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

Idbatterim

Say us boards posters wanted to get some attention for the project and counter the farcical rubbish we have heard. Fight fire with Fire what would you have the headline as “ green line set for chaos as metrolink to terminate at charlemont” its all propaganda, fight fire with Fire. Has anyone actually come up with something eye catching and brief to counter the lies. If it’s ever going to be done, it needs to be now!!!

CatInABox

Sam Russell wrote: »

Looking at Googlemaps, it would be possible to bring the metro up just south of Beechwood but would require that a row of houses be lost, and perhaps no stop for the metro at Beechwood because of lack of space, but the stop could be put 300 m further south at Albany Rd and Windsor RD, but that might cost a few houses for access. This would make Cowper unnecessary as ti is only 200 m further south, or alternatively forget Beechwood as a metro stop altogether. This would save a few bob, to counter the extra cost of the tunnel. Beechwood is only 500 m north of Cowper anyway. Normally metro stations are 1 km apart.

One of the published options was to surface south of Beechwood, convert Beechwood into a Metro stop, leaving Ranelagh as the end of the Luas line. It's an acceptable plan in terms of shutdown time as well, it was a tie in rather than an in line connection.

I don't see why this has been abandoned if they're talking about 4 years though. Maybe they went back and drew up a plan that involved no CPO activity in the area, that would definitely turn it into an in line connection, and perhaps take four years.

froinky

cgcsb wrote: »

If you want to argue against ML, there are actual real world issues:
The apartment block at Tara St
The digging up and closure of O'Connell St and East Stephen's Green
Dunville is a non-Issue or a first-world problem for about 20 people.

Wow. Thats a valuable opinion.

D.L.R.

froinky wrote: »

Wow. Thats a valuable opinion.

says the guy with 5 posts

froinky

MJohnston wrote: »

Here's the thing about Dunville Avenue: it's going to have to close to cars.

Metrolink or not, it's going to have to close to cars.

With Metrolink, it's obvious why. Without Metrolink, we've already had this discussion, but the Green Line's frequency and tram length will quickly increase to the point where the road is almost permanently closed at peak.

I repeat: there is no way that Dunville Avenue can remain open to cars.

Great - its sorted so (rolls eyes)

MJohnston

froinky wrote: »

Great - its sorted so (rolls eyes)

Ah, you must be part of the vaunted Rethink Metrolink group, what with your total lack of debate or workable alternatives.

It's hilarious how bad that Rethink group is - one of their headline complaints is almost literally "something else will work" without any reference to what that alternative might be. They just want to keep on driving their cars.

Sam Russell

CatInABox wrote: »

One of the published options was to surface south of Beechwood, convert Beechwood into a Metro stop, leaving Ranelagh as the end of the Luas line. It's an acceptable plan in terms of shutdown time as well, it was a tie in rather than an in line connection.

I don't see why this has been abandoned if they're talking about 4 years though. Maybe they went back and drew up a plan that involved no CPO activity in the area, that would definitely turn it into an in line connection, and perhaps take four years.

That would require Beechwood to be underground. What I am looking at is Beechwood be the turnaround for Luas, while Cowper becomes the first aboveground stop, while only having one underground stop between Cowper and SSG - perhaps at Ranelagh or Charlemont. Cowper is 2.5 km from SSG East.

Dropping stations is a way of reducing cost, and a stop every km is normal. Moving Cowper north by a few hundred metres could then allow a walkway between the new Cowper and Beechwood. Most passengers could interchange at SSG or Charlemont/Ranelagh. This also improves travelling time.

LXFlyer

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

How about having some green line trams terminate before the canal and passengers transfer to metro?

He’s talking about before Metro.

jd

CatInABox wrote: »

Maybe they went back and drew up a plan that involved no CPO activity in the area, that would definitely turn it into an in line connection, and perhaps take four years.

I think this is what happened. They may have been asked to draw up a design that minimises CPOs, and when the implications of this were apparent it was probably leaked and spun by someone with inside info. There may be a few mandarins who don't like the thought of the hoi polloi whizzing past their back gardens.

Marcusm

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is within the published plan.

Looking at Googlemaps, it would be possible to bring the metro up just south of Beechwood but would require that a row of houses be lost, and perhaps no stop for the metro at Beechwood because of lack of space, but the stop could be put 300 m further south at Albany Rd and Windsor RD, but that might cost a few houses for access. This would make Cowper unnecessary as ti is only 200 m further south, or alternatively forget Beechwood as a metro stop altogether. This would save a few bob, to counter the extra cost of the tunnel. Beechwood is only 500 m north of Cowper anyway. Normally metro stations are 1 km apart.

If the tunnel were to rise at that point, I cannot see why the GL would close for more than a few months. The original plan was to have the tunnel going under the GL, which would affect the GL for longer, but not for as much as two years.

Charlemont requires houses to be taken as well, 2 at Dartmouth Road and a terrace of them at Northbrook. The station building and the small apartment complex behind it are what would have to go at Beechwood.

Idbatterim

College house has now been leveled. The screen cinema is being demolished. Why can’t they build a station here instead of demolishing an apartment block?!

Kermit.de.frog

Because it's about to be redeveloped...

Idbatterim

For Commercial ! The state could have bought these sites years ago , don’t they own Hawkins house?

If they cpo ‘d it, could they build the station box and everything now and then immediately begin to construct the commercial scheme over it ?

I’m assuming not ...

Amirani

Idbatterim wrote: »

College house has now been leveled. The screen cinema is being demolished. Why can’t they build a station here instead of demolishing an apartment block?!

It's private land with a high site value that already has plans to develop on.

It's also a pretty poor place for a station, as it doesn't interchange well with Tara St station, which is the primary reason for location the station in this part of the city.

Idbatterim

They can’t put in a short pedestrian tunnel between that site and Tara street?

Those kips have been an eyesore and empty for years. I’m very well aware of the site value ...

CatInABox

Idbatterim wrote: »

They can’t put in a short pedestrian tunnel between that site and Tara street?

Those kips have been an eyesore and empty for years. I’m very well aware of the site value ...

They could, but there would be an impact beyond just Tara St. Most likely, due to the constraints of fitting it into the Hawkins House site, the alignment would change enough that they'd have to move the O'Connell St station location.

Idbatterim

Apollo house gone now too. Could they not just build a station on this huge site and connect it to ocs with pedestrian tunnel and travelator? The stops are relatively on top of each other!

strandroad

Idbatterim wrote: »

They can’t put in a short pedestrian tunnel between that site and Tara street?

It wouldn't be very short, it's a few hundred meters so 200m of tunnel at least on top of moving around the stations themselves. Tara St connection is supposed to deliver passengers to the airport from the entire Dart covered southside and back; there would be a lot of luggage! Normally such connecting stations are one on top of the other, it's already unusual to split them.

Idbatterim

strandroad wrote: »

It wouldn't be very short, it's a few hundred meters so 200m of tunnel at least on top of moving around the stations themselves. Tara St connection is supposed to deliver passengers to the airport from the entire Dart covered southside and back; there would be a lot of luggage! Normally such connecting stations are one on top of the other, it's already unusual to split them.

Some of the walks in airports etc are a multiple of this. I’ve had at least ten minute power walks getting off at the back arse of T2 and that was very quick walking! If 100-200,000,000 is potentially going to de-rail the green line upgrade to metro , maybe they could recoup it here!

CatInABox

Idbatterim wrote: »

Apollo house gone now too. Could they not just build a station on this huge site and connect it to ocs with pedestrian tunnel and travelator? The stops are relatively on top of each other!

No, not with near surface tunnelling anyway, there's a big river in the way.

Most likely, the O'Connell Street stop would be moved northwards to Parnell Square East, or eastward, onto Marlborough Street. Either way, the station would be further away from key trip generators.

MICKEYG

Idbatterim wrote: »

strandroad wrote: »

It wouldn't be very short, it's a few hundred meters so 200m of tunnel at least on top of moving around the stations themselves. Tara St connection is supposed to deliver passengers to the airport from the entire Dart covered southside and back; there would be a lot of luggage! Normally such connecting stations are one on top of the other, it's already unusual to split them.

Some of the walks in airports etc are a multiple of this. I’ve had at least ten minute power walks getting off at the back arse of T2 and that was very quick walking! If 100-200,000,000 is potentially going to de-rail the green line upgrade to metro , maybe they could recoup it here!

That is at the very most once a week for most people. Metro will be 10 times per week for each user.

MJohnston

Metrolink doesn't even have a railway order yet, and it isn't planned to turn a sod until 2021 at the earliest. There is basically zero chance of successfully asking private developers to wait another 2 years to start redeveloping College House or wherever for an infrastructure project that may not even go ahead yet.

Idbatterim

According to An article I read in paper, The owner of one of these sites with pp. Is now looking at trying to purchase possibly the Hawkins house site and merge the schemes. If that is true, it Could be at least another year. No need to rip down an apartment block and swimming pool. The state should have bought one or more of these blocks , whatever they needed , in my opinion to avoid what is Now proposed.

marno21

Idbatterim wrote: »

According to An article I read in paper, The owner of one of these sites with pp. Is now looking at trying to purchase possibly the Hawkins house site and merge the schemes. If that is true, it Could be at least another year. No need to rip down an apartment block and swimming pool. The state should have bought one or more of these blocks , whatever they needed , in my opinion to avoid what is Now proposed.

A bit of perspective here.

I highly doubt the NTA are proposing to CPO that building without heavily researching other options.

If that building has to be knocked to create a station on Dublin's Main Street along with Ireland's biggest rail interchange then so be it. The site will be available for redevelopment after Metrolink is built

CatInABox

Idbatterim wrote: »

According to An article I read in paper, The owner of one of these sites with pp. Is now looking at trying to purchase possibly the Hawkins house site and merge the schemes. If that is true, it Could be at least another year. No need to rip down an apartment block and swimming pool. The state should have bought one or more of these blocks , whatever they needed , in my opinion to avoid what is Now proposed.

While it would have been great, there's regulations around all of these things.

A government was previously shot down for trying to CPO land without an actual need, so without a finalised Metrolink plan, they'd lose any court case if they went down this route.

The government could have bought the land on the open market, any government that did so without a plan in hand would be taken apart for financial negligence. Imagine the uproar if someone said "We're going to spend millions on this site here, because at some unspecified time in the future, we think that there's a possibility we might build some kind of Metro station here"

Kfagan10

They're already building on the old Screen cinema/Apollo house site.

This will be literally 4 stories high before MetroLink even starts tunneling from Na Fianna southwards.

prunudo

Kfagan10 wrote: »

They're already building on the old Screen cinema/Apollo house site.

This will be literally 4 stories high before MetroLink even starts tunneling from Na Fianna southwards.

4 stories, glad to see they're planning such an ambitious new build in a prime city centre location!

Sam Russell

CatInABox wrote: »

While it would have been great, there's regulations around all of these things.

A government was previously shot down for trying to CPO land without an actual need, so without a finalised Metrolink plan, they'd lose any court case if they went down this route.

The government could have bought the land on the open market, any government that did so without a plan in hand would be taken apart for financial negligence. Imagine the uproar if someone said "We're going to spend millions on this site here, because at some unspecified time in the future, we think that there's a possibility we might build some kind of Metro station here"

Wasn't there a project to build a prison on North County Dublin, and they bought the site before they had any plans?

I do not think they want to do that again.

prunudo

Sam Russell wrote: »

Wasn't there a project to build a prison on North County Dublin, and they bought the site before they had any plans?

I do not think they want to do that again.

I suppose its a case of damned if they do and damned if they don't.

CatInABox

Someone finally did the grunt work and made a map that I've been way to lazy to do.

https://twitter.com/yimbydublin/status/1101621955936092165

Really brings home the ridiculousness of those arguments asking for a southwest metro, or that a southwest metro will reduce demand on the Green Line.