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

cgcsb

My guess:
1st week in March
Talk of metro going further south than Sandyford.
Charlemont portal remains number one option, extending tunneling is too expensive and wasteful
Dunville ave will have an underpass or bridge, whichever locals prefer

salmocab

jvan wrote: »

In the grand scheme €100m isn't that much extra. Also if it does come in the around the €3bn mark then when compared to the Nch it will be a bargain of a project.

I know you aren’t doing this but we need to be careful of the language it’s not 100 million extra it’s 100 million more than a different option. It’s a small point but when it’s used over and over it becomes fact. The NCH overun is different but it will taint other projects costings for the foreseeable future.

Dats me

cgcsb wrote: »

My guess:
1st week in March
Talk of metro going further south than Sandyford.
Charlemont portal remains number one option, extending tunneling is too expensive and wasteful
Dunville ave will have an underpass or bridge, whichever locals prefer

I think they'd be mad not to put the out-line or whatever you call it beechwood connection in, that would have "minimal disruption" but more expensive and lots of CPO, as an option so there can be talk of a choice as opposed to having people against it.

Would going past Sandyford mean less chance of High-Floor? When I was at the public consultation the engineer I was talking to said that past Sandyford wouldn't be suitable for high-floor

cgcsb

Dats me wrote: »

I think they'd be mad not to put the out-line or whatever you call it beechwood connection in, that would have "minimal disruption" but more expensive and lots of CPO, as an option so there can be talk of a choice as opposed to having people against it.

Would going past Sandyford mean less chance of High-Floor? When I was at the public consultation the engineer I was talking to said that past Sandyford wouldn't be suitable for high-floor

There's lots of options for retrofitting the line south of Sandyford, the line has quite a bit of space around it to work with. In light of the Cherrywood development, this might make more sense. Having a rural, semi-mountainous tram between Bray and Sandyford would be a bit odd.

salmocab

cgcsb wrote: »

Dunville ave will have an underpass or bridge, whichever locals prefer

I’d say the most likely option is an underpass with the tracks raised so far something like a 1.5 mtr drop in the road and the tracks raised about a metre that should give about a 2.1 mtr clearance.

tallaghtfornia

Such a pity that the old Harcourt Street line was not preserved all the way to Bray - it would have been perfect for the Metro - Swords all the way to Bray that would be a dream!

Sam Russell

salmocab wrote: »

I’d say the most likely option is an underpass with the tracks raised so far something like a 1.5 mtr drop in the road and the tracks raised about a metre that should give about a 2.1 mtr clearance.

A gap of 2.1 matres would not be adequate, there would be too many bridge strikes.

marno21

Sam Russell wrote: »

A gap of 2.1 matres would not be adequate, there would be too many bridge strikes.

What clearance was provided with the old bridge ?

marno21

tallaghtfornia wrote: »

Such a pity that the old Harcourt Street line was not preserved all the way to Bray - it would have been perfect for the Metro - Swords all the way to Bray that would be a dream!

The section that is currently bypassed, between Sandyford and Leopardstown, is home to some fairly low density development through Foxrock though. The diverted section here serves quite a lot of development - at the expense of alignment quality.

Rulmeq

cgcsb wrote: »

My guess:
Talk of metro going further south than Sandyford.

I really hope they do (and using the old alignment, not the line that goes around the world)

salmocab

Sam Russell wrote: »

A gap of 2.1 matres would not be adequate, there would be too many bridge strikes.

In fairness it’s a residential area it wouldn’t be too much trouble to have a low bridge. Cars, cyclists,pedestrians and most vans would go under 2.1. I don’t see the need for there to be much more. Once the few businesses on the rathmines side of the junction get their deliveries from that end it should be easy enough.

Marcusm

salmocab wrote: »

In fairness it’s a residential area it wouldn’t be too much trouble to have a low bridge. Cars, cyclists,pedestrians and most vans would go under 2.1. I don’t see the need for there to be much more. Once the few businesses on the rathmines side of the junction get their deliveries from that end it should be easy enough.

The supermarket 75m from the line gets 16-25 deliveries per day (per owner) with mostly 3.5tn plus vehicles. It would close off one route - not a killer although I really think the time delay and cost of building up the embankment etc must be close to the option of joining in at Beechwood.

cgcsb

Marcusm wrote: »

The supermarket 75m from the line gets 16-25 deliveries per day (per owner) with mostly 3.5tn plus vehicles. It would close off one route - not a killer although I really think the time delay and cost of building up the embankment etc must be close to the option of joining in at Beechwood.

Doubtful. It's the difference between €100m and €20m + one supermarket with a changed delivery route.

jd

Some debate coming up on Today FM

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097540672045883396

cgcsb

jd wrote: »

Some debate coming up on Today FM

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097540672045883396

Love the retro pics.

marno21

jd wrote: »

Some debate coming up on Today FM

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097540672045883396

The NTA need a public relations officer pronto

More bull**** about ripping up Luas lines from the usual suspects. It's a waste of time trying to get this project built if such activity continues

salmocab

marno21 wrote: »

The NTA need a public relations officer pronto

More bull**** about ripping up Luas lines from the usual suspects. It's a waste of time trying to get this project built if such activity continues

They had too many people on with too many views it went no where

marno21

salmocab wrote: »

They had too many people on with too many views it went no where

If that's the case a good start would be omitting people who don't believe in the "you can have your own opinion but not your own facts" idea.

LeinsterDub

Insufferable levels of nonsense regarding both ML and cycling from both newstalk and today fm today. It's like or very own version of Brexit. Who should be get to discuss this? How about that guy who opposed every public transport project and claimed the Luas would be a white elephant? Perfect!

salmocab

marno21 wrote: »

If that's the case a good start would be omitting people who don't believe in the "you can have your own opinion but not your own facts" idea.

They were talking about the second runway too and had someone from I think the limerick chamber of commerce. It was about the investment in Dublin in general with two big projects the usual busses are enough carry on followed by link the northern line through the airport. Then a bit of Dublin gets everything everywhere else is neglected.

marno21

I only got to listen to the Metrolink segment from TLW there in full, only heard bits of it earlier:

Paul O'Kane from the DAA is the type of person the NTA need for these projects and quick. He rattled off proper factful answers to all of Matt's questions.

Graeme McQueen was as he always is, fully supportive of both projects (runway + Metro) because he knows the benefits of both. He also properly corrected the nonsense about the Green Line.

Frank.. I don't know what reason he was invited on for, but not supporting Metro for airport workers because they already drive to work (maybe
because they don't have a choice?) and there already is a Port Tunnel.. along with the usual crap about ripping up Luas lines.

It's disappointing at this stage that Matt Cooper is on about ripping up the Luas line. This plan is out with 12 months now and this crap is still not being corrected.

Dats me

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters

Link to the Dublin Commuter Coalition twitter I saw there. There's a link to a facebook page in the description that seems quiet but it's a place for people to get involved and counter the nonsense.

Lots of good tweets up countering the 2 years rubbish

Marcusm

cgcsb wrote: »

Doubtful. It's the difference between €100m and €20m + one supermarket with a changed delivery route.

Plus the period for which there will be an incomplete line. Charlemont close to canal, etc. I can just see the greater prospect for unseen/uncertain events. Seems less likely to be the case with a tie in at Beechwood South. Sometimes, an expected higher cost with lower prospect of disruption is better than lower cost with a greater prospect of disruption. What did they say it cost to move the unrecorded Drimnagh sewer at the NCH site? 50-60m?

CatInABox

An Taoiseach is giving some thought to actually splitting the Metrolink project into North and South elements, according to the DublinLive.ie*. Apparently he came out with this at the sod turning photo op for the new runway.

He also said this:

There are a lot of projects that have been talked about for decades, notwithstanding the controversy, the children’s hospital is now under construction, the Dublin Airport runway is now under construction and we’ll get Metro under construction too.

So that's still very positive.

Of course, as soon as Brexit is settled, there'll be a new election, and the Childrens Hospital will probably mean he'll be kicked out, so that's not so positive. The fact that it was a capital project that brought down a government will probably mean that nothing will ever be approved again.

*The photo of "The planned Metro line" is obviously totally wrong.

marno21

https://twitter.com/frankmcdonald60/status/1097821092905959424

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097826497614802944

Interesting thread with Frank getting challenged rightly on his 2 years claim. It's disappointing that Graeme McQueen has to be the one to correct all this, it shows how badly the NTA need someone to communicate this information.

Of course, Frank's Tweet was retweeted by the Rethink Metrolink group

MJohnston

Frank desperately needs something to do more productive with his retirement. Old man yells at cloud barely covers it.

prunudo

With the likes of these lads its no wonder after 40 years of talking about a metro we still don't have one. Graeme McQueen is about the only positive voice out there.

jd

In today's Indo. I wonder what options were presented to Ross.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

prunudo

jd wrote: »

In today's Indo. I wonder what options were presented to Ross.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

Was just going to post this. More attention grabbing negative headlines from the media.

New Metrolink route could shut down Luas Green Line 'for up to four years'

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

salmocab

jvan wrote: »

Was just going to post this. More attention grabbing negative headlines from the media.

New Metrolink route could shut down Luas Green Line 'for up to four years'

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

Surely people can see how ridiculous 4 years is, it’s so over the top than anyone who thinks it’s real is an absolute moron.