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

salmocab

I’ve said here before that I’ve no issue with people I near Dunville having objections. There is an issue with just closing off that crossing. What I’ve slso said is it is how the issues are dealt with and this would be a capitulation to a small noisy minority whilst the quiet majority would suffer. This issue could easily be engineered away.

hmmm

Places like Cherrywood and other high density plans along the light rail green line need to be put on hold now - we know the system is approaching capacity.

markpb

bk wrote: »

So what will happen now:
- Seeing how good the Metro is in comparison and what they could have had, these people will scream bloody murder and demand the Green Line be upgraded to Metro. These voices will end up drowning out a couple of old people in Dunville Avenue, etc.
- The green line will eventually be upgraded to Metro as was planned.

You might be right but let's look at a possible timeline:

Construction of metrolink: 2021 - 2030.
Demand for metrolink to be extended: 2030 - 2035
Planning for metro south: 2035 - 2040
Construction of metro south: 2040 - 2045 (assuming it's an in-place upgrade)

Those numbers are years, not 24h time!

bk

hmmm wrote: »

Places like Cherrywood and other high density plans along the light rail green line need to be put on hold now - we know the system is approaching capacity.

No, the opposite, we need to power ahead with Cherrywood, etc.

The more disaster that the Luas and south Dublin ends up, the more pressure there will be to do the southern Metro.

bk

markpb wrote: »

You might be right but let's look at a possible timeline:

Construction of metrolink: 2021 - 2030.
Demand for metrolink to be extended: 2030 - 2035
Planning for metro south: 2035 - 2040
Construction of metro south: 2040 - 2045 (assuming it's an in-place upgrade)

Those numbers are years, not 24h time!

I know. Though I'd expect the demand will actually start well before the Metro is open and perhaps they can start getting the plan in place before the Northern half ends.

Idbatterim

The primary issue isn’t dunville Avenue surely?! It’s the green line being out of action for a period, surely that is the primary reason for this proposal?

marno21

salmocab wrote: »

I’ve said here before that I’ve no issue with people I near Dunville having objections. There is an issue with just closing off that crossing. What I’ve slso said is it is how the issues are dealt with and this would be a capitulation to a small noisy minority whilst the quiet majority would suffer. This issue could easily be engineered away.

Yes but the NTA said they'd deal with Dunville Avenue and with this the NIMBYs switched to complaining about chaos due to the Line being closed for 2 years.

They got their problem solved and they found another problem which was also grossly exaggerated

Idbatterim

marno21 wrote: »

Yes but the NTA said they'd deal with Dunville Avenue and with this the NIMBYs switched to complaining about chaos due to the Line being closed for 2 years.

They got their problem solved and they found another problem which was also grossly exaggerated

This looks far worse on the nta than a few local idiots then in my opinion. Aren’t the nta meant to be the”experts”...

marno21

schemingbohemia wrote: »

If the Irish Times story is true then the NTA should be disbanded, one of the main reasons it was set up was to give politicians cover for unpopular decisions and to be immune to NIMBYISM.
This would literally be kicking the sardine can down the road - knowing that the southern part of the Green line would not be fit for purpose within 5 years.

I went sale agreed on a house just off Dunville Avenue, it fell through due to survey issues. This whole rubbish about detours for a few clowns who'd be quicker walking around the "Berlin Wall" was bonkers.

The NTA's role is to enact government policy. This is a Government issue not the NTA.

I feel sorry for the people in both the NTA and TII who have put years of work into this project only to have their work written off over blatant lies and deceit

salmocab

Idbatterim wrote: »

The primary issue isn’t dunville Avenue surely?! It’s the green line being out of action for a period, surely that is the primary reason for this proposal?

It is an issue but the length of time and how much of it is closed is unknown without details of the route. It certainly wouldn’t be 4 years I’d imagine we’ll likely end up with something like 6 months and a series of weekend closures after that. It could be timed to have the brunt done over summer which lessens the blow a bit.
The likes of the rethink metro crowd aren’t really interested in the closure it’s about not having it at the bottom of their gardens, it’s just a handy flag for them to fly.

Pixel Eater

bk wrote: »

As terrible as this news is, this bit at least gives me some comfort:

At least they seem to be still going to Charlemont, rather then just SSG as per the original Metro North plan.

This says to me that they still plan to eventually do the Green Line upgrade, just at a future point.

So what will happen now:
- Northen section opens, is a massive success, everyone loves it.
- Green Line Luas deteriorates over the next 10 years until it becomes completely unusable for those north of Sandyford and probably even overcrowded for those south of it.
- Seeing how good the Metro is in comparison and what they could have had, these people will scream bloody murder and demand the Green Line be upgraded to Metro. These voices will end up drowning out a couple of old people in Dunville Avenue, etc.
- The green line will eventually be upgraded to Metro as was planned.

Same thing as happened with Luas Cross City, it will just take longer and cost more.

Of course by still going to Charlemont, they won't actually save hardly any money, the tie-in and platform upgrades would have been a drop in the overall cost of the project and it will clearly make the CBA worse.

But if it makes it politically less difficult and easier to get done, then so be it.

Just wondering: if they did start hard part - the northern section - which will take years; by the time it's near completion in all probability the Luas Green line will be at capacity. What are the changes that line would then be upgraded and the whole thing would be opened as per the original plan?

bk

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Just wondering: if they did start hard part - the northern section - which will take years; by the time it's near completion in all probability the Luas Green line will be at capacity. What are the changes that line would then be upgraded and the whole thing would be opened as per the original plan?

I don't think southern end would be opened on the same schedule (2027), but could possibly be 3 to 5 years later.

Ironically the southern end really isn't technically difficult, just politically. Technically it would be just a rather straight forward tie-in at Charlemont, raising/lengthen platforms, bridges over the tracks and the junctions. Compared to tunnelling and underground stations, much easier. So it really shouldn't take as long to plan as the Northern end, shouldn't take as long to build and should be relatively cheap in comparison.

It is just the politicians having the will to face down the NIMBYs. Much easier to do if the Luas is chaos and the Metro is a big success.

Idbatterim

salmocab wrote: »

It is an issue but the length of time and how much of it is closed is unknown without details of the route. It certainly wouldn’t be 4 years I’d imagine we’ll likely end up with something like 6 months and a series of weekend closures after that. It could be timed to have the brunt done over summer which lessens the blow a bit.
The likes of the rethink metro crowd aren’t really interested in the closure it’s about not having it at the bottom of their gardens, it’s just a handy flag for them to fly.

Ok. But again I’d put all of this down to government/ nta spinelessness and being inept and not prepared. This is ireland, you’ll always have objectors and idiots! Who do we elect to make decisions and lead here? Because at no point do I remember voting for the muppets that were protesting against this ...

salmocab

Idbatterim wrote: »

Ok. But again I’d put all of this down to government/ nta spinelessness and being inept and not prepared. This is ireland, you’ll always have objectors and idiots! Who do we elect to make decisions and lead here? Because at no point do I remember voting for the muppets that were protesting against this ...

We always pander to the noisy minority. Politicians like to be the involved locally with whatever creates the most noise locally which almost inevitably is a nimby cause.

marno21

Idbatterim wrote: »

Ok. But again I’d put all of this down to government/ nta spinelessness and being inept and not prepared. This is ireland, you’ll always have objectors and idiots! Who do we elect to make decisions and lead here? Because at no point do I remember voting for the muppets that were protesting against this ...

Government is the spineless one, not the NTA. The NTA have nothing to do with this decision, but they will be the ones that will have to clean up the mess when the Green Line is chaos in 10 years time and they'll be getting the blame over it

Of course, the new planned Metro will only put additional pressure on the Green Line as it'll now be useful for Cherrywood-DCU etc. So this new Swords-Charlemont plan will actually make the Green Line worse than building no Metro at all

Idbatterim

If even the new proposal gets built, it will be a relief! They’ll be forced to do something with green line pretty soon. No leadership from higher up, like varadkar etc. all just silent andspineless snakes.

They are building huge amounts in sandyford again , cherrywood etc. this issue will be forced one way or another ultimately. A few hundred apartments are being fitted out on churchtown road bedside dundrum luas right now. Old Dundrum shopping centre is being redeveloped in due course. I just hope there isn’t a crash firstly or if there is , that so much more new development has happened, that they can’t try and manipulate the figures to suit their agenda of proposing another bloody luas to the airport via Finglas. Total comedy!

Idbatterim

in My opinion , the entire line needs to be extended further down south and upgraded to metro along the entire length. Huge park and ride just off n11... high density apartments either side of line where possible.

Maybe this will now happen as part of the shelved green line upgrade.

VeryOwl

The only remaining vaguely credible rationale for the re-design of this metro has now been deleted. As was obvious for a long time.

The rest of the project will follow in due course.

VeryOwl wrote: »

Sad to think all we've achieved in the eight years since this thread was started is renaming Metro North to Metro Link (and wasted millions in the process).

Nine years now!

hmmm

It doesn't bode well for bus connects if we let the nimbys win here. In fact I'd go so far as to say it kills it, it is that serious. Government has to do what is right for the greater good or it means chaos.

Idbatterim

hmmm wrote: »

It doesn't bode well for bus connects if we let the nimbys win here. In fact I'd go so far as to say it kills it, it is that serious. Government has to do what is right for the greater good or it means chaos.

Unless they are losing the ability to park in their front gardens, boo F***ing hoo. Couldn’t care less, this will benefit far more people than it will inconvenience.

They lose a few votes , but would probably gain many more for not being spineless. I honestly don’t see how they think siding with a handful of nimbies makes any sense!

marno21

Dublin Bay South is a very tight constituency and with all of the opposition TDs hopping on the NIMBY bandwagon obviously FG feel the need to do the same for fear it could cost them one of their 2 seats there. Kevin Humphreys who only just lost out on a seat the last time around has been vocal on the Metrolink issue.

prunudo

hmmm wrote: »

It doesn't bode well for bus connects if we let the nimbys win here. In fact I'd go so far as to say it kills it, it is that serious. Government has to do what is right for the greater good or it means chaos.

It doesn't bode well for any future projects either. How can we ever get ambitious plans past the consultation process if arm chair experts, agenda driven policitians and nimbys contuine to be the loudest voices.

LeinsterDub

salmocab wrote: »

We always pander to the noisy minority. Politicians like to be the involved locally with whatever creates the most noise locally which almost inevitably is a nimby cause.

I'd suggest joining https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters so. We can sit here complaining that the squeaky wheel got the oil yet again or we can attempt to prove the the squeaky wheel has it's facts all wrong

strassenwo!f

jvan wrote: »

Also on a side note the current Greenline is a victim of its own success in that there is a lot of high density housing south of Dundrum. These residents must go through the low density suburbs further north.
I'm open to correction but I dont think the sw route has similar density so while it may need better public transport it may not have the population to warrant a metro at present at the expense of the greenline upgrade.

The 2016 census figures are useful here. There are a number of places where you can find them, I generally use:

https://www.citypopulation.de/php/ireland-dublin.php

This shows, for example, that the 'Dundrum' electoral areas (including Sandyford) had a total area of 7.061 sq. km and a population of 23,653, giving a density of 3,349 people per sq. km. Parts of Clonskeagh adjacent to the Green line (Farranboley, Windy Arbour and Milltown) had a population density of 4,007 per square km.

In the southwest, the Terenure electoral areas had a combined area of 3.978 sq. km, a population of 17,468 and a density of 4,391 people per sq. km. - around 1,000 people more people per sq. km. than Dundrum.

The Rathfarnham electoral area has an area of 5.353 sq.km, and a population of 22,161, with a density of 4,139 people per sq.km. And the Firhouse-Knocklyon electoral area has an area of 6.38 sq.km and a population of 23949, giving a density of 3,753 people per sq.km.

It is worth noting that the Dundrum electoral areas have 5 LUAS stops and are still officially slated to have 5 metro stations.

The Terenure, Rathfarnham and Firhouse-Knocklyon electoral areas do not have any LUAS stops and, as things currently stand, there are no plans for them to have any LUAS stops or metro stations in the future, despite being higher density areas than Dundrum/Sandyford or anywhere on the Green line south of the canal, probably with the exception of Ranelagh.

I hope that helps.

cgcsb

hmmm wrote: »

It doesn't bode well for bus connects if we let the nimbys win here. In fact I'd go so far as to say it kills it, it is that serious. Government has to do what is right for the greater good or it means chaos.

The weird thing about bus connects is the number of complaints about the CBCs is only dozens so far, the network redesign, i.e. changing the bus routes was a torrent of abuse.

Bus Connects won't happen either, there's too much consideration given to individuals and the vast scale of the project ensures it'll be brought down. The status quo will remain for about 20 years I'd say.

cgcsb

I don't get how Dunville Ave is a problem. Build a lift and ramp overpass for bikes and pedestrians, make it a cul de sac for cars, with a metro station at the end and watch the property property values increase radically.

MJohnston

jvan wrote: »

I'm open to correction but I dont think the sw route has similar density so while it may need better public transport it may not have the population to warrant a metro at present at the expense of the greenline upgrade.

Southwest has great density....in areas already served by the Red Line! Inside of the M50, the SW 'route' and the Green Line have a fairly similar density.

Cherrywood and Stepaside are the game changers though, considering most of the construction in those areas is still to come:

marno21

This was discussed twice on Newstalk this morning

Firstly, on Breakfast, they had a transport lecturer on giving an accurate account of the consequences of abandoning the project.

Then, on Pat Kenny, Eamon Ryan on with his crayons with pie in the sky nonsense. Funny how he seems to be logical about public transport projects when they don't involve arselicking NIMBYs in his constituency.

Of course, the head of Rethink Metrolink was on also with the usual soundbites about ripping up, longer trams etc but that's not surprising.

No NTA/TII representation on either.

I cannot understand why Pat Kenny still believes that the Metro and Luas trams will both be running on the Green Line at this stage. Why has he not been corrected.

froinky

This is great news,

The overground Metrolink was poorly planned from the start, and had zero consultation with the communities it ran through. Quite frankly, it presented an entirely unworkable solution - (which is what happens when you don't invest in proper planning).

Lets build a decent underground transport system in Dublin. Starting with the link from SSG to the airport (I think the Charlemont section is pointless as it adds little immediate value and limits future route options).

This will provide time to plan the next phase - and keep it underground.

salmocab

cgcsb wrote: »

I don't get how Dunville Ave is a problem. Build a lift and ramp overpass for bikes and pedestrians, make it a cul de sac for cars, with a metro station at the end and watch the property property values increase radically.

It is an issue as it cuts a lot of peoples route out of the area off forcing them to use Ranelagh village which can be quite busy. The price increase would be the same if the metro was there regardless of the dead end or not. I do think there are valid concerns for cutting off that road but as I’ve said before nothing that couldn’t be dealt with by engineering. We shouldn’t assume that all objections are unreasonable although plenty are.