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

strassenwo!f · 20-01-2014 12:18am

cgcsb wrote: »

You've really taken the wind out of this thread.

Sorry if I have.

With the interconnector, there never was any time for discussion of the route. The initial consulation for the interconnector, which took place after the LUAS link-up route had been chosen, involved only interconnector routes going through St. Stephen's Green.

There really was never any opportunity for anybody to talk seriously about alternatives.

OssianSmyth · 21-01-2014 12:33am

strassenwo!f · 21-01-2014 1:43am

That looks like a lovely park. Where is it?

Are there many people commuting to that park?

murphaph · 21-01-2014 7:00pm

Most of those don't live near there so yes they are commuting to it.

LeinsterDub · 03-02-2014 10:49am

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-almost-as-fast-as-metro-north-says-nta-1.1676924

Commuters could be brought from Swords to Dublin city centre in 35 minutes – only five minutes more than proposed for Metro North – on a new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system.

mackerski · 03-02-2014 12:36pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-almost-as-fast-as-metro-north-says-nta-1.1676924

Commuters could be brought from Swords to Dublin city centre in 35 minutes – only five minutes more than proposed for Metro North – on a new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system.

"Priority at traffic lights"? Genius! Why didn't we think of that one before?

markpb · 03-02-2014 12:47pm

Apparently a BRT only lane in the city centre would be impossible. It's funny how they found the space for a Luas lane through the city centre in that case! This is where BRT falls down, people see it as bus so theres no problem treating it like one and making compromises like that. It doesn't matter that it's only five minutes slower than train if it's not reliable because it's stuck in traffic outside Busaras.

Jack Noble · 03-02-2014 1:50pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/rapid-bus-almost-as-fast-as-metro-north-says-nta-1.1676924

Commuters could be brought from Swords to Dublin city centre in 35 minutes – only five minutes more than proposed for Metro North – on a new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system.

Here's what the NTA had to say about BRT in its Draft Integrated Implementation plan for Dublin 2013-2018.

6.7.2 Analysis
The Authority published areport in October 2012, “Bus Rapid Transit - Core
Dublin Network”, setting out two cross city routes for development as BRT schemes.

These are:
Blanchardstown to N11 (UCD);
and
Clongriffin to Tallaght.

The report recommended the progression of these two routes with further work being required to establish the exact routes and terminal points. In addition, that report also examined the potential for BRT to serve the Swords/ Airport to City Centre corridor. It identified that while BRT does not have sufficient capacity to serve this link over the longer term, it would provide
an interim transport solution in the shorter term, pending the development of
a higher capacity rail solution, such as a metro, on this corridor. It would complement any rail-based solution in the long term, and continue to perform strongly in terms of passenger usage. Further work carried out since the publication of that report has confirmed the feasibility and likely usage of a BRT from Swords/Airport to City Centre.

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Draft-Intergrated-Implemation-Plan-2013-2018.pdf

Page 30

When you examine the 2012 study Bus Rapid Transit - Core Dublin Network document from the NTA, it has this to say about demand on the Swords-Airport-City Centre line:

The AM peak passenger loads on the Swords to Tallaght BRT service are given in Figure 37 and Figure 38.
From Figure 37, it can be seen that demand in the Base Year AM peak will likely be strong in this direction, with a peak lineflow of approximately 3,500 passengers at Drumcondra. This far exceeds the capacity of a 15vph service and is also very close to the ultimate capacity of 3,600 ppdph. In the absence of Metro North, the 2030 Current Infrastructure scenario shows a peak
lineflow of approximately 5,900 at St. Patricks College. This far exceeds the ultimate capacity of 3,600ppdph.
The 2030 draft NTA Strategy scenario shows a lower level of demand for the service, which is due primarily to the presence of Metro North in this scenario. In this case the peak lineflow is approximately 4,000, again at St. Patricks College. This also exceeds the ultimate capacity of 3,600ppdph.

In the opposite direction (Figure 38), all scenarios show a demand for BRT that will again exceed the service capacity of 15 vph and 20 vph. In both the Base Year and 2030 NTA Strategy scenarios the peak lineflow exceeds 3,000 ppdph at approximately 3,100ppdph and 3,300ppdph respectively but are below the ultimate capacity of the BRT system, while the 2030 Current Infrastructure scenario has a peak lineflow of approximately 4,200 at St. Stephen’s Green.
It is on the northern section of this corridor – between Swords and the City Centre – that the high levels of demand arise. The southern section – Tallaght to City Centre – is within BRT capacity. This section of the corridor is common to the Clongriffin to Tallaght proposal which is dealt with in subsequent paragraphs. Overall, the link between the city centre and Swords
has demand levels that exceed the capacity of a moderate capacity BRT system, in the longer term. While BRT may provide an interim partial transport solution in the shorter term, a higher capacity rail solution, such as a metro system, will ultimately be required on this corridor. In light of this, the Swords to City Centre BRT section has not been progressed to the later costing and appraisal sections of this feasibility study report.

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Bus-Rapid-Transit-Core-Network-Report.pdf

Pages 53 and 54

So, according to the NTA's own study in 2012, A Swords-City Centre BRT does not have the capacity to cope with peak demand from day one - and thus it was not progressed to more detail study.

The NTA also tells us that such a Swords-CC BRT would only be an 'interim' solution pending the construction in the longer-term of Metro North.

Yet now the Irish Times tells us the NTA is going to proceed to planning with a BRT line it only two years ago deemed not capable of meeting demand.

So why has something that did not meet projected demand and deemed not feasible to proceed to planning in 2012 suddenly become feasible in 2014?

And why has the Irish Times failed to point out these rather important points?

It took me a few minutes to find and read the relevant documents on the NTA website - could the IT reporter not have done the same?

monument · 03-02-2014 4:00pm

If anybody is interisted, there's a thread on C&T about BRT:

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057010435/3/#post88811807

OssianSmyth · 03-02-2014 11:40pm

So it shares traffic with other vehicles in the city centre because a dedicated lane would not be feasible. And it waits at traffic lights elsewhere. So how reliably can it get to Swords in 35 mins?

Its capacity is one fifth of Metro North.

Is it meant to fit within the current capital budget up to 2016 or is it planned for the next round after 2016?

What about the blue line BRT (St Vincents - UCD-Goatstown-Sandyford) That made more sense as it had available land reservations for much of the route and no city centre streets.

It's worth noting that construction tender prices are now around one third below peak values in 2006/2007, according to the Society of Chartered Surveyors of Ireland

I don't know to what extent this translates into cheaper tender prices for rail and road infrastructure projects.

Lastly Ireland is now paying 3.3% for 10yr debt. http://www.boerse-frankfurt.de/en/bonds/ireld+14+24+IE00B6X95T99

OssianSmyth · 03-02-2014 11:58pm

This was published last year by the NTA
http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Draft-Intergrated-Implemation-Plan-2013-2018.pdf
and suggests that BRT would be an interim measure that would complement a Metro. Of course it might make a Metro less feasible in future!

6.7.2 Analysis

The Authority published a report in October 2012,
“Bus Rapid Transit - Core Dublin Network”, setting
out two cross city routes for development as BRT
schemes. These are:
c Blanchardstown to N11 (UCD); and
c Clongriffin to Tallaght.

The report recommended the progression of these
two routes with further work being required to
establish the exact routes and terminal points.

In addition, that report also examined the potential
for BRT to serve the Swords / Airport to City Centre
corridor. It identified that while BRT does not have
sufficient capacity to serve this link over the longer
term, it would provide an interim transport solution
in the shorter term, pending the development of
a higher capacity rail solution, such as a metro, on
this corridor. It would complement any rail based
solution in the long term, and continue to perform
strongly in terms of passenger usage. Further work
carried out since the publication of that report has
confirmed the feasibility and likely usage of a BRT
from Swords / Airport to City Centre.

6.7.3 Proposals

It is proposed to progress the development of three
BRT routes as part of this Plan. These are:
c Swords / Airport to City Centre;
c Blanchardstown to N11 (UCD); and
c Clongriffin to Tallaght.

It is envisaged that planning consent will be
achieved for each of these projects in the early
years of the Plan.

Subsequent implementation of these schemes
will be progressed on an incremental basis in
accordance with available funding

aindriu80 · 04-02-2014 7:08pm

I don't think an improved bus lane can match a proper Metro. Of course I understand the price argument in this age of austerity but bus lanes are only a help not a solution. You can beat higher density living with a proper metro to boot.

The €1.95 Billion Metro on the cheap sound like nonsense.

Sam Russell · 04-02-2014 11:14pm

BRT services are expected to run every 4 minutes in traffic (15 vehicles per hour) and they cannot run Darts more than 8 per hour!

Who are they kidding?

xper · 05-02-2014 1:03am

Meanwhile...
Cormac Rabbitt's "Dublin Metro" crayon-fest has been given the deserved assessment by the NTA:

Alternative to Dublin metro ‘a fantasy’, says transport body - Irish Times:
"A plan for a Dublin rail system which would be cheaper and more extensive than Metro North was 'completely unreal and fantastical', the National Transport Authority (NTA) has said.
Dublin city councillors will tomorrow be presented with the authority’s report on the Metro Dublin plan proposed by transport engineer Cormac Rabbitt.
..."

The only problem I have with this is that the NTA actually had to spend any time dealing with this one-man fantasy. That said, it probably took a job bridger half an hour to tear it apart.

Carawaystick · 05-02-2014 1:05am

OssianSmyth wrote: »

So it shares traffic with other vehicles in the city centre because a dedicated lane would not be feasible. And it waits at traffic lights elsewhere. So how reliably can it get to Swords in 35 mins?

The 33x can get from Lusk to City centre (Grafton St)in 35 mins in rush hour.
A 33 can get back to Lusk in the evening in about the same time, or maybe 40 mins.

Getting rid of the Cat & Cage/St Patricks College bottleneck and routing Coolock Lane/N1/Shantalla Bridge to avoid the Santry Bottleneck; and ramping up frequency from Swords could get very cheap performance, for feic all capex. The cat and cage pinchpoint is being done away with as we type.

maninasia · 05-02-2014 4:56am

aindriu80 wrote: »

I don't think an improved bus lane can match a proper Metro. Of course I understand the price argument in this age of austerity but bus lanes are only a help not a solution. You can beat higher density living with a proper metro to boot.

The €1.95 Billion Metro on the cheap sound like nonsense.

You are right. It would actually be a very expensive half arsed solution if used to replace the Metro North line.

It would be better to finance the Metro North line with low interest debt over the long-term, and maybe to contemplate BRT for the other two routes, or an extended LUAS, or just to use the money to subidise a better dublin bus service for key routes.

aindriu80 · 19-05-2014 5:41pm

Metro North is back on track with cheaper plan - Varadkar.

36 months and €2bn. Sounds like peanuts & you really get what you pay for. They have to build it.

monument · 19-05-2014 5:54pm

aindriu80 wrote: »

Metro North is back on track with cheaper plan - Varadkar.

36 months and €2bn. Sounds like peanuts & you really get what you pay for. They have to build it.

Wow -- that's a very muddled article. From paragraph to paragraph it switches to talking about the non-official "Metro Dublin" and the plans the RPA or NTA are looking at.

Interweaving both with out any clarity or any understanding about what is being officially looked at.

Daftness.

Luas to the airport via Finglas is likely in the mix and maybe variants of Metro North, but I'd be surprised if the "Dublin Metro" plan was looked at in any detail.

Peregrine · 19-05-2014 5:57pm

That proposal surfaced last year, did it not?

aindriu80 · 19-05-2014 6:44pm

It sounds like a lot of the original design has been cut. There was a lot of tunnelling but it seems as though they intend to go all overground for most of it. The tabloid article is a bit tabloid like but they can't build a second rate Metro for Dublin.

donvito99 · 19-05-2014 6:56pm

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

Aard · 19-05-2014 8:32pm

Yes; it's an incredibly confusing article.

Sam Russell · 19-05-2014 9:31pm

Does it include the Phoenix Park Tunnel by any chance?

golfwallah · 20-05-2014 7:12am

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

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

Copyerselveson · 20-05-2014 7:38am

golfwallah wrote: »

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

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

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

golfwallah · 20-05-2014 7:56am

Copyerselveson wrote: »

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

BRT, NTA?

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

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

Just a thought - no offence meant!

Banjoxed · 20-05-2014 9:00am

golfwallah wrote: »

BRT, NTA?

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

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

Just a thought - no offence meant!

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

BRT is "Bus Rapid Transit"

NTA is the National Transport Authority.

A quick google will advise what these are.

cgcsb · 20-05-2014 11:14am

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

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

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

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

L1011 · 20-05-2014 11:30am

cgcsb wrote: »

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

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

cgcsb · 20-05-2014 11:33am

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

L1011 · 20-05-2014 1:37pm

cgcsb wrote: »

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

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

monument · 20-05-2014 1:37pm

cgcsb wrote: »

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

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

A viaduct is really not going to happen.

Jack Noble · 20-05-2014 2:25pm

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

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

On April 4, 2014, Leo Varadkar told the Transport Ireland conference in Dublin:

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

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

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

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

cgcsb · 20-05-2014 8:31pm

monument wrote: »

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

A viaduct is really not going to happen.

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

Idbatterim · 21-05-2014 12:50am

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

maninasia · 17-06-2014 4:44pm

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

The state-owned China Development Bank wants to become a significant backer of Britain's major infrastructure projects, the BBC has learned.

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

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

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

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

fly_agaric · 18-06-2014 11:18pm

maninasia wrote: »

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

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

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

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

strassenwo!f · 19-06-2014 2:19am

maninasia wrote: »

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

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

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

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

Sam Russell · 19-06-2014 8:10am

fly_agaric wrote: »

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

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

markpb · 19-06-2014 11:08am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

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

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

MrMorooka · 13-02-2015 4:08pm

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

donvito99 · 14-02-2015 3:19pm

MrMorooka wrote: »

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

Sense prevailing at the DAA.

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

MrMorooka · 14-02-2015 3:58pm

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

Panda_Turtle · 15-02-2015 9:19am

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

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

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

A tunnel to the UK by 2050.

Carawaystick · 19-02-2015 4:16pm

Panda_Turtle wrote: »

A tunnel to the UK by 2050.

There is already a Railway and a HQDC to the UK... I'm not sure what benefit a tunnel would bring.

MrMorooka · 19-02-2015 4:21pm

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

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

Banjoxed · 19-02-2015 5:19pm

MrMorooka wrote: »

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

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

Talk is cheap, and in particular Fianna Fáil talk.

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

Sam Russell · 19-02-2015 5:43pm

Banjoxed wrote: »

Talk is cheap, and in particular Fianna Fáil talk.

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

Grandeeod · 24-02-2015 8:27pm

MrMorooka wrote: »

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

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

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

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

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

Grandeeod · 24-02-2015 8:43pm

Banjoxed wrote: »

Talk is cheap, and in particular Fianna Fáil talk.

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

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

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

Comments