Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

St Stephen's Green during Metro North/Interconnector construction

  • 25-08-2010 6:03pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭ Amtmann


    It's been claimed today in the Irish Independent that:
    Sit down, while you read what is being proposed: a vast underground station beneath St Stephen's Green. This will require the destruction of the Green, the felling of its trees and its probable closure for two years. During this time, the removal of waste from beneath the Green will require 400 lorry movements a day through the city-centre's narrow streets to some dump in the greater Dublin area. And which lucky rural community will be the beneficiary of these thousands of lorries a week, unloading millions of tons of spoil a year? (LINK)

    Clearly the construction of Metro North and its affect on the Green will be a bone of contention, and possibly an issue that will inspire serious protests, in the years ahead. I'd like this forum and this thread in particular to be a place where people can post the facts of the matter, and where others can learn about those facts without being misinformed by agitators and protestors.

    So: How will the construction of Metro North affect St Stephen's Green? Be as detailed as you like in your answers. Feel free to post images, excerpts from EIS statements, traffic mitigation strategies, etc. to back up your claims, and to make information easy for others to access.


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 930 ✭✭✭ Brian CivilEng


    You can't bake a cake without breaking an egg. There will be massive disruption to a corner of the Green for a few years, but when it is all over the Green will be restored and our city will have been improved immensely. We need to concentrate on the positives and put up with temporary disruptions, not only in the case of the Metro/DART station but also with life in general.


  • Registered Users Posts: 97 ✭✭ Alright


    I agree with the last post from abitofacomedian

    We're such a negative bunch, the irish that is, and we fail
    to think long term.
    Let's go for it. Although going on previous records it'll probably
    be overbudget and behind schedule.
    But I still feel that the metro is a good idea.

    Now all we have to do is get a universal ticketing system that will
    allow us to use all this public infrastructure when it's in place...
    progressive eh? :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,581 ✭✭✭ jd


    http://dublinobserver.com/2010/08/dublin-before-and-after-dart-underground/
    the paper only showed one of the environmental impact statement images of St Stephen’s Green. The environmental impact statement also shows further stages, including where part of the park is a construction site and, at the opposite end, where trees have been reinstated.
    As we show below, many of the sites which will be used for the Dart Underground project will see improvement abandoned looking sites cleaned up, and some of the expected development over stations structures.

    green4.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭ Son of Stupido


    most of the trees in the affected area are being retained as there is a preservation order on them. So the big mature trees are staying. Most of the trees going are small semi-mature. (tree-survey / EIS)

    The hole for the station will mostly be where the lakes are. Yes there will be lots of lorries, as there were for Lansdowne road. But (i suspect) not as much traffic movement as there was for the stadium. (smaller site, smaller build).

    The works area will be about 1/3 of the green, but the impact area will be smaller (EIS).

    A lot of people seem to think the place will be destroyed. It is a National Monument, which means anything they want to do is by ministerial consent only (this is above ABP) and the Government, OPW, Parks & Wildlife & DCC have been very tight on what they can do and not do (EIS).


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭ Son of Stupido


    The Interconnector is a different project. Its impact on SSG is liable to change. That view may well be different by the time the Oral Hearing comes around.

    It was my understanding that there would be no upstanding buildings in the green, that they would be flush with the ground level, as with the metro


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,235 ✭✭✭ D.L.R.


    You can't bake a cake without breaking an egg. There will be massive disruption to a corner of the Green for a few years, but when it is all over the Green will be restored and our city will have been improved immensely. We need to concentrate on the positives and put up with temporary disruptions, not only in the case of the Metro/DART station but also with life in general.

    Exactly. All this Metro opposition reminds me of a kid being dragged to school crying.

    Too bad son, just deal with it. Go to Merrion bleedin Square for a few years to eat your hang sanger when its not raining at lunchtime.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ ardmacha


    Every city in Europe has metro stations, car parks and the like under city parks and squares. And one time these had to be built and there was disruption for a year or so, then everything was restored better than before. Dublin can do likewise.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 454 ✭✭ irishdub14


    most of the trees in the affected area are being retained as there is a preservation order on them. So the big mature trees are staying. Most of the trees going are small semi-mature. (tree-survey / EIS)

    Oh thank god! All I cared about were the beautiful trees! :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 257 ✭✭ Lifelike


    Does anyone know when the bulldozers are going to start this demolition of the Green? Not that I oppose the project, I'm just curious as to when it will start.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,511 ✭✭✭✭ FreudianSlippers


    Lifelike wrote: »
    Does anyone know when the bulldozers are going to start this demolition of the Green? Not that I oppose the project, I'm just curious as to when it will start.
    Yeah, no bulldozers... they're just going to plant TNT and make a nice big hole.:rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,278 ✭✭✭ dowlingm


    Navvies with picks and shovels would employ more people - surprised the government haven't cottoned on to that! :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,581 ✭✭✭ jd


    The Interconnector is a different project. Its impact on SSG is liable to change. That view may well be different by the time the Oral Hearing comes around.

    I'm aware of that - however the dart connection will be pretty fundamental to the connectivity of the metro - and I think there may be opposition to *all* work that involves the green.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 DWCommuter


    Lifelike wrote: »
    Does anyone know when the bulldozers are going to start this demolition of the Green? Not that I oppose the project, I'm just curious as to when it will start.

    Ask Paddy Power. In fact even Paddy Power is cagey on a start date. My prediction? No metro north or interconnector start date within the next 10 years.:eek:

    And I'm not being troublesome. I genuinely believe these projects will be sidelined.

    The Green is safe.:D


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭ spacetweek


    DWCommuter wrote: »
    Ask Paddy Power. In fact even Paddy Power is cagey on a start date. My prediction? No metro north or interconnector start date within the next 10 years.:eek:

    And I'm not being troublesome. I genuinely believe these projects will be sidelined.

    The Green is safe.:D
    I'm gonna take the optimist view and believe that work on the Green will begin early in the new year.

    Does anyone know how long the works at the Green will go on for? I presume they won't be working at that location for the entirety of the project.

    Another thing is what happens when they build Metro South? Will the Green have to be dug up again, in the southeast corner this time?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 DWCommuter


    spacetweek wrote: »
    I'm gonna take the optimist view and believe that work on the Green will begin early in the new year.

    Does anyone know how long the works at the Green will go on for? I presume they won't be working at that location for the entirety of the project.

    Another thing is what happens when they build Metro South? Will the Green have to be dug up again, in the southeast corner this time?


    Hello Optimist.:D

    This was one of the issues discussed at length. To my knowledge the TBMs are going in at the green. Putting them in at a point further south like the abandoned barracks over by the canal would mean less disruption and an easier option for building a metro south. However as I alluded to in a different thread there is no plan to do this and T21 offers us a connection to Luas green line instead.

    I think its a bit short sighted. But I remain convinced that Irish politics is still not ready to build things like metro north and the interconnector.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 BrianD


    The Interconnector is a different project. Its impact on SSG is liable to change. That view may well be different by the time the Oral Hearing comes around.

    It was my understanding that there would be no upstanding buildings in the green, that they would be flush with the ground level, as with the metro

    incorrect, there will be a new building on the south side of the green.

    The DART underground is an essential piece of infrastructure. However, it is regretable that the gem that is St. Stephens green is going to substantially altered as a result. While it makes sense to do the dig there, all the documentation and info released to the public seems to suggest a somewhat cavalier approach to the dig. One wonders can they do the dig in the green and do a better job of restoring the park afterwards.


  • Registered Users Posts: 368 ✭✭ Empire o de Sun


    The Green is not natural, far from it, I think it can be done again, and put back as it was.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 BrianD


    BrianD wrote: »
    incorrect, there will be a new building on the south side of the green.

    Sorry I meant the North side of the green.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭ dubhthach


    The Green is not natural, far from it, I think it can be done again, and put back as it was.

    Indeed it's current layout only dates to the 1880's when it was own by the Guinness family who gifted it to the city of Dublin. I have a great book at home that has a map from 1790's which had a development proposal to build on most of the Green leaving a considerably smaller square in the centre.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭ Amtmann


    It is possible, at great expense, to replace the felled trees in the Green with mature trees so you don't have to wait decades for the saplings to grow. I've seen it done before. It might even be possible to dig up some of the current trees and preserve them for eventual replanting when works in the Green have concluded. It's highly risky for the tree obviously, but in theory it can work. I don't know if that is on the cards here though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,638 Zoney


    My concern would be the unadorned ugly lumps that they propose to have as part of the final arrangements. I'm very much of the view that disruption for long-term gain is OK (even felling trees, having to wait for aquatic environment to restabilise). However, I see now reason why any permanent structures above ground cannot be camoflagued in a Victorian-style veneer to fit in with the surrounding environment. Or even just a less stark, more elegant modern finish that somehow fits in.

    I do think the current plans show a cavalier attitude to the park. It isn't the same thing to consider some disruption as "worth it" as to feel free to have any amount of disruption as one feels necessary for the project. I'm not convinced that there is even much official regard for the park, which is most concerning given that even now in 2010, far too much of the *public* regard much of *our* heritage as too British and not worth caring about.

    Someone commented there is no reason why it can't be put back better than before. That isn't true. What is true is that it can *in theory* be put back better than before. I would suggest that a collaboration of factors would mean that in an Irish context, it is very unlikely it would be (so the focus should be on minimising the impact in total, as I'm not convinced every interference would be repaired).

    Certainly there should be no cause to complain about detractors of this project, as surely it is understandable that people with an interest in the park are not going to be convinced given the track record of the authorities and contractors here in *Ireland* (whatever about success stories abroad).


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,285 ✭✭✭ Pete_Cavan


    spacetweek wrote: »

    Another thing is what happens when they build Metro South? Will the Green have to be dug up again, in the southeast corner this time?

    Tunnelling for MN will not just go north, it will also go south a bit in order to have a turn back facility just south of the station under St. Stephens Green to allow the trains turn around there. If there is ever going to be a Metro South I would imagine they will tunnel up to this turn back facility and there would be no disruption to the station or the green itself.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 BrianD


    spacetweek wrote: »
    .

    Another thing is what happens when they build Metro South? Will the Green have to be dug up again, in the southeast corner this time?

    yes, what is this Metro South that you speak of?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,285 ✭✭✭ Pete_Cavan


    BrianD wrote: »
    yes, what is this Metro South that you speak of?

    Extending Metro North to the south of the city. There are no plans for it and it wont happen this decade but hopefully MN will be a success and we wont have to wade through to all the sh*t we have had to put up with in order to get MN built. As I said there are no plans for Metro South, and Im sure there will be plenty other opinions on this, but I would imagine it would go Harolds Cross, Terenure, Rathfarnham, or something similar.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 Godge


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Extending Metro North to the south of the city. There are no plans for it and it wont happen this decade but hopefully MN will be a success and we wont have to wade through to all the sh*t we have had to put up with in order to get MN built. As I said there are no plans for Metro South, and Im sure there will be plenty other opinions on this, but I would imagine it would go Harolds Cross, Terenure, Rathfarnham, or something similar.


    There are four lines on the south side of the Liffey - Dart, two Luas and the Kildare route.

    Metro West, the Luas lines to Lucan and Broombridge should all take precedence over Metro South. However, when it does happen (2050?) it should follow the route you suggest away from the existing lines.


  • Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭ Son of Stupido


    two things
    1. SSG is NOT a TBM launch site. The two are at the airport and DCU. The TBMS will then be buried (left) under the green.
    2. 'Metro South' is an extension of the line to join the green luas and a possible new branch from around Adelade road to terenure and tallaght.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 185 ✭✭ oharach


    1. SSG is NOT a TBM launch site. The two are at the airport and DCU. The TBMS will then be buried (left) under the green.

    I understand they will be stripping it of whatever they can though, so it won't be available to just turn on again once we decide we need a 'Metro South'. Is that right?


  • Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭ Son of Stupido


    oharach wrote: »
    I understand they will be stripping it of whatever they can though, so it won't be available to just turn on again once we decide we need a 'Metro South'. Is that right?

    No, they will dive down, so they will not be able to be re-instated for extensions, but they will not block the passage of future extensions.

    Its too expensive to dismantle them, thats why they will be abandoned.

    Every TBM is unique to the particular tunnel, so it doesn't have a re-sale value.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 185 ✭✭ oharach


    No, they will dive down, so they will not be able to be re-instated for extensions, but they will not block the passage of future extensions.

    Its too expensive to dismantle them, thats why they will be abandoned.

    Every TBM is unique to the particular tunnel, so it doesn't have a re-sale value.

    Well in this case, of course, the future extension would be the same size. Would it be at all possible to leave it in situ or would it just rust and become a blockage?


Advertisement