Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

[Article] Costly Metro project should be derailed

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    aliveandkicking wrote: »
    A couple of years ago I would have agreed with you that we were being sold a pup by the RPA. Back then they were proposing 60m trams, no integration with the DART except a crazy travelator idea from Tara St to College Green, no integration with the Maynooth line at all, no integration with the red Luas line and only going as far as the Airport not to Swords. Back then I was a staunch critic of the metro proposal (read my posts here from around that time) but now I'm glad to say what the RPA are offering now is a millions times better.

    I want to point out that the travelator idea is not crazy at all. Barcelona metro is building a travelator to connect the Catalan "dart" commuter trains with the metro lines at Diagonal. The travelator is needed because the underground walkway that connects the two is cramped and too long. It does not facilitate easy integration.

    To not build a travelator to connect O´Connell Bridge station with Tara Street is, in my opinion, highly stupid because such a travelator would stimulate interchange between these lines in a way that a surface connection cannot.

    It is always better to install facilties such as travelators, multiple exits and wide platforms from the word go; not spending money on these things is false economy because eventually they will be required and it always costs more to do it retrospectively.

    In relation to the interconnector while I now accept the idea that it is a good thing and is needed, I do feel that it is the thing that will actually cost the most money to build. Simply put, I think CIE will make a balls of it. They couldn´t even manage to upgrade the DART properly, so how in god´s name will they be able to engineer a tunnel under Viking Dublin without causing numerous buildings to implode?

    Looking at the sitation in Barcelona currently, where construction of the TGV tunnel between the airport and central Barcelona has caused a surface line to subside and a commuter rail tunnel to collapse, in a city that has decades of experience with rail tunneling, I wouldn´t like to think what would have happened if CIE were in charge of that project!


  • Options
    #33
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Metrobest wrote: »
    I wouldn´t like to think what would have happened if CIE were in charge of that project!
    Nothing would have happened. ;)

    I've agreed with you on a lot of things lately MB, but a long travelator in a tunnel to Tara St. would be an extravagance that would be better spent elsewhere for the time being.

    Anyone heading Bray->Maynooth on the DART and wanting the O'Connell St area will likely depart at Tara and walk anyway. Anyone wanting St. Stephen's Green will depart an walk or change at Pearse, anyone wanting the Mater Hospital can stay on as far as Drumcondra and take metro southbound 1 stop.

    The very limited number of journeys made easier by a travelator connection between Tara and O'Connell Bridge wouldn't justify the relatively large expense incurred in driving the tunnel and installing a mega long travelator-remember this metro system may be devoid of regular escalators at many stops! The money spent on the Tara connection could easily pay for multiple escalators at all stops not at grade. That would be a better use of the limited funding I believe.

    They should of course leave the option open to later drive a pedestrian tunnel in the design of the O'Connell Bridge stop as we do not know the future direction of any southside extension to the metro. It may link to green line but it's possible it will also swing out towards Tallaght, in which case a better connection at Tara would be beneficial. :)


  • Options
    #34
    BrianD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    Metrobest wrote: »
    To not build a travelator to connect O´Connell Bridge station with Tara Street is, in my opinion, highly stupid because such a travelator would stimulate interchange between these lines in a way that a surface connection cannot.

    No problem with them but I think the distances are too long to be practical and would would be an unsatisfactory state of affairs for users.
    In relation to the interconnector while I now accept the idea that it is a good thing and is needed, I do feel that it is the thing that will actually cost the most money to build. Simply put, I think CIE will make a balls of it. They couldn´t even manage to upgrade the DART properly, so how in god´s name will they be able to engineer a tunnel under Viking Dublin without causing numerous buildings to implode?

    You accept anything that the RPA tell you but not CIE?!? We all know that a line north to swords is needed and we are discussing the finer details of it here. Whether the RPA or CIE build it is not that relevant it is needed. We all know that the interconnector is needed (again makes no odds who builds it) but you wouldn't accept it because it was a CIE project?!??? Are you for real? RPA are asking people to jump off the north wall ... off you go!!

    The fact of the matter despite all their faults, and cock ups in the past, IR have demonstrated that they are now well able to deliver major projects on time and on budget. To be frank, the RPA don't enjot that record though its early days for them. Let's face it the interconnector won't be built by CIE - it would probably be one of the big international contractors who would be building it as no such expertese exists here.
    Looking at the sitation in Barcelona currently, where construction of the TGV tunnel between the airport and central Barcelona has caused a surface line to subside and a commuter rail tunnel to collapse, in a city that has decades of experience with rail tunneling, I wouldn´t like to think what would have happened if CIE were in charge of that project!

    That's an idiotic statement to make that has no basis in fact! How can you possible make that statement? Surely the same should apply to the RPA who have no tunneling experience either? Oh hang on, who caused HArcourt st to subside ... oh, the RPA!


  • Options
    #35
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    The very limited number of journeys made easier by a travelator connection between Tara and O'Connell Bridge wouldn't justify the relatively large expense incurred in driving the tunnel and installing a mega long travelator-remember this metro system may be devoid of regular escalators at many stops! The money spent on the Tara connection could easily pay for multiple escalators at all stops not at grade. That would be a better use of the limited funding I believe.

    They should of course leave the option open to later drive a pedestrian tunnel in the design of the O'Connell Bridge stop as we do not know the future direction of any southside extension to the metro. It may link to green line but it's possible it will also swing out towards Tallaght, in which case a better connection at Tara would be beneficial.

    Philip, compared with many underground connections at metro stations in various European cities the distance between Tara Street and O´Connell Street is not insurmountable and it´s a shame, I believe, to leave the two unconnected.

    Here in Barcelona I have to change everyday at Passeig de Gracia station which has a long, claustrophobic tunnel. There are ways of avoiding this connection, but at the end of the day people, though they hate it, use it because it´s the fastest connection for many journeys. (A similar walkway at Diagonal-Provenca is to be converted to a travelator).

    If time is money, and travelators save time, then travelators in the long run save money - to business, to society (in terms of lower stress levels and higher productivity and efficiency.)

    Nobody did a cost benefits analysis on the Spire or on the square in Smithfield, these are public spaces which have a positive aesthetic quality and improve people´s quality of life. The travelator does all that too, yet it also yields a useful function in terms of connnecting what may well be Ireland´s two busiest stations. Why am I the only person on this forum advocating it?

    I want the MetroNorth to be the best metro possible and for it to avoid the mistakes made in the Barcelona metro, ie. narrow platforms, claustrophobic tunnels and lack of travelators (many of the Barcelona stations were built during the Franco dictatorship). (We don´t have that excuse: we voted for Bertie Ahern.)

    Whether or not there is an underground connection between Tara Street and O´Connell Bridge, the reality is that people will find themselves making connections between these two stations, for example the nurse traveling from Dun Laoghaire to the Mater or the trade union official from Sandymount en route to his office in Parnell Square. Yes, such connections could be made via Drumcondra but they can be done much more speedily and confortably via a travelator to Tara.

    It´s horrendously disruptive to install a travelator retrospectively, however do it first time round and it´s a doddle. I don´t have a figure on how much a Tara-O´Connell Bridge travelator would cost but it wouldn´t be huge - at the end of the day this is supposed to be Ireland´s showpiece metro station which every tourist to the city will end up using, do we want the Europeans to think we´re a bunch of idiots for not connecting these two stations, as would surely be done in any other EU city building a metro like this?

    And Philip don´t worry that a travelator will deprive other stations of their escalators. While MetroNorth may not provide escalators to street level it has always allowed for escalators from Concourse to platform level, along with lifts for the disabled to street level. Again that´s common practice in new metro lines across Europe, such as Madrid´s.


  • Options
    #36
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    BrianD wrote: »
    IR have demonstrated that they are now well able to deliver major projects on time and on budget. !

    *laughs*

    the last major project they (mis)managed was DART Upgrade which came in half a year late.

    And did they ever get back those DART carriages they sent to be refurbished in Ukraine or some other random place?

    And then there was the fiasco of the drivers going on strike over the new Cork-Dublin train project. And even those trains were late to come on stream.

    Brian you must have some deep nostalgia about Irish Rail or some other connection to the company, I find it so strange that as someone who´s lived outside Ireland and seen how the first hand the rail systems operate in other countries you can possibly defend Irish Rail?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Metrobest wrote: »
    And did they ever get back those DART carriages they sent to be refurbished in Ukraine or some other random place?

    Was that delay not the refurbisher's fault?
    Metrobest wrote: »
    ...And even those trains were late to come on stream.

    Again, was that not the train builder's fault?
    Metrobest wrote: »
    Brian you must have some deep nostalgia about Irish Rail or some other connection to the company, I find it so strange that as someone who´s lived outside Ireland and seen how the first hand the rail systems operate in other countries you can possibly defend Irish Rail?

    Him having nostalgia a side, you're not building a massive case of major IR projects not on time and on budget.

    You list one building project, two new/refurbished train issues which I'm nearly sure the train builders were in the wrong, and one union issue.

    When we're talking about building projects you look to be going off in a tangent.


  • Options
    #38
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,487 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Metrobest wrote:
    Why am I the only person on this forum advocating it?

    Because most people see that while Tara is currently an important station, once Metro North and the interconnector are built, it becomes far less important with easier connections at other stations.

    Interchange between Metro North and Kildare Line/Dart at Stephens Green, interchange between Metro North and Maynooth Line/Dart at Drumcondra. I can't think of a single reason why someone would want to go to Tara unless they work/live close by.

    Much more important to ensure there are exits at both sides of the quays at the O'Connell St Station
    monument wrote:
    Was that delay not the refurbisher's fault?

    .....

    Again, was that not the train builder's fault?

    It was most definitely CIE's fault for badly managing these projects and allowing their subcontractors to get away with such outrageously over scheduled projects
    (I actually don't think the DART station upgrades taking an extra 6 months is a big deal, but the DART carriage situation is truly awful).


  • Options
    #39
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Metrobest wrote: »
    It´s horrendously disruptive to install a travelator retrospectively, however do it first time round and it´s a doddle. I don´t have a figure on how much a Tara-O´Connell Bridge travelator would cost but it wouldn´t be huge - at the end of the day this is supposed to be Ireland´s showpiece metro station which every tourist to the city will end up using, do we want the Europeans to think we´re a bunch of idiots for not connecting these two stations, as would surely be done in any other EU city building a metro like this?

    And Philip don´t worry that a travelator will deprive other stations of their escalators. While MetroNorth may not provide escalators to street level it has always allowed for escalators from Concourse to platform level, along with lifts for the disabled to street level. Again that´s common practice in new metro lines across Europe, such as Madrid´s.
    It's over 1000 feet from O'Connell Bridge to Tara MB. That's a proper long tunnel. It's not just an extended exit shaft. It would cost in the low millions to build. It would require services to be diverted like a 1000ft of Luas track. It would not be a doddle.

    I have seen metros (like Berlin) where the concourse to street has no escalator and it's a big let down compared to (for example) Munich where most statons have an escalator up to street (in fact most are bi-directional with sensors at each end) level. Remember especially for metro north that many passengers will be armed with luggage from the airport. I'd rather the cash was spent on equipping every underground/elevated station with proper escalators. Each to their own but definitely I would like to allow for the travelator to be added later.


  • Options
    #40
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,487 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Navan Junction wrote:
    Three years later, the RPA is motoring ahead with a scheme that will cost even more - at least €5 billion, as revealed by The Irish Timeslast August. And the cost of repaying this capital investment would equate to €22 for every trip taken on the line from Swords to St Stephen's Green.

    That's the figure cited by the Oireachtas Library and Research Service in a report on the metro project commissioned by Senator Paschal Donohoe (FG). It assumed that fares would cover the annual operating costs, leaving taxpayers to service a huge capital debt for 30 years.

    Anyone know where I might get this report?

    Freedom of information request perhaps?

    The reason I ask is that I've been doing the maths and I've absolutely no idea where they come up with the figure of €22 per trip for the capital cost over 30 years.

    Based on the following assumptions:
    - €5 billion build cost
    - 34 million passengers per year
    - over 30 years
    - Fares cover operational and maintenance costs

    I come up with a figure of just €4.90 per trip to cover the capital cost over 30 years.

    There is a big difference between €4.90 and €22

    The only way I can come up with a figure of €22 per trip was if:

    1) the cost of building the Metro was €22 billion!!!!
    2) or if you wrote off the capital cost off over 7 years rather then 30
    3) or if the expected number of passengers was only 7.5 million per year
    (unlikely as the Luas red line already gets 14.5 million per year)

    Seriously I've absolutely no idea where the figure of €22 comes from and I'd love to see the report that the Oireachtas Library and Research Service compiled.


  • Options
    #41
    marmajam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 66 ✭✭marmajam


    BK, allow the 22 Euros for a mo' - in 30 yrs time it will very very likely cost 22 Euros in fare to make the trip from CC to Swords..........or more.
    The maths are a feeble attempt of the anti public transport lobby to derail these projects.
    From their perspective the plebs can make their way to work by walking, or horse and cart if more than 15 miles, and not on the back of any tax funded fancy travel machines.
    Also what's with the 30 years? - are the owner's going to put it back in it's box then and take it home? They don't seem to have noticed that the 1st London 'Tube' - Paddington to Farringdon - stills runs 142 years on?
    In 2150 it might cost 2,222 Euros to get from the road works in O'Connell/Osama Bin Laden St to Not-Ryanair-terminal 33 in Dublin Airport.
    Mind, 2,222E x 30 million trips will buy individual horse and carts for every chinese language student in Dublin. And China.
    I suggest that the backs of all envelopes at the evil empire HQ, Irish Times, be confiscated.
    Immediately.
    And the school math's teachers of big Frankie MacDonald et al publicly beheaded as an encouragement to the rest.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    paulm17781
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭paulm17781


    Metrobest wrote: »
    Why am I the only person on this forum advocating it?

    Does that in itself not speak volumes to you?


  • Options
    #43
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    bk wrote: »
    It was most definitely CIE's fault for badly managing these projects and allowing their subcontractors to get away with such outrageously over scheduled projects

    The problem with the Luas tracks which the contractors said they would pay for etc is also most definitely the RPA's fault then?


  • Options
    #44
    paulm17781
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭paulm17781


    monument wrote: »
    The problem with the Luas tracks which the contractors said they would pay for etc is also most definitely the RPA's fault then?

    Who managed the Luas? The RPA, it is their fault.

    Who managed the DART upgrade? CIE, it is their fault.

    Project management isn't just outsourcing and forgetting about it. It is managing the project so it gets done on time, properly and preferably under budget.


  • Options
    #45
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    I aggree.

    But it's funny that the RPA lovers (or at least the over the top ones) attack IR on one side and previouly dissmissed the problems with the Luas tracks as the contractors' fault.


  • Options
    #46
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,487 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    monument wrote: »
    I aggree.

    But it's funny that the RPA lovers (or at least the over the top ones) attack IR on one side and previouly dissmissed the problems with the Luas tracks as the contractors' fault.

    I agree completely with Paulm above, all projects will have problems and mistakes made. What is important to me is how they handled the situation.

    For the problem with the tracks, the RPA admitted their was a problem, forced the contractors to pay for their mistakes and it was quickly fixed, all good project management process.

    The problem with the Dart carriages has been on going for the last two years, CIE won't even admit there is a problem and don't seem to be doing anything, they don't seem to be pushing Siemens to fix the problem quickly or pay for their mistakes.

    CIE seem to be following the typical old government department approach to project management. Hide the problem and pretend it doesn't exist. This isn't good project management.


  • Options
    #47
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    murphaph wrote: »
    It's over 1000 feet from O'Connell Bridge to Tara MB. That's a proper long tunnel. It's not just an extended exit shaft. It would cost in the low millions to build. It would require services to be diverted like a 1000ft of Luas track. It would not be a doddle.

    I have seen metros (like Berlin) where the concourse to street has no escalator and it's a big let down compared to (for example) Munich where most statons have an escalator up to street (in fact most are bi-directional with sensors at each end) level. Remember especially for metro north that many passengers will be armed with luggage from the airport. I'd rather the cash was spent on equipping every underground/elevated station with proper escalators. Each to their own but definitely I would like to allow for the travelator to be added later.

    Philip I agree metroNorth stations should all have escalators to street level but at least in the case - no pun intended - of passsengers who carry luggage, these folks will be able to take the lift, a quicker and more convenient option in such a scenario.

    But there will be no lift, no travelator, to connect passengers making connections between O'Connell and Tara and that's what I believe is shortsighted. Because whatever happens with Drumcondra and Pearse and the Green, the reality is that people will make connections at points where it's most central to do so as this saves time. That's the experience here in BCN.

    At the very least allow for a travelator to be installed at a later date but realise that installing one retrospectively will be hugely disruptive. I am witnessing this disruption in Barcelona where a travelator is being installed at the Diagonal Station "incanviador" and entire streets have lanes closed for many long months to facilitate construction. It's never an easy task to do these things retrospectively so why not do it now and give Dublin a world class interchange, a flashy metro station that visible to every tourist visiting the city?

    It's also not hard to make the leap of faith to believe that metroNorth and West will stimulate demand for future metro lines, making the travelator all the more essential to install. Right now!


  • Options
    #48
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    Just to illustrate my point, some pics from the fabulous Bilbao metro and its travelator...


  • Options
    #49
    BendiBus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    Metrobest wrote: »
    But there will be no lift

    How can there be no lift in any station that isn't at ground level? Accessibility regulations effectively make them compulsary don't they?


  • Options
    #50
    paulm17781
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭paulm17781


    Metrobest wrote: »
    Just to illustrate my point, some pics from the fabulous Bilbao metro and its travelator...

    Fwoar... that's hot!


  • Options
    #51
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Metrobest wrote: »
    ..... so why not do it now and give Dublin a world class interchange, a flashy metro station that visible to every tourist visiting the city?

    see here I have problems...I'm getting a vibe of style over substance to be honest with you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Winters
    Registered Users Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    BendiBus wrote: »
    How can there be no lift in any station that isn't at ground level? Accessibility regulations effectively make them compulsary don't they?

    Every underground station will have a lift. The RPA have always maintained this, its the law. I dont understand how 'metrobest' was under the impression that some stations wouldnt.

    The ambiguity came about regarding escalators to the surface whereby the RPA were following the Oporto model where the stations use stairs from surface to concourse level and then either escalators to deep level stations or stairs to more shallow level stations (Example here: http://www.rpa.ie/cms/download.asp?id=396). Lifts were never going to be omitted.


  • Options
    #53
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    Calina wrote: »
    see here I have problems...I'm getting a vibe of style over substance to be honest with you.

    But a travelator combines style and substance, and that's why people love using them when making connections between platforms at metro stations. And that's why cities like Barcelona are putting in travelators retrospectively in their cheaply built metro stations, because once you have a decent metro system in place the emphasis shifts on improving passenger experience while using the system.

    Ps. in relation to lifts, I know that there was always going to be lifts in metro north. my point was that the Tara/O'Connell connection will have neither lift nor travelator and that's shortsighted.

    Fast forward 20 years and we'll be reading opinion pieces from an alzheimers ridden Frank McDonald, saying it was a disgrace that they never built a travelator at this location!


Advertisement