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

marno21

Signage like this on approach to the M1 P&R at Lissenhall post Metrolink would be wonderful. Replace the bottom line with "Metro every x minutes" as appropriate

https://twitter.com/tweetsupa/status/1040475749214351362

marno21

bk wrote: »

Which would be pretty insane, as we desperately need more and better transport infrastructure to support the building of a lot more housing.

Yes we should definitely not CPO 90 homes in order to provide a transport link that could open up additional houses for thousands. This idea of affecting 1 person in order to benefit 100 is too unirish.

MJohnston

marno21 wrote: »

Signage like this on approach to the M1 P&R at Lissenhall post Metrolink would be wonderful. Replace the bottom line with "Metro every x minutes" as appropriate

Heh, kind of funny to see that considering the Caltrain didn't have any form of RTPI until about 2/3 years ago. When I lived there you had to rely on a Twitter hashtag (not even an actual account) that people would use to report delays.

marno21

Jim O'Callaghan in the Dail this week with the type of populist anti-development dribble Fianna Fail have been carrying on with of late. Plenty of misinformation in there too:

1. The apartment block for Tara station shouldn't be knocked.
2. The Luas Green Line should not be ripped up from Charlemont-Cherrywood and Metro should be sent to Templeogue

https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2018-09-19a.250

D.L.R.

Jim O'Callaghan and the politics of failure. No wonder this country's transport system is in the dark ages with those clowns in control so long.. not a clue about urban development.

ncounties

What is the real story behind the apartment block? Is it actually to be demolished? Is the station actually going to be on that back street!? I suppose if they did knock it down, you could have a larger building, built in it´s place.

jd

McDowell has another piece about Metrolink in the SBP. Still on about the guy who will travel from Brides Glen to Grangegorman.. (in other words nothing new from his previous article. I expect another rehash in 5 or 6 weeks

marno21

jd wrote: »

McDowell has another piece about Metrolink in the SBP. Still on about the guy who will travel from Brides Glen to Grangegorman.. (in other words nothing new from his previous article. I expect another rehash in 5 or 6 weeks

Following on for his rant in the Seanad this week about cost benefit analysis:

https://www.kildarestreet.com/sendebates/?id=2018-09-20a.65

Might be no harm for him to take up golf or something.

prunudo

Off topic I know (maybe we need a rant thread) but as a society we need to have a proper discussion about what we want for the future of both housing and infrastructure. All these stalling tactics from ex politicians, so called economists and outraged locals is only kicking the can down the road. Dublin and the country needs serious infrastructure investment now, not in 10 years, between public transport, roads, housing water and sewerage.

On one hand the government are selling the country as an alternative to the UK post brexit but lets face it, the country can barely cope with the demend the current workforce is putting on the road/rail/bus networks.

There are plenty of threads on the infrastructure/roads forum with great projects but the vast majority of them are being either being held up by objections, funding issues or just not due to start till the mid 2020's.
We need the infrastructure now or at the very least to be starting now.

D.L.R.

The political opposition to the Metrolink route on the whole is muted imo, and lacks any real economic credibility.

McDowell's period in office propping up Fianna Fail produced a confused, half-baked transport mess for Dublin, and the inevitable changes required to that hairbrained shambles means there is an element of bruised ego involved there. Metrolink imo is a vast improvement from the amateurish Metro North.

Building a project of this sheer scale can't be taken for granted though, considering this tiny state has never attempted anything like it.

Expect this project to get bogged down in the minutiae of nimbyism in several key locations. But economic outlook is even more critical to this project happening.

FunkyDa2

D.L.R. wrote: »

The political opposition to the Metrolink route on the whole is muted imo, and lacks any real economic credibility.

McDowell's period in office propping up Fianna Fail produced a confused, half-baked transport mess for Dublin, and the inevitable changes required to that hairbrained shambles means there is an element of bruised ego involved there. Metrolink imo is a vast improvement from the amateurish Metro North.

Building a project of this sheer scale can't be taken for granted though, considering this tiny state has never attempted anything like it.

Expect this project to get bogged down in the minutiae of nimbyism in several key locations. But economic outlook is even more critical to this project happening.

With ref to the scale of the project...I understand that the Shannon hydro electric was an enormous undertaking when it was constructed in the 1920's. However, Siemens underwrote it to produce a demonstration of their technological know-how.

Grandeeod

D.L.R. wrote: »

The political opposition to the Metrolink route on the whole is muted imo, and lacks any real economic credibility.

McDowell's period in office propping up Fianna Fail produced a confused, half-baked transport mess for Dublin, and the inevitable changes required to that hairbrained shambles means there is an element of bruised ego involved there. Metrolink imo is a vast improvement from the amateurish Metro North.

Building a project of this sheer scale can't be taken for granted though, considering this tiny state has never attempted anything like it.

Expect this project to get bogged down in the minutiae of nimbyism in several key locations. But economic outlook is even more critical to this project happening.

Metro North was amateurish? Honestly, I don't even want to get into it with you. I'll say this though. Take the political crap out of it. Take the recession out of it. Take the lack of real will out of it and imagine this. 2015 arrived and the last of Transport 21 was delivered. DU, MN and all the rest. What would we be debating here now?

prunudo

Grandeeod wrote: »

Metro North was amateurish? Honestly, I don't even want to get into it with you. I'll say this though. Take the political crap out of it. Take the recession out of it. Take the lack of real will out of it and imagine this. 2015 arrived and the last of Transport 21 was delivered. DU, MN and all the rest. What would we be debating here now?

I think this is probably at the core of the problem, bar engineers and people on the likes of this forum, there doesn't seem to be any great will or ambition to build big infrastructure projects, its not just the politicians, the general public don't really seem to care whether it happens or not.

Grandeeod

jvan wrote: »

I think this is probably at the core of the problem, bar engineers and people on the likes of this forum, there doesn't seem to be any great will or ambition to build big infrastructure projects, its not just the politicians, the general public don't really seem to care whether it happens or not.

Right through the whole Celtic Tiger thing there was lots of moaning about traffic issues, Commuter rail issues, Bus issues. On and on it went. The then Governments promised this that and the other. Boards.ie salivated over the proposals and debated them to death. It all went tits up in the end and lots of reasons were rolled out as the excuse. I find myself back here reading the same old guff as we rehash everything all over again. I get lambasted by posters and mods for stating the same facts. I reckon its down to different generations posting here that have no knowledge of whats happened before and the obvious trend that has evolved. MN/DU were never election issues. Metrolink won't be an election issue either apart from localised objections which to me seemed like very obvious red flags to begin with. When the NTA and TII appeared before an Oireachtas Committe last April they were silent when asked about the likes of Na Fianna, while the Government abdicate themselves from responsibility. Its bonkers stuff.

If the same thing had happened during the development of the Shannon scheme, we'd have had electricity in Ireland around 1960. While its not a perfect comparison, it certainly proves as a good example as to how so very far behind we are. PT solutions are the 21st century version, in importance, to what electricity was in the early 20th century.

D.L.R.

Grandeeod wrote: »

Metro North was amateurish? Honestly, I don't even want to get into it with you. I'll say this though. Take the political crap out of it. Take the recession out of it. Take the lack of real will out of it and imagine this. 2015 arrived and the last of Transport 21 was delivered. DU, MN and all the rest. What would we be debating here now?

Yes, amateurish. Personally I doubt the Tiger govt would have delivered either project even with another 10 years in power and no crash.

My view on MN can be summed up as overpriced and underconnected. Lots of pointless expense, such as the massive station at OCB, etc etc. I'd have taken it at the time but its clear it was flawed in several aspects which Metrolink has improved upon.

Grandeeod

D.L.R. wrote: »

Yes, amateurish. Personally I doubt the Tiger govt would have delivered either project even with another 10 years in power and no crash.

My view on MN can be summed up as overpriced and underconnected. Lots of pointless expense, such as the massive station at OCB, etc etc. I'd have taken it at the time but its clear it was flawed in several aspects which Metrolink has improved upon.

I agree with the delivery part re MN.

We'll agree to differ on the rest as we'd only be taking this OT. In relation to Metrolink, it supposedly represents a better reinvention of what came before. But that reinvention slows progress down. If Metrolink is stalled, I've no doubt a different Government will reinvent it all over again by adding a caveat like running a line to Terenure etc. At some point we have to shout stop.

antoinolachtnai

I think the 'fudge' or 'wriggle-room' that the NTA have left open to themselves is that the TBM could be left in the ground at Charlemont and continued southwest. This could be done as well as linking up with the Green Line.

Sam Russell

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

I think the 'fudge' or 'wriggle-room' that the NTA have left open to themselves is that the TBM could be left in the ground at Charlemont and continued southwest. This could be done as well as linking up with the Green Line.

That decision is at least 5 years away.

Sam Russell

Mod: Metro North is dead and burried, so can we stick with the current published plan for Metrolink, and possible unpublished leaks.

There is another thread for alternatives.

antoinolachtnai

Sam Russell wrote: »

That decision is at least 5 years away.

Sure, but a decision, or a decision to investigate possible routes, is waiting ready to be made, at any time. It doesn't require a whole lot of deep thought or a lot of studies, just an announcement and the appointment of some planners or engineers. Such an extension will be a billion-euro odd project, so it will be a much easier project to get a grip on and to finance.

This allows a future group of politicians to put their mark on the overall metro vision without interfering with the core project.

Sam Russell

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Sure, but a decision, or a decision to investigate possible routes, is waiting ready to be made, at any time. It doesn't require a whole lot of deep thought or a lot of studies, just an announcement and the appointment of some planners or engineers. Such an extension will be a billion-euro odd project, so it will be a much easier project to get a grip on and to finance.

This allows a future group of politicians to put their mark on the overall metro vision without interfering with the core project.

Mod: The SW Metro option is not for this thread.

D.L.R.

Grandeeod wrote: »

I agree with the delivery part re MN.

We'll agree to differ on the rest as we'd only be taking this OT. In relation to Metrolink, it supposedly represents a better reinvention of what came before. But that reinvention slows progress down. If Metrolink is stalled, I've no doubt a different Government will reinvent it all over again by adding a caveat like running a line to Terenure etc. At some point we have to shout stop.

Agreed. There is no silver bullet, and the important thing is to actually follow through and BUILD something.

My main concern now is not opposition parties per se, its individual politicians shameless attempts to make personal political gain out of the nimby issues.

MetroLinker

marno21 wrote: »

Yes we should definitely not CPO 90 homes in order to provide a transport link that could open up additional houses for thousands. This idea of affecting 1 person in order to benefit 100 is too unirish.

CPOs certainly have their time and place for development. However, for such a large scale project which has very long timelines, a different approach should have been used. As the CPO intention has now been announced, the apartments are now (virtually) unsellable until a further decision is made on the scheme. An An Bord Pleanála decision on the scheme (and CPO) is currently not proposed until 2020 but is this even a likely timeline?

The CPO is also a poor mechanism for such a site as there is a future conflict of interest for TIA. Following the acquisition and construction of the station, they will then suddenly own a very valuable, developable site in the city centre as the majority of the construction is underground with only a small footprint overground. Technically, the apartments are only being demolished to facilitate a construction process. This is not the case with other Metrolink stops, e.g. O'Connell Street and St. Stephen's Green.

This boards.ie thread has noted that the currently proposed twin bore construction is only one of the methods available for the scheme. If the scheme moved to a monotube solution, a glance at the plans would indicate that the apartment block does not need to be demolished as the station wouldn't need to be directly overhead. Would this free the apartment's from the shadow of the CPO? Unlikely and until the scheme is submitted to An Bord Pleanála, they will possibly be still in-limbo.

Surely, a semi-public consultation could have been organised with the apartment block owners in advance to assess whether a CPO would be a worthwhile approach. Instead, they found out about it from the newspaper announcement of Metrolink.

antoinolachtnai

On the other hand, if they don’t name a location then they cast a shadow over all the property in the area, not just one block. If you were really stuck maybe TII would buy the unit off you now?

MJohnston

Are properties that are potentially going to be CPO'd in future really unsellable? I would have thought you could make a tidy profit out of that.

salmocab

MJohnston wrote: »

Are properties that are potentially going to be CPO'd in future really unsellable? I would have thought you could make a tidy profit out of that.

Probably could but banks probably wouldn’t lend for one

MetroLinker

MJohnston wrote: »

Are properties that are potentially going to be CPO'd in future really unsellable? I would have thought you could make a tidy profit out of that.

Yes, you could probably sell now at a below market rate and get a prospective cash buyer. My understanding is a CPO will only offer market rate of the apartment plus any professional fees (e.g. surveyor) to put you in the same position before the CPO as after. This is prevent speculative buying of properties to get a quick pay-out.

If an owner received the market rate for a property in Dublin, they may be able to purchase a similar property. However, would seventy owners be able to do this, at the same time, in the same area?

As I mentioned previously, my opinion is the CPO is a blunt instrument in this case. There must be better mechanisms for transferring larger populations from a required property. I remember reading previously about developers demolishing and rebuilding (larger, more modern) housing blocks in London where they would rent accommodation for the tenants before transferring them back into the new block.

Dats me

@MetroLinker, are you living in one of these apartments? It's obvious that you're account is new etc. Would be interesting to hear about the mood if so!

Pete_Cavan

MetroLinker wrote: »

Surely, a semi-public consultation could have been organised with the apartment block owners in advance to assess whether a CPO would be a worthwhile approach. Instead, they found out about it from the newspaper announcement of Metrolink.

A final route or type of construction hasn't been selected yet, those apartments may not be demolished at all. Having meetings about potential CPOs before basic decisions which will determine which properties required CPOing are made is putting the cart before the horse. The way things have gone, you'd have to consult personally with every property owner between there and Rathfarnham if certain people get their way! Say what you want about the CPO process but it has worked well for years and don't worry, you will get well compensated.

MetroLinker

Dats me wrote: »

@MetroLinker, are you living in one of these apartments? It's obvious that you're account is new etc. Would be interesting to hear about the mood if so!

Yes, unfortunately a long-term tenant but not an owner so won't be seeing a cent from any of this. I may get to re-experience the joys of entering Dublin's renting market.

We thought after living above the ~€1million upgrade to the Dublin City Council gym under the apartments in 2016 that the apartment block was in great shape for the foreseeable future.

I can't speak for everyone but most people that I've spoken to first found out that the apartment block was due to be demolished via the Irish Times. Communication from Metrolink on this project has been very minimal to date.

I'm obviously not one of the worst affected as I can start looking for another rental but there are families on the block who have mortgages and are facing a huge uncertainty.

NTA’s deputy CEO Hugh Creegan said back in June, “At this stage, it is likely but not certain that we will propose a single bore tunnel." So I'm looking forward to the new plan and crossing my finger that they propose a new solution.

Despite being in the city centre, there are lots of disused plots and properties in this area, and commercial properties who could probably make the move as a few offices rather than seventy apartments looking for re-housing.