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

cgcsb

Land use in Ireland is mental. bus depots, an post sorting centres, social housing in the form of terraced 2 storey homes with front and back gardens, all within the commercial core while families are destroyed by excessive commuting from Kildare. And these aren't historic problems, we built terraced houses within eyeshot of O'Connell st in the 1990s. The an post sorting depot on maken st is a 1980s addition I believe. If we were good at Land use there would be no Tallaght or Blanchardstown, Dublin would extend no further west than Ballyfermot and the M50 would pass through mostly greenfields with some industrial development near it's junctions.

Dyr

Communities in the city centre, its a disgrace Joe. They should all be pushed out to reservations up on the side of the dublin mountains Joe

Bray Head

Compare eir's footprint today to An Post's and how much each has changed since 1984.

Public sector bodies should be forced to pay some kind of charge on the notional value of their landholdings back to the exchequer.


It could even help to pay for a big metro line:-)

Grandeeod

Deedsie wrote: »

The last 10 years, 3 of which we went through financial turmoil in which the state now owes billions to the IMF etc

I don't disagree that there has been massive incompetence but your constant comment of "it will never be built" offers nothing to the discussion.

I'd rather read about German comparisons than "it's never gonna happen" ad infinitum.

If you don't like my "constant comment" then just ignore it. My opinion is based on history to date and its certainly backed up by the current situation. What I'm trying to offer to the discussion is actually a scenario that may pan out considering how we arrived at the point we are at.

wakka12 wrote: »

But to say that something will never be built is a bit ridiculous don't you think? Like never ever ever? Not even before the sun burns out and humans go extinct? Of course it'll happen eventually. Maybe a more realistic superlative would be never in our lifetime, but even that I doubt.

Ok so, just to placate you.

Since 1973, we have failed to build anything planned in rail terms. That's essentially "underground" and "Dublin" based, just in case someone tries to claim a motorway in Offaly is proof of state support for public transport.

43 years have elapsed. What's to say another 43 years won't elapse? Maybe another 43 years will elapse after the second 43 years have elapsed?

"Never" is a funny word and is easily claimed to be wrong, but only based on the same assumption. My never is your maybe.

But I'll finish by saying that MN will not be built within the next 20 years, just to please the younger generation here. I may be dead in 20 years and if I am, then my "never" is a right for me.

At the end of the day, it's my opinion (based on history) and it shouldn't be dismissed as trolling or negative to the forum.

MrMorooka

cgcsb wrote: »

The an post sorting depot on maken st is a 1980s addition I believe

I'm think that recently got permission to be demolished and redeveloped into something commercial, at least.

D.L.R.

richardmoyes wrote: »

<snip> abusive post deleted: Mod

Try and get into double figures before you start lecturing everyone eh chap.

Carawaystick

Bray Head wrote: »

Public sector bodies should be forced to pay some kind of charge on the notional value of their landholdings back to the exchequer.


It could even help to pay for a big metro line:-)

Maybe we could get private sector businesses to pay some levy on sites which are vacant too...
Maybe we could go further and get state bodies to pay rates to the corpo.

richardmoyes

D.L.R. wrote: »

Try and get into double figures before you start lecturing everyone eh chap.

Spoilsports

strassenwo!f

monument wrote: »

So, basically, you're guessing 300 metres? The drawings don't support you.

No, Monument, of course I wasn't guessing. In this situation it is unfortunate that I'm not on the ground in Dublin, with my opisometer, to get an exact figure for the distance between Abbey Street and Fleet Street (i.e. the approximate length of the RPA's proposal).

I was relying on google's maps which, the way I measured it, came in at 315 metres.

I originally said 'around 300 metres', and the lowest figure we've had so far has been the poster MJohnston's 280 metres. Assuming this is correct, this figure would equate to a station which is over 3 (three) times longer than the metro platforms it includes (ca. 90 metres in the original plan), before we even begin to consider the enormous depth of the station boxes either side of the river.

richardmoyes

How embarrassing for poor Monument

strassenwo!f

richardmoyes wrote: »

No underground station will be built at CG because PP will be impossible - this is the conclusion of the MN team. The main problem is Trinity who have vowed to fight it tooth and nail. There's also the issue of shutting the corridor down for perhaps 2 years - so this will not be revisited. Forests of trees have been used up arguing this but a simple call to the IR engineers office will find somebody to confirm this. All Die Strassenvolf's calculations are defunct on this reality.
The new MN is certain to scrap the O'Connell Bridge Behmoth and Parnell Sq Stn for 1 station close to the GPO.

Why would somebody call Irish Rail with a question about the proposed metro? Isn't the metro being handled by another organisation?

Sam Russell

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Why would somebody call Irish Rail with a question about the proposed metro? Isn't the metro being handled by another organisation?

No organisation has been given any role for Metro North nor will they till it is built.

monument

cgcsb wrote: »

Land use in Ireland is mental. bus depots, an post sorting centres, social housing in the form of terraced 2 storey homes with front and back gardens, all within the commercial core while families are destroyed by excessive commuting from Kildare. And these aren't historic problems, we built terraced houses within eyeshot of O'Connell st in the 1990s. The an post sorting depot on maken st is a 1980s addition I believe.

That's simplistic at best.

These are two storey houses on Church Street with "front and back gardens"... but...



...they had a 2011 population density of 15,500 persons per SQKM:



This is the areas around O'Connell Street with the /km2 per Electoral Division shown:


SEE: http://airo.maynoothuniversity.ie/external-content/census-2011-national-mapping-viewer

Considering that the amount of retail / office / institutional etc space around here... that's high or very high population levels for cities comparable to Dublin.

cgcsb wrote: »

If we were good at Land use there would be no Tallaght or Blanchardstown, Dublin would extend no further west than Ballyfermot and the M50 would pass through mostly greenfields with some industrial development near it's junctions.

I'm not so sure about that, Amsterdam and Copenhagen etc have areas outside their ring roads and Dublin has a higher urban population density than Amsterdam and Copenhagen.

Amsterdam-Zuid was built mostly outside the their ring road, so were other areas including the more recently planned IJburg area. It can fairly said that their ring road is in closer than the M50 but there's also suburbs outside the 7-9km M50 radius. The Amsterdam Metro serves suburbs out 10 or 11 km out as the bird flies from its city centre.

The main problem with Tallaght and Blanchardstown is mainly not where they are but how they are served by transport. Tallaght and Blanch aren't half bad for density -- with the former ranging from around 4,500 to 6,000 persons per km/2, and the latter ranging from 4,000 to 5,000 persons per km2 in residential and reasonably mixed areas and lots of green space.

monument

strassenwo!f wrote: »

No, Monument, of course I wasn't guessing. In this situation it is unfortunate that I'm not on the ground in Dublin, with my opisometer, to get an exact figure for the distance between Abbey Street and Fleet Street (i.e. the approximate length of the RPA's proposal).

I was relying on google's maps which, the way I measured it, came in at 315 metres.

I originally said 'around 300 metres', and the lowest figure we've had so far has been the poster MJohnston's 280 metres. Assuming this is correct,

How on earth are you getting 300 metres?



But the Metro North drawings show that the station boxes fall short of each street, with the eastern one falling a good deal short of Fleet Street.

strassenwo!f wrote: »

...this figure would equate to a station which is over 3 (three) times longer than the metro platforms it includes (ca. 90 metres in the original plan), before we even begin to consider the enormous depth of the station boxes either side of the river.

SHOCKER! STOP THE PRESSES! Station boxes on each side of a platform is longer than the platform!

Where do you want the station boxes? In the Liffey? Or maybe you want them built in more limited space on the quays just so the station boxes don't stretch so far north to east?

Sam Russell wrote: »

No organisation has been given any role for Metro North nor will they till it is built.

Transport Infrastructure Ireland?

The National Transport Authority?

wakka12

Why does the metro north cost so much to build? Are we just estimating badly? Do we build very inefficiently ? Because I honestly cant imagine that other similar sized european cities with several underground lines have spent 10-15 billion euro in total to develop their underground transport over the years but maybe Im wrong.

Sam Russell

wakka12 wrote: »

Why does the metro north cost so much to build? Are we just estimating badly? Do we build very inefficiently ? Because I honestly cant imagine that other similar sized european cities with several underground lines have spent 10-15 billion euro in total to develop their underground transport over the years but maybe Im wrong.

London's Crossrail was budgeted at £15 bn for 26 miles (40 km) of rail tunnel, including extras for staions, shafts, etc. DU is 7.6 km long with 6 stations. So proportionally would give €3.5 bn. Metro North is 17 km, but tunnelling would only be for a small part of that, and the exact route is yet to be decided and the details of how it is to be constructed is still not decided so costing is impossible. However, a figure of €2.4 bn has been quoted.

However all of this is speculation since it is unlikely to be built before 2025 or later.

wakka12

Sam Russell wrote: »

London's Crossrail was budgeted at £15 bn for 26 miles (40 km) of rail tunnel, including extras for staions, shafts, etc. DU is 7.6 km long with 6 stations. So proportionally would give €3.5 bn. Metro North is 17 km, but tunnelling would only be for a small part of that, and the exact route is yet to be decided and the details of how it is to be constructed is still not decided so costing is impossible. However, a figure of €2.4 bn has been quoted.

However all of this is speculation since it is unlikely to be built before 2025 or later.

Ah fair enough then!
Yeh it'll be a while. I read an article today and apparently if the underground to the airport was operating in 12 years then that would be very optimistic. Bit depressing that ill be nearly middle aged by the time I can take a train to get to the airport :pac:

markpb

wakka12 wrote:

Bit depressing that ill be nearly middle aged by the time I can take a train to get to the airport

Don't think about it like that.

You'll actually be old aged at best.

Sam Russell

Just think - they could build the Clongriffin spur in very little time for very little money if they wanted to as the Clongriffin station already has some of the requirements to handle it. Also the signal improvement from Clontarf to Sandymount are complete (I believe) and will allow 20 trains per hour in each direction so no problem there.

€200 million would do it. 7 km over open countryside with just a few property owners to deal with.

If only.

wakka12

But why cant the luas just be extended from broom bridge to the airport? Like what would be so bad about a surface level train bringing people to the airport? It would just be so handy for the entire city of Dublin to be able to go from near their homes or city centre to the airport. Like why isn't a luas to the airport viable? Why is an underground to the airport so necessary??

Amirani

wakka12 wrote: »

But why cant the luas just be extended from broom bridge to the airport? Like what would be so bad about a surface level train bringing people to the airport? It would just be so handy for the entire city of Dublin to be able to go from near their homes or city centre to the airport. Like why isn't a luas to the airport viable? Why is an underground to the airport so necessary??

Too slow, too small a capacity, lack of available routing.

jd

It wouldn't have enough capacity and would be too slow. It'd be better to extend it to Finglas. It could go on your Airport after that, but it would only be really useful for some connectivity, and primarily local use (airport employees to and from airport and Finglas, maybe Ballymun )

wakka12

Could there really be just no available routes whatsoever to build it on? And well regardless, is a slow low capacity train hardly worse than no train at all.. I certainly would prefer an hour and a half train ride to the airport than having to drive (and park for the length of my holiday) there.

Sam Russell

Heathrow was connected to the Piccadilly line but it was not until the Heathrow Express started was it considered any use.

[Who wants to go to Paddington?]

marno21

wakka12 wrote: »

Could there really be just no available routes whatsoever to build it on? And well regardless, is a slow low capacity train hardly worse than no train at all.. I certainly would prefer an hour and a half train ride to the airport than having to drive (and park for the length of my holiday) there.

No it isn't.

This country has wasted far too much money on upgrading projects because **** was built on the cheap in the first place to save pennies.

M50, N40 in Cork are two examples of massive upgrading projects.

Western Rail Corridor is an example of a slow train that's "hardly worse than no trail at all." Look how that's doing and how beneficial that spending of €105m was.

BonkeyDonker

jd wrote: »

It wouldn't have enough capacity and would be too slow. It'd be better to extend it to Finglas. It could go on your Airport after that, but it would only be really useful for some connectivity, and primarily local use (airport employees to and from airport and Finglas, maybe Ballymun )

Not just Finglas/Ballymun but onward through Santry/Swords. Like you said there is more to transporting people to/from the airport than just passengers and making it easier more practical for the employees to get there would help as well.

1huge1

Does anyone think we may have an update on this in the budget, perhaps the start date moving closer (2021 at the moment I believe).

wakka12

1huge1 wrote: »

Does anyone think we may have an update on this in the budget, perhaps the start date moving closer (2021 at the moment I believe).

Always seems very up in the air. I honestly wouldn't hold my breath until the moment they've actually begun digging the tunnels.. 2021 is what I heard in the latest update also, I think it was in june when they said that.

Sam Russell

Deedsie wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-airport-5-2988906-Sep2016/

3 terminals and no rail link connecting them or connecting them to the city centre....

Please don't allow this proposal to be given planning permission without the condition that a rail link must be built first.

Do not worry! ABP will insist that there be adequate car parks - they will be satisfied with that.

Markcheese

newcar2016 wrote:

What about Metro West? Which should by the way be extended to link with Metro South at Dundrum!

So would metro west come after the interconnector ..and before metro south ? Where'd any new luas lines come in that mix ...4 tracking mainline rail.

Sure we'll have the best public transport planning system in the world so we will :-) :-) :-)
Say 1 project every 20 years (optimistic I know) ,there plans out there to take us into the next century ...