Metro to get green light as plans are on track

thesecret7

Metro to get green light as plans are on track
Treacy Hogan
Environment Correspondent
The Irish Independent
22-March-2004


THE €2.4bn underground Metro for Dublin is expected to get the green light from the Cabinet within the next fortnight, it was revealed last night.

The announcement follows the disclosure yesterday that Fingal County Council plans to raise the €220m needed to extend the planned metro system beyond Dublin airport to Swords.

The council says if the plan is approved by members, it will raise the money through development levies.

Fingal County Council will use legislation that allows for developers, who would benefit from the new transport link, to contribute to the cost of building it.

Transport Minister Seamus Brennan is to bring final proposals for the Metro to Cabinet within the next two weeks, the Irish Independent has learned.

It will run mainly underground from the city centre to the airport.

Mr Brennan is likely to be quizzed on the proposals when he opens the €117m facelift for Heuston Station in Dublin today .

The project was delivered under budget. Although expected to cost €117m, it actually cost €7m less.

The revamp will lead to big increases in the Kildare rail-route commuter capacity, as well as increasing capacity for the number of InterCity services.

The project includes: the number of platforms increased in Heuston from five to nine; the platforms lengthened for greater numbers of services; remodelling of the the track work at Heuston and the approaches to the station to allow for more flexible operations and to reduce delays; and resignalling the Heuston and Inchicore cabin areas to modern computerised signalling to enhance safety.

In addition, a secondary concourse has been completed to serve the new platforms and improve customer comfort and facilities at Heuston.

There will also be improved customer information facilities throughout the station including new train information displays, and automated PA with help points installed for customers to receive assistance - designed to suit the needs of the mobility-impaired.

Iarnrod Eireann says its 2004 to 2008 investment programme plans will see continued improvements in commuter capacity, InterCity frequencies and journey times.

The plans include the four-tracking of the Heuston-Hazelhatch section of the Kildare route to dramatically increase the numbers of services that can serve Heuston in both the InterCity and Commuter services.

In addition, a further 67 new InterCity carriages have been ordered at a cost of €117m to enter service in late 2005 and 2006.

This will boost frequency, particularly on the Dublin to Cork route, where the company plans an hourly service each way from 2006.

There will also be a further order of regional rail cars planned for other InterCity routes.

Finally, the plans include an extra 36 commuter rail cars, in addition to the 80 commuter rail cars that entered general service late last year.

thesecret7

THank GOD the metro is going ahead !!! ITs great news isnt it !!

In addition, a further 67 new InterCity carriages have been ordered at a cost of €117m to enter service in late 2005 and 2006.

Is that all they are getting? Is it enough? Is there a second order perhaps?

There will also be a further order of regional rail cars planned for other InterCity routes.

Does anyone know what they will look like?

Finally, the plans include an extra 36 commuter rail cars, in addition to the 80 commuter rail cars that entered general service late last year.

Wasnt someone saying on the board here that these commuter rail cars are crap and built for little people like the japanese?? Can someone fill me in on my ignorance????

Humphrey

Metro project expected to get green light within two weeks
22/03/2004 - 11:09:13 AM

The Cabinet is reportedly set to approve plans to build a €2.4bn metro system in Dublin.

Reports this morning said the project is expected to get the green light within the next two weeks.

The report said the approval is expected following Fingal County Council’s decision to raise the €220m needed to extend the planned metro beyond Dublin Airport and into Swords.

BrianD

Once again, with the exception of a line to the airport, Dublin does not need nor can it afford a metro. No doubt, once the project is approved, electrification of the Maynooth and Kildare lines will be long fingered and the Airport/Swords line will not be integrated into any existing line and will be delivered late and over budget by the RPA.

Convenient that Fingal CC are willing to extend the metro to Swords to benefit many lands that were subject to rezoning controversies.

lowlands

Dublin does not need nor can it afford a metro

Are you serious?

It needed one 5 years ago, it really needs one today, and will desperately need it in 5 years time. The sooner we start building the better.

BrianD

Once again ...DUBLIN DOES NOT NEED NOR CAN IT AFFORD A METRO!

This is blatantly obvious if you look at the population size and density of the city.

The simple solution is the upgrade of existing heavy rail lines to DART standard, the building of the airport link (preferably to an existing heavy rail line) and the introduction of more tram lines where apropriate.

Finally, all modes of transport should be under a single brand name with integrated ticketing in place.

seamus

Originally posted by lowlands
Are you serious?

It needed one 5 years ago, it really needs one today, and will desperately need it in 5 years time. The sooner we start building the better.

I'd agree. We're already years behind in terms of public transport. There can't be much more of a delay.

lowlands

A Metro system is the ideal solution for inner city transport and can be connected up to Dart and light railway to remote urban area's.

This is how it works in all major cities around the world to much satisfaction of the traveling public.

You must be a taxi driver to be against the convenience of a metro?

And about the cost, I have been told much of it is reserved to pay for land to tunnel through. That is wrong, nobody should have to pay for that, you don't own the sky above, you don't own the ground below.

Scruff

Originally posted by BrianD
The simple solution is the upgrade of existing heavy rail lines to DART standard, the building of the airport link (preferably to an existing heavy rail line) and the introduction of more tram lines where apropriate.

dont think theres any way the existing two line track from Hueston to Cork and the west could handle this very well.
The new tram lines have every sign of being absolutely useless, as well as costing €600 million over budget. screw more trams

Finally, all modes of transport should be under a single brand name with integrated ticketing in place.

if they cant even do that when all modes or transport are under the one company do u really think they'll be able to do it if mr.brennan succeeds in breaking them up??

Tom Dunne

Originally posted by BrianD
Once again ...DUBLIN DOES NOT NEED NOR CAN IT AFFORD A METRO!

This is blatantly obvious if you look at the population size and density of the city.

I agree the country probably cannot afford the metro, but weren't the same arguments being put forward in the 80's for the M50? We can't afford it, we don't need it, etc.

In the end, they decided to build it, cut costs and put roundabouts at each of the junctions. Look where that has got us...

thesecret7

This is the bestest news I have heard about public transport in Dublin yet!! The sooner they start digging the better! Its going ahead so you can like it or walk.

Kaner

I have been on metros in many cities. I cannot think of one reason the airport metro
will not work. Its route has a high population density - with a bigger footprint than the DART route, given that the DART runs along the coast. The metro will be as heavily utilised as the DART is. The metros in other cities use carriages that are almost as big as DART carriges.

A DART spur to the airport will only serve the airport, the metro will serve 150,000+ Dubliners and the Airport. If they build a large park-and-ride facility near the M50 then it will be even better.

Sure it is expensive, but when you spread the cost over 25 or 30 years and add private financing, then the expense is justified. Just don't let the RPA near it.

It will also relieve some of the burden of traffic congestion which is estimated to cost around 450 million per year.

Dublin needs both heavy rail and underground. I think the financing for both will be available now that the EU restrictions on accounting for infrastructure borrowing have been relaxed.

BrianD

I am not a taxi driver and Iam a supporter of public transport and the more investment the better. However, the metro idea is a complete and utter waste of time and money. It should not be given another thought until their is a complete reversal in the way Dublin is developing as a city. If Dublin continues to develop as it is (i.e. an urban sprawl) no metro or transport infrastructue will ever be able to adequately serve it. This is a fact.

We are wasting our time with a metro when Irish Rail have put an excellent propopsal to further develop the existing rail network including the construction of a new rail link to the airport. This mean that Dublin would have a 4 line DART system (depending how you look at it) delivered within the next few years at a modest cost. Furtermore it would be integrated and all the same guage. Add extra tram lines (preferably not built or project managed by the RPA) to provide extra 'spokes' within the network. Furthermore, the Dart-ified lines and be further extended outwards from the city to cope as the city expands.

dont think theres any way the existing two line track from Hueston to Cork and the west could handle this very well.

Upgrading to a 4 track line to kildare is included in the IR plan as is a spur off the Maynooth line to serve Dunboyne.

A Metro system is the ideal solution for inner city transport and can be connected up to Dart and light railway to remote urban area

What do you class as the inner city? The Dublin City Council area where the population is a mere 495,101 persons. Perhaps we might include all of the county - 1.058 million people - with a more extensive network? Whatever way you look at it, the figures just don't add up.

While we would all like to have a speedy metro system in our suburb, I say again, the metro is a pie-in-the sky waste of time. It provides politicans with a useful ball to kick to touch when it comes to public transport development. A convenient excuse for doing nothing.

The new tram lines have every sign of being absolutely useless, as well as costing €600 million over budget. screw more trams

What basis do you have for this presumption? Leaving aside the construction pains they have every sign of being a huge success. Plus they are being introduced in 'Dublin' sized cities all over the world.

lowlands

I'll agree with BrianD on one thing, we need an integrated solution.

But the only true way forward is to take city transport underground, thats is where land is cheap, there are no other road users to take into account, service can be swift and safe, no need to queue in the rain etc. I can go on about the joys of a metro system but you get the picture by now.

What do you class as the inner city?

Anything within the M50 is underground. The lines surface in major urban areas outside the M50, have transport hubs + park and ride, use car or light rail / Dart to get you further to Satellite towns.

Enough said, lets start digging !!

Capt'n Midnight

The only way for a metro would be a circle line - so people commuting across the city would not have to change in O'Connell st - this would relieve a lot of pressure in the centre.

Still 2.5Bn would pay for a lot of busses,
How long would it keep Dublin Bus running if they doubled the fleet and charged 50c per journey ????

thesecret7

I agree the country probably cannot afford the metro, but weren't the same arguments being put forward in the 80's for the M50? We can't afford it, we don't need it, etc.

In the end, they decided to build it, cut costs and put roundabouts at each of the junctions. Look where that has got us...

Persisely! The M-50 was built and everyone said we havnet any need for it. The DART have sufford for the same allogations.

Once the Metro is built it will be the biggest mover of people in Dublin. But the minster must press ahead with completely covering Dublin with the Metro (and the D connector thing). Once thats in place we can all sing ADIOS to traffic jams.

Everything is goinig under the earth(so we have more room). Have you seen the New york plans ??Bostons big dig

spuddy

Having just returned from Rennes where they have just finished building a brand new metro from scratch, I think it will be a huge success. My girlfriend is a native and she said many people were against it siting many of the concerns raised here(Rennes has a much smaller population than Dublin) However now that construction is complete, everyone sees its benifets. The service is excellent thou (one train every two minutes!) and all trains are operated unmanned. It is slightly unnerving to see a train coming towards you with no driver, but the system works very well, so well in fact that they are planning another line to serve other parts of the city. Hope the metro does get the green light, it will be of huge benefit to everyone.

Kaner

One thing I am a little confused with on the metro project is the cost.

If they can build 10 km of the Dublin Port Tunnel for 600 million, and 23km of Luas for 700 million, then why is the metro going to cost 2400 million (even allowing 300 million for building the stations)?

Are they including the interest they would pay on money borrowed for the construction? Seems to me that I read this in the Irish Independant a while ago.

Another thing to think about when comparing the DART spur with the metro: If the DART spur costs 400 million and carries 10,000 passenger per day, and the metro costs 2400 million and carries 60,000 passengers per day, then the cost per passenger is about the same. While both these numbers are probably optimistic it does demonstrate that the metro can be viable when compared with the DART.

If the metro is connected with the Sandyford Luas line (which was part of the original plan) then 90,000 to 100,000 passangers a day would be possible. The DART will carry 110,000 per day after it is upgraded.

sceptre

Originally posted by lowlands
you don't own the ground below.

Yes you do. If you find an oilfield under your few acres it's yours.

thesecret7

€3.5bn for public transport 'certain'
Treacy Hogan
Environment Correspondent

A GUARANTEED €3.5bn is to be invested in public transport over the next five years, mainly on improving rail services, Transport Minister Seamus Brennan announced yesterday.

This is half the €7bn guaranteed for the national road building programme during the same period.

Mr Brennan also confirmed he will bring proposals for a €2bn underground metro to the Cabinet in coming weeks.

To be known as the "Central Line", the metro will run from Dublin Airport via Ballymun, Dublin City University and the city centre to St Stephen's Green. It will be built and operated by private investors.

The minister held out the prospect yesterday of possible developments on re-opening the Western Rail Corridor, although he stressed later that no decision would be made until a group examining the issue had completed its work.

Iarnrod Eireann is also examining the introduction of further possible rural commuter services, including Blarney to Midleton.

The minister was speaking at the opening of the €117m facelift of Dublin's Heuston rail station. The project means journey times on nearly all inter-city rail services into Dublin from Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford have been cut by up to 30 minutes. The redevelopment clears the way for extra high capacity commuter trains on the Kildare route as well as increased capacity on inter-city services.

Mr Brennan announced a formal agreement between himself and Finance Minister Charlie McCreevy will guarantee a multi-annual cash package up to 2008 totalling €3.5bn. He said the surge in investment in recent years was delivering major rail infrastructure and customer services improvements.

The most recent improvements include 80 new diesel railcars (€119m), completion of the Drogheda Diesel Railcar Depot (€42m) and completion of the Heuston Station redevelopment.

Dr John Lynch, CIE chairman, said the Heuston redevelopment would allow the rail hub to meet the needs of inter-city and commuter customers "for decades into the future".

However, Green Party Transport spokesperson Eamonn Ryan said the Government's announcement of a €1.7bn investment for capital public transport projects up to 2008 was really only €500m if the annual subvention of €1.2bn to CIE was deducted.

Mr Ryan said this level of funding "pales in comparison to the €7bn given to roads". He called on Mr Brennan to explain how he will secure investment for the Dublin Metro, Cork suburban rail and the Western Rail line.

Winters

A metro is not needed in any way, anyone who says "we need a metro" doesnt actually fully understand the rail system in Ireland or for that matter the rest of the world.

As BrianD pointed about above, Metro's are for city's that have a large innercity population. Dublin itself have only about 1/2 million people in what can be classed as the "inner city". Building a metro at a cost of €2.5+ Billion to link the Airport and InnerCity is easily a waste of money. Any person with a knowledge of transport can see this.

If the origional DART and the many LUAS plans were followed Dublin would have a fully intregated transport system where the Airport is linked by both Tram [Luas] and Heavy Rail [Airport Express spur]. Not only that but a Tram would better serve the surrounding residents then a metro.

As for the population aspect in relation to other countries. Looking through one of the main manufactors of Metro's, Alstom. Metro's are not being built for cities whose populations are in relation to Dublin. Trams are. The Metros are being built in cities such as London [Population 10million+ (correct me if i'm wrong)]] Singapore [Population 4million+], Mexico City etc. Can you really see Dublin being populated enough to require a metro?

What is being built in cities that are of similar size to Dublin are trams. For example, Melbourne in Australia where the Alstom CITADIS tram [same as the one in Dublin] is being built has a populaton of 3.2million [as of 2001 Census]. Torino in Italy which is also introducing CITADIS trams has a population of 910,000 people. How can Dublin, with a population of about 500,000 in the city and abot 1million in surrouding areas require anything more then a proper tram system?

All that is required to satisfy Dublin's rail transportation needs are more tram lines and upgrading of existing heavy rail lines through electrification, extra tracks and new spur's to towns. This can be achived for a lot less then €2.5 billion, a figure which will end up being doubled at least.

Also lets not forget that Dublin now has the knowledge and expierance in building tram lines. Why bother developing a totally new system when we can just extend what we have already? Open the Connolly to Heuston line [Phoenix Park Tunnel] and also electrify it. Put trams along Dame Street sure, and thats the majority of the center of Dublin linked together. That would hardly cost more then €200 or €300 million including stations and the like. Add in a Airport Line spur from the exising Droghada/Dundalk line and you have really completed what the Metro has set out to do. A few more Luas extensions such as to the Airport and Swords would give a fully intregated transport system at half the price.

Anyone who says Dublin actually honestly needs a Metro system just doesnt really know their transport.

Andrew Duffy

Bear in mind, however, that this proposal for a Metro is actually a tram line - it even involves on-street running for the extension to Swords. However well-segregated it is, it will never allow for high-speed, high capacity trains like the Dart (no jokes about the Dart's speed, please - it is capable of going fast, it just has to stop too often).
If it can be built with private money, that's fine. However, look at all the private money that has gone into building a tram line to the docklands, with all of its offices and apartments - absolutely none. If this particular Metro/Luas line means IÉ will not get the funding it needs to upgrade and electrify the Maynooth and Kildare lines, build spurs to Dunboyne and the Airport, reopen and electrify the Phoenix Park tunnel and add the much-needed extra capacity of the underground interconnector and Spencer Dock station, it is a bad thing.

uberwolf

electrification of Maynooth - even Kilcock line is badly needed. How long would it take to do that work?

BrianD

The maynooth line could be electrfied within a year. The big problem is increasing the train frequency as there is the bottleneck at connolly station.

Of course the real irony of the metro plan is that it only consists of one line to the airport and possibly onto Swords. It will be more than likely be an underground tram line. For the rest of the city there will be no change. We are really being sold a pup by Brennan & Co.

To be frank I would rather see the money being spent on upgrading existing rail networks and new light rail that will benefit the entire city. After all, how many times do you go to the Airport?? It's hardly a priority destination when there are many bus routes serving it!

BuffyBot

It's hardly a priority destination when there are many bus routes serving it!

No fan of the metro idea, but the buses take a ridiculous amount of time to get from City Centre to Airport!

Winters

Originally posted by BuffyBot
No fan of the metro idea, but the buses take a ridiculous amount of time to get from City Centre to Airport!

Agreed about the busses, it can take a silly amount of time however this can be put to the following reasons:
1) Number of HGV on the roads through and into the city
However once the Port Tunnel is open majority of these will disappear.
2) Port Tunnel works cutting out a lane here and there
A temporary inconvienance while the tunnel is being built, we can all live with that for another couple of years.
3) Number of traffic lights along the route
We know how bloody long those traffic lights can slow us down, there everywhere.
4) Lack of QBC in certain area's of the route's.

If plans are followed we should have a LUAS line going stright from Swords, through the Airport into the city and a Heavy Rail link from Spencer Dock [or Connolly/Heuson] to the Airport. It should then take possibly 15minutes depending on the routes taken to get stright from the Airport into the City Center.

Now, wouldn't that be fantastic.

Kaner

Metro/Underground/Subway whatever you want to call it is not a tram system. For the sake of clarity I will use the term Metro to describe the kind of underground trains they use in London, Paris, Madrid, Cologne and a lot of other cities.

Metros have more in common with DART trains than trams. They are high capacity, run a lot faster than a tram, and don't run along streets.

Forget about the size of Dublin. The London Underground runs through areas no more densely populated than Dublin, (and it was build in the 1800s, God bless us).
The only questions should be - will it serve Dubliners and is it economically feasible.

If the airport metro is connected to the Sandyford line at the top of Harcourt Street ( and dont tell me it wont be, I was informed by an "expert" recently that it would not run to Swords) and if it carries 100,000 people per day compared to DARTS 110,000 after upgrade, then what is the problem? It is even being privately financed, but that is not enough for some "experts".

100,000 * 2 euros = 75,000,000 per year (approx) - this seems enough to me to finance the 2.4 billion investment over 25 years (fares will rise over that time).
It may turn out to be a similar deal to the MI motorway - 11km built by a toll company and they get to operate and maintain 40km.

I think it will serve Dublin as well as the DART, and it will also free up rail capacity for increased suburban rail. If Brennan can get a private company to assume the risk then it is ovbiously feasible, notwithstanding the fact that they "won't know their transport".

Humphrey

Platform 11 is supporting the new 'Metro' plan, one of the reasons it is supporting it is because of the new proposal to extend to Swords.


Kaner I presume your 'expert' informed you it wont go to Swords before Fingal CC announced it would 'fund' the extension to Swords from the Airport.


I am from Swords :-)

Humphrey.

Andrew Duffy

Are you suggesting that trains, not trams, will run along St. Stephen's Green, Harcourt Street and the narrow residential streets between there and Grand Parade? That is flat out impossible. In fact, this line is to terminate under Stephen's Green, with easy access between the underground stop and the overground terminus. It's not clear how much of an underground walk will be required, but it's unlikely to be too long.

Also, the government's plan is to pay €400m pa for 25 years for the construction and operation of the system - thus paying over €10bn for a project that will cost €2.4bn to build and will probably not require a subsidy.

This line would make a lot more sense is if it is continued so it can join the Green B somewhere South of the Grand Canal and the short street-running section of Green Line is extended along Dawson St., Nassau St., College Green, Westmoreland St. and O'Connell St. as originally planned. If not, IÉ's proposed interconnector would also dramatically improve the situation, as then a single St. Stephen's Green station would be on the DART as well as being the terminus of the airport tram line (or Metro, if the madness of multiple brands for the same thing persists) and the Green Line.

Incidentally, the majority of the London Underground was built in the 20th century.

BrianD

There is nothing to suggest from recent press reports that the "metro" will be anything other than an extension of the Sandyford tram line. The trams will simply go underground. Nothing wrong with this as they can be as speedy as regular metro trains and quite common in Germany.

Now where are the other lines in this "metro" and why on earth are the letting the RPA build it???

Kaner

Humphrey

I am really glad to see the metro is going to be extended to Swords. I was told the final plan did not include a Swords extension, but it seemed logical to me that Swords should included. It is growing fast and it takes ages to get to Dublin on the bus (my parents live there).

One thing I like about Seamus Brennan is that he seems to want to get things done, rather than just talk, talk, talk. He also seems to take a pragmatic approach to solving Dublin's transport problems, rather than get hung up on the minutae of planning. Plans are guides, not commandments.

None of this really affects me too much as I live in the States, but I get home twice a year and it makes me cringe sometimes to see the transportation crap Dubliners have to put up with. I live in Salt Lake City (1.5 million population). It has no traffic jams in any part of the city at any time of the day (unbelievable?), a good bus and tram system, and is a dream to get around.

uberwolf

Originally posted by Kaner


None of this really affects me too much as I live in the States, but I get home twice a year and it makes me cringe sometimes to see the transportation crap Dubliners have to put up with. I live in Salt Lake City (1.5 million population). It has no traffic jams in any part of the city at any time of the day (unbelievable?), a good bus and tram system, and is a dream to get around.

people like you should be censored, hung drawn and quartered. Do any of us want to hear just how good it could be with a modicum of planning and money?!?

I'm going to insert a smilie so people realise that there may be an element of sarcasm :ninja:

West Briton

Originally posted by BrianD
Now where are the other lines in this "metro" and why on earth are the letting the RPA build it???

Er, because they are the agency mandated by the Government for this work?

Kaner

I agree with you Andrew - it would be great if the extended the on-street tram line to O'Connell Street. Even if they build the interconnector they should do that.

The more cars they can get off the streets of Dublin the better.

BrianD

I agree! Scrap the underground and continue the green line from Stephens Green to the airport/swords.

As for the RPA. Given their appalling project management of the Luas they should be banned from any future transport projects. Irish Rail have demonstrated that they can build on time and under budget. Can not understand why their recent alternative proposal to the metro got such little media coverage.

Perhaps its not as sexy as Brennans ridiculous metro white elephant. And Brennan does talk, talk, talk and there is very little action or progress. He is afraid of publi opinion and unable to make any decisions. This is why he is in favour of the metro. It will be years before the consultants reports come back so he has a convenient excuse for no decisions. Better than his predecessor though.

West Briton

I don't accept the line, fed by Irish Rail themselves into the media, that they can build under time and under budget.

They are notorious for their "care and maintenance" programme, where for political reasons they do not acknowledge that disused railways are closed but use the weasel phrase that the lines concerned are under "care and maintenance".

Two railways that are the subject of such "care and maintenence" programmes are the railway from Glounthane (Cobh Junction) to Midleton and the "Western Rail Corridor" from Ennis to Sligo.

Weeds cover the tracks and the whole systems will have to be demolished and rebuilt again. Irish Rail care so much about the Western Rail Corridor that they have disconnected the lines north and south of Athenry and have added hundreds of thousands of euro to the restoration cost of the WRC.

Don't be victims of spin and don't take the word of commentators in the newspapers that are really hostile to railways in any form, whether tram, metro or heavy rail, as gospel!

BrianD

The proof of the pudding is what they delivering around Dublin and on mainline rail. I agree with you whats happening with the western rail corridor is a disgrace but there is a definite lack of political will to keep this line open.

Having said that the IR proposal for an expanded DART system is the best and achievable proposal by far to have been presented and yet Brennans shiny metro still gets all the publicity. The RPA are a strong lobby!

rs

Does Dublin need a metro? You could convince me that it does not need one today.

It will take the best part of 10 - 15 years to build a proper metro system (probably longer). The first line (airport) will take a good five years to complete.

Now think how much Dublin has expanded since 1990. How many more cars are there on the roads? How many more houses have been built? How many new houses are built every year?

We may not *need* a Metro today, but in 2020 we won't be able to survive without one.

Does it not make more sense to actually build something before we need it for a change?

Or do you all prefer the current system of waiting until something is a complete disaster and then trying to figure a way out of it then?

BrianD

Whether a metro is required or not and whether it will be viable ultimately rests with the planners and developers. At the rate the city sprawl is expanding in a low density manner no transport infrastructure is ever going to serve these populations adequately.

As stated elsewhere in this thread, most of the trafic generated in Dublin is from cars inbound from the low density hinterland. We will never see this change at the rate we are going.

rs

Originally posted by BrianD
Whether a metro is required or not and whether it will be viable ultimately rests with the planners and developers. At the rate the city sprawl is expanding in a low density manner no transport infrastructure is ever going to serve these populations adequately.

As stated elsewhere in this thread, most of the trafic generated in Dublin is from cars inbound from the low density hinterland. We will never see this change at the rate we are going.

I don't agree, with a good train system (metro, tram, dart, whatever) that covers the majority of the city people in the outskirts of dublin will drive to the nearest train station and then take the train, instead of driving into the city center. I know I would. The worst part of a driving commuters trip into the city center is the last few kilometers. If I could drive a few km on regional roads (which are not nearly as congested as city center roads) and then dump my car and take a train the rest of the way, I'd be delighted.

Many people currently do this with dart and train stations. Drive to the station, get the train.

Hopefully, the planners are smart enough to put big parking areas at the stations on the ourskirts of the city that will be fed by driving commuters.

LFCFan

Like rs said, The Metro may not be 'needed' now but by the time it's completed we probably will. The M50 wasn't 'needed' according to 'experts' but they are now planning to upgrade it before it's even finished. Ireland needs to be more forward thinking, Proactive instead of reactive. There also needs to be an end to the 'urban sprawl' mentality. There needs to be more building up instead of out. Added to this a decent broadband infrastructure and teleworking could become a reality for people who choose to live in the country. All this put together should reduce road usage in and around Dublin.

thesecret7

I am in much aggreement also. Because of the metro is under the ground it is better.

(and when they have said we dont need a Dart or we dont have a need for a M-50 surely they were joking with the peoples)

BrianD

Whoa! No experts ever said that we didn't want the M50 or the DART! The M50 was planned for years. It's pretty obvious that Dublin needed a ring road and it was built piecemeal and under spec over the years.

The big problem is the lack of foresight from our politicians and councilors. To me it is bloody obvious that even if we sink a metro into the ground today it will still be little or no use in the future. The sprawl is there and unless there is a complete rethink of urban development and planning we are better off shutting up and putting up.

rs

There are plenty of cities that are of a simialr size to Dublin that already have Metro systems.

Brussels 1 Million
Prague 1.2 Million
Barcelona 1.6 Million
Budapest 2 million
Glasgow 2 Million

I've been in plenty of cities within the last 12 months that had Metros (London, Prague, Budapest, Barcelona, Berlin, Vienna)

They were all much easier to travel in than cities that don't have a metro system

We have to expect that Dublin will keep growing. Better planning is certainly needed, but a major problem is that dublin is so damn old. Buildings a streets have existed for hundreds of years and it makes it difficult to build a transport and road systems that work. Going underground solves many of these problems.

The sooner we get one built the better. We will need it sooner rather than later.

Hopefully, dublin will build a train system that services the majority of the city, and then use the existing busses on the outskirts to bring people to the trains. This removes a huge number of cars and busses from the city center, which is where the worst congestion is.

Winters

Originally posted by rs
I've been in plenty of cities within the last 12 months that had Metros (London, Prague, Budapest, Barcelona, Berlin, Vienna)

They were all much easier to travel in than cities that don't have a metro system

We have to expect that Dublin will keep growing. Better planning is certainly needed, but a major problem is that dublin is so damn old. Buildings a streets have existed for hundreds of years and it makes it difficult to build a transport and road systems that work. Going underground solves many of these problems.

You point is useless when looked at the way Dublin is growing. Majority of cities you mentioned above all have large dense city centers. Dublin itself has a very low population density in the city center. Majority of Dublins population live actually outside of the city in the suburban area's, and again they are low density in reality. A metro is designed to cater for large density urban centers, such as Brussles etc.
Also, Brussles has a lot more then 1 million people, is a lot more dencly populated then Dublin and Brussles has a tram system. Brussles itself has a massive tram and metro system that connect everything, inclusing the main stations which bring people living in the suburbs to the city center.

Dublin does not truly require a Metro, just more tram lines and better surburban rail [DART/Arrow]. In reality the DART is Dublins metro, to a degree.

rs

Originally posted by Winters
You point is useless when looked at the way Dublin is growing. Majority of cities you mentioned above all have large dense city centers. Dublin itself has a very low population density in the city center. Majority of Dublins population live actually outside of the city in the suburban area's, and again they are low density in reality. A metro is designed to cater for large density urban centers, such as Brussles etc.
Also, Brussles has a lot more then 1 million people, is a lot more dencly populated then Dublin and Brussles has a tram system. Brussles itself has a massive tram and metro system that connect everything, inclusing the main stations which bring people living in the suburbs to the city center.

Dublin does not truly require a Metro, just more tram lines and better surburban rail [DART/Arrow]. In reality the DART is Dublins metro, to a degree.

I agree that Dublin does not have a particlarly high population density in the city center. But many, many people in dublin work in the city center. We need a effective means of moving people into, out of and through the city center.

Busses don't work because they share the roads with cars, and the inner city roads are too congested. Timetables can't be met.

Trams are great, don't get me wrong. But once they hit a city center they slow to a crawl, because they once again have to complete with traffic, intersections, etc.

I think we should be sensible where we use underground Metros. The airport is constantly expanding, and I highly agree with a direct rail link between the airport and city center. It will always be used.

Other metro lines should be carefully considered as to where they are most beneficial.

But, sooner or later we will need a metro. The sooner we build it the cheaper it will be.

And I want a metro. All the 'cool' cities have one.

BrianD

Given our population density, buses and trams may be our most cost effective solution to moving people.

John R

Given our traffic problems and 19th century street layout the only workable option that will not require a large destruction of buildings is underground rail.

thejollyrodger

yeah metro is the best option... once its built the housing density will no doubt increase ! Its dirt cheap at only €2bn.

West Briton

A metro to the airport would be very nice but let's not fool ourselves that its construction would be hassle free. I recall an article in the Sunday Tribune around eight years ago at the onset of the Luas ding-dong which had nice graphics showing cute underground trains with cute little cars on the streets above and a comment stating that underground construction would not interfere with the precious traffic above.

The reality is that firstly tunnel spoil has to be excavated at the far end of the tunnel works and that underground stations must be excavated from street level downwards. Think the Port Tunnel works.

In London the Jubilee line extension from Westminster to Stratford took nearly ten years to complete.

GeorgeBush

yeah but we arent building the jubalee line... were building it simple like in Madrid and look how quick they built theirs !!!!!!!

Underground is the way to go