Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Where would a surface Luas / BRT alternative to Metro North fit?
Options
Comments
-
Yes, but more than 2/3 of the passenger numbers on the Metro North come from the Swords and Dublin Airport stops. Why spend 2-3billion on a transport system when these ares are already served well atm?
Because they are creating an integrated NETWORK covering the entire city - not simply link Swords or Dublin Airport with Stephen's Green.
Why do people have such difficulty grasping such a simply concept?0 -
Jack Noble wrote: »Because they are creating an integrated NETWORK covering the entire city - not simply link Swords or Dublin Airport with Stephen's Green.
Why do people have such difficulty grasping such a simply concept?
Yeah, Swords Express and Dublin Bus 747, 748 and Aircoach are currently part of a network that serves the entire city.0 -
Yeah, Swords Express and Dublin Bus 747, 748 and Aircoach are currently part of a network that serves the entire city.
No, they link Swords and the Airport to the city centre - they do not serve the areas in between or efficiently link to anywhere else in the city.
The whole point of this planned Metro-Luas-Dart system is that by one - or at most two - changes, you can reach your destination by rapid rail.
Airport to Dun Laoghaire - change at Drumcondra.
Airport to Sligo - change at Drumcondra for train at Connolly.
Swords to Tallaght - change at O'Connell/Abbey Street
Blanchardstown to Hueston - change at Pearse
Clondalkin to Airport - change at SSG.
Simple stuff that will make getting around the city easier and much more efficient than it is today by bus, taxi or car where you are often stuck in gridlock.
Your view is the typically short-sighted one that helped kill the Dart in the 1980s and fails to take into account any planning for the future or the effects of daily gridlock on the economy, social fabric and quality of life in the Dublin area.0 -
Jack Noble wrote: »Because they are creating an integrated NETWORK covering the entire city - not simply link Swords or Dublin Airport with Stephen's Green.
Why do people have such difficulty grasping such a simply concept?
Well it's not presented as anything other that a linear route and that's a marketing issue that the RPA haven;t been able to grasp yet. There's also it's failure to link into a mainline station. Any route that serves an international airport should have this as a design criteria.
Leaving that aside, the problem still exists that it's too expensive a solution than what is required. It travels through low density areas that will never provide the passenger numbers that it is capable of carrying at full capacity.
mgmt hits the nail on the head. If 2/3 of the passengers come from area that is already 5km of a rail station then we should be looking at how best we can serve them. As i suggested, a major upgrade of the northern rail line along with an integrated multi route bus network in the Swords area would achieve the same goals of both getting people into the city and opening up more of, say, Swords to the network.
Buses from the Airport can already make it to Ringsend in 18 min and by using the tunnel and the soon to be build North Wall Quay bus lane could get into the city in less than 30 min.aard wrote:It's a myth that Dublin is low-density. Dublin City has a density of ~4,500/km2, and Dublin Urban Area (basically anywhere that actually "touches" the main city -- including Blanchardstown, Tallaght, Lucan, but not Bray or Swords) is ~3,500.
It's not. Dublin City has a density of 4,398/km2 which is within the DCC area. The average for Fingal is 433/km2. Swords village hits about 2,500 which puts it in the bottom ranking of the main population centres of the Fingal area.
Even if you look at the planning strategies for both DCC and Fingal. There is an absolute resistance to build up and increase densities. Ideally we need to allow 8 storey developments. It seems that we'll only be allowed 6 stories. High rise in Ballymun has been leveled and unless we start razing semi-D's along the route inside the M50 we won't see any population growth there either.
As regards other cities, if they have the money go for it. Agreed that London is a low density city but most of their tunneled network was sunk along time ago and less than half of the network is underground.
However, the population and the predicted population of the route all point to other modes of transport offering better value for money.0 -
Well it's not presented as anything other that a linear route and that's a marketing issue that the RPA haven;t been able to grasp yet. There's also it's failure to link into a mainline station. Any route that serves an international airport should have this as a design criteria.
It is all over the RPA, IE, DoT, T21 and NTA websites. RPA have always stated it is part of an integrated network and point out the integration with Luas, Dart and Bus.Leaving that aside, the problem still exists that it's too expensive a solution than what is required. It travels through low density areas that will never provide the passenger numbers that it is capable of carrying at full capacity.
We can only judge if it is too expensive when we see the final price later this year. And it travels through quite high density areas. Have you actually looked at the densities for each area on the 2006 Census?mgmt hits the nail on the head. If 2/3 of the passengers come from area that is already 5km of a rail station then we should be looking at how best we can serve them. As i suggested, a major upgrade of the northern rail line along with an integrated multi route bus network in the Swords area would achieve the same goals of both getting people into the city and opening up more of, say, Swords to the network.
No it wouldn't because it ignore the big gap in the system through north Dublin city. You and mgmt and other opponents are fixated about Swords and the airport and ignore the rest of the areas on the route.Buses from the Airport can already make it to Ringsend in 18 min and by using the tunnel and the soon to be build North Wall Quay bus lane could get into the city in less than 30 min.
Again, that airport fixation - the airport is just one stop. You ignore the rest.It's not. Dublin City has a density of 4,398/km2 which is within the DCC area. The average for Fingal is 433/km2. Swords village hits about 2,500 which puts it in the bottom ranking of the main population centres of the Fingal area.
Dublin CC extends to north of Ballymun - there are eight stops in the DCC area which have higher than average densities.Even if you look at the planning strategies for both DCC and Fingal. There is an absolute resistance to build up and increase densities. Ideally we need to allow 8 storey developments. It seems that we'll only be allowed 6 stories. High rise in Ballymun has been leveled and unless we start razing semi-D's along the route inside the M50 we won't see any population growth there either.
That is now - policy will change in the future. It is already changing in Dublin city and has in South Dublin. Have you seen Tallaght lately?As regards other cities, if they have the money go for it. Agreed that London is a low density city but most of their tunneled network was sunk along time ago and less than half of the network is underground.
However, the population and the predicted population of the route all point to other modes of transport offering better value for money.
The experts disagree with you. Thanks, but I'll stick with their analysis rather than random internet guy's brainstorms.
Dart seems to work okay considering its catchment area is lower density and half of it is Dublin Bay - in fact, it has had capacity doubled in recent years to cope with demand. Metro opponents alway fail to take this into account. Densities on the Luas lines are also lower and they are at capacity at peak time. Again, a fact you all conveniently ignore.0 -
Advertisement
-
TBH I don't care if it ends up costing €5 billion.
I want a mode of transport that will still be viable in 100 years, and a means of travelling from the North City, deprived of decent public transport, to the City Centre.
I do not want a half arsed, Ryanair, recession, short sighted solution using a few fancily liveried buses and lazy, incomplete 'Q'BCs.
Why not for once have some ambition seriously! This will not be a white elephant, unlike the WRC, this route will be built on in the future, and just because it may not be in your lifetime is not a reason to scrap the project.
I'm tired of the same reasons being brought up again. Dublin Airport is not well connected to the city centre. Waiting for taxis -> Long queues (when they actually show up), slow crowded buses trundling through Phibsborough etc. I'd take the train 1000 times over rather than taking the fecking bus.
Why should we just be satisfied with a glorified shuttle bus? Why not build something fit for purpose and usefull?0 -
I don't know where you get your figures from, the RPA gives a density figure of 1,300people/km2 for Dublin.
http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%2001042009/MN%20Oral%20Hearing%20Presentation%20Transport%20Model%20Dave%20King%20030409.pdf
That's the Dublin Region (aka County Dublin). I'm talking about just the built-up urban area of the city. Dublin Region has huge tracts of completely open spaces all over Fingal, and to a lesser extent the rest of the area. TBH, I have no idea why the RPA would use the County Dublin density figures to try and sell the idea.0 -
The urban area of Dublin (not County Dublin, which is/was purely an administrative entity) has a density of 3,500. You just said yourself that Swords has 2,500. Using the source that mgmt gave above, this is still above that of Munich. The rest of the route is the Airport stop. So, in all you have a line serving high-density areas, and an airport.It's not. Dublin City has a density of 4,398/km2 which is within the DCC area. The average for Fingal is 433/km2. Swords village hits about 2,500 which puts it in the bottom ranking of the main population centres of the Fingal area.
The average density of Fingal has absolutely no bearing on the situation.0 -
And who in the world other than the likes of us posting on this board actually looks at those websites? Much as I disagree with BrianD about pretty much everything else, he's spot on about this. The RPA do precious little to put across the point that Metro North will be part of a network.Jack Noble wrote: »It is all over the RPA, IE, DoT, T21 and NTA websites. RPA have always stated it is part of an integrated network and point out the integration with Luas, Dart and Bus.
In fact, I'm not sure you're even right about those websites. It's difficult to find a post-T21 network map anywhere.0 -
And who in the world other than the likes of us posting on this board actually looks at those websites? Much as I disagree with BrianD about pretty much everything else, he's spot on about this. The RPA do precious little to put across the point that Metro North will be part of a network.
In fact, I'm not sure you're even right about those websites. It's difficult to find a post-T21 network map anywhere.
The RPA have been doing that from day one. But it is not their job to sell the project to people - it is the governments. However, the RPA have been doing a reasonably effective job since last autumn with briefings to the media, the Myths and Facts page on its website, its YouTube site with videos and the Metro North Facebook page.
The problem is with the politicians and the government.
Most politicians don't understand what's going on and are only concerned about what happens in their areas.
And no one trusts or believes the current government on anything.
If Metro North and Dart Underground are to go ahead, the next govt, ie Transport Minister, will have to be clear in explaining how Metro, Dart, Luas and Bus form an integregated network. And they will have to sell it to their party colleagues in the Dail as much as the people.0 -
Advertisement
-
None of these resources do anything to emphasise that Metro North is part of an integrated network.Jack Noble wrote: »The RPA have been doing that from day one. But it is not their job to sell the project to people - it is the governments. However, the RPA have been doing a reasonably effective job since last autumn with briefings to the media, the Myths and Facts page on its website, its YouTube site with videos and the Metro North Facebook page.
Trying to find a post-T21 network map on the websites of any of the agencies concerned is an arduous task. There's usually one in DART Underground PDF brochures and leaflets but I don't recall ever seeing on on the RPA site. Indeed the network map on their homepage seems to entirely ignore the existence of Irish Rail.
Integration into the existing network is one of the least emphasised aspects of the Metro North project. I've never heard anyone from the RPA mention it in an interview. It's the obvious answer to the question that's invariably asked by journalists: "Who wants to get from the airport to the city centre anyway?" And yet it's never mentioned.
I don't deny that the government isn't bothering either but your original point was that the RPA are doing a good job. Having had it pointed out to you that they aren't, you've changed your tune to "it's not their job anyway".
It's a major selling point for a project that has much less benefits when it stands alone. However I suspect that the RPA have known all along that they were effectively in competition with Irish Rail for funding. Turns out they were right.0 -
BUMP! As posted by jd in the Metro North thread, the Labour party have now joined the chorus, with a manifesto severely playing down (in fact not mentioning at all) Metro North and saying they will "explore the development of Bus Rapid Transit"
http://www.labour.ie/download/pdf/labour_election_manifesto_2011.pdf
(page 32)0 -
BUMP! As posted by jd in the Metro North thread, the Labour party have now joined the chorus, with a manifesto severely playing down (in fact not mentioning at all) Metro North and saying they will "explore the development of Bus Rapid Transit"
http://www.labour.ie/download/pdf/labour_election_manifesto_2011.pdf
(page 32)
Sensible move and in the national interest. Fair play Labour!
Though it's difficult to know whether they know it to be the crock that it is or that they know the funding won't be available for it in the lifetime of the next Dail. Hopefully they see it as bad value for money project.0 -
Sensible move and in the national interest. Fair play Labour!
Though it's difficult to know whether they know it to be the crock that it is or that they know the funding won't be available for it in the lifetime of the next Dail. Hopefully they see it as bad value for money project.
Metro North may be cancelled, but bus improvements to a BRT level of service is a non-runner for the Metro North route. As I said on the other thread:
Rolling around on the floor laughing is the only response that can be given to anybody who seriously thinks that Labour or FG will introduce proper BRT or on surface Luas along roads which run near Metro North. You're fooling your self.
There's an idealistic part of the Labour Party, there's a lot in-between and then there's a very pro car and/or very pro anybody who shouts a lot (ie motorists and residents along the route of any BRT in north city and county Dublin. It's around the same or worst with FF, FG, and SF, so this is not a dig at Labour.0 -
Sensible move and in the national interest. Fair play Labour!
Though it's difficult to know whether they know it to be the crock that it is or that they know the funding won't be available for it in the lifetime of the next Dail. Hopefully they see it as bad value for money project.
Brian, I wouldn't take too much solace from the Labour manifesto and the lack of mention of Metro North, if I were you.
The lack of a clear commitment either way on Metro and the deliberate mention clear cost benefit analysis is a compromise/fudge to cover deep divisions in the party in Dublin over Metro North. This stems from Gilmore's 'shove back' comments last autumn on Marian Finucane's radio show and a few days later in an interview in the Herald. Those comments caught a lot of people in Labour cold and there was a public row back a few days later.
There are a number of very strong supporters of Metro in Labour, the most important of which are Joan Burton, Ruairi Quinn and Tommy Broughan. Roisin Shorthall also supports the project but publicly has taken the Gilmore line. Burton described Metro as a 'no brainer', Broughan is a longtime supporter and the party's former transport spokesman and Quinn told Morning Ireland last October that fact the PPP could be paid back over 25 years made the project affordable. Burton and Broughan have both received detailed briefings on the project from the RPA and are familiar with the figures and the true costs to the State. Burton described the project as 'revenue neutral' for the taxpayer during construction. Obviously, the constituencies of all four are served by Metro North and they are conscious of the job creation prospects associated with the project, both during construction and once the line is operational.
Opponents include Gilmore and transport spokesman Joe Costello. Neither have been briefed on the project to the extent of Burton and Broughan and Costello's comments on Metro have been all over the place. He has shown himself to be clueless on his brief. His NIMBY posturing in opposition to Dart Underground have also shown him up badly.
Pat Rabbitte is neutral - he supports building Metro but is deeply sceptical and suspicious of the PPP approach. He won't commit either way until he see the detailed figures. If there is a high cost to the State, then he favours delaying construction until the State can afford it. However, Rabbitte last summer told his local paper in Tallaght that he favours building Metro West now because he sees it as a more important project than Metro North - go figure!!!
Labour's manifesto is simply recognition of that divide and gives the party a 'get out' clause - detailed cost benefit analysis - either way. If the PPP and CBA costs are favourable, the project goes ahead. If not, it will be 'shoved back', as Gilmore said.
Fine Gael this week gave unequivical support to the project when transport spokesman Simon Coveney backed it on Today FM. He specifically stated the business case was favourable and the PPP made it attractive as it would be paid back over 25 years.
Like Labour, there are powerful supporters within the party - the most prominent being James Reilly and Leo Varadkar, both of whom represent constituencies served by Metro. Reilly has been able to convince Enda Kenny to support the project. He also has received a similar, detailed RPA briefing to Burton and Broughan. That was last summer and he was accompanied by Michael Noonan. They also have the figures on the project. Paschal Donohoe, the FG candidate in Dublin Central also supports the project.
The most prominent opponent/sceptic in FG is Richard Bruton - who is simply not convinced of the need for the project or whether it is affordable, either now or ever. He shares the same view of Metro/Dart as anti-rail economists like Colm McCarthy and Sean Barrett.
When FG and Labour are in government, they will receive detailed briefings on the project from officials in Finance, Transport and the RPA and will be made aware of the costs very early on. They will also be briefed by officials from Enterprise, Trade and Employments, the IDA, and Dublin City and Fingal councils on how important they view the project is to their job creation and growth strategies. And, no doubt they will be lobbied by private sector supporters and opponents of the project.
But any final decision on whether to proceed with or delay or cancel Metro North will be made based on the final cost of the PPP when the BAFOs are submitted this summer and a winning tender selected and whether the updated CBA is favourable. That decision will be based on cold, hard analysis of the figures, probably in consulation with the IMF/EU and nothing else - emotions and passions of supporters and opponents simply won't come into it.
I am a supporter of Metro North, Dart Underground and the various other Metro and Luas projects and I make no bones about it on this site, on P.ie and to people I talk to.
However, the above analysis is based on my discussions in recent months - both before and after the election was called - with politicians of all parties. Sinn Fein also supported proceeding with Metro and Dart - despite Mary Lou's Costello-esque NIMBY antics in Dublin Central. Fianna Fail also support the project but, like SF, will be nowhere near government to be able to make the decision.
In my view, based on those discussions, Metro is very much still alive and still in play and will remain so until a final decision has to be made later this year. And that decision will be based on the numbers alone. If it's a good deal for the State, it will go ahead. If the PPP is too expensive in the short or long-term, then it won't. It's that simple.
It's up to posters here whether they accept my analysis or not.
As for Labour's commitment to examining BRT, that is meaningless. It was rejected for the north Dublin corridor in 1975 (DRRTS) and DTO Platform for Change (2001). The surface Luas line for the same corridor was also rejected more than a decade ago. There is simply nowhere to put either BRT or Luas to segregate from all other traffic. That is why Metro - essentially Luas Mor - is going underground. If BRT or Luas weren't viable then, they certainly is not viable now. That is simply another example of Labour spoofing. It's either Metro or nothing at this stage.0 -
Ive got to agree with that. It's not as if this hasnt been examined before - several times.
BRT I believe does have a major role to play in transport in Ireland, just not in the case of the Metro North corridor.
In Dublin, there are a few corridors where it would be perfectly feasible, but only after we have completed the basic rail network that the city needs to function.
The Blue line proposal is certainly interesting, and you could transplant that model to some parts of Dublin where the route had access to a wide, quality route, such as for example the N11 or N4. The problem of course is that we dont have all that many such quality routes within the M50 circle.
Dublin isnt one of those cities that was newly built with wide streets after being blown to smithereens in some war or another - its a historic city with generally narrow streets that are not in a grid pattern. That really limits our viable options in many cases to underground rail.
In Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford, you may have far more scope to use BRT. I know Limerick quite well and I can think of a few routes which could really benefit.
Only Cork probably has the scale that could justify a Luas type solution, but BRT would be a good solution for the remaining cities. But fo course, Cork also has its topographical issues to contend with... Patrick's hill springs to mind! ;-)
Although San Francisco was able to cope, and believe me no hill in Cork compares to some of the ones in Frisco!0
Advertisement