We have updated our Privacy Notice, you can read the updated document here
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

1575860626365

Comments

  • #2


    The simple thing is,
    <snip>


  • #2


    The simple thing is, of course, <snip>

    MOD: This thread is about the planned MetroLink project, which is currently awaiting Government approval for a Railway Order submission. The route of this project is outlined on the scheme website here: https://www.metrolink.ie/#/map

    The reasons behind the routing of this project, and why the routing is different to that of the Metro North scheme, have been repeated ad nauseum on this thread.

    This thread is used for discussion of MetroLink from Swords to Charlemont only, as per the thread title.


  • #2


    I'll never understand the power Residents Associations think they have.

    They want the line to cut from Charlemont to Saint Stephen's Green in order for it to be diverted to Rathfarnham.

    A MONTH before It goes in for Planning Permission

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/residents-seek-redraft-of-metrolink-line-1.4579409


  • #2


    Just came here to post that myself...

    This isn't an either or project... both need doing. The green line has to go metro... that area of the city, rathmines, harolds cross etc, does need better public transport....

    I think motor tax, fuel costs should increase and perhaps a euro toll for crossing the canal, use this to fund the lines if needs be... they wont touch lpt as it's too politically contentions

    Maybe the government could spend a fraction of the covid tens of billions it pulled out of its ass overnight on decent transport for Dublin...


  • #2


    I'll never understand the power Residents Associations think they have.

    They want the line to cut from Charlemont to Saint Stephen's Green in order for it to be diverted to Rathfarnham.

    A MONTH before It goes in for Planning Permission

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/residents-seek-redraft-of-metrolink-line-1.4579409

    This is a new one: YIMBYNIMNBY "Yes In My Back Yard Not In My Neighbours Back Yard".


  • #2


    sure once they announce it the same residents associations will probably start complaining about it.


  • #2


    Murph85 wrote: »
    The green line has to go metro


    That's not the impression that the NTA are giving in the above Examiner article. The implicit suggestion seems to be that extending Metro to Sandyford via an alternative route through UCD would negate the need to upgrade green line.


  • #2


    AngryLips wrote: »
    That's not the impression that the NTA are giving in the above Examiner article. The implicit suggestion seems to be that extending Metro to Sandyford via an alternative route through UCD would negate the need to upgrade green line.

    If the Green Line upgrade is going to persistently get bogged down in objections in the usual troublesome spots it makes sense for there to be a long term “Green Line bypass” that connects Sandyford to Charlemont via an alternative route that also provides connectivity to somewhere unconnected. The Eastern bypass corridor from Goatstown to UCD would be useful as a cost saving measure here.


  • #2


    I'll never understand the power Residents Associations think they have.

    They want the line to cut from Charlemont to Saint Stephen's Green in order for it to be diverted to Rathfarnham.

    A MONTH before It goes in for Planning Permission

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/residents-seek-redraft-of-metrolink-line-1.4579409

    The gas thing is they tend to ostracise residents who they know don't agree with them. It's a group of like minded friends basically.


  • #2


    If the residents get their wishes the project will finally have completed its slow and time-wasting transition back into being Metro North.


  • #2


    VeryOwl wrote: »
    If the residents get their wishes the project will finally have completed its slow and time-wasting transition back into being Metro North.


    ...developments with Metrolink is just evidence they should have stuck with the original shovel-ready Metro North to begin with.


  • #2


    AngryLips wrote: »
    ...developments with Metrolink is just evidence they should have stuck with the original shovel-ready Metro North to begin with.

    Metro North wasn't shovel ready any more as Luas Corss City was built over locations where stations were supposed to go. It would have had to change regardless.

    Plus many of the stations were massively overcomplicated and would likely have had very big cost overruns and digging up the whole of Stephens Green would have faced massive public resistance IMO.

    I'd say Metro North would cost closer to 5 to 6 billion these days given the complexity of the stations.


  • #2


    Metrolink will also be undisputibly far superior for two reasons; the large Glasnevin interchange station and driverless vehicles.

    Suggesting MN is better is the Irish infrastructural equivalent of Partridge saying "Wings, the band The Bettles could have been".


  • #2


    Yeah, while I'd love to be sitting on a Metronorth train right now, Metrolink is a far superior project.

    The Metronorth O'Connell bridge stop was a complete nightmare for constructability, it was a recipe for a massive cost overrun disaster. Conversely, the Metrolink stations are so basic that it'd be hard to make them go over budget. That said, I'm sure BAM would chance their arm on it......


  • #2


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Metrolink will also be undisputibly far superior for two reasons; the large Glasnevin interchange station and driverless vehicles.

    Suggesting MN is better is the Irish infrastructural equivalent of Partridge saying "Wings, the band The Bettles could have been".

    You're also forgetting Tara Street. MetroNorth required the Dart Underground to be built in order to have any interchange with the Dart, which shows how weird the project was.


  • #2


    The best plan is the one that gets built.

    (also, MetroLink is superior)


  • #2


    Peregrine wrote: »
    The best plan is the one that gets built.

    (also, MetroLink is superior)

    And now if not sooner.

    Why is our Minister for Transport - a Green Party Minister - not pressing for the various actors on this plan to press the full speed ahead button, and calling for high priority to get funding in place to get this through planning, tendering, and to start digging. This is a major Green Public Transport project - who would think it?


  • #2


    Why is our Minister for Transport - a Green Party Minister - not pressing for the various actors on this plan to press the full speed ahead button, and calling for high priority to get funding in place to get this through planning, tendering, and to start digging. This is a major Green Public Transport project - who would think it?

    Eamon is just like all other policticians in this regard - all for major, strategic and national investment... until some of his constituents get wind of the fact that they mighn't be able to drive to Mortons on Dunville Avenue.


  • #2


    “Sweat the asset” my guess is Green line metro delivered in piecemeal. An extension here, a crossing closed there, bit by bit until hey presto you’ve metro south (as far as Sandyford at least).


  • #2


    And now if not sooner.

    Why is our Minister for Transport - a Green Party Minister - not pressing for the various actors on this plan to press the full speed ahead button, and calling for high priority to get funding in place to get this through planning, tendering, and to start digging. This is a major Green Public Transport project - who would think it?

    It’s just about to go to ABP in the next month or two.

    He can’t interfere with that process.


  • #2


    Mod: Can I remind posters that this thread is for Swords to Charlemont. Posts related to Sandyford or other Metrolink matters should go in the appropriate thread - not this one.

    Off topic posts have been moved to a new thread here.

    Thank you.



  • #2


    i'm curious what the works (if/when they start) will do to traffic flows on the northside - for example, ballymun road at the church will be severely restricted from what i can see - the station is being placed half under the road, half under the front lawn of the church.


  • #2


    i'm curious what the works (if/when they start) will do to traffic flows on the northside - for example, ballymun road at the church will be severely restricted from what i can see - the station is being placed half under the road, half under the front lawn of the church.

    A lot less disruptive than luas Cross city. Most stations are off road. Other than the one you mention, Stephens green and Northwood, plus the line out in Swords. A drop in the bucket really.


  • #2


    I'll never understand the power Residents Associations think they have.

    They want the line to cut from Charlemont to Saint Stephen's Green in order for it to be diverted to Rathfarnham.

    A MONTH before It goes in for Planning Permission

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/residents-seek-redraft-of-metrolink-line-1.4579409

    Wow. It should be a tired cliche by now but what a way to cut off one's nose to spite one's face. Is there no perception of any patience with these people? How stupid can these people be within the various resident's associations can become who somehow can get away with either going against or messing up other big important infrastructure projects like this one that will give a net benefit to tens of thousand or potentially millions of people in the long term?

    The implied aims of their proposals, from the article itself, appear to be way too ambitious & way too challenging and controversial to have any sort of consideration for Metrolink to be cut down to St. Stephen's Green only at the present time. So much preparatory groundwork by way of public consultations have already been quite extensive when they have been to the general public over a few times already.

    I would say that the public who are in agreement about Metrolink going down to Charlemont, in this current alignment, should be implying in their heads that the Railway Order for this project should continue to be submitted to ABP as normal without any interruption. At least, coming from the IT article above, the NTA spokesperson said that, as it stands, Metrolink will still proceed with submitting the Railway Order as normal during this year. It won't impede on the progress with the studies for other lines which can continue as planned.

    Let's all of us hope, at this time, that the NTA's plan on the Metrolink will be continuing unimpeded.


  • #2


    The Public Consultation that I must have imagined happening?
    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/metrolink-and-consultations-1.4582207
    ..the National Transport Authority is quoted as saying that, “the proposed MetroLink to Charlemont had gone through several rounds of public consultation and the terminus would not be altered ahead of its application for a railway order later this year”. This statement is incorrect.
    ..
    There have been no consultations regarding the current NTA proposal to terminate MetroLink at a location just north of Beechwood. – Is mise,

    EUGENE BARRETT,

    Dublin 16.


  • #2


    jd wrote: »
    The Public Consultation that I must have imagined happening?
    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/metrolink-and-consultations-1.4582207

    There was a public consultation for Swords-Charlemont in 2019.


  • #2


    D.L.R. wrote: »
    There was a public consultation for Swords-Charlemont in 2019.

    Dublin residents who oppose major public transport infrastructure have a lot of trouble recognising public consultations. In fact, they'll complain about the lack of them in the course of a public consultation.


  • #2


    donvito99 wrote: »
    Dublin residents who oppose major public transport infrastructure have a lot of trouble recognising public consultations. In fact, they'll complain about the lack of them in the course of a public consultation.

    Yes, what people like this mean by "public consultation", is that engineers didn't individually call around to their home, sit down for a cup of tea with them and they could then tell the engineer directly why they don't want this anywhere near their home.

    The fact that these projects have proceeded to full, open and transparent public consultation is anathema to these NIMBY's

    They don't like the public consultation because others might actually like the project and put forward their view that it is for the greater public good.


  • #2


    bk wrote: »
    Yes, what people like this mean by "public consultation", is that engineers didn't individually call around to their home, sit down for a cup of tea with them and they could then tell the engineer directly why they don't want this anywhere near their home.

    The fact that these projects have proceeded to full, open and transparent public consultation is anathema to these NIMBY's

    They don't like the public consultation because others might actually like the project and put forward their view that it is for the greater public good.

    There's some weird misunderstanding around the purpose of public consultation from residents and politicians alike.

    The situation is that the professionals come up with the plan based on evidence and vague concepts that the people in general want.

    Then the Professionals say "This is the plan, let us know if you think it might badly impact you for whatever reason and we'll see about fixing it"

    For some reason, residents think they're in the driving seat and should get to design the whole project


  • #2


    jd wrote: »
    ..the National Transport Authority is quoted as saying that, “the proposed MetroLink to Charlemont had gone through several rounds of public consultation and the terminus would not be altered ahead of its application for a railway order later this year”. This statement is incorrect.
    ..
    There have been no consultations regarding the current NTA proposal to terminate MetroLink at a location just north of Beechwood. – Is mise,

    EUGENE BARRETT,

    Dublin 16.
    The Public Consultation that I must have imagined happening?
    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/metrolink-and-consultations-1.4582207


    To be fair, he's right that there wasn't a public consultation done for the line as it now stands. (On the back of the last consultation, it was decided to substantially alter it to its current design.) But consultations exist to smooth over fine details, not to consider the public's suggestions of grand alternatives. And, anyway, as we all know, the NTA still expects to upgrade the Green Line south of Charlemont in a decade or two. Perhaps the NTA has brought this on itself by being so coy about its future intentions.


Society & Culture