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 (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Options
1…7273757778…314

Comments

  • Options
    #2222
    donvito99
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    Is it just me or is the Metro Dublin concept that is mentioned in the article one which includes DART? It talks about Pearse, Docklands etc. Then it talks about 53km, 130million passengers a year. DART is longer than that, but it would seem that to reach those passenger numbers DART would need to be included perhaps.


  • Options
    #2223
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Yes; it's an incredibly confusing article.


  • Options
    #2224
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,409 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Does it include the Phoenix Park Tunnel by any chance?


  • Options
    #2225
    golfwallah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭golfwallah


    I think we need to remember that there are elections going on at the moment.

    So, good news is called for but better keep it vague as you might be asked to deliver on it someday!


  • Options
    #2226
    Copyerselveson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 299 ✭✭Copyerselveson


    golfwallah wrote: »
    I think we need to remember that there are elections going on at the moment.

    So, good news is called for but better keep it vague as you might be asked to deliver on it someday!

    BRT is better than nothing on the Swords-Airport-City Centre route but are the NTA are really thinking BRT is a permanent replacement for a rail based option? That's the impression I got from reading that article.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2227
    golfwallah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭golfwallah


    Copyerselveson wrote: »
    BRT is better than nothing on the Swords-Airport-City Centre route but are the NTA are really thinking BRT is a permanent replacement for a rail based option? That's the impression I got from reading that article.

    BRT, NTA?

    Some people will instantly understand what these acronyms mean but not everyone.

    Would help, I feel, with quick understanding if full names were used, at least, with first reference to these organisations.

    Just a thought - no offence meant!


  • Options
    #2228
    Banjoxed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,844 ✭✭✭Banjoxed


    golfwallah wrote: »
    BRT, NTA?

    Some people will instantly understand what these acronyms mean but not everyone.

    Would help, I feel, with quick understanding if full names were used, at least, with first reference to these organisations.

    Just a thought - no offence meant!

    They have been used extensively in the media and on this board for many years, but for complete clarity and to save Googling them or the inconvenience of reading upthread,

    BRT is "Bus Rapid Transit"

    NTA is the National Transport Authority.

    A quick google will advise what these are.


  • Options
    #2229
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I'm not exactly sure what I just read. Is the Rabbit guy that nutter who said he could build us a monorail for a tenner(or something along those lines)??

    All that see that is coming from a sane source is: the minister said the NTA is looking at options for an airport rail link. Well of course it is, the RPA has indeed already gotten a railway order for metro.

    Reading between the lines, I guess that Varadkar will consider different route options with a view to making savings. That means that some supplementary planning application will have to be made to take the alterations into account.

    I suspect that the cut and cover tunnel along Ballymun Rd. is up for the chop to be replaced by a viaduct structure. This was the original plan which was overturned by the Ballymun residents association when they made phone calls to Bertie's office about the viaduct 'attracting anti social behaviour'. As such elevated running was not even considered my the RPA.


  • Options
    #2230
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,833 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I'm not exactly sure what I just read. Is the Rabbit guy that nutter who said he could build us a monorail for a tenner(or something along those lines)??

    Yes. Serial fantasist who someone managed to con the media last year in to thinking he had some backing. When he didn't.


  • Options
    #2231
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I think it's irresponsible of the media to conflate the official metro north project with the ramblings of a random lunatic. The man on the street could be forgiven for thinking the metro north project was to connect both Pearse and Docklands to the airport. As a side note, why are rambling lunatics given such ample media air time?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2232
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,833 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I think it's irresponsible of the media to conflate the official metro north project with the ramblings of a random lunatic. The man on the street could be forgiven for thinking the metro north project was to connect both Pearse and Docklands to the airport. As a side note, why are rambling lunatics given such ample media air time?

    Because elections aside, its a bloody slow news week. Just you wait till the moratorium kicks in :eek:


  • Options
    #2233
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I suspect that the cut and cover tunnel along Ballymun Rd. is up for the chop to be replaced by a viaduct structure. This was the original plan which was overturned by the Ballymun residents association when they made phone calls to Bertie's office about the viaduct 'attracting anti social behaviour'. As such elevated running was not even considered my the RPA.

    The RPA went into some detail on the options and outlined them publicly at the time. This was all part if the planning process.

    A viaduct is really not going to happen.


  • Options
    #2234
    Jack Noble
    Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭Jack Noble


    Utter nonsense from The Herald - linking something Leo Varadkar said in a speech at the beginning of April with Cormac Rabbitt's fantasy crayonomics and giving the impression they are one and the same.

    And populist politicians and the public will fall for this oul guff like they always do.

    On April 4, 2014, Leo Varadkar told the Transport Ireland conference in Dublin:
    The NTA is also proposing a technical consultancy to assess the long term transport requirements of the North Dublin/Fingal corridor, extending from Finglas to Malahide and including Dublin Airport and Swords. This review will examine existing proposals as well as other options for a rail-based transport solution to meet the area's needs.

    http://www.dttas.ie/speeches/2014/speech-minister-transport-tourism-sport-leo-varadkar-transport-ireland-conference-2014

    The NTA 'study' will simply tell us what we already know - BRT and Luas don't have the capacity to serve the city centre-airport-Swords corridor in the medium to long-term, and any 'rail-based transport solution' will be Metro North. And that will come in at circa €3bn

    That NTA study has nothing to do with Rabbitt's Metro Dublin fantasy - nor will it. And the sooner people grasp that, the better.


  • Options
    #2235
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,277 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    monument wrote: »
    The RPA went into some detail on the options and outlined them publicly at the time. This was all part if the planning process.

    A viaduct is really not going to happen.

    The viaduct didn't get a mention in the EIS.


  • Options
    #2236
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,843 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    by the time this thing is built, the airport will be well over 30,000,000 plus god knows how many more housing units are going to have to be developed. How much time and money is going to be wasted debating other half assed ideas?!


  • Options
    #2237
    maninasia
    Registered Users Posts: 4,616 ✭✭✭maninasia


    The British have no problem receiving Chinese funding. The Chinese see a blue chip solid investment which absorbs their excess funds. Everybody wins.
    The state-owned China Development Bank wants to become a significant backer of Britain's major infrastructure projects, the BBC has learned.

    China Development Bank (CDB) is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Chinese government.

    The BBC understands that it wants to directly fund two project areas in the UK - High Speed 2 and the next generation of nuclear power stations.

    Get your fingers out of your arses and go get the funding! There's money sloshing around the world right now.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27882954


  • Options
    #2238
    fly_agaric
    Registered Users Posts: 4,809 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    maninasia wrote: »
    The British have no problem receiving Chinese funding. The Chinese see a blue chip solid investment which absorbs their excess funds. Everybody wins.



    Get your fingers out of your arses and go get the funding! There's money sloshing around the world right now.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27882954

    I don't think we'd need to go as far as China.
    I'm sure EU would fund it if a good case were made.
    My "conspiracy" theory as to why it has not happened is optics of the govt. (edit being seen to spend) vast sums on such infrastructure while austerity budgets are still being passed.
    Most people in the country beyond the M50 (if they think about issue at all) either do not believe Dublin needs it or don't care if it does. They would punish the politicians if any metro [and or "interconnector"] were built while the economy is still in the crapper and the country is heavily in debt no matter where funding comes from.


  • Options
    #2239
    strassenwo!f
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    maninasia wrote: »
    The British have no problem receiving Chinese funding. The Chinese see a blue chip solid investment which absorbs their excess funds. Everybody wins.



    Get your fingers out of your arses and go get the funding! There's money sloshing around the world right now.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27882954

    These Chinese investors might certainly welcome a planning regime in which the highest planning authority in the land (An Bord Pleanala) approves the metro station proposed at O'Connell Bridge (i.e. an eight(8)-level non-interchange station), without question.


  • Options
    #2240
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,409 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    fly_agaric wrote: »
    I don't think we'd need to go as far as China.
    I'm sure EU would fund it if a good case were made.
    My "conspiracy" theory as to why it has not happened is optics of the govt. (edit being seen to spend) vast sums on such infrastructure while austerity budgets are still being passed.
    Most people in the country beyond the M50 (if they think about issue at all) either do not believe Dublin needs it or don't care if it does. They would punish the politicians if any metro [and or "interconnector"] were built while the economy is still in the crapper and the country is heavily in debt no matter where funding comes from.

    While begrudgery is alive and well, such projects would be a way of creating jobs which is the route out of austerity.


  • Options
    #2241
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,254 ✭✭✭markpb


    strassenwo!f wrote: »
    These Chinese investors might certainly welcome a planning regime in which the highest planning authority in the land (An Bord Pleanala) approves the metro station proposed at O'Connell Bridge (i.e. an eight(8)-level non-interchange station), without question.


    I'm sure if we ever let a foreign company build and operate our metro, you'll be the first person they call for consultancy services :-)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2242
    MrMorooka
    Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭MrMorooka


    Think I heard something on the radio today about the DAA supporting MN over the other options in the Fingal transport consultation?


  • Options
    #2243
    donvito99
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    MrMorooka wrote: »
    Think I heard something on the radio today about the DAA supporting MN over the other options in the Fingal transport consultation?

    Sense prevailing at the DAA.

    I've heard Irish Rail are proposing that the 2nd runway be built in Inchicore. You know, train from terminals, under the Phoenix Park, etc etc.


  • Options
    #2244
    MrMorooka
    Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭MrMorooka


    In fairness I can't seem to find anything online about it, so take it with a pinch of salt.


  • Options
    #2245
    Panda_Turtle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 304 ✭✭Panda_Turtle


    About time this metro north was built. Along with metro west which should extend to dundrum and link up with my proposed city-dundrum-bray southern metro line. Dont forget about the eastern bypass.

    Followed by a metro link direct from the city to tallaght, and a southern metro route via Dundrum to Bray.

    Relax the planning laws to allow high density tall buildings, contain urban sprawl, replant trees in the countryside.

    A tunnel to the UK by 2050.


  • Options
    #2246
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Panda_Turtle wrote: »
    A tunnel to the UK by 2050.
    There is already a Railway and a HQDC to the UK... I'm not sure what benefit a tunnel would bring.


  • Options
    #2247
    MrMorooka
    Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭MrMorooka


    whatever.. back on topic, I found a reference :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=590n0m6gG2U#t=74

    Shame I can't find a better clip or online reference- it's mostly Fianna Fail online sources patting a senator on the back for bringing this up to the newly appointed DAA chief.


  • Options
    #2248
    Banjoxed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,844 ✭✭✭Banjoxed


    MrMorooka wrote: »
    whatever.. back on topic, I found a reference :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=590n0m6gG2U#t=74

    Shame I can't find a better clip or online reference- it's mostly Fianna Fail online sources patting a senator on the back for bringing this up to the newly appointed DAA chief.

    Talk is cheap, and in particular Fianna Fáil talk.

    http://www.indymedia.ie/article/73117


  • Options
    #2249
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,409 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Banjoxed wrote: »
    Talk is cheap, and in particular Fianna Fáil talk.

    FF talk has us where we are today - deep in the doo dah.


  • Options
    #2250
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,098 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    MrMorooka wrote: »
    whatever.. back on topic, I found a reference :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=590n0m6gG2U#t=74

    Shame I can't find a better clip or online reference- it's mostly Fianna Fail online sources patting a senator on the back for bringing this up to the newly appointed DAA chief.

    Herein lies the problem yet again. Political motivation should not dictate transport planning. MN is viewed as a FF idea. Even FF view it that way. It has become a victim of the Celtic Tiger largesse. But nothing has changed, because the current study is nothing more than a dictate from the current Government to the NTA in order to achieve two things.

    1. Fudge real construction of anything.
    2. Put their own stamp on a solution.

    Historically, the see sawing between FF lead Governments and FG lead Governments has been to the detriment of developing rail transport in this country. That will not change any time soon.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2251
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,098 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Banjoxed wrote: »
    Talk is cheap, and in particular Fianna Fáil talk.

    http://www.indymedia.ie/article/73117

    Ironically the extension of the line to Navan was financially impractical. During the crazy days of "lets reopen any rail line that we can", some of us got caught up in the madness of it all. Once the motorway opened, the case for the railway along the original direct route was finished. FF and Dempsey were liars right to the end and I suspect that was driven by Dempseys "local" aspect. Let's remember that MCC and the Government actively destroyed the alignment via various schemes, in particular the M3 project. The idea of reopening to Navan was never ever on the table in any realistic fashion.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement