Metro North - Open day information

darkman2

http://www.rpa.ie/cms/download.asp?id=814



Some info on the proposed O'Connell Street Stop for Metro North from the open day held.


3.20MB



Also the Metro North Terminus station just north of Lissenhall


http://www.rpa.ie/cms/download.asp?id=829

godtabh

The station is massive!

murphaph

I understand they pretty much have to go with deep bore tunnelling to avoid massive on-street disruption during construction but those deep level stations are going to be quite tedious to actually use compared to the surface and Ballymun (cut and cover) stations.

D.L.R.

great stuff. looks more and more likely this project will actually happen now. hopefully.

this and the interconnector will transform the city. can't wait for those diggers to move in.

darkman2

http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/St%20Stephens%20Green.pdf


St Stephens Green with interconnector underneath.

Victor

They have presented much of the information that was on display, but specificly exclude any of the actual CAD drawings - they have full plans and sections good enough* to go for a railway order, but they seem to be hoarding them.


* There are mistakes and places where the public wasn't happy with the designs offered.

godtabh

Victor wrote: »

They have presented much of the information that was on display, but specificly exclude any of the actual CAD drawings - they have full plans and sections good enough* to go for a railway order, but they seem to be hoarding them.


* There are mistakes and places where the public wasn't happy with the designs offered.

The design would have been done through CAD. PDF allows the publication of the data with out the loss of it. OS mapping at that scale is expensive!

murphaph

You mean they don't use one of these....



I think Victor's point was that the CAD drawings have been held back by the RPA because they show 'too much'.

Carawaystick

No exit on the western side of Westmoreland st or D'Olier st, where will the busses that stop on westmoreland st now operate from?

murphaph

Why would they bother mining a loop at St. Stephen's Green rather than a simple crossover(s) I wonder? Sure, for operational flexibility it's better but they don't plan one at the outer terminus, instead opting for a crossver with one extra track. I think they might be thinking about the future with this arrangement-ie, the 2 stub tracks continue to the Green Line and the loop is used to connect another line (like the proposed one from Tallaght) without massive disruption to the existing service.

godtabh

murphaph wrote: »

You mean they don't use one of these....



I think Victor's point was that the CAD drawings have been held back by the RPA because they show 'too much'.

What do you mean by to much?

L1011

murphaph wrote: »

Why would they bother mining a loop at St. Stephen's Green rather than a simple crossover(s) I wonder? Sure, for operational flexibility it's better but they don't plan one at the outer terminus, instead opting for a crossver with one extra track. I think they might be thinking about the future with this arrangement-ie, the 2 stub tracks continue to the Green Line and the loop is used to connect another line (like the proposed one from Tallaght) without massive disruption to the existing service.

A loop means a runaway metro doesn't smash in to a wall (as quickly, as its still likely to derail on a curve...).

murphaph

kearnsr wrote: »

What do you mean by to much?

It's not my point. I believe Victor thinks the RPA is hoarding the CAD drawings because they show stuff they think may be unpopular. I don't know what that is-ask Victor.

godtabh

MYOB wrote: »

A loop means a runaway metro doesn't smash in to a wall (as quickly, as its still likely to derail on a curve...).

Does a loop around offer faster turn arounds?

kearnsr wrote: »

What do you mean by to much?

murphaph wrote: »

It's not my point. I believe Victor thinks the RPA is hoarding the CAD drawings because they show stuff they think may be unpopular. I don't know what that is-ask Victor.

Sorry quoted the wrong person.

L1011

kearnsr wrote: »

Does a loop over higher turn arounds?

Higher?

aliveandkicking

Carawaystick wrote: »

No exit on the western side of Westmoreland st or D'Olier st, where will the busses that stop on westmoreland st now operate from?

The entrance/exit is on the western side of Westmoreland Street. The footpath is being widened to accomodate the the station entrance meaning Westmoreland street will be down to just two lanes of traffic which I suspect will be made bus only. Private cars in Westmoreland Street will become a thing of the past.

markpb

MYOB wrote: »

Higher?

It makes sense, the trains can keep going round the loop and back onto the other track without any conflict or signalling. If you want to see the disadvantages of a crossover, go to Sandyford now while one of the terminal platforms is out of use.

godtabh

MYOB wrote: »

Higher?

I dont know at this stage

Victor

I said they were hoarding drawings - they have drawings that they showed at the public presentations, but haven't put on the internet - this is consistant with their and IÉ pattern of providing only limited information for "take home".

murphaph wrote: »

Why would they bother mining a loop at St. Stephen's Green rather than a simple crossover(s) I wonder? Sure, for operational flexibility it's better but they don't plan one at the outer terminus, instead opting for a crossver with one extra track. I think they might be thinking about the future with this arrangement-ie, the 2 stub tracks continue to the Green Line and the loop is used to connect another line (like the proposed one from Tallaght) without massive disruption to the existing service.

The stub is for the Green Line - but tell me, how are they going to build it? Better to build it now as part of a tender process and not as a brown envelope passing exercise later.

The plan was for a cross-over nearer O'Connell Bridge, but the tenderers are suggesting to them to put it at the terminus. Having the loop means drivers don't need to change ends. They are common on some tram systems, which have driving cabs at only one end. It also means that any future connection can come in from any angle.

godtabh

Victor wrote: »

The plan was for a cross-over nearer O'Connell Bridge, but the tenderers are suggesting to them to put it at the terminus.

What does the reference design call for?

How do you know the tenderers are looking for a change?

D.L.R.

Victor wrote: »

The stub is for the Green Line - but tell me, how are they going to build it? Better to build it now as part of a tender process and not as a brown envelope passing exercise later.

The plan was for a cross-over nearer O'Connell Bridge, but the tenderers are suggesting to them to put it at the terminus. Having the loop means drivers don't need to change ends. They are common on some tram systems, which have driving cabs at only one end. It also means that any future connection can come in from any angle.

If they decide to connect to the Green Line, won't the stub obliterate the loop? Are they at the same level?

Carawaystick

aliveandkicking wrote: »

The entrance/exit is on the western side of Westmoreland Street. The footpath is being widened to accomodate the the station entrance meaning Westmoreland street will be down to just two lanes of traffic which I suspect will be made bus only. Private cars in Westmoreland Street will become a thing of the past.

Mea Culpa, I meant the eastern side of Westmoreland st. so passengers would not need to cross th estreet to enter the station.

Victor

kearnsr wrote: »

What does the reference design call for?

The RPA design called for it to be near O'Connell Bridge. However, in the first phase of the tendering, the RPA have asked the tenderers where improvements can be made as part of a cost engineering exercise. Another possible change is the removal of some superfluous underground space.

How do you know the tenderers are looking for a change?

I met one at the open day.

godtabh

Victor wrote: »

I met one at the open day.

The recent open day? What tenderer was it?

Victor

Yeah - I saw them at the Civic Offices one and the Swords one - Keolis. All their contact details are on one of the RPA press releases.

godtabh

Victor wrote: »

Yeah - I saw them at the Civic Offices one and the Swords one - Keolis. All their contact details are on one of the RPA press releases.

The reason I ask is that this tender process is worth alot to any one who wins it. Giving away information like that could easily alter competitors of your way of thinking and lose you your edge.

Victor

Yes, it has to be handled carefully. They need to base their core tender on the same thing as everyone else. But remember that the specification is performance based, not prescriptive - they have to provide a train every X minutes, to Y standard. Whether they need 50 or 55 trains (to cover for breakdowns, maintenance, etc.) to achieve this is up to the tenderer.

godtabh

Victor wrote: »

Yes, it has to be handled carefully. They need to base their core tender on the same thing as everyone else. But remember that the specification is performance based, not prescriptive - they have to provide a train every X minutes, to Y standard. Whether they need 50 or 55 trains (to cover for breakdowns, maintenance, etc.) to achieve this is up to the tenderer.

The tender is judged on the whole package between construction to operation i.e traffic mamangement carries a weight, construction phasing carries an weight, operation carries a weight. If this new layout saves on all of this you have a compeitive tender but you give out your ideas to the public its lost

stiktoir

kearnsr wrote: »

The tender is judged on the whole package between construction to operation i.e traffic mamangement carries a weight, construction phasing carries an weight, operation carries a weight. If this new layout saves on all of this you have a compeitive tender but you give out your ideas to the public its lost

Yes.........if you're tendering for building a bus shelter or the like.

In this case the contract will go to the cheapest tender that satisfies specifications. Phasing, traffic management trivial details.

More pontificating from the 'expert'

Victor

stiktoir, try to keep it constructive.

---

We don't know the exact rules they will use to decide on the tenders. While it is likely to be some variant of 'most economically advantageous' (cheapest isn't always best, even if it does comply with specification).

There are costs to the economy, the government and others depending on how the project will be constructed. If the government pays X extra to see a 10X reduction in costs to others it may be willing to pay it.

One tendered might propose to build the St. Stephen's Green station with no interference on the surface other than putting in the station roof and exits with everything hauled via the tunnels. That would hugely reduce the impact on the area, but will come at a cost.

All these options are likely to come out in the wash of the first round of tenders, with each tenderer pricing options. Then in the second round things can be tightened up.

stiktoir

Pedantry not likely to be one of the rules victor.
None of these 4 consortia will will propose any system that is technically unsatisfactory.
With a contract worth C. 3 billion, the cost will weigh at least 95% in the decision.

godtabh

stiktoir wrote: »

Pedantry not likely to be one of the rules victor.
None of these 4 consortia will will propose any system that is technically unsatisfactory.
With a contract worth C. 3 billion, the cost will weigh at least 95% in the decision.

If Tender A costs €2.9b but will result in major traffic disruption over 10 years as a result of a poorly thought out traffic management plan as opposed to Tender B which will cost €2.95b which will result in minor traffic disruption over a shorter period of time by implementing an intergraded traffic management plan the more expensive is likely to be accepted as it saves on “over all costs”.

This is just one area were a more expensive tender maybe more favourably than a cheaper tender. All tenders will have the same technical specification but how its implemented can be vastly different.

As victor said the cheapest tender is not always the best. That’s why they use weighted factors for tenders so each of them can be assessed equally.

stiktoir

kearnsr wrote: »

If Tender A costs €2.9b but will result in major traffic disruption over 10 years as a result of a poorly thought out traffic management plan as opposed to Tender B which will cost €2.95b which will result in minor traffic disruption over a shorter period of time by implementing an intergraded traffic management plan the more expensive is likely to be accepted as it saves on “over all costs”.

This is just one area were a more expensive tender maybe more favourably than a cheaper tender. All tenders will have the same technical specification but how its implemented can be vastly different.

As victor said the cheapest tender is not always the best. That’s why they use weighted factors for tenders so each of them can be assessed equally.

in your theoretical world of erecting bus stops and the like.

spare me the waffle none of it relates to the state of play with these tenders

Calina

Please cut out the personal sniping. It is not constructive. I on the other hand have bans and infractions at my disposal and they are constructive.

strassenwolf

kearnsr wrote: »

The station is massive!

My estimate is that it's around 260 metres from end to end (i.e. between Fleet Street and (almost) Abbey Street).

This gives it a station length to platform length ratio of almost 3:1, assuming that the platforms will be designed to accomodate 90 metre trams.

This station is deffo going into the record books.