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

LXFlyer

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Regardless of the "reason" and both of those reasons are crocks of **** no matter how anyone at the time could say otherwise.

The asterisks in my post on the last page are actually "fūck. And it was in relation to the luas plan as we have it now as opposed to how it was envisaged in the late 90s.

Well I think actually the two separate lines are going to work out better than the original plan. While I have serious misgivings about the actual physical route of the Green Line extension through the city centre, given the massive disruption it is causing and indeed will now continue cause to the city bus network, I think that the two lines as built will offer better connectivity.

The way they are now means all trams from Heuston link it with Connolly and Busaras, and the Green line will link north inner Dublin with the southside rather than a mish-mash.

BonnieSituation

lxflyer wrote: »

Well I think actually the two separate lines are going to work out better than the original plan. While I have serious misgivings about the actual physical route of the Green Line extension through the city centre, given the massive disruption it is causing and indeed will now continue cause to the city bus network, I think that the two lines as built will offer better connectivity.

The way they are now means all trams from Heuston link it with Connolly and Busaras, and the Green line will link north inner Dublin with the southside rather than a mish-mash.

The original route from Ballymun to Stephen's Green I'm on about.

strassenwo!f

murphaph wrote: »

Interesting that you favour bringing the line closer to a park, something you are fervently against in other threads....

Sorry, Murphaph, I would have replied to this sooner, but apparently I was banned:(.

In this case, I think it should be brought closer to a park because that would involve a shorter route which should reduce costs and possibly increase the catchment.

I say 'possibly' because I haven't done any detailed study of the figures for that area, but much of the immediate area around the currently proposed station is taken up by the hospital, the prison and Berkeley Road church and its adjoining park. There are, of course, many people working in the hospital and the prison, but most of the people present in the hospital and the prison are not regular users of public transport in that area.

In the other case you mention - and I hope you are talking about my views on the DART Underground project - building a circuitous route via a park certainly increases the length of the route, most probably increases the cost, and I believe certainly reduces the catchment.

In both cases, I am in favour of a shorter route, reduced cost and greater catchment. I see no inconsistency in my position on both of these routes.

strassenwo!f

D.L.R. wrote: »

Mountjoy square is less than 200m from the new tram line. Besides Mater is half built already, there's no way it'll be abandoned. Not in this economy.

I may be wrong here, but the emerging route for the metro in that area seems to me to involve a station at O'Connell Street, a station at the Mater and a station at Drumcondra.

The earlier plan, the one which got planning permission, involved the two O'Connell Bridge stations, a station at Parnell Square, a station at the Mater - which is half-built, as you say - and a station at Drumcondra.

Now, if you're going to get rid of the station at Parnell Square, which may well be the plan, it makes sense to replace it with something which is between the O'Connell Street station and Drumcondra.

The Mater would be a possibility, but it would involve a longer route than a route via Mountjoy Square or Temple Street, and would not be as close to Parnell Square.

The Mater station is half-built because, at the time of its construction, there was still an assumption that the Childrens' Hospital would be built there.

That, as we now know, is not going to happen.

Bray Head

BonnieSituation wrote: »

lxflyer wrote: »

Well I think actually the two separate lines are going to work out better than the original plan. While I have serious misgivings about the actual physical route of the Green Line extension through the city centre, given the massive disruption it is causing and indeed will now continue cause to the city bus network, I think that the two lines as built will offer better connectivity.

The way they are now means all trams from Heuston link it with Connolly and Busaras, and the Green line will link north inner Dublin with the southside rather than a mish-mash.

The original route from Ballymun to Stephen's Green I'm on about.

Is there a link to this route anywhere? (I'm too young to remember).

D.L.R.

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I may be wrong here, but the emerging route for the metro in that area seems to me to involve a station at O'Connell Street, a station at the Mater and a station at Drumcondra.

The earlier plan, the one which got planning permission, involved the two O'Connell Bridge stations, a station at Parnell Square, a station at the Mater - which is half-built, as you say - and a station at Drumcondra.

Now, if you're going to get rid of the station at Parnell Square, which may well be the plan, it makes sense to replace it with something which is between the O'Connell Street station and Drumcondra.

The Mater would be a possibility, but it would involve a longer route than a route via Mountjoy Square or Temple Street, and would not be as close to Parnell Square.

The Mater station is half-built because, at the time of its construction, there was still an assumption that the Childrens' Hospital would be built there.

That, as we now know, is not going to happen.

I'm not necessarily against it. Since Parnell has been deleted there's a case for reappraising the route between OCS and Drumcondra.

But my feeling is they'll not be reinventing the wheel here since a lot of the MN levy is tied up in these assets now, and untangling all that might be more trouble than its worth.

LeinsterDub

Getting back to Ballymun Rd. The road is 2 KM long from the bottom to just past the metro hotel. If they maintain 3 junctions at Glasnevin Ave, Ballymun and Pappins road they will need 900m (300m *3) or more in a trench to dive below the junctions . It seems like more effort to Duck and Dive so much for the sake of 1 KM

BonnieSituation

Bray Head wrote: »

Is there a link to this route anywhere? (I'm too young to remember).

It's definitely somewhere.

I'll have a root for ya after lunch.

MJohnston

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Getting back to Ballymun Rd. The road is 2 KM long from the bottom to just past the metro hotel. If they maintain 3 junctions at Glasnevin Ave, Ballymun and Pappins road they will need 900m (300m *3) or more in a trench to dive below the junctions . It seems like more effort to Duck and Dive so much for the sake of 1 KM

Why are you stopping the measurement at the Metro Hotel though?

It's actually about 3km from the bottom all the way to the M50 junction.

LeinsterDub

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Regardless of the "reason" and both of those reasons are crocks of **** no matter how anyone at the time could say otherwise.

The asterisks in my post on the last page are actually "fūck. And it was in relation to the luas plan as we have it now as opposed to how it was envisaged in the late 90s.

Removing trams was the prevaliling wisdom at the time in many countries not just Ireland but Big Auto may have had something to do with that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFhsrbtQObI

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

LeinsterDub

MJohnston wrote: »

Why are you stopping the measurement at the Metro Hotel though?

It's actually about 3km from the bottom all the way to the M50 junction.

Ok if you want to include up the m50 we'll need a other duck and dive at the Ikea junction up past the retail park so a other 400 m in a trench

P.S I forgot about one at Shangan Road also. More roller coaster than Metro

MJohnston

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Ok if you want to include up the m50 we'll need a other duck and dive at the Ikea junction up past the retail park so a other 400 m in a trench

P.S I forgot about one at Shangan Road also. More roller coaster than Metro

No reason for any duck and dives here for the Metro when it'd be far cheaper and easier to rearrange the traffic layout - there's lots and lots of space.

lucernarian

MJohnston wrote: »

No reason for any duck and dives here for the Metro when it'd be far cheaper and easier to rearrange the traffic layout - there's lots and lots of space.

I think a dive under Collins ave would be useful as a compromise. Not that much extra street space there. I'm concerned for how this will preclude any automated computer-controlled operations though. I feel we should be aiming for that. When there's talk of reducing platform lengths for a measly 77 million euro saving, it's probably just a fanciful notion on my part..

Dyr

MJohnston wrote: »

No reason for any duck and dives here for the Metro when it'd be far cheaper and easier to rearrange the traffic layout - there's lots and lots of space.

Lord jaysus he's back at it.

LeinsterDub

MJohnston wrote: »

No reason for any duck and dives here for the Metro when it'd be far cheaper and easier to rearrange the traffic layout - there's lots and lots of space.

1. This is a residential area
2. Traffic needs to be able cross the road
3. People need to be able to cross the road
4. MU is expecting to run every 3 to 5 minutes in one direction
5. MU is expected to going at about 80 kph

All of which means better than long mile road like grade separation and no time to sit around at lights

Or of course we can cheap out on it and have in running at 30 kph like the Luas around town, stopping for traffic lights but then it's not really a metro

MJohnston

I'm talking about rearranging lanes at the Ikea/Gullivers Retail Park and M50/Ballymun Road junction specifically. That said, it should also be possible for it to go elevated once it passes the Metro Hotel spot, no residents in that area to complain about it!

LeinsterDub

lucernarian wrote: »

I think a dive under Collins ave would be useful as a compromise. Not that much extra street space there. I'm concerned for how this will preclude any automated computer-controlled operations though. I feel we should be aiming for that. When there's talk of reducing platform lengths for a measly 77 million euro saving, it's probably just a fanciful notion on my part..

The leave us with 3 KM of road with 1 way for people and cars to cross!

LeinsterDub

MJohnston wrote: »

I'm talking about rearranging lanes at the Ikea/Gullivers Retail Park and M50/Ballymun Road junction specifically. That said, it should also be possible for it to go elevated once it passes the Metro Hotel spot, no residents in that area to complain about it!

How would this rearranging of lanes allow me to get from one side of the road to the other?

MJohnston

LeinsterDub wrote: »

How would this rearranging of lane allow me to get from one side of the road to the other?

How many pedestrians are walking in this area? Again, specifically I'm referring to the area between Santry Avenue and the M50.

Previous conversations about at-grade running along the rest of the Ballymun Road were only to compare to Bambi's suggestion of running at-grade via Dorset Street->Drumcondra->Griffith Avenue->Ballymun Road.

LeinsterDub

MJohnston wrote: »

How many pedestrians are walking in this area? Again, specifically I'm referring to the area between Santry Avenue and the M50.

Between Santry Avenue and the M50 the number is probably small enough but the issue there is you've 2 major junctions which have to be maintained

McAlban

MJohnston wrote: »

No reason for any duck and dives here for the Metro when it'd be far cheaper and easier to rearrange the traffic layout - there's lots and lots of space.

Not during rush hour, My Kid goes to Scoil Chaitriona getting down the R108 from J4 in the mornings is a nightmare, and I assume so in the opposite direction in the evenings.

jd

MJohnston wrote: »

I'm talking about rearranging lanes at the Ikea/Gullivers Retail Park and M50/Ballymun Road junction specifically. That said, it should also be possible for it to go elevated once it passes the Metro Hotel spot, no residents in that area to complain about it!

But that's the plan - elevated along the route of the old Ballymun road (between Northwood and the new Ballymun Road)

MJohnston

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Between Santry Avenue and the M50 the number is probably small enough but the issue there is you've 2 major junctions which have to be maintained

The St Margaret's Road/Ikea road already could do with re-alignment as the two unnecessary 90 degree corners are bizarre. Traffic coming from SMR/Ikea to north or southbound can be directed towards the M50 roundabout to get where they need to go. Traffic heading north from Gulliver's could use Santry Avenue via Northwood Ave, and traffic coming from the M50 roundabout wanting to access Ikea could go via Balbutcher Lane.

Here would be my crayon compromise if a full tunnel or elevated running through Ballymun itself are off the cards:

1. The aforementioned traffic adjustments between M50 and Santry Avenue with Metro North running
2. Duck and Dive just north of Santry Avenue and Shangan/Balcurris Road, returning to at-grade just south of Shangan. The natural incline between the Ikea junction and Santry Avenue should make the 'ducking' easier.
3. At-grade running between Shangan Road and Collins Avenue.
4. Duck and Dive under Collins Avenue. Due to the natural incline of the hill here, it would only involve 'ducking' on the northern end.
5. Undergrounding just before the Griffith Avenue 'triangle'.

Roads that would lose crossroad access:
+ Ballymun Road N/B to Hampstead Avenue (depending on where the underground happens, this might be retained).
+ St Canices Road to BR S/B and reverse - minor road redirected to Glasnevin Ave.
+ St Pappin Road to BR S/B and reverse - redirected to Glasnevin Ave.
+ BR N/B to Albert College Drive - redirected via Collins Ave.
+ Junction of Gateway Crescent/unknown road on the eastside of BR - alternative routes exist for these streets.
+ Aforementioned St Margaret's Road/Northwood junctions.

There's one alternative, which would be to go elevated just north of Santry Avenue (using the natural incline there should help this be feasible) towards the M50 which would retain the Ikea/Gullivers access junctions.

I'd probably also look at a possible pedestrian over/underpass near DCU.

Again, can't emphasise enough that I'd simply prefer full-underground to any of this. But if it's a choice between full-underground and no budget to build it, and this compromise and having the budget to build it - I'll take the latter anyday.

We have plenty of precedent for shutting minor cross-access roads and redirecting them to major junctions, specifically I'm thinking of the Luas along the Naas Road before the Long Mile Road.

Dyr

MJohnston wrote: »

How many pedestrians are walking in this area? Again, specifically I'm referring to the area between Santry Avenue and the M50.

Previous conversations about at-grade running along the rest of the Ballymun Road were only to compare to Bambi's suggestion of running at-grade via Dorset Street->Drumcondra->Griffith Avenue->Ballymun Road.

I suggested that if you think the ballymun road has loads of space you may run it down dorset street etc as well

Eventually you had to admit that what you meant was there would be a load of space once you got rid of the junctions/lanes/pedestrian areas.

Sam Russell

Bambi wrote: »

Lord jaysus he's back at it.

Mod: Can we have a higher level of debate here, that kind of post adds nothing.

jd

MJohnston wrote: »

The St Margaret's Road/Ikea road already could do with re-alignment as the two unnecessary 90 degree corners are bizarre.

I think there may be further development in the area so those 90 degree turns may become roundabouts. Not sure on this though

MJohnston

Bambi wrote: »

I suggested that if you think the ballymun road has loads of space you may run it down dorset street etc as well

Eventually you had to admit that what you meant was there would be a load of space once you got rid of the junctions/lanes/pedestrian areas.

Actually you were trying to suggest Dorset Street had the same amount of space as Ballymun Road. You just kept comparing one Google Streetview screenshot of the a junction on the BR with Dorset Street, and even then BR was still wider

MJohnston

jd wrote: »

I think there may be further development in the area so those 90 degree turns may become roundabouts. Not sure on this though

I'm certain that was the original plan (you can still see the orphaned junction exits on both turns) but you'd have to say, most traffic along there is going to Ikea, and it's a really awkward road for that purpose.

Idbatterim

When there's talk of reducing platform lengths for a measly 77 million euro saving, it's probably just a fanciful notion on my part...

This will be issue number 1 to be highlighted and shown for the sham it is, when it opens for public consultation etc. I am sure many here will agree and put pressure on this point...

Ill ask them why not make them 30m sure we can save another 77 million?! does that seem like a moronic proposal to them? about as moronic as their penny pinching proposal!

LeinsterDub

MJohnston wrote: »

1. The aforementioned traffic adjustments between M50 and Santry Avenue with Metro North running
2. Duck and Dive just north of Santry Avenue and Shangan/Balcurris Road, returning to at-grade just south of Shangan. The natural incline between the Ikea junction and Santry Avenue should make the 'ducking' easier.
3. At-grade running between Shangan Road and Collins Avenue.
4. Duck and Dive under Collins Avenue. Due to the natural incline of the hill here, it would only involve 'ducking' on the northern end.
5. Undergrounding just before the Griffith Avenue 'triangle'.

Roads that would lose crossroad access:
+ Ballymun Road N/B to Hampstead Avenue (depending on where the underground happens, this might be retained).
+ St Canices Road to BR S/B and reverse - minor road redirected to Glasnevin Ave.
+ St Pappin Road to BR S/B and reverse - redirected to Glasnevin Ave.
+ BR N/B to Albert College Drive - redirected via Collins Ave.
+ Junction of Gateway Crescent/unknown road on the eastside of BR - alternative routes exist for these streets.
+ Aforementioned St Margaret's Road/Northwood junctions.

.

Great one car crossing and maybe 2 pedestrian crossing over 3 k of road.