Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Options
1112113115117118314

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    markpb wrote: »
    FWIW I agree with almost everything you said but several banks have indicated that the regulatory environment in other countries was a reason for choosing them over Ireland. I'm not sure what exactly this means but I believe that there were concerns about the Irish Central Banks ability to cope with the increased demand.
    Yeah fair point. I have also read that some banks trade in such complicated deals that only the regulators in the UK and Germany are actually capable of properly overseeing it all, but this doesn't apply to all banks by any means.

    I just hope Varadkar is being put under pressure by these bank CEOs to get Dublin's infrastructure sorted ASAP.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,851 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    murphaph wrote: »
    markpb wrote: »
    FWIW I agree with almost everything you said but several banks have indicated that the regulatory environment in other countries was a reason for choosing them over Ireland. I'm not sure what exactly this means but I believe that there were concerns about the Irish Central Banks ability to cope with the increased demand.
    Yeah fair point. I have also read that some banks trade in such complicated deals that only the regulators in the UK and Germany are actually capable of properly overseeing it all, but this doesn't apply to all banks by any means.

    I just hope Varadkar is being put under pressure by these bank CEOs to get Dublin's infrastructure sorted ASAP.
    if that's the case. He will give go ahead to MN original


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,326 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I'd be pretty confident that metro north will get off the ground come budget day. TII are currently recruiting engineers and we've had report after report mention it.

    DARTunderground is an uncertainty and there'll have to be some arrangement whereby TII deliver the infrastructure, perhaps on a phased basis. The project is too complex for CIE


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I'd be pretty confident that metro north will get off the ground come budget day. TII are currently recruiting engineers and we've had report after report mention it.

    DARTunderground is an uncertainty and there'll have to be some arrangement whereby TII deliver the infrastructure, perhaps on a phased basis. The project is too complex for CIE

    As I've said before on here. NMN is going ahead based on all the work being carried out by Arup et al. Big unveil come October would be my "guess".


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,865 ✭✭✭Van.Bosch


    As I've said before on here. NMN is going ahead based on all the work being carried out by Arup et al. Big unveil come October would be my "guess".

    Any word on the emerging route you said you might be able to share in a few days?


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    if that's the case. He will give go ahead to MN original

    No, he won't. The original Metro North is dead. Forget about it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Van.Bosch wrote: »
    Any word on the emerging route you said you might be able to share in a few days?

    Yeah sorry about that. I'll lob it up in the morning. Friday afternoon was a disaster zone for me; didn't get out of the office til late.

    Some of the lads working on the project were in late Friday night so I'd reckon there would be some new stuff for me to peruse tomorrow morning.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,585 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    Doesn't really mean anything solid, but it's something:

    https://www.twitter.com/TheTMNinja/status/888400172442669056


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,383 ✭✭✭yannakis


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I'd be pretty confident that metro north will get off the ground come budget day. TII are currently recruiting engineers and we've had report after report mention it.

    DARTunderground is an uncertainty and there'll have to be some arrangement whereby TII deliver the infrastructure, perhaps on a phased basis. The project is too complex for CIE

    Let's hope that once the boring machines are around town for MN, they will just jump from project to project with DU being the second most likely.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,440 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    yannakis wrote:
    Let's hope that once the boring machines are around town for MN, they will just jump from project to project with DU being the second most likely.

    Does it work like that? 😀

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,851 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    theyd have been better off calling it "luas north" sure wont "metro north" be another white elephant, like the original luas lines were meant to be? :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,690 ✭✭✭jd


    Yeah sorry about that. I'll lob it up in the morning. Friday afternoon was a disaster zone for me; didn't get out of the office til late.
    Oh you titillator :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    jd wrote: »
    Oh you titillator :)

    SORRY!

    Promise before I leave the office tonight!


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Right so:

    In the time that has passed since I last looked at the data a few things have changed. a really interesting P+R has disappeared which is a shame from my own POV as it seemed to have an extension to Ashbourne in mind from its positioning and a new route to the west has emerged.

    (As you can imagine I am pretty wary about being too exact with the details and as such the planned .shp file I had considered throwing up, was just too detailed and defo would result in me getting the heave ho, but alas...)

    I hope what I do post here satiates ye and if not I'll answer what questions I can.

    Routes:

    So there seems to be 4 major routes at present and various combinations of these will result in 2 final routes being sent forward for detailed consideration by the NTA. From what I gather this is being done in the next couple of weeks.

    These routes aren't exact but should give you an idea. There are dozens of potential routes at present given the station combos but I'll outline 4 and ye can work out what I mean:

    Route 1: Balheary P+R >>> Pavilions >>> Airside >>> Airport >>> Dardistown >>> Gullivers >>> Ballymun >>> DCU >>> Glasnevin >>> Prospect >>> city centre stations that are not O'Connell St >>> Charlemont etc...

    Route 2: Balheary P+R >>> Swords/Airside/Swords Central >>> Airport >>> Dardistown >>> Gullivers >>> Ballymun >>> Millmount >>> Drumcondra >>> Parnell >>> Tara >>> St Stephen's Green East >>> Charlemont etc...

    Route 3: Balheary P+R >>> Swords/Airside/Swords Central >>> Airport >>> Dardistown >>> Gullivers >>> Santry >>> DCU >>> Millmount >>> Drumcondra >>> Mountjoy Square >>> Tara >>> St Stephen's Green East >>> Charlemont etc...

    Route 4: Balheary P+R >>> Pavilions >>> Airside >>> Airport >>> Dardistown >>> Gullivers >>> Ballymun >>> Millmount >>> Drumcondra >>> Parnell >>> Tara >>> St Stephen's Green East >>> Charlemont etc...


    ---

    So that's the jist. I hope that's okay. My initial post was going to be more detailed but again I'm cognisant of trying to not get sacked. The "city centre stations that are not O'Connell St " is the most interesting (and to my mind sensible) new development as it will avoid OCS getting dug up again, open up the western side of the city to new transport options and be a hub for more expansion on the St Patrick St >>> Harold's Cross >>> Templeogue arterial route in the future... I hope.

    I'l get a chance to inquire more during the week. And will let ye know.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    That is interesting about an alignment west of O'Connell Street, avoiding a duplication of Luas cross city. What ever you do, don't get yourself sacked for us!


  • Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭Khuitlio


    Just a couple of questions if you get a chance!

    -Any particular reason why Stephens Green has moved from NW to East?
    -Would Tara involve a station under Hawkins/Apollo with interchange to Tara Street Station?
    -Would there be a proposed interchange with Dart Underground?

    For what its worth my favourite route would be: Balheary P+R > Pavillions > Airside > Airport > Daridstown > Gullivers > Ballymun > DCU > Millmount > Drumcondra > Parnell > Tara > SSG > Charlemount etc


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭Avada


    My main issue with the lack of O'Connell bridge stop is that it doesn't really connect with the Red Line. I know it's not a long walk, but come on, have we not learnt anything?


  • Registered Users Posts: 264 ✭✭nairy hipples


    Avada wrote: »
    My main issue with the lack of O'Connell bridge stop is that it doesn't really connect with the Red Line. I know it's not a long walk, but come on, have we not learnt anything?


    It could connect with the Red Line further west at the Four Courts/Smithfield etc.
    I'd be in favour of it going west, that area would benefit from the regeneration


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭Avada


    It could connect with the Red Line further west at the Four Courts/Smithfield etc.
    I'd be in favour of it going west, that area would benefit from the regeneration

    Not with any of the 4 routes referred to above it wouldn't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Avada wrote: »
    Not with any of the 4 routes referred to above it wouldn't.

    It connects wth the Red Line with an interchange station west of O'Connell Street.

    As I said I didn't detail the CC stations for a reason.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭Avada


    It connects wth the Red Line with an interchange station west of O'Connell Street.

    As I said I didn't detail the CC stations for a reason.

    Ah I missed the end of your post.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Khuitlio wrote: »
    Just a couple of questions if you get a chance!

    -Any particular reason why Stephens Green has moved from NW to East?

    It's hard to know the reason as this came out of the blue for me last week.

    But my guess would be that it aligns better with a potential Tara Stop.
    Would Tara involve a station under Hawkins/Apollo with interchange to Tara Street Station?
    It's as good a place as any for a station alright. ;)
    Would there be a proposed interchange with Dart Underground?

    That can't be ascertained at all from this project unfortunately.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    4 new potential routes. Let the infrastructure nerdgasms commence


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,690 ✭✭✭jd





    Route 1: Balheary P+R >>> Pavilions >>> Airside >>> Airport >>> Dardistown >>> Gullivers >>> Ballymun >>> DCU >>> Glasnevin >>> Prospect >>> city centre stations that are not O'Connell St >>> Charlemont etc...

    That sounds like they would share some of the segregated BXD route on the old railway alignment before tunnelling towards Charlemont street (sounds familiar!).
    They'd need an interchange station where it intersects the Maynooth line possibly here https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3658087,-6.2765847,480m/data=!3m1!1e3

    In other words a variation of the tram to the airport(LR3 LCC to Swords via Airport, under Glasnevin (Luas D2) ) proposal below,
    from the study of 2015 (https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Fingal_North_Dublin_Transport_Study_Final_June_2015.pdf) , take a look at page 110 on. I think it would be a mistake to do this :(
    337047.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,138 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Reinventing the wheel again and again and again.:rolleyes: There is no need for any of this. MN was hit and miss anyway without a wider Metro plan. More fudging around the place and a great internet forum topic. I'll stay with my usual opinion - won't be built. That's not negative for the sake of it either. We were here before 12 years ago and we'll still be here in 12 years time. If you think political opinion has changed then all I can suggest is watch this space. All this talk, reivention and political ping pong and we are still only looking at one Metro line since 2001. STILL!


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,198 ✭✭✭plodder


    Route 2: Balheary P+R >>> Swords/Airside/Swords Central >>> Airport >>> Dardistown >>> Gullivers >>> Ballymun >>> Millmount >>> Drumcondra >>> Parnell >>> Tara >>> St Stephen's Green East >>> Charlemont etc...
    Where roughly is the Swords/Airside/Swords Central stop located? I presume it is one stop to cover all of those areas? Thx.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    Frankly, I find all of this very difficult to believe.

    There was originally a Lissenhall park-and-ride, which made sense, because it would have been right beside the M1. BonnieSituation is now saying that it will all start at a park-and-ride in a place called Balheary, which nobody had ever heard of before this evening and which seems to be remote from the M1, and nowhere near the M2.

    It also seems impossible that all the southside options are 'Charlemont, etc.'. This would indicate that the only southside extension being considered is along the current Green Luas line. It seems doubtful that no consideration is being given to an eventual continuation of the metro to areas in the southwest of the city like Rathmines, Terenure, Walkinstown, etc.

    I'd be very sceptical as to the value of what has been posted above by BonnieSituation.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,373 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Frankly, I find all of this very difficult to believe.

    There was originally a Lissenhall park-and-ride, which made sense, because it would have been right beside the M1. BonnieSituation is now saying that it will all start at a park-and-ride in a place called Balheary, which nobody had ever heard of before this evening and which seems to be remote from the M1, and nowhere near the M2.

    It also seems impossible that all the southside options are 'Charlemont, etc.'. This would indicate that the only southside extension being considered is along the current Green Luas line. It seems doubtful that no consideration is being given to an eventual continuation of the metro to areas in the southwest of the city like Rathmines, Terenure, Walkinstown, etc.

    I'd be very sceptical as to the value of what has been posted above by BonnieSituation.
    Balheary is a townland directly adjacent to the M1 Lissenhall Interchange (J4). Fairly good location for a P&R.

    Charlemont etc refers to the plan by the NTA to convert the segregated Green Line south of Charlemont to Metro to tie in with Metro North. This would appear correct given that TII are trademarking "Dublin Metro" instead of "Metro North".

    Having a high capacity N/S line from Lissenhall to Fassaroe would be a major major leap forward in the long term, and would be phenomenal in reducing traffic on the M1, M50 and M11. Now all we need is a E/W line to tie in with it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 894 ✭✭✭Bray Head


    One of the big problems with 'Old' MN was that it needed a turnback loop constructed under St Stephen's Green. Frank McDonald had one or two stories saying that basically half the park would be dug up for four years and this got some traction: "Where will all the ducks go?, etc"

    All of the above options seem to imply that this part of the plan is gone. There will be a basic station at SSG (or elsewhere) and MN will instead terminate at Charlemont. Not clear to me if this implies a straightforward extension of the Luas line. If so, I am wondering where the space is to send the Luas line underground is around there as it is so built up.

    If it implies an interchange station you have a bit less of an issue, though again, you have to wonder where the space for a TBM to be set up is.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 79 ✭✭lateconnection


    A station on SSG East avoids the need to remove the Fusilier's Arch, and the temporary removal of the lake and island in SSG and its reinstatemnt upon the completion of the works. The arch, lake and island removal were necessary on original mn. Better option really, and I suppose it can still be a future DU interchange at that side of the park.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement