Integration chaos

Victor · 03-06-2006 8:25pm

Metrobest wrote:

* Tara Street is a better and more suitable site than Drumcondra.

If you can't find space at Drumcondra, where are you going to find space at Tara Street?

Yes, I know there are potential sites at both, but Drumcondra would be easier for routing, finance and construction.

Better map of Singapore here:

http://www.cicred.org/Eng/Seminars/FDA/singapore-map.GIF
http://www.unsw.edu.au/images/UNSWAsia/SingaporeMap_bigweb.jpg
http://www.fareastsvcapts.com.sg/imgs/main/mrtmap.jpg

Anyone got a street map?

dermo88 wrote:

Of course, in Singapore every single thing is watched.

Of course they are. It's a one-family state.

DerekP11 wrote:

These are some of the questions that everyone interested should ask. Barry Kenny won't give you the answers. He's not allowed to. Remember that his ultimate boss is the "sod turner of the year", Martin Cullen.

Yes, sir. Colonel Jessup, SIR!.

Metrobest · 04-06-2006 1:24pm

Metrobeast

LOL

Perhaps flesh out and make a valid point as to why Tara St would be better than Drumcondra. When doing so, please make refernce to the DART post interconnector, that means

Maynooth - Bray. ( with the Maynooth side having by far a larger catchment )
Hazelhatch - Balbriggan.

with the interchange between being at Pearse.

I did so but just to repeat:

I prefer Tara Street because it's city centre, it connects to Bray-Maynooth DART and it brings Tara Street closer to Dublin's core environment. It's a win-win for DART and metro.

Tara Street interchange allows passengers from the Maynooth line get off at Tara Street. Via the underground travelator/walkway they can exit in sixty-ninety seconds at Trinity without having to negotiate pedestrian crossings. Having the interchange at Tara also makes it easier for a third south-westerly metro line to intergrate with the city's transport system.

MetroWest caters for many Maynooth connections to MetroNorth and the airport while Tara Streets captures Northbound connections to metroNorth from as far south as Gorey, Co Wexford.

The beauty of Tara Street is the proximity is enjoys to Dublin city centre - that's what makes it Ireland's busiest train station. Putting the futuristic interchange at Tara benefits existing passengers and attracts new ones.

If you can't find space at Drumcondra, where are you going to find space at Tara Street?

The main ticket concourse is shared with the metro station in the vicinity of Trinity; the existing Tara Street station as we know it would likely be remodelled to incorporate the travelator connecting with metro.

Drumcondra would be easier for routing...

The fastest, most direct route is via Glasnevin.

The metro can connect with Tara via travelor, then onto O'Connell Street and the central route as originally proposed. Easy as.

...construction

Relatively less disruptive in a light traffic area such as Hawkins Street than on the busiest road in north Dublin city.

Perhaps the RPA could do Dublin another favour during construction and demolish one of the world's ugliest buildings, Hawkins House.

...finance

Space leased to retail outlets along the underground walkway helps offset contruction costs. This advantage is not open to Drumcondra as the metro will surface on-street either side of the railway bridge; the existing Drumcondra station will not be modified. Not as integrated as at Tara, I might add.

Metrobest · 04-06-2006 1:37pm

Mayshine wrote:

Hi Metrobeast,

Just to clarrify (and having lived there) - in your Singapore example, there are three underground line (red, green and purple). These lines cross in 3 different places. All these are interconnecting stations (Doby Ghaut, Raffles Place and Harbourfront).

In Raffles Place and also City hall the lines actually run in parallel above and below each other

Singapore MRT Map

They are adding a fourth line (circle line) to be completed end of the year ish). This crosses the other line in 5 places, with 4 of these inconnecting. I'm guessin from looking at the map there is no way of expanding city hall to accomodate it

Singapore Circle line

KL - also been there quite a bit - system is also fully interconnected

here --> KL Map

I haven't been to sydney, but looking at it maps it seems that there is about two instaces on their rail map where there are lines crossing without an interconnect

Say what you may but that in my book that means that when urban transit lines cross it is pretty uncommon not to find an interconnect

Then again with with Dublin, regardless of all the good points and ideas being provided by some of the activist groups, I'm feeling we'll get what we deserve.

Namely a transit system build by bickering partizan sides overseen by a corrupt and useless government, for a majority (present company excepted) of citizens whose only contribution to the project was to moan/agure/not care about it.

What we will get probably might have been considered world class in 1980, but by the time it is build every other forward thinking global city will have a much better vision and implementation of integrated public transport

I totally agree with you that Singapore has a fantastic transport system and you'll no doubt be aware of their stunning EZLink smart cards which I think are the way forward for Dublin.

Singapore's MRT doesn't connect to the international train station - I would assume it crosses under the national railway line at some point, yet there is no interchange?

There are a few other holes in the MRT system when it comes to connecting from one line to another - for example Little India and Bugis being so close yet connections relatively cumbersome. Again, schematic maps don't paint a true picture of the lines' exact street location.

As for KL... well... how could you call that shambolic transport system "intergrated"? KL's transport system make Dublin's planning look truly Scandanavian! Just look at the perpetual rush hour day and night, the most appaling bus "service" run like something you'd see in a small African village, unconnected light rail lines.. It's just dire.

I presume Dermo 88 you have a car there?

murphaph · 04-06-2006 1:47pm

Metrobest wrote:

The main ticket concourse is shared with the metro station in the vicinity of Trinity; the existing Tara Street station as we know it would likely be remodelled to incorporate the travelator connecting with metro.

That's very vague in fairness. Where exactly would you locate the metro station box (at least 100 metres long and 10 metres wide, at least!) so that it would be easier than the N1 at Drumcondra (straight and very wide street on a north-south axis)? The N1 has been severely disrupted for years with the Port Tunnel anyway, so what's new? The metro box would only take 12-18 months to construct which is nothing compared to the tunnel works. The N1 is so wide at Drumcondra Rd that you could probably keep it open at least to buses.

I'd also question your assertion that you could make it from train to Trinity (I assume you mean the main entrance at College Green?) in 60 to 90 seconds, underground walkway or not.

The point you made earlier about metroWest catering for Red Line passengers bound for the airport was irrelevant. You cannot expect a Red Line passenger boarding at Rialto etc. to head south west for a few miles before heading north again when a cursory look at a map shows that a route via the city centre is much more direct. Diverting the metroNorth over towards Tara at the expense of proper interchange at Abbey St is thus flawed, especially as metroNorth will be able to provide genuine quality (no travelator nonsense) interchange at Drumcondra between DART1 and metro.

Metrobest wrote:

Space leased to retail outlets along the underground walkway helps offset contruction costs. This advantage is not open to Drumcondra as the metro will surface on-street either side of the railway bridge; the existing Drumcondra station will not be modified. Not as integrated as at Tara, I might add.

If you built the metroNorth box between the Midland Line and Drumcondra Line and included a mezzanine level running the length of the station box, then you can capture travellers with plenty of retail opportunities. A future IE station on the Midland Line can be de facto connected to the existing Drumcondra Station by this sheltered mezzanine level, thus providing retail space for passengers not even using metroNorth, just interchanging between IE lines. We have to think beyond the limited vision of Iarnrod Eireann etc. to a point where all the heavy rail lines in the city are running trains and providing a real network.

dermo88 · 04-06-2006 5:00pm

No I don't have a car here yet. I don't drive, and its a bit suicidal to drive on Malaysian roads. I do use a bicycle, (cheap....I bought it off the security guards at my condo for 20 Euro, the lock for it cost more). but thats only for short distances, and its mainly pure stubborness and a wish to keep fit that causes me to use it.

Normally in KL, I would use a taxi, but the transport system is sporadic in its quality, even though it is cheap.

Rapid KL are the new transit authority. I thought it was very funny to have a public transport (bus) company called "Rapid" KL. They were formed in 2005, and are getting their act together, but like Iarnrod Eireann......lots to do.

Malaysians themselves have no confidence in their public transport system, with the exception of the two LRT systems, which despite their somewhat haphazard planning, work like clockwork, especially the driverless train, which goes within 2km of my apartment. BUT, when compared to taxis, on price versus time, they just don't compete. There is a swipe card system. There is unlimited use of the buses, all day every day within the city centre for RM2, but the truly screwed up thing about the whole thing was that when I arrived, there were 5 transport companies between buses and trains taking care of public transport in the Klang Valley (KL) conurbation, a region of more than 3 million people.

It was, and is, a complete UMNO/Barisan Nasional slush fund funder. Mohd X gets contract to run Putra LRT, Mohd Y gets contract to run STAR LRT, Mohd Z becomes the managing director of ERL, Mohd A becomes head of KTMB, and Mohd B head of KL monorail. Of course, these guys are all Malay. There are no Chinese Malaysian or Indian Malaysian owners or directors. The whole idea is to provide jobs for the boys and there is no consideration of quality, or value for money. Unlike Singapore.....which is basically a kind of one family state (Lee Kwan Yew and family), or more accurately....one party (Peoples Action Party). They may be borderline fascist, but they know how to make things work down there, and are honest as the day is long.

Thats 5 railway companies in charge of rail based public transport in KL. All public-private partnerships, and all doing that lovely trick of creative bankruptcy. The Government is seriously free market, wants to keep fares low on one hand, while giving as little subsidy as possible. The effects tell in quality. KTMB (Malaysian mainline and electrified national railways), suffer from a lack of investment, or the money on mega projects is being siphoned off to their coffee shop buddies (nudge nudge wink wink)

Singapore.....BLISS. But I would never live there. Its just too fast moving, expensive and they never relax down there, although I like Singaporeans and Malaysians alike. Honest taxi drivers, efficient transport. The Tiger beer does not taste as if its got a Muslim brewmaster.

Now, you asked about why Singapores MRT does not connect with the International Train station. The International train station is NOT Singaporean land. Its actually Malaysian. The railway yards and station are prime real estate. The railway line and 10 meters each side of it are all Malaysian land, running right into the middle of Singapore. Singapore and Malaysia have been in a kind of cold war or words since 1965. They don't like each other, but can't live witout each other. So, Singapore does all it can to try and drive the mainline back to Johor Bahru, despite the fact that its the fastest way out of the place on a Friday or public holiday when the causeway is jammed. The PAP Government have several silly excuses to keep it from being developed, 1. Its meter gauge, whereas all MRT trackage is standard gauge. 2. KTMB would electrify it, BUT the Singapore Govt have a ban on catenery above ground. 3. Its single track. 4. Its unsafe/badly maintained.

So the public transport system in KL may be shambolic. Its cheap. It works if you know how it works, and its understandable for a Dublin native, because its not integrated, and its not that unexpected. I use the bus system for a challenge, but bring lots of deodorant and aftershave in your bag, you'll sweat like a......sheep (sorry, no pigs here)

Metrobest · 05-06-2006 1:23pm

Indeed, the transport system in KL and other parts of Malaysia made me nostalgic for CIE. The buses go nowhere for minutes on end while unkempt bus conductors try to drum up business, shouting random destinations at passengers on the street like a street trader on Moore Street flogging Chinese bangers. Loud music blares from the driver's crackly radio and congestion makes journey times unbearable in eight-lane streets creaking with traffic.

So I didn't see much of KL's "relaxed" side.

Thanks for the info on Singapore Int. I didn't know that about the station being on Malaysian land - it all makes sense now. Even still, Singapore has a transport system that makes Dublin look truly third world.

Unlike Singapore.....which is basically a kind of one family state (Lee Kwan Yew and family), or more accurately....one party (Peoples Action Party). They may be borderline fascist, but they know how to make things work down there, and are honest as the day is long.

It's easy to be "honest" when there's no free press. Singapore is Orwellian. Yet thanks to its booming economy - second only to Ireland in terms of globalisation - it's a very exciting city to live in, and is definately on an upward curve. The recent election results, showing a degree of independent thought exists on the island, were encouraging.

And in terms of public transport there's one lesson to take from Singapore. When you are only one view - the government view - together with a compliant media, big projects like metros and high-rise housing can be implemented with ease. Maybe we should hand the reigns of power over to Mary Harney and replace Joe Duffy with country and western music.

That's very vague in fairness. Where exactly would you locate the metro station box (at least 100 metres long and 10 metres wide, at least!) so that it would be easier than the N1 at Drumcondra (straight and very wide street on a north-south axis)?

The point you made earlier about metroWest catering for Red Line passengers bound for the airport was irrelevant. You cannot expect a Red Line passenger boarding at Rialto etc. to head south west for a few miles before heading north again when a cursory look at a map shows that a route via the city centre is much more direct. Diverting the metroNorth over towards Tara at the expense of proper interchange at Abbey St is thus flawed, especially as metroNorth will be able to provide genuine quality (no travelator nonsense) interchange at Drumcondra between DART1 and metro.

Well I know that since the earliest days of MetroNorth, the Trinity-Tara travelator idea has been floating around so presumably it is feasible from an engineering perspective. I haven't seen the plans. As I understand it, the station box is in the vicinity of the Screen cinema roughly parallel to D'Olier Street. If Hawkins House could be knocked in the process, God speed.

You mentioned Rialto. Well surely you'll agree Red Line passengers at Rialto have plenty of options aside from MetroWest. I think they would be better off changing to interconnector at Heuston and then Metro North at Stephen's Green. They have the option of changing trams at O'Connell St or they can rattle on to Spencer Dock/Connolly and change to DART. Or MetroNorth by walking to "James Joyce Central" metro stop. That's FIVE - count 'em - connections. Not so unintegrated after all!

Tell me Philip, what kind of a "proper interchange" are you hoping for at Abbey and at Drumcondra? Leaving aside Tara Street for a moment. Best case scenario at Abbey is an entrance to the O'Connell Street metro stop at the corner of Abbey/O'Connell. More likely from the latest information is a metro entrance near the Spire. Would you be happy with that?

At Drumcondra, the plans are less known - in fact there probably is no plan, because if there were, Drumcondra would have been the RPA's preferred route and it wasn't. But my guess is a metro with an entrance on Dorset Street Upper where passengers will proceed to the existing tiny Drumcondra station. Do you agree that's what's likely at this point in time, going on what information you procured at the Open Day you attended?

My reaons for Tara/Trinity I have outlined in posts above. But another, yet equally vital reason, is this. Drumcondra won't achieve the kind of quality futuristic intergration that's on offer at Tara/Trinity. Dubliners deserve 21st century solutions like travelors - not Brixton-style lip-service to the God of integration. I think the travelator would be a really cool thing for Dublin. We deserve cool things. They make the city nicer and that's a valid reason for building them. To anyone who disagrees: please explain the function of the Spire?

Dubliners are now fiercely proud of the luas and visitors from all over the world are coming to look at it and are hailing it as a style icon. When John Howard was visiting Dublin, Australian television news filmed their reports with luas gliding by in the background. Dublin never looked better.

The same would be true for the travelator. :cool:

murphaph · 05-06-2006 1:53pm

Metrobest wrote:

You mentioned Rialto. Well surely you'll agree Red Line passengers at Rialto have plenty of options aside from MetroWest. I think they would be better off changing to interconnector at Heuston and then Metro North at Stephen's Green. They have the option of changing trams at O'Connell St or they can rattle on to Spencer Dock/Connolly and change to DART. Or MetroNorth by walking to "James Joyce Central" metro stop. That's FIVE - count 'em - connections. Not so unintegrated after all!

They're all pretty sh!te connections though. Forget about Rialto anyway, it's only one stop. What about all the stops along the Red Line from Benburb St to Abbey? They'd have a very circuitous route if they did anything other than change at Abbey.

Metrobest wrote:

Tell me Philip, what kind of a "proper interchange" are you hoping for at Abbey and at Drumcondra? Leaving aside Tara Street for a moment. Best case scenario at Abbey is an entrance to the O'Connell Street metro stop at the corner of Abbey/O'Connell. More likely from the latest information is a metro entrance near the Spire. Would you be happy with that?

I'd want the south eastern entrance to the metroNorth station to surface directly adjacent to the Luas at Abbey and the southern entrance to surface directly adjacent to the Luas O'Connell St stop (future, part of likely Bx route). The northern entrances should surface either side of O'Connell St in the vicinity of the Spire.

At Drumcondra I'm hoping for the metro box to sit along the alignment of Drumcondra Rd, exactly between the existing heavy rail lines with the north western entrance splitting, one to street level, one directly up to Drumcondra P1 and one directly up to Drumcondra P2. Long escalators, but I've ridden longer. The north eastern entrance to surface on Drumcondra Rd at street level and the south western entrance surfacing to street leel also, with the south eastern entrance surfacing to street level BUT also reserving a potential direct access to a future Midland Line station (there is room for one and it is lower than street level so a horizontal access from metro mezzanine level to heavy rail station could be achieved).

Metrobest wrote:

At Drumcondra, the plans are less known - in fact there probably is no plan, because if there were, Drumcondra would have been the RPA's preferred route and it wasn't. But my guess is a metro with an entrance on Dorset Street Upper where passengers will proceed to the existing tiny Drumcondra station. Do you agree that's what's likely at this point in time, going on what information you procured at the Open Day you attended?

I would not like to say what is planned because it's all up for grabs. The platforms at Drumcondra are more spacious than Tara Street by the way!! There's also more room to widen them, there are various buildings constraining Tara.

Metrobest wrote:

My reaons for Tara/Trinity I have outlined in posts above. But another, yet equally vital reason, is this. Drumcondra won't achieve the kind of quality futuristic intergration that's on offer at Tara/Trinity. Dubliners deserve 21st century solutions like travelors - not Brixton-style lip-service to the God of integration. I think the travelator would be a really cool thing for Dublin. We deserve cool things. They make the city nicer and that's a valid reason for building them. To anyone who disagrees: please explain the function of the Spire?

Travelators are a second best solution! You only provide them when you cannot provide vertical integration!

markf909 · 05-06-2006 2:20pm

The platforms at Drumcondra are more spacious than Tara Street by the way!! There's also more room to widen them, there are various buildings constraining Tara.

This is very true and another reason why I would prefer to see an interchange at Drumcondra. If Metro West takes a portion of airport bound passengers from say west of the M50 then we still have an axis from the new Phoenix Park station through new developments at Ashtown all the way through to Bray who would be relying on Tara St for an interchange (via a travelator) to MetroNorth. If the interchange is at Drumcondra a nice balance can be added to the passenger loadings. If the interchange is at Tara, ( already the busiest station ) what safety guarantees are there for regular city centre pax and pax changing from DART to Metro and vice versa with the platforms being already very narrow. I feel we could be selling ourselves short here in terms of passenger throughput and ease of transfer at any Tara St interchange.

Murpaph's solution for Drumcondra is one I have envisinged myself and it will be interesting to see what the RPA come up with as they hinted that they were in favour of a hybrid alignment involving Drumcondra.

dowlingm · 05-06-2006 6:29pm

It's not really fair to compare Singapore with anywhere. An Taisce would probably be dubbed a terrorist organisation there. If you have a de facto one-party (or one-family) state then there's no real limit to what you can do.

dermo88 · 05-06-2006 6:41pm

Metrobest wrote:

.It's easy to be "honest" when there's no free press. Singapore is Orwellian. Yet thanks to its booming economy - second only to Ireland in terms of globalisation - it's a very exciting city to live in, and is definately on an upward curve. The recent election results, showing a degree of independent thought exists on the island, were encouraging.

And in terms of public transport there's one lesson to take from Singapore. When you are only one view - the government view - together with a compliant media, big projects like metros and high-rise housing can be implemented with ease. Maybe we should hand the reigns of power over to Mary Harney and replace Joe Duffy with country and western music.

Theres a reason for that Orwellian approach. You can have the rule of Government, or the rule of the Triads, and all the other ethic centric gangs and groups and secret societies. The Triads run Hong Kong, but they are not even allowed breathing space in Singapore. They were very clever. Export the problem over the causeway to Johor Bahru, and let them pay off the Malaysian authorities to operate their corrupt, whore ridden, drug addled, gambling, womanising way. Every house needs its toilet, and stress relief zone, and for Singapore, its Johor Bahru. For Malaysia, its Thailand. For Hong Kong, its Macau. For Europe....maybe Amsterdam.

There was simply no choice. I make it sound worse than it actually is, but if I want anything sorted out here, I'd go to them first before the Malaysian police. But I am in a position to do that, not everyone is, and you'd want to be very careful.

In Ireland, we've had a predominantly white, catholic culture. Yes, the Irish equivalent of the Triad is without a doubt the IRA. But we speak English, and we're not out chinese out to knock the blocks off Muslims, or Indians, or Cantonese out to bump off Hokkien rivals, in a turf war, and vice versa. Singapore has the potential to turn lawless in the space of 5 years if it ever became too free and liberal. Hence the big stick approach by the state.

In Ireland we have an old city, and its hard to modernise with so many constraints. Dublin is 800 years old. Many buildings are between 200 and 300 years old. Thats why its taking so long to get anything done. There are so many competing authorities, such as county councils, city councils, transport authorities. The rights of the individual are respected over the rights of the greater good, which is the way I like it, and the way you like it.

I mean, you'd be well pissed off if the Land Transport Authority came along to demolish your home for a metro station with a 40 floor high rise Housing block, and said it was only worth 200,000 Euro, after you'd lived there 40-50-60 years, over generations, had been born there, brought up there. They'll relocate you into the tower block, and give you the compo, but the way there is people lose, and lose for the greater good.

In Dublin, land use is terribly inefficient. You have extremely low housing densities in areas right beside major rail corridors such as in Inchicore, Ballyfermot and Clondalkin. The nature of the housing there was appropriate to Dublins size and population in 1950 through to the early 1990's, but it is certainly not appropriate now. In fairness, if possible, the approach should be to do a mass CPO, compensate each householder X00,000 Euro, promise to relocate them in the new housing developments by these corridors, but this will never happen, because the construction standards of these are so good that they have survived 50 years, and will survive to at least 100. In fact most homes in the UK and Ireland are designed to last centuries, despite the changing needs. Even look at London.....where the prevailing culture and aspiration is towards "3 bedroom semi detached".

It does not happen anywhere else in a major European city, and contibutes to our problems today. There is urban sprawl in Dublin, and it is down to this idea of building low and small. Now we should be looking up instead of looking out.

Victor · 05-06-2006 8:52pm

Note that Tara Street Station is likely to be rebuilt anyway, whether as a "great leap forward" or not.

Metrobest wrote:

We deserve cool things.

Screw "cool", make it work first.

Metrobest · 07-06-2006 12:31pm

I would not like to say what is planned because it's all up for grabs.

Well Philip is it or is it not what I suggested in my previous post? Let's assume it is. Would you then acknowledge that the Tara/Trinty travelator is an equal, if not superior, form of integration as it flows more seamlessly?

The platforms at Drumcondra are more spacious than Tara Street by the way!! There's also more room to widen them, there are various buildings constraining Tara

I think there's room to extend Tara's platforms. Victor says it's being redeveloped. Does anyone know the nature of the plans? In the context of Tara being redeveloped and a metro station being build at Hawkins Street, wouldn't it would be sheer madness not to connect the two and create one of the world's funkiest transport hubs?

Travelators are a second best solution! You only provide them when you cannot provide vertical integration!

When I get around to it, I'll post up some pictures I took of the Bilbao metro when I was there last year. Bilbao has Europe's newest metro system and it's like a work of art contributing to the urban and economic regeneration of the city. The pictures will include a travelator. It's one of the coolest things you've ever seen... the locosexuals will be getting excited .

I'd want the south eastern entrance to the metroNorth station to surface directly adjacent to the Luas at Abbey

I would have imagined that the best chances of such an exit alignment would be if metro is routed via the Tara interchange at Hawkins Street as its approach to O'Connell Street will be from an easterly direction.

murphaph · 07-06-2006 1:10pm

Metrobest wrote:

Well Philip is it or is it not what I suggested in my previous post? Let's assume it is. Would you then acknowledge that the Tara/Trinty travelator is an equal, if not superior, form of integration as it flows more seamlessly?

No I don't agree it does flow more seemlessly. Travelators are a second best solution. They are a means of providing what's known as 'horizontal integration', which is universally acknowledged as being a poor relation to vertical integration (provided by escalators or lifts alone).

Metrobest wrote:

I think there's room to extend Tara's platforms. Victor says it's being redeveloped. Does anyone know the nature of the plans? In the context of Tara being redeveloped and a metro station being build at Hawkins Street, wouldn't it would be sheer madness not to connect the two and create one of the world's funkiest transport hubs?

I couldn't give a fiddler's curse about what's funky. I want a solution that serves the most people at the best cost. I simply don't believe enough DART1<->metroNorth changes would be made at Tara (in the event of no interchange at Drumcondra) to justify the loss of interconnection at Abbey and the added cost and longer overall journey time caused by all the added bends. In any case, redevopling Tara is a separate project that may or may not happen. Integration at Drumcondra relies very little on CIE to do anything as the platforms are wide enough as is and could be widened very cheaply if needs be (cantilever extensions). The escalators would be installed by the RPA contractors. Tara would require major surgery to make it safe and it's platforms are also curved making them that bit more unsafe than Drumcondra which has nice straight ones. All in all, you couldn't pick a worse station than Tara to add passengers to. And for what? A very few journeys that can't be made more easily using Drumcondra as an interchange point.

Metrobest wrote:

When I get around to it, I'll post up some pictures I took of the Bilbao metro when I was there last year. Bilbao has Europe's newest metro system and it's like a work of art contributing to the urban and economic regeneration of the city. The pictures will include a travelator. It's one of the coolest things you've ever seen... the locosexuals will be getting excited .

Travelators are not cool. They are provided in addition to escalators because vertical integration couldn't be provided for whatever reason. They are not included because they are better than good old fashioned escalators.

Metrobest wrote:

I would have imagined that the best chances of such an exit alignment would be if metro is routed via the Tara interchange at Hawkins Street as its approach to O'Connell Street will be from an easterly direction.

No no no! You have this all wrong. To get the southeastern exit from the metroNorth station box to surface at Abbey you need to have the station box located between Abbey St and Princes Lane/GPO. To achieve this you have to appoach directly up Westmoreland St/O'Connell St. This deviation to Tara is the reason that Abbey St Luas wouldn't get interchange with metro because the minimum radius of curvature would not allow the line to make it back over to the O'Connell/Abbey st junction-causing a much more northerly location for the metro box on O'Connell St. No other reason according to the RPA. That's one of the reasons they'd like to ditch Tara.

dowlingm · 07-06-2006 3:52pm

The one thing about vertical connections rather than horizontal is that from an accessibility standpoint they are probably easier/better than escalators/stairs because you will also almost certainly have to provide elevators.

As for travelators not being cool - Toronto Pearson is full of the things, as is Heathrow. Sometimes vertical integration is just not practical. Also - horizontal corridors do give opportunity to site retail arcades along it to help fund the project and make the corridors safer due to more continuous presence.

Victor · 08-06-2006 5:21am

Metrobest wrote:

I think there's room to extend Tara's platforms. Victor says it's being redeveloped. Does anyone know the nature of the plans?

there are various proposals, from simply adding stairs and an exit concourse at Townsends Street right up to a 14(?) storey office building over the platforms (probably a CIE, as opposed to IE, project). Would require closing the station for an extended period

dowlingm wrote:

As for travelators not being cool

Cool doesn't get people from A to B. Yes it might be important for persuading some parts of society, but look at many a German station - not the prettiest, full of graffitti and grime (but not litter!), but people still use it because the trains work, on time.

extragon · 08-06-2006 1:49pm

found this when googling Frank McDonald's article, here in integrated Paris...

You're all missing the point. Dublin is small. It should be possible to travel from anywhere to anywhere with one change. Usually possible, in Paris ( pop. 10 million ) and with a much shorter walk than at the Chatelet-les-Halles, mentioned above, if you know the system.
So, in Dublin, let's say you live somewhere like Raheny and get a job in Leopardstown or Dundrum - 2 changes, and I suspect the interconnector services will not be very frequent and it will be as quick to walk Pearse to Stephens green. There are many other examples.

In the end it's about economic efficiency. In a city like Dublin this would mean, initially, a single "hub" where everything meets. The nearest Dublin has to a hub is Connolly station - Busarus area which is to be ignored on the grounds, I believe, that it's capacity cannot be increased - which seems like total nonsense - instead they're building a new "Docklands hub" a kilometer away, in the middle of nowhere.

re. the Metro.
Airports worldwide, including LHR and CDG, do not have metros expensively burrowed out to them, under low density suburbs, but are connected by surface lines ( like the DART ) which only go underground in the city centre.
But, without any real consideration, the option of a DART extension has been dropped. And does anyone know of a metro system, anywhere, that doesn't serve the city's main rail station? ( I can only think of Calcutta. )
And what happens if the economy declines and the interconnector is never built and the metro is left permanently disconnected - passengers to be forever dumped in Stephen's green to catch a bus or a taxi in the rain?

This whole "plan" is absurdly complicated and has corruption written all over it - property development in docklands, political appeasement of north Dublin, RPA wishing to secure it's long term existence etc.
You'll be sorry when it's half built.

MarkoP11 · 08-06-2006 2:06pm

extragon wrote:

So, in Dublin, let's say you live somewhere like Raheny and get a job in Leopardstown or Dundrum - 2 changes, and I suspect the interconnector services will not be very frequent and it will be as quick to walk Pearse to Stephens green. There are many other examples.

Board Raheny, direct train to St Stephens Green 12 times an hour, walk up to ground level, board Luas, done, it actually works

extragon · 08-06-2006 9:49pm

This assumes that the interconnector will be built.
Even if it is, and if most northern DART services are routed through it, it will only be at the expense of inconveniencing people who want to go to Connolly or Tara street, and leave longer distance rail/bus travellers disconnected. Also, what is the purpose of the Docklands station diversion apart from increasing the value of government owned property?

Better examples of complicated connections: anywhere on the DART south of Pearse to Luas green line. And of course, the various long walk connections as discussed above. Ridiculous, in such a small city, after spending so much money.

Build a surface DART to the airport. Enlarge Connolly. Bring Kildare trains through Phoenix park tunnel. Connect LUAS green line to Connolly.
Save a billion. ( Then decide if a metro is needed. )

mackerski · 08-06-2006 10:23pm

extragon wrote:

re. the Metro.
Airports worldwide, including LHR and CDG, do not have metros expensively burrowed out to them, under low density suburbs, but are connected by surface lines ( like the DART ) which only go underground in the city centre.

LHR had a tube line running to it long before the standard rail connection. Yes, the additional section was partly on the surface, just like Metro North is due to be from DCU northwards, but that's certainly what you'd call a Metro-class connection.

extragon wrote:

This assumes that the interconnector will be built.
Even if it is, and if most northern DART services are routed through it, it will only be at the expense of inconveniencing people who want to go to Connolly or Tara street, and leave longer distance rail/bus travellers disconnected.

Who are these commuters that utterly need to be in Connolly or Tara St? Is there no chance that Spencer Dock, Stephen's Green or an onward Luas from either of those might work? For my money, the requirement to make a change to get to the two stations you named is a small price to pay for the rest of the interconnector dividend.

Dermot

dowlingm · 09-06-2006 4:45am

extragon

whatever the inconvenience and I don't wish to downplay it, the increased convenience interconnector will bring with Stephen's Green Station (LUAS), High Street and of course the direct link to the Cork line is not to be sneezed at. London is already doing this exercise with Crossrail.

extragon · 09-06-2006 9:00am

The Piccadilly line runs above ground to Hammersmith, about 75% of the way in. The RER B runs above ground all the way to the Gare du Nord. Only in Dublin is it necessary to burrow beneath the teeming masses, in places like Glasnevin.
( clew. If you want a tunnel you build it in the city centre, as in connecting the Luas lines )
And then it all comes to a halt in St Stephens green, ( dubbed by the Minister Grand Central Terminus! )
This has been hobbled together by a crowd of chancers trying to make an impression. Sure it might all work in the end, but expensively, and ONLY if it's all built. An incremental approach, starting off by extending the DART, would serve the tax payer much better.

mackerski · 09-06-2006 9:29am

extragon wrote:

The Piccadilly line runs above ground to Hammersmith, about 75% of the way in. The RER B runs above ground all the way to the Gare du Nord.

Is there any news here? railways can be built on the surface where space is available. In other cases, you tunnel. London was fortunate enough to have built its airport close enough to an existing surface rail alignment. Clearly, we could have gone for the DART spur that would have exploited an existing surface line, though the Metro North theory is that the new corridor adds value of its own, enough to justify tunnelling from Glasnevin - over a distance far shorter than the distance from Hammersmith to Picadilly Circus.

Dermot

murphaph · 09-06-2006 1:03pm

Exactly Dermot. Extragon-you're forgetting just how close DUB is to the city centre. 6 miles or so is nothing compared to other major airports including LHR etc. That's why the tunnel section is proportionately longer.

There's nothing stopping a DART spur in future btw. IE may well (when everything else is built) opt to build it themselves as it may provide lucrative "airport express" possibilities. The land is securely reserved as it's under the approach.

bk · 09-06-2006 1:12pm

murphaph wrote:

There's nothing stopping a DART spur in future btw. IE may well (when everything else is built) opt to build it themselves as it may provide lucrative "airport express" possibilities. The land is securely reserved as it's under the approach.

But I thought DART's can't go fast as they share track with trains and that the Metro will be faster.

However it might make sense to connect people who live along the DART line, specially once the connector goes in.

murphaph · 09-06-2006 1:28pm

bk wrote:

But I thought DART's can't go fast as they share track with trains and that the Metro will be faster.

You're partly right bk. The DART will continue to share trackage with other trains following T21 BUT IE could in theory add a track (or two) along the northern line out as far as the airport spur, along which dedicated service could be provided. Remember because the DART would run from the airport to Heuston Station (via the Interconnector-IE's original plan, not to be funded under T21 sadly) it would allow many more 0 and 1 change rides to the airport, especially capturing ALL intercity train arrivals into Dublin, whereas to access metroNorth from Heuston/Pearse/Connolly will all require one change, so it's a slightly different target market, certainly a possibility in the future. Of course, metroWest MAY allow 1 change to the airport from certain IC trains arriving into Heuston.

bk · 09-06-2006 3:13pm

Yes, that sounds like a good idea. However I still believe that the Metro is very important, it is much more then just a train to the airport, it is a modern rapid transport system for a large part of the North side of the city. Something we desperately need.

I fell very sorry for people who get the train to Dublin for the airport. In the last 5 times I've travelled Cork to Dublin, the train has broken down twice, causing a one hour to one and a half hour delay. Not nice.

Victor · 09-06-2006 7:11pm

extragon wrote:

Also, what is the purpose of the Docklands station diversion apart from increasing the value of government owned property?

The sole purpose of the Docklands station diversion is to increase the value of privately owned property?[/

extragon · 10-06-2006 1:24am

Victor, I thought Spencer dock was all owned by then govt. Anyway, it's a poor enough reason for building a station there. Last time in Dublin I walked down there and I don't believe the majority of commuters know how remote the place is. I predict a massive collective WTF when the first train pulls in.

re. the metro. Build the damned thing. But do not depend on the govt. to build the interconnector in any reasonable timeframe. Therefore - let it at least end someplace sensible, like a railway station. ( Am I right in assuming that the reason it ends in St Stephens green is to evade the problem of connecting the LUAS lines? )
One final point. The metro will not serve the future terminal 3, which may end up as 50% of the airport in the medium term - and because of it's alignment towards Swords it's not likely to either.
So maybe that DART extension will get built as well. Great the country is so rich.

mysterious · 10-06-2006 3:02am

dermo88 wrote:

In Ireland we have an old city, and its hard to modernise with so many constraints. Dublin is 800 years old. Many buildings are between 200 and 300 years old. Thats why its taking so long to get anything done. There are so many competing authorities, such as county councils, city councils, transport authorities. The rights of the individual are respected over the rights of the greater good, which is the way I like it, and the way you like

I know I'm probably a twat for saying this but, where did you get the idea that Dublin is 800 years old. And getting anything done in this city is difficult, that is a load of bollox just because building's are 200 and 300 hundred years old dosn't mean we can't have reasonable public transport... and I mean bloody plain and intergrated. ffs.. Take a look at Paris and London.. better still Madrid a city that nearly 20km of new metro planned or built in the last few years.... Better again, Amsterdam a city simular in comparison in size and age as Dublin... should I explain... No..

Our problem is we have a government who are laid back about our transport needs.... it's hideous full stop Cullen get your finger out... crooked man. who just cuts ribbons, fear of him

dowlingm · 10-06-2006 4:51am

extragon - much of the docklands near spencer dock is former IE land which Treasury Holdings have the right to develop.

extragon · 10-06-2006 4:57pm

Yes, thanks for that, dowlingm.
So the development by the Spencer Dock Development Company ( incl Treasury Holdings and CIE ) is linked to the building of the Docklands station. So, to make some sense of this, someone came up with the interconnector.
But, if you want a metro the obvious route is Airport, Connolly, Pearse, St Stephen's Green, Heuston - built as one line. It couldn't be simpler or more effective.
Whatever the merits of the dockland development it shouldn't be allowed to permanently distort the city's infrastructure.

murphaph · 10-06-2006 5:26pm

extragon wrote:

Yes, thanks for that, dowlingm.
So the development by the Spencer Dock Development Company ( incl Treasury Holdings and CIE ) is linked to the building of the Docklands station. So, to make some sense of this, someone came up with the interconnector.
But, if you want a metro the obvious route is Airport, Connolly, Pearse, St Stephen's Green, Heuston - built as one line. It couldn't be simpler or more effective.
Whatever the merits of the dockland development it shouldn't be allowed to permanently distort the city's infrastructure.

Arrrgh, sorry, no. The interconnector does much more than you seem to realise. It eliminates conflicting movements in and around Connolly Station. It creates two distinct DART routes and opens up metro quality rail commuting to the likes of Adamstown in west Dublin. Indeed, if I had to choose between metroNorth or Interconnector alone, I would choose the latter as it does much more.

dowlingm · 10-06-2006 5:37pm

extragon - it needs distorting. Dublin badly needs intensification of its city core to absorb population increase, and because so much of the existing Parnell Square-St Stephen's Green axis is unlikely to be redevelopable in such a way as to produce density - the docklands are the only place it can happen because there are fewer heritage issues. Obviously it can't happen any old way but it has to happen and that should mean Dublin Port become Balbriggan Port.

Interconnector takes terminating trains out of Heuston to free up Intercity platform slots in the main station and creates a second through route rather than the single one at the moment, and also reducing terminating Connolly services. Unlike the Park Tunnel, which should already be in use as a stop gap, it has no impact on Maynooth line service because it is completely new line.

It would have been nice if the history of Irish railways hadn't involved competing rail lines and terminals like Heuston and Connolly and Broadstone (a lesson for Dublin airport there) but a central through station but that's not what we got.

I think the principle was actually right - IE to relocate freight yards and make the most of their property assets the way the army sold off the barracks to get APCs and planes. The problem is IE sold rather than relocated freight yards and they were babes in the wood compared to the savvy guys at Treasury who got a great deal. That of itself invalidates neither interconnector which was originally supposed to connect to Connolly before someone figured out how hard that would be, or developing Spencer Dock as a concept.
(edit for spelling)

spacetweek · 10-06-2006 6:21pm

extragon wrote:

Yes, thanks for that, dowlingm.
So the development by the Spencer Dock Development Company ( incl Treasury Holdings and CIE ) is linked to the building of the Docklands station. So, to make some sense of this, someone came up with the interconnector.
But, if you want a metro the obvious route is Airport, Connolly, Pearse, St Stephen's Green, Heuston - built as one line. It couldn't be simpler or more effective.
Whatever the merits of the dockland development it shouldn't be allowed to permanently distort the city's infrastructure.

The Interconnector is such an essential piece of infrastructure that I didn't think it needed to be justified, but here's a shortlist:

- Takes pressure off Heuston: Kildare Commuter trains pass straight through
- Takes pressure off Connolly: Maynooth trains pass straight through
- Takes pressure off Luas Red line overcrowded section Heuston-Connolly - no one has picked up on this benefit yet, but it's very important - I live in Smithfield and this section of the line is practically unusable at this stage at peak, and often off peak too.
- Complete e/w cross city route for the first time
- Joins two mainline train stations
- Opens up rail access to High St and Spencer Dock
- Creates connections between Green Line, Red Line, Metro
- Simplifies and rationalises Dublin Area rail network, and greatly increases efficiency and capacity

Murphaph, you're on the money. Seriously, if it came down to Interconnector or Metro instead of And, Interconnector is actually far more essential.

extragon · 11-06-2006 12:13am

Thanks for the clarifications. However, what you ignore is - funding is not currently provided for an Interconnector, and that it carries fewer obvious political benefits than the metro. Who can be certain how govt. finances will stand in five or ten years time and if it will ever be built?
The govt. will be happy to have Spencer Dock development and a metro under way, and may delay indefinitely any further development. There will always be more votes in hospitals than in underground rail lines, in a country like Ireland.
They won't even pay to have the metro go via Tara Street, or run it southwards on the LUAS line - and you think they'll fork up for the Interconnector?
It seems to me that the Interconnector carrot is being used by the Dept. to sell the idea of a cut-price inadequate metro and divert the attention of those who might otherwise campaign to have the job done properly.

I like the vision of an RER style project linking Adamstown with Artane in the style that Versailles is linked to Gare d'Austerlitz and Orly. But that's Paris. In London they haven't got round to deciding to pay for Crossrail, and whenever I'm in Heuston or Connolly I am not reminded of Paddington and Liverpool Street but of someplace very small. What congestion? Last time in Dublin I waited 10 minutes for a DART at about 5 pm. I am not a transport specialist, obviously, but neither are politicians and most voters - who might quickly remember that Dublin is smaller than Greater Manchester, and that maybe an extra platform or two is needed, and better bus lanes, and some nice tax cuts.
I think the metro should be regarded as a one off loosening on the purse strings and if it is to be built more should be made of it.

Victor · 11-06-2006 12:23am

extragon wrote:

I am not a transport specialist, obviously, but neither are politicians and most voters - who might quickly remember that Dublin is smaller than Greater Manchester, and that maybe an extra platform or two is needed, and better bus lanes, and some nice tax cuts.

Realise that people need to get to work and that businesses are willing to pay a little bit more to ensure people get to work. After all, they would much prefer you to work for 10 hours and commute for one than commute for 3 and then do degraded work for 8 and to pay you a little more, because you don't "have to" have a car.

Winters · 11-06-2006 1:19pm

extragon wrote:

However, what you ignore is - funding is not currently provided for an Interconnector, and that it carries fewer obvious political benefits than the metro.

The Interconnector is fully provided for in the current Transport 21 funding envelope. It is not a once off payment but rather an incremental increase in subvention respective to the timescale.

MarkoP11 · 11-06-2006 1:43pm

The funding for all projects within T21 is ring fenced, the interconnector is funded, if there is a project to worry about in funding terms its the metro as the consortium that wins will have to finance its construction itself and not recieve any government funds until it opens sometime after 2012

extragon · 11-06-2006 7:36pm

I realise that funding has been promised and "ring fenced" - on the strength of the public finances that we know will be fantastic in five or ten years time. What I failed to realize was that "promised" is the same thing as "provided."
I was misled, also, by the new surface station they're building in Spencer Dock, and by the fact that they'll build a new underground station in St Stephens green - and then come back a few years later and build another underground station in the same place.
They do things differently in Ireland

monument · 11-06-2006 8:07pm

spacetweek wrote:

The Interconnector is such an essential piece of infrastructure that I didn't think it needed to be justified, but here's a shortlist...

Yes, anyone with the slimiest knowledge of integration should know most of this, it’s why I get a sick feeling in my stomach every time Olivia Mitchell questions the project… is she still at it or just taking a break?

murphaph · 11-06-2006 8:11pm

extragon wrote:

I was misled .. by the fact that they'll build a new underground station in St Stephens green - and then come back a few years later and build another underground station in the same place.

<Philip raises hand and groans>. I'll take this one. There is no good reason to build both metroNorth and DART stations at the same time. All the powers that be (in this case the RPA as they'll get there first) have to do is ensure sufficient allowance is left in the metroNorth station to provide escalators/lifts/stairs to access the DART station which WILL be below it. The DART station was always going to be mined from the tunnel bore, as opposed to the box tehnique that mero will use. The DART station platforms will be at 90 degrees to the metro ones btw, it would not be a solution to just dig a really deep box as the lines approach from different directions. The RPA and IE (and their respective consultants) are working VERY closely on the Stephen's Green interchange, believe it or not.

bk · 11-06-2006 8:34pm

extragon wrote:

I realise that funding has been promised and "ring fenced" - on the strength of the public finances that we know will be fantastic in five or ten years time. What I failed to realize was that "promised" is the same thing as "provided."

Actually the ring fenced funding is very conservative percentage of GDP and should easily be affordable even if things don't continue going so well for the economy.

Actually one of the complaints about the T21 plan was that it is too conservative, that it was only spending the same percentage of GDP as the last 20 years and with more money in the economy we should actually pouring more money into transport.

From everything I've seen the T21 projects aren't just promises, they are very serious and work and financing of them is procedding very quickly.

Victor · 12-06-2006 4:08pm

bk wrote:

From everything I've seen the T21 projects aren't just promises, they are very serious and work and financing of them is procedding very quickly.

Adn this is why the entire plan is 17 pages long. :rolleyes:

Integration chaos

Comments