Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121462495#Comment_121462495

It's a lot more expensive to develop this land in comparison to building out towns with existing rail connections though. Rush and Lusk are at an ideal distance where you could cultivate vibrant communities with medium density resi and commercial. You can't just stuff resi here and there on random bits of brownfield sites around the city. It requires more planning than that, and won't have any hope of hitting the demand we're sitting.

Developing the greenfields along the M1 south of Swords would be fantastic and open up a serious amount of housing for the north. Same as developing around Hazelhatch, Sallins, Celbridge, and Adamstown.

gjim

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121458149#Comment_121458149

The problem with building lots of housing in the middle of green fields 15 or 20km from the city centre, is the same now as it was back in the 1970s. Yes it can be cheaper and quicker for developers to provide X number of housing "units" but what about the rest of what people expect to have access to, in order to have a fulfilling life? Shopping, restaurants, music venues, bars, cafes, sports and social clubs, flexible public transport links, schools, hospitals, cinemas, theatres, sports stadiums, colleges, etc. If you build close or within an already built up area, you get all these for "free". And in fact you actually support and strengthen these existing facilities.

Building in the middle of green fields has the appearance of offering better-value housing - the developer walks away, job done - but that's only because the costs of providing all the supporting facilities for a fulfilling life have been externalized. So inevitably, the area remains a soulless dormitory town for decades with no society/social aspect to speak of.

Even with access to a metro station, many will end up owning cars because of simple geometry - the reason it's seen as "cheap" in the first place is because the area is undeveloped - therefore undermining any case for providing other PT routes in other directions.

As Pete_Cavan says, this model of development is now generally seen as very poor planning. Dublin needs to densify from the centre out - not develop into a doughnut city with pockets of density around an outer "rim". There's absolutely no shortage of very low-value-add land use inside the m50 even ignoring actual dereliction, which while nothing like it was 30 years ago, is still remarkably prevalent.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121463771#Comment_121463771

You can do both, and I don't believe there is enough brownfields in the city which can fulfill current demand or even exceed it, given we likely need in the region of 40,000 units per year in the capital.

Idbatterim

so what is the genius idea these planners would have here? build low density housing, several km from the nearest metro stop, that is totally car dependant? The bad planning and sprawl is ridiculous, I also think large developments, should have their own basic facilities, than can be walked too. Like a grocery shop

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121464203#Comment_121464203

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFS8NKugso4

This maybe.

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121463707#Comment_121463707

But the existing brownfield has existing services. That’s a massive cost saving vs greenfield.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121464666#Comment_121464666

Within the canals there are about 60 hectares of Brownfield land available for redevelopment. Even at its most dense (akin to Docklands level density, which is likely unrealistic given how its broken up into smaller parcels of land) thats about 12,000 housing units.

If you broaden this to within the M50, we can perhaps do better. The council has selected 4 suitable sites which could reach densities that could buy us maybe 25,000 housing units, with another 3,000 homes spread across an additional 30 sites.

Lets set this beside what the ESRI says, where housing demand requires that we build around 28,000 homes per year, the vast majority of which need to be in, or close to the capital. Brownfield isn't going to get us out of this situation, and isn't a magic tap that we can turn on to meet current demands of the population. Which is why having a coherent plan of densifying new urban centres around future transport stops on greenfield sites is a cheap way of planning for the future, whilst working on existing densities.

Idbatterim

from a sustainability perspective, increasing density in existing serviced and established areas makes more sense, but it doesnt have to be either or...

in addition to brownfield, they need to stop permitting more office development, if residential is suitable for the site and in the docklands in particular, start redeveloping old end of life office, into residential...

this 28.000 a year figure is also spoof, we need probably 50,000 plus homes a year in the state, 28,000 for the dublin area alone would be about right...

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121464710#Comment_121464710

So according to this article:

https://m.independent.ie/regionals/herald/29-storey-skyscraper-at-heart-of-plan-for-500-apartments-by-liffey/38955444.html

they plan on building 500 apartments on an area of 1.5 hectares, which is 333 apartments per hectare.

If there’s 60 hectares available within the canals then that’s 60x333= 20k apartments.

TBF I don’t think they’ll achieve anywhere near this kind of density within the canals as there’ll be far too many objections and probably infrastructure constraints (water, electricity, sewage, crèche, school places, etc etc).

cgcsb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121463707#Comment_121463707

This seems to be a self perpetuating myth. I'm not sure what fuels it to be honest. The truth is the cost of building a new dormatory town, let's say in North County Dublin, would exceed the cost of providing the same accommodation units within the M50, be it on multiple sites across the city or one site. It would actually be more expensive by a factor of multiples.

You're talking about building new HV, electricity sub stations, electricity transmission across great distance, a new public sewer network, a new street network, new street lighting, a new high speed broadband network, providing new roads, cycle routes, parks etc. This may have been cheaper in the 70s because the developer quite simply socialised these costs and trousered the profits, the houses were built and the politician pals of the developers promised services later.it doesn't work that way anymore

A similar development in the urban area would simply utilise existing spare capacity and contribute a small % to the upgrade of existing services. The only thing that makes the urban area more expensive to develop is the land value.

As for "stuffing resi anywhere" that's what dormitory towns are, resi and little else stuffed somewhere. It's a failed development model that increases commute distances. A brownfield site in Drumcondra is not stuffing resi anywhere.

Podge_irl

This conversation started on the back of a discussion around an extension of ML to Rush and Lusk.

At the end of the day, if this happens, the land will 100% be developed.There is no point suggesting whether it is a good idea or not, it would happen.

JohnnyChimpo

this thread has become more derailed than MetroNorth

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we get back on track.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121462495#Comment_121462495

A better example is Dunsink. Elm Green golf course could be relocated to the old dump site and the golf course used for development, together with surrounding lands. With the former dump turned into parkland and golf course, plenty of amenity available.

M50 next door and the Navan Road Parkway train station on Dart+ West nearby. Fingal County Council have a plan but don't see anything happening for ten years, this could be accelerated. A lot of it state-owned land as well.

Idbatterim

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-traffic-congestion-costs-to-increase-four-fold-to-over-e1-5bn-by-2040-1562025.html#:~:text=The%20economic%20cost%20of%20congestion,by%20the%20Department%20of%20Transport.

Dublin traffic congestion costs to increase four-fold to over €1.5bn by 2040 (breakingnews.ie)

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-style/2023/12/09/commuting-is-back-when-youre-leaving-at-7am-and-coming-home-at-7pm-youre-missing-your-kids-growing-up/

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/editorials/2023/12/08/the-irish-times-view-on-cso-commuter-data-time-to-end-the-national-gridlock/

cgcsb

I think in the new year ill invest in an ebike and abandon Dublin Bus entirely, its become completely unusable, mad 20 minute + gaps on main corridors in rush hour and then full bus passes you by. If You can get on you might be lucky and get one of the buses that still have single door operation so you can battle your way up to the front and probably miss your stop if you're not a pro rugby player.

Hotblack Desiato

Dublin Bus is what encouraged me to take up motorcycling 😀 nearly 30 years now and it's still the best way by far to get around the city.

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/dublin/2023/12/11/dublins-pedestrian-plans-to-be-reassessed-following-city-riots/

This is an indictment of DCC flooding the city center with social housing, homeless hostels and addiction clinics.

I have said for some time that a barrier less metro would be insane in Dublin. I stand by that. I think this has to be a barriered line or you're asking for trouble.

Think the red luas line only worse and underground.

There are things we just can not have unfortunately.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121478234#Comment_121478234

20 minute gaps! We would dream of such a high quality and frequent service down in Cork City!

Im being serious, my parents bus route in Cork is supposed to be every 20 minutes, but not unusual to have to wait an hour!

Not that I’m defending 20 minutes in Dublin, that definitely isn’t good enough, but just a reminder how much worse things are in the rest of the country.

Ive always said, Dublin City Bus services can depending on where you live, be really good and useable or be terrible.

Where I live, it is great, but that is because the stop I use is served by half a dozen core services and now I’ve even have great new orbital and 24/7 service that has really opened up the city to someone who doesn’t have a car.

That isn’t to boast about my service, but more to show that buses can work well, if the frequency is there along with good bus lanes.

Having said all that, electric bikes are fantastic and a great investment. I don’t have one, but gotten the chance a few times to use ne and you really bomb along. Check out if the bike to work scheme is available to you, but even if it isn’t Immsure it will pay for itself quickly. Just make sure to get really good bike locks like the Hiplock D1000 or Litelok X3 if you are going to be locking it outside (generally avoid if you can). Of course there are folding bikes too.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121481516#Comment_121481516

That's one of the most brain dead, stupidest articles that I've ever seen. Like knuckle dragging neanderthal stuff.

Because of a riot that happened on a road with cars, taxis, buses and Luas on it, we should stop plans for pedestrianisation? Jesus wept. Like, it's actually astonishing how incredibly stupid that is.

cgcsb

College Green is chockers with pedestrians on an almost 24hr basis, pedestrianisation will likely attract further pedestrian traffic as has been demonstrated the world over. People driving past in cars is not good passive surveillance, you don't notice much whizzing by in a car.

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121481844#Comment_121481844

Not becuase of just a riot It's DCC acknowledging that anti-social behaviour is so bad in the city center that they effectively want to stop full pedestrianisation on safety grounds.

I agree with that myself but what annoys me is that you would think Dublin City Council has no responsibility whatsoever for the safety issues.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121482545#Comment_121482545

Zero evidence that cars and taxis provide "passive surveillance". Studies done on the LTNs in England have shown a noticeable reduction in all types* of crime in those areas.

It is stupidity. Pure status quoism.

*One type of crime did indeed increase: bike thefts

ArcadiaJunction

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121481844#Comment_121481844

it is all part of the agenda by the Irish Establishment to invent a Far Right danger that does not exist. It is imperative for the politicans to use all at their disposal to hide their failings and incompetence behind 'that baddy Far Right are to blame!!!'

Having said that, this article in the Irish Times is a monumental lowpoint. Right up there with the infamous Dublin Rail Plan one in the Indo in 1973 claiming the DART would lead to New York murder rates.

We really have the worst jounalists/editors on the planet in this country.

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121482172#Comment_121482172

100%.

It will be busy with pedestrians for 20 hours a day at least.

It will be busy with buses and trams on one end for 18 hours a day.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121481516#Comment_121481516

Damn this post reeks of classism. Tell us what you really think about poor people.

Kermit.de.frog

It's not about poverty. It's about the city center being over run with scumbags and addicts.

Not exactly breaking news, is it?

A lot of the problems are due to over concentration of social issues in a relatively small area.

My point is that we can keep the city center like that but that limits what we can do because the safety and well being of the general public have to be taken in to account.

That's particularly relevant to public transport.

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121483806#Comment_121483806

I didn't realise the Metro would be barrierless.

Long term we need to spread out social housing and homeless and addiction services.

For example the North east inner city should be a very desirable place to live but I'd actually be afraid just walking there and I'm a grown man. I don't mean Talbot st but Sheriff St area.

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121483857#Comment_121483857

As far as I know they want the metro to be barrier free. That might be ok at St Stephen's Green but not at O'Connell Street. I don't think it's workable. You'll have the exact same problems as the red line Luas which a lot of people try to avoid if they can help it.

If they are serious they need to really address the issues as some over arching plan but that will take a long time.

For now I don't think a barrierless metro is workable or desirable. I think it will be trouble from week one.

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121483917#Comment_121483917

Yeah I don't see the reason for it.

Is that common for modern Metros?

Most Metros I've used have barriers.