Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

Would the same things be sorted for Wynn's Hotel in Abbey St very soon?

The hotel management made a submission on the seventh day of the ML oral hearing recently that their advance hotel bookings from guests would be severely affected if the TBM was drilling underneath the hotel for 2 weeks. They also said to TII that the building is a protected structure and has been operating for 170 years. When the Luas was built outside the hotel; they said they put in triple glazed windows into the building when the Luas Red Line went into service outside the building.

TII had carried out an assessment and a report on their concerns about the issues regarding the hotel. TII concluded that the noise coming from underneath the building would not cause to too much disruption to the hotel's business to guests when ML officially gets the RO cleared from ABP.

The noise distruption according to TII would reach it's peak in two or three days.

I personally don't think that is a bad outcome for any of the staff or guests who are in the hotel.

It would be great to know that this issues coming from Wynn's will be cleared up very soon.

Imagine even considering an objection to the Metrolink on the basis of two weeks of disruption to a hotel compared to providing a major infrastructural project which will benefit so many people in the city for potentially hundreds of years to come.

Not only that, but you can be sure they'll be using the 'a quick metrolink journey from airport to our door' to entice tourists in the future.

But given how the hotel sector has behaved in the last 2 years, I'm not surprised by their short-sightedness.

Equally, it could be said, what were Dublin City Council doing, granting premission without considering that the building was over the metro route.

they were made aware of it Submission No. 129 long before the oral hearing.

https://downloads.metrolink.ie/documentsro/MetroLink%20RO%20Statutory%20Consultation%205.2%20Pt%201%20of%202%20-%20TII%20Response%20to%20Submissions%20001%20to%20140.pdf

but TII did the same thing they have done to anyone who points out that the metrolink will cause damage and responded that the damage would be 'Slight/Very Slight damage''.

TII did not bothering to read the plans for the Cadenza Building given to them by Irish Life or check when responding and just gave a default reply that everything was fine, turns out they had done a damage assessment on a building that was already knocked down, that a new building had been granted planning in 2018 and was well under construction when the damage assessment was meant to be done. turned out the building foundation anchor bolts would have been 1 meter inside the tunnel.

they made the same mistake with another building that they reviewed for damage even tho the building had been demolished in 2013 long before there was a metrolink plan.

The company said the impact assessment described Aercap House as a "five-storey building without a basement" and said "that is a better description of the previous building which was Canada House", as Aercap House is a "six-storey building with a two-storey basement and a piled perimeter wall".

it's interesting that, the two buildings with proven large dumb mistakes were at the bottom of the RTE article when they were first on in the morning.

there is mistakes all over the RO, TII won't admit any error unless someone tracks down all the evidence and 100% proves it, any point raised is dismissed with don't worry. we will do another damage assessment (phase 3) after TII have planning approved and someone can't object and will then tell the person what damage will actually happen to them, and if it's cost a lot to repair you need to sue them in court to get damages, so they need to wait 9 years till it's finished for all damage to be done then take them to court and good luck if that does not take another 5-7 years

It is correct, having read and studied the full RO, there is a lot of mistakes. incorrect sound data modeling, incorrect damage data, wrong building types being listed, incorrect heights, buildings that are to be demolished being using in the sound models 2-3 years after there date of removal this affects what level of sound is received by the now exposed buildings, buildings that are on the RPS "record of protected structures" being classified as modern buildings with modern foundations and so being shown has getting less damage than they will, the wrong sound levels being used for construction. I could go on for pages and pages.

I understand the huge task it takes in making the RO, and it's understandable that there will be some errors but the errors can change peoples lives for the worse so denying they exist or TII just giving generic responses to people and not double checking the work done by the lowest bidder is not an acceptable response.

There was no miscommunication they did not do there job. Canada House was demolished in 2014, how in 2020 can someone be writing a damage report and describe a building that was gone 6 years before? and it's not small changes one was a 5 story building the other a 6 story building with two basement floors an important point if your going to tunnel under it.

the other building had been granted planning in 2018 when Metrolink was only in the "Emerging Preferred Route" stage in May 2018 without fixed plans.

the damage report for the "Cadenza" building was produced in 2020 when the place was a hole in the ground and described the old building which had been knocked down. the only way that happens is if your just using google street view and not even bothering to do a simple walk around the place your planning to build a 10 billion euro subway.

and you go to the conclusion that it's a fault of DCC, TII have had 6 years to look at the route and see what is there and was built, it's easy to check the planning web site. and they failed to do that simple check. TII have a policy of deny everything and anyone not totally in favor of it is a a NIMBY

everyone wants good transport links like the metrolink built but that does not meant that when it's build peoples buildings being damages or their houses being made uninhabitable for 9 years should be swept under the rug

There's a big possible red flag there in the RTÉ News article about the Candenza Building in Earlsfort Terrace.

I think it was making some errors about quotes from officials working for Transport Infrastructure Ireland. The article was misquoting the TII officials in error as TFI officials which would be the people who work for Transport for Ireland. TFI is the consumer brand of the National Transport Authority. They are a completely separate agency as opposed to TII who are the agency responsible for applying to build ML under their RO.

Are the officials who are doing the oral hearings for those impacted by ML are being conducted from TII & ABP?

Do Transport for Ireland have any officials present at these oral hearings for ML?

Assuming thats from the dartmouth square nimbys? If so its absolute horseshit they arent digging in the same place for the whole construction phase

Yeah it's bizarre. A metro to bring guests directly from Dublin Airport to their hotel and all they can do is complain.

Horseshit? if it is then it's from the houses mouth TII

"A5.2 Construction programme Including Tunnel Elements.pdf"

https://downloads.metrolink.ie/documentsro/A5.2%20Construction%20programme%20Including%20Tunnel%20Elements.pdf

there is 45,000 m3 of rock to be removed, drilling and 27 tons of explosives needed to blow it up. it's 100 feet deep through 70 feet of rock. that's going to take 4-5 years of building as per TII. and the TBM and the extra tunnels are still not built they come after the station box is built another 6-12 months of 24/7 shift work by the tunnel guys to build them. and then there is 3 years of 24/7 fitting out of the station. all of this is in the Railway Order if anyone bothered to read it, no need to make it up.

That is the entire construction timeline for each station + duration of logistics hubs etc that apply.

It does not mean digging duration, and it certainly does not mean making houses uninhabitable. Can you elaborate on how houses are to be made uninhabitable for 9 years?