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

LeinsterDub

salmocab wrote: »

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.

This is an alternative proposal to ML. The NTA are getting their ducks in a line. So disruption or 4 years of closure with added cost and expense

1huge1

Well if we ever needed to know the indos agenda on this (aside from getting a eye catching headline to help their dwindling readership), you just have to look at that ridiculous over the top headline.

prunudo

salmocab wrote: »

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.

Never underestimate how much faith some people put in articles in their respected print media.

Edit.
Just turned on Newstalk to hear the tail end of Eamon Ryan talking about this 4yr closure. Anyone else hear the full interview? What was the general gist?

CatInABox

jd wrote: »

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

Cut and cover would imply that they "surface" between Charlemont and Ranelagh, and then cut and cover south past Dunville Avenue. In order to Cut and Cover without affecting peoples homes, they'd need to use the area of the Luas tracks to do so, hence the "4 years".

Honestly, it sounds like the NTA are going to present the Minister with a number of options that could work engineering wise, but in reality, only one or two will work politically. Any lengthy Luas closure will be ruled out by the Minister, so that's basically all of the in-line options removed, leaving only the tie in at Charlemont and Beechwood South as realistic options.

The tie in options have a three month closure, and I'd assume that all of the other construction needed along the line would happen at the same time, i.e. the temporary tie ins at St Raphaela's Rd onto the diversion around the bridge construction site, etc.

Of course, this is all assuming that Shane Ross is competent, which is something a lot of people doubt these days.

LXFlyer

1huge1 wrote: »

Well if we ever needed to know the indos agenda on this (aside from getting a eye catching headline to help their dwindling readership), you just have to look at that ridiculous over the top headline.

It’s quite possible that it is one of the options (albeit a crazy one) that the NTA have in their proposals. A “worst” option that wouldn’t be politically acceptable.

I doubt that the paper made it up.

We will have to wait and see.

jd

CatInABox wrote: »

Cut and cover would imply that they "surface" between Charlemont and Ranelagh, and then cut and cover south past Dunville Avenue. In order to Cut and Cover without affecting peoples homes, they'd need to use the area of the Luas tracks to do so, hence the "4 years".

.

Yes, I figured that was the option given if they wanted to minimise property acquisition on the south side.

marno21

This plan in the Indo today is effectively ripping up the Luas tracks. It's a total non runner

Perhaps it's why Frank was so focused on ripping up tracks in the last week or so

Back to the realistic options lads

salmocab

marno21 wrote: »

This plan in the Indo today is effectively ripping up the Luas tracks. It's a total non runner

Perhaps it's why Frank was so focused on ripping up tracks in the last week or so

Back to the realistic options lads

It is a non runner but the point is it still wouldn’t take 4 years to dig the cut and cover.

cgcsb

The journalists seem to be conflating the term 'disrupted' with 'closure'. Disruption could be reduced evening services on summer weekends (down to one track for a short stretch for example). Seems like a deliberate ploy to mislead.

prunudo

cgcsb wrote: »

The journalists seem to be conflating the term 'disrupted' with 'closure'. Disruption could be reduced evening services on summer weekends (down to one track for a short stretch for example). Seems like a deliberate ploy to mislead.

But who is misleading and who is responsible for the leaks. Are the media stirring up hysteria on the back of the Nch mess or are the Nta releasing the worst case scenario plans now so when the real plan comes out it won't look so bad.

prunudo

If you value your blood pressure don't be listening to Pat Kenny at present.

Synode

jvan wrote: »

If you value your blood pressure don't be listening to Pat Kenny at present.

Just switched it on and he's reading out texts. Every single piece of misinformation & crackpot idea, not to mention the eejits outside Dublin complaining that Dublin gets everything :mad:

prunudo

Synode wrote: »

Just switched it on and he's reading out texts. Every single piece of misinformation & crackpot idea, not to mention the eejits outside Dublin complaining that Dublin gets everything :mad:

I really hope its not, but IF that is the general publics opinion on Metro and having good infrastructure then we don't actually deserve a proper metro.
The fact these so called experts and crackpot texters get airtime is as annoying as their ideas.

Pixel Eater

jvan wrote: »

If you value your blood pressure don't be listening to Pat Kenny at present.

Just listen to it. Shocking. McDonald and some southside councillor both vehemently opposed to the Metrolink so absolutely no objectivity or balance. McDonald's whole argument seems to be that closing the current Luas line will cause too much interuption. An unfortunate consequence but hardly a strong enough reason to suppered the whole thing. Pat Kenny even chirped in with the whole 'We can't do big infastructure projects here, get someone else to do it'. Hopeless 'debate'.

LeinsterDub

cgcsb wrote: »

The journalists seem to be conflating the term 'disrupted' with 'closure'. Disruption could be reduced evening services on summer weekends (down to one track for a short stretch for example). Seems like a deliberate ploy to mislead.

Disruption could be even less than that. The green lines was 'disrupted' while the platform where extended. No one cared

LeinsterDub

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Just listen to it. Shocking. McDonald and some southside councillor both vehemently opposed to the Metrolink so absolutely no objectivity or balance. McDonald's whole argument seems to be that closing the current Luas line will cause too much interuption. An unfortunate consequence but hardly a strong enough reason to suppered the whole thing. Pat Kenny even chirped in with the whole 'We can't do big infastructure projects here, get someone else to do it'. Hopeless 'debate'.

Under no circumstances will the line be closed in its entirety. Broombridge to SSG will be entirely unaffected as will Sandyford to Brides Glen

marno21

Is this a fly the 4 year closure kite, watch the outrage and return with a new plan that involves a much shorter closure but with property acquisition at Beechwood?

The NTA need to get this route out pronto before this misinformation snowballs beyond control.

MJohnston

If it is deliberate misinformation, they overestimated the journalistic abilities of the Irish media.

My guess is we're just hearing about one of a series of plans that were proposed as final options, and this happens to be the worst case (or one of the worst cases). No surprise that, of course, our media would miss that subtlety.

roadmaster

When a general election is called and if the numbers stack up the FG get back in with partners, Leo Varadkar has said he would like to have the green party as part of the collation. With there views on how the metro would be delivered could we see it changed again as there price of support for the government or would it be to late by then?

MJohnston

I don't think there's any predicting how Metrolink would survive a general election. Whilst we're still in the paperwork phase, nothing is concrete.

marno21

MJohnston wrote: »

I don't think there's any predicting how Metrolink would survive a general election. Whilst we're still in the paperwork phase, nothing is concrete.

The one difference this time around, which is an unknown, is the NTA and it's role, and it's statutory 2016-2035 transport strategy. It's more than just a political project from Transport21 the last time

cgcsb

Next election must be before April 2021. If there are spades in the ground by then, I'd be impressed.

MJohnston

It's basically the only thing that has me hoping for FG to retain power (other than the fact that the likely alternative is FF).

Pete_Cavan

roadmaster wrote: »

When a general election is called and if the numbers stack up the FG get back in with partners, Leo Varadkar has said he would like to have the green party as part of the collation. With there views on how the metro would be delivered could we see it changed again as there price of support for the government or would it be to late by then?

The Green Party's contribution to a coalition government would be negligible and if the numbers were that tight, another minority government would be most likely. I doubt FG would allow a tiny number of GP TDs give them a majority of one and have such a controlling influence. It would be an incredibly unstable government and a defection from anywhere within the government ranks could topple the lot. The GP really aren't a concern (thankfully for all our sakes).

Marcusm

marno21 wrote: »

Is this a fly the 4 year closure kite, watch the outrage and return with a new plan that involves a much shorter closure but with property acquisition at Beechwood?

The NTA need to get this route out pronto before this misinformation snowballs beyond control.

Does the Beechwood property acquisition substitute the Dartmouth Road, Northbrook property acquisition with the Charlemont option? Just strikes me that whatever option reduces the tie in disruption is more easily justifiable.

LeinsterDub

roadmaster wrote: »

When a general election is called and if the numbers stack up the FG get back in with partners, Leo Varadkar has said he would like to have the green party as part of the collation. With there views on how the metro would be delivered could we see it changed again as there price of support for the government or would it be to late by then?

The leader of green party is opposed to ML

salmocab

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The leader of green party is opposed to ML

Only because he wants votes not through any beliefs which should be odd for a member of the Green Party but he cares not a jot about public transport and a lot about getting paid by the tax payer.

cgcsb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The leader of green party is opposed to ML

You would struggle to make that up in fairness. The leader of a suposedly environmentalist party opposing high capacity, electric powered mass transit. This would be in the cartoon section of the German tabloids if it were in Germany.

FreudianSlippers

This government will only last until there is a Brexit deal IMHO.

marno21

https://twitter.com/ocallaghanjim/status/1098210342197436418

What an absolute charlatan