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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

After BXD: The next big public transport project for Dublin?3

Options
1…45679

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    the thing is, I totally agree with the concept . it is very straighforward and makes sense. There are lots of houses in Dublin 18 on large plots, starting to be purchased and knocked down and far higher density put on site. You would wonder to really get the ball rolling on this, could the government offer some incentive to get owners of low density homes, to do this. See its one thing if you have one house on a large site etc, but try to convince the owners of several houses to all agree! Also a lot of older people probably wouldnt leave their home, for all of king midas silver!

    Thats true, I never said it would be easy..the stars would have to aline in order to find a few houses in a row where the owners would be happy to move out.But theres such a vast volume of these kind of homes that I think you could find a good few spots where its feasible venture. And even at that I think you'd have to offer the home owners several incentives on top of money to buy their plot/house, offer them a free home within the new development on the same spot that is larger unit than their old home. At that stage it may begin to become not a very lucrative venture anymore so I can see why its not a popular route for developers, but I think it could be manageable with some government help. Especially as the council still own a lot of council builds and rent them out? Don't they? Or are the vast majority sold off?


  • Options
    #243
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,851 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Plenty of old housing was knocked down close to Croke Park after being bought up by the GAA over the years during the ground’s redevelopment.


  • Options
    #244
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,460 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    The OP seemed to be referring to a driverless rail system not a driverless bus system. If your building the Luas or MN to the airport whether it be driverless or not you still couldn't run trains/trams as night as train/tram is more complex than bus maintenance and more importantly maintence on tracks and OEL would need to be done at night.

    Apologies then, I misread.
    Stephen15 wrote: »
    I would a 24 hour link to airport MN/Luas between 05:00hrs and 00:30hrs but it would have be replaced with buses during the night for maintenance.

    I agree and it won't be a problem, at those hours passenger numbers and trafic would both be very low, so a bus would be a reasonable replacement and would be into the city just as fast as MN at that hour. The Aircoach pretty much already is, though I'd like to see it as a BRT service.
    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Plenty of old housing was knocked down close to Croke Park after being bought up by the GAA over the years during the ground’s redevelopment.

    And it took decades to buy up all the property and cost the GAA a fortune!

    And then go look at the issues they had with similar next to the Aviva. Goes to show why this isn't at all easy.


  • Options
    #245
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,851 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    It didn’t cost the GAA a fortune as they left the properties they bought idle, bringing with it further social problems to the local area and driving down the price of adjoining areas. Same tactic was employed around Anfield in Liverpool.

    Not that I’m proposing that the state or any of its’ agencies employ similarly disgusting tactics.


  • Options
    #246
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    It didn’t cost the GAA a fortune as they left the properties they bought idle, bringing with it further social problems to the local area and driving down the price of adjoining areas. Same tactic was employed around Anfield in Liverpool.

    Not that I’m proposing that the state or any of its’ agencies employ similarly disgusting tactics.

    Off topic but unfortunately the system promotes this kind of behaviour as you'll not end up stuck with tenants who've been there for years and as such have extra protection, you decrease the number of people who can make objections and as you say lower the price of property. The government need to levy heavy taxes on this sort of property sitting.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,625 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    The OP seemed to be referring to a driverless rail system not a driverless bus system. If your building the Luas or MN to the airport whether it be driverless or not you still couldn't run trains/trams as night as train/tram is more complex than bus maintenance and more importantly maintence on tracks and OEL would need to be done at night.

    You may want to tell Copenhagen and New York that its not possible to run a metro 24h...

    One is driverless and new, one is neither!


  • Options
    #248
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    L1011 wrote: »
    You may want to tell Copenhagen and New York that its not possible to run a metro 24h...

    One is driverless and new, one is neither!

    And needs to be closed for longer periods of time for maintence. It's better to do constant maintence at night to prevent any major disruption rather than once off for a long period of time for major work.

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/nyregion/l-train-will-shut-down-between-manhattan-and-brooklyn-in-2019-for-18-months.html?referer=https://www.google.ie/


  • Options
    #249
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,625 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    That's due to not doing any proper maintenance for years as is the norm with infrastructure in the US


  • Options
    #250
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Not so long ago the Dart system was shut down every weekend so the O/H lines could be replaced. It was also shutdown for works on the Aviva, and for works at GCD. The Port Tunnel is also closed at night from time to time for maintenance.

    What is unusual for maintence shut downs?

    Even boards.ie shuts down for maintenance.


  • Options
    #251
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    AngryLips wrote: »
    Similar international experience suggests that it is preferable to run an airport express service rather than a metro, if the aim is to connect the airport, but why let that inconvenient fact get in the way of the obsession with MN?

    No, the aim is not just to connect the airport -- Metro North is a high-capacity and high-frequency public transport route which is to serve a large route (and even larger give the green line link up which is planned)

    The standard across Europe seems to be mixed modes -- ie a mix of intercity trains, intercity trains, commuter trains, expresses, metros and even trams. Airport express do not seem to stand out as main rail mode to airports -- it mostly seems like national networks which have an airport stop.

    With airports around the 10km/h mark (which Dublin is well within) Metros see to be common enough -- Copenhagen, Dubai, Sofia, Lisbon, Porto, Madrid, Stuttgart. Barcelona airport is further away from the city centre but it's still connected by two metro lines because they have a decent view of having a transport network. Copenhagen is connected by both rail and metro but from what I know from people who live in the city, the metro is the main mode used by most people.

    Dublin's around 8km distance from the city centre means an airport express would not be justified unless its for an unreal premium.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    assuming that it's 8km from Dub airport to the City Centre, assuming the Metro trams will be able to do 75km/hr and can accelerate to that speed pretty quickly. Also assume an express tram gets a clear run(unlikely). Such a tram would reach Dublin City Centre in 6 minutes. Is that not slightly overkill?


  • Options
    #253
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,921 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    cgcsb wrote: »
    assuming that it's 8km from Dub airport to the City Centre, assuming the Metro trams will be able to do 75km/hr and can accelerate to that speed pretty quickly. Also assume an express tram gets a clear run(unlikely). Such a tram would reach Dublin City Centre in 6 minutes. Is that not slightly overkill?

    Only if it doesn't stop anywhere else. :)


  • Options
    #254
    budhabob
    Registered Users Posts: 4,821 ✭✭✭budhabob


    monument wrote: »
    No, the aim is not just to connect the airport -- Metro North is a high-capacity and high-frequency public transport route which is to serve a large route (and even larger give the green line link up which is planned)

    The standard across Europe seems to be mixed modes -- ie a mix of intercity trains, intercity trains, commuter trains, expresses, metros and even trams. Airport express do not seem to stand out as main rail mode to airports -- it mostly seems like national networks which have an airport stop.

    With airports around the 10km/h mark (which Dublin is well within) Metros see to be common enough -- Copenhagen, Dubai, Sofia, Lisbon, Porto, Madrid, Stuttgart. Barcelona airport is further away from the city centre but it's still connected by two metro lines because they have a decent view of having a transport network. Copenhagen is connected by both rail and metro but from what I know from people who live in the city, the metro is the main mode used by most people.

    Dublin's around 8km distance from the city centre means an airport express would not be justified unless its for an unreal premium.

    This is all very true. Unfortunately, Metro North as it was planned was not a metro! And as such is suitable for a commuter line, but not for an airport link.


  • Options
    #255
    AngryLips
    Registered Users Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭AngryLips


    If the northern line can’t be four-tracked then could a cut and cover option be an alternative to increase capacity?


  • Options
    #256
    budhabob
    Registered Users Posts: 4,821 ✭✭✭budhabob


    AngryLips wrote: »
    If the northern line can’t be four-tracked then could a cut and cover option be an alternative to increase capacity?

    From memory, I think this was one option looked at.
    The real capacity constraint on any of the lines coming into Dublin are the bottlenecks of Heuston and Connolly (both mainly termini stations). That's why DU was so important, to bypass them both, thereby increasing capacity for all lines.


  • Options
    #257
    AngryLips
    Registered Users Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭AngryLips


    budhabob wrote: »
    From memory, I think this was one option looked at.
    The real capacity constraint on any of the lines coming into Dublin are the bottlenecks of Heuston and Connolly (both mainly termini stations). That's why DU was so important, to bypass them both, thereby increasing capacity for all lines.

    Well there’s also the problem of intercity trains getting caught up in dart and suburban services, which the DU won’t solve.


  • Options
    #258
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    AngryLips wrote: »
    Well there’s also the problem of intercity trains getting caught up in dart and suburban services, which the DU won’t solve.

    Will not 50% or more of Darts avoid Connelly by going through the tunnel? Also, many Darts will be going to Maynooth.


  • Options
    #259
    donvito99
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Will not 50% or more of Darts avoid Connelly by going through the tunnel? Also, many Darts will be going to Maynooth.

    The Dart Underground masterplan is Hazelhatch - Malahide (or beyond) and Maynooth - Bray/greystones. Two lines intersecting at Pearse.


  • Options
    #260
    Equium
    Registered Users Posts: 538 ✭✭✭Equium


    According to a TII official whose lecture I attended today, the Emerging Preferred Route for Metro North should be published next month.

    With respect to the Luas network he stated that, from their point of view, the next major project is almost certain to be the extension of the Green Line to a Park and Ride facility at the M50/M2 interchange via Finglas and Charlestown. Line F to Lucan, and the southbound extension of the Red Line from before the Point Depot stop were made to sound more like back-burner projects.


  • Options
    #261
    jd
    Registered Users Posts: 5,680 ✭✭✭jd


    Equium wrote: »
    According to a TII official whose lecture I attended today, the Emerging Preferred Route for Metro North should be published next month.
    Yes, that is what I heard from two TII officials. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    Hugh Jampton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 204 ✭✭Hugh Jampton


    jd wrote: »
    Yes, that is what I heard from two TII officials. :)

    Well with an indolent implementation date of 2026, they won't be too challenged.


  • Options
    #263
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Equium wrote: »
    According to a TII official whose lecture I attended today, the Emerging Preferred Route for Metro North should be published next month.

    With respect to the Luas network he stated that, from their point of view, the next major project is almost certain to be the extension of the Green Line to a Park and Ride facility at the M50/M2 interchange via Finglas and Charlestown. Line F to Lucan, and the southbound extension of the Red Line from before the Point Depot stop were made to sound more like back-burner projects.

    I would agree with going with that options or preferably connecting cherrywood to bray, but my assumption is, that project will be more expensive?


  • Options
    #264
    ncounties
    Registered Users Posts: 270 ✭✭ncounties


    Could we incorporate this into whatever we build next? A guy can dream... Youtube: Delft bicycle parking facility


  • Options
    #265
    Ireland trains
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭Ireland trains


    DART Underground as well as the DART expansion and DART to the airport are the most needed. But Dublin airport should really have a metro and DART service


  • Options
    #266
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    IF dart went to Airport and connected with metro north. They could feed each other large amounts of passengers ... they should build the spur in my opinion. It's fairly cheap isn't it?


  • Options
    #267
    donvito99
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    Why not just continue metro north to donabateish? Eliminates the need for another alignment to the airport. The disadvantage of having to change is mitigated by the fact that metro is at a very high frequency.


  • Options
    #268
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,527 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    donvito99 wrote: »
    Why not just continue metro north to donabateish? Eliminates the need for another alignment to the airport. The disadvantage of having to change is mitigated by the fact that metro is at a very high frequency.

    Why not make "Metro North" a four track DART to the airport and beyond to link with the northern line near Rush/Donabate, then divert Belfast, Dundalk, Drogheda via this line.

    This leave the Malahide-Connolly section of the northern line exclusively for DART, so no need 3/4 track it.


  • Options
    #269
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,734 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    GerardKeating wrote: »
    Why not make "Metro North" a four track DART to the airport and beyond to link with the northern line near Rush/Donabate, then divert Belfast, Dundalk, Drogheda via this line.

    This leave the Malahide-Connolly section of the northern line exclusively for DART, so no need 3/4 track it.

    the govt. doesn't want to spend billions on a piece of infrastructure and then hand it over to CIE, this is one of the reasons DU has been continually kicked down the road.


  • Options
    #270
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    loyatemu wrote: »
    the govt. doesn't want to spend billions on a piece of infrastructure and then hand it over to CIE, this is one of the reasons DU has been continually kicked down the road.

    CIE is only the shambles that it is due to lack of clear, consistent instruction from governments down the decades.

    ****



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,460 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    GerardKeating wrote: »
    Why not make "Metro North" a four track DART to the airport and beyond to link with the northern line near Rush/Donabate, then divert Belfast, Dundalk, Drogheda via this line.

    This leave the Malahide-Connolly section of the northern line exclusively for DART, so no need 3/4 track it.

    Would cost billions more then using light rail Metro and for little benefit.


Advertisement