Metrolink south of Charlemont

Sam Russell

Once the boring bit starts, there will be plenty of time to sort out Dunville Ave and access to Mortons.

Grassy Knoll

If this is what happened very poor foresight from the design team to remove the bridge - though not surprising as we have seen over the years all sort of transport projects needing costly subsequent upgrades. Failure to future proof …. and all of that…

To the future, not a showstopper, I presume some form of elevated track / bridge can be retrofitted if not closing the road etc Bigger issue is the tie- to the underground piece … (and the usual mouthpieces are muzzled from their NIMBY guff)

Sam Russell

There are three problems for this portion of Metrolink. The Gov has decided to kick this problem down the road for the moment as it would delay the project more than it already has.

1. The St Raphaela's Rd needs a bridge for the Luas/Metrolink. This could be done as a separate project - it is needed anyway, and could be done with little disruption - if planned properly.
2. The Dunville Ave. Just close the road. This could just be done with pedestrian/cycle bridge installed. Face down the NYMBY objectors.
3. The connection for Metrolink south of Charlemont. This is the biggie. Either connect before the current Charlemont station, or link south of Beechwood. If going with the Beechwood link, save the cost of underground stations between SSG and Beechwood, with perhaps one at Charlemont to link with the Luas. I would favour connecting at Charlemont, with the Luas diverting down Adelaide Rd. Of course, Peter Place and the Presbyteran Church would be affected.

Now, the link north of Charlemont was dismissed, but the sewer should cause a rethink.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120524543#Comment_120524543

The Green Line Capacity Upgrade project is slated to include the St Raphaela's road upgrade, but when that comes about now, I've no idea. Pretty sure that Dunville avenue is to be looked at in this as well, and I'd agree, it should just close.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120524965#Comment_120524965

But those two aspects should be done now - as it settles the issue away from Metrolink. The huge delays projected for these two projects were made huge in aa attempt to undermine the whole metrolink project.

They are small projects on their own and could be just done.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120525121#Comment_120525121

Yeah, that's what I meant, the Capacity upgrade is the replacement for the Metrolink upgrade.

gjim

Easy to say "plenty of time to sort out the section south of Charlemont" but I just don't see how it will ever be viable or how it can be done without ending up with a hugely compromised system. Realistically, without huge disruption and extensive CPOing, the tie-in will have to be south of Beechwood if not Cowper. The result will be a long stretch of metro with no access from Ranelagh village, for example, shadowed by a surface level tram line that will be forced to terminate in the middle of a low-density housing with no room for a depo.

Like Sam says, the tie-in should have been planned for just south of the canal which would mean Ranelagh and Beechwood could still have metro stations and the Green line could be extended somewhere sensible like down Adelaide Rd towards Ringsend/Irishtown or the other way toward Terenure or Rathgar.

I understand the anxiety to get going with ML but I think this is more than kicking the can down the road - the can has been kicked into the next county.

prunudo

Do we know if there is a team in the nta looking into how to proceed south or is it just being vaguely talked about.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120526318#Comment_120526318

No idea, but at a guess, they're not going to look at it at all until Metrolink starts tunneling. That way they can avoid all FOI requests about it, they really don't want to stir the hornets nest for no reason.

Sam Russell

I am proposing that they wait till the boring bit gets past the M50, then announce a choice of solutions.

In the meantime, the build the bridge at Stillorgan as a traffic solution to that crazy set up of lights. They also build a level crossing at Dunville Ave and a pedestrian bridge, as a road safety measure.

Idbatterim

Dunville can fit two lanes of traffic, currently it is only one. If its such a big deal. Why not have barriers like at dart Station crossing?

It was very short sighted to remove the old bridge...

walshb

Monstrous monstrous project. And as always, folks will welcome it, but not near me!!! NIMBY

Idbatterim

The old bridge...

Tow

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121814866#Comment_121814866

The locals got to vote on keeping (reinstating) the bridge or removing the embankment, as the costs were about the same. They voted to remove the embankment. I subsequently heard one of the original engineers calling it the worse decision made when building the lines.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121814866#Comment_121814866

There'll be a train going through every 90 seconds in each direction. Between the tolerances needed for safety, there simply won't be enough time for more than a few cars to get through. This will increase driver frustration to the point that it'd be likely that some would "chance it", with an increased likelihood of bridge strikes. This would then be a significant point of failure, any strike against those barriers would cause significant transport disruption.

Removing the old bridge was indeed incredibly short sighted.

Idbatterim

I get you... having lights that told you how long before going green, would increase efficiency... but yeah I get your point

LXFlyer

Given the existence of the sewer at the Grand Canal, this crossing is irrelevant in the context of Metrolink, as it would likely surface further south.

cgcsb

Allowing the public to make an engineering decision is fairly wild, not sure I've heard of that elsewhere in the world. The currently metrolink had a public consultation on the location of an intervention shift, again wild. The hyper-consultative process in Ireland has simply gone too far.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815061#Comment_121815061

Are there any reports detailing the impact of the sewer

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815184#Comment_121815184

Yes and the best way to find them would be to use google and search for “Metrolink” and “sewer”.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815229#Comment_121815229

Easy to be smart about it. It was an honest question as I have spent the morning trying to find details of its impact on the tie in. I know that the station is necessarily deeper as a result of the sewer, but we probably don't have a clear idea as to where the tunnel can emerge now as a result.

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815256#Comment_121815256

I wasn’t being smart - I don’t have the link but there is definitely a full technical report about it, and most likely somewhere on the Metrolink website.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815058#Comment_121815058

Driverless metros need total segregation of the line. They can not use level crossings.

Sam Russell

Of course, the sewer problem would be solved if the ML came above ground north of Charlemont.

If that was done, the GL conversion becomes a lot simpler.

Consonata

constructabilityreportgreenlineclosure.pdf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815683#Comment_121815683

Seems like the plan to have an underground station at Beechwood makes sense, but seems needlessly costly. Better than it coming to ground at Cowper I guess. Any future redirection of the Green Line will probably mean a small stub spur from Harcourt down to Beechwood which is unfortunate.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815683#Comment_121815683

What massive demolition are you proposing to allow that?

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815683#Comment_121815683

That’s not going to and never was going to happen.

It’s pointless even discussing it.

Idbatterim

Look if they are demolishing a residential building for metrolink, how in gods name does dunville avenue situation cause so much fuss...

gjim

It was one of the options considered - before knowledge of the sewer scuppered their preferred option of a tie-in north of Ranelagh.

It involved cut n cover along Earlsfort Terrace with the tie-in at Peter’s Place.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121815824#Comment_121815824

The proposals will come from the design team.