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

Pixel Eater

Sam Russell wrote: »

It will happen about one week after the Gardai start enforcing it through Operation 'Free Bus Lanes' or whatever they decide to call it.

Of course it will be paid for by all the FPNs issued for driving in the bus lane, no licence, no insurance, no motor tax, and no NCT. It is usually those people that drive in the bus lane.

Metrolink Public Consultation ends soon. Get your views known by then.

This might be a stupid question but if you've no objections/recommendations/concerns etc and are generally happy with the whole project can you just say write in to say how enthusiastic you are for the venture?!

salmocab

Pixel Eater wrote: »

This might be a stupid question but if you've no objections/recommendations/concerns etc and are generally happy with the whole project can you just say write in to say how enthusiastic you are for the venture?!

You could voice your concerns about it not happening when a vocal minority have had their say.

Dats me

Pixel Eater wrote: »

This might be a stupid question but if you've no objections/recommendations/concerns etc and are generally happy with the whole project can you just say write in to say how enthusiastic you are for the venture?!

If you're living near one of the stops maybe that would be good to add?

LuckyLloyd

Pixel Eater wrote: »

This might be a stupid question but if you've no objections/recommendations/concerns etc and are generally happy with the whole project can you just say write in to say how enthusiastic you are for the venture?!

I have the same question

marno21

And if you do have concerns - send them in now whilst the route isn't finalised yet. Don't hang around for it to reach An Bord Pleanala and get up in arms about something that the public could provide feedback on at the appropriate stage unlike other groups of ignorant ****ers elsewhere in the country, delaying the whole process for no useful purpose.

jd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I have the same question

Write in saying you are happy with the route and could there please be adequate bicycle parking at all station or similar (and not as an after thought)

stimpson

salmocab wrote: »

You could voice your concerns about it not happening when a vocal minority have had their say.

I’ve done exactly this.

marno21

Sam Russell wrote: »

It will happen about one week after the Gardai start enforcing it through Operation 'Free Bus Lanes' or whatever they decide to call it.

Of course it will be paid for by all the FPNs issued for driving in the bus lane, no licence, no insurance, no motor tax, and no NCT. It is usually those people that drive in the bus lane.

Metrolink Public Consultation ends soon. Get your views known by then.

Whenever I hear someone on about the Gardai using speed guns and speed vans as a revenue generation racket, I always think of the bus lanes. If they were that interested in revenue generation they would make a mint from them. Widespread bus lane violation in Limerick was targeted last week and 33 people were given FCPNs. A lot more than were caught speeding in a similar timeframe.

CatInABox

marno21 wrote: »

Whenever I hear someone on about the Gardai using speed guns and speed vans as a revenue generation racket, I always think of the bus lanes. If they were that interested in revenue generation they would make a mint from them. Widespread bus lane violation in Limerick was targeted last week and 33 people were given FCPNs. A lot more than were caught speeding in a similar timeframe.

Yeah, I don't get it either. You can't reverse out your driveway in London without passing a speed camera, then there's the congestion charge cameras, the ANPR enabled parking enforcement cars, the hundreds of parking wardens who have daily routes. Most of the motorways are a chore to drive on as well, Average Speed Cameras are on most routes out of London.

The use of speed guns and vans in Ireland brings to mind the Garda enforcement of drink driving tests: Halfhearted and unprofessional.

citizen6

Made my submission in support of the project. I suggested depot at Dardistown per Option B, which would allow new housing at Estuary instead of the depot (without impeding future extensions).

I also made the point that while tunnelling from Northwood takes longer in theory, there could be fewer restrictions on truck movements and tunnelling times than at Mobhi Road. So it might work out the same in the long run. And fewer legal challenges as well.

jd

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Saw this on FB yesterday:



Route Map in link:

https://www.facebook.com/FrancisNoelDuffy/photos/a.718837338146745.1073741828.718141228216356/1908306232533177/?type=3

That guy is spreading some FUD about
https://www.facebook.com/philippa.james.104/posts/10213703085785271?comment_id=10213703486515289

LongboardPro

jd wrote: »

That guy is spreading some FUD about

Someone who still uses Facebook call out that fake news please.

ncounties

CatInABox wrote: »

Yeah, I don't get it either. You can't reverse out your driveway in London without passing a speed camera, then there's the congestion charge cameras, the ANPR enabled parking enforcement cars, the hundreds of parking wardens who have daily routes. Most of the motorways are a chore to drive on as well, Average Speed Cameras are on most routes out of London.

The use of speed guns and vans in Ireland brings to mind the Garda enforcement of drink driving tests: Halfhearted and unprofessional.

Average speed cameras on arterial routes out of London are not about revenue generation - they are about improving flow. High speed is not equal to large flow.

CatInABox

ncounties wrote: »

Average speed cameras on arterial routes out of London are not about revenue generation - they are about improving flow. High speed is not equal to large flow.

Yeah, I phrased it wrong, I more wanted to imply that the guards struggle to run an effective enforcement campaign, never mind run a permanent "revenue generation" campaign.

marno21

Eamon Ryan/Green Party submission on Metrolink

https://greenparty.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Metro-Link-Submission.pdf

Main points by him are:

1. The route should be directed to Rathfarnham from Charlemont instead of along the Green Line
2. The route should be extended from Lissenhall to Donabate instead of building a P&R. A P&R in his mind would create extra congestion on the M1.

Sam Russell

Made my submission today. Hope they read it.

marno21

On a seperate note, when the Green Line from Ranelagh to Sandyford was built with Metro in mind, they made one huge mistake of leaving the Beechwood level crossing at grade. It should have been bridged as the old Harcourt Street line was. It's proving now to be a major stumbling block and a big mistake in hindsight.

salmocab

marno21 wrote: »

Eamon Ryan/Green Party submission on Metrolink

https://greenparty.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Metro-Link-Submission.pdf

Main points by him are:

1. The route should be directed to Rathfarnham from Charlemont instead of along the Green Line
2. The route should be extended from Lissenhall to Donabate instead of building a P&R. A P&R in his mind would create extra congestion on the M1.

He thinks a P&R creates congestion? God almighty.

Sam Russell

ncounties wrote: »

Average speed cameras on arterial routes out of London are not about revenue generation - they are about improving flow. High speed is not equal to large flow.

Mod: This thread is for Metrolink only. Off topic posts will be deleted.

jd

marno21 wrote: »

On a seperate note, when the Green Line from Ranelagh to Sandyford was built with Metro in mind, they made one huge mistake of leaving the Beechwood level crossing at grade. It should have been bridged as the old Harcourt Street line was. It's proving now to be a major stumbling block and a big mistake in hindsight.

Got mine in today. Alluded to the same design decisions for the Green Line causing these issues now

marno21

Sam Russell wrote: »

Made my submission today. Hope they read it.

Would you like to tell us some of what you said?

Sam Russell

marno21 wrote: »

Would you like to tell us some of what you said?

It is inline with my previous posts.

1. Depot at Dardistown to allow housing at Estuary. P&R at Estuary and Dardistown.

2. Drop Stillorgan stop entirely.

3. Solve Beechwood Ave by bridge.

4. Send Luas down Addelaide Rd to GCD.

Plus a few more minor points, like driverless, passenger doors, etc.

stimpson

marno21 wrote: »

1. The route should be directed to Rathfarnham from Charlemont instead of along the Green Line

So it should serve his constituency. Gotta prime that parish pump.

specialbyte

I also sent my submission in today. Though maybe I should have been more supportive of the scheme than I was. Though that's a little hard as I've also been writing the MetroLink submissions for two organisations this week.

Here's a list of the points I touched on:
* High-quality cycle parking at all metro stops
* Segregated cycle paths to all metro stops
* Allow bicycles on metro vehicles in line with National Cycle Policy Framework
* Green line metro upgrade cannot remove existing cyclist permeability. Appropriate engineering solutions need to be found
* The Glasnevin station must not infringe on the Grand Canal Geenway route, which it is adjacent to

(You may be picking up a theme here)

* Do Alternative Option A (some segregated ground running in Swords). This allows the Metro Plaza to be built over the line and the swords bypass road. This will connect Swords town centre with the development lands on the other side of the bypass road. Metro Plaza is from the Swords Masterplan document and the Fingal County Development Plan
* Do Alternative Option B (depot at Dardistown). This allows for much better land use. The Dardistown land is unsuitable for housing as it is within the Outer Airport Safety Zone and the Inner Airport Noise Zone (Fingal County Development Plan). Building a bridge over the M50 allows allows the option of a pedestrian and cycle track on the same bridge beside the tracks. This helps solve the permeability issue the M50 causes for pedestrians and cyclists.
* I also threw in a section around long term planning for the future. Encouraging them to think past the end of the GDA Transport Strategy that runs until 2035. To consider how DART underground, Metro West (or something like it) and an extension to Donabate might need space left for them. Essentially try to avoid designing future engineers into a corner.

strassenwo!f

stimpson wrote: »

So it should serve his constituency. Gotta prime that parish pump.

Actually no.

When he was a TD for Dublin South, through which the LUAS Green line currently runs, he was very much for upgrading that route to a metro. At the time, before if was extended across the city, the vast majority of the line ran right through the middle of his constituency.

Now that he's again a TD, but this time for the Dublin Bay South constituency - through which, and I am open to correction on this - the southside Green LUAS (the proposed southside Metro route) either doesn't run at all, or is only on the fringes, he feels freer to take a different opinion on what should be done.

I broadly agree with him about what should be done on the southside of Dublin, but Mr Ryan has shown himself here to be a naked opportunist.

specialbyte

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Actually no.

When he was a TD for Dublin South, through which the LUAS Green line currently runs, he was very much for upgrading that route to a metro. At the time, before if was extended across the city, the vast majority of the line ran right through the middle of his constituency.

Now that he's again a TD, but this time for the Dublin Bay South constituency - through which, and I am open to correction on this - the southside Green LUAS (the proposed southside Metro route) either doesn't run at all, or is only on the fringes, he feels freer to take a different opinion on what should be done.

I broadly agree with him about what should be done on the southside of Dublin, but Mr Ryan has shown himself here to be a naked opportunist.

The Dublin Bay South constituency goes much further in-land than I thought. There's a map here: https://sites.google.com/site/robertemmetcumann/_/rsrc/1524413384682/our-mission/Dublin%20Bay%20South%20Constituency.jpg?height=277&width=400

So the green line runs relatively down the middle of his constituency. The Metro SW he's suggesting is also within his constituency for the most part.

I just wish Eamon Ryan would realise that at this stage he's two public consultations too late to be suggesting a metro SW instead of upgrading the green line. There was a public consultation on the GDA Transport Strategy, which proposed metro south on the green line. He could have commented then. There was the national development plan, which also had a public consultation phase. He could have commented then. He can't decide to wake up this late in the process and start taking out the crayons. He's not the only politician guilty of this.

marno21

The part of the Luas Green Line that runs through Ryan's constituency is currently "controversial" due to the Beechwood LC issue and general ignorant comments about RIPPING UP LUAS TRACKS and that kind of bull scutter.

As said before, Metro is Swords-Sandyford. Nowhere else. The lack of investment in the N4 is not a reason not to build the M20.

LongboardPro

Could somone post a template or an idea of the format of the letter they submitted?

tom1ie

marno21 wrote: »

Eamon Ryan/Green Party submission on Metrolink

https://greenparty.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Metro-Link-Submission.pdf

Main points by him are:

1. The route should be directed to Rathfarnham from Charlemont instead of along the Green Line
2. The route should be extended from Lissenhall to Donabate instead of building a P&R. A P&R in his mind would create extra congestion on the M1.

I’m really surprised at the p+r comment from him. A properly laid out p+r will reduce traffic levels south of the metro along the m1 etc.
if anything the p+r is too small.

markpb

He's not exactly wrong. TfL don't support the building of P&R in London because they believe it causes congestion. They believe a local bus network is a better plan.

It should be obvious that it will cause congestion, the question is whether the congestion is in an area that would cause problems and whether the benefits of the P&R outweigh the problems caused by the congestion.

I don't know Dardistown at all. If we're talking about a P&R directly accessed from a motorway with no surface road road access and very long merge and demerge lanes onto the motorway, that would probably be okay. However even that would cause some additional congestion on the motorway as people drive short distances on the motorway to access the P&R. Look at the problem the M50 suffers because people use it for short distances. It's not just the additional traffic, it's the magnification of that because of the additional lane changes in a very concentrated area.