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

cgcsb · 12-08-2011 1:17pm

markpb wrote: »

Luas from Busaras to the Point were delivered on time and on budget.

completely untrue. They just changed the completion date so that it would be delivered "on time" the original completion date was 2008, it was a year late.

cgcsb · 12-08-2011 1:33pm

When construction goes ahead on BXD, I hope to good god that ABP insists that they at least build the station box on o'connell st for metro. This will prevent future disruption when metro does go ahead. The construction of MetroN is inevitable, and has been since 1975, it's just a question of when.

I'm willing to accept that finances won't allow for it in the next 5 years, but we can at least get the preparatory works out of the way the same time as BXD.

There was also talk a few months ago about a re-branding of metro north. Perhaps they'll call it luas, this is probably an attempt to quash the perception that it is entirely underground, that it is heavy rail and that it only serves the airport. Then the cultchies and nay sayers might lighten up.

dynamick · 12-08-2011 1:38pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

Metro North Railway Order is active for 10 years and is enforceable until December 2020.

Others may know better on this point, but I have to presume that such an RO can be extended via legislation or ministerial order, if necessary.

10 years extensible by ministerial order

ABP Railway Order MN wrote:

15 Period within which Agency is authorised to carry out the scheduled works
(1)Subject to paragraph (2) and so far as is reasonably practicable, execution of
the authorised works shall be substantially completed by the end of the period of 10
years beginning on the date on which this Order comes into operation pursuant to
section 43(4) of the Principal Act.

Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Act, 2001 wrote:

43.
(7) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), on application in that behalf by the railway undertaking to the Minister, the Minister may, if he or she considers it appropriate to do so, by order amend a railway order or the plan or book of reference relating to it and amendments under this paragraph may include a provision varying the route of the railway.
(b) Where, in the opinion of the Minister, an amendment of a railway order would, if made, constitute a substantial material variation in the railway works, the subject of the order, and the Minister so declares in a notice published in Iris Oifigiúil, sections 37 to 43 shall apply in relation to the making of an order under paragraph (a) as they apply to a railway order and the application shall be deemed for the purposes of this Part to be an application for a railway order and this Part shall apply accordingly in relation to the application with any necessary modifications.

So the minister can change a railway order so long as he doesn't consider it a 'substantial material variation'. He can even change the route in this way.

DWCommuter · 12-08-2011 2:05pm

cgcsb wrote: »

When construction goes ahead on BXD, I hope to good god that ABP insists that they at least build the station box on o'connell st for metro.

That will be a very revealing factor regarding a commitment to MN.

BluntGuy · 12-08-2011 2:34pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

If these projects are 'deferred' post 2014 or even 2016, anyone think FG and Labour are storing up an election headache for themselves?

With Metro North and Dart Underground holding 10-year railway orders, I will be very surprised if FF, SF, ULA and Greens won't be making their own 'promises' re Metro and Dart come 2016.

Varadkar, Reilly, Burton and Shorthall will be particularly vulnerable on the issue locally and I fully expect FF and SF to exploit it to the maximum in Dublin North, North West and West, in particular.

I know DWC is very pessimistic but I'll look at the glass half full here and say 'deferral' in the current economic and political climate really is the best we can expect.

However, the need for these projects hasn't gone away and will actually grow when recovery takes hold.

The difference between now and the 1980s, is that Metro and DartU will have railway orders active until 2020 and 2022 and much of the design and preparatory work has already been done.

It is now up to advocates of public transport in Dublin to keep Metro and Dart on the agenda for when better economic times come and put them back on the political agenda post-2014 and the next general election.

Finally, let's see what Leo and govt actually says in September when the review is published.

As has been pointed out on another thread, the number 2 in the NTA told the Oireachtas Transport committee two weeks ago that he expected 'the right result' from the capital review - and the NTA's future strategy hinges on Metro and Dart.

That's my optimistic view...

It's certainly quite optimistic Jack. :pac:

It's hard to see it as "glass half full" and not a glass that never had anything in it and then was tossed on the floor. "Deferred" is death-speak in political terms. We shall of course wait to see what Mr Varadkar says in September, but it's likely going to hand waving, vague "commitments" to "assess" the projects "when economic conditions allow" rather than any approaching a hard and dedicated promise to get them done. If BXD does go ahead, we can also expect it to be talked up out of this world. I'm sure it was already called the "BXD Interconnector" at some point. :P

RPA maintain no decision has been made:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Metro-North/139624076083382

No decision has been made about any of the projects which the Government is considering in the context of the changed economic circumstances.

dowlingm · 12-08-2011 6:28pm

dynamick wrote: »

So the minister can change a railway order so long as he doesn't consider it a 'substantial material variation'. He can even change the route in this way.

Could be important should the TBMs hit something not predicted by the bores. Very expensive similar situation happened recently when a huge TBM was boring a new water tunnel to Niagara Falls Power Station - a substantial deviation had to be done.

AngryLips · 13-08-2011 2:59pm

cgcsb wrote: »

There was also talk a few months ago about a re-branding of metro north. Perhaps they'll call it luas

Given that Metro North and Luas have more in common (than any discernable differences) it was always going to make sense for the two to be branded as one. Another disparate identity in Dublin's public transport system wasn't something that the city has been crying out for anyway.

lods · 13-08-2011 5:34pm

BluntGuy wrote: »

It's certainly quite optimistic Jack. :pac:

It's hard to see it as "glass half full" and not a glass that never had anything in it and then was tossed on the floor. "Deferred" is death-speak in political terms. We shall of course wait to see what Mr Varadkar says in September, but it's likely going to hand waving, vague "commitments" to "assess" the projects "when economic conditions allow" rather than any approaching a hard and dedicated promise to get them done. If BXD does go ahead, we can also expect it to be talked up out of this world. I'm sure it was already called the "BXD Interconnector" at some point. :P

RPA maintain no decision has been made:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Metro-North/139624076083382

it should read , "no decision has been announced". The decision was made long ago.:rolleyes:

D.L.R. · 13-08-2011 6:03pm

Well, at least we got the M9, M3, M2, M18, Waterford Bypass, Western Rail Corridor, Cherrywood Luas, Tullamore Bypass, Bog Museum, Docklands Temporary Station, and all the other truly economically essential projects built before the credit crunch.

Who knows where our reputation for spending other people's money wisely would be without these vital gems.

And very special thanks to the previous govt for leaving us this bountiful legacy to build on.

strassenwo!f · 14-08-2011 12:32pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

That will be a very revealing factor regarding a commitment to MN.

It certainly will. If they have to go ahead and build both station boxes at O'Connell Bridge it will add a lot to the cost. I wonder will they do it?

cgcsb · 14-08-2011 1:43pm

the way I see it, the options are build luas BXD, then rip it up again years later to accommodate metro, then build it again, i.e. pay twice(probably more the second time). This option will add to the cost to the tax payer and would be the most disruptive option for Dubliners. Sadly it is most likely what will happen.

The second option is to build the OCS metro station in conjuction with BXD, it'll cost more in the short term, but save a lot of future wastage and disruption. It is unlikely Irish politicians will go for this option because it's not short sighted enough and it would actually involve listening to their expert planners for a change.

markpb · 14-08-2011 1:52pm

cgcsb wrote: »

the way I see it, the options are build luas BXD, then rip it up again years later to accommodate metro, then build it again, i.e. pay twice(probably more the second time). This option will add to the cost to the tax payer and would be the most disruptive option for Dubliners. Sadly it is most likely what will happen.

You forgot the third option: Build Luas BXD and then talk for forty years about upgrading it to Metro.

cgcsb · 14-08-2011 1:55pm

markpb wrote: »

You forgot the third option: Build Luas BXD and then talk for forty years about upgrading it to Metro.

oh yes, and of course at that stage mainland Europe will be covered by incredibly fast, high speed maglev intercity trains, we'll still be talking about a very simple 80 year old solution to our transport needs.

Jack Noble · 14-08-2011 2:15pm

There's a report in today's Sunday Business Post (Aug 14, available online Monday 10am) that the cost of Luas BXD has fallen to around €280m - down from more than €300m. Report says ABP decision due next month.

Let me quote what report says - you can check it online yourself tomorrow morning.

An RPA spokesman confirmed that a reduction is contractors and other related costs has pushed down the estimated spend on BXD.

"We have been looking at ways to do it more cost effectively. However, there is always the issue of any conditions attached to the railway order which could cost money."

That last bit is the most telling - could the RPA have got a hint of what is coming from ABP and that is why they seem so laid back about reports that Metro North will be 'deferred'?

They certainly knew about the Metro depot issue well before ABP published the RO last October.

If ABP stipulates that the OCS and SSG station boxes must be done as part of Luas BXD works, then that could at least double the price of Luas BXD as those two stations are the most complex and costly on the whole route.

OCS is under the Liffey with entrances on OCS and Westmoreland, while SSG is joint Metro/Dart station which was due to be constructed as part of Metro North on behalf of IE and Dart Underground.

What will Leo and govt do with BXD is ABP conditions put an effective price tag on it of €600m and timescale of at least four years?

Given the State contribution to Metro North PPP is rumoured to be between €700m and €1bn, IF the private element is available at an affordable rate, it could give Leo and govt a very big headache.

Next month could be very interesting and revealing in terms of short-term and long-term strategy for future rail public transport in Dublin - given the No2 in the NTA told the Oireachtas Transport committee two weeks ago that he expected the 'right result' from the govt's review of capital spending, McDonald's 'deferral' report in Friday and potential ABP conditions in BXD RO.

Cathaoirleach · 14-08-2011 5:08pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

If ABP stipulates that the OCS and SSG station boxes must be done as part of Luas BXD works

It's not really up to APB to make that decision on their own though, is it? Surely it would be at a Ministerial level.

Should be very intereting to see what's going to happen next month as you said.

Jack Noble · 14-08-2011 5:18pm

Cathaoirleach wrote: »

It's not really up to APB to make that decision on their own though, is it? Surely it would be at a Ministerial level.

Should be very intereting to see what's going to happen next month as you said.

ABP can make it a condition of planning. They rules Metro North main contract works could not begin until matter of depot relocation was sorted.

The fact Metro North has a railway order already points in that direction. From a strictly planning point perspective, it makes every sense for ABP to make it a condition of the BXD RO that the Metro OCS and SSG station boxes be built first or as part of BXD.

That's why next month could be so interesting - expecially if ABP rules on BXD before the govt announces results of capital spending review.

strassenwo!f · 14-08-2011 6:24pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

If ABP stipulates that the OCS and SSG station boxes must be done as part of Luas BXD works, then that could at least double the price of Luas BXD as those two stations are the most complex and costly on the whole route.

I think we can safely say that that is not going to happen. ABP are not going to stipulate works for a project which is very much in doubt. Especially if it adds the cost of construction of three station boxes to the cost.

What they might do is order that nothing be done to hinder the construction of the three station boxes in the future.

I honestly think that people are making too much of this issue with the station boxes. Yes, it is of course nice if they are in place when the time comes to build whatever line it is that you wish to construct. But, if they aren't, then you find some other way around it. Underground lines and stations are built all the time without people whingeing that "if only we'd put in a station box when we were building X, Y or Z."

Do we hear people complaining about the failure to put in a station box for Crossrail at Tottenham Court Road in London, which is already a major interchange? I haven't heard them.

No, like the proposed second core tunnel in Munich, which is to be built under the existing mainline station, an S-Bahn and two U-Bahn lines, they just get on with figuring out how it is to be done without affecting existing services, or affecting them in any big way. Now that project may have stalled, but as far as I'm aware, figuring out how to construct the station at Munich Hauptbahnhof wasn't one of the reasons. (Oh, and they also have to figure out how to do all that and still leave room for the city's proposed Maglev service to the airport).

People are making too much of this. Build the Luas link-up and let the future take care of itself.

D.L.R. · 14-08-2011 7:14pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

let the future take care of itself

Whats with all the FF election slogans lately?

strassenwo!f · 14-08-2011 7:32pm

D.L.R. wrote: »

Whats with all the FF election slogans lately?

You're too right.

But honestly. The money's gone. So build the important projects that we can. And while it would be nice to think about future-proofing things so that the metro and interconnector could be built with as little hassle as possible, the reality is that they won't be built for a very long time.

So press on with building things like the BXD line, which will make a difference, while we can.

Because "We're worth it." (Was that FF?)

Anyway, I think it's The Way Forward. (That certainly was):)

strassenwo!f · 14-08-2011 8:08pm

I mean, they had the public consultation for the various possible BXD routes back in 2005, then they announced the preferred route later on that year. I'm not very enamoured of the preferred route, but we're now heading towards 2012 and not a centimetre of the link-up has been built. Almost seven years, and nothing delivered on a project which had an extensive public consultation and a lot of RPA work put into it. What's that about?

AngryLips · 15-08-2011 12:51am

Having Metro North and BXD built along the same alignment was never going to be the best use of capital funding to begin with. If BXD was going to go ahead without station boxes for Metro North then it might force a future Government to reconsider the alignment of Metro North to the benefit of other areas of the city centre not currently served by light rail.

Connectivity at Stephen's Green only ever made sense in the context of Dart Underground and the assumption that it was the terminus for Luas Green line. There are other alignments worth considering such as a Capel Street/Chirstchurch alignment or a Parnell Square/Temple Bar/Georges Street alignment. Either could be made work without compromising on future connectivity with the right amount of planning.

The other alternative, of course, is to reconsider the alignment of BXD so that there wasn't so much overlap with Metro North in its current guise.

monument · 15-08-2011 12:52am

Or ABP could give the RPA the option of using two way Marlborough Street only...

cgcsb · 15-08-2011 1:48am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I think we can safely say that that is not going to happen. ABP are not going to stipulate works for a project which is very much in doubt. Especially if it adds the cost of construction of three station boxes to the cost.

What they might do is order that nothing be done to hinder the construction of the three station boxes in the future.

I honestly think that people are making too much of this issue with the station boxes. Yes, it is of course nice if they are in place when the time comes to build whatever line it is that you wish to construct. But, if they aren't, then you find some other way around it. Underground lines and stations are built all the time without people whingeing that "if only we'd put in a station box when we were building X, Y or Z."

Do we hear people complaining about the failure to put in a station box for Crossrail at Tottenham Court Road in London, which is already a major interchange? I haven't heard them.

No, like the proposed second core tunnel in Munich, which is to be built under the existing mainline station, an S-Bahn and two U-Bahn lines, they just get on with figuring out how it is to be done without affecting existing services, or affecting them in any big way. Now that project may have stalled, but as far as I'm aware, figuring out how to construct the station at Munich Hauptbahnhof wasn't one of the reasons. (Oh, and they also have to figure out how to do all that and still leave room for the city's proposed Maglev service to the airport).

People are making too much of this. Build the Luas link-up and let the future take care of itself.

a typically Irish, ah sure it'll be grand anyway attitude. The problem is that if not built before BXD, the OCD metro stn box will require that significant sections of BXD be ripped up and replaced at significant cost and disruption.

cgcsb · 15-08-2011 1:51am

80mil could be saved by abandoning the marlborough st section and the new bridge that comes with it.

dynamick · 15-08-2011 9:24am

Jack Noble wrote: »

OCS is under the Liffey with entrances on OCS and Westmoreland, while SSG is joint Metro/Dart station which was due to be constructed as part of Metro North on behalf of IE and Dart Underground.

I don't think any works would be required beneath the river. The O'Connell Bridge station uses two station boxes, one north and one south of the river. The stations boxes are constructed first and then the TBM is driven along, passing through each station box in turn. The OCS stop and platforms would be constructed at that stage (the platforms would be mined).

A cheaper alternative to constructing the station boxes might be to provide a tramway on either side of Westmoreland st and O'Connell st. When the boxes need to be built in future, the tram would use the alternative route. I don't know if this is cost feasible.

Jack Noble · 15-08-2011 11:15am

dynamick wrote: »

I don't think any works would be required beneath the river. The O'Connell Bridge station uses two station boxes, one north and one south of the river. The stations boxes are constructed first and then the TBM is driven along, passing through each station box in turn. The OCS stop and platforms would be constructed at that stage (the platforms would be mined).

A cheaper alternative to constructing the station boxes might be to provide a tramway on either side of Westmoreland st and O'Connell st. When the boxes need to be built in future, the tram would use the alternative route. I don't know if this is cost feasible.

I know the main platform works will not be done as part of any station box works on OCS/WS and SSG, but the stations are still the most complex on the route, along with the Mater which is under a hospital.

Work on both station boxes will still be considerable if it is ordered by ABP to be done as part of Luas BXD as it will require all the enabling works planned for Metro North on OCS/WS and SSG, as well as digging bloody great holes on all three under where the Luas tracks will run to create the openings for later mining of stations and the entrances.

The other option is to do what was done in Budapest during station works on M4 - which included terminating tram lines just before the station works and replacing them with bus transfers for the duration. This happened on the 47/49 routes crossing the Liberty Bridge over the Danube and the 2/2A route along the Pest-side of Danube to facilitate works at Kalvin Ter (an interchange station with M3) and Fovam Ter beside Liberty Bridge. Both lines are open again but were closed for the guts of three years during the works.

But can you imagine the reaction here if Luas was curtailed at SSG and Parnell to build Metro North just a few years after it opened?

I will be very surprised if ABP does not put in some conditions on the BXD RO which facilitate future Metro construction if BXD is to proceed first.

robd · 15-08-2011 11:19am

If their's any sanity in ABP, they'll stipulate that the Luas Extension should not run up O'Connell Street at all, due to extensive disruption that works will cause, the historic nature of the street and the silliness of ripping of a street that was completely relaid to a high standard (materials wise, e.g. granite) only a few years ago. It will also cause havic to current public transport services (bus) which make extensive use of street.

The Luas should run up 1 street not 2, as 2 streets is twice the disruption. So Malborough Street is the only sane option IMO.

Jack Noble · 15-08-2011 11:22am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I mean, they had the public consultation for the various possible BXD routes back in 2005, then they announced the preferred route later on that year. I'm not very enamoured of the preferred route, but we're now heading towards 2012 and not a centimetre of the link-up has been built. Almost seven years, and nothing delivered on a project which had an extensive public consultation and a lot of RPA work put into it. What's that about?

Metro North was prioritised and BX and D merged into a single project to be delivered in parallel with Metro.

The delays to BXD are due to the delays in delivering Metro.

IF the stated Transport 21 timetables had been strictly adhered to, Metro and BXD would now be under construction and nearing completion and DartU would be under construction too.

And we could have been watching the pigs fly over all the construction sites across Dublin...

Jack Noble · 15-08-2011 11:55am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I think we can safely say that that is not going to happen. ABP are not going to stipulate works for a project which is very much in doubt. Especially if it adds the cost of construction of three station boxes to the cost.

If ABP sticks strictly to its remit, then it will put in strict conditions about any Luas BXD construction faciltating future Metro North construction - precisely because it granted Metro a 10-year railway order less than a year ago. Just because it may be in doubt now, does not mean it will be so in three or five or eight years and ABP should make allowances for that.

What they might do is order that nothing be done to hinder the construction of the three station boxes in the future.

One sure-fire way to hinder future construction is to put tram lines above the spots were underground rail stations are planned to go.

I honestly think that people are making too much of this issue with the station boxes. Yes, it is of course nice if they are in place when the time comes to build whatever line it is that you wish to construct. But, if they aren't, then you find some other way around it. Underground lines and stations are built all the time without people whingeing that "if only we'd put in a station box when we were building X, Y or Z."

Do we hear people complaining about the failure to put in a station box for Crossrail at Tottenham Court Road in London, which is already a major interchange? I haven't heard them.

Silly comparision - TCR was built a century ago, well before Crossrail was ever dreamt up. But as part of Crossrail, a massive new interchange station is being constructed at a cost of Stg500m, will take six years to complete and involves closing the station to both the Northern and Charing Cross lines at some stages and relocating platforms. It also involves making provision for another interchange with a planned new line, Crossrail 2, the Chelsea-Hackney line.

That's an example of clear forward-planning which some of us hope ABP will do wrt Luas BXD and Metro North.

Right across Europe and elsewhere you see plenty of evidence of future plans and construction being incorporated into metro/rail lines and stations, including extra levels for other lines, extra platforms, extra tunnel sections, future stations, etc.

For example, during construction of the single Helsinki Metro line, a second perpendicular platform was built under the platform at Kamppi for planned interchange with a second line. That was done in the late-70s/early-80s and that line is still just a plan that may or may not be implemented in the future. Again, that's forward planning, European-style.

No, like the proposed second core tunnel in Munich, which is to be built under the existing mainline station, an S-Bahn and two U-Bahn lines, they just get on with figuring out how it is to be done without affecting existing services, or affecting them in any big way. Now that project may have stalled, but as far as I'm aware, figuring out how to construct the station at Munich Hauptbahnhof wasn't one of the reasons. (Oh, and they also have to figure out how to do all that and still leave room for the city's proposed Maglev service to the airport).

Again, not the same as Dublin. These are future developments planned in addition to existing lines so, therefore, it is bound to provide significant engineering challenges - which will be overcome, of course.

You seem to be either forgetting or deliberately ignoring the key fact that here in Dublin, three projects - MetroN, DartU and Luas BXD - are being planned in parallel so ABP should and will likely take that into account when approving railway orders for all three, which will allow all to be built at various stages without disrupting the others.

People are making too much of this. Build the Luas link-up and let the future take care of itself.

Actually, given the experiences in Ireland over the last 40 years, where infrastructure was not built with sufficient expansion capacity or future planning and development taken into account, people are not making enough of this issue, IMHO.

Decisions this govt take today could have significant implications and consequences for their successors so they can't afford to get them wrong. They need to leave open the possibility for future govts to be able to carry forward plans that FG-Lab cannot afford to do today. It would be reckless and irresponsible for them to do otherwise - and I would have thought we have seen in recent years enough evidence of what reckless and irresponsible govt decisions and policies can do for future generations.

strassenwo!f · 15-08-2011 11:56am

cgcsb wrote: »

a typically Irish, ah sure it'll be grand anyway attitude. The problem is that if not built before BXD, the OCD metro stn box will require that significant sections of BXD be ripped up and replaced at significant cost and disruption.

For one who is accusing me of sloppy thinking, you might look at yourself first:

OCD - where's that?
stn - are you sending a text?
box - should be "boxes".

And read the post properly. I've given a couple of examples for you.

This kind of thing happens all the time. We're not expecting mainline and DART services to be halted just because there are to be stations built under Heuston and Pearse. Disrupted, possibly, but halted for a couple of years? I doubt it. The same with LUAS BXD.

It will, of course, require a bit of ingenuity, and it would be lovely if all of these things like station boxes could be put in place before putting in the LUAS link-up. But to hold up the link-up because of the requirements of a metro line which may not be built for many years is probably foolish.

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

Comments