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

cgcsb · 18-02-2019 12:56pm

My guess:
1st week in March
Talk of metro going further south than Sandyford.
Charlemont portal remains number one option, extending tunneling is too expensive and wasteful
Dunville ave will have an underpass or bridge, whichever locals prefer

salmocab · 18-02-2019 12:57pm

jvan wrote: »

In the grand scheme €100m isn't that much extra. Also if it does come in the around the €3bn mark then when compared to the Nch it will be a bargain of a project.

I know you aren’t doing this but we need to be careful of the language it’s not 100 million extra it’s 100 million more than a different option. It’s a small point but when it’s used over and over it becomes fact. The NCH overun is different but it will taint other projects costings for the foreseeable future.

Dats me · 18-02-2019 1:03pm

cgcsb wrote: »

My guess:
1st week in March
Talk of metro going further south than Sandyford.
Charlemont portal remains number one option, extending tunneling is too expensive and wasteful
Dunville ave will have an underpass or bridge, whichever locals prefer

I think they'd be mad not to put the out-line or whatever you call it beechwood connection in, that would have "minimal disruption" but more expensive and lots of CPO, as an option so there can be talk of a choice as opposed to having people against it.

Would going past Sandyford mean less chance of High-Floor? When I was at the public consultation the engineer I was talking to said that past Sandyford wouldn't be suitable for high-floor

cgcsb · 18-02-2019 1:13pm

Dats me wrote: »

I think they'd be mad not to put the out-line or whatever you call it beechwood connection in, that would have "minimal disruption" but more expensive and lots of CPO, as an option so there can be talk of a choice as opposed to having people against it.

Would going past Sandyford mean less chance of High-Floor? When I was at the public consultation the engineer I was talking to said that past Sandyford wouldn't be suitable for high-floor

There's lots of options for retrofitting the line south of Sandyford, the line has quite a bit of space around it to work with. In light of the Cherrywood development, this might make more sense. Having a rural, semi-mountainous tram between Bray and Sandyford would be a bit odd.

salmocab · 18-02-2019 1:16pm

cgcsb wrote: »

Dunville ave will have an underpass or bridge, whichever locals prefer

I’d say the most likely option is an underpass with the tracks raised so far something like a 1.5 mtr drop in the road and the tracks raised about a metre that should give about a 2.1 mtr clearance.

tallaghtfornia · 18-02-2019 1:17pm

Such a pity that the old Harcourt Street line was not preserved all the way to Bray - it would have been perfect for the Metro - Swords all the way to Bray that would be a dream!

Sam Russell · 18-02-2019 3:01pm

salmocab wrote: »

I’d say the most likely option is an underpass with the tracks raised so far something like a 1.5 mtr drop in the road and the tracks raised about a metre that should give about a 2.1 mtr clearance.

A gap of 2.1 matres would not be adequate, there would be too many bridge strikes.

marno21 · 18-02-2019 3:03pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

A gap of 2.1 matres would not be adequate, there would be too many bridge strikes.

What clearance was provided with the old bridge ?

marno21 · 18-02-2019 3:32pm

tallaghtfornia wrote: »

Such a pity that the old Harcourt Street line was not preserved all the way to Bray - it would have been perfect for the Metro - Swords all the way to Bray that would be a dream!

The section that is currently bypassed, between Sandyford and Leopardstown, is home to some fairly low density development through Foxrock though. The diverted section here serves quite a lot of development - at the expense of alignment quality.

Rulmeq · 18-02-2019 3:47pm

cgcsb wrote: »

My guess:
Talk of metro going further south than Sandyford.

I really hope they do (and using the old alignment, not the line that goes around the world)

salmocab · 18-02-2019 3:49pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

A gap of 2.1 matres would not be adequate, there would be too many bridge strikes.

In fairness it’s a residential area it wouldn’t be too much trouble to have a low bridge. Cars, cyclists,pedestrians and most vans would go under 2.1. I don’t see the need for there to be much more. Once the few businesses on the rathmines side of the junction get their deliveries from that end it should be easy enough.

Marcusm · 18-02-2019 6:02pm

salmocab wrote: »

In fairness it’s a residential area it wouldn’t be too much trouble to have a low bridge. Cars, cyclists,pedestrians and most vans would go under 2.1. I don’t see the need for there to be much more. Once the few businesses on the rathmines side of the junction get their deliveries from that end it should be easy enough.

The supermarket 75m from the line gets 16-25 deliveries per day (per owner) with mostly 3.5tn plus vehicles. It would close off one route - not a killer although I really think the time delay and cost of building up the embankment etc must be close to the option of joining in at Beechwood.

cgcsb · 18-02-2019 6:09pm

Marcusm wrote: »

The supermarket 75m from the line gets 16-25 deliveries per day (per owner) with mostly 3.5tn plus vehicles. It would close off one route - not a killer although I really think the time delay and cost of building up the embankment etc must be close to the option of joining in at Beechwood.

Doubtful. It's the difference between €100m and €20m + one supermarket with a changed delivery route.

jd · 18-02-2019 6:11pm

Some debate coming up on Today FM

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097540672045883396

cgcsb · 18-02-2019 6:13pm

jd wrote: »

Some debate coming up on Today FM

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097540672045883396

Love the retro pics.

marno21 · 18-02-2019 7:00pm

jd wrote: »

Some debate coming up on Today FM

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097540672045883396

The NTA need a public relations officer pronto

More bull**** about ripping up Luas lines from the usual suspects. It's a waste of time trying to get this project built if such activity continues

salmocab · 18-02-2019 7:02pm

marno21 wrote: »

The NTA need a public relations officer pronto

More bull**** about ripping up Luas lines from the usual suspects. It's a waste of time trying to get this project built if such activity continues

They had too many people on with too many views it went no where

marno21 · 18-02-2019 7:22pm

salmocab wrote: »

They had too many people on with too many views it went no where

If that's the case a good start would be omitting people who don't believe in the "you can have your own opinion but not your own facts" idea.

LeinsterDub · 18-02-2019 7:28pm

Insufferable levels of nonsense regarding both ML and cycling from both newstalk and today fm today. It's like or very own version of Brexit. Who should be get to discuss this? How about that guy who opposed every public transport project and claimed the Luas would be a white elephant? Perfect!

salmocab · 18-02-2019 7:28pm

marno21 wrote: »

If that's the case a good start would be omitting people who don't believe in the "you can have your own opinion but not your own facts" idea.

They were talking about the second runway too and had someone from I think the limerick chamber of commerce. It was about the investment in Dublin in general with two big projects the usual busses are enough carry on followed by link the northern line through the airport. Then a bit of Dublin gets everything everywhere else is neglected.

marno21 · 19-02-2019 2:41am

I only got to listen to the Metrolink segment from TLW there in full, only heard bits of it earlier:

Paul O'Kane from the DAA is the type of person the NTA need for these projects and quick. He rattled off proper factful answers to all of Matt's questions.

Graeme McQueen was as he always is, fully supportive of both projects (runway + Metro) because he knows the benefits of both. He also properly corrected the nonsense about the Green Line.

Frank.. I don't know what reason he was invited on for, but not supporting Metro for airport workers because they already drive to work (maybe
because they don't have a choice?) and there already is a Port Tunnel.. along with the usual crap about ripping up Luas lines.

It's disappointing at this stage that Matt Cooper is on about ripping up the Luas line. This plan is out with 12 months now and this crap is still not being corrected.

Dats me · 19-02-2019 2:06pm

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters

Link to the Dublin Commuter Coalition twitter I saw there. There's a link to a facebook page in the description that seems quiet but it's a place for people to get involved and counter the nonsense.

Lots of good tweets up countering the 2 years rubbish

Marcusm · 19-02-2019 2:55pm

cgcsb wrote: »

Doubtful. It's the difference between €100m and €20m + one supermarket with a changed delivery route.

Plus the period for which there will be an incomplete line. Charlemont close to canal, etc. I can just see the greater prospect for unseen/uncertain events. Seems less likely to be the case with a tie in at Beechwood South. Sometimes, an expected higher cost with lower prospect of disruption is better than lower cost with a greater prospect of disruption. What did they say it cost to move the unrecorded Drimnagh sewer at the NCH site? 50-60m?

CatInABox · 19-02-2019 6:42pm

An Taoiseach is giving some thought to actually splitting the Metrolink project into North and South elements, according to the DublinLive.ie*. Apparently he came out with this at the sod turning photo op for the new runway.

He also said this:

There are a lot of projects that have been talked about for decades, notwithstanding the controversy, the children’s hospital is now under construction, the Dublin Airport runway is now under construction and we’ll get Metro under construction too.

So that's still very positive.

Of course, as soon as Brexit is settled, there'll be a new election, and the Childrens Hospital will probably mean he'll be kicked out, so that's not so positive. The fact that it was a capital project that brought down a government will probably mean that nothing will ever be approved again.

*The photo of "The planned Metro line" is obviously totally wrong.

marno21 · 19-02-2019 10:11pm

https://twitter.com/frankmcdonald60/status/1097821092905959424

https://twitter.com/GraemeMcQ/status/1097826497614802944

Interesting thread with Frank getting challenged rightly on his 2 years claim. It's disappointing that Graeme McQueen has to be the one to correct all this, it shows how badly the NTA need someone to communicate this information.

Of course, Frank's Tweet was retweeted by the Rethink Metrolink group

MJohnston · 19-02-2019 10:50pm

Frank desperately needs something to do more productive with his retirement. Old man yells at cloud barely covers it.

prunudo · 20-02-2019 7:32am

With the likes of these lads its no wonder after 40 years of talking about a metro we still don't have one. Graeme McQueen is about the only positive voice out there.

jd · 20-02-2019 8:32am

In today's Indo. I wonder what options were presented to Ross.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

prunudo · 20-02-2019 8:40am

jd wrote: »

In today's Indo. I wonder what options were presented to Ross.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

Was just going to post this. More attention grabbing negative headlines from the media.

New Metrolink route could shut down Luas Green Line 'for up to four years'

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

salmocab · 20-02-2019 8:47am

jvan wrote: »

Was just going to post this. More attention grabbing negative headlines from the media.

New Metrolink route could shut down Luas Green Line 'for up to four years'

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-metrolink-route-could-shut-down-luas-green-line-for-up-to-four-years-37833997.html

Surely people can see how ridiculous 4 years is, it’s so over the top than anyone who thinks it’s real is an absolute moron.

LeinsterDub · 20-02-2019 8:53am

salmocab wrote: »

Surely people can see how ridiculous 4 years is, it’s so over the top than anyone who thinks it’s real is an absolute moron.

This is an alternative proposal to ML. The NTA are getting their ducks in a line. So disruption or 4 years of closure with added cost and expense

1huge1 · 20-02-2019 8:56am

Well if we ever needed to know the indos agenda on this (aside from getting a eye catching headline to help their dwindling readership), you just have to look at that ridiculous over the top headline.

prunudo · 20-02-2019 9:10am

salmocab wrote: »

Surely people can see how ridiculous 4 years is, it’s so over the top than anyone who thinks it’s real is an absolute moron.

Never underestimate how much faith some people put in articles in their respected print media.

Edit.
Just turned on Newstalk to hear the tail end of Eamon Ryan talking about this 4yr closure. Anyone else hear the full interview? What was the general gist?

CatInABox · 20-02-2019 9:28am

jd wrote: »

In today's Indo. I wonder what options were presented to Ross.

Cut and cover would imply that they "surface" between Charlemont and Ranelagh, and then cut and cover south past Dunville Avenue. In order to Cut and Cover without affecting peoples homes, they'd need to use the area of the Luas tracks to do so, hence the "4 years".

Honestly, it sounds like the NTA are going to present the Minister with a number of options that could work engineering wise, but in reality, only one or two will work politically. Any lengthy Luas closure will be ruled out by the Minister, so that's basically all of the in-line options removed, leaving only the tie in at Charlemont and Beechwood South as realistic options.

The tie in options have a three month closure, and I'd assume that all of the other construction needed along the line would happen at the same time, i.e. the temporary tie ins at St Raphaela's Rd onto the diversion around the bridge construction site, etc.

Of course, this is all assuming that Shane Ross is competent, which is something a lot of people doubt these days.

LXFlyer · 20-02-2019 9:35am

1huge1 wrote: »

Well if we ever needed to know the indos agenda on this (aside from getting a eye catching headline to help their dwindling readership), you just have to look at that ridiculous over the top headline.

It’s quite possible that it is one of the options (albeit a crazy one) that the NTA have in their proposals. A “worst” option that wouldn’t be politically acceptable.

I doubt that the paper made it up.

We will have to wait and see.

jd · 20-02-2019 10:10am

CatInABox wrote: »

Cut and cover would imply that they "surface" between Charlemont and Ranelagh, and then cut and cover south past Dunville Avenue. In order to Cut and Cover without affecting peoples homes, they'd need to use the area of the Luas tracks to do so, hence the "4 years".

.

Yes, I figured that was the option given if they wanted to minimise property acquisition on the south side.

marno21 · 20-02-2019 10:12am

This plan in the Indo today is effectively ripping up the Luas tracks. It's a total non runner

Perhaps it's why Frank was so focused on ripping up tracks in the last week or so

Back to the realistic options lads

salmocab · 20-02-2019 10:41am

marno21 wrote: »

This plan in the Indo today is effectively ripping up the Luas tracks. It's a total non runner

Perhaps it's why Frank was so focused on ripping up tracks in the last week or so

Back to the realistic options lads

It is a non runner but the point is it still wouldn’t take 4 years to dig the cut and cover.

cgcsb · 20-02-2019 10:50am

The journalists seem to be conflating the term 'disrupted' with 'closure'. Disruption could be reduced evening services on summer weekends (down to one track for a short stretch for example). Seems like a deliberate ploy to mislead.

prunudo · 20-02-2019 11:03am

cgcsb wrote: »

The journalists seem to be conflating the term 'disrupted' with 'closure'. Disruption could be reduced evening services on summer weekends (down to one track for a short stretch for example). Seems like a deliberate ploy to mislead.

But who is misleading and who is responsible for the leaks. Are the media stirring up hysteria on the back of the Nch mess or are the Nta releasing the worst case scenario plans now so when the real plan comes out it won't look so bad.

prunudo · 20-02-2019 11:16am

If you value your blood pressure don't be listening to Pat Kenny at present.

Synode · 20-02-2019 11:29am

jvan wrote: »

If you value your blood pressure don't be listening to Pat Kenny at present.

Just switched it on and he's reading out texts. Every single piece of misinformation & crackpot idea, not to mention the eejits outside Dublin complaining that Dublin gets everything :mad:

prunudo · 20-02-2019 11:38am

Synode wrote: »

Just switched it on and he's reading out texts. Every single piece of misinformation & crackpot idea, not to mention the eejits outside Dublin complaining that Dublin gets everything :mad:

I really hope its not, but IF that is the general publics opinion on Metro and having good infrastructure then we don't actually deserve a proper metro.
The fact these so called experts and crackpot texters get airtime is as annoying as their ideas.

Pixel Eater · 20-02-2019 11:40am

jvan wrote: »

If you value your blood pressure don't be listening to Pat Kenny at present.

Just listen to it. Shocking. McDonald and some southside councillor both vehemently opposed to the Metrolink so absolutely no objectivity or balance. McDonald's whole argument seems to be that closing the current Luas line will cause too much interuption. An unfortunate consequence but hardly a strong enough reason to suppered the whole thing. Pat Kenny even chirped in with the whole 'We can't do big infastructure projects here, get someone else to do it'. Hopeless 'debate'.

LeinsterDub · 20-02-2019 11:42am

cgcsb wrote: »

The journalists seem to be conflating the term 'disrupted' with 'closure'. Disruption could be reduced evening services on summer weekends (down to one track for a short stretch for example). Seems like a deliberate ploy to mislead.

Disruption could be even less than that. The green lines was 'disrupted' while the platform where extended. No one cared

LeinsterDub · 20-02-2019 11:47am

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Just listen to it. Shocking. McDonald and some southside councillor both vehemently opposed to the Metrolink so absolutely no objectivity or balance. McDonald's whole argument seems to be that closing the current Luas line will cause too much interuption. An unfortunate consequence but hardly a strong enough reason to suppered the whole thing. Pat Kenny even chirped in with the whole 'We can't do big infastructure projects here, get someone else to do it'. Hopeless 'debate'.

Under no circumstances will the line be closed in its entirety. Broombridge to SSG will be entirely unaffected as will Sandyford to Brides Glen

marno21 · 20-02-2019 1:51pm

Is this a fly the 4 year closure kite, watch the outrage and return with a new plan that involves a much shorter closure but with property acquisition at Beechwood?

The NTA need to get this route out pronto before this misinformation snowballs beyond control.

MJohnston · 20-02-2019 2:11pm

If it is deliberate misinformation, they overestimated the journalistic abilities of the Irish media.

My guess is we're just hearing about one of a series of plans that were proposed as final options, and this happens to be the worst case (or one of the worst cases). No surprise that, of course, our media would miss that subtlety.

roadmaster · 20-02-2019 2:18pm

When a general election is called and if the numbers stack up the FG get back in with partners, Leo Varadkar has said he would like to have the green party as part of the collation. With there views on how the metro would be delivered could we see it changed again as there price of support for the government or would it be to late by then?

MJohnston · 20-02-2019 2:30pm

I don't think there's any predicting how Metrolink would survive a general election. Whilst we're still in the paperwork phase, nothing is concrete.

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

Comments