Private Profiles - an update on how they will be changing here
We've partnered up with to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from and get an exclusive discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.

Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,553 ✭✭✭ dublinman1990

    Let me ask you this @Peregrine.

    If Peter Walsh ever had a thought in his head that he blurted out the wrong completion date for Metrolink to the media; Why did he ever say it in the 1st place if the statement he gave to the media was in complete contradiction to what the tender for the delivery services partner was actually going to deliver for the project within it's multi stage procurement process?

    Did something change with what his advisers had initially said to him when he said the incorrect completion date to the media or did he not even think about the tender for the project delivery partner being involved when he made that statement to the media last friday?

    If you said that he contradicted his previous statement on this project like this on public record to members of the media or to the PAC. Do you ever think that he would make a major correction on it & mention it straight away to anyone who is involved within the PAC, the NTA, Eamon Ryan's dept & to members of the media?

    Or do you think that the nuclear option should be considered with him leaving his post if he had made a lot of other major errors while his agency is outlining the delivery process of all of the other major pieces of transport infrastructure being proposed by the state?

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,437 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f

    A bit of historical context would be useful here, in relation to the first paragraph of this post.

    For most of the time that metronorth was being discussed and planned, there was no M3 Parkway service, and there were no plans for passenger services through the Phoenix Park tunnel. (At that time we had spectacular events like the Dublin Castle gig in around 2004 where government ministers were falling over themselves to tell everyone that the money for the metronorth and the DART Underground project had been 'ring-fenced'. Those funds would not and could not be touched).

    After the crash, IE and the RPA then went ahead in around 2010 to seek railway orders from ABP for the metro and DART projects which they knew wouldn't be happening, and which ABP knew wouldn't be happening, which is presumably why ABP devoted so little time and effort analysing them before, of course, waving the projects through and giving pointless railway orders which would never be implemented.

    An interesting by-product of this is that Dublin now has a situation where the Maynooth line passes through Drumcondra, as it always has and, in addition, the Phoenix Park tunnel line passes through Drumcondra station too, both on their way to and from Connolly. On top of that the M3 parkway line goes into the current Docklands station, which the other two don't serve and - since the M3 Parkway line shares a lot of track with the Maynooth line - it's hard to see how it couldn't share that route via Drumcondra station too when the new Docklands station comes on stream, and when many of the trains from those three routes will be using that station as their main city terminus.

    Thus, the metronorth could reasonably have been envisaged to serve those three lines - rather than just one - at Drumcondra, at the time of pursuing the Railway Order, but of course with the provisos that the DART Underground wouldn't be built (which it hasn't been) and that the Phoenix Park tunnel would be pressed into service (which, after strenuous opposition from IE, it has been).

  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 13,177 Mod ✭✭✭✭ marno21

    Market update published on the project website

  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 13,177 Mod ✭✭✭✭ marno21

    The NDFA are looking for specialist financial advisory services for the MetroLink PPP

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,991 ✭✭✭ roadmaster

    Is the below just bull or could it be another possable delay to the metro

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,337 ✭✭✭✭ salmocab

    Yeah it’s just nonsense to spin a story, even using Ryans image is nonsense as it kinda suggests it’s something to do with him. It’s just a bunch of people making a bit of noise. Thankfully they can be ignored.

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,642 ✭✭✭ Shedite27

    Got as far as "" and that's enough to tell me its BS

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭ cgcsb

    That sounds really positive. Would be great to at least get it to railway order

  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 16,579 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Sam Russell

    My problem is that the Minister for Transport is completely silent about this project which ought to be top of his Green Party projects.

    Why is he ignoring it?

  • Registered Users Posts: 15,544 ✭✭✭✭ LXFlyer

    Because firstly that isn’t how government works, and it is going through a statutory process right now which won’t be any faster with Ministerial proclamations.

    Nothing he might have to say right now is going to speed things up, and frankly the less ministerial re-announcements the better.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,085 ✭✭✭ prunudo

    Its not that he should be side stepping due process, but his lack of support, certainly publicly, for the project doesn't look good. I'd go as far as to say I don't think he believes in it himself.

    He should be singing from the roof tops at the prospect of a modern public transport project getting the go ahead during his tenure as minister for transport.

  • Registered Users Posts: 15,544 ✭✭✭✭ LXFlyer

    When we get to railway order application stage, I’d be quite sure that there will be a lot of PR happening.

    Given the lengthy lead times involved, people will get fed up if they hear Ministers going on and on about investment projects every week.

    The key times are the milestones and the next one of those is cabinet approval of the business case and then the railway order application.

  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 16,579 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Sam Russell

    It is the way politics works - particularly when you are a junior member of the Gov in charge of the project. A running commentary of his efforts to get this project over the line would help - if only with his own support group. The next step is the business case which is within his dept.

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,181 ✭✭✭✭ loyatemu

    if it's politics and optics you're concerned about, bear in mind the Metro is not a Green project; it wasn't started by them and Ryan will probably be long retired when it opens; it's unlikely he'll even still be in Govt when the shovels go in the ground. There's very little political capital in it for him. Unlike Busconnects, cycle lanes, cheaper fares etc all of which should see some tangible progress before the next election.

  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 16,579 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Sam Russell

    When did the fact the project was started by someone else stop any politician from claiming credit - whether justified or not.

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 8,050 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Sierra Oscar

    What timeline are we looking at now for construction actually to get underway - i.e. beyond procurement when we can rest easy knowing that it's actually happening without any political meddling?

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 207 ✭✭ Heartbreak Hank

    Thanks for posting those. There is a lot of detail there.

    I want to apologize in advance for this because it has probably been discussed to death but I thought the tunnel was stopping north of Beechwood to allow for a future connection to the upgraded green line there. I knew that Charlemont was the last stop but I didn't realize the tunnel was ending just south of the turnback.

    Surely the arrangement as shown means the green line will never be connected as a new TBM will be needed for the c. 1 km of tunnel.

    Again apologies because I am sure this is covered here already.

  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,319 Mod ✭✭✭✭ spacetweek

    It probably was covered, but it's a shocking omission. Dunno if they've any gameplan for the future extension at all now.

  • Registered Users Posts: 844 ✭✭✭ gjim

    Yeah - it seems to me that there's no proper plan for future extension. Part of the design should not only cover the line to Charlemont but also include a detailed plan for the future extension so that the works can be designed to dovetail with the extension. I can understand the urgency to get something built and avoid NIMBY battles by burying the plan for future extension but it doesn't really look like there is a plan. Without one, it would make more sense to stop at Stephen's Green and provide the interchange with the Green line there and not bother with the expense and aggravation over Charlemont.

  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,136 Mod ✭✭✭✭ CatInABox

    I've a feeling that the plan at Charlemont changed when they took the need for ventilation into account, you can see that they've added a ventilation shaft onto Charlemont station. Finishing the tunnel just north of Beechwood would have meant they'd need another intervention/ventilation shaft, ala Albert College Park, except this one wouldn't have a huge park to place it in. It'd also be a lot harder to justify as well, as there won't be a station further on, it'd literally be a shaft stuck at the end of the line.

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,154 ✭✭✭✭ Thelonious Monk

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,483 ✭✭✭ yer man!

    What's the likely outcome of this? Will it actually delay anything? Will NTA power on regardless?