Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

Options
1187189191192193

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭shoegirl


    He's not the only person peddling the ridiculous, amateurish "Newtown Plan." ACRA and Dublin Chamber push it too. And it is properly insane. The guy's a retired bus driver, that's his level of "expertise." And I'd hazard a guess this "solution" is one designed down the pub with the likes of McCarthy and McDonald on the back of a serviette.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,132 ✭✭✭gjim


    Reminds me, indirectly, of that daft McGuckian plan for Dublin from a few decades back which similarly attracted the support of the gullible and ignorant (of how public transport is supposed to work), the odd opposition politician and a few NGO type bodies which should have known better.

    I don't recall all of the details but McGuckian's "genius" was to ignore conventional radial/orbital thinking about public transport routes - I mean who wants to travel in a boring straight line on their daily commute? Instead, Dublin was to be the proud host of the world's first PT system designed around a figure-of-8 rail loop.

    Like our man above, he had no engineering background at all.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,626 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Mod: Can we forget the Newtown attempts at scrapping this plan to replace this project with an ex-bus driver's vision of public transport service.

    If you must discuss this nonsense, do it in another thread or, better still, another forum



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,013 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    The way the article is written, it might have been Mr. Truscott from John Laing who said "from the city to Malahide". So maybe not the journalist's fault, but it should have been corrected by the journalist anyway.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Citizen  Six


    I like the sound of this figure 8 loop idea. Lets resurrect that.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,626 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    @Citizen Six

    Mod: You can resurrect it anywhere you like but not here, and preferably in another forum altogether.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,013 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Right at the end of the article:

    "it is expected that a decision on planning permission will be granted within the next 6 months."

    I'd need a better source than Dublin People, but that's good news nonetheless.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,318 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox




  • Registered Users Posts: 251 ✭✭Ronald Binge Redux


    Brian Guckian. At least have the decency to get his name right if you are going to insult him.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,632 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,638 ✭✭✭Qrt


    I'm just realised that there is only one planned P+R planned for all of the route, seems like one on the M50 at Northwood or Dardistown is a missed opportunity. I'm sure many from the M2/M3 would use a P+R to get into town, but driving all the way to north of Swords is a long way out.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,132 ✭✭✭gjim


    I didn't know he had passed away. RIP.

    Btw, I said his plan was daft not that he was daft. There's a difference - I don't believe ideas deserve decency - people do.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40 jumpinsheep


    Finally a clearer rendering of what can potentially be built in place of College Gate and Ashford house, than the screenshot I took from their video in Vimeo a while ago:

    Someone will profit big time with those suggested developments in the rendering, once existing building are CPO'ed; TII should share more details about what the plan is, as they'll most likely profit as well (as I understood that TII will become the owner of the CPO'ed land).

    Strange that only one of those two building is high rise, the one of the left looks like 10 storeys and College Gate is 6



  • Registered Users Posts: 676 ✭✭✭spillit67


    Any logic to holding that space in anticipation of further Metro lines and / or the DART+ Tunnel?



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,318 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Yet another letter to the editor about Metrolink, with loads of misconceptions about how rail operates.

    Apparently we should cancel Metrolink because it's not interoperable with Luas or Dart… Ironically, that's something that I'd consider a plus point 😂



  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    MetroLink, if built, will be not be part of a network, as it will be completely separate to any other rail-based service

    I hate this nonsense. If Metrolink used the same trams as the Luas does but everything else was the same, why would that make it a network? It is such a stupid think to criticise it for.

    He says we need to copy Zurich and have more on street trams. I agree we need more Luas and more of everything really but the on street running of the Luas absolutely kills it. It slows it down massively at points. The Metro will be quicker and higher capacity than an on street Luas version of it.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,318 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    It's a "common sense" opinion that shows how zero to a little knowledge can be a disaster. Same with Duncan Stewart, it sounds common sense that the Dart should be able to go to the airport, but that kind of idea requires ignorance of all the restraints and problems that it'd cause and run into.

    It's frustrating to hear this kind of stuff over and over, while TII and the NTA sit passively. They really should have a quick FAQ page that deals with all of this in simple, laymans terms: "Yes, we can easily run the dart out to Airport, but due to constraints on the line from HJ to Connolly, we wouldn't be able to run a useful service on it, and in fact it'd make the problem worse for every other service on that line."



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,626 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Or even a Luas version of Metrolink underground.

    This is just plain daft. The Luas is not interoperable with buses, coaches, cars, airplanes, or TVG trains or anything.

    Luas is not even interoperable with the other Luas line except for a maintenance link that requires trams to change direction so cannot carry passengers.

    What a plonker.



  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    To be honest the FAQ would not make a difference. These eejits will still throw out this rubbish. The papers should know what they are doing and not publish absolute nonsense like this. If he was saying we should scrap Metrolink and replace it with a load of magic carpets that will fly us to our destination, they wouldn't publish it.



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,655 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    The author of the article conveniently forgot to mention that Zurich has 3 x S-Bahn tunnels running under the city that basically act as a form of Metro in the city center, which is the backbone of the network, which the tram lines then interchange with.

    Basically Metrolink will play the same part for us. A core backbone that will basically link all public transport in Dublin, every DART line, Luas line and all the core bus routes.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,318 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    The FAQ wouldn't be to stop people from posting shite opinions, it'd be something for people like us to point them to without having to redo all the research each time.

    Agree though, it wouldn't stop people, and even when you point it out to them, some would still continue posting shite.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,870 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    And would continue writing tosh in their newspaper columns.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,318 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    I checked the letters page from the Irish Times today, as I knew that someone would write in to complain about that idiotic letter, and I was not disappointed.

    The first letter points out that interoperable and interchange are basically the same thing, while the second letter does much the same thing, but is from someone in Tralee. Tralee might be very, very far from Metrolink, but it is indicative of the level of support for this around the country. Despite what you might think from reading the papers, or listening to politicians, the vast majority of people around Ireland are of the "just get on with it FFS" opinion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,209 ✭✭✭plodder


    Also, the complaints of …

    "Only in Ireland, would they open a metro to the airport from a suburb but not the city centre …"



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    Is there any word on when the public consultation will reopen? It seems to have gone quiet since ABP made its announcement back in March.

    Time is ticking on. I was hoping the reopening would be a quick process with a tight turnaround. It won't be this side of the summer now by the looks of it given the lack of additional information.

    I fear it will be much later in the year with the decision on the Railway Order being pushed well into 2025 as a result. Will we even have a decision by this time next year?

    The longer the time between the closing of the previous consultation and it’s reopening the greater the likelihood that the same arguments will be rehashed over and over, imho. It's a certainty that there will be a General Election in the mix now too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 26 OisinCooke


    While I agree that this is a load of rubbish, I do think the point is well made about the Luas network still not being a network - the Green and Red Lines were not ‘linked’ in 2017, they merely cross each other and still involve a large walk to change trains. The bullets should have been bitten to run both lines of the Green Line up O’Connell St (also would have been far better than splitting the lines, even without a cross-platform connection) and have a new interconnecting O’Connell stop (replacing Abbey Street) where the tracks meet at right angles at the junction of O’Connell and Abbey Streets.

    And as much as I am for Metrolink and do agree that it just needs to be built and will be transformative for Dublin and even the whole country, I’ve said it before and will say it again that not having the O’Connell stop connect with the Red Line and Green Line at the Abbey/O’Connell/Marlborough stops was a huge mistake and should have been caught and corrected.

    Overall though the reasons above and the ones mentioned in that article are not reasons to scrap the project by any means. It will be 100 times faster and more effective than any new Luas line for North Dublin and while a Luas network would be great (and will still happen slowly with projects like Luas Lucan and Luas Knocklyon, a metro line will open up the possibility for a Metro Network which would be faaaar better and more transformative than a Luas network ever could be.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,441 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    You can't have a stop actually on the junction - it would completely block the other line and the road for far too long. It would make no sense. It is much better set up as is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,632 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    I don't really think this is as huge a problem as you make out, honestly the main problem with the current configuration is the same old story — pedestrians aren't given any priority on Dublin streets so it takes twice as long to interchange as it should given the distance.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,632 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    But that's a different topic, and I've shamed myself by indulging in this digression!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 26 OisinCooke


    Sorry yes I should have made that a little clearer, I’ll attach a very crude graph of what I meant.

    (it is very crude but it would fit along the junction without blocking the roads on either street)


    And yes in fairness @MJohnston you’re right it isn’t a huge issue but it would have been nice if the once-in-a-few-generations transport project that we did linked all of the cities existing transport together but ultimately yes, with better pedestrian priority (I do believe O’Connell Street will eventually need to be pedestrianised) it will not be a huge problem. Still though with a walking distance between the two stops of 450 metres, it would have been nice if the extra effort had been made to link Metrolink and the Red Line. It’s actually quicker (and would feel quicker too) to walk to the Tara stop from Abbey Street stop with this plan



Advertisement