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

Grandeeod

Captain Chaos wrote: »

DART Underground was cancelled while the useless option will still go ahead. It will end up costing more in the long run trying to upgrade it's capacity in years after it opening.

DU on the other hand is a future proof scaling plan and intergrates with the existing system instead of another isolated transport system.

DU was cancelled. MN was cancelled. MN was not an useless option. MN (via FG) may well be a useless option.

Idbatterim

I just posted the below on the " I hate the M50 thread" there can be no excuses anymore, the government are 3 billion ahead of target. We all know where this is going, government surpluses over the next few years, no doubt tens of billions ahead of expectation! Is it asking too much that this time round, it isnt all blown on things we see nothing in return for? that cant be clawed back easily the next time recession hits, like welfare rates for example?

the minister for transport is a total moron. The guy has said, multi point tolling wont happen until there is a decent transport network for Dublin, is that one that would involve MN and DU, which you have just robbed Dublin of for at least another decade to "save" total and utter irrelevance money in the scheme of things Pascale, that pocket change?!

the below is from an rte.ie article, the real shocker for me, is that growth was so massively underestimated (sarcasm overload), where have we seen that before? Sure why not lie more Paschal, the more you lie about projections being over optimistic etc, the less the government can begrudgingly invest in area such as transport and infrastructure and other areas they begrudge giving a red cent to!

Quote:

Prime Time also reported that up to 400,000 unique journeys are now taking place on the M50 every day – well in excess of the number of journeys previously estimated.

The growth in traffic levels on the M50 are the highest in Europe.

New technology to help clear the scene of collisions faster is also to be acquired according to the Minister.

He also ruled out additional multi point tolling in the near future. The measure would, according to an NRA report, reduce traffic volumes on the route.

Mr Donohoe said that he would not be in favour of additional tolls on the M50 until viable public transport alternatives are in place.

He also said forcing traffic off the M50 would result in an increase in congestion and traffic on other smaller regional roads and residential areas along the route.
The airport regulator reckoned it would take another half decade minimum to reach the numbers the airport will hit this year.

I also read that the reason for the original surface running Luas out to the airport was abandoned, was not because it was totally inadequate, it was because it would have meant the Luas couldnt serve Finglas! That airport is going to top 25,000,000 this year! that airport could easily be 40,000,000 plus before a bloody light rail line services it! This banana republic is truly in a league of its own!

cgcsb

you would be hard pressed to find an airport with 40,000,000 pax not served by rail in the developed world.

Reuben1210

cgcsb wrote: »

you would be hard pressed to find an airport with 40,000,000 pax not served by rail in the developed world.

I challenge anyone to find one. Doubt it exists.

brownbeard

Reuben1210 wrote: »

I challenge anyone to find one. Doubt it exists.

LAX (70m)
Charlotte (44m)
Denver (53m)

Although, As I understand it, Denver and LAX are at the same "Sure we will build it, but not yet" stage as we are.

Having said that, I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find this sort of carry on outside the US.

MICKEYG

brownbeard wrote: »

LAX (70m)
Charlotte (44m)
Denver (53m)

Although, As I understand it, Denver and LAX are at the same "Sure we will build it, but not yet" stage as we are.

Having said that, I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find this sort of carry on outside the US.

Denver rail link is close to opening but I agree with the post. Absolute joke that both projects (DU as well) with such positive cost/beneift figures are delayed. They should be built now to high spec and future proofed as much as possible. The tangible and intangible benefits are huge.

cgcsb

brownbeard wrote: »

LAX (70m)
Charlotte (44m)
Denver (53m)

Although, As I understand it, Denver and LAX are at the same "Sure we will build it, but not yet" stage as we are.

Having said that, I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find this sort of carry on outside the US.

I never considered the madness that is North America to be sure.

LeinsterDub

cgcsb wrote: »

I never considered the madness that is North America to be sure.

Awh here! In my experience the Canadians do decent infrastructure

cgcsb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Awh here! In my experience the Canadians do decent infrastructure

Toronto is a joke, bus + two trains from airport to City Centre, journey time of an hour

Edit: I understand Toronto has just this year opened a new rail link to the airport. Ireland take note.

Idbatterim

Absolute joke that both projects (DU as well) with such positive cost/beneift figures are delayed.

not just delayed, we are now getting inferior versions, the "savings" for this alone are so minuscule, that to deprive dublin of them for 5 years on that reason alone is a disgrace!

Funny how with welfare spend, Burton was saying its good for the economy etc, funny how it isnt the same for infrastructure isnt it? This money that is to be "saved" must simply all end up outside of Ireland, I would love them to explain that one to me... :rolleyes:

strassenwo!f

In the above article, the Minister said that the project would be funded by the exchequer.

In the earlier plan for the metro north project, just as (belatedly) with the Dart underground plan, funding for construction was to have come from the private sector.

Obviously the exchequer ends up funding these projects anyway, in the long run, but it is interesting that it is envisaged by this government that this would be the case from the start, should the metro north eventually ever happen.

ofjames

Melbourne Airport has over 30m px and no rail link either, which is odd as the city has a pretty extensive tram and metro network

Sam Russell

80,000 passengers expected to transit through Dublin Airport today.

Busiest day before Christmas.

If only we had decent public transport access to the airport.

Zubeneschamali

Sam Russell wrote: »

If only we had decent public transport access to the airport.

Yeah, but then we'd need decent public transport to get us to the train station, too.

MJohnston

While I would agree that Dublin could always do with *better* public transport options for residents, imho I don't think getting to and from the airport as a visitor is actually all that bad. Copious coach options as well as a plethora of taxis, neither of which are all that expensive or indeed slow. The best thing Metro North could do for the airport, imo, is provide better connections for staff, second best might be a higher volume method of public transport compared to the existing options. Either way, I still think MN has very little importance to the airport.

Carawaystick

MJohnston wrote: »

The best thing Metro North could do for the airport, imo, is provide better connections for staff

Of course better PT for airport staff could easily be provided without MN. Just look at the blank on the map where Airport staff might live
https://www.transportforireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Dublin-Airport-City-Routes.pdf

Brian CivilEng

Carawaystick wrote: »

Of course better PT for airport staff could easily be provided without MN. Just look at the blank on the map where Airport staff might live
https://www.transportforireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Dublin-Airport-City-Routes.pdf

I work at the airport and live in Dublin 5. Quickest way for me to get there on PT is via town.

I pass by the portal to the port tunnel on the dart, then about 30mins later go through it on the 747.

MJohnston

Carawaystick wrote: »

Of course better PT for airport staff could easily be provided without MN. Just look at the blank on the map where Airport staff might live
https://www.transportforireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Dublin-Airport-City-Routes.pdf

My phrasing was intentional - "The best thing Metro North could do for the airport"- I think MN's biggest benefit is opening up more swathes of Dublin to be reasonable commuting suburbs for large amounts of people currently unable to find suitable accommodation.

OssianSmyth

The airport was expected to provide just 20% of the passengers for Metro North. The main purpose was to be a public transport backbone for Fingal and North Dublin city, linking with the interconnector and DART.

When the consent was obtained in 2010, the projected passenger numbers were based on the 2006 census along with some growth predictions from the CSO and the local authorities. But then, when the 2011 census was published after the Metro application had been submitted, it turned out that the population of Fingal had already grown 14% from 2006-2011. This happened despite the recession. Now all the projections are for further rapid employment and population growth in Dublin.

Yet the Metro will be scaled back by a third of its capacity and delayed a decade. The government admits that it will miss both its binding emissions reduction targets and its renewable energy in transport targets by 2020 and that 2030 will be even harder to meet. The fines could amount to billions. Meanwhile, if we chose to invest in public transport, Ireland can borrow 30 year money at 2%

The clear view of the national authorities is still that economic success should be measured in car sales and traffic volume on the M50. There has been an increase in cycling in Dublin and Cork since 2007 but the overall trend is still towards everyone driving everywhere. (the chart below is via Cian Ginty)



We don't have to build Metro North; we could do the interconnector or more onstreet Luas or provide the infrastructure to make cycling viable or even BRT but to do nothing but long fingering a scaled back plan shows a vacuum of vision and ambition.

Idbatterim

thank you OssianSmyth, you have taken the time to post, what I have meant to do for ages. I dont know if I posted it in this thread, but what is p**ssing me off the most about everything, is their outright barefaced lying to the public on this. Oh metro north and DU were based on more optimistic figures, figures for the m50 and dublin airport are well ahead of the boom, just as were are coming out of recession, what in gods name will things be like in another 5-10 years?!

Their lying about the figures is one issue! Issue number 2, there isnt the finance etc, the usual, absolute BS, we are 3 billion ahead of target on state finances for the year,god knows how many more they will have available over the next few years, just like the boom! The question is, this time round will it be squandered again, its looks likely!

FG are going a FF, with the benefit of hindsight this time! Both projects should be given the greenlight asap. If they are reluctant to do it for political reasons as they think it may lose voters outside dublin, fine, re-secure election and do it then!

I see zero point at this stage with proceeding with some new inferior BS revised metro north scheme, everything is in place, simply wait another year or two if needs be until we are well away from election, finances cant be used as an excuse and the shutting down of the city forces the issue...

Its funny the staggering sums that can be come up with when needs be, the welfare budget, bank guarantee, the finance issue is an outright lie. THEY decide how much is spent on what, THEY are deciding and have decided to continue to spend far too little on infrastructure!

Markcheese

Actually what I find odd is that they announce a scaled back budget metro north- and at the same time say it'll be the end of the next government before it 'll get started - its on the never-never anyway - why scale it back .
Politically I understand not announcing the major funding - coming up to an election every pressure group would say if you can spend on that then you should spend on our project/tax cut/hospital ect

thomasj

abitofacomedian wrote:

I work at the airport and live in Dublin 5. Quickest way for me to get there on PT is via town.

abitofacomedian wrote:

I pass by the portal to the port tunnel on the dart, then about 30mins later go through it on the 747.

it's redicilous really that half of the city (mainly northside) do not have a direct connection to the airport, but given the public transport infrastructure, im not surprised.

When i suggested the 17A run past donaghmede shopping centre and down the N32 past the Hilton and via the M1 or M50 to the airport it got a negative response.

My point was there are a lot of areas on that bus route that don't have a connection to the airport (not via city centre) that could do with this change.

Maybe not blanch or finglas but coolock, malahide road, kilbarrick and so on would have a connection currently missing. Plus while blanch and finglas may catch a 16 from the swords road. There may be tourists who may feel better to stay on the bus, rather than fear getting off at the wrong stop etc.

Carawaystick

Markcheese wrote: »

Actually what I find odd is that they announce a scaled back budget metro north- and at the same time say it'll be the end of the next government before it 'll get started - its on the never-never anyway - why scale it back .

I presume they had to change it as it had full planning permission. Changing gives more excuse to delay...

Deedsie

Carawaystick wrote: »

I presume they had to change it as it had full planning permission. Changing gives more excuse to delay...

If they decide to change it back again they should be booted out of government for gross incompetence

Ren2k7

Captain Chaos wrote: »

DART Underground was cancelled while the useless option will still go ahead. It will end up costing more in the long run trying to upgrade it's capacity in years after it opening.

DU on the other hand is a future proof scaling plan and intergrates with the existing system instead of another isolated transport system.

MN, even scaled back is far from being useless. OMN is better than non at all.

Schadenfreudia

Ren2k7 wrote: »

MN, even scaled back is far from being useless. OMN is better than non at all.

Are we now reduced to being content with public transport that is merely "better than none at all"? :mad:

I guess if we set the bar of our expectations low enough they will be met....

GerardKeating

Ren2k7 wrote: »

MN, even scaled back is far from being useless. OMN is better than non at all.

Nope, it is not better than nothing. If we get a substandard solution in place, it takes up the route that the proper solution would have used and will be a reason for not doing anything else.

strassenwo!f

There is a section on the NTA's website about the 'New Metro North', which seems to be largely Metro North without the O'Connell Bridge stations, but it doesn't yet seem to envisage an interchange with the DART.

Hopefully more will be forthcoming.

Schadenfreudia

strassenwo!f wrote: »

There is a section on the NTA's website about the 'New Metro North', which seems to be largely Metro North without the O'Connell Bridge stations, but it doesn't yet seem to envisage an interchange with the DART.

Yeah, well, you wouldn't want too much interconnection or too many options - Paddy would get confused :rolleyes:

dowlingm

Denver rail link is under construction.
Toronto (hit 40 million passengers in 2015) has a rail link now but because of pricing operates at very low loads.