I think Na Fianna is a fine location for the TBM. I was commenting to another poster that was suggesting another location next to the Botanic Gardens which I feel would be even less ideal then Na Fianna.

BTW the alternative suggested location for the TBM site is up near the airport and it does have some nice advantages.

HatchSt

Rechuchote wrote: »

Instead of that southwards re-edit of a good Luas line (which does need more trams running on it), it would seem far better to extend to other areas where trams would be a big advantage to commuters.

Upgrading Luas Green to Metro has ALWAYS been the plan. It was part of the DTO strategy adopted by Government in 2001. Michael McDowell was AG at the time, and sat at cabinet.

McDowell is effectively suggesting that both the current GDA transport strategy and the capital plan should be binned.

HatchSt

bk wrote: »

Your commenting me.

Apologies!

marno21

Rechuchote wrote: »

I don't mean that the Metro from Dublin Airport to Dublin city centre is a vanity project, not at all. Just that extending it south to Stepaside…

Instead of that southwards re-edit of a good Luas line (which does need more trams running on it), it would seem far better to extend to other areas where trams would be a big advantage to commuters.

https://www.facebook.com/harolds.cross/videos/232333250852202/?hc_ref=ARQxSBWElMi-0xENKduJHPrZy-X5AeJl-BPG_Ct4uUZzYSn8O7zs9aLUxNhq-H0Ge1Q

There is no Metro going to Stepaside

Metro South was included in the 2016-2035 NTA GDA Transport Strategy for which Shane Ross had zero input.

Rechuchote

marno21 wrote: »

There is no Metro going to Stepaside

Sorry! Sandyford!

LXFlyer wrote: »

Without massive CPO costs and demolishing Terenure Village and Harold’s Cross Village you could not put two segregated tram lines in.

Both Harold's Cross and Terenure already had two tram lines - they were a major part of the original tram network.

marno21

MOD:

No further discussion of rerouting the Swords-Sandyford Metro towards South West Dublin. It's not happening and was never on the table to begin with. Discuss the idea of a SW Metro in the other thread.

Stephen15

DublinOnTrack wrote: »

Hi guys,

I've been following this thread for some time now and have seen the calls to start some sort of campaign or group to counter the misinformation and negative portrayal of MetroLink in the Irish media which has spread to the general public. Countless posters are right in saying that once the metro is up and running everyone will love it and want their own one. Well my worry is that this first metro might never be up and running. People just don't seem to grasp how important it is, economically and socially. Some of these details are within the report published by MetroLinks but 326 page documents are inaccessible to most of the population. Our elected officials are meant to summarise these reports to the public in a way everyone can understand the advantages MetroLinks can bring to the city. However I'm sure we all realise that this isn't really happening.

The Na Fianna issue is only the first hurdle and it appears the project is already stumbling to get over that, so now it looks like it has to go around. Thanks to public pressure there will surely be many more issues like this and if MetroLink keeps going around the issue then we may either end up with a line that is unfit for purpose or no line at all. It is for these reasons that I have decided to kickstart a campaign for like minded people and experts who understand the importance of this project for Dublin and Ireland as a whole. It is not just a ‘line to the airport’. But a vital artery through our city and one if built will influence more like it, completely revolutionising our city into the modern, sustainable and prosperous city that Dublin can be.

So I ask all of you to first follow our twitter page at DublinOnTrack (cant post links yet)

I have also seen numerous arguments here discussing the advantages of metro, I ask people to please email some of these on to dublinontrack at gmail.com (cant post links yet) where we can start contributing to the debate with these articles and opinion pieces, firstly via our social media accounts and at a later stage with a website.

Thanks for reading and all feedback is more than welcome

I've been trying to search for your group but I've only got something to do with cycling. Does anyone have a link to the Twitter page or even their exact Twitter address so I can check it out.

jd

Stephen15 wrote: »

I've been trying to search for your group but I've only got something to do with cycling. Does anyone have a link to the Twitter page or even their exact Twitter address so I can check it out.

https://twitter.com/DublinOnTrack

Mod: A thread has been opened to assist in keeping people abreast of Dublin on track, and any media activity on Metrolink.

Sam Russell

Mod: I have posted a warning (see below) on post #1 of this thread. It is not intended to stifle discussion, just to direct it to the appropriate thread.

Mod warning: Please only post only about the actual Metrolink proposal - proposals or discussion about Luas/Metro alternatives should go here. Otherwise posts will be moved or deleted.