Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

marno21

As the other thread is reaching its limit of 10,000 posts, and in light of the announcement of the preferred route, this is the new thread for discussing the Metrolink scheme.

Old thread here: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055849587

This is for discussing the current active plan for a Metro between Swords and Charlemont. Only. Discussion of the planned Metro South connection to the Green Line will be in this thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057972047

salmocab

Think you made a wee mistake with the two links on the old thread Marno. They both link to this thread

marno21

salmocab wrote: »

Think you made a wee mistake with the two links on the old thread Marno. They both link to this thread

They both work ok for me

salmocab

marno21 wrote: »

They both work ok for me

They both brought me to the same place, had to click on the link above to get the south bit

Synode

Both going to the same place for me too

Qrt

Any chance they’ll put a subway at the Ballymun station? It’d be nice to be able to avoid crossing the road.

Dats me

Qrt wrote: »

Any chance they’ll put a subway at the Ballymun station? It’d be nice to be able to avoid crossing the road.

They're actually building a 19km subway from Swords to Charlemont as part of the project!

spacetweek

Qrt wrote: »

Any chance they’ll put a subway at the Ballymun station? It’d be nice to be able to avoid crossing the road.

The term subway is used in the UK, we call them pedestrian underpasses and there used be one in ballymun which was a hotbed of muggings and ASB so probably isn’t a good idea.

prunudo

Qrt wrote: »

Any chance they’ll put a subway at the Ballymun station? It’d be nice to be able to avoid crossing the road.

A meat ball footlong would be handy while you're waiting for the lights to change

jd

spacetweek wrote: »

The term subway is used in the UK, we call them pedestrian underpasses and there used be one in ballymun which was a hotbed of muggings and ASB so probably isn’t a good idea.

Looks like there will be a de facto one at Northwood up the road. (I think it will be tag on/off without turnstiles)

CatInABox

jd wrote: »

Looks like there will be a de facto one at Northwood up the road. (I think it will be tag on/off without turnstiles)

Haven't looked at the station designs for there, or if they're looking to go barrier free entry, but I'd imagine that even with a barrier in place, there will be enough room for a pedestrian through way there.

I.e. the first level is an open corridor, and if you want to go down to the platforms, then you go through the barrier, otherwise you just go around.

EDIT: Took a look at the Northwood station appendix:

The Preferred Route proposal is to pull it south of the Retail Park so that it will now sit directly under and at an angle to the junction of the R108 and Northwood Avenue - the Park entrance. This will allow passengers to access the station from either side of the R108 and pedestrians to cross the R108 through the station without having to cross a busy road.

cgcsb

How they work natural light into the stations will be interesting, in that way it'll be quite a unique metro. Is there a link somewhere I missed to station designs or artist impressions?

Pixel Eater

spacetweek wrote: »

The term subway is used in the UK, we call them pedestrian underpasses and there used be one in ballymun which was a hotbed of muggings and ASB so probably isn’t a good idea.

The best deterent to anti-social behaviour is if it's heavily used and lots of people are around. With a busy Metro station, hotel, shopping centre and housing around there shouldn't be an issue having an underpass.

Sam Russell

Pixel Eater wrote: »

The best deterent to anti-social behaviour is if it's heavily used and lots of people are around. With a busy Metro station, hotel, shopping centre and housing around there shouldn't be an issue having an underpass.

Also a plentiful number of Revenue protection personnel would help, particularly if they go for barrier free access.

Pixel Eater

While we're on the subject, would be worth considering having a direct tunnel from the Collins Avenue stop direct to the DCU campus?

Sam Russell

Pixel Eater wrote: »

While we're on the subject, would be worth considering having a direct tunnel from the Collins Avenue stop direct to the DCU campus?

How far is it?

Pixel Eater

Sam Russell wrote: »

How far is it?

As the crow flies about 500 metres; walking about 900, although it depends exactly where in the campus you're going. Just seems to be a long about route to get to either main gates.

Pete_Cavan

Pixel Eater wrote: »

While we're on the subject, would be worth considering having a direct tunnel from the Collins Avenue stop direct to the DCU campus?

The only way to build such a tunnel would be cut and cover. The ability to this implies that there is a clear route all the way, in which case, a surface path would be better in every respect.

Pixel Eater

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The only way to build such a tunnel would be cut and cover. The ability to this implies that there is a clear route all the way, in which case, a surface path would be better in every respect.

Really? Is there no other why to create a pedestrian tunnel in this day and age? It would be a nice feature but probably not worth it if it's too much hassle.

cgcsb

I find the O'Connell st station very interesting how it is integrated into the shopping centre, certainly a great boost for a neglected part of the City, also getting from the airport to a City Centre shopping centre without going outside would be quite the novelty.

bk

cgcsb wrote: »

How they work natural light into the stations will be interesting, in that way it'll be quite a unique metro. Is there a link somewhere I missed to station designs or artist impressions?

The appendix has some rough plans, but they don't seem finalised.

Many seem to include sky lights over the length of top of the station to leave light down.

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Really? Is there no other why to create a pedestrian tunnel in this day and age? It would be a nice feature but probably not worth it if it's too much hassle.

You could possibly mine one out, but would be very expensive, so probably a non runner.

cgcsb wrote: »

I find the O'Connell st station very interesting how it is integrated into the shopping centre, certainly a great boost for a neglected part of the City, also getting from the airport to a City Centre shopping centre without going outside would be quite the novelty.

Yes, it will be great. Novel for us, but quiet common with Metros around Europe to be built into shopping centers or even hotels.

Pete_Cavan

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Really? Is there no other why to create a pedestrian tunnel in this day and age? It would be a nice feature but probably not worth it if it's too much hassle.

You would be working at a depth to avoid affecting the foundations of houses and with such a small bore, nothing else is feasible.

Pete_Cavan

cgcsb wrote: »

I find the O'Connell st station very interesting how it is integrated into the shopping centre, certainly a great boost for a neglected part of the City, also getting from the airport to a City Centre shopping centre without going outside would be quite the novelty.

It would also be great if the OCS station was also accessible from Parnell Street which would make it easier to get to the Rotunda, DIT Bolton Street, future city library, etc. This can easily be facilitated by having a pedestrian route through the new development to Moore Lane.

cgcsb

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It would also be great if the OCS station was also accessible from Parnell Street which would make it easier to get to the Rotunda, DIT Bolton Street, future city library, etc. This can easily be facilitated by having a pedestrian route through the new development to Moore Lane.

Also access to Moore St would be appreciated and I think that will be the case, permeability is important for these developments

LongboardPro

Does anyone else think there should be more than one entrance to the stations wherever possible? A lot of the stations only have one entry / exit which seems stupid.

Sam Russell

LongboardPro wrote: »

Does anyone else think there should be more than one entrance to the stations wherever possible? A lot of the stations only have one entry / exit which seems stupid.

Cost based, I would think.

murphaph

Sam Russell wrote: »

Cost based, I would think.

Massive false economy nevertheless. You can effectively increase the catchment area significantly by having multiple exits to street level.

MJohnston

murphaph wrote: »

Massive false economy nevertheless. You can effectively increase the catchment area significantly by having multiple exits to street level.

There's only arguably 3 stations where that is an important consideration imo - SSG, Tara, and OCS. They should probably make OCS permeable to Moore Street, Tara does have 2 exits, and maybe SSG could do with a south entrance, but it wouldn't add too much in terms of catchment.

Everywhere else, I'd argue it's unnecessary, because they're all suburban stations that you're likely to already to be traveling further to reach anyway, so a couple dozen extra metres isn't going to deter you.

Sam Russell

murphaph wrote: »

Massive false economy nevertheless. You can effectively increase the catchment area significantly by having multiple exits to street level.

Well, the extreme would be to have an entrance at each end on the 100 m station box, which would give about 150 m separation. I doubt it would add much except in the centre of town, and in particular SSG, and perhaps OCS.

Tara St is a special case.

CarlosHarpic

I have a question and forgive me if it has already been answered. I love the interchange with the heavy rail lines at Glasnevin idea. I am just wondering will the heavy rail interchange be built before the Metro station? Personally, I think that the IE part could proceed as a stand-alone project and would be a very useful transfer point ever before the Metro reaches it.

prunudo

LongboardPro wrote: »

Does anyone else think there should be more than one entrance to the stations wherever possible? A lot of the stations only have one entry / exit which seems stupid.

I would have thought from a fire safety point of view they'd have to have 2 exits.

murphaph

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, the extreme would be to have an entrance at each end on the 100 m station box, which would give about 150 m separation. I doubt it would add much except in the centre of town, and in particular SSG, and perhaps OCS.

Tara St is a special case.

It's not just about the as the crow flies distance. If it was I would agree that 150m is of little benefit.

It's about eliminating the need to cross that busy road.

Here in Berlin a typical station has a mezzanine at each end of the station box which splits left and right to provide access from both sides of the street.

Only where there is no space would there be only two exits. I can't think of a single Berlin U-Bahn station with just one exit.

Pete_Cavan

CarlosHarpic wrote: »

I have a question and forgive me if it has already been answered. I love the interchange with the heavy rail lines at Glasnevin idea. I am just wondering will the heavy rail interchange be built before the Metro station? Personally, I think that the IE part could proceed as a stand-alone project and would be a very useful transfer point ever before the Metro reaches it.

As I understand it, the tracks which continue through Drumcondra station will have to be closed to allow for the construction of the Metrolink station box underneath (it won't stretch under the Docklands line tracks). Engineering works will be required to facilitate all trains using the other tracks temporarily. Only once the station box is complete can the IE part of the station be sorted out so very little can be done until the station box is in.

Sam Russell

murphaph wrote: »

It's not just about the as the crow flies distance. If it was I would agree that 150m is of little benefit.

It's about eliminating the need to cross that busy road.

Here in Berlin a typical station has a mezzanine at each end of the station box which splits left and right to provide access from both sides of the street.

Only where there is no space would there be only two exits. I can't think of a single Berlin U-Bahn station with just one exit.

Well, yes, incorporating a subway under the road would make sense, and increase pedestrian safety. Not sure about antisocial behaviour though, particularly if the ML is unmanned.

Pete_Cavan

jvan wrote: »

I would have thought from a fire safety point of view they'd have to have 2 exits.

Stations usually have dedicated emergency exit routes separate from the main public entrance/exit.

Qrt

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, yes, incorporating a subway under the road would make sense, and increase pedestrian safety. Not sure about antisocial behaviour though, particularly if the ML is unmanned.

Pretty sure underground stations will have to be manned? I know that’s the case with Bank DLR vs the rest of the network, probably an EU regulation (and a wise one at that)

murphaph

Qrt wrote: »

Pretty sure underground stations will have to be manned? I know that’s the case with Bank DLR vs the rest of the network, probably an EU regulation (and a wise one at that)

Definitely not an EU regulation. Hundreds of unmanned underground stations across the EU.

Dats me

The new positioning of the Northwood station seems to be entirely with 2 entrances in mind - one on either side of the road. I still can't see how they can justify digging up the road though

They think the tunnel machine portal site could be developed after completion which would a lovely site.

cgcsb

Dats me wrote: »

The new positioning of the Northwood station seems to be entirely with 2 entrances in mind - one on either side of the road. I still can't see how they can justify digging up the road though

They think the tunnel machine portal site could be developed after completion which would a lovely site.

Doesn't have to be the whole road, half at a time will do. That road is a dual carriageway that serves nowhere other than IKEA

Qrt

murphaph wrote: »

Definitely not an EU regulation. Hundreds of unmanned underground stations across the EU.

Oh right, I just going off my research of the Copenhagen metro.

hmmm

Why Charlemont anyway? On the outbound rush hour the trams are packed until Dundrum.

We're likely to see some sort of mad rush from a metro at Charlemont to a LUAS which doesn't have the capacity to take everyone. It sounds vaguely dangerous.

jd

Artistic impressions of some stations have been added
https://www.metrolink.ie/#/Reports

Rulmeq

jd wrote: »

Artistic impressions of some stations have been added
https://www.metrolink.ie/#/Reports

Love what they have proposed for Tara, but there would be war!

Qrt

Rulmeq wrote: »

Love what they have proposed for Tara, but there would be war!

Seems a bit bland, I'd rather some building...

Also, no real interchange at Charlemont? Jaysus...

CatInABox

Rulmeq wrote: »

Love what they have proposed for Tara, but there would be war!

The white area surrounding the Irish times building is to be redeveloped, so it's not going to be quite as empty

CatInABox

Qrt wrote: »

Seems a bit bland, I'd rather some building...

Also, no real interchange at Charlemont? Jaysus...

Doesn't look like it from that angle, but they've already acknowledged that Charlemont is the station most likely to change, so hopefully the final design isn't as bad there.

Marcusm

Qrt wrote: »

Seems a bit bland, I'd rather some building...

Also, no real interchange at Charlemont? Jaysus...

Physically I can’t see the interchange at a Charlemont as ever being efficient; it’s like the interchange between the Jubilee Line and DLR at Canary Wharf. The Metro should join in with Green Line south of Beechwood - no Dunville fight and no ****ty interchange at Charlemont.

Qrt

Marcusm wrote: »

Physically I can’t see the interchange at a Charlemont as ever being efficient; it’s like the interchange between the Jubilee Line and DLR at Canary Wharf. The Metro should join in with Green Line south of Beechwood - no Dunville fight and no ****ty interchange at Charlemont.

I suppose, thinking about it again, there's the O'Connell Street station and the Luas stop, and a station at St Stephen's Green.

Marcusm

Qrt wrote: »

I suppose, thinking about it again, there's the O'Connell Street station and the Luas stop, and a station at St Stephen's Green.

O’Connell St will be ok heading northbound - Luas will be on street and Metro station will be in new shopping centre where Carlton cinemas is/was. On SSG, they will be on different sides of the green. There’s no efficient interface planned.

Qrt

Marcusm wrote: »

O’Connell St will be ok heading northbound - Luas will be on street and Metro station will be in new shopping centre where Carlton cinemas is/was. On SSG, they will be on different sides of the green. There’s no efficient interface planned.

Ya I know about Stephen’s Green but people won’t need to change at Stephen’s Green because many will be alighting anyway

jd

One other thing, when I talked to some engineers at one of the presentations they indicated the TBM would tunnel at about 80 meters a week.