New Metro North Drawings

Victor

New over all drawing and a series of smaller scale drawings (most overlaid on aerial photos) under the heading "Metro North Photographic Route Alignment".

http://www.rpa.ie/metro/maps/metro_north_maps

spacetweek

Victor wrote: »

New over all drawing and a series of smaller scale drawings (most overlaid on aerial photos) under the heading "Metro North Photographic Route Alignment".

http://www.rpa.ie/metro/maps/metro_north_maps

Apparently a stop north of Lissenhall, Belinstown, has now been added. It is east-facing, making an extension east to the Northern line quite simple. They're planning on a combination of tunnel and elevated to get around the Swords bypass. Also Santry Demesne has been renamed Northwood.

Irish and Proud

spacetweek wrote: »

Apparently a stop north of Lissenhall, Belinstown, has now been added. It is east-facing, making an extension east to the Northern line quite simple. They're planning on a combination of tunnel and elevated to get around the Swords bypass. Also Santry Demesne has been renamed Northwood.

Well, why not go all the way and link into the Northern Line - think of all the extra traffic the Metro North would take - especially towards the airport (11k employees?).

Regards!

Victor

There is certainly scope for some sort of connection, even if its by bus for the moment.

spacetweek wrote: »

It is east-facing

No it isn't, its a northward continuation. The RPA maps are a bit misleading.

Its something like this.

spacetweek

Agreed that the bus is fine for the moment, but we should fill in the gap in the future.

Considering Lissenhall is undeveloped land and is just going to be a P+R, what is the purpose of Belinstown? I wonder if they're planning a new town up there? It doesn't appear on dev maps so it must be a long way off.

Another major thing I just noticed is that MW used to approach MN and turn to face south, making an eastern continuation difficult. In that new map, this has been corrected, and MW now faces east. This is good news, as I've heard it proposed that MW be eventually continued along the Northern Fringe to the Northern line.

murphaph

MW will join MN in a full grade separated delta junction AFAIK.

The purpose of Belinstown is unclear to me too, as pointed out, Lissenhall is undeveloped as it is. I note however that the Depot is now at Belinstown.

If an alignment into Donabate on the northern line isn't preserved someone should be shot. It is the most obvious next step and in relative terms would cost buttons.

Bluetonic

I wonder what sort of impact the P&R facilities will have on the Lissenhall interchange which already suffers from congestion at peak times.

It would have been nice to see the termination north of the interchange which would reduce the need for Skerries/Rush/Lusk P&R traffic to ever need to touch the interchange.

weehamster

If an alignment into Donabate on the northern line isn't preserved someone should be shot. It is the most obvious next step and in relative terms would cost buttons.

Don't be silly. Nobody should be shot.
Donabate is getting the DART so there is no need for the light rail metro to go near there.

If there is going to be a link up between the Northern Line and the light rail metro north, this will happen much closer to the city

As for cost, well it doesnt matter and the best best example was the Airport DART Spur (which I still think will be needed in the future).

The current light rail metro design is leaving the possibility (one day) of heading to Ashbourne.

Random

Any idea where at the airport this is actually going to come in? Are you gonna be able to come up an escalator into the deparatures area? (wishful thinking?) or are you gonna have to get a shuttle bus from a station miles from the Airport that's called Dublin Aiport Station ?

Victor

Its in the centre of the airport, between the hangars and the termini.

Bluetonic

Victor wrote: »

There is certainly scope for some sort of connection,

Here's the minutes of the motion to extend when it was discussed by FCC.

http://www.fingalcoco.ie/minutes/meeting_doc.aspx?id=4009

EXTENSION OF THE METRO FROM LISSENHALL TO DONABATE

The following motion in the name of Councillor C. Byrne was proposed by Councillor C. Byrne and seconded by Councillor J. Corr.



That in the interests of securing improved mainline rail access to Dublin Airport, and greater access between Balbriggan, Skerries, Rush, Lusk and Donabate with the areas of the County and Dublin City along the existing Metro route, that this Council introduce a Variation to the Fingal County Development Plan 2005-2011 identifying an indicative route for an extension of the Metro from Lissenhall to Donabate.



The following report was circulated:





The Metro North project is an intrinsic element of the Governments Transport 21 framework that outlines the future investment programme for the countrys transportation network. The planned route for Metro North commences at St. Stephens Green and terminates at Lissenhall. The planned route does not make any provision for an extension to Donabate and, due to the recent agreement of the route following a lengthy public consultation period and the absence of commitment of public finance for such an extension, it is considered highly unlikely that the Metro North would be extended to Donabate. As such it is considered inappropriate to vary the County Development Plan for such an unlikely proposal. The planned Metro terminus for Lissenhall includes a bus interchange and a Park and Ride facility. It is considered that these facilities, in particular the Park and Ride will allow persons residing in the northern towns such as Donabate, Skerries Lusk and Rush to park their vehicles at the terminus and utilise the Metro to access the Airport and to travel to the city centre.



Furthermore, for such an extension to be sustainable and financially feasible the lands along the route would have to be developed in an intensive manner that could contribute towards the costs of the Metro such as high density residential and commercial development. An extension of the Metro Line to Donabate would involve traversing through lands zoned as Greenbelt (GB) and identified as being a Sensitive Landscape. The current zoning would not support a Section 49 Scheme, which would be necessary to assist in financing the suggested extended Metro line, and the potential rezoning of this area would be highly undesirable.



With regard to the concern raised in the motion for greater access between Balbriggan, Skerries, Rush, Lusk and Donabate a number of projects included within Transport 21 should address the concern. As part of Transport 21, there are plans for the extension of the Dart Line from its existing terminus in Malahide to Donabate. This will serve to provide more effective and efficient rail access for the town and its environs. In addition, Transport 21 also includes further proposals for the development of an improved Dart line between Balbriggan and Kildare, which will have interchanges with a new Dart line proposed from Maynooth to Greystones, and the Luas and Metro lines. These planned improvements will significantly improve the access and connectivity of a number of urban settlements throughout Fingal.



Therefore, it is submitted that the motion to reserve an indicative route for the extension of the Metro line between Lissenhall and Donabate should be rejected. Instead, the concerns raised with regard to securing improved access between settlements in Fingal will be more appropriately tackled in coming years through the planned and committed Dart improvements to these settlements.



The Cathaoirleach then informed the meeting that it was proposed to defer the motions in the names of Councillor D. Healy and Councillor C. Byrne to the adjourned Council Meeting on 27th November 2006.



The meeting concluded at 8.00pm.

murphaph

Very parochial of FCC there. Extending metro to Donabate would allow (in the medium term) very easy access to Dublin Airport from the north east. As well as easier commuting to the north inner city. The easier we make it, the less likely people are to take the car.

weehamster

Very parochial of FCC there. Extending metro to Donabate would allow (in the medium term) very easy access to Dublin Airport from the north east. As well as easier commuting to the north inner city. The easier we make it, the less likely people are to take the car.

Typical of some self-opportunist councillors chancing their arm. This idea is a total waist of taxpayers money and time. The Cash is needed for much more important projects elsewhere.

As already mentioned, the DART is coming to Donabate, in about 2 years (possibly 1 year) after the Light Rail Metro opens. Very easy access from the north east to the Airport can be achieved with a line closer to city (RPA are looking at a possible line from Howth Jtn / Clongriffin to the Light Rail Metro North). As for taking cars off the road, the DART upgrade will move more passengers and take more cars off the Road than the entire Light Rail Metro system put together.

Sorry but the Donabate Light Rail Metro spur is a non starter. Donabate is well catered for with the DART. Don't get greedy. Ashbourne needs the extension more than Donabate as they have nothing.

bazzer06

Cant say i agree - even if a connection to the Dart was going to be built further in to the city, I still think this spur is an excellent idea. Its not just about Donabate getting greedy - Its about integration. Most good metro systems have interchanges that overlap ( for example in paris, the RER A intersects the Metro line 1 5 times ) - it makes the system more flexible.

On top of that, I think Ashbourne is too far from the city, and across sparsely populated countryside to justify an extension of a Metro line. Maybe a spur off the Navan line would make more sense?

Metrobest

I know I will face accustations that I am a broken record, but I have to come back to a key point: looking at the maps just reinforces the proximity of O'Connell Bridge to Tara Street station, two of the most central stations. They need to be connected and this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to do it cost effectively. Doing it belately like they have done in Barcelona will be horrendously disruptive and expensive.

Seeing the allignment mapped out really makes the metro seem that little bit more real. I'm very happy with its location under Drumcondra Station which will allow for good interchange. Parnell Square stop is also to be welcomed.

The RPA's consultation stragegy is very positive. Nobody can cry foul when construction begins that they were not consulted. Hopefully no M3-type protestors will decide that there is some item in the ground that could not possibly be dug through. I do have worries about Stephen's Green. I'm frightened M3 types supported by Frank McDonald will decide to chain themselves to the rails of the Green, delaying the project. I really think it's time the government got tough on these wasters. I'd like to see Frank McDonald crawl into a tunnel though - and not come back out!

KC61

Why do Tara Street and O'Connell Bridge need to be linked, given that the exact same DART trains (Maynooth/Pace-Bray/Greystones) would interchange with Metro North at Drumcondra?

Agreed re the consultation - anyone who comes back later complaining has no fallback.

Bluetonic

Wasn't there talk of extending MW to create a spur to join the northern rail line at the Howth Junction area? This makes more sense then extending MW to join Donabate.

An extension of MN will only lead a low density spread of development with Donabate joining Swords. We should be trying to preserve green field land like this. Already Swords and Malahide are starting to merge, Portmarnock and Baldoyle aren't too far from each other either. We don't need to encourage any more low density spread.

The high denisty area of Clongriffin (the largest bank of land being developed in the city at the moment) would be better served with a spur to the northern line of where MW and MN meet. Added to this there is talk to Baldoyle Industrial Estate being sold and residential unit being developed - it really is a no brainer to have the Metro system join the northern line at this point.

Skyhater

KC61 wrote: »

Why do Tara Street and O'Connell Bridge need to be linked, given that the exact same DART trains (Maynooth/Pace-Bray/Greystones) would interchange with Metro North at Drumcondra?

Because it gives passengers choice!!! A relatively simple link like this should be pursued.

In general, I'm really sceptic about the RPA and IE's ability to bang their heads together and give us proper integration.
I'm even unsure about Drumcondra.....will there definitely be direct access from the IE station to Merto North???? I still haven's seen any details on this.

Also for metro(aka Luas)west.... the location of the Porterstown stop doesn't look optimal from integration with a future Dart Stop.

armada104

Skyhater wrote: »

Because it gives passengers choice!!! A relatively simple link like this should be pursued.

It's not a choice that anyone needs! In making a change from the Greystones-Maynooth DART line to Metro North or vice-versa, there's never a situation where Tara Street is necessary. For the hard of thinking (and because I'm procrastinating from real work) below are all the scenarios I can think of:

Scenario 1: You're at Stephen's Green and want to get the DART Greystones-bound/Maynooth-bound (assuming you're too lazy to walk)
Get the other DART line to Pearse

Scenario 2: You're travelling Southbound on Metro North and want to get the DART Greystones-bound/Maynooth-bound
Change at Drumcondra

Scenario 3: You're travelling from Maynooth and want to get to Stephen's Green/travel north on Metro North
Change at Drumcondra

Scenario 4: You're travelling from Greystones and want to travel north on Metro North
Change at Drumcondra

Scenario 5: You're travelling from Greystones and want to get to Stephen's Green(again assuming you're lazy)
Change to the other DART line at Pearse

Please let me know if I've left anything out.

Skyhater

I think you've captured most scenario's....., and i can totally see your point.
But having options is always a good thing. For starters, it would alleviate passengers numbers changing at Drumcondra.

Also, as someone who regularly travels from Clonsilla to Stephens green, i'd much prefer to change onto an partly loaded southbound Metro at Tara, than a packed Metro at Drumcondra.

Granted it depends on cost vs small benifit. I just think as a general rule we should integrate where possible.

armada104

I think it would be better to have passengers changing at Drumcondra generally, as O'Connell would, I'd imagine, be the busiest stop on the line.

You raise an interesting point regarding loadings, though. I hadn't thought of that one. Particularly if the line is ever extended southwards (unlikely but should be taken into account in the name of futureproofing). Suppose it would be worth a link so.

steve-o

Metrobest wrote: »

They need to be connected and this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to do it cost effectively.

What route do you propose? How do you suggest it be constructed? What's your cost estimate?

Metrobest

armada104 wrote: »

Please let me know if I've left anything out.

Yes, eg. board metro north at Griffith Avenue, Drumcondra, Mater or Parnell Square and change at O'Connell/Tara for the fastest connection southbound on the DART. Huge numbers of people would take advantage of this connection.

Accessing the DART line from the O'Connell Street/Temple Bar area also benefits hugely from an underground link between O'Connell and Tara; because it brings Tara closer to the central area than it currently is.

I advise you to spend time using the metro systems in cities like Sydney and Barcelona, seeing how such connections make life easier for passengers. Then
use an unintegrated system in places like Kuala Lumper (with unconnected stations of similar distance of seperation as Tara/O'Connell) and come back on this forum with the same level of knowledge as I have of how metro systems function across the world, and you might then see why my point is salient.

What route do you propose? How do you suggest it be constructed? What's your cost estimate?

In an underground passageway parellel to the river, either under Burgh Key or Fleet Street. Can be constructed as part of the excavations of the station. Any cost can be offset against the retail opportunities such a connection would bring about (ie shops along the length of the connection).

It's being done right now in Barcelona to connect existing stations (for example Provenca/Diagonal and Sant Gervasi/Placa Molina. A trench is being dug along Balmes Street and a travelator installed to connect the two stations. Barcelona's metro was built on the cheap under the Franco dictatorship and now city planners have to deal with the poor specifications of certain stations and connections. I can see the same mistakes being made in Dublin, and what's depressing is people on this forum arguing against a connection between two of Ireland's busiest stations located 100metres apart.

spacetweek

weehamster wrote: »

The current light rail metro design is leaving the possibility (one day) of heading to Ashbourne.

bazzer06 wrote: »

On top of that, I think Ashbourne is too far from the city, and across sparsely populated countryside to justify an extension of a Metro line. Maybe a spur off the Navan line would make more sense?

I don't think either of these ideas are a good for serving Ashbourne. Considering the whole N2 corridor between M50 and Dublin county boundary is likely to be developed in future, it would be better to build a new metro line (in a decade or so) from Ashbourne to the city centre via Finglas.

OTK

Metrobest wrote: »

I can see the same mistakes being made in Dublin, and what's depressing is people on this forum arguing against a connection between two of Ireland's busiest stations located 100metres apart.

A straight line from O'Connell Bridge to Tara Street is 270m (under 4 minutes walk). It's more if you follow the route of the quay. It might be worth doing. It depends on the alternative surface journey time which should only involve one major road crossing (Tara Street).

(edit)
It would be a lot quicker with with a high speed travelator but less opportunity for shops and more costly to build and maintain.

Skyhater

A link makes sense. As Metrobest says, other cities are retrofitting their systems to link stations. You see these type of links all over the world.
Infact, I believe Tara street station and the new O'Connell Bridge stations should be combined into one station (Call it whatever - my preference would be "O'Connell Bridge"). They are so so so close together, it would make sense from every perspective.

OTK wrote: »

A straight line from O'Connell Bridge to Tara Street is 270m (under 4 minutes walk). It's more if you follow the route of the quay. It might be worth doing. It depends on the alternative surface journey time which should only involve one major road crossing (Tara Street).
(edit)
It would be a lot quicker with with a high speed travelator but less opportunity for shops and more costly to build and maintain.

I don't think an underground link can be compared to an overground obstacle course!!! An underground link keeps you within the public transport system, without interaction with traffic/pedestrians and most importantly in this country "Keeps you Dry". It's a much superior alternative.

However, As i said before, i think the main issue stopping this from happening is the RPA Vs IE battle. There are still no details of seamless integrations at other designated interchanged (...with the exception of Stephens green)

MICKEYG

The link is a brilliant idea that, with the retail opportunites, might pay for itself. From experience, connecting within the transport system is far easier than exiting and rentering even if the times involved are similar. Of course it will never happen

Nostradamus

MICKEYG wrote: »

The link is a brilliant idea that, with the retail opportunites, might pay for itself. From experience, connecting within the transport system is far easier than exiting and rentering even if the times involved are similar. Of course it will never happen

Underground retail is a huge aspect of the Montreal Metro and I think Metrobest's idea is spot on. It would be the ideal PPP project too.

paulm17781

Nostradamus wrote: »

Underground retail is a huge aspect of the Montreal Metro and I think Metrobest's idea is spot on. It would be the ideal PPP project too.

All of Montreal (city centre) is linked underground, all the malls are connected, this would be because of the freezing winters. It is something I would like here but I think underground walkways like that would require a major upgrade of the city sewerage system. If you don't believe me, go in to some pub basements around O'Connell st.

steve-o

It seems to me that people are suggesting a cut-and-cover tunnel for this O'Connell-Tara link, about 300m long, maybe 20m wide (to allow for shops/restaurants), 5m deep (assuming just one level). I think that Burgh quay is the only route wide enough.

It would probably mean a large-scale relocation of under-street services and any streams/culverts that drain into the river, and it would be below high tide level. Can anyone hazard a guess at the cost? €200m? €400m?

Obviously there would be significant disruption during construction with the closure of some major arteries. Perhaps some buildings on either side of Tara St could be acquired to allow for a bridge over the street to minimise disruption.

HydeRoad

I don't think people mind walking a reasonable distance.

The problem is, we live on an island in the middle of an ocean. Contrary to popular belief, rain is not our biggest enemy, it's constant wind.

When you step off a train or a bus, or when you leave your warm office at 5:30 in the evening, you dread the thoughts of having the head blown off you, particularly accompanied by squally rain and biting cold, and your umbrella blowing inside out. We get more windy days than calm days.

That is the biggest enemy of public transport. That's why people prefer to use their cars, to park outside their door, and run in out of the weather.

Victor

My case for a connection at Donabate is that it means people from Drogheda and Dundalk and further afield don't need to double back to get to Swords, the Airport and the M50 / Ballmun area. It would make the outer stretch of MN busier and the inner stretch slightly less busy.

Of course I still think Metro East (Dardistown-Howth Junction/Clongriffen) might be a runner.

Nostradamus

paulm17781 wrote: »

All of Montreal (city centre) is linked underground, all the malls are connected, this would be because of the freezing winters. It is something I would like here but I think underground walkways like that would require a major upgrade of the city sewerage system. If you don't believe me, go in to some pub basements around O'Connell st.

The walkway I would imagine would be under the pipes. The tunnel would not be cut and cover so no problem there and would be sealed anyways. This kind of thing is done all over the world. No big deal.

paulm17781

Nostradamus wrote: »

The walkway I would imagine would be under the pipes. The tunnel would not be cut and cover so no problem there and would be sealed anyways. This kind of thing is done all over the world. No big deal.

Totally agree, one thing thought... This is Dublin, it is rare things are done right. A sewerage smelling tunnel would be worse than the wind. What are the odds it'd be done right?

Metrobest

steve-o wrote: »

It seems to me that people are suggesting a cut-and-cover tunnel for this O'Connell-Tara link, about 300m long, maybe 20m wide (to allow for shops/restaurants), 5m deep (assuming just one level). I think that Burgh quay is the only route wide enough.

It would probably mean a large-scale relocation of under-street services and any streams/culverts that drain into the river, and it would be below high tide level. Can anyone hazard a guess at the cost? €200m? €400m?

Obviously there would be significant disruption during construction with the closure of some major arteries. Perhaps some buildings on either side of Tara St could be acquired to allow for a bridge over the street to minimise disruption.

In relation to cost, as has been pointed out, it could be exploited as part of a PPP, offset against the commercial development, and I think even €200 sounds outlandish. We're not talking here about mining an entire station with all its associated facilities from platform to surface level, we're talking about mining out an underground tunnel as part of an existing station development. Economies of scale come into play. Done retrospectively like in Barcelona, however, it becomes intensely disruptive with two lanes of the street in question closed.

To make the walkway construction less disruptive, it could be built as part of a wider renewel of this area. Keep the Heineken building but everything else on Burgh Quay could be replaced with some iconic, sustainable high rise buildings, for example like Torre Agbar in Barcelona or Swiss Re in London. Burgh Quay itself has little in the way of architectural merit and is already a high rise district, relatively speaking. So the question is now one of creating better, more sustainable high rise rather than awful buildings like Liberty Hall and Hawkins House. I personally would have no qualms about razing the area between Hawkins Street, Poolbeg Street and Tara Street Station, including the the horrible Hawkins House. Efforts could be made to preserve Mulligans pub

Imagine beautiful skygardens on the 40th floor of one of these new skyscapers, what wonderful spaces could be provided not just for employees but all citizens of the city. Dublin needs new vertical villages and this underground link could, in the context of the buildings on Burgh Quay being demolished, have entrances into every building, allowing people to go directly from metro, tram or Dart into their office building, escaping whatever weather is thrown at them!

Look at the newest skyscapers like Shard London Bridge, a 300 metre icon beside the Tower Bridge. Dublin needs to get a move on, because all those companies in the IFSC are going to be looking for prestige headquarters with 21st century infrastructure and at the moment nothing in Dublin can offer that.

murphaph

Metrobest wrote: »

Dublin needs to get a move on, because all those companies in the IFSC are going to be looking for prestige headquarters with 21st century infrastructure and at the moment nothing in Dublin can offer that.

Sure don't they have Docklands Station (when IE bother to open it )

Irish and Proud

Metrobest wrote: »

Yes, eg. board metro north at Griffith Avenue, Drumcondra, Mater or Parnell Square and change at O'Connell/Tara for the fastest connection southbound on the DART. Huge numbers of people would take advantage of this connection.

Accessing the DART line from the O'Connell Street/Temple Bar area also benefits hugely from an underground link between O'Connell and Tara; because it brings Tara closer to the central area than it currently is.

I advise you to spend time using the metro systems in cities like Sydney and Barcelona, seeing how such connections make life easier for passengers. Then
use an unintegrated system in places like Kuala Lumper (with unconnected stations of similar distance of seperation as Tara/O'Connell) and come back on this forum with the same level of knowledge as I have of how metro systems function across the world, and you might then see why my point is salient.

Yes, we'd need to do our research properly in relation to a metro system before we end up building the Line 50 to match its motorway counterpart, which is now being rectified at huge cost! So called economies such as omitting escalators and travelator links are in fact, economic lunacy. Either, build a proper metro or not at all. €5bn for a cheap metro is a total waste of money.

I'd focus on getting the interconnector built, which in conjunction with the proposed DART extensions, would be of far greater benefit over a far greater area with far better capacity. The LUAS (much cheaper than a metro) is a total economic success - OK, it gets completly over-crowed at rush hour, but anytime I've been on it (well outside rush hour), it is very well used (both ways) and not over-crowded - now that's value for money! - and think of the massive social benefits involved!

Oh, and what about rush hour? - well is the problem limited capacity or is it concentrated over demand? Why can't we have more major employment centres such as Sandyford and Cherrywood? Why can't we spread out our commuting destinations across the city - thereby making far more efficient use of all transport infrastructure? For example, having sardine tins in one direction and diserted trains in another is a complete misuse and waste of resurces - it's ridiculous! :mad: If we (employers and employees) change our commuting attitudes, we could significanly increase performance on all routes (road and rail) leading in and out of Dublin, and that's without any additional transport infrastructure.

Metrobest wrote: »

In an underground passageway parellel to the river, either under Burgh Key or Fleet Street. Can be constructed as part of the excavations of the station. Any cost can be offset against the retail opportunities such a connection would bring about (ie shops along the length of the connection).

It's being done right now in Barcelona to connect existing stations (for example Provenca/Diagonal and Sant Gervasi/Placa Molina. A trench is being dug along Balmes Street and a travelator installed to connect the two stations. Barcelona's metro was built on the cheap under the Franco dictatorship and now city planners have to deal with the poor specifications of certain stations and connections. I can see the same mistakes being made in Dublin, and what's depressing is people on this forum arguing against a connection between two of Ireland's busiest stations located 100metres apart.

Well given that the O'Connell St. and Tara St. stations would be so close together, it would make complete sense to link them up, and they could even look at the feasibility of linking up the North end of Grafton St. too (via Fleet St. and Dame St.). This would make Tara St. the main station for both the Henry St. and Grafton St. shopping precincts. It would also give a direct traffic free connection for pedestrians between the precincts. Obviously, the connection between the Metro North and the Bray to Maynooth Dart Line would be of massive benefit to both and finally, pedestrians (workers from the Georges Quay area etc.) heading East-West along the South bank area could also benefit. Also, some major department stores (Arnotts via Northern Quater, Clerys etc.) could be linked in via the basements. In return, they could make a financial contribution.

Regards!

HydeRoad

I spent a pleasant week in Paris a few years ago. Decided to do it right, and booked into the Hotel Concorde Lafayette, beside the Porte Maillot, 17th floor, with a panoramic view over the whole of Paris, to equal the Eiffel Tower! The 33rd floor was the Bar Panoramique (highly recommended for a romantic surprise), served by express elevator from the reception floor.

There is an enormous underground shopping mall with restaurants and shops of every persuasion on two levels, and at one end, is the busy Porte Maillot station, for RER line 1 to La Défense, Champs Elysées, Concorde, Louvre; also Metro line A to Opéra, Les Halles, and onward to Eurodisney. The Palais de Congres is here too.

The airport coaches leave you right at the door, and you could spend a week there and never set foot outside in the weather if you so wished, although Paris is indeed a sight to behold.

Dublin will never be Paris, despite our very own Champs Ulysses complete with lime trees and a lingerie shop. But it's an inspiration towards where we might go, up and down, down and sideways. It would take a little pressure off the overcrowded pavements up above, too.

marmajam

I prefer the charms of the Paris Hilton. Lingerie est de rigeur mon ami.

gjim

Yes, eg. board metro north at Griffith Avenue, Drumcondra, Mater or Parnell Square and change at O'Connell/Tara for the fastest connection southbound on the DART.

Eh? Why would you not just get the DART directly at Drumcondra - there's only one stop between it and Tara? Why would "huge numbers" opt to get a metro passing two stops to walk 300m when there's a zero change option involving fewer stops? Ditto for anyone wanting to go southbound on the DART from anywhere north of Drumcondra; change at Drumcondra.

Your proposal adds zero utility to the system. Unless it is going to add utility (which it isn't), I'd rather the money be spent elsewhere.

It's not like a 300m public tunnel close to the Liffey will be a piece of piss to build to put it crudely. Off the top of my head, here are a few issues: Engineering and disruption - use cut and cover and you block some of the most of the important traffic routes in the city (the westbound quays and Tara St) and potentially D'Olier St. and have to contend with utilities, sewers, etc. Running a TBM is hardly economically viable for a pedestrian link of this nature. Safety - you'll need emergency services access, multiple escape routes, ventilation systems, etc. These features have added significant cost to both the Interconnector and Metro North. Property rights - unless you are going to go deep underground, you'll probably have to CPO properties along the route given a significant portion of the streets are owned by the facing buildings. Going right against the river would introduce other obvious engineering challenges.

Yes they sometimes do things like this in other cities but you can be sure that they do cost benefit analysis before diverting huge financial and engineering resources into such an enterprise. And if the utility is zero (as it is in this case), then such a project would be unjustifiable.

As for comparisons with the likes of Paris with its big underground shopping centres or the suggestion that this could be self-financing using PPP, people need to get real. Property and land is expensive in Dublin but it simply doesn't compare with Paris where the lack of potential for development within the traditional centre can justify the enormous costs of building underground shopping centres and museums. There are modestly priced small two story houses with back yards within 2km of O'Connell bridge in Dublin. There are 3 bed semi-ds within 3km. There is simply no comparison with Paris or any other dense european city. As a result the financials just don't stack up.

Nostradamus

From the rumour mill so take it for what it worth...the RPA are planning a large station at Dublin airport with multiple platforms with extra capacity for future Metro North extenions to Donebate AND Ashbourne. Heard 6 platforms in total.

Victor

Nostradamus wrote: »

From the rumour mill so take it for what it worth...the RPA are planning a large station at Dublin airport with multiple platforms with extra capacity for future Metro North extenions to Donebate AND Ashbourne. Heard 6 platforms in total.

What day is it?

Note Dublin Airport may have local services to the long term car parks. The blie car aprk is right next to the 'future' Harristown stop. Note Harristown Garage will be next to the Silloge stop. :rolleyes:

Metrobest

gjim wrote: »

Eh? Why would you not just get the DART directly at Drumcondra - there's only one stop between it and Tara? Why would "huge numbers" opt to get a metro passing two stops to walk 300m when there's a zero change option involving fewer stops? Ditto for anyone wanting to go southbound on the DART from anywhere north of Drumcondra; change at Drumcondra.

Your proposal adds zero utility to the system. Unless it is going to add utility (which it isn't), I'd rather the money be spent elsewhere.

It's not like a 300m public tunnel close to the Liffey will be a piece of piss to build to put it crudely. Off the top of my head, here are a few issues: Engineering and disruption - use cut and cover and you block some of the most of the important traffic routes in the city (the westbound quays and Tara St) and potentially D'Olier St. and have to contend with utilities, sewers, etc. Running a TBM is hardly economically viable for a pedestrian link of this nature. Safety - you'll need emergency services access, multiple escape routes, ventilation systems, etc. These features have added significant cost to both the Interconnector and Metro North. Property rights - unless you are going to go deep underground, you'll probably have to CPO properties along the route given a significant portion of the streets are owned by the facing buildings. Going right against the river would introduce other obvious engineering challenges.

Yes they sometimes do things like this in other cities but you can be sure that they do cost benefit analysis before diverting huge financial and engineering resources into such an enterprise. And if the utility is zero (as it is in this case), then such a project would be unjustifiable.

As for comparisons with the likes of Paris with its big underground shopping centres or the suggestion that this could be self-financing using PPP, people need to get real. Property and land is expensive in Dublin but it simply doesn't compare with Paris where the lack of potential for development within the traditional centre can justify the enormous costs of building underground shopping centres and museums. There are modestly priced small two story houses with back yards within 2km of O'Connell bridge in Dublin. There are 3 bed semi-ds within 3km. There is simply no comparison with Paris or any other dense european city. As a result the financials just don't stack up.

Drumconda-Tara via metro is the fastest, most direct route. Look at the map. There absolutely is utility in having mutiple connection points in the system, even if only because the system over time will grow.

In terms of safety, tunnels of this nature do not have, in my experience, such features as multiple access routes. Don't make it seem more complicated than it actually is. The reality is that such connections are commonplace in metro systems the world over and ironically, the newer the system, the more likely it is that such connections are built. If you get your way, though, Dublin will have a 19th century metro system trying to cope with 21st century ways of living and working, which is regrettable.

Additionally, the tunnel need not be a continuous 300 metre. It would also be possible to divide the tunnel into two shorter tunnels, like for example at Sydney's Railway Square, which has the Devonshire Tunnel (360 metres), then a sub surface public placa, above ground bus interchange, and then another tunnel at the opposite side of the plaza under George Street.

Another solution could be to raise the tunnel to ground level hovering above the Liffey and elevate it into Tara Station, a "metro boardwalk" so to speak. There are so many iconic solutions, but let's first of all agree that the two stations not only should be connected, but need to connect in an iconic format. Then it's up to the architects and project leaders to come up with the solution.

It's funny, I was watching on television recently about "Ireland". It's an island being built on reclaimed land off the coast of Dubai. The most amazing engineering solutions are being deployed to make this island a reality. Yet back in the real Ireland, lack of ambition and suspicion of modernity destroys iconic ideas. So instead of skyscapers we get semi Ds.

OTK

Metrobest wrote: »

Drumconda-Tara via metro is the fastest, most direct route. Look at the map.

It's currently 7 minutes by diesel train from drumcondra-connolly-tara. How is a metro journey drumcondra-mater-parnell-O'Connell Bridge plus a 300m walk going to beat an electrified maynooth train?

I was watching on television recently about "Ireland". It's an island being built on reclaimed land off the coast of Dubai. The most amazing engineering solutions are being deployed to make this island a reality.

This is an isolated housing estate in the sea where the residents are dependent on motor launches instead of SUVs for all their transport needs. It's hardly progress.

Metrobest

OTK wrote: »

It's currently 7 minutes by diesel train from drumcondra-connolly-tara. How is a metro journey drumcondra-mater-parnell-O'Connell Bridge plus a 300m walk going to beat an electrified maynooth train?

This is an isolated housing estate in the sea where the residents are dependent on motor launches instead of SUVs for all their transport needs. It's hardly progress.

This annoys me, because you deliberately misrepresent what I have said. It surprises in the first place that you wish to argue against such a connection. Scroll back up the thread and see where other rationale for the Tara-O'Connell Bridge have been pointed out; eg:

* Bringing Tara St Station closer to the central area
* Facilitating connections from Mater, Parnell and Griffith to Southbound Dart in fastest journey times
* Fastest journey time between Drumcondra and Tara (point to point)
* Potential for retail and high rise development along the trajectory of the passageway with direct connections into high rise buildings
* Encouraging sustainable high rise and vertical villages, neccessary for Dublin's continued urban development
* Minimal cost implications due to potential commerical facilties parellell to, or at either end of, the tunnel
* Superquick journey in tunnel due to travelator
* Iconic connection can provide ecomic benefits in itself (tourism, positive image of city, etc.)
* Linkup will benefit any future extensions to metro system in Dublin

And in relation to The World project in Dubai, I think most of us would gladly trade our appalling housing estates, climate and infrastructure for the luxury that is the "Ireland" of Dubai, one of the world's most dynamic economies, with its mind-blowing engineering feats, feats the old Ireland would do well to learn from.

Calina

I like debates. I will and do hand out infractions to people who are either messing about or not contributing to the debate constructively. And bans. I haven't banned anyone for a very long time.

________________________

Back on topic: MetroBest, there was an absolutely fascinating article on Dubai in the NatGeog sometime last year; I think it was the Jan issue from what I remember. I recall a key element of society in Dubai being the social disparity in the country; there is a surface to be scratched, particularly in relation to the grunt work side of things. Not every one in Dubai lives the life that they show off to the world, in other words.

There are other places which have non-dysfunctional public services that are a bit closer than Dubai, with a little more democracy and, dare I say it, better weather.

With respect to the O'Connell St Tara Street connection, I believe I am on record in the past of having said that I didn't see why it should be a priority.

I'm inclined to wonder how many people who are advocating the concept of a vertical village have actually lived in a towerblock that is at least 20 stories high? That's by the way.

gjim

metrobest wrote:

Drumconda-Tara via metro is the fastest, most direct route. Look at the map. There absolutely is utility in having mutiple connection points in the system, even if only because the system over time will grow.

Then

OTK wrote:

It's currently 7 minutes by diesel train from drumcondra-connolly-tara. How is a metro journey drumcondra-mater-parnell-O'Connell Bridge plus a 300m walk going to beat an electrified maynooth train?

Then

metrobest wrote:

This annoys me, because you deliberately misrepresent what I have said.

"misrepresented" eh? Your words are visible for all to see. You claimed on more than one occasion that passengers from Drumcondra wishing to go southbound on the DART would be facilitated by this connection. For example, you repeated the claim in your list of advantages claiming it would support "* Fastest journey time between Drumcondra and Tara (point to point)". You may have other reasons to argue for this connection but there is no misrepresentation here and you are simply wrong.

Then we have:

In terms of safety, tunnels of this nature do not have, in my experience, such features as multiple access routes. Don't make it seem more complicated than it actually is.

Followed by:

Additionally, the tunnel need not be a continuous 300 metre. It would also be possible to divide the tunnel into two shorter tunnels, like for example at Sydney's Railway Square, which has the Devonshire Tunnel (360 metres), then a sub surface public placa, above ground bus interchange, and then another tunnel at the opposite side of the plaza under George Street.

Followed by an even more complicated solution involving some sort of glass tube floating above the Liffey. Do you really not see any sort of contradiction in your "argument". Simultaneously, you accuse me of making things more complicated by suggesting that emergency access and exits and the like would be necessary. Are you aware of how inconsistent your posts are?

Next we have a whole load of fanciful non-sequiters which remind me of the monorail song from the Simpsons. Not only would this connection allow passengers to move from one station to another, it would support sustainable vertical villages and be iconic for tourists.

Calina wrote:

I like debates. I will and do hand out infractions to people who are either messing about or not contributing to the debate constructively.

There's debate and there's sophistry. Instead of defending the financial viability and the utility of this connection, metrobest seems happier going all philosophical (:rolleyes:) on the debate claiming "lack of ambition and suspicion of modernity destroys iconic ideas."; effectively an ad-hominem side-swipe against anyone who questions the viability of metrobest's "vision". I'd rather leave Dubai out of this debate as I suspect it would suit metrobest's attempt to deflect the debate against the simple and basic criticisms of this idea. But I've have been there and while I was impressed with (some of) the engineering (I'm an engineer myself - not civil though) but would not live there. Whatever flaws Ireland has fade into insignificance in comparison. There are hundreds of better cities in the world particularly if you place any value is little things like democracy, human rights or an independent legal system.

Calina

Well where you have a problem, you can report posts. That's what other people do usually, hence a gentle reminder of the "you wouldn't like me when I'm angry variety".

As you were.

HydeRoad

The point is surely not to RECREATE Dubai in Ireland, nor to RECREATE Paris in Dublin. The point is simply that these places open their minds when considering engineering projects. They have a 'can do' attitude to infrastructure, rather than the Irish bargain basement, cheapest, lowest common denominator attitude. That's why we end up with expensive tunnels with fans that don't work, etc. Because everything is delayed for years while governments wring their hands, looking for ways of decapitating good proposals to save money in the short term, while ending up with half finished and under capacity infrastructure that is rushed through at the last minute, under engineered, and costing ten times as much to put right in the long term.

OTK

Metrobest wrote: »

* Fastest journey time between Drumcondra and Tara (point to point)

How long do you think it would take to get from Drumcondra to Tara Street Station via Metro North and a tunnelled walkway?

gjim

The point is simply that these places open their minds when considering engineering projects.

My mind is open. Metrobest proposed a connection. I thought about it.

I can see very little utility to it and he has yet to provide a convincing case that it would be of use to more than a tiny number of passengers. In particular he claims a benefit to certain passengers (from Drumcondra) which is nonsense. The benefit to the small number of people it would facilitatate (e.g. going from the Mater to southbound DART) is of limited value given they have alternatives which involve little more than a few extra minutes for their commute.

So little benefit.

Now lets look at the cost; even with PPP, the cost in terms of direct finance and the disruption are significant no matter what way you look at it. Given the frontage available for shops, the rent would barely cover the running costs of the thing never mind the capital finance. The disruption is another significant cost.

So significant cost.

Put the two together; little benefit and significant cost. So not a great idea, in my opinion. You can be absolutely sure that every engineering project in the world is subject to similar consideration. You can be absolutely sure that in Paris, they look at the benefits before they engage in massive and disruptive engineering projects. They do in Dubai also but the constraints are very different.

If being "open" means jumping up and down gurgling "good idea" at every half baked notion trotted out on internet message boards then no I am not "open". If you are still smitten by the idea of building an underground walkway with retail then I'd suggest a less disruptive and cheaper site for the venture like under the car park of the Liffey Valley centre. Simcity might also provide an outlet for such urges.