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

D.L.R.

monument wrote: »

Not worth it.

Tara is just north of 300m away, it'd be cheaper to build an underground travelator between one of the planned O'Connell Bridge stop exits to Tara (as suggested by metrobest ? a few years ago) than it would be to replan the route.

Pearse is out of the way.

Well if we're indulging in pure fantasy, what I'd REALLY like to see is BX scrapped, MN built and merged with Green line, and Luas "D" going underground at Broadstone to merge with MN under Parnell, creating an underground junction.

Yeah I know...

I just think using street luas to do the job of a metro is your typical Irish half-measure and really this goes back to Bertie opting for surface lines in the late 90s. They were all too busy enriching themselves to be arsed with a metro, frankly.

V. sad when you look abroad, Ireland's being left behind.

dynamick

Jack Noble wrote: »

I would think there will be more than enough room on OCS to dig the metro station box without disrupting the Luas service if BXD is built first.

I don't think there is enough room. To build the OCS stop you need two huge underground boxes north and south of the river, beneath Westmoreland Street and O'Connell Street South. Each box is the full width of the street and the same depth as the height of the surrounding buildings. The way these boxes are usually built is that half the lanes on the street are shut while one half of the box is excavated, then the other lanes on the street while the next half is dug. For both the North and South boxes, the Luas will be overhead.

Look at the diagrams:


and



So, it looks to me that the Luas BXD would have to be shut down for years during a future Metro construction. One answer is to find the money to build the boxes at the same time as BXD. The boxes have planning permission already so it's a shovel-ready project as Leo would say.

Cathaoirleach

Could we dip into the €500m EIB fund to do enabling works for Metro North along side BXD so that we don't have to rip up the streets in 20 years time?

BluntGuy

Jack Noble wrote: »

I would think there will be more than enough room on OCS to dig the metro station box without disrupting the Luas service if BXD is built first.

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%20070409/MN%20OH%20Pres%20Const%20Seq%20John%20Mc%20L%20080409%20Part%202.pdf

The construction diagrams make it fairly clear that there would be no space.

Cathaoirleach wrote: »

Could we dip into the €500m EIB fund to do enabling works for Metro North along side BXD so that we don't have to rip up the streets in 20 years time?

I think accessing that funding would most likely be conditional on having funding in place for the rest of the project.

Jack Noble

dynamick wrote: »

I don't think there is enough room. To build the OCS stop you need two huge underground boxes north and south of the river, beneath Westmoreland Street and O'Connell Street South. Each box is the full width of the street and the same depth as the height of the surrounding buildings. The way these boxes are usually built is that half the lanes on the street are shut while one half of the box is excavated, then the other lanes on the street while the next half is dug. For both the North and South boxes, the Luas will be overhead.

Look at the diagrams:


and



So, it looks to me that the Luas BXD would have to be shut down for years during a future Metro construction. One answer is to find the money to build the boxes at the same time as BXD. The boxes have planning permission already so it's a shovel-ready project as Leo would say.

Not according to these presentations by RPA to businesses and others re OCS and WS construction works. They could simple work around the Luas tracks.

http://www.slideshare.net/RailwayProcurementAgency/oconnell-street-presentation-17th-november-2010

http://www.slideshare.net/RailwayProcurementAgency/metro-north-westmoreland-st-presentation-held-on-10th-november-2010

And here's SSG.

http://www.slideshare.net/RailwayProcurementAgency/metro-north-ststephensgreen-presentation22nov2010

Pete_Cavan

Jack Noble wrote: »

Not according to these presentations by RPA to businesses and others re OCS and WS construction works. They could simple work around the Luas tracks.

It is not that simple. The width of any excavations would have to be a lot bigger than the final opening (ie. access stairs, ventilations shafts, etc.) to allow for working space, trench supports, supports for adjacent structures, etc. Then there is the working space required on the surface for materials, plant, etc. Also, there will be huge precast concrete elements to be inserted, as part of the station box construction, which will require the ground to be opened. There is no way would have enough room for all this if they have to keep away from a Luas track on one side and leave min. 3.2m of footpath in front of Burger King on the other. Either they build the station box at the same time or BXD kills MN.

dynamick

Jack Noble wrote: »

Not according to these presentations by RPA to businesses and others re OCS and WS construction works. They could simple work around the Luas tracks.

http://www.slideshare.net/RailwayProcurementAgency/oconnell-street-presentation-17th-november-2010

check slides 54-56. blue areas indicate areas of the street to be walled off and excavated. Cars can be diverted but not luas.

Jack Noble

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It is not that simple. The width of any excavations would have to be a lot bigger than the final opening (ie. access stairs, ventilations shafts, etc.) to allow for working space, trench supports, supports for adjacent structures, etc. Then there is the working space required on the surface for materials, plant, etc. Also, there will be huge precast concrete elements to be inserted, as part of the station box construction, which will require the ground to be opened. There is no way would have enough room for all this if they have to keep away from a Luas track on one side and leave min. 3.2m of footpath in front of Burger King on the other. Either they build the station box at the same time or BXD kills MN.

dynamick wrote: »

check slides 54-56. blue areas indicate areas of the street to be walled off and excavated. Cars can be diverted but not luas.

Every engineering problem has an engineering solution.

If they have to deal with a Luas track on WS and OCS then they will.

However, SSG presents a much bigger challenge than simply changing the size and locations of worksites on OCS and WS.

But I would much prefer the two station boxes to be done as part of BXD if MN&DU are delayed - especially under terms of ABP order as part of BXD RO.

Jack Noble

Cathaoirleach wrote: »

Could we dip into the €500m EIB fund to do enabling works for Metro North along side BXD so that we don't have to rip up the streets in 20 years time?

RPA told me last year that EIB funding is part of PPP element and not Govt share.

chooochooo

BluntGuy wrote: »

I'm getting fed up of your unnecessarily abrasive posting, which has been noted on several occasions before. Cut the personal remarks or you'll be enjoying a month ban.

How are the miners going to get underground to mine out the platforms pray tell? Are they going to teleport there?

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%20070409/MN%20OH%20Pres%20Const%20Seq%20John%20Mc%20L%20080409%20Part%202.pdf

Unnecessarily stupid posts demand a somewhat 'abrasive' treatment to help the ludramaun to buck up his ideas.
Don't take it personally, see it as a medicine.
You'll feel much better for it eventually.

DWCommuter

chooochooo wrote: »

Unnecessarily stupid posts demand a somewhat 'abrasive' treatment to help the ludramaun to buck up his ideas.
Don't take it personally, see it as a medicine.
You'll feel much better for it eventually.

If this isn't a final goodbye to you and your half hearted, smartarse bull****, then I'll dig out MN with a bucket and spade. You really are nothing more that an Irish indo informed twat.

monument

Solved.

Run all BXD tracks down Marlborough Street / Hawkins Street / College Street. The fine detail (access, moving of bus stops and shared use or tram only etc) can be worked out. All of the streets have enough room -- the red line runs down some tighter spots.

If ABP agrees to BXD as it is, amending it as above should not be a big deal. It could solve or part solve a lot of the objections -- no messing with the layout of O'Connell Street and still wires on College Green, but none on OCS.

If needs be at the terminate it southbound before the Green when/if metro construction goes ahead, no such a big deal.

BluntGuy

chooochooo wrote: »

Unnecessarily stupid posts demand a somewhat 'abrasive' treatment to help the ludramaun to buck up his ideas.
Don't take it personally, see it as a medicine.
You'll feel much better for it eventually.

Find another forum that entertains your rubbish then.

Banned for a month.

gjim

chooochooo wrote: »

the amount of spoofing on this thread is laughable.
it's not at all inconceivable that the winner consortium will be able to raise the capital at cheaper rates than Irish Gov bonds if the lenders feel that the project makes business sense.
and the consortia have said as much recently.

Spoofing? About what? The Moody's junk rating? The fact that Irish 10 year bond yields are at 14% - while to borrow for three years the government would have to pay over 20% a year? That our bonds are now excluded from the portfolios of many big bond holders?

All PPPs have to be backed up by government cash-flow and/or guarantees. The PPP model is dead in Ireland at the moment: the NRA have admitted it, the government has stated it but an anonymous expert called chooochooo on an internet forum claims the existence of a financial perpetual motion machine while simultaneously claiming that the rest of the world is spoofing. Very convincing.

Sponge Bob

I declared PPPs dead in 2008 since which none started (bar perhaps a couple of schools in 2009) but there is always one delusional cnut isn't there.

T2daK

why are we still talking about this obviously not going to happen

L1011

Sponge Bob wrote: »

I declared PPPs dead in 2008 since which none started (bar perhaps a couple of schools in 2009) but there is always one delusional cnut isn't there.

He has a very minor sliver of a point in that there is a chance that someone could get funding for it on a purely commercial level.

BUT the contract time would have to be more in the range of 100 years rather than 30 and include operating it. And its still not that likely.

Pete_Cavan

Jack Noble wrote: »

Every engineering problem has an engineering solution.

If they have to deal with a Luas track on WS and OCS then they will.

However, SSG presents a much bigger challenge than simply changing the size and locations of worksites on OCS and WS.

The problem is not so much the Luas track, but the space restrictions that would exist because of it. You would be left with at most a 10m strip, which is not a lot of space when you have deep excavations, heavy plant, large precast concrete and steel elements, etc. SSG will actually be easier because they have a large area in the green to work with.

T2daK wrote: »

why are we still talking about this obviously not going to happen

The discussion currently centres around the possible effects of Luas BXD on MN. It is looking increasingly likely that BXD will be the one to get the go-ahead this year so this is not an irrelevant issue to discuss. Of course if you dont like it you could just not read the thread...

lods

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dart-airport-link-cost-cut-to-euro200m-2823282.htmlIndependent.ie

DART airport link cost cut to €200m
Irish Rail says new line could be built quickly for less than 10pc of Metro bill

By Paul Melia
Saturday July 16 2011

CONSTRUCTION of a new DART line to Dublin Airport will cost just €200m, less than one-tenth the cost of Metro North, the Irish Independent has learned.

Iarnrod Eireann will tell Transport Minister Leo Varadkar in the coming weeks that the cost of building the 6.5km DART spur would be significantly lower than expected because of falling land prices and lower construction costs.

The new line could be operational within four years.

The lower cost and rapid delivery of a high-speed rail link from the airport to the city means the project is more likely to be approved by the cash-strapped government.

A review of the capital spending programme is under way and will be completed in September, after which a decision will be made on which of the four projects -- Metro North, DART underground, DART airport and link-up of the two Luas lines -- will go ahead.

Last May the Irish Independent revealed that the Government had ordered Iarnrod Eireann to update a 1991 plan to build a spur from Clongriffin Station to the airport.

The move came amid concerns that the State could not afford a €2.5bn Metro North project from the city centre to Swords via the airport, and that an extension of the DART network could be the cheaper option.

A new business case for the project will be submitted to the Department of Transport and National Transport Authority by the end of the month setting out construction costs, expected number of passengers, timeline for delivery and frequency of services to be provided.

A site for a station has been identified at Dublin Airport, within a five-minute walk of both terminals.

"Iarnrod Eireann expects to submit a business case proposal to the Department of Transport and National Transport Authority for the DART airport link at the end of this month," an Iarnrod Eireann spokesman said.

"Initial indications are that the cost of the 6.5km rail link from the airport to Clongriffin, which would provide direct DART services between the airport and the city centre, will come in significantly lower than previously estimated, in the region of €200m in total."

This is €100m less than previously thought. Up to 2,000 jobs will be created if the project is approved.

The airport link would integrate with the DART and commuter network, and would allow airport passengers to change for Belfast services at Clongriffin, to continue into the city centre or to board northbound services to Howth and Malahide.

Trains would operate from the airport to Dublin Connolly and Pearse stations every 15 minutes, with a journey time of 25 minutes into the city. There would be no impact on existing services because Iarnrod Eireann is upgrading the signalling system, allowing 20 trains to use the line every hour compared with 12 at present.

Passenger numbers are expected at 10,000 a day and a park-and-ride site could be built nearby to allow commuters from Swords to use the service.

- Paul Melia

Seem to have though of everything. Their giving Leo an easy way out of Metro North with the Park & ride for the swords people.

Aard

They say that "because of falling land prices and lower construction costs" there would be a 33% reduction in the price of this spur. Assuming these factors apply to other places and not just the specific Dart Spur corridor, I wonder if that means that MN's price would fall a corresponding 33% (which would be €1.65bn according to their figure).

crucamim

Presumably, Clongriffin Station is at a place called "Clongriffin". But where is Clongriffin? Is it somewhere south of Balbriggan and north of Contarf? Is it near Portmarnock?

markpb

crucamim wrote: »

Presumably, Clongriffin Station is at a place called "Clongriffin". But where is Clongriffin? Is it somewhere south of Balbriggan and north of Contarf? Is it near Portmarnock?

Here's the Irish Rail map and the Google Maps map.

lods

crucamim wrote: »

Presumably, Clongriffin Station is at a place called "Clongriffin". But where is Clongriffin? Is it somewhere south of Balbriggan and north of Contarf? Is it near Portmarnock?

It's nearer ti Baldoyle . Just south of Ballgriffin & east of Clare Hall

lods

Aard wrote: »

They say that "because of falling land prices and lower construction costs" there would be a 33% reduction in the price of this spur. Assuming these factors apply to other places and not just the specific Dart Spur corridor, I wonder if that means that MN's price would fall a corresponding 33% (which would be €1.65bn according to their figure).

Most of the land is undeveloped or agricultural . MN is a different beast all together . It will always be more expensive , because of that. The rail spur is basic construction

crucamim

markpb wrote: »

Here's the Irish Rail map and the Google Maps map.

Thank you. I was on that line just a few weeks ago - travelling from Belfast to Dublin. I never noticed Clongriffin. I must have been asleep.

A spur from Clongriffin to the airport seems a good idea BUT, everytime (yes every time) I travel to Dublin by train there are long delays on that last 10 miles into Connolly. I understand this is caused by congestion on the line or by congestion on the last few humdred metres into Connolly.

Presumably, a spur to the airport would increase that congestion. Could the proposed spur to the airport operate efficiently without making the line from Clongriffin to Connolly a 4 track line? Making that line 4 track would probably be very, very expensive as houses are situated very close to that line - and many of those houses are high quality houses.

P.S. With many vacant houses in the Dublin area and so many building workers unemployed, now might be the best opportunity in a generation to make the line from Connolly to Clongriffin 4 track. And also the line from Pearse station to Bray. And also the line from Connolly to Maynooth.

lods

crucamim wrote: »

markpb wrote: »

Here's the Irish Rail map and the Google Maps map.

Thank you. I was on that line just a few weeks ago - travelling from Belfast to Dublin. I never noticed Clongriffin. I must have been asleep.

A spur from Clongriffin to the airport seems a good idea BUT, everytime (yes every time) I travel to Dublin by train there are long delays on that last 10 miles into Connolly. I understand this is caused by congestion on the line or by congestion on the last few humdred metres into Connolly.

Presumably, a spur to the airport would increase that congestion. Could the proposed spur to the airport operate efficiently without making the line from Clongriffin to Connolly a 4 track line? Making that line 4 track would probably be very, very expensive as houses are situated very close to that line - and many of those houses are high quality houses.

P.S. With many vacant houses in the Dublin area and so many building workers unemployed, now might be the best opportunity in a generation to make the line from Connolly to Clongriffin 4 track. And also the line from Pearse station to Bray. And also the line from Connolly to Maynooth.

by ungrading the signals they can have 20 trains an hour rather than 12at present . The other thing is to run trains through Connolly to Spenser dock rather than terminating them in Connolly

crucamim

lods wrote: »

by ungrading the signals they can have 20 trains an hour rather than 12at present.

Does that mean that a better signalling system would remove the delays on the line between Portmarnock and Connolly?

DWCommuter

crucamim wrote: »

Does that mean that a better signalling system would remove the delays on the line between Portmarnock and Connolly?

Apparently so.

murphaph

Pity IE didn't see fit to use the money they spent on the Mk IVs (when perfectly acceptable mk IIIs are being scrapped/sold) to upgrade silly things like signalling systems. They really are completely clueless when it comes to the priorities of running a railway.

Privatisation has been bad in many other places because what was privatised was actually functioning quite well. IE does not. The question is simply, is it beyond reform or should we really just seek out professional rail operators to come in and run it.

bk

Trains would operate from the airport to Dublin Connolly and Pearse stations every 15 minutes, with a journey time of 25 minutes into the city

Er, why bother so, must direct buses (aircoach, etc.) to the airport can already do it in 25 minutes. So why waste 200 million on this. Even LUAS BXD would be money better spent then this.