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

prunudo

Heard Noel Rock TD on the radio earlier giving about the delay in getting a plan out, not because of the problems for commuters, or the airport connection or even opening up Swords to better public transport.
No he was giving out because parents are unsure about which school to send their kids to as they don't want to send them to one beside a building site for years on end!

dubhthach

bk wrote: »

I'd assume they are looking at either Option 6 or 6(A) now. My comments are based on those, of course they might go with a variation on these now.

Yes, the Luas would run as far as Beechwood.

They don't mention extra stations and I don't see why there would be a need for one. Someone at Charlemont heading to the Airport would just get the Luas to Stephens Green and transfer to Metrolink there.



Both option 6 and 6A have interchanges with the Luas at Beechwood. Option 6 have the stations right next to one another. Option 6A mentions a 10meter walk.

Can you post a link to the document that talks about these options? I'm assuming it's a PDF.

not1but4

dubhthach wrote: »

Can you post a link to the document that talks about these options? I'm assuming it's a PDF.

http://data.tii.ie/metrolink/alignment-options-study/study-2/metrolink-1-gl-tie-in-options-appraisal-report.pdf

Search for "Option 6"

I don't understand how Option 6(A) is a 10 minute walk away from the Luas tie-in when looking at the drawing.

AlmightyCushion

not1but4 wrote: »

http://data.tii.ie/metrolink/alignment-options-study/study-2/metrolink-1-gl-tie-in-options-appraisal-report.pdf

Search for "Option 6"

I don't understand how Option 6(A) is a 10 minute walk away from the Luas tie-in when looking at the drawing.

I haven't read the PDF but going by Bk's post above, it's a 10 meter walk not a 10 minute walk (I assume they say 10m walk and you though that meant minute as opposed to metre, I could be wrong though).

LuckyLloyd

It's not going to happen, as Grandeod predicted. It will be the back end of next year before they get to a point of being able to apply to ABP at the earliest. By the time they get the go ahead for railway orders we'll be in the midst of a recession with a new government in place. It will be killed off. We don't have the balls.

bk

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I haven't read the PDF but going by Bk's post above, it's a 10 meter walk not a 10 minute walk (I assume they say 10m walk and you though that meant minute as opposed to metre, I could be wrong though).

Yes, it says 10m on page 75 of the report.

Interchange: Beechwood Metro to Beechwood Luas (10m walking
distance)

Though now I think this is incorrect, page 48 says for Option 6A the closest Metro stop is Ranelagh, so perhaps the above is incorrect and they mean 10 minutes walk. Which certainly wouldn't be ideal.

Having said all that, Option 6 was shortlisted option and that is the one that includes Luas platform and Metrolink side by side. Option 6A wasn't shortlisted.

Zebra3

jvan wrote: »

Heard Noel Rock TD on the radio earlier giving about the delay in getting a plan out, not because of the problems for commuters, or the airport connection or even opening up Swords to better public transport.
No he was giving out because parents are unsure about which school to send their kids to as they don't want to send them to one beside a building site for years on end!

And he’s a government TD. :rolleyes:

And people slag off the Healy-Raes.

No shortage of them about Dublin. Just different accents.

Rulmeq

not1but4 wrote: »

http://data.tii.ie/metrolink/alignment-options-study/study-2/metrolink-1-gl-tie-in-options-appraisal-report.pdf

Search for "Option 6"

I don't understand how Option 6(A) is a 10 minute walk away from the Luas tie-in when looking at the drawing.

Thanks for the link, but option 6 is going to take a lot of back gardens, and if we thought the objections were bad when they were getting a "Berlin Wall", they are going to be really loud about this.

I can't see it in the PDF (It's very long), but is there an option to just close the level crossing instead of all this extra cost and messing?

CatInABox

bk wrote: »

Yes, it says 10m on page 75 of the report.



Though now I think this is incorrect, page 48 says for Option 6A the closest Metro stop is Ranelagh, so perhaps the above is incorrect and they mean 10 minutes walk. Which certainly wouldn't be ideal.

Having said all that, Option 6 was shortlisted option and that is the one that includes Luas platform and Metrolink side by side. Option 6A wasn't shortlisted.

Option 6A seems to removes the Luas Beechwood stop, and turn it into a Metro only stop. That might explain the "10 minute walk".

The text says:

The final operating configuration will result in the severance of the existing Luas Green Line at
Ranelagh with future Metro vehicles operating exclusively south of the tie-in point in order to enable
through Metro services from Swords to Bride’s Glen. Luas Green Line services will operate between
the Ranelagh and Broombridge Stops. Ranelagh Stop will become the terminus for the Luas Green Line
with the provision of a turnback facility, south of the stop.

While the appendix says:

Luas Green Line Broombridge to Beechwood


One of these is wrong, and I think it's the appendix. If you want to get the luas from Beechwood, you'll need to walk to Ranelagh. Of course, you'd actually just get the Metro One stop and change at Ranelagh, I assume that one of the two new Metro stations required would go there.

Dats me

I emailed Eoghan Murphy there to say that he should be solving these problems and bringing his constituency along not interfering and delaying the project.

Idbatterim

Dats me wrote: »

I emailed Eoghan Murphy there to say that he should be solving these problems and bringing his constituency along not interfering and delaying the project.

I dont know how you do it! You're dealing with morons of the highest order! They didnt want to close the link between Ranelagh and Rathmines, there was the cutting option, for 25-35 million. Why should another 65-75 million be spent to accomodate these clowns?

Sure if money is no object, why the hell are they looking to "save" a pittance on the low floor driver based trams?!

Dats me

I agree, I don't think the NTA want to change it, it's TDs that are the problem! If we could get a lot of emails into minister@housing.gov.ie it would probably make a difference

Idbatterim

Im not paying that much attention to this critical project any more. All I can hope is, they are digging before the **** hits the fan again!

prunudo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It's not going to happen, as Grandeod predicted. It will be the back end of next year before they get to a point of being able to apply to ABP at the earliest. By the time they get the go ahead for railway orders we'll be in the midst of a recession with a new government in place. It will be killed off. We don't have the balls.

I really hope you're wrong and that it gets built but it has that feeling of inevitability of failure about it. I believe the NTA want it built but I think its the politctians who don't have the balls to back it.
The fact we are debating a revised plan (I presume somebody leaked it) with no details only bits of info that isn't due till the new year doesn't bode well either, gives vested interests plenty of time to make lots of noise before a plan is even drawn up and released.

Idbatterim

the amount of time and energy that will have gone into this, I am assuming even more than the last time with metro north?! If the **** hits the fan again or they dont have the balls, FFS dont reinvent the wheel again, just shelve the project as it is, until they will actually bring it to fruition!!!

marno21

bk wrote: »

I'd assume they are looking at either Option 6 or 6(A) now. My comments are based on those, of course they might go with a variation on these now.

Yes, the Luas would run as far as Beechwood.

They don't mention extra stations and I don't see why there would be a need for one. Someone at Charlemont heading to the Airport would just get the Luas to Stephens Green and transfer to Metrolink there.

So, to put it this way, a fudge of reduced service for people along Charlemont-Beechwood in order to indulge local NIMBYs. Super.

Qrt

Can someone sum up why some people don't want Dunville Avenue access maintained by lowering or raising the railway? It seems like the perfect solution...

FreudianSlippers

Heard a spokesperson from Irish Rail on the radio yesterday (the day before maybe?) and he mentioned DART Underground a few times... made me think of Metrolink and whether Irish Rail are also of the belief that this will be mothballed and they can get the government to divert the funding to DU?

Rulmeq

marno21 wrote: »

So, to put it this way, a fudge of reduced service for people along Charlemont-Beechwood in order to indulge local NIMBYs. Super.

We're prioritising cars over PT yet again. Just close the ****ing road, it's not like there's no other routes that can be used. (Or give the locals a choice, of close the road, or "Berlin Wall")

bk

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Heard a spokesperson from Irish Rail on the radio yesterday (the day before maybe?) and he mentioned DART Underground a few times... made me think of Metrolink and whether Irish Rail are also of the belief that this will be mothballed and they can get the government to divert the funding to DU?

LOL if you think ML faces opposition, wait until people realise DU will require station boxes at least twice as long through the heart of the city!!

FreudianSlippers

bk wrote: »

LOL if you think ML faces opposition, wait until people realise DU will require station boxes at least twice as long through the heart of the city!!

Yeah, but does it disrupt temporarily inconvenience a GAA pitch or cause construction in a middle-class neighbourhood? You know... the important issues when considering infrastructure.

patrickbrophy18

https://www.thejournal.ie/metrolink-public-consultation-delays-4313978-Oct2018/


Really?
So, NIMBY-ism wins once again!


Seriously, when are we going to realize that in order to make an omelette, you have to crack a few eggs?


In many cities world wide, Metro systems are built above ground as well as underground or a mixture of both.


I was recently in Boston where the rail lines operate above ground mainly in the suburbs before going underground where ground level traffic would be very hazardous.


Failure to do this with the Luas Cross City is proving very futile. Also, at ground level, it is far too easy to access for fare evaders.


At this stage, we need an intervention to stop petty local matters and parish pump politics where they jeopardize such projects. Otherwise, our Fair City will grind to a halt. Finally, it shouldn’t take a year to redraft the plans!

L1011

Qrt wrote: »

Can someone sum up why some people don't want Dunville Avenue access maintained by lowering or raising the railway? It seems like the perfect solution...

The bridge - that existed the first time it was a railway - would be unacceptable to their aesthetics basically

CreativeSen

If the well to do Ranelagh and Rathmines residents dont want a metrolink to the airport, fine, dont give it to them!

BUT PLEASE do not sacrifice or delay the rest of this plan. Swords to Stephens Green will do just fine for now!

CatInABox

Not sure why people are getting so worked up over this, there was always going to be issues, changes and delays to the plan, that's the whole point of having a consultation.

In my opinion, the NTA are proceeding with this the right way. Find out what the objections are and remove them if possible. They've clearly dealt with Na Fiannas objections. They're trying to deal with the objections around Dunville Avenue, and in the context of a multi-billion euro project, the rumoured solution is pretty cheap.

The only objections that they can't really do anything about is the Townsend St apartments, and the NTA seem to be digging their feet in there.

salmocab

There’s nothing wrong with residents protesting about changes to their neighborhoods or na Fianna not wanting to lose their pitches. So long as it’s all dealt with correctly. Ultimately the greater good needs to win out but we can’t really just expect people to accept massive changes but it’s important to deal with them in a fair manner.

Marcusm

L1011 wrote: »

The bridge - that existed the first time it was a railway - would be unacceptable to their aesthetics basically

I’ve tried to find photos of this bridge to see what it used to look like. I heard it was only dismantled in 1995 but I don’t remember it at all.

Idbatterim

its a pity about the apartments, that is a real shame and that is a real pity IF they have to go, they should put in the bridge or cutting and thats it, no 'berlin wall' is going up and thats it and throw in two fingers for good measure!

FG etc must be delighted with the delays, another year closer to the **** hitting the fan! they can then axe the project and use the money to prop up world class welfare rates for example, while the workers can commute on the third world transport system here!

bk

CreativeSen wrote: »

If the well to do Ranelagh and Rathmines residents dont want a metrolink to the airport, fine, dont give it to them!

BUT PLEASE do not sacrifice or delay the rest of this plan. Swords to Stephens Green will do just fine for now!

You can't just decide to stop at Stephens Green, it doesn't work like that.

You would need to build a massive expensive turn around facility under Stephens Green and dig up most of the Green to do it. That was what was planned under the original Metro North.

The nice thing about linking into the Luas Green Line is that it eliminated the need for this massive and expensive works. Instead you just tie into the Green line and make use of the existing depot and turn around facilities at the Sandymount depot.

It actually makes the entire project more straight forward and simpler, while also benefiting from upgrading the Luas line, better connectivity and for little extra cost.

Marcusm

L1011 wrote: »

The bridge - that existed the first time it was a railway - would be unacceptable to their aesthetics basically

I’ve tried to find photos of this bridge to see what it used to look like. I heard it was only dismantled in 1995 but I don’t remember it at all.