Airport to city metro set for approval

jesus_thats_gre

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=48822936&p=488z3y8x&n=48823234



[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Junior Minister Ivor Callely has reportedly indicated that the cabinet is set to approve plans to build a metro line linking Dublin Airport with the city centre.

Reports this morning said Deputy Callely indicated that the project would be approved within two weeks.

The reports said a green light for the project was pending after figures suggested the metro could be built for between €450m and €855m, a fraction of the €3.5bn estimated by the Rail Procurement Agency.








Does anyone have any idea how they are going to build it for so cheap? Does anyone believe it too
[/font]

Traffic

I would say its a matter of that junior minister getting over excited again

BrianD

A disaster! Clearly a man who likes to get headlines without even researching the range of options available. let's hope that the single line metro won't be built to add to the other single line systems we have recently built i.e. the luas. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the luas but the two unconnected lines are as a result of political meddling.

mackerski

The news article I heard mentioned the minister invoking a Metro project in Munich whose cost per km was the basis of his bargain price estimate. Anybody know what project that was?

Dermot

jank

Surely this metro will link up the 2 luas lines?
Yes No

Surprised about the figure. Like Luas cost twice that so how can the metro be so cheap? How many stops are planned for this line?

BrianD

Nobody knows! They are talking about running it to Stephens Green without any other connections to heavy rail. It's bizarre ... running a metro from an airport to a public park. Only in Ireland!!

Let's hope they adopt the Irish Rail proposal or an alternative that involves an extension from the existing Irish Rail infrastructure.

Metrobest

jank wrote:

Surely this metro will link up the 2 luas lines?
Yes No

Surprised about the figure. Like Luas cost twice that so how can the metro be so cheap? How many stops are planned for this line?

It will link them up in the sense that trains will terminate at the Green Line stop on Stephen's Green; passengers connecting to the Red Line can walk to the Abbey Street stop: I presume an underground travelator could link the two if it didn't strain the budget.

The costs mentioned in that report sound fairly off-the-wall. Don't believe everything you read in the papers!

SeanW

Rule #1: Dont listen to Craz-ee Callelly

Metrobest wrote:

It will link them up in the sense that trains will terminate at the Green Line stop on Stephen's Green; passengers connecting to the Red Line can walk to the Abbey Street stop: I presume an underground travelator could link the two if it didn't strain the budget.

Metrobest are you suggesting that you expect a travelator to be constructed from St. Stephens Green to Abbey St? Do you honestly call St. Stephens Green CONNECTED to the Luas Red Line?

Let's hope they adopt the Irish Rail proposal

Let us PRAY that the government stops dithering and adopts the Irish Rail "A Plan for Dublin."

Metrobest

SeanW wrote:

Rule #1: Dont listen to Craz-ee Callelly

Do you honestly call St. Stephens Green CONNECTED to the Luas Red Line?
."

No, I meant from the stop outside the Gresham hotel. The metro tunnels have to follow existing street alignment as much as possible, so the only way to have an absolutely seamless like from metro to Red Line luas would be to plonk the tram stop bang in the middle of O'Connell Street, which isn't feasible.

Ps. What's with the Callelly bashing? You'd think he was devil incarnate

SeanW

I've nothing against him per se, but the way he's announced everything over and over again before the 10 year plan is finished isn't all that credible.

Neither is the claim that the Metro can be done for under a billion ...

Neither is this:

Deputy Callely indicated that the project would be approved within two weeks.

I've heard ****e like that for the past 7 years, they'll NEVER release this plan, they'll just dither over it for the next 10 years - they've been dithering over Aer Lingus, Terminal 2/Pier D, the Dublin Rail Plan, and the eeeuch "Metro" for as long as I can remember. Plus for most of this time, I've heard Ministers constantly stating that X, Y and Z would be "brought to cabinet within weeks"

weehamster

I think we would all be better off waiting for the 'official' seal of approval and not paying any attention to any comments made (no matter who it is) that suggest what 'might' be constructed.

murphaph

Callely's a gobsh!te. Disregard everything he says. He's refering to extensions to Munich's metro-these don't account for rolling stock/depot costs etc. Like I said, gobsh!te.

gjim

Ps. What's with the Callelly bashing? You'd think he was devil incarnate

Even by the standards of the anti-intellectual political scene in Ireland, he's an absolute idiot. Remember a previous high profile squawking fit of his a few years ago when he predicted that allowing more taxis on the streets of Dublin would spell the demise of the "high quality existing levels of service"? A good stepping stone to a junior ministry in transport, obviously.

hawkmoon269

Callely is a loose cannon whose main agenda appears to be to undermine his "boss" Martin Cullen. Cullen should gag him.

enterprise

A load of tosh from Ivor the Tank Engine again.

Metrobest :rolleyes: the tunnels do not have to follow the above street alignment. LUL's Victoria and Jubilee lines are prime examples of this. IE's proposed tunnel also does not follow the ground level street layout. Take the most direct route possible!!

It's DRP Vs Metro time again! Yipee! hehehe. Im suprised we actually got to Thursday without it being mentioned!

weehamster

It's DRP Vs Metro time again! Yipee! hehehe. Im suprised we actually got to Thursday without it being mentioned!

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooo................................................................
:rolleyes:

enterprise

weehamster wrote:

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo................................................................
:rolleyes:

Thats good!

weehamster

Phew! That was close.
Now lets talk about how beautiful the weather is etc...

PandaMania

Ivor is a simpleton. His quest to keep the Dublin Taxis under the control of a skanger cartel in order to "protect the high standard of taxi service Dubliners and overseas visitors have come to accept as being among the best in the world" showed him for the arsewit he truly is.

SeanW

Well, Metrobest does that answer your question about Calelly bashing?

Metrobest

enterprise wrote:

A load of tosh from Ivor the Tank Engine again.

Metrobest :rolleyes: the tunnels do not have to follow the above street alignment. LUL's Victoria and Jubilee lines are prime examples of this. IE's proposed tunnel also does not follow the ground level street layout. Take the most direct route possible!!:)

There's no Critical Infrastructure Bill in Ireland so following street alignment negates the need for costly compensation of property owners.

BrianD

Is there not one about to be introduced? The port tunnel is not following any existing road alignment.

Metrobest

AFAIK it was shelved and is unlikely to reappear anytime soon. Not to worry. Amsterdam has no Critical Infrastructure Bill either; yet its metro is only costing €1.4bn. The key is to follow street alignment as much as possible and avoid conflicts with private landowners. Tunnels can be 'stacked' where streets are narrow.

maxheadroom

Metrobest wrote:

AFAIK it was shelved and is unlikely to reappear anytime soon. Not to worry. Amsterdam has no Critical Infrastructure Bill either; yet its metro is only costing €1.4bn. The key is to follow street alignment as much as possible and avoid conflicts with private landowners. Tunnels can be 'stacked' where streets are narrow.

You can also route the tunnel under lands in public ownership (like govt department office buildings, public parks etc)

Victor

Metrobest wrote:

There's no Critical Infrastructure Bill in Ireland so following street alignment negates the need for costly compensation of property owners.

What about streets where the property owners own to the centre of the street - like much of the city centre?

Zaph0d

Did property owners over the port tunnel get compensation for the tunnel going under their houses? I never heard that. All I remember is a few who were compensated for damage to their property as a result of vibrations from the TBM.

Victor

Zaph0d wrote:

Did property owners over the port tunnel get compensation for the tunnel going under their houses? I never heard that. All I remember is a few who were compensated for damage to their property as a result of vibrations from the TBM.

They did, typically €5,000 per house for loss of land rights + damage (I only know of two houses actually being damaged, both had cracks around extensions).

Metrobest

Victor wrote:

What about streets where the property owners own to the centre of the street - like much of the city centre?

The metro should be able to avoid this difficulty for most of its underground trajectory: Airport to College Green should be possible without major compensation issues. From there it depends on the route taken. (Does anyone know what that is?) A key aspect for keeping the budget under control is to minimise compensation claims. Maybe there needs to be some changes in the law regarding ownership rights to facilitate this. If it saves the project from being mired in legal battles, however, it would probably make sense to follow the same compensation strategy as the Luas and Port Tunnel.

BrianD

Why on earth would you select a route such as Airport to College Green or Stephens Green???? It makes absolutely no sense and offers very limited functionality. The only viable and sensible option for both the long and short term is a spur of an existing rail line whether that be the Belfast or Sligo line. If the Sligo line were used, a line starting at Swords running via the Aiirport, Ballymun, DCU and then on down towards the Sligo line would be a real addition to the Dublin rail network. Alternatively, in theory, it could link into the inter connector. This line could run under or over ground as required.

The Governments policy seems just to build something from the airport towards the city centre. I say build something that will actually be useful both to Dubliners and to those who will use public transport from outside of Dublin to reach the airport.

MrPudding

BrianD wrote:

Why on earth would you select a route such as Airport to College Green or Stephens Green????

Sigh. Because metro is best. Even when the plan is an idiotic waste of money that would not see the light of day in any other "normal" country.

MrP

MarkoP11

BrianD wrote:

Why on earth would you select a route such as Airport to College Green or Stephens Green????

The original plan was Shanaghanagh to Dublin Airport then later to Swords via the City Centre, heading out along the Broadstone alignment to Liffey Junction where the line headed north west to the M50/N2 interchange serving Finglas on the way at the M50, one half turned for the Airport. The other half turned and formed a loop serving Blanchardstown, Liffey Valley, Clondalkin, Tallaght and Harolds Cross rejoining the Shanganagh line before Stephen's Green.


There appears to be a dash by government to have a metro to join the European club, more a fashion thing than a proper transport system

BrianD

Could the section from Liffey Junction be constructed with trains routed either to Connolly or Heuston with a second phase to extend the line south to another destination?

Why can't the politicians see the logic and sensibility of this or the fact that they have been sitting on two potential Dart lines for the past 20 years and done nothing about it?

Metrobest

BrianD wrote:

Why on earth would you select a route such as Airport to College Green or Stephens Green???? .

(1) It's the fastest, most direct route
(2) It serves the real city centre (O'Connell St, College Grn, Stephen's Grn)
(3) It connects with practically every bus route in the city centre
(4) It follows the best street alignment, saving costs
(5) It connects with the Green Luas, the Red Luas (+/- 3mins walk)
(6) It has scope to connect with the interconnector at Stephen's Green, commuter rail at Glasnevin
(7) Its cost estimate of €1.2bn compares "very favourably" with European norms [not my words: that's the words of the Joint Oireachtas Cmte on Transport]
(8) Only 20% of its passengers would be airport-bound; that means, excluding 5m bound for the airport, 15m passengers annually who'll have access to a new rail corridor.

MrPudding

Metrobest wrote:

(5) It connects with the Green Luas, the Red Luas (+/- 3mins walk)
(

What is a -3 minute walk and where do I get one?

MrP

dowlingm

Stephen's Green to Abbey St. is 3 minutes in your dreams Metrobest. 10 maybe, unless you are a very fast walker. You have to cross three major intersections each of which could cost you a minute (Trinity and both sides of O'Connell Bridge).

Metrobest

Dowlingm, I meant three minutes from Abbey Street Red line Luas stop to the metro station that would be on Upper O'Connell St; the St Stephen's Grn stop would interchange with the Green line luas to Sandyford seamlessly.

weehamster

Dowlingm, I meant three minutes from Abbey Street Red line Luas stop to the metro station that would be on Upper O'Connell St; the St Stephen's Grn stop would interchange with the Green line luas to Sandyford seamlessly.

I would like to see those people coming from the Red line headding to the Airport hauling their luggage from Abbey St to the Metro Stop accross from the Gresham. Don't think that would be too popular.

murphaph

BrianD wrote:

Could the section from Liffey Junction be constructed with trains routed either to Connolly or Heuston with a second phase to extend the line south to another destination?

Ah Brian, you've struck on one of the key failings of the RPA. They want their toy built to 4' 8" instead of Irish Standard (the DART) 5' 3". Thus ensuring future interoperability is never going to happen.

MarkoP11

murphaph wrote:

Ah Brian, you've struck on one of the key failings of the RPA. They want their toy built to 4' 8" instead of Irish Standard (the DART) 5' 3". Thus ensuring future interoperability is never going to happen.

The RPA have failed to justify there choice, we all know they are wrong. And when challenged they unsurprisingly go all quiet

interoperability and compatibility are king, we need to build a system that can grow and adapt

Metrobest

Where's the problem here? Metro tracks should be built to the gauge that best suits metro. DARTS won't be running on the Stephen's Green-Airport line: only metro. The Paris metro doesn't have to accomodate RERs; the Amsterdam metro does not have to accomodate stoptrains; so why would a Dublin metro have to accomodate DARTs? In any event, the rogue gauge of the DART could cause difficulties for wheelchair users etc. And the metro line is far more likely to be linked to the Green Luas than anything else, so 4.8 is the best option. Let metro do what metro does best: high-frequency, dedicated tracks, no level crossings etc.

As for hauling luggage from Abbey to Connolly; well, you can please some of the people.. etc etc

weehamster

As for hauling luggage from Abbey to Connolly; well, you can please some of the people.. etc etc

I see intergration isnt important to some people etc etc

BuffyBot

As for hauling luggage from Abbey to Connolly; well, you can please some of the people.. etc etc

As for hauling luggage..makes a "convenient" aiport metro a bit..pointless...

Metrobest

Do you think the RPA just said "ah sure let's stick the 'owl metro anywhere, as far away from the Red line as possible."? Of course not! Obviously for valid engineering reasons, and other reasons, the best position for a metro station is on the capital's main thoroughfare, O'Connell street. Whilst that's not ideal for Luas passengers disembarking at Abbey Street, it's a damn sight better than the current arrangement, which is, em, no metro.

It seems to me like you're being anti-metro just for the hell of it. I mean, only 20% of passengers would be for the airport anyway - 15 million would be regular commuters who currently have to make do with shoddy transport - and in any event, while we're on the subject, I'm sure you're well aware that Irish people are quite experienced when it comes to "hauling" luggage around the badly designed Heuston Station, Connolly Station and the third world facilities at Dublin Delayport.

hawkmoon269

Metrobest wrote:

Do you think the RPA just said "ah sure let's stick the 'owl metro anywhere, as far away from the Red line as possible."? Of course not! Obviously for valid engineering reasons, and other reasons, the best position for a metro station is on the capital's main thoroughfare, O'Connell street. Whilst that's not ideal for Luas passengers disembarking at Abbey Street, it's a damn sight better than the current arrangement, which is, em, no metro.

Initially I supported the Interconnector. At this stage I am so fed up waiting for a decision - ANY decision - that if they announce a decision to build a Metro and if they can do it at reasonable cost - I say, let them get on with it. Anything is better than nothing at this stage.

murphaph

Metrobest wrote:

Where's the problem here? Metro tracks should be built to the gauge that best suits metro. DARTS won't be running on the Stephen's Green-Airport line: only metro. The Paris metro doesn't have to accomodate RERs; the Amsterdam metro does not have to accomodate stoptrains; so why would a Dublin metro have to accomodate DARTs? In any event, the rogue gauge of the DART could cause difficulties for wheelchair users etc. And the metro line is far more likely to be linked to the Green Luas than anything else, so 4.8 is the best option. Let metro do what metro does best: high-frequency, dedicated tracks, no level crossings etc.

As for hauling luggage from Abbey to Connolly; well, you can please some of the people.. etc etc

metrobest you have no vision. if the gauge is set at 4 Feet 8 and a half inches (not 4.8 whatever that is?) then there will be immense difficulty in rearanging the network to use current heavy rail lines in later years. All you can see is your one line to the airport without thinking about future network expansion! The Green line will likely stay Luas for the forseeable, so long as lots of other deserving places remain train and tramless anyway.

You seem very happy to swallow everything the RPA feed you. It's quite strange.

You spoke of technical reasons why the Luas can't integrate with the metro. Remember the RPA is responsible for BOTH so there can be no excuses!

Metrobest wrote:

the rogue gauge of the DART could cause difficulties for wheelchair users

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Gauge is the distance between rail centres. You must mean platform height in which case you're still wrong. The DART isn't rogue btw, it's IRISH STANDARD GAUGE. The rogue is the RPA with their standard gauge.

BrianD

Metrobest wrote:

Do you think the RPA just said "ah sure let's stick the 'owl metro anywhere, as far away from the Red line as possible."? Of course not! Obviously for valid engineering reasons, and other reasons, the best position for a metro station is on the capital's main thoroughfare, O'Connell street. Whilst that's not ideal for Luas passengers disembarking at Abbey Street, it's a damn sight better than the current arrangement, which is, em, no metro.

The answer is probably yes! There is NO ENGINEERING PLAN for the metro, there is NO ROUTEMAP for the metro nor has the termini for the much vaunted airport metro been established. One day its O'Connell St., the next Stephens Green and on Tuesdays it's Tara St. station. Clearly, O'Connell St., with it's stated development plan and traffic management is the last place to put the city terminus.

To be blunt the current situation of private and publicly owned buses serving a number of areas in Dublin is FAR SUPERIOR to a half baked metro that is going to COST ME IN TAXES in the long run. It makes perfect sense to delay the metro as long as possible till a sensible route is evaluated one that links into existing transport modes. Connolly station is one obvious hub where public transport users from the Dart line, suburban rail, intercity and tram can transfer in one change to the airport line.

It seems to me like you're being anti-metro just for the hell of it. I mean, only 20% of passengers would be for the airport anyway - 15 million would be regular commuters who currently have to make do with shoddy transport - and in any event, while we're on the subject, I'm sure you're well aware that Irish people are quite experienced when it comes to "hauling" luggage around the badly designed Heuston Station, Connolly Station and the third world facilities at Dublin Delayport.

I wouldn't agree, the routing is seriously flawed and useless to the other 80% of users. Are you trying that those "15 million" are all heading for O'connell St.? It is utter stupidity that a line would terminate in O'connell st. or Stephens Green and beyond belief that anyone would even think of supporting such a plan. The sooner the realistic dublin rail plan is adopted the better and this ridiculous metro line is ditched. A rail line serving both the airport and swords can then be planned and integrated into this system.

weehamster

Do you think the RPA just said "ah sure let's stick the 'owl metro anywhere, as far away from the Red line as possible."? Of course not! Obviously for valid engineering reasons, and other reasons, the best position for a metro station is on the capital's main thoroughfare, O'Connell street. Whilst that's not ideal for Luas passengers disembarking at Abbey Street, it's a damn sight better than the current arrangement, which is, em, no metro.

You see metrobest, this is exactly why your arguments for the RPA metro are just useless. You will accept any metro system while others wont accept what is basically a poorly designed line.

Nobody has said ‘no metro’. They have either called for a proper metro lines (based on the DTO model) or my preference, use the budget for this RPA metro on a City wide Luas system and other projects, which can in the short to medium term help to give a REAL alternative to car commuting at a FAR CHEAPER COST and still have change left.

So I can build the Airport DART line, a Dundrum to Ballymun/Howth Jtn & Lucan to Spencer Dock Luas lines, re-open the Navan line fully and make it a DART, maybe build a Light rail for other congested cities like Cork, Limerick or Galway, and I would still have change from the RPA metro budget.

Later, when the population justifies the HUGE cost for one line, then we can build a metro line or two. As I've said before I’m in favour of the complete DTO metro as this is a proper line which is fully integratable and would do wonders for this city and beyond. But cost a fortune and the state (i.e. taxpayer) doesn't have the dosh.

Dublin and other cities suffer from bad traffic congestion. To build one line and blow nearly all of the transport funding on it is just simply criminal.

BrianD

Metrobest wrote:

Where's the problem here? Metro tracks should be built to the gauge that best suits metro. DARTS won't be running on the Stephen's Green-Airport line: only metro. The Paris metro doesn't have to accomodate RERs; the Amsterdam metro does not have to accomodate stoptrains; so why would a Dublin metro have to accomodate DARTs? In any event, the rogue gauge of the DART could cause difficulties for wheelchair users etc. And the metro line is far more likely to be linked to the Green Luas than anything else, so 4.8 is the best option. Let metro do what metro does best: high-frequency, dedicated tracks, no level crossings etc.

As for hauling luggage from Abbey to Connolly; well, you can please some of the people.. etc etc

DART=METRO. Please don't try and tell me that there is a difference between a DART train and a metro train!!! Or a DART line and Metro line. Please! One and the same thing.

It makes no odds what the rail guage is but why change it from the existing Irish Rail standard. It makes no sense. It's not a rogue guage, it's the standard we use here and as we have no international rail links it's irrelevant what is used elsewhere. We can live with the pros and cons of the "Irish guage". Existing Darts can run on the airport/swords line and rolling stock can be transferred for maintenance etc. The possibility of new alignments can be opened up. In theory Swords- Bray could be a new alignment with trains running on the new line to Connolly and then on the existing line to Bray. This is only an example.

Perhaps you can explain why the Irish Guage creates problems for wheel chair users.

The integration of a metro line into the Green Line is another myth and while possible in theory, I can't see how it would be achievable in reality. The changeover would require a complete closure of the line, removal and upgrading of power systems, construction of new rail stations etc, removal of your precious level crossings and that's not even considering how and where the line will disappear underground. Sure the track is metro guage but that's almost immaterial.

maxheadroom

Metrobest wrote:

In any event, the rogue gauge of the DART could cause difficulties for wheelchair users etc.

I hope I'm not alone in saying WTF??? Wheelchair users can use the DART, and have no trouble with the 'rogue guage'. Why would it be any different on a metro?

Metrobest wrote:

As for hauling luggage from Abbey to Connolly; well, you can please some of the people.. etc etc

It is suppossed to be an AIRPORT METRO. So it should do its best to facilitate people going to the AIRPORT. People going to the AIRPORT are quite likely to have lots of luggage. Make it inconvenient for them to use the system and they just won't bother.
And anyway, why should it be socially and/or politically acceptable to have a proper interchange with the green line (passing through some rather affluent areas...) and make red line passangers (many coming from less affluent areas) haul their luggage up O'Connel St?

Metrobest

I've read Platform For Change. It's a wonderful plan. It will never happen. It's for the long, long term. We have to look at what's doable now; what will bring maximum benefit to the most amount of people at the best possible cost.

The Irish rogue gauge requires that special carriages be built, isn't that so? And that means a gap, horizontally and vertically, between platform and carriage. Wheelchair users will tell you that this means they need special help to access the train - a ramp and so forth. Why not use the gauge that's used internationally; it's the best gauge, isn't it, for everybody? Again, DARTs won't be running on the metro tracks. The only things that will run on the metro tracks are metros, which obviously would also be built to 4''8.

Past Ranelagh, the Green line could be upgraded to metro. See how Tram 5 and Metro line 51 share the same tracks from ZuidWTC to Amstelveen in Amsterdam. Split level platforms and short-car metros are the answer.

I won't accept any old metro system, but the Airport-Stephen's Green metro is a fairly good one. True, it could be better, but the core issue is that the politicians aren't willing to invest the money in it. I'd prefer to see a fairly good metro built for €1.2bn than a grandiose bertie-bowl style metro that sits in Martin Cullen's filing cabinet, gathering dust. There is a plan for the metro and it's in the O'Reilly report. Read it, then judge. Don't believe everything you read in the papers!!

MarkoP11

All suburban trains in Ireland are designed to have a floor height of 1067 mm, thats not rouge thats standard, its the UK standard too and is common across europe where high level platfroms are in use

The reason trains don't line up with platforms correctly is due to the track not being fixed as you would have in a tunnel you have to allow extra clearance to allow for track movement. In tunnel with fixed track the clearances can be much tighter since there can be no variences.

All Arrow and Dart units have level correction suspension, the floor height does vary owing to wear of the wheels which can account for up to a 4 cm difference, thats something all steel wheeled trains have to deal with.

Either way what ever is built will have to comply with all regulations so bringing this non issue up only clouds matters