Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

OurLadyofKnock

dubhthach wrote: »

Aard,

Thanks for the image. Most people don't realise that "High-Rise/High density" Ballymun only had a density of 8 houses per acre, while Griffith avenue which consists of semi-detached houses has a density of 24 houses per acre!

Very true. I grew up in the Ballymun flats and people always recall how it was socially more like a country village in that everyone knew everyone else by name. That's because it wasn't that populated really.

ei.sdraob

dubhthach wrote: »

Aard,

Thanks for the image. Most people don't realise that "High-Rise/High density" Ballymun only had a density of 8 houses per acre, while Griffith avenue which consists of semi-detached houses has a density of 24 houses per acre!

Houses per acre is a "funny" measure that can be deceptive since there could be a large difference in size of homes

what about square meters of housing space per acre?

dynamick

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Houses per acre is a "funny" measure that can be deceptive since there could be a large difference in size of homes

what about square meters of housing space per acre?

This metric is called "plot ratio" in Ireland. This is total building gross floor area divided by plot size. For a one off house of 250 sqm on a quarter hectare site, the plot ratio is 0.1
For the above diagram, assuming a unit size of 80-90 sqm, the plot ratio is about 0.6

Dublin city council and other councils have guidance on recommended plot ratios in their dev plans such as :
http://www.dublincity.ie/development_plan/15.pdf

Highest expected plot ratios area about 2.5-3.0

Another metric used is site coverage or the proportion of a site covered with buildings as opposed to parking and green space.

lods

Herald.ie
Minister says FG will build Metro North
SUPPORT: Reilly backs rail project

By Cormac Murphy
Friday March 18 2011

METRO North has received a boost after a Government minister revealed he will be lobbying hard for the project.

Health Minister James Reilly made the comment and also indicated he will be joined in his efforts by Transport Minister Leo Varadkar. They represent two of the Dublin constituencies through which the high-speed rail line would go.

Dublin North TD Mr Reilly said he will be "pushing very hard" around the Cabinet table for Metro North.

Referring to Mr Varadkar's position as Transport Minister and a TD for Dublin West, Mr Reilly said "you couldn't hope for better in terms of driving this project forward".

However, when contacted, Mr Varadkar's spokeswoman told the Herald the Government's position will only be clear when they have had time to consider the project.

"They [the ministers] were only really appointed on Wednesday of last week and then the ministers of State were appointed on Friday," she pointed out.

"Our minister is currently in India [for St Patrick's Day celebrations]," she added.

The spokeswoman indicated that no decision has been made either way on whether to sign off on orders allowing for preliminary works on Metro North.

"Currently what the situation there is that the minister is familiarising himself with his brief at present and the Government has yet to consider it. That is where things are," she said.

She added that "there is mention in the Programme for Government of a commitment to high speed public transport".

However, the Government has to consider it and "then make a decision on it at that stage", the spokeswoman said.

Mr Reilly said: "[Metro North] fits in very well in terms of creating jobs and providing infrastructure to ensure we remain competitive."

Businesses and residents in Dublin North have been calling for construction on the 18km Dublin Airport link, which will cost €2.5bn, to begin.

Fingal councillors put pressure on the previous government to immediately begin construction of Metro North.

Prior to stepping down as Transport Minister, Fianna Fail's Noel Dempsey said whether the project goes ahead or not "is a budgetary matter".

comurphy@herald.ie

- Cormac Murphy

There's a lot of spin from those trying to bounce the government into starting the enabling works . Not too sure Leo will welcome Reilly trying to speak for him .

DWCommuter

A pretty meaningless release. No weight in it whatsoever.

BrianD

runway16 wrote: »

There's a real venom againnst MN the likes of which I have never seen against any infrastructure project in Ireland.

We have a collection of "Irish Independent" types, Myers, MOL and all, who continue to propogate out and out lies, and hold to the line that MN is just an airport rail link. Their slavish insistence on telling these mistruths tells me there is something much deeper to the outright hostility towards this project - one which obviously in the minds of these people, completely outweighs the wishes of the People of that part of the City, who lets face it, quite obviously outnumber Myers, O'Leary, Carroll and their Cronies.

So if anyone knows exactly what their major issue is, their issue which makes them tell complete lies - over and over again so (hopefully for them) they stick, can they please come out and tell us exactly what this issue is??

It's simple equation and easy to understand. It's too expensive a facility or what is required. Where are the lies? None. I don't see the RPA coming out to challenge these "lies" especially the core issues. They've also handled the "public relations" and public information aspects of the project very poorly. Look at it from a common sense point of view. You've got to start accepting that there is a strong rationale behind this "hostility" particularly as a self serving quango just wants to push it through leading to poor value for money for the tax payer.

The stupid bloody people of this country crowed on during the boom about how we failed to invest in transport infrastructure in readiness for the boom.... and now, on the edge of us making that investment, they cry stop??? They say we dont need this?? They try to pretend that a Metropolitan area of about 1.6 million people doesnt need an efficient rail system?

We do need a good urban rail system. We don't actually need this one. There are multiple other solutions that will provide better utility to those on the MN corridor and bus is one of those solutions.

They claim that BUS is the way forward when BUS has manifestly failed to get ENOUGH people out of their cars, and failed to make the city a more attractive place to live?

What is the real agenda folks - out with it!!!!??

Do some research, the most economical public transport solution for low density urban sprawl is bus. Bus as a mode of transport hasn't failed at all in this city. There's a number of problems - bad planning, bad transport policies and not enough bus routes. Of course you have got to remember the Irish psyche when it comes to public transport - it's really for somebody else.

monument

BrianD, a few questions, asked before:

What density and population is needed for Metro North? What are you basing this on?

And while you're at it what densities and populations are needed for Dart Underground, Luas and Commuter rail?

BrianD

monument wrote: »

Can you offer anything but rhetoric or generalisations and poor examples which you flip flop from one to another. Almost all your main points are disprove:

• You keep saying that there is no density within the M50 but the census data mapped out shows the high density within the M50.

Incorrect. I'm stating that there is not sufficient population density to justify the construction of the line.

[*]You claimed that "only 2 story low density housing is being served within the M50", when clearly that is wrong.

And I still do. The majority of the housing stock on the route is 2 story back garden type stock. Perhaps you should zoom out a little on your Google Earth? Clearly I am not wrong on this point as anyone in living in Dublin would know.

[*]You seem to be confusing hight with density. While the two are interlinked, one does not always mean the other. The mixed but overall high density areas in and around Ballymun are an example of this.

Incorrect. I am not confusing either. I am well aware that the two are interlinked. We have a tradition of low rise in this city and an adverse reaction to increasing building heights. This is a key requirement in 'in fill' developments.

[*]You keep saying buses should serve high density areas around Ballymun, but you're not dealing with the reality of the routes between it and the city being small roads and/or heavily congested routes.

They should and they provide the best value for money. High density Ballymun? Small roads? Heavily congested routes? Your descriptions are amusing but your own opinions.

[*]You don't seem to be able to compare like with like. You claim Dublin needs Barcelona-like density to support one partly underground metro line. Nobody is suggesting Barcelona-like 11 metro lines (which are largely underground?).

I'm not sure what your point is here. My observation about Barcelona that it has a population density to support its metro system. As a result it has the passenger numbers to make it efficient. The skyline is typically 8 stories. If we had this kind of population density we should be tunnelling everywhere for multiple lines.

[*]You claimed Swords should be served by the heavily congested Northern line. People could be buses there. The example you used is Dachau in Germany where under 2.5km gets you from almost ever where in the town to the main train station with U-Bahn services, most of the town is around 1km from a train station. And you were trying to compare that to Swords where it's nearly 7km to the Northern line from parts of the town and the large bulk of housing is about 5km away from a train station.

It's still cheaper than Metro North! Sure the geography is more favourable to Dachau but there's no reason why it would not be an effective solution.

[*]You tried to claim nobody in Phibsborough would walk to a metro stop as if the nearest stop was miles away. But the Matter stop is in Phibsborough.

Incorrect. You said Phibsborough was a high density area. I disagreed and even so it was a walk to the nearest station. Unless I misread the map, the stop is at the Mater Hospital? For me Phibsborough is the cross roads.

[*]You talk about the whole route as if there is no room for more density. When there's loads of room around Swords, the areas north of Ballymun, and Ballymun its self. While Phibsborough is likely to be redeveloped sooner or later. And there's other small and large pockets of land which can be developed along the canal, in Drumcondra and even some in Glasnevin.

Again you are missing the point. Of course there's land available and more of it as you move further out. The key problem is that within the M50 the vast majority of the land is already developed (ignore park land) at low density levels. The opportunities are limited. Plus you'll have all the NIMBY's who will have problems with higher density developments in the areas. Councillors will cave in and you know how it goes.

[*]You seem to be anti-rail and you seem to be in denial that Luas and Dart have been overall good projects which have added a lot to the city.

absolutely not. I'm very pro rail and the more of it the better. I just don't support this project.

How can anybody trust what you're saying about Metro North?

Why wouldn't they? I'm backed up with facts! In fact your own list of Google Earth references has only added more credance.

More distractions.

You can keep saying there's only two story houses inside the M50 until you're blue in the face. I've proven otherwise, please stop calling black white. Even a lot of the two story housing is not "low density 2 story housing" (ie a county house with a large garden), much of the two stories within the M50 are not even detached.

But this is true! This is what the majority of the housing stock is! Maybe you need to go up to Three Rock and take in the city vista.

Dachau was still your example. Three or four tracking or the northern line is planned anyway. Dublin needs both, not one or the other.

Yep and a reasonably good example I thought.

Yes, so many DCU students live on campus that the car parks and nearby estates are not full of cars. Never mind DCU staff, on campus companies, or the Helix. :rolleyes:

Use the bus! Let's face it, student car usage is a product of the Celtic Tiger years when Daddy bought the kids cars. If the metro was there, they'd still be driving!

I said the North Circular Road area, go back and look at the links to see exactly where those apartments are. A bulk of the road it self, in the areas we are talking about, is three or more stories high, not two.

Done! No change of opinion required. We are talking about the North Circular Road areain Dublin?

If you think I'm wrong about there being no room for a bus way or BRT -- you prove me wrong. Show me your solutions -- start a new thread on it if its that groundbreaking. EDIT: You never did answer my questions on how you see BRT fitting into the route before on this thread.

Why would I need to do that? I've no idea what the route would be. That's up to the planners but I see no reason why it could not be built. Why not? Certainly more achievable than the population density increase required on the MN route!!

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

runway16

So you agree we need an efficient Urban rail system, but there is no where in this city in which it can be viable because its all 2 story houses...

Confused much?

Come on Brian, London is mostly 2 story homes as well!

monument

BrianD wrote: »

Incorrect. I'm stating that there is not sufficient population density to justify the construction of the line.

And I still do. The majority of the housing stock on the route is 2 story back garden type stock. Perhaps you should zoom out a little on your Google Earth? Clearly I am not wrong on this point as anyone in living in Dublin would know.

Incorrect. I am not confusing either. I am well aware that the two are interlinked. We have a tradition of low rise in this city and an adverse reaction to increasing building heights. This is a key requirement in 'in fill' developments.

What is sufficient population density to justify it?

As for two story housing -- even that ranges in density. There's mixed density, not just low two-story housing. Inside the M50 has the highest density in the country.

You still seem to be confusing hight with density. You can get a good bit of density before going high-rise and high-rise is does not always mean density.

BrianD wrote: »

They should and they provide the best value for money. High density Ballymun? Small roads? Heavily congested routes? Your descriptions are amusing but your own opinions.

Yes, there are small roads between the city and Ballymun, such as Botanic Road and St Mobhi Road. And, yes, heavily congested roads such as those just mentioned, the N1 and, yeah, most of the northside.

And, yes, Ballymun has high density by Irish standards. Maybe I should have said on by Irish standards. But you claiming it is low density is just as bad, if not worse.

The more you talk the more people know you don't know what you're talking about.

BrianD wrote: »

I'm not sure what your point is here. My observation about Barcelona that it has a population density to support its metro system. As a result it has the passenger numbers to make it efficient. The skyline is typically 8 stories. If we had this kind of population density we should be tunnelling everywhere for multiple lines.

It's still cheaper than Metro North! Sure the geography is more favourable to Dachau but there's no reason why it would not be an effective solution.

My point is your examples are flawed beyond belief.

Barcelona has a large network of underground lines. We'd only need that kind of population density if we were talking about "tunnelling everywhere for multiple lines", but we're not. We're talking about one light rail, only parts of which are underground and underground for good reason.

Dachau is a poor example due to the reasons already outlined. An example of a U-bahn station inside of a town is not comparable to using buses for the 7km trip from Swords to the northern line. If you want to maintain that the example is not flawed, then for Metro North you could bus people around 7km away to metro stations.

BrianD wrote: »

Incorrect. You said Phibsborough was a high density area. I disagreed and even so it was a walk to the nearest station. Unless I misread the map, the stop is at the Mater Hospital? For me Phibsborough is the cross roads.

Phibsborough is an area, not a cross roads. Your previous post question that nobody would walk to the metro stop -- a whole 500m from the cross roads!

BrianD wrote: »

Again you are missing the point. Of course there's land available and more of it as you move further out. The key problem is that within the M50 the vast majority of the land is already developed (ignore park land) at low density levels. The opportunities are limited. Plus you'll have all the NIMBY's who will have problems with higher density developments in the areas. Councillors will cave in and you know how it goes.

There's large tracks of land yet to be developed / redeveloped. We're going around in circles here, but opportunities are by far not as limited as you're making out.

BrianD wrote: »

absolutely not. I'm very pro rail and the more of it the better. I just don't support this project.

Why wouldn't they? I'm backed up with facts! In fact your own list of Google Earth references has only added more credance.

I don't think so. You seem blinded by your pro-bus agenda.

Facts? You still seem unable to answer simple questions you've been asked a number of times now about what density and population is needed for Metro North.

BrianD wrote: »

But this is true! This is what the majority of the housing stock is! Maybe you need to go up to Three Rock and take in the city vista.

No, it's not true to say there's only two story houses within the M50.

It's an outright lie.

You keep repeating an outright lie.

BrianD wrote: »

Done! No change of opinion required. We are talking about the North Circular Road areain Dublin?

Yes, apartments in the North Circular Road area! As before: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 etc.

And outside of those the area has more three and four story building than two story buildings.

BrianD wrote: »

Why would I need to do that? I've no idea what the route would be. That's up to the planners but I see no reason why it could not be built. Why not? Certainly more achievable than the population density increase required on the MN route!!

You need to do it because you're the one claiming that such a route for BRT is possible. Nobody in public transport or city planning seem to agree, so you have to back up what you're saying or BRT remains a nice but impractical idea.

Dublin City Council is in favour of Metro North, so I don't see city planner supporting you any time soon. And you have still to answer what population density is need for Metro North.

Aard

@Brian
Did you see my image posted above?

lucernarian

BrianD wrote:

It's still cheaper than Metro North! Sure the geography is more favourable to Dachau but there's no reason why it would not be an effective solution.

Are you saying that Malahide train station or the Northern line in general is an "effective solution" to the commuting needs of Swords (modal distance of housing is 5km away from said train stn)? And that this comparison is based on an example in a different country where the distance from the train station to the town was only 1km??

You're really going to have to offer a less lazy justification for that conclusion, if I understood it correctly.

lods

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The route meanders around north Dublin trying to justify itself by hitting as many locations as possible . It's not clear if the children's hospital will be built . The minister Reilly is to busy playing old style politics :rolleyes:

Aard

How can you say that it meanders? It's almost a straight line! There's a small deviation at Drumcondra, but that's to create an interchange.

Look at Paris for weaving metro lines.

dubhthach

To put route bendiness into context. Here is a map of London Underground that is based on geography instead of classic route maps:

dynamick

How will the cabinet vote on the metro and other Dublin projects? It looks like Dublin is overrepresented at the cabinet table relative to populations.
There are 15 voting cabinet members, 9 of whom represent Dublin constituencies.

Eamon Gilmore (DLR)
Frances Fitzgerald (DUB SE)
Pat Rabbitte (DUB SW)
Ruairi Quinn (DUB SE)
Richard Bruton (DUB NC)
James Reilly (DUB N)
Alan Shatter (DUB S)
Joan Burton (DUB W)
Leo Varadkar (DUB W)

I imagine that James Reilly as Dublin North rep & health minister will be supporting the Children's Hospital at the Mater & Metro North together.

As yet the coalition has not produced a multi-year capital budget but the previous FF IMF endorsed multi-year budget in late 2010 included 16bn capex spend between 2011 and 2014. Even if there are further cuts to this capital budget the idea that 700m will be found to continue the metro to 2014 is not inconceivable.

Jack Noble

dynamick wrote: »

How will the cabinet vote on the metro and other Dublin projects? It looks like Dublin is overrepresented at the cabinet table relative to populations.
There are 15 voting cabinet members, 9 of whom represent Dublin constituencies.

Eamon Gilmore (DLR)
Frances Fitzgerald (DUB SE)
Pat Rabbitte (DUB SW)
Ruairi Quinn (DUB SE)
Richard Bruton (DUB NC)
James Reilly (DUB N)
Alan Shatter (DUB S)
Joan Burton (DUB W)
Leo Varadkar (DUB W)

I imagine that James Reilly as Dublin North rep & health minister will be supporting the Children's Hospital at the Mater & Metro North together.

As yet the coalition has not produced a multi-year capital budget but the previous FF IMF endorsed multi-year budget in late 2010 included 16bn capex spend between 2011 and 2014. Even if there are further cuts to this capital budget the idea that 700m will be found to continue the metro to 2014 is not inconceivable.

Gilmore has flip-flopped so much it is hard to tell which side he will take on Metro.

Varadkar, Reilly, Burton and Quinn all support Metro North.

Bruton and Rabbitte are sceptical and remain to be convinced - but Rabbitte supports Metro West and sees it as more important than Metro North. Go figure...:rolleyes:

Don't know how Fitzgerald and Shatter will vote on Metro - but FF, like Rabbitte, has a local interest in Metro West going ahead.

We'll know soon enough - a decision to proceed with the enabling works needs to be taken in the nextr few weeks.

lods

Jack Noble wrote: »

Gilmore has flip-flopped so much it is hard to tell which side he will take on Metro.

Varadkar, Reilly, Burton and Quinn all support Metro North.

Bruton and Rabbitte are sceptical and remain to be convinced - but Rabbitte supports Metro West and sees it as more important than Metro North. Go figure...:rolleyes:

Don't know how Fitzgerald and Shatter will vote on Metro - but FF, like Rabbitte, has a local interest in Metro West going ahead.

We'll know soon enough - a decision to proceed with the enabling works needs to be taken in the nextr few weeks.

Reilly could just be trying to cover his back,with his press release the cabinet made the decision, blame Labour etc.

dowlingm

dynamick wrote: »

How will the cabinet vote on the metro and other Dublin projects? It looks like Dublin is overrepresented at the cabinet table relative to populations.

It could have been more only for needing to accommodate the likes of Jimmy Dennihan :rolleyes:

dynamick

dynamick wrote: »

I imagine that James Reilly as Dublin North rep & health minister will be supporting the Children's Hospital at the Mater & Metro North together.

Apparently Reilly was against building the children's hospital at the mater while he was in opposition, so I don't know how that will unfold.
http://reilly.ie/2010/10/18/phillip-lynch-statement-confirms-doubt-about-childrens-hospital-project/

OurLadyofKnock

lods wrote: »

The route meanders around north Dublin trying to justify itself by hitting as many locations as possible . It's not clear if the children's hospital will be built . The minister Reilly is to busy playing old style politics :rolleyes:

When I first saw the route map one of the things which stuck me was that it must be one of the straightest metro lines ever.

spacetweek

BrianD, you keep quoting Barcelona for city density. Low density cities often have huge metros!
What about London, Sydney, Washington DC, Philly, Boston, Toronto.
Please try and do right by your city and stop opposing this very beneficial and long overdue project. I'm frustrated by the incoming gov's need to review - YET AGAIN - the project. Shouldn't it be a done deal at this stage? Must we dither forever?

OurLadyofKnock wrote: »

When I first saw the route map one of the things which stuck me was that it must be one of the straightest metro lines ever.

LOL, that's so true.
"Tries to hit as many locations as possible" - another LOL, how surprising that they're trying to serve communities with their metro line!

lods

OurLadyofKnock wrote: »

When I first saw the route map one of the things which stuck me was that it must be one of the straightest metro lines ever.

He has a history of flip flopping:rolleyes:

dowlingm

The metro can't help but meander - unlike north American cities it doesn't have bullet straight grids to tunnel under and thus has to at least try to dodge as many foundations as possible within range of minimum curvature. Unfortunately that will mean some mighty wheel squeal in places I suspect.

murphaph

Metro North is really quite straight though. Amazing it manages to hit so many trip generators in such a straight alignment tbh!

lods

http://planbetter.ie/2011/03/03/planbetter-details-major-savings-in-transport/

Depending on the outcome of cost/benefit assessment, Advanced QBC could replace proposals for Metro and Luas with significant capital investment savings for the economy, while providing a fast, efficient, and reliable public transport network.
Advanced QBC costs €7.5 million per kilometre, one quarter the cost of Luas and around one 50th of the cost of Metro North. As noted above, the government needs to save money by suspending work on Metro North and Metro West until such time as these projects are subject to independent cost assessment, and by a panel that is also cognisant of the wider fiscal picture facing Ireland, and with knowledge of the impact high interest rates have on projects entailing multi-billion euro borrowing.

markpb

lods wrote: »

http://planbetter.ie/2011/03/03/planbetter-details-major-savings-in-transport/

And just to put that in context, it was written by: An Taisce, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the Irish Environment and Feasta (Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability) with not a single transport expert or economist between them

lods

Advanced QBCs are cost-efficient to build. For example, Line 4 in Nantes cost

approximately €7.5 million per kilometre. This is a quarter of the cost of Luas and
around one 50th of the cost of Metro North per kilometre.
The government needs to save money by suspending work on Metro North and
Metro West until such time as these projects are subject to cost appraisal by a party
other than their promoter (see above), and with knowledge of the wider fiscal
picture for Ireland, factoring in how higher interest rates completely alter the
complexion of projects that entail the borrowing of billions.
There are critical advantages to completing a nationwide programme of Advanced
QBCs. First, job creation is spread widely across the State, rather than being
concentrated along one corridor in one city. Street works for Advanced QBC provide
jobs for consultants and contractors who are typically locally-based, thereby
avoiding the flight of money abroad. Second, risk is lower, in that the State is
investing in a series of projects in cities and towns right across Ireland, not putting all
its eggs in one basket.
Regional cities will become more attractive places to live and work, improving their
competitiveness at the lowest possible cost.
In Dublin, Metro North is intended mainly to serve Swords, with just 20% of
projected patronage attributable to Dublin Airport. Matthew Harley has put forward
an alternative. The Dublin Port Tunnel, which already serves Swords and Dublin
Airport via the M1, is underused just with 16,000 vehicles per day passing through it,
well below capacity.
An Advanced QBC service could be provided at a fraction of the capital cost of
Metro. In fact so low is the cost of Advanced QBC that a comprehensive network can
be put in place right across north Dublin and still not come close to the total outlay
projected for Metro North.
Under the alternative strategy, three proposed A-QBC lines would be delivered, the
first linking the city centre via the Dublin Port Tunnel and M1 to the Airport and
Swords; the second linking the city centre via Glasnevin, DCU and Ballymun to the
Airport and Swords, and the third, connecting the city centre via Drumcondra,
Whitehall and Santry to the Airport and Swords (see www.aris.ie for further details).
A-QBC is much more viable in economic, social and environmental terms than higher
cost projects which must of necessity be reconsidered. A-QBC meets Ireland’s needs

at this time.
Those who have advocated for Metro North over the past three years have been
unable to show how the project could compete with buses using the Dublin Port
Tunnel. In truth, what happened in the Celtic Tiger era was that a more expensive
option was settled upon first, ignoring the need for proper step-by-step

consideration of solutions. While not unique to transport planning during the boom,

this prejudicial approach now has to be unwound

:cool:

Pete_Cavan

lods wrote: »

Under the alternative strategy, three proposed A-QBC lines would be delivered, the first linking the city centre via the Dublin Port Tunnel and M1 to the Airport and Swords; the second linking the city centre via Glasnevin, DCU and Ballymun to the Airport and Swords, and the third, connecting the city centre via Drumcondra, Whitehall and Santry to the Airport and Swords

There is no room for QBCs between Griffith Ave and the city centre so that is the routes via Drumcondra and Glasnevin out the window. Nothing wrong with running an airport bus through the Port Tunnel, the problem with running an alternative to MN through the Port Tunnel is you miss out all the other stops, therefore it is not an alternative.