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

monument

lxflyer wrote: »

Let's be honest here - the only reason BXD is going ahead is that the politicians needed to be seen to get one "big ticket" transport project under way - that doesn't necessarily mean it's the right one.

It's the right one because of the limited funding and because it should have been built (regardless of route chosen) at the time of the original Luas construction.

lxflyer wrote: »

Point to where I said BXD should now be re-routed - I may be many things, but I am a realist - the project is under construction. I'm resigned to the thing being built, but it doesn't mean that I am still very frustrated about the way existing bus users were not adequately considered in the business case, and how they are now going to be affected.

You have not said BXD should now be re-routed, but you do seem to be opposed to rerouting buses -- so, I'm not sure what you want.

lxflyer wrote: »

We're not just talking about any bus stops being affected here, we are talking about some of the busiest stops on the entire network - College Street, Grafton Street, Nassau Street, and Suffolk Street. This is where people wish to travel to and from and for a significantly greater number of people that will use the LUAS, they will not be able to do so anymore.

Lots of people go to places like Dame Street and College Green so they can walk elsewhere. Just the same way as Suffolk Street bus stop users walk there because is a key stop on many routes, but other stops can be established as such.
Suffolk Street is a mess. It and Church Lane are an accident waiting to happen and so congested with buses that it's ineffective for buses.

lxflyer wrote: »

Even your choice of words "pushing buses around there" is an implied suggestion that they are being forced out to the "next best solution", despite the fact that they carry more people than the LUAS will.

As I said, my preference was that Luas would go around.

lxflyer wrote: »

As for your idea re Westland Row - while the NTA discussion document might have had it - it still would have to get past DCC, whose track record on implementing public transport priority measures is not exactly one painted in glory - viz. how long it took to get them to address the city centre traffic issues, the pandering to business re the College Green bus gate hours, the retention for years of the parking spaces on the south side of St Stephen's Green North (making access to bus stops difficult).
Unless DCC's attitude changes significantly (which would be surprising given they do not want to give up car parking revenue), I don't see it happening.
Instead, I honestly do believe that bus users will face longer journeys as a result of this.

A key challenge is buy in, from Dublin Bus and its supports, to the idea of going around. Not a focus on what should have happened.
Without that buy in, it's hardener for the councilor stop know the importance.

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm not sure how you are calculating your distances, but Dawson Street to Westmoreland Street via Suffolk Street is 500m. The route via Westland Row is 1.5km - a kilometre more.

I'm calculating it from the start point to the end point of any diversions.
No diverted bus will be using Dawson as there will be a no right turn ban at the northern end of the street.
Going around TCD will be seen as and advantage to those who's trips are not in the core -- those who want to skip the city centre, those working in the Docklands or just east of Killdare Street and those who want to connect with a train or Dart.

lxflyer wrote: »

It is utterly ludicrous that in designing a scheme like this, that the detailed effects of it on bus users was not required to be analysed, planned and explained clearly. Instead it is almost an afterthought - we still don't know what they are going to be.

Agreed.

lxflyer wrote: »

If, for example, the 14 and 15/15a/15b end up being re-routed via Camden Street and Georges Street, then significant groups of people who currently board in Nassau Street, Kildare Street, St Stephen's Green and Earlsfort Terrace will have a not insignificant walk that they did not have before.

If that was the case those who used Nassau Street would just have to walk around the corner to College Green.
St Stephen's Green isn't far from the Camden Street - Georges Street corridor.
Earlsfort Terrace isn't that far from Camden Street.

lxflyer wrote: »

It's the lack of any proper public consideration of all of this in the planning process, in the assessment of the business case, coupled with the lack of any significant improvement in journey times, that really does lead me to the conclusion that this was primarily a political decision rather than one that has the best interests of the majority of public transport users in this city at it's core. Metro North clearly did deliver real improvements to a far greater number of people.

It's not really a matter for the BXD business case, more so the planning system.
On one hand ABP were concerned with widening footpath, but it's not to clear that they were much about concerned about bus routes or cyclists or taxis.

lxflyer wrote: »

Until all of the powers that be in infrastructure planning start showing some realistic attitudes towards public transport development, meaning proper bus priority measures and not shifting buses away from the core city centre market (which will only make buses less attractive), then I really despair at where we are going.

Buses don't have to go down College Green to serve it.

lxflyer wrote: »

Where specifically do you feel frequency is insufficient to meet demand levels?

The NTA's BRT would seem like a good start.
Capturing the higher end of potential demand for public transport is not really something Dublin Bus is able to do for a long list of reasons. Topping that list is likely because DB is such a damaged brand. 

LXFlyer

monument wrote: »

It's the right one because of the limited funding and because it should have been built (regardless of route chosen) at the time of the original Luas construction.

You have not said BXD should now be re-routed, but you do seem to be opposed to rerouting buses -- so, I'm not sure what you want.

What I am exceptionally frustrated about is that:

1) No proper consideration was (and still has not been) given to the negative impact on the greater number of bus passengers that this project has.

2) No recognition that more people will be negatively impacted by this project than will actually benefit - the numbers of bus users affected by this will be far greater than the numbers that the LUAS BXD will ever be able to carry

It is a shocking indictment of the whole process of assessing whether this project was the right thing to do that this has not taken place.

Right now I would like to see those plans published in public and explained to everyone, as I think an awful lot of people do not yet realise how much this will affect them.

monument wrote: »

Lots of people go to places like Dame Street and College Green so they can walk elsewhere. Just the same way as Suffolk Street bus stop users walk there because is a key stop on many routes, but other stops can be established as such.
Suffolk Street is a mess. It and Church Lane are an accident waiting to happen and so congested with buses that it's ineffective for buses.

That's like saying, "tough luck - nothing we can do". That is in my view unacceptable.

monument wrote: »

A key challenge is buy in, from Dublin Bus and its supports, to the idea of going around. Not a focus on what should have happened.
Without that buy in, it's hardener for the councilor stop know the importance.

Why would you expect Dublin Bus to be remotely enthusiastic about their services having extended journey times and key stops being removed? This has bigger ramifications as it may mean additional running time is needed which may mean more buses are required to maintain the service levels.

monument wrote: »

I'm calculating it from the start point to the end point of any diversions.
No diverted bus will be using Dawson as there will be a no right turn ban at the northern end of the street.

Can you point me to where that there is any indication of that (post-construction) please?

monument wrote: »

Going around TCD will be seen as and advantage to those who's trips are not in the core -- those who want to skip the city centre, those working in the Docklands or just east of Killdare Street and those who want to connect with a train or Dart.

So we should design public transport to benefit a minority of people? I somehow doubt that the numbers of people going to those locations come even close to those using the key city centre stops.

monument wrote: »

If that was the case those who used Nassau Street would just have to walk around the corner to College Green.
St Stephen's Green isn't far from the Camden Street - Georges Street corridor.
Earlsfort Terrace isn't that far from Camden Street.

Now you really are pushing things - it's a good extra 10 minutes walk from St Stephen's Green East or Earlsfort Terrace to Camden Street. Why was this not assessed as a cost? Again, you appear to be taking the line "oh well, your luck out". That is frankly a crazy approach to this.

Not forgetting that that route is already much slower than the existing route via Nassau St, Kildare St and Earlsfort Terrace for through passengers.

monument wrote: »

It's not really a matter for the BXD business case, more so the planning system.
On one hand ABP were concerned with widening footpath, but it's not to clear that they were much about concerned about bus routes or cyclists or taxis.

If you are seriously trying to suggest that a business case for a project such as this, should not incorporate a detailed assessment of the negative impact on much larger volumes of people than the LUAS will ever carry, then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. This is a fundamental cost and nowhere in that document was it properly assessed.

monument wrote: »

Buses don't have to go down College Green to serve it.

Again I go back to the point - the negative impact was not properly assessed.

monument wrote: »

The NTA's BRT would seem like a good start.
Capturing the higher end of potential demand for public transport is not really something Dublin Bus is able to do for a long list of reasons. Topping that list is likely because DB is such a damaged brand.

Well that's your opinion - but I think your personal bias against the company is becoming a bit clearer now, and I don't think that it is necessarily correct.

There have been significant improvements in the bus service in the last three years through Network Direct and the AVLC/RTPI rollout, both of which need to be followed up on now.

I have to say that I find your attitude that "well they should be pushed away" or "they should walk further" rather condescending - it's like almost saying that the LUAS passengers (although fewer in number) are more important than the bus passengers.

It's that attitude that pervades many transport idealists that frankly stinks to high heaven, as it fails to recognise the massive contribution that our bus network makes to keeping this city moving.

The BRT route from Blanchardstown (for example) would require anyone going to O'Connell Street to either have a much longer walk or get another bus or tram. Is that an improvement as well? I don't believe it is.

It seems to me that unfortunately the RPA seem to be ploughing ahead with all these wonderful ideas, but without any clear analysis of the cost and impact on other transport users - that to my mind is fundamentally wrong.

monument

Will reply later in detail but what exactly is the alternative to having strong bus priority around TCD?

murphaph

monument wrote: »

Will reply later in detail but what exactly is the alternative to having strong bus priority around TCD?

In an ideal world?

Pedestrianised College Green with sub surface Luas tunnel connecting Green Line to Metro North (initially) and Broadstone with trams running to Finglas via Broombridge.

If you mean with no effort made to deliver decent segregation for light rail in the core of the network then long term the private car should at least be restricted around college green. To a pedestrian however smoking hulks of double deckers are no better (if not worse) than cars. Buses are noisier all round, there are just fewer of them.

The bus is a fantastic thing, but Dublin is far too reliant on the bus due to a lack of investment in proper rail based alternatives and a lack of courage to go underground when it's been proven (50 years ago) that it's the right thing to do.

Even Palma de Mallorca has a sodding metro and went underground to get it in as far as the core of the city. There simply is no excuse for not having already gone underground in some shape or form. Dublin clay isn't even difficult to bore through.

LXFlyer

monument wrote: »

Will reply later in detail but what exactly is the alternative to having strong bus priority around TCD?

Ultimately at this stage nothing to be honest. But that is a battle that should have been fought before this project got the green light.

But it would be nice if the people planning this actually acknowledged that a very significant number of people would be inconvenienced by this.

It would also be nice if you actually recognised this for once rather than blandly effectively saying "well tough that's their lot" and focusing on the much smaller number of people that may gain from their buses being diverted.

Don't get me wrong - the LUAS green line is great as it is fast due to the segregation. Would I use the Red Line over the bus? It would depend on the journey. When working in Tallaght I always found the bus faster to the Central Bank for example, and with RTPI it made planning a trip much easier.

metrostation

Also another thing that Dublin bus could look at is to try and operate in tandem with Luas and Dart systems more efficiently.

As time goes by and the city centre becomes more congested, it could be a good idea to have bus services feeding into these public transport services from the suburbs.

For example a bus servicing the greater Blanchardstown area to feed into the Maynooth line,
A bus service from Lucan and Clondalkin to the Hazelhatch line,
Terenure/Rathfarnham into the Luas green line etc.

LXFlyer

metrostation wrote: »

Also another thing that Dublin bus could look at is to try and operate in tandem with Luas and Dart systems more efficiently.

As time goes by and the city centre becomes more congested, it could be a good idea to have bus services feeding into these public transport services from the suburbs.

For example a bus servicing the greater Blanchardstown area to feed into the Maynooth line,
A bus service from Lucan and Clondalkin to the Hazelhatch line,
Terenure/Rathfarnham into the Luas green line etc.

Well for the latter, the 17 and 61 already do that job (the stop is at the far side of the LUAS bridge in Dundrum), and the 14 also links it with Ballinteer.

Amirani

lxflyer wrote: »

Well for the latter, the 17 and 61 already do that job (the stop is at the far side of the LUAS bridge in Dundrum), and the 14 also links it with Ballinteer.

Yep. It's essentially pointless though without free or even heavily discounted transfers on LEAP.

Aard

Talk of the viability of transfers in Dublin is meaningless until public transport here moves from distance-based fares to time-based fares.

This is and always has been the most significant impediment to a city-unifying public transport system. Elephant in the room.

LXFlyer

NiallSparky wrote: »

Yep. It's essentially pointless though without free or even heavily discounted transfers on LEAP.

Aard wrote: »

Talk of the viability of transfers in Dublin is meaningless until public transport here moves from distance-based fares to time-based fares.

This is and always has been the most significant impediment to a city-unifying public transport system. Elephant in the room.

For occasional travellers I agree, but there are bus/LUAS period passes available for regular commuters.

I sometimes take the bus to town or v.v., and other days use the bus/LUAS combination which that ticket gives me the freedom to do.

Victor

monument wrote: »

I have never been to those cities but it seems the problem is that Cologne and Stuttgart trams have a stronger need to be underground because of their large road networks on the ground in their city centers.

I'm not dismissing the usefulness of some cut and cover, we're just heading more towards the models adapted by other cities where more limited space on streets and urban roads is given over to walking, cycling and public transport.

Cologne (much bigger river - that floods), not unlike Dublin, has an issue with the river. You have to either go surface or deep, not shallow.

While Cologne has a very complicated inner city street network (property ownership issues after the war prevented changes), most of those streets are traffic calmed or pedestrianised.

In the Altstadt and Belgisches Viertel - that is the whole area inside the ring railway - there is only a handful of heavily trafficked routes.

bk

Aard wrote: »

Talk of the viability of transfers in Dublin is meaningless until public transport here moves from distance-based fares to time-based fares.

Not necessarily, Amsterdam has a superb distance/time hybrid ticketing system.

You get charged 80c when you get on the bus, then you get charged 14c * per km for the distance you travel.

If you get off one bus and on another bus/tram/metro within 30 minutes, you aren't charged the 80c again, just continue to be charged the 14c per km fee.

This setup is made possible by their version of Leap and tag-on/tag-off at every bus/tram/metro.

* The per km fee can be different depending on bus/tram/metro and even time of day (e.g. higher rate at night).

Seems like an ideal system for Ireland.

monument

lxflyer - What you seem to be missing is that BXD will have a wider effect than just public transport and that, on balance, more people will be better off. Reinforced by the orders of ABP, the result of the BXD should be to overall improve the public realm -- from wider footpaths, more pedestrianised areas, to a traffic calming effect across some of the core city centre and high density residential areas.

Purely on public transport –The point is we’re heading towards a Luas line plus an amount of bus route on College Green; and a new bus route around TCD. That’s a clear-cut net benefit to the city.

lxflyer wrote: »

But it would be nice if the people planning this actually acknowledged that a very significant number of people would be inconvenienced by this.

It would also be nice if you actually recognised this for once rather than blandly effectively saying "well tough that's their lot" and focusing on the much smaller number of people that may gain from their buses being diverted.

Sure a significant number of people would be inconvenienced, but others will be better off.

How are you calculating that there will be a "much smaller number of people that may gain" from a route going around TCD? Any routes going around TCD will closer serve:

Businesses, government buildings and museums on Kildare Street
Businesses around Merrion Square
Holles Street
Parts of TCD
Connections with Dart, Commuter and intercity rail services
Residential and businesses from Tara St into the south Docklands

I might just about be able to buy ‘marginally smaller’ or ‘a little smaller’, but not much smaller by any means.

Also: The routes will still serve the city centre (College Green and Dame Street are just a small section of it).

lxflyer wrote: »

What I am exceptionally frustrated about is that:

1) No proper consideration was (and still has not been) given to the negative impact on the greater number of bus passengers that this project has.

...Right now I would like to see those plans published in public and explained to everyone, as I think an awful lot of people do not yet realise how much this will affect them.

As already discussed, it's not true that there is no proper consideration, it has just yet to be made public, expect what the Irish Times covered.

I agree with your frustration on this and I am in the process of using AIE to try to get DCC and/or the NTA to release the NTA draft plan.

The NTA are using the draft nature of the plan as a reason not to release it and I'm waiting to hear from DCC. The NTA says the plan should be released in any case early in 2014.

lxflyer wrote: »

2) No recognition that more people will be negatively impacted by this project than will actually benefit - the numbers of bus users affected by this will be far greater than the numbers that the LUAS BXD will ever be able to carry

See my opening point above.

lxflyer wrote: »

That's like saying, "tough luck - nothing we can do". That is in my view unacceptable.

I’m clearly not saying “nothing we can do” – I’m saying the opposite! That there’s something to do and Dublin Bus and its supporters should get behind that way…

lxflyer wrote: »

Why would you expect Dublin Bus to be remotely enthusiastic about their services having extended journey times and key stops being removed? This has bigger ramifications as it may mean additional running time is needed which may mean more buses are required to maintain the service levels.

Because if they don’t get behind the idea of a high quality bus route around TCD it will mean additional running time and additional costs. Not only getting behind, but pushing the idea of a high quality route around TCD is the best way to limit the impacts and to make it so the difference is negligible.

lxflyer wrote: »

Can you point me to where that there is any indication of that (post-construction) please?

http://www.dublinluasbroombridge.ie

lxflyer wrote: »

So we should design public transport to benefit a minority of people? I somehow doubt that the numbers of people going to those locations come even close to those using the key city centre stops.

The routes will still serve the city centre.

lxflyer wrote: »

If you are seriously trying to suggest that a business case for a project such as this, should not incorporate a detailed assessment of the negative impact on much larger volumes of people than the LUAS will ever carry, then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. This is a fundamental cost and nowhere in that document was it properly assessed.

I’m suggesting the oversight should be in the planning system.

lxflyer wrote: »

Well that's your opinion - but I think your personal bias against the company is becoming a bit clearer now, and I don't think that it is necessarily correct.

There have been significant improvements in the bus service in the last three years through Network Direct and the AVLC/RTPI rollout, both of which need to be followed up on now.

My “personal bias” is an echo of the views held by many current and former Dublin Bus users. By my personal view is that people interested in providing high quality transport should not get too attached to one company and my interest is in the effective movement of people, not keeping a company with a damaged brand which has gone beyond saving.

As for ‘significant improvements’ nothing compared to even BRT lite.

lxflyer wrote: »

I have to say that I find your attitude that "well they should be pushed away" or "they should walk further" rather condescending - it's like almost saying that the LUAS passengers (although fewer in number) are more important than the bus passengers.

Your attitude to this has the air about it that there’s some other way – that BXD is going to be rerouted or that both Luas and all the current buses can share College Green (when currently there’s too many buses there even without Luas!).

lxflyer wrote: »

The BRT route from Blanchardstown (for example) would require anyone going to O'Connell Street to either have a much longer walk or get another bus or tram. Is that an improvement as well? I don't believe it is.

Yes, it is an improvement.

Unlike Dublin Bus, more reliable high-frequency and capacity public transport works as a network. Switching to another BRT route or Luas is not the same as getting another bus.

All routes should not be clogging up one corridor and the network should be serving the high density inner city better. But that’s a problem with Dublin Bus – nothing can be changed which might change things for Mary or John who have always used the bus.

Victor wrote: »

Cologne (much bigger river - that floods), not unlike Dublin, has an issue with the river. You have to either go surface or deep, not shallow.

While Cologne has a very complicated inner city street network (property ownership issues after the war prevented changes), most of those streets are traffic calmed or pedestrianised.

In the Altstadt and Belgisches Viertel - that is the whole area inside the ring railway - there is only a handful of heavily trafficked routes.

In fairness, there's a fairly notable grid of large, wide, multi-lane roads within the railway ring: 51, 55, L111, Tunisstraße, Tel-Aviv-Staße, Turiner Straße, Magusstraße etc.

Not at all comparable to Dublin with an overall a far narrower and disjointed large road network with many pinch points and loads of areas with very little permeability of large road (and often little permeability for any mode inside these blocks of areas).

Sam Russell

A few points.

I think that the airport should be covered by Dart extension from the Northern line from Howth Junction. The Spur could come from anypoint from Howth Junction to Portmarnock, but it would be across open country. A 30 min service to Connolly would be OK, journey time to be 15 min or so.

Electrify the Maynooth line, and extend the Dart - should be simple enough.

If Leinster St and Nassau St had a contra-flow buslane to join with the bus lane from Dawson St, then busses would be able to get from Merrion Sq to College Green quicker and with more freedom, avoiding the difficult turn into Westland Row. It has the advantage that busses going north follow the same route as southbound ones. Passengers would be delivered to Grafton St.

Nassau St suffers from coach parking, making for difficulties for the huge amount of busses that stop there. They should be forced to park elsewhere, perhaps in the docks area. A set-down rule should apply.

Clare Street could be busses only from Leinster St to Merrion Sq, with 'normal' traffic going left round Lincon Place and back to Merrion Sq. This would give a better flow to the traffic. The busses would miss the connection with Pearse station though.

cabrasnake

A DORT spur from the Howth junction area, amazing nobody thought of that before.
Should be grand. More than 50,000 meeters, greeters, arrivals and staff travel to the airport everyday. This will never change as clearly air travel is on the way out.
A DORT train every 15 mins will manage that no bother.
Other DORT commuters will be glad to take to buses so the flyers can use the system.

Or.....maybe the idea is bonkers.

metrostation

Yes the Dart spur idea has been around a long time and now that metro north has been shelved for the forseable future, IE has made this project a priority.

As a temporary measure it could work, it would not however be of any benefit to commuters.The only practical way they could operate this would be to use it as an express airport to city centre service(similar to the Heathrow-London express).They could run it every 30 mins with a return ticket costing around €20 for a direct 20 minute train into Connoly. Down the line when (or if) the dart underground gets built this will especially be of benefit to those travelling to destinations around the city centre.

Sam Russell

metrostation wrote: »

Yes the Dart spur idea has been around a long time and now that metro north has been shelved for the forseable future, IE has made this project a priority.

As a temporary measure it could work, it would not however be of any benefit to commuters.The only practical way they could operate this would be to use it as an express airport to city centre service(similar to the Heathrow-London express).They could run it every 30 mins with a return ticket costing around €20 for a direct 20 minute train into Connoly. Down the line when (or if) the dart underground gets built this will especially be of benefit to those travelling to destinations around the city centre.

It would not be temporary, because it would be used heavily. Certainly as an express trip into town, it would be popular and reliable (if anything is). The Dart underground would take years and years to be decided upon let alone built. The spur is over open countryside so could be built in no time if it got the nod. It could also be continued to Ballymun and link up with lines to the west, say skirting Cappagh and onto Broombridge, and eventually Heuston.

metrostation

Sam Russell wrote: »

It would not be temporary, because it would be used heavily. Certainly as an express trip into town, it would be popular and reliable (if anything is). The Dart underground would take years and years to be decided upon let alone built. The spur is over open countryside so could be built in no time if it got the nod. It could also be continued to Ballymun and link up with lines to the west, say skirting Cappagh and onto Broombridge, and eventually Heuston.

The dart underground may be getting the go-ahead sooner than we think, the EU have already stated they would be providing funding for the project.

"A combination of potential EU funding, to a maximum of between 20pc and 30pc of the total cost and a one-off special allocation from the Exchequer could allow the project to be re-started," a department of transport spokesman said.

"The EU regards Dart Underground as a significant project on a European scale because it would connect all the main rail lines, and it remains a live project for the National Transport Authority (NTA)."

strassenwo!f

metrostation wrote: »

The dart underground may be getting the go-ahead sooner than we think, the EU have already stated they would be providing funding for the project.

"A combination of potential EU funding, to a maximum of between 20pc and 30pc of the total cost and a one-off special allocation from the Exchequer could allow the project to be re-started," a department of transport spokesman said.

"The EU regards Dart Underground as a significant project on a European scale because it would connect all the main rail lines, and it remains a live project for the National Transport Authority (NTA)."

It would be nice to see a source for the bold type quote given above.

A very important project for Ireland, to be sure, and one I am broadly in favour of. But how can anybody be expected to take seriously a comment that the EU regards this project as "a significant project on a European scale"? It's a project which is planned to take place on an island in Europe which has no connection to any other island and which is to take place on a rail network which has its own gauge. How can this really have a "European" scale to it?

Sam Russell

strassenwo!f wrote: »

It would be nice to see a source for the bold type quote given above.

A very important project for Ireland, to be sure, and one I am broadly in favour of. But how can anybody be expected to take seriously a comment that the EU regards this project as "a significant project on a European scale"? It's a project which is planned to take place on an island in Europe which has no connection to any other island and which is to take place on a rail network which has its own gauge. How can this really have a "European" scale to it?

Didn't the bank crash of Anglo Irish Bank occur on an island in Europe which has no connection to any other island but was not only on a European scale but on a world-wide scale?

We need projects funded by Europe to get us out of the hole we are in, and what better project than an underground railway to get us out of a hole?

BeerSteakBirds

The photos are great but I think architects should be given stick figures which resemble junkies. It might help them design areas to be as junkie unfriendly as possible - a design skill which Dublin planners need.

metrostation

strassenwo!f wrote: »

It would be nice to see a source for the bold type quote given above.

A very important project for Ireland, to be sure, and one I am broadly in favour of. But how can anybody be expected to take seriously a comment that the EU regards this project as "a significant project on a European scale"? It's a project which is planned to take place on an island in Europe which has no connection to any other island and which is to take place on a rail network which has its own gauge. How can this really have a "European" scale to it?

Source here: http://http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/airport-link-tunnel-included-in-expanded-dart-plan-29479191.html

It is an important project on a european basis as we are viewed as one of the very few important cities within the EU without either an airport rail link or a comprehensive city metro network.The EU has helped fund many important projects in this country including hospitals, schools, motorways, Ferry ports etc. and this would rank as a fairly significant project dont you think?

strassenwo!f

Sam Russell wrote: »

Didn't the bank crash of Anglo Irish Bank occur on an island in Europe which has no connection to any other island but was not only on a European scale but on a world-wide scale?

We need projects funded by Europe to get us out of the hole we are in, and what better project than an underground railway to get us out of a hole?

Don't wish to stray too far from the issue of metro north, but wasn't much of Ireland's problem the fact that its banking system was connected to that of other countries, so it was easy to borrow cash from external banks?

Did you think that some guy from Bayerische HypothekenEuroSparkassenLandesbank got on a plane from Munich to Dublin with a suitcase full of euros, waited at the carousel to collect it and then headed in on the Aircoach to St. Stephen's Green to lend it to Anglo?

metrostation wrote:

Source here: http://http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/airport-link-tunnel-included-in-expanded-dart-plan-29479191.html

It is an important project on a european basis as we are viewed as one of the very few important cities within the EU without either an airport rail link or a comprehensive city metro network.The EU has helped fund many important projects in this country including hospitals, schools, motorways, Ferry ports etc. and this would rank as a fairly significant project dont you think?

Thanks for providing the link.

The EU has helped build the things you mention because it is desirable for the citizens of the EU to be healthy and educated, and because it is desirable for people to move freely around a particular area of the EU and to move between the different areas of the EU.

I think both the metro and interconnector are important projects. But they are not, for example, the resurfacing of the Brenner pass or the construction of a high speed link between Frankfurt and Paris, both of which could very conceivably have significant knock-on effects in at least a dozen countries in the EU. Those are projects on a "European scale".

For some mouthpiece from the Department of Transport to suggest that either of Dublin's major infrastructure projects is a project on a "European scale" does sound, to me, like a bit of an overstatement.

Grandeeod

I believe these guys were around before.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/private-group-revives-plan-to-build-19bn-dublin-metro-service-29740692.html

handlemaster

Grandeeod wrote: »

I believe these guys were around before.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/private-group-revives-plan-to-build-19bn-dublin-metro-service-29740692.html

Let's hope these guys get the go ahead because the city needs it. We are a nation of talkers just get on and build the thing....

lods

handlemaster wrote: »

Let's hope these guys get the go ahead because the city needs it. We are a nation of talkers just get on and build the thing....

Who are "these guys" and what is their Agenda ? 200 million from levies ? Where can we view the actual plan , rather than some vague dream ?

TheBandicoot

What's the point? The government HAS. NO. MONEY. Unless this private group can show a plan that costs the state absolutely nothing, they're wasting their time.

handlemaster

lods wrote: »

Who are "these guys" and what is their Agenda ? 200 million from levies ? Where can we view the actual plan , rather than some vague dream ?

Well who ever they are hopefully becomes apparent and maybe they will do more than most sitting behind a VDU bitching about people who dare to move forward

richiek83

handlemaster wrote: »

Well who ever they are hopefully becomes apparent and maybe they will do more than most sitting behind a VDU bitching about people who dare to move forward

Hi folks,

Their website is http://www.metrodublin.ie.


Provides a bit more info but says site is under construction.

handlemaster

richiek83 wrote: »

Hi folks,

Their website is http://www.metrodublin.ie.


Provides a bit more info but says site is under construction.

Who is the site registered to .?

handlemaster

TheBandicoot wrote: »

What's the point? The government HAS. NO. MONEY. Unless this private group can show a plan that costs the state absolutely nothing, they're wasting their time.

There's a few ministers in Dublin 15 that need to deliver for the area as they will find it hard pressed knocking on doors come the next election.I would start there and then say the money can be found.

LionelNashe

So the airport line doesn't run North-South under O'Connell Street, but avoids the very centre of the city and goes to Heuston. Hmm. I don't like that but maybe I'm being selfish because I live in the north city centre.

I'm not sure of the point of the M-1 line from Blanchardstown. It follows the line of the existing train track for most of its length.

handlemaster

LionelNashe wrote: »

So the airport line doesn't run North-South under O'Connell Street, but avoids the very centre of the city and goes to Heuston. Hmm. I don't like that but maybe I'm being selfish because I live in the north city centre.

I'm not sure of the point of the M-1 line from Blanchardstown. It follows the line of the existing train track for most of its length.

That's the problem to many objectors and nothing ever gets done. I'm sure you could have a 1000 people and all not aggree.

LionelNashe

handlemaster wrote: »

That's the problem to many objectors and nothing ever gets done. I'm sure you could have a 1000 people and all not aggree.

If you're referring to my first point, I acknowledged that the original route under O'Connell Street was maybe just my personal preference. At the same time, if money wasn't an issue, I still think that the O'Connell Street route would be better becuse it would be more direct for most people's journeys. But like I said, I'm biased.

If you're referring to my second point about the need for a line from Blanchardstown, then that's ridiculous. Of course people are entitled to object and question. Projects being halted because of objectors isn't necessarily a bad thing; sometimes it's the correct decision.

strassenwo!f

richiek83 wrote: »

Hi folks,

Their website is http://www.metrodublin.ie.


Provides a bit more info but says site is under construction.

Interesting one. They seem to be proposing the IrishRail gauge for the project.

Aard

Nice map on that site.

It essentially is just: interconnector + reuse of the Cabra line + MN extended to Malahide and truncated in city centre + Blanch stub. If all of that was done at the same gauge as Dart, there'd be no need for metro branding.

I'm very suspicious of a private company proposing their own railway infrastructure. Why has there been no SEA for rail infra in Dublin? The incrementalist approach falls apart when you start to build very expensive things.

maninasia

It doesn't matter who builds it as long as it gets built. The Chinese have a lot of experience building subways now, and they could provide finance for it too. This would be a bluechip investment for them. The Japanese might also be interested. There's no point doing 'an el cheapo' when it should be done right from the start (which guarantees usage), and the money is out there if they look further afield.

The Chinese have just financed a nuclear power plant in the UK for billions of GBP, because they know it's a solid investment over the next few decades.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/00eff456-3979-11e3-a3a4-00144feab7de.html#axzz2kDl6eGdH

An investment in the metro would be a solid investment too with support from the public and government and guaranteed fare scheme. It would actually be a lot more reliable than investment in a motorway. It's hard to think of anything that would be less guaranteed in terms of public infrastructure. The tube was started over 150 years ago and still going (strong).

strassenwo!f

There are also a couple of fairly sharp turns involved around the St. James' Hospital/Heuston area. Not sure how that would work, if the trains capable of making such turns would be running on shared track with DART trains.

OssianSmyth

Is this from Cormac Rabbit? The proposal is modified from the 1996/2003 versions.

Right now there is an alignment with full planning permission and broad political support. The one problem is that the government doesn't believe it is worth 200m/year compared to alternative spending choices.

Victor

26 months is completely unrealistic as such a plan needs some form of planning permission and land acquisition.

On of the comments on the Independent website is quite telling

The article says it will run on "totally separate tracks" from Irish rail but the map clearly shows that most of the 3 planned routes would run parallel to or on existing Irish Rail infrastructure.

Now either they are planning to build new tracks beside existing Irish Rail track (highly unlikely) or they are planning to use existing Irish Rail infrastructure (most certainly). Neither of which is ever, ever, ever going to happen.

The first option would require the four tracking of existing tracks, this would mean destruction of a large amount of property along the route and the removal and replacement of every existing road and rail bridge and tunnel. The cost and disruption to existing Irish Rail services would simply be too prohibitive.

The second option, using Irish Rail infrastructure, would require Irish rail to upgrade the existing two tracks to handle dramatically increased traffic as well as a lot of stations along the routes.

monument

According to iedr.ie, metrodublin.ie is registered to UNIFIED PROPOSAL LIMITED with a contact of Cormac Rabbitt (a name many here will know).

The problem is cro.ie has UNIFIED PROPOSAL LIMITED at 8 HYBRASIL COURT CIRCULAR ROAD GALWAY listed as "Dissolved -- Effective Date 12/04/2013"

"DUBLIN METRO GROUP" at the same address (well, "8 HY BRASIL COURT") is listed on solocheck.ie: "This Registered Business Name is owned by the company Unified Proposal Limited" [it's a business name of a company which is now dissolved].

Cormac Rabbitte of the "Dublin Metro Group" has previously talked in 2003 at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport on how a Dublin metro could be built for far less than the RPA were proposing -- see the transcript here or reports from the Indo or RTE.

The same committee were a lot less impressed with Rabbitte when he was back to them in 2006 in a debate titled "The Dargan Project: Presentation" but it at least starts as more of a grilling and interruptions about who's behind the project and how viable it is.

OssianSmyth wrote: »

Is this from Cormac Rabbit? The proposal is modified from the 1996/2003 versions.

Right now there is an alignment with full planning permission and broad political support. The one problem is that the government doesn't believe it is worth 200m/year compared to alternative spending choices.

Yes, was going to post the above before getting interrupted.

BonkeyDonker

strassenwo!f wrote: »

There are also a couple of fairly sharp turns involved around the St. James' Hospital/Heuston area. Not sure how that would work, if the trains capable of making such turns would be running on shared track with DART trains.

Are those not the existing Luas lines?

strassenwo!f

BonkeyDonker wrote: »

Are those not the existing Luas lines?

The M3 on that map is a line which, heading out of town, goes from St. Stephen's Green to a 'Liberties' station, presumably somewhere around Christchurch. Then it heads west to a station at St. James' Hospital and then south to a station at Heuston, with interchanges with the LUAS red line at both of these. This bit is not really shown as a southward turn towards Heuston, but it would have to be, as that is the position of St. James' and Heuston relative to each other. After that it turns west again to go out along the Hazelhatch line. Those would need to be pretty sharp turns.

In effect, for this bit of the proposal, they seem to have just added a station at St. James', for whatever reason, to the DART underground proposal.

Edit: sorry, I meant "(heads) north to a station at Heuston", and "a northward turn towards Heuston".

loyatemu

the existing Metro and Dart Underground proposals already have planning permission, which took years to finalise. This is just more crayons on a map speculation.

GerardKeating

loyatemu wrote: »

the existing Metro and Dart Underground proposals already have planning permission, which took years to finalise. This is just more crayons on a map speculation.

The DART underground bits are mostly the same construction, it's only the airport link is different

Sam Russell

That plan (MetroDublin) has a lot of merit. It is a modification of the Dart Underground proposal, with the Metro North being diverted to Heuston over existing lines (some of the way). Quite clever.

However, I would not bring the line from Malahide, but from Howth Junction/Clongriffin, then onto the Airport. Avoiding the city centre would cut costs for sure. Using a large bore single tunnel rather than twin tunnels would also cut costs.

But are the costs and time scales realistic?

Aard

Actually, something I really like about the proposal is the tie-in of the disused Cabra line to the Interconnector.

Sam Russell

Also, an extension to Maynooth would not be a bad addition either. It would actually make the Dart (assuming everything is Dart compatible) the rapid transit it was meant to be (thirty years old now).

monument

There is some merit with the proposals but...

It would be one thing if Cormac Rabbitt came forward with these proposals on a website detailing clearly who was backing this (even if it is only him) and the costing details. But instead we've got the opposite: We have a site which is listed by the .IE whois directory as registered to a company which CRO.ie says is dissolved.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Also, an extension to Maynooth would not be a bad addition either. It would actually make the Dart (assuming everything is Dart compatible) the rapid transit it was meant to be (thirty years old now).

The extension to Maynooth was discussed on these boards recently -- there's a reserved alignment for it which Metro West was to use.

Aard wrote: »

Actually, something I really like about the proposal is the tie-in of the disused Cabra line to the Interconnector.

It's also makes a circle line -- a main feature of Rabbitt's "the Dargan Project".

loyatemu wrote: »

the existing Metro and Dart Underground proposals already have planning permission, which took years to finalise. This is just more crayons on a map speculation.

It's a rehashing of a rehashing of advanced crayons (note: crayon thinking can be a good thing!).

Here's a 2011 doc from Rabbite: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/131803111/Dublin-Metro-Route-Map-Capacity-Capital-Cost

handlemaster

Are there actually any backers for this ? According to the info they are doing a presention to to council this week !!!!