Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

Goldengirl

Great informative thread. Thank you all .

I have been 'waiting for metro' to come along since the mid 00s and , waited and waited on buses , in traffic when I tried Park and Ride , have had 3 bikes stolen and 2 knocks off same, ending up in hospital , all while trying to commute to work in a busy city hospital . Arriving late, sweaty and harassed most shifts :)

Am now finished with that thankfully, but am angry that my children are now doing the same commute to college and work in an increasingly difficult city to traverse .

Metrolink North and then South needs to be prioritised by whatever government is in power .

Our city is crumbling from cars and buses and expecting people to cycle in the rain or wind to work is just pandering to a minority as I think everyone here agrees , so I am preaching to the converted apologies.

I agree with the 'push it through and fvck the begrudgers at this stage 'rhetoric . Its way past time to bite the bullet and get it done , and perfection appears to be the enemy of the good at this stage .

Tweaks to perfect can be done afterwards .

My abiding memory of travelling the Tube in London to work was the continuous upgrade works all year round , which meant you might have to walk five or ten minutes extra if your underground stop was one of the stations being fixed.

It was still 100 times better than driving , and people just got on with it because the service was so reliable .

Which nothing is here , no matter what we have been promised with buses , Luas etc.

One more point ..we need a dedicated rail and bus transport police . There are a lot of issues on certain Luas and bus routes , and Dart as well and it would be a shame if those troublemakers were allowed to wreck the Metro as well .

LuckyLloyd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120794992#Comment_120794992

This nonsense has been debunked repeatedly. The Green Line, as constructed, will run out of capacity within the next decade due to the increase in demand and approved building projects along the catchment area. The upgrade to Metro would have future-proofed capacity for decades to come. NIMBYs advanced spurious arguments in and around the Ranelagh area, including numerous public appearances by Micheal McDowell, who never once disclosed that the route and works draft would have involved CPO'ing a small portion of his back garden.

Minister Ryan actively worked to frustrate and cancel the project with fanciful and unrealistic routes that lacked a business case.

You'll have to link me to the "independent review" you cite. I don't believe it exists or that it was truly "independent" and unbiased if it does.

marno21

It doesn’t get noted enough that we have a section of (mostly) grade separated heavy rail line between Charlemont and Sandyford that currently is heavily restricted by the fact that any service running along it also has to be compatible with running through busy streets to the north of there.

The lack of capacity utilisation along Charlemont-Sandyford is criminal. One of the few decent rail corridors in the city ready made for mass transit and it’s used for trams.

Metro South as outlined in 2016 was a no brainer. Instead now there will be a mess at Charlemont for the forseeable.

LuckyLloyd

Killing Metro South was an absolute masterwork of NIMBYism. I had to explain to countless friends that the ‘we’ll lose the LUAS claims’ were completely fraudulent. Wealthy property owners can really achieve nothing when they are determined to do so

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120796579#Comment_120796579

what would have been the difference between metro south and the Green Luas line?

salmocab

We need to stop using nimby for any objection it’s ridiculous, plenty of people that would have objected at beechwood for instance had real objections. If a road they use regularly is closed off and the alternative will add to their journey then it’s a real objection. Now it shouldn’t be enough to stop a project like this but some objections are legitimate and they are now dismissed as nimby which really just kills any debate.

cson

Ultimately the needs of the many >needs of the few.

Coyote

most people on this thread only want a metro built and that's fine, and I agree that it should be built but the people who will be affected by the years of building work, being forced to move out for years, houses being threatened to be demolished they have a right to object. and then having to living with the affect of the noise and traffic for the rest of their lives. the current design is not what the engineers wanted having a terminal of a metro line in a suburbia street.

what most people don't remember was that the engineers wanted to do was tie in at Cowper or even better was to tie in at Milltown

you can see both options 7 and 8 in http://data.tii.ie/metrolink/alignment-options-study/study-2/metrolink-1-gl-tie-in-options-appraisal-report.pdf

pages 32-34

this was listed as the best option by the engineers with only cost as a downside, but was dismissed by politicians as it would have cost an extra 366 million and they were trying to save money, then the cheaper/worse option was picked to try and tie in just after the canal, which was never going to work due to the sewers depth at the canal and the fact that all the work on the Luas line would close the Luas for 4 years that's why the tie in got canceled, no politician wanted to cut the green line for 4 years, so they canceled the tie in.

what they should have done was commit to the original tie in which would not have blocked off Beachwood ave, force the building of a terminal at Dartmouth road, had a metro that ran north to south and would could have been build without the Luas being offline for years, a month or two maybe. but hey we saved 366 million but now wont' have a connected metro and probably spend more than that on trying to make a bad idea work.

ArcadiaJunction

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120791633#Comment_120791633

If Sinn Fein get into government you can kiss not only the metro but all the DART+ projects goodbye. Ironically they will bring their British Backwater Mentality that 'buses are enough' into government with them.

AngryLips

If the plan is to extend metro south by converting Green line ...why isn't there a plan to extend the Luas green line south elsewhere in the southside once the existing green line south of Charlemont gets taken over by metro?

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120796956#Comment_120796956

Charlemont being the terminus is irrelevant in that the same scale of work is required there whether it is the terminus or not. The engineers wanted the tie-in further south due to wider operational and general capacity reasons, not purely to avoid a terminus at Charlemont. Which houses are being threatened to be demolished?

An online tie-in with the Green Line was going to be hugely disruptive so it was dropped and the 'Green Luas capacity enhancement' thing was introduced in order to avoid greater opposition to Metrolink. It was a good strategy for now but the nettle that is the Green Line between Ranelagh and Sandyford will have to be grasped later. Once MetroLink opens and the Green Line is operating way beyond capacity, it should become much easier to do so.

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120795507#Comment_120795507

Would you not say that instead of unrealistic times scales being the issue it’s the woefully under resourced ABP that is the issue.

This falls to (as I understand it) the housing minister, Dara o brien, to resource.

Surely that ministerial department should have seen the amount of infrastructure coming down the tracks (pun intended 😂) and acted Accordingly.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120791552#Comment_120791552

A nonsensical party political broadcast on behalf of Sinn Fein.

You can be certain of one thing if Sinn Fein get into government - there will be cancellation of infrastructure projects so that their promises on welfare spending can be delivered. If Metrolink or DART+ survive the SF cancellations, I will be amazed.

LuckyLloyd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120796724#Comment_120796724

It gets labelled as NIMBY in a negative sense when the people are so annoyed that they won't be able to use a road / will be disrupted due to necessary major infrastructure works in their area, that they start spreading misinformation and/or making public appearances without declaring their interest.

The debate in a broader sense is about the economic necessity for major infrastructure links through leafy well-to-do areas like Ranelagh or Glasnevin so we can ferry large volumes of commuters from further reaches of North and South Dublin. It's the same debate we're going through around the redevelopment of the old Dundrum shopping centre (including blackmailing developers not to take up objections, in that case). Economically, we need this to future-proof our ability to attract and maintain foreign investment.

So sure, we can debate the right of property owners to resist change in their broader area, and the limit of their right for things to stay the same forever as pitched against the economic realities of a major capital city grinding to a halt. I think I know which side of that argument wins, as do the residents of Beechwood. And so, the debate becomes a cynical canard of bad faith arguing against the value of a Metro with endless crayon drawings of "superior" alternative routes and spook stories of stranded commuters without a way into work for years upon years while tax payer money is squandered building the thing.

Who is killing the debate here?

Coyote

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120797820#Comment_120797820

In the scale of a project it's not a lot but then they should have done it right by gong to Milltown, on a local scale of the work is not the same it's 10x times the work of building a station with one exit and continuing on to the next station compared to building the terminal there now requires 1km of extra tunnel to the south for turn around, a extra safety tunnel to built along side the 1km, this has to be build without a TBM. the site work for the station is literately 3 times the size requiring piling down 100 feet, you can see the difference in size required from the original drawing of the station to the new 3 times larger station with multi exit due to everyone having to disembark, building taxi ranks and bus drop off and all of this on a residential street.

did you read the document it literately states "There will be minor disruption to Luas services during tie-in works" for options 7-8 all the other option listed were the ones that say large disruption, and option 4b which was what they picked required the demolish of 32-33 Dartmouth road along with a open trench and removing the embankment and rebuilding it along with closing a number of roads. this was the cheapest option but also the worse, this was also the "chosen" option for over two years even tho anyone who knows the area knew it would not work given the disruption it would cause and the main sewers running beside the canal and trying to make a train clime a grade of 6-7%

if you look at option 8 99% of the work can be completed to the side of the Luas track and then just tie in at ground level. see how the Japaneses switched a above ground to underground in 3.5 hours

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIbZqqLra9k

now there is other major issues all station platforms would need to be adjusted for the new train height so I'm not saying it's easy but we are where are today because they tried to cut costs, then got push back from the public about having to close the Luas to rebuild the embankment which is what would have taken a number of years, the tie in of the Milltown connection could have been done in a month or two.

the extension of the Luas trams was not a good strategy it was a short term fix that everyone knew would not last and only delayed what needs to be done (I'm not saying it should not have been done just not a long term solution). a good strategy is building something to meet the needs for 20+ years. There would have been less opposition if they had continued to Milltown as only the School would have been affected no roads closed and not building a terminal with all it's associated anti social implications like 30,000-40,000+ a people a day coming out on a residential street, with taxi, buses and other things.

some people on boards calling people nimby is unfair as many people support the build of the Metro but also see that the design is not the result of good planning but of politicians trying to cut costs and then when that backfired on them canceling the line south forcing a terminal to be build in a residential street with poor links compared to the original plan to run all the way south.

as a example the Abbey Theatre and other places in town they made changes to the sound/vibration noise of the tunnel build but did not make the same plans for residents who live closer to the metro so they are just expected to live with that noise/vibration to save cost. imagine if the GAA said they wanted to use 40,000 seats of Croke Park 365 days of the year and no one should have any issue with it or ask for any changes. or Tesco building a huge supermarket in the middle of a suburbia estate you think the locals should not have a say.

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120797908#Comment_120797908

I'm referring to all of the deadlines missed prior to getting this and other projects to ABP. Every one of them has been spectacularly missed.

salmocab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120799281#Comment_120799281

Well I’d argue you are, I said that some objections are legitimate and they are. We are at a stage where every objection gets called nimby and it’s just not true. Some people have real objections to things that doesn’t make them a nimby. It begins to lose its meaning when it’s used like this, the same way as people used cancel culture and it has effectively become meaningless.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120799413#Comment_120799413

I find it quiet hard to follow what you are saying here, but if saying that building a terminus station at Charlemont is more disruptive than extending the tunnel further, building another underground station, creating a tunnel portal and tying into the existing Green Line, plus upgrading the Green Line to Metro, then you are wrong.

Maybe it would be a little less disruptive for you (I assume from your post that you live near the Charlemont stop) but it would be a lot more disruptive for a lot more people. Things like a taxi rank or bus stops aren't limited to terminus stops so these likely would happen regardless.

Upgrading the Green Line was going to kill Metrolink so it was dropped. It can still happen later and hopefully the quality of service from Metrolink and the awkwardness in accessing it will hopefully mean in future, Green Line residents will accept short-term pain for the long-term gain of having Metrolink run from Swords to Sandyford.

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120799236#Comment_120799236

What additional Social spending are SF planning? Are we talking more direct investment into the actual building of social housing?

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120799281#Comment_120799281

What is the value of Metro South over and above the Green Line Luas though?

How much extra capacity would Metro South deliver vs the Green Line Luas with extended operaring hours and frequency?

Genuine question.

I understand connectivity to the airport,but to be honest, its quick enough to be bussed or drive up to the airport and the Green Line Luas already gives very fast and reliable service into the city centre & anywhere along the line itself.

I am not seeing any great demand for people from Sandyford or Cherrywood to goto Santry or Swords. So what are people living along the Green line getting over and above what they already have, other than airport access which isnt a priority because its so close to the city anyway.

DART underground i can see huge value in, but given that we only have 2 Luas lines, it seems wasteful to focus on a rail project that overlaps one of those 2 lines, as opposed to building a new luas or underground line through an area not currently served by same.

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120802184#Comment_120802184

What upgrades were planned for the Green Line that now wont take place because of Metro?

What benefit is it to Green line residents to be able to travel to Swords from Sandyford, given the airport is easily reachable already?

If I am a Green Line resident and i were to lose that service for x amount of months (we all know it would be longer than projected) i would want to know what the long term benefit was, vs investing in other capital projects that dont have any rail service currently.

CatInABox

Remember a few years ago how the Green Line hit capacity between Sandyford and the city? When people had to get the Luas out of the city, and then swap onto trams going into the city?

The Green Line has needed several capacity upgrades already, and the main developments along the line hasn't even hit yet. Cherrywood is going to be a massive hit to capacity, and there's other huge developments along the line that will have a similar, albeit smaller effect. An over-capacity Luas has an outsized hit on other transport methods in the region, as it's quite concentrated. Not upgrading the Green Line and going with a different route leaves that problem to get worse for years.

It's also extremely cheap in comparison to any other route.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120802279#Comment_120802279

The 11k capacity would require 30 trams per hour and some significant infrastructure upgrades anyway as well as something close to the effective shutting of crossing points such as Dunville (it would require absolute LUAS priority at these junctions and with the frequency of trams you would have very very low traffic flow). Realistically you would really struggle to get to 11k, so its more or less a doubling of capacity.

LuckyLloyd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120802313#Comment_120802313

Podge has the numbers there, but this will be the difference from being able to get on a tram from certain stops at certain types of day or watching multiple trams go by completely full that you have to choose whether to try and shove onto or not. The long term benefit is the service not grinding to a halt, essentially.

AerLingus747

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120799413#Comment_120799413

for that video, if you add on 10 years of delays, 100 times budget size, requirements reduction to shoehorn the end result, we might just end up with a bus service that runs every 30 mins along that route.

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120802496#Comment_120802496

Thanks, thats very clear.

I suppose the obvious question is, although it would be great to have additional capacity of up to 18k p/ph vs perhaps (9k p/ph, if we leave the road networks untouched) is the project good value for money from the Tax Payers perspective?

For those on the Green Line, its a doubling of capacity that will help at peak times, but outside of peak times the Green line is currently very sedate.

It seems to me that the project is a "nice to have" but really delivers an improved service on top of a service that is already robust and reliable and certianly isnt near capacity outside of a handful of peak hours.

I think what i am trying to say is, if we could only deliver one project, surely DART underground or another Luas/underground service not currently active would be more benefical to more people?

A side note, but I do think there is a clear case for Luas running late night friday and saturdays.

The amount of people getting taxis along the Green line is huge and with the planned later opening times for hospitality and arts later this year, surely its a no brainer to put on later luas services.

Additonal ticket costs for security staff not a problem.

salmocab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120802810#Comment_120802810

Yes it would be very good value for money.

LuckyLloyd

Metro is excellent money from a tax payer's perspective, yes. You are waving away the 'well it's just extra capacity at peak times' too glibly imo. That extra capacity is the difference between a functioning service or not. But in terms of cost per passenger journey, Metro along a dense catchment area is a better way to spend money on infrastructure than any road or tram or train to Claremorris.

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120802844#Comment_120802844

But prioritised over DART underground?

I just dont see how that can be the case, but appreciate your input.

salmocab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120802917#Comment_120802917

It was a relatively cheap way of stopping the luas getting overcrowded, the luas will soon reach capacity at peak times. This was as close to a no brainier as we are likely to get in all these big projects. With all the building along the green line we are storing up issues.