[Article] - Should we have a metro for Dublin

markf909

Debate number 1,098,878...

Frank McDonald in the no corner. In this case he makes a better point than a few trees being knocked down but this type of continued analysis is not helping.
I would prefer the interconnector built first over the metro but there is a need for the metro too.

The 4 consortia are shortlisted and the railway order is supposed to be ready for the autumn. Anyone see a government fudge coming?

Does Dublin need a Metro rail service?

YES: Metro North is an essential part of the infrastructure needed to support development and guarantee a better quality of life in Dublin, writes FRANK ALLEN

METRO NORTH is a response to the extraordinary growth in population and employment that has taken place in Dublin since the 1990s and is an essential part of the infrastructure needed to support future development.

Ireland's GDP doubled between 1996 and 2006 and employment grew by 40 per cent. Growth in the Dublin area was more dramatic, with employment rising in Dublin city and Co Dublin by 137 per cent and jobs in the Fingal area growing by 184 per cent.

These figures alone explain why the commute between Swords and the city centre has taken longer every year, particularly when many commuters do not have an attractive public transport option available to them. This private car dependency is also contributing to an unsustainable growth in energy usage.

We all want infrastructure to support economic development and commuters, shoppers and policymakers alike recognise that traffic congestion and negative environmental trends must be addressed.

The Government's commitment to fund major improvements in public transport through Transport 21 allowed the Rail Procurement Agency (RPA) to begin public consultation on a route for Metro North. Excellent progress has been made in agreeing a preferred route and in achieving strong support from key stakeholders.

When we began consultation two years ago, it was clear that people saw Metro as a link between the city centre and the country's busiest airport. With active participation in consultation by residents, businesses and institutions, the role of Metro North as a vital link for communities on the northside of Dublin is now much better understood.

Metro North is recognised by Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council as necessary to achieving population growth without urban sprawl. Metro North will contribute to the success of Dublin City Council's regeneration of Ballymun and the renewal of the Parnell Square area. Fingal County Council's exciting plans to develop Swords as a consolidated town with a vibrant economy depend critically on proceeding with Metro North without delay.

Hospitals such as the Mater and the Rotunda recognise the benefits of a fast, high-frequency transport service at their doorstep. We are working closely with Dublin City University to integrate its campus with regional and national transport services.

A Metro stop at Drumcondra will provide excellent interchange with Iarnród Éireann's Maynooth line service and will accommodate large crowds attending Croke Park. All of these benefits will not be achieved by Metro North on its own but through interchange with Dart, the Luas Red and Green lines and with bus services at high quality interchanges at many stops.

Visitors to Dublin from the North will be able to park their cars at a 2,000 space park-and-ride at Belinstown and travel to the city centre by Metro in half an hour.

An argument has been made that Metro North should be delayed and that implementation of the Iarnród Éireann interconnector project should be advanced in its place. This argument makes little sense.

The interconnector, whose funding is also provided for in Transport 21, will integrate Dublin's suburban rail network and create additional capacity for commuter rail services. RPA and Iarnród Éireann are working closely together to ensure that passengers can avail of high-quality interchange between Metro North, the reconfigured Dart and the Luas Green line at St Stephen's Green.

This co-operation is also intended to limit the construction impact experienced by the public from the two projects. Apart from the St Stephen's Green interchange, the geographical areas to be served by Metro North and the interconnector are different; Dublin requires both projects to be implemented rather than one or the other.

Considering the advanced stage of design and progress with planning and procurement, a decision to reverse the order of implementation would do nothing to advance the interconnector and would put the implementation of Metro North in jeopardy.

Dublin's pace of economic growth is likely to slow in the short term, but any future projections of employment and population for the region call for high-capacity public transport. There are understandable historical reasons why the Government was not able to fund the scale of infrastructure in Dublin that is regarded as the minimum required for a reasonable quality of life in other European countries.

Through Transport 21, the Government has committed to investing in infrastructure to catch up with urban growth and to make growth sustainable. If we spend the next year agonising about Metro North, the sequence in which projects should be implemented or whether we need a European standard of public transport, we will be deciding in favour of urban sprawl, continued car dependency creating worsening gridlock and a poor quality of life for Dublin's future generations.

Frank Allen is chief executive of the Rail Procurement Agency

NO: The proposed Metro line to Dublin airport is just another example of bad - and very costly - planning, writes FRANK MCDONALD

FRANCIS RAMBERT, director of the Institut Français d'Architecture, got it right recently when he diagnosed Dublin as being "sick with urban and suburban sprawl". We all know this is true; indeed, the Los Angeles-isation of the city has created a commuter belt extending outwards for 100km, with the M50 as its congested distributor road.

The plan to build a metro conjures up images of Paris and other major cities with underground rail networks. But Dublin isn't Paris. The French capital has a population density of 20,000 people per square kilometre, compared to Dublin's 1,500 per square kilometre. This raises the issue of horses for courses, and shows we're not at the races.

Metro North, a 17km line between Swords and St Stephen's Green, will do nothing to serve Dublin's sprawling suburbs, with the single exception of Swords. All it will do is to add yet another disparate element to the city's public transport services, which comprise buses, Dart, suburban rail and Luas.

This fragmented way of getting around doesn't qualify as a public transport "system". It is difficult to transfer between modes, there is still no integrated ticketing and the bus service, in particular, is unreliable due to American-style traffic congestion. No wonder most Dublin commuters choose to travel to and from work by car.

Nobody could deny that the two Luas lines have been a great success, even though they still don't connect. According to the 2006 Census, Luas resulted in a 66 per cent increase in the number of rail commuters in the Dublin area, compared to 2002.

That's a vote of confidence in high-quality, surface-running public transport. But now the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA), which brought us Luas, wants to go underground for Metro North. One of the main selling points is that this line would serve Dublin airport, where passenger numbers have exploded. But even with a rail link to the city centre, how many airport users would avail of it?

The rather surprising evidence from other European cities, even where airports are served by mainline rail, is that less than 30 per cent would take the train. In any case, if Dublin airport is the priority, it could be served much more economically by a spur off the Dart at Malahide, or by diverting the Dublin-Belfast main line.

Metro North would be extremely expensive. Although the RPA and the Department of Transport have refused to release even ballpark figures, The Irish Times established that the cost was estimated at €4.58 billion in 2004. Allowing for construction inflation since then and design changes that add to the cost, it's probably close to €6 billion now.

At least 100km of surface-running light rail lines could be built for the same price, and probably a lot more. This would turn Luas into a network serving many more places than Metro North. Even augmented by Metro West, the cost of which has not been disclosed either, Dublin would only be getting a total of 42km of metro under current plans.

The economic analysis of Metro North as a stand-alone project is not impressive. Even with "value engineering", such as no-frills stations, the benefit-to-cost ratio is nearly three times lower than the equivalent calculation by the RPA of a city centre link between the Tallaght and Sandyford Luas lines, running down Dawson Street.

Yet this vital link, dropped by the Government in 1998 due to sheer political cowardice, has been long-fingered again as the RPA concentrates on the metro project. Sure, it would cause disruption - but nothing quite as devastating as digging up a quarter of St Stephen's Green to carve out Martin Cullen's "Grand Central" station.

In economic and even transportation terms, Metro North would only stack up if it was extended southwards to Sandyford, Cherrywood and Bray - in effect, supplanting the existing Luas line. This would involve yet more expensive tunnelling between the Green and Ranelagh.

The major transport project in Dublin that does make sense is CIÉ's proposed rail interconnector, or "Dart underground", between Heuston Station and Spencer Dock, running via the Liberties, St Stephen's Green and Pearse Station, Westland Row. This would knit together all of the suburban rail services, transforming them into a real network. Inter-agency rivalry between the RPA and CIÉ, with each jockeying for position (and public funds), should not be allowed to get in the way of an objective assessment of the priorities for investment - especially in these financially-straitened times. Otherwise, the danger is that Metro North will consume most or all of the resources available.

The Government (including its Green Party Ministers) needs to pause and reflect on the priorities before the RPA enters into a contract with one or other of the four consortiums bidding to construct, operate and maintain Metro North. And that could happen as early as August.

Frank McDonald is environment editor of The Irish Times and author of several books on Dublin

spacetweek

I can't believe there's still dithering over this. What part of "the city will grind to a halt without this" doesn't Frank understand?

Also, if there's a Railway Order in autumn, does anyone know if that gives an indicative date for start of construction? I know the Interconnector is scheduled for 2010 but that would be too late for Metro North which is meant to be ready by 2013?

jjbrien

markf909 wrote: »

Debate number 1,098,878...

Frank McDonald in the no corner. In this case he makes a better point than a few trees being knocked down but this type of continued analysis is not helping.
I would prefer the interconnector built first over the metro but there is a need for the metro too.

The 4 consortia are shortlisted and the railway order is supposed to be ready for the autumn. Anyone see a government fudge coming?

We dont need to build a new interconnetor. When there is already one in place it just needs over head power lines and a couple of stations added along the way. There are 2 routes with tracks in place which could be used the first one is from connolly station, around the tacks that go at the back of croke park along withford road trough phibsbough, under the phonix park and then to Heuston. The other option is to use th tracks from Connolly to Drumcondra Station to the phonix park tunnell to Heauston. I dont see why wasing money on a big interconnector when this would serve Dublin better and give us a kind of a circle line.

darkman2

To be absolutely honest I wish Frank MacDonald would keep his mouth shut. He seems to be running a campaign against the metro, a project - granted gold plated etc etc - that is badly needed not just for North Dublin but also as an appropriate means of transport from Dublin Airport to the City. Remember millions of overseas visitors are treated to an antiquated bus service and this is embarrasing. I use the 16A alot and I cannot believe that this is the main from of transport from one of Europe's busiest airports. Its the indignity of it I suppose thats most illuminating for alot of visitors. This is the first impression of our country and needless to say its a pretty attrocious one. So what do we do? Go down MacDonalds route and do nothing? - put a shoddy tram out there instead on the cheap!? that wont handle this amount of traffic. When terminal 2 is finished DA will be handling 35 million plus passengers. Dublin Bus are a union infested joke. The less amount of time they hold a monopoly there the better. Build the bloody metro and give people real transport that every other city worth its salt has.

I hope people are not taken in by his Ivory tower rants. I mean - god help us if the Northside ends up with better transport then the Southside. Too much money to be spent on the peasants eh?

In economic and even transportation terms, Metro North would only stack up if it was extended southwards to Sandyford, Cherrywood and Bray

bazzer06

Dublin Airport 23million passengers p/a
30% of 23 million = 6.9 million passengers p/a
from one stop, on an integrated metro line.

As for this "IE tried to build a railway line to the airport but the government wouldn't let them" - how did they intend to fit the trains in on the northern line? if anything, connection to the new Navan line would make a lot more sense

murphaph

Macdonald continues to ignore the bursting at the seams Luas green line which is proof if it were needed that high quality transport (a la metro) is swamped when it is supplied and it does in fact help drive densification as can be seen along the green line (and red line for that matter).

Munich has metro lines that run out into the sticks through green fields to reach the Technical University. They don't automatically build all alongside it. We need to control planning. The two are linked but it's not compulsory to build alongside every bit of track!

armada104

darkman2 wrote: »

I mean - god help us if the Northside ends up with better transport then the Southside. Too much money to be spent on the peasants eh?

In fairness, that's a bit kneejerk. I disagree with most of what McDonald says but it is true that Metro North would make more economic sense if it incorporated the Green Line.

Also, Iarnród Éireann have said that they can expedite the Interconnector if the government asks. Frank Allen's argument that both MN and IC will be built does not stand up in the light of Irish transport planning precedent or indeed the current economic situation. Both should be built, but in case they aren't, the Interconnector should be first. It's more important.

DWCommuter

Some of you really amaze me. Do you still not get it? Why are you so wrapped up in what you want to hear Frank McDonald say? He's not anti anything for the sake of it or for any hidden agenda. And before you all jump in with myths, rumours, amateur knowledge and insults towards me, try and examine what people like Frank McDonald are actually saying. This metro north mallarkey is based on feck all research of commuting patterns and relies on a busy airport, Swords and the huge assumption that all those cars on the M1 in peak times, will or rather can consider the metro option. The interconnector is important, not because it will take cars off the road, but because the current network cannot function efficiently without it. Furthermore packed Luas trams do not mean success. They are merely representative of a public with an appetite for clean, frequent and somewhat trendy public transport. Current Luas lines have had no impact on car use, but huge impact on bus use, as in its decline. Building for public transport modal shift will not work. Planning a network that offers efficient options to the car does work. But this can't be achieved without definitive research of how it has all panned out after years of economic boom.

In my opinion Frank doesn't go far enough. I'd call a complete halt to the whole lot of it until its quantifiably established what is really needed and suited to ease Dublins car dependency. As for the poster who suggested that Dublin will grind to a halt without metro north? Will you please educate yourself on Dublins transport crisis. If every T21 Dublin project was operating tomorrow morning, Dublin would still have a chronic traffic problem. Im not alone in that thinking and have absolutely no doubt that it will be discussed more, once we move on from the poverty driven excitement that engulfed many of us when the promise of shiny trams, metros and underground DARTs was made. You can build what you like, but its damn all use without a strategy and folks, there is no strategy.

murphaph

DWCommuter wrote: »

Some of you really amaze me. Do you still not get it? Why are you so wrapped up in what you want to hear Frank McDonald say? He's not anti anything for the sake of it or for any hidden agenda. And before you all jump in with myths, rumours, amateur knowledge and insults towards me, try and examine what people like Frank McDonald are actually saying. This metro north mallarkey is based on feck all research of commuting patterns and relies on a busy airport, Swords and the huge assumption that all those cars on the M1 in peak times, will or rather can consider the metro option. The interconnector is important, not because it will take cars off the road, but because the current network cannot function efficiently without it. Furthermore packed Luas trams do not mean success. They are merely representative of a public with an appetite for clean, frequent and somewhat trendy public transport. Current Luas lines have had no impact on car use, but huge impact on bus use, as in its decline. Building for public transport modal shift will not work. Planning a network that offers efficient options to the car does work. But this can't be achieved without definitive research of how it has all panned out after years of economic boom.

In my opinion Frank doesn't go far enough. I'd call a complete halt to the whole lot of it until its quantifiably established what is really needed and suited to ease Dublins car dependency. As for the poster who suggested that Dublin will grind to a halt without metro north? Will you please educate yourself on Dublins transport crisis. If every T21 Dublin project was operating tomorrow morning, Dublin would still have a chronic traffic problem. Im not alone in that thinking and have absolutely no doubt that it will be discussed more, once we move on from the poverty driven excitement that engulfed many of us when the promise of shiny trams, metros and underground DARTs was made. You can build what you like, but its damn all use without a strategy and folks, there is no strategy.

I hear what you're saying Derek but I'm at a point in my life where I'd take a metro north and no strategy rather than a strategy and no metro north.

We live in a land plagued by indecision. I say build it, even if it's not perfect or the best solution simply because I fear ANY pause to develop an actual strategy will be the death of all the infrastructure plans.

If T21 was delivered in full (even the silly bits). If the DTA was fully established. If the bus was given free reign and the entire network canged to tie into the rail aspects of T21 where feasible and if it was all linked with integrated ticketing we could introduce a simple ban on cars within the canals and be done with it.

Sorry, but I'm impatient now and want to see men digging holes in the ground, even if they aren't spot on. The Victorians (and their continental cousins) didn't dither-they built as fast as they could, not always in the right place but I admire their 'get on with it' attitude much more than the dither, delay and eventually fudge attitude of ours.

Cool Mo D

I strongly agree with the above. Dublin has suffered from a lack of joined up thinking, it cannot be denied, but it would be the death of any chance of any new major piece of public transport infrastructure being built if the RPA, IE, Dublin Bus and the council were sent off to think it through and come up with a proper plan. I can't imagine it would be less than 25 years before any of it could possibly come to fruition.

Even though transport 21 is weak in so, so many ways - Metro West, line B2, luas to citywest being prime examples, I don't think it's time to scrap it all and try to start again though. Build it all I say! I'm under no illusions that traffic in Dublin is going to be any better in 10 years time, even if it is all built - I'm pretty sure it'll be even worse - but the attractive thing about these plans is that they make it possible for someone who doesn't mind a 15/20 minute walk to/from a station to get most places in Dublin on a train, which suits people like me down to the ground. Even the crappest luas line is better in many cases than no line at all. And we can be sure that Metro West, if built, will provide some happy contractor in 20 years time with a nice juicy contract to grade separate and realign it properly for 10 times the price of doing it now. This is a traditional Irish practise in major infrastructural projects which will boost the construction sector, and give everyone something to complain about, so it's win-win really.

Seriously though, it's time to start building: "review" to any state body just means "talk about it loudly for a bit, come up with a plan, then quietly shelve it for being too hard". Any major transport planning done now will be long out of date by the stuff is built, so my personal opinion is that what we've got now is the best we can hope to get for the foreseeable future. Some of it makes sense, some doesn't, but it's seriously time now to get down to business and make it happen. I do think the stuff that's proposed is significantly better then nothing at all.

DWCommuter

murphaph wrote: »

I hear what you're saying Derek but I'm at a point in my life where I'd take a metro north and no strategy rather than a strategy and no metro north.

We live in a land plagued by indecision. I say build it, even if it's not perfect or the best solution simply because I fear ANY pause to develop an actual strategy will be the death of all the infrastructure plans.

If T21 was delivered in full (even the silly bits). If the DTA was fully established. If the bus was given free reign and the entire network canged to tie into the rail aspects of T21 where feasible and if it was all linked with integrated ticketing we could introduce a simple ban on cars within the canals and be done with it.

Sorry, but I'm impatient now and want to see men digging holes in the ground, even if they aren't spot on. The Victorians (and their continental cousins) didn't dither-they built as fast as they could, not always in the right place but I admire their 'get on with it' attitude much more than the dither, delay and eventually fudge attitude of ours.

I understand you completely Philip. But you know me. The more I study, the more frightening the reality becomes and I just want to make sure that this reality is recorded for future generations. Times have changed and the methods of communication enable us to make our mark and state our case. Never before have "the people" themselves had so much opportunity to discuss, suggest and seek out more info on the transport crisis in Ireland

5 years ago I knew little. Now, I'm happy to be armed with historical facts, current policy, future policy and international examples. Germany is your baby and they do things so well. They have their problems but just think how we'd be if we took their attitude and applied it to a city like Dublin. Traffic congestion is everywhere worldwide, but Dublin is still small enough to beat it. I no longer accept the well worn crap of justifying crushloads on public transport and inevitable road congestion in Dublin. As a city its a pimple on the arse of cities worldwide. Its solvable with the right approach. Just look at the RPA today, droning on about the capacity increase on the red line due to longer trams and how great it all is. Philip, you remember what I said on live radio and in newspapers in 2004. A complete idiot from the RPA told me I was talking nonsense. He said it again in 2005. That shambles encouraged me to go off and chart Irelands attitude to public transport and inevitably led me back to T21 and its not pretty. If someone like me who's not a paid transport professional can identify gaping holes in plans, then we are up the creek without a paddle.

murphaph

Indeed. I feel the Interconnector (etc.) and metro north are quite solid projects and I feel metro west although a Luas will be upgradable to well, fast Luas and I'm willing to take the nonsense (Lucan Luas is a nonsense) just to get the first two built! Desperation maybe!

Chris_533976

I really dont know on this one, I really dont. I dont know Dublin well enough to re-plan its transport myself, but I do feel that Metros North and West are both a little bit crazy. The interconnector is important, that should be built now, no questions asked.

As for the Metros?? I'm leaning to no on them.

Even taking the 4.5 billion for Metro North. Add the Metro West cost onto that. Say we're at 8 billion now.

Think of the amount of Luas could be built for that. Think of the massive improvement of the bus service that could be done. It would be phenomenal. Extensive trams, buses and suburban rail will do Dublin just fine.

That said, the airport needs a link badly as its chronic at the moment. How about a Luas line that ends up at the airport? Is that terribly far fetched?

How about reopening the Navan line NOW and stop pandering to the M3 toll companies? How about linking up the two Luas lines and getting an Amsterdam style, extensive tram system across lots of Dublin? And lets give the Luas priority everywhere, not having it stop or pause for cars?

How about trying something new, pedestrianising a fair swathe of the centre of Dublin and allowing only cars, trams, taxis and buses in? But this could only be done with a massive rake of orbital Park and Rides. People still need to get places in their cars, but supplemented with an ability to get from the suburban carparks to the centre of town. But all this could be done, and gold plated, for €8 billion.

However, the BIGGEST thing that needs to happen in this country isnt construction. Its sorting out the monsters that are CIE, Irish Rail, Bus Eireann, etc etc. All this lovely billions worth of infrastructure wont be worth their money if you have the likes of CIE drivers shutting it down because someone dropped their sandwich. Also, massive work on planning laws needs to be done. And lets sort out integrated ticketing. Come on. The only word for it all is 'shambles'. You just have pig headed idiots squabbling for no good reason. Get the Dublin Oyster Card or something like that, its not difficult. It could be in within a year if they got the finger out.

Also simple things. Remove bus stops and put up bus shelters everywhere. GPS trackers on buses so you can see on a screen how far away the buses are. Jeez for 8 billion you could have a bus network that the whole world envies.

Spend some money sorting out these companies, drop the overly expensive metro ideas and find an easier way of sorting out Dublin. Be it Luas, Bus, suburban rail etc etc etc. But the Metro is too expensive for too little and it will not do as much for commuters as more traditional methods. Dublin is too sparsely populated for metro lines.

murphaph

I have a friend who lives in what is currently a backwater for public transport-Parkwest. She lives right on top of the station under construction. She simply doesn't believe that she will be able to take a DART! from her door to St. Stephen's Green. We are all too used to getting NOTHING that I feel it's imperative now to deliver SOMETHING so that the population of the city can see a real underground system and say "hey, I want to be able to take that to work". I believe until the IC and/or metroNorth is/are built that nobody will ever really believe that it's possible. When the likes of Parkwest suddenly become a stone's throw from D2 people's eyes will open I think.

The Germans (in the form of their ambassador) have already commented on how we somehow are coming off the back of an unprecedented economic boom yet have got very little to show for it. He made his hasty retreat but his comments were made. They think we're muppets and they're right.

ofjames

jjbrien wrote: »

We dont need to build a new interconnetor. When there is already one in place it just needs over head power lines and a couple of stations added along the way. There are 2 routes with tracks in place which could be used the first one is from connolly station, around the tacks that go at the back of croke park along withford road trough phibsbough, under the phonix park and then to Heuston. The other option is to use th tracks from Connolly to Drumcondra Station to the phonix park tunnell to Heauston. I dont see why wasing money on a big interconnector when this would serve Dublin better and give us a kind of a circle line.

Two things JJ,

1) the first route you proposed is not possible, the PPT cannot be accessed from the midland line due to the layout of Glasnevin Junction. It can only be accessed from the Drumcondra line.

2) secondly, you are completely missing the point of the interconnector. You are perceiving it as a means of linking up Heuston and Connolly stations - incorrect.

Its purpose is to provide a "connolly station bypass" if you will. Connolly is the bottleneck in the whole system. Currently we have DART, Maynooth Suburban, Northern Suburban and Rosslare services battling for slots through Connolly and the loop line - making it a hyper-congested mess. By using the PPT as you propose, all that would happen would be to add Kildare line trains into this equation. As Connolly is at capacity already, no Kildare line trains could be accommodated unless slots are taken from the other services. In short, your plan gives zero extra capacity to the system as a whole.

On the other hand, if the interconnector is delivered as planned, all the existing DART services from Malahide and Howth get diverted away from Connolly into the tunnel at Spencer Dock and on to Heuston, freeing up oodles of capacity on the loop line for the new Maynooth/Dunboyne - Greystones DART.

By the way, I'm not saying the PPT should not be used, clearly it's silly to have a line sitting idle that goes through the areas it does. However, you are mistaken to view the PPT as an alternative to the interconnector. Frankly, its not, the interconnector makes a lot of sense

Nostradamus

murphaph wrote: »

The Germans (in the form of their ambassador) have already commented on how we somehow are coming off the back of an unprecedented economic boom yet have got very little to show for it.

The most highly paid and lavishly pampered public sector in the history of the world. But the same old crappy and pathetic civil service and semi-states.

That's were the money went.

Metrobest

I can't believe this debate about metro north is still happening. Groundhog day.

We cannot afford any more paralysis by analysis. In no other EU country would such a straighforward and neccessary transport project be debated by so many for so long. It should have been built yesterday. While Ireland dithers over a simple metro, the rest of Europe works on their TGV networks and fills in gaps in existing metro systems, putting car parks underground to recover public spaces and revitalising run-down districts with new planning and transport solutions. We need to build metro north were we get lapped on the racetrack.

I'm very knowledgeable about metro North and transport in other cities. I want to expose the lie that metro north has not been properly thought through. In fact, there is a virtual rainforest of paper on Metro North including Oireachtas transport committee reports, consultants' reports, RPA reports and so on which give a very conservative estimate of the benefits of Metro, yet all favour it.

Up till Luas, the only option for most Dubliners was their car. Even though the street pattern of Dublin is simply not conducive to high volumes of cars (or even buses). Until luas Dubliners barely knew what quality public transport meant because they'd never been exposed to it in their daily life. Living on an island has an isolating effect. Or at least it had until Ryanair came along.

Luas is successful. That's because on the Green line becuase it is essentially a light metro, running mainly segregated and at high frequency, much different to the slow, low capacity on street trams in the likes of Amsterdam. Luas has had its five seconds of fame, but luas can't be repliacated all over Dublin like Frank McDonald suggest because the land reservations for a segregated high speed/frequency surface system simply do not exist.

Saying that the cost of metro north = the cost of X on-street luas lines is a very dangerous and misguided way to think. It's like saying the cost of a motorway from Dublin to Cork = the cost of 11 bypasses in Donegal, ignoring the qualitative difference in benefits between the two. The emphasis has to be on benefits, not costs.

Any surface luas line to the airport and Swords would have low benefits. Not only would it be incredibly slow, it would be intensely disruptive and would shut down the whole of North Dublin for years during construction (and even after thanks to the traffic lanes it would require). If Dublin were a city like Paris or Barcelona or Melbourne with wide streets and sweeping boulevards, you could picture a network of tram lines functioning smoothly. But Dublin is a Viking city with irregular street patterns and narrow arterial routes. The Champs Elysses in Paris carries more traffic than the M50, yet nobody talks of that avenue as a failure in Paris. Dublin does have a traffic problem, but this problem is exacerbated by the street pattern. While Paris and Barcelona can get away with high traffic volumes in their grid system, Dublin cannot. The only solution to Dublin's problems is underground rail and in the longer term more underground roads, the quays should be underground like they are in Paris, for one.

And that's where the debate will move to after metro north finally gets going, as it surely will despite the "save the ducks"; "dublin doesn't need a metro" campaign that Frank McDonald, to his eternal shame, is waging.

murphaph

Metrobest wrote: »

I can't believe this debate about metro north is still happening. Groundhog day.

We cannot afford any more paralysis by analysis. In no other EU country would such a straighforward and neccessary transport project be debated by so many for so long. It should have been built yesterday. While Ireland dithers over a simple metro, the rest of Europe works on their TGV networks and fills in gaps in existing metro systems, putting car parks underground to recover public spaces and revitalising run-down districts with new planning and transport solutions. We need to build metro north were we get lapped on the racetrack.

I'm very knowledgeable about metro North and transport in other cities. I want to expose the lie that metro north has not been properly thought through. In fact, there is a virtual rainforest of paper on Metro North including Oireachtas transport committee reports, consultants' reports, RPA reports and so on which give a very conservative estimate of the benefits of Metro, yet all favour it.

Up till Luas, the only option for most Dubliners was their car. Even though the street pattern of Dublin is simply not conducive to high volumes of cars (or even buses). Until luas Dubliners barely knew what quality public transport meant because they'd never been exposed to it in their daily life. Living on an island has an isolating effect. Or at least it had until Ryanair came along.

Luas is successful. That's because on the Green line becuase it is essentially a light metro, running mainly segregated and at high frequency, much different to the slow, low capacity on street trams in the likes of Amsterdam. Luas has had its five seconds of fame, but luas can't be repliacated all over Dublin like Frank McDonald suggest because the land reservations for a segregated high speed/frequency surface system simply do not exist.

Saying that the cost of metro north = the cost of X on-street luas lines is a very dangerous and misguided way to think. It's like saying the cost of a motorway from Dublin to Cork = the cost of 11 bypasses in Donegal, ignoring the qualitative difference in benefits between the two. The emphasis has to be on benefits, not costs.

Any surface luas line to the airport and Swords would have low benefits. Not only would it be incredibly slow, it would be intensely disruptive and would shut down the whole of North Dublin for years during construction (and even after thanks to the traffic lanes it would require). If Dublin were a city like Paris or Barcelona or Melbourne with wide streets and sweeping boulevards, you could picture a network of tram lines functioning smoothly. But Dublin is a Viking city with irregular street patterns and narrow arterial routes. The Champs Elysses in Paris carries more traffic than the M50, yet nobody talks of that avenue as a failure in Paris. Dublin does have a traffic problem, but this problem is exacerbated by the street pattern. While Paris and Barcelona can get away with high traffic volumes in their grid system, Dublin cannot. The only solution to Dublin's problems is underground rail and in the longer term more underground roads, the quays should be underground like they are in Paris, for one.

And that's where the debate will move to after metro north finally gets going, as it surely will despite the "save the ducks"; "dublin doesn't need a metro" campaign that Frank McDonald, to his eternal shame, is waging.

Never thought I'd say it but I agree with absolutely every word you say.

McDonald is being a bit sneaky with his x Luas lines for the price of one line as people think Green line, not what would actually materialise (km's and km's of Heuston to Connolly agony). There's simply no getting away from it....we have to go underground.

Metrobest

murphaph wrote: »

Never thought I'd say it but I agree with absolutely every word you say. .

Thanks Philip. The cheque is in the post

Hotblack Desiato

murphaph wrote: »

Never thought I'd say it but I agree with absolutely every word you say.

+1. Metrobest for DTA chief!

McDonald is being a bit sneaky with his x Luas lines for the price of one line as people think Green line, not what would actually materialise (km's and km's of Heuston to Connolly agony). There's simply no getting away from it....we have to go underground.

You're right of course. McDonald is a bit hard to figure out. He's undoubtedly an intelligent man who has spent a good deal of time looking at these issues, which makes some of the conclusions he comes up with very hard to figure out.