Cullen announces Metro North route

bk

tomflynn wrote:

It is my view however that there should be an underground pedestrian tunnel / travelator between the new 'landmark' underground station' at O' Connell Bridge to an area within the curtilage of Tara Street Station allowing interchange in relative comfort and with minimal 'perceived' distance between the points of interchange. This is the approach that appears to have been adopted with the pedestrian tunnel to the Luas at Abbey Street.

What you are missing is that there will be an interchange with both new DART lines, one at Drumcondra and the other at Stephens Green. Thus making at interchange with Tara St irrelevant and simply spending extra money for something that in the long term won't be needed.

In the short term, I'm sure that there will be an exit on the Quays, putting Tara St just a short walk from it.

Ste.phen

mackerski wrote:

It would probably have had to be a 3rd and 4th tunnel, I think modern practice prefers having them separate. Apart from the fact that they already had to make a mess at either end to put the road TBMs in, I don't see a big economy of scale doing that. The one you have is negated by the fact that your railway surfaces in a place where you're already trying to find ways of routing an M1 full of cars around one building site.

Also, the alignment you end up with doesn't seem to offer the best station coverage (much of the route that would have been served is already quite close to DART).

Dermot

heh, well, that set me straight
I was really only looking at the "you're already digging it up" argument, and nothing else

MICKEYG

bk wrote:

What you are missing is that there will be an interchange with both new DART lines, one at Drumcondra and the other at Stephens Green. Thus making at interchange with Tara St irrelevant and simply spending extra money for something that in the long term won't be needed.

In the short term, I'm sure that there will be an exit on the Quays, putting Tara St just a short walk from it.

The interface to the DART at Stephens Green (via the interconnector) will involve two changes. A direct underground walkway from O'Connell St Bridge station to Tara Street would be one change. I think it would be a great idea and not that expensive for what it would achieve. If you lined it with shops it would probably pay for itself in rents. A lot of European cities have this even for regular under road junction walkways (Warsaw is an example).

MarkoP11

Its only one change since Metro to Maynooth/Pace/Connolly/Tars/Pearse/Bray/Greystones change Drumcondra, Metro to Heuston/Pearse/Spencer Dock/Ballbriggan/Hazelhatch change at Stephen's Green

Tara Street is redundant as a interchange, time cost and complexity bearing in mind that the chosen O'Connell Steet option integrates with the vast bulk of city bus routes which carry heaps more than the DART line anyway

Winters

MICKEYG wrote:

The interface to the DART at Stephens Green (via the interconnector) will involve two changes.

No, when T21 is completed it will involve one change. Metro North shall connect to both planned DART lines.

tomflynn

Winters wrote:

No, when T21 is completed it will involve one change. Metro North shall connect to both planned DART lines.

Correct....Metro north shall connect to both DART lines when T21 is complete.

But in the intervening period between the completion of the interconnector the Metro will be stranded and terminate as a single entity with no connection to the Dart line.

Whilst interchanging at Drumcondra, the Maynooth will not have been electrified by that stage and will not have the regularity of DART.

The cost involved in completing a relatively minor pedestrian tunnel is irrelevant relative to the €2b (maybe more?) being spent on the entire METRO project.

A 240m long 2.5m diameter service tunnel under the Liffey has been commenced between the North Wall Docklands and Grand Canal Docks area at a cost of €6.5m. The approximate distance between O'Connell Bridge and Tara Street is 300m. The costs involved to cover such a distance are not prohibitive.

If the attitude prevailed that 'sure its not far to walk' prevailed in most European cities then there would be no underground walkways between alternative rail routes. The advantage is that they remove barriers and ease tranfer between links. There is no requirement to surface with the shoppers, the traffic, and further delays typically associated with getting off a mainline rail/train/bus etc and having to to walk some distance.

Priority should be to maximise connections and make travel easy from day one on completion of the Metro. A fully operational interconnector with 2 DART lines might not be ready for 5-10 years after metro complete. Policy makers must consider the possibility of government failure and not always assume they will deliver success and even if they do they are most unlikely to be delivered on time. Policy makers must plan for all eventualities or benefits are significantly reduced....like an unconnected Luas line for 5 years.

A direct pedestrian link between O'Connell Bridge station and Tara St. would be a small and worthwhile investment and would make life easier, in particular for international travellers traveling to/from Dublin Airport.

Its the small marginal interventions that can make the biggest differences over the short term.

tomflynn

tomflynn wrote:

Correct....Metro north shall connect to both DART lines when T21 is complete.

I am acutely aware of this fact. The problem is the intervening timelag.

Blackjack

tomflynn wrote:

I am acutely aware of this fact. The problem is the intervening timelag.

tomflynn wrote:

Originally Posted by tomflynn
Correct....Metro north shall connect to both DART lines when T21 is complete.

I am acutely aware of this fact. The problem is the intervening timelag.

weird....

bk

tomflynn wrote:

But in the intervening period between the completion of the interconnector the Metro will be stranded and terminate as a single entity with no connection to the Dart line.

So we are going to spend millions extra (that could be spent on other better things like a stop at Parnell St), so people don't have to get off their lazy, fat asses and walk 5 minutes, for just three years.

I also wonder if underground walkways would really work in Ireland. There are just far too many scum bags in Dublin, specially around Tara St. I'm not sure it would really work without a very large policing presence.

Anyway it is the RPA you need to go ahead and convince, not me. I've already gotten most of what I wanted from LUAS, personally I think the money could be used much better elsewhere.

murphaph

Previously I had been against a tunnel to Tara because I believed the metro station would be in the vicinity of the GPO, now we are told we're getting a mined station straddling the river, so I say, why not build the ped tunnel to Tara. You're already doing the expensive bells and whistles station so adding a tunnel seems reasonable to me. The quays can be a windy inhospitable place in winter, a warm tunnel lined with shops and snack bars sounds great.

wwhyte

murphaph wrote:

Previously I had been against a tunnel to Tara because I believed the metro station would be in the vicinity of the GPO, now we are told we're getting a mined station straddling the river, so I say, why not build the ped tunnel to Tara. You're already doing the expensive bells and whistles station so adding a tunnel seems reasonable to me. The quays can be a windy inhospitable place in winter, a warm tunnel lined with shops and snack bars sounds great.

I agree. It'd be like the boardwalks -- it'd be so heavily used that once it was built everyone would be amazed there'd ever been any talk of not having it.

Slice

If there's talk of building an underground walkway to Abbey Street for connection with Luas Red line then surely it could be done to Tara as well? Again, the difference in distance isn't that great...

therecklessone

lego wrote:

I don't know if anyone has already linked to this but the RPA have by far the most detailed map of the proposed metro north:

http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/October%202006%20-%20Dublin%20Metro%20North.pdf

Thanks for that, answers my questions from earlier.

Line follows the R132 alignement from just south of the Airside/Borimhe junction, with Nevinstown north of that junction near the Pinnock Hill roundabout. Hopefully there'll be direct pedestrian access from the Forest Road to facilitate Rivervalley residents.

MICKEYG

I'm still confused as to where the one change will be when everything is done.
If I am coming from the airport and want to go to Bray do I not need to change at Stephens Green to the interconnector and then change again at Pearse to get the DART?

bk

MICKEYG wrote:

I'm still confused as to where the one change will be when everything is done.
If I am coming from the airport and want to go to Bray do I not need to change at Stephens Green to the interconnector and then change again at Pearse to get the DART?

No, you change at Drumcondra.

They will be changing the DART layout into two different lines. This map (more diagram) should help you visualise it better:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dublin_interconnector_tunnel_map.png

MICKEYG

bk wrote:

No, you change at Drumcondra.

They will be changing the DART layout into two different lines. This map (more diagram) should help you visualise it better:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dublin_interconnector_tunnel_map.png

Lovely, thanks.
I still think a pedestrian tunnel linking Red Line on O'Connell Street with O'Connell Bridge Station and Tara Street with make the linking extremely convenient. As mentioned previously, leaving a station to go walk with shoppers and traffic etc to go to another one goes against the idea of integration.
It may be only a 5 minute walk but psychologically it is a big especially on a windy wet winters day.
Yes, it will cost money but ebverything doies. Lets do things properly for once in this country instead of the usual "sure it will do approach" which blights our road building and ends up costing more in the long run.

tomflynn

MICKEYG wrote:

I'm still confused as to where the one change will be when everything is done.
If I am coming from the airport and want to go to Bray do I not need to change at Stephens Green to the interconnector and then change again at Pearse to get the DART?

No change once at Drumcondra and get new Dart line (Maynooth to Bray/Greystones) direct to Bray. One change only. When Metro complete but prior to Dart electrification of that line, change once at Drumcondra for Maynooth line to Docklands, get out at Docklands and walk 600m to Luas line. Get Luas to Connolly Station. Get DART south to Bray. 3 changes.
Time lost 35mins min.

Or get out O'Connell Bridge and walk 300m crossing 2 roads and waiting for traffic lights to change. Time lost 10mins and missed the Dart. None for 17 mins.

Or to prevent all the messing about for about 10 years for travellers from the airport we could build a little walkway from O'Connel Bridge to Tara Street. Cost minimal as station already mined and majority of tunnell goes directly underneath the river (or sits on river base). Help passengers. If we spent our time worrying about scumbags we'd do nothing.

€10m-€15m won't built anything at Parnell Square. Its costing €60m to build Docklands station at Spencer Dock and thats above ground.

BK...I still see no problem in building a tunnel. It will be a lot more than 3 years before interconnector is built because no political party will have the guts to start it when metro costs rise and it has numerous inevitable delays, irrespective of the merits of either project.

Metrobest

tomflynn wrote:

Correct....Metro north shall connect to both DART lines when T21 is complete.

But in the intervening period between the completion of the interconnector the Metro will be stranded and terminate as a single entity with no connection to the Dart line.

Whilst interchanging at Drumcondra, the Maynooth will not have been electrified by that stage and will not have the regularity of DART.

The cost involved in completing a relatively minor pedestrian tunnel is irrelevant relative to the €2b (maybe more?) being spent on the entire METRO project.

A 240m long 2.5m diameter service tunnel under the Liffey has been commenced between the North Wall Docklands and Grand Canal Docks area at a cost of €6.5m. The approximate distance between O'Connell Bridge and Tara Street is 300m. The costs involved to cover such a distance are not prohibitive.

If the attitude prevailed that 'sure its not far to walk' prevailed in most European cities then there would be no underground walkways between alternative rail routes. The advantage is that they remove barriers and ease tranfer between links. There is no requirement to surface with the shoppers, the traffic, and further delays typically associated with getting off a mainline rail/train/bus etc and having to to walk some distance.

Priority should be to maximise connections and make travel easy from day one on completion of the Metro. A fully operational interconnector with 2 DART lines might not be ready for 5-10 years after metro complete. Policy makers must consider the possibility of government failure and not always assume they will deliver success and even if they do they are most unlikely to be delivered on time. Policy makers must plan for all eventualities or benefits are significantly reduced....like an unconnected Luas line for 5 years.

A direct pedestrian link between O'Connell Bridge station and Tara St. would be a small and worthwhile investment and would make life easier, in particular for international travellers traveling to/from Dublin Airport.

Its the small marginal interventions that can make the biggest differences over the short term.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

Apart from everything else, I think a tunnel between Tara Street (currently Ireland's busiest railway station) and O'Connell Bridge would yield significant rents for retail development due to the footfall it would command. As would a similar travelator/walkway between the metro concourse and College Green. Therefore it's economically viable.

As for tunnels being a haunt of junkies and winos, think again. I'm not talking about some rat-infested sewer tunnel, as some people seem to fear it would become. These tunnels would be more like Jervis Street shopping mall - bright, airy, well-patronised. Modern tunnels are fantastic futuristic places: they have plasma screens beaming 24-hour news, modern art installations and an array of shops to quickly dash into.

These kinds of tunnels are to be found all over Sydney's city circle underground lines, especially in Town Hall where walkways run in four different directions into shopping centres, office towers and nearby streets. It connects up a lot of different areas and maximises passenger use of the trains. I see this system in action every day and I'm telling you right now - if it works in the hot sydney climate where being outdoors is a pleasure, it's garaunteed to work in the chilly Dublin weather.

BK's point of "why don't they just walk" is laughable. People don't want to walk everywhere; that's human nature. They want solutions that make their lives easier. They don't want to stand at three pedestrian crossings in the freezing cold, waiting for the lights to turn green, inhaling the pollution.

The point I want to make to Platform 11 is this. The problem with Platform 11 has always been its holier-than-thou attitude: platform 11 knows best. You come across as being out of touch with the ordinary commuter and what they want, which is ironic because that's who you're supposed to represent. Ordinary commuters want a tunnel between O'Connell Bridge and Tara Street because it makes their lives easier. You should be arguing for the tunnel. Or will you just continue to oppose it because it was my idea?

steve-o

The tunnel/shopping idea has some merits, but why would the public sector need to build it? If it is viable, then let the private sector submit ideas for route, design, construction plans (including how traffic disruption would be managed), and let it be built as a PPP.

gobdaw

steve-o wrote:

The tunnel/shopping idea has some merits, but why would the public sector need to build it? If it is viable, then let the private sector submit ideas for route, design, construction plans (including how traffic disruption would be managed), and let it be built as a PPP.

I think that this is a very attractive idea, with most if not all of the €**million being provided apart from public funds. Plus private developers would be better at identifying comercially viable outlets as tenents.

But isn't Metro North itself to be provided by PPP, so it may not be necessary to hive off O'Connell/Tara pedestrian route from the balance.

dowlingm

One thing - the Toronto PATH system, which would be a good model for the retail tunnel between SSG and TS, is organised by the City - not the transit system. So it's not for CIE/RPA/Platform 11 to make it happen, it's for Dublin City Council.

Also - there could be resistance from property owners as the links between buildings make changes of ownership tricky so any land law problems would have to thought out.

http://www.toronto.ca/path/

mackerski

The reduced distance between the now-proposed Metro station and Tara Street does make it more reasonable to consider a tunnel linking the two. However...

Metrobest wrote:

Ordinary commuters want a tunnel between O'Connell Bridge and Tara Street because it makes their lives easier.

I disagree. The Ordinary Commuter will by and large favour the tunnel because they believe that it will make their life easier, mainly due to...

Metrobest wrote:

Tara Street (currently Ireland's busiest railway station)

...the fact that, today, their journey has to involve Tara St. In fact Tara St. is one of the pokiest stations on the network. It is ill-suited to the passenger numbers it serves today. A strategy that reduces footfall in Tara Street by removing those people that could more productively end their journeys in Docklands, O'Connell Bridge or Stephen's Green would IMHO be far more worthy than one that strengthens peoples' assumptions that Tara St. is a good stopover point.

Dermot

DerekP11

Metrobest wrote:

The point I want to make to Platform 11 is this. The problem with Platform 11 has always been its holier-than-thou attitude: platform 11 knows best. You come across as being out of touch with the ordinary commuter and what they want, which is ironic because that's who you're supposed to represent. Ordinary commuters want a tunnel between O'Connell Bridge and Tara Street because it makes their lives easier. You should be arguing for the tunnel. Or will you just continue to oppose it because it was my idea?

In all fairness Metrobest, the above quote is a prime example of why you risk losing any credibility. How the hell do you know what ordinary Dublin commuters want? Thats a very difficulty point to juistify from the far flung reaches of Austrailia. If you think that whats posted on this forum is an accurate representation, then you are sadly mislead. I meet and talk to commuters everyday of the week. (thats commuters in Dublin, not Sydney, Austrailia) Furthermore, the P11 board is also an area that doesn't necessarily represent the views of Dublin commuters. Huge amounts of P11 work with commuters is done "on the ground". Views are sought/offered from people who havent even heard of Boards.ie or those who can't/won't log on to an internet forum such as the one provided by P11. P11 no longer relies on cyberspace for information or opinion, hence our forthcoming hardcopy Newsletter and public meetings.(due to demand) We are much better placed to guage public opinion in Dublin, than you are. Be civil and accept that. Its a simple reality.

Nowhere on this thread can I find an example of where we "disagreed" with the link between Tara St. and the metro station at O'Connell bridge. I think we may have possibly pointed out why it wasn't being done.

Victor

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

On the RPA metro site, it states that a draft Environmental Imapct Statement can be reviewed and commented on by the 30th November. Anybody know if this draft EIS is online?

They have edited that page to add Metro North Draft Scoping Report.pdf (6.82 MB)

bk

Metrobest wrote:

The point I want to make to Platform 11 is this. The problem with Platform 11 has always been its holier-than-thou attitude: platform 11 knows best. You come across as being out of touch with the ordinary commuter and what they want, which is ironic because that's who you're supposed to represent. Ordinary commuters want a tunnel between O'Connell Bridge and Tara Street because it makes their lives easier. You should be arguing for the tunnel. Or will you just continue to oppose it because it was my idea?

Just wanted to say that I'm not in P11 and I don't think I saw a P11 member disagree with a tunnel anyway on this thread.

BTW if developers completely paid for a tunnel then I'd have no problem with it.

popebenny16

Just in relation to the walkway from O'connell street to Tara Street, ok it will be in effect temporary, and it will be expensive. Then again, Spencer Dock station is temporary and expensive.

If it was to be in effect temporary why would any shops locate there? Who would build a temporary underground shopping centre?

To be fair to Metrobest, if i was in Sydney and saw this wondeful system I'd be doing everything to get it into dublin as well, because it sounds great. The problem is that system you described was probably designed like that from scratch. The dublin situation is different, we're trying to put a square peg into a round hole. Post interconnector Tara Street will lose almost all of its importance, people will go to Stephens Green or O'connell Street instead. That said, the stephens green underground site will be a massive potential for what Metrobest proposes, as there will be massive amounts of people there.

I dont get where "the vast majority of people want it" comes from, what evidence have you got to back that up?

In relation to upgrading of the Maynooth line there is in fact no reason why they cant start this right away, and shock horror, have it ready for when the Interconnector opens, in other words Irish Rail should NOW start putting out their detailed proposals to the minister, but you know how they work, they'll start the design and tendering work in about 2014........

hence our forthcoming hardcopy Newsletter

Yeah, great Derek, when exactly do i get a day off again?

strassenwolf

I don't get this bit:

popebenny16 wrote:

Post interconnector Tara Street will lose almost all of its importance, people will go to Stephens Green or O'connell Street instead.

Tara Street will surely have plenty of traffic after the interconnector is built, if it indeed is. Drogheda Arrow trains will not be going through the interconnector, so it would make sense to route them through Tara Street. The same would be the case for Navan trains, if they were to travel via Drogheda.

Even if a Clonsilla-Navan line were to be built, it would still be sensible for Navan Arrow trains to head into town via Tara Street, as it would probably still be a better option than going to Spencer Dock (which may not at that stage even be possible if the Spencer Dock surface station is only a temporary one).

It is true that passengers on such a Navan-Clonsilla service could change at Drumcondra to get to O'Connell Bridge, as could Maynooth passengers. However, if they wish to get to the O'Connell Bridge/Tara Street area, it would be necessary to weigh up the advantage of changing onto the metro over being brought directly to a central station which is connected to O'Connell Bridge by a nice underground shopping centre.

And, of course, passengers from Greystones inwards who wish to get to the area around O'Connell Bridge will be doing so in the way they currently do, using Tara Street or Connolly. There's plenty of them too.

All in all, this shopping mall idea looks like one with plenty of potential.

popebenny16

I did say almost all of its importance, at the moment its used so much simply because it is the nearest station to the dead centre of town and there is no alternative, it is also a kip, but thats beside the point.

Sure the Arrow from Arklow will still be running through it, and the idea to run the trains from Dundalk would be a good move also. A lot of those people would get off at Pearse, though, and get onto the interconnector.

The same would be the case for Navan trains, if they were to travel via Drogheda.

They wont be though, which is a pity. They could go tomorrow, if IE wanted, but they dont.

I personally am not aginst this tunnell from the bridge to Tara Street station, the only problem is that as well as the "termporary" aspect to it, there is the entire ambiance and indeed capacity issues for Tara street. In fact, with the interconnector will we need Tara Street at all?

strassenwolf

Indeed, a poor performance by IE wrt Navan. I understand your team had identified at least a couple of slots which would have allowed trains to run between Dublin and Navan without interfering with anyone else.

Tara Street is a bit of a dump, but a nice lick of paint (or better still implementation of IE's earlier plan to develop the site) could do wonders for it.

We certainly do very much need Tara Street, even after construction of the interconnector. It's a very useful station for lots of places in that area immediately either side of the Liffey. The Irish Life Centre, Temple Bar, etc. Whether or not this "shopping mall" in a tunnel is built, it would be an extremely useful station for people on Drogheda/Dundalk trains, southside DART trains, Arklow arrow, etc.

Interconnector or not, I can't imagine how a journey from Drogheda or Dun Laoghaire to, say, the Irish Life centre or Temple Bar could possibly be improved by removing Tara Street station.

Don't forget also that in the next few years the station will be able to handle 16 trains an hour. There really should not be a "temporary" feel to the fact that trains will be stopping there in numbers approaching that, and that lots of people will be getting on and off at that station. For many years to come.

Metrobest

To be fair to Metrobest, if i was in Sydney and saw this wondeful system I'd be doing everything to get it into dublin as well, because it sounds great. The problem is that system you described was probably designed like that from scratch. The dublin situation is different, we're trying to put a square peg into a round hole..

And it is great, your holiness. Just for reference, I attach a picture looking south towards Sydney's Town Hall station: the platforms are underneath the clock building. It was built in 1930 - the station, that is. Most of the tunnels from concourse level link into modern buildings and were added in the 80s and 90s, including an underground link to the nearby Monorail which was built for the Sydney Olympics. The tunnel network wasn't designed like that from scratch. Sometimes square pegs can fit round holes if you even out the corners.

The tunnel runs via the station concourse from the building on the left (QVB) and surfaces near the skyscraper going up in the background of the image.

Throngs of people powerwalk through the tunnels during rush hour as they catch their trains to outer suburbs. They find it very handy that they can stop off in the underground supermarket or dry cleaners or wine shop or coffee kiosk. It just makes life easier for people and that's why it's so heavily used.

Convenience is a universal virtue. I don't think Sydneysiders and Dubliners are so different that a similar network of tunnels would be shunned by the commuters of Dublin. I don't think any Dubliner in their right mind would choose to wait interminably at pedestrian crossings for the green man when they could be powering along a heated tunnel, stopping off for a hot chocolate or a juice along the way.

Derek, in response to your comment, I don't need to go out and talk to commuters with a clipboard to know that the people of Dublin would love an underground network of tunnels and shops all the way from College Green to Tara Street and Abbey Street. A tunnel/travelator is a modern convenience like a microwave or a dishwasher. If you've never experienced it, you don't know what you're missing. And once you have it, you'll never want to live without it.

I personally am not aginst this tunnell from the bridge to Tara Street station, the only problem is that as well as the "termporary" aspect to it, there is the entire ambiance and indeed capacity issues for Tara street. In fact, with the interconnector will we need Tara Street at all?

We'll always need Tara Street so let's focus on how to make life easier for the tens of thousands of citzens of Dublin who use it. While it's not the fanciest station, it is functional. Remember that a tunnel from Tara to O'Connell Bridge would change Tara as we know it. Tara Street would in effect become part of the under-Liffey metro station. And that's a good thing, right? That's why I believe Platform 11 should be crying out for this tunnel. Again I scratch my head. Why isn't it?