Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

Calling €4bn an "irrelevance" is just asinine even if hyperbolic. However, the real point is that ML will be a net-positive investment to the Irish exchequer. Not a lot of Keynesian thinking in our Government or media though, more of a Junior Cert Business Studies understanding of State finances as analogised to a household budget

I guess that's kind of what issuing a Government bond is, although I think they mostly mature within 5 - 20 years you just keep rolling it over forever as long as you don't default.

The sooner we're rid of so called experts that can only think in a straight line the better.

Neither BusConnects nor trams can overcome the issue of city centre street capacity for the longer term.

Concept designs seem to be out there now:

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1450572705762316290

This looks to be a consistent issue along the corridor; to keep costs low they're avoiding proper integration for passengers. Proposals currently include at-grade street crossings between the Metrolink and the airport as well as along the R132 in Swords.

This is based on the detailed drawings released as part of the first consultation

metrolink-concept-engineering-drawings-book.pdf (tii.ie) (Page 63-39)

The station would be built to allow interchange between both modes much like Glasnevin and, at the time, Charlemont.

But this was also when there was 2 tunnels instead of one, and we haven't heard of any updates since then to signal that this has changed.

Some designs show a single encapsulated building allowing interchange, others show the metrolink entrance opening directly next to the Tara Street Southern Concourse, so whilst its still possible that we will be left with a street level interchange, both entrances will be exactly opposite each other, there will be no need to travel to the Quays to access the Northern Concourse.

It'll be more than one at-grade pedestrian crossing at the airport where none are acceptable. It's meant to be catering for high volumes of passengers with luggage, travelling against the clock. Passenger levels are envisaged to be a lot higher than they are now.

On R132, at-grade will result in jay-walking and reduced level of service for buses and cyclists; particularly at Swords Pavilions and Barrysparks LAP. Think about the amount of Toucan green time needed for a flow of pedestrians arriving to/from Metro services that run every few minutes.

Balally Luas Stop near Dundrum Town Centre provides some insight. It's a disaster for pedestrians and not something we should set out to design from scratch.

I'm not really sure it is TII's job to ensure that the airport metro station ties in neatly with the terminal buildings at Dublin Airport. That's the job of DAA who run the airport. I usually hate the "that's not my job" line but in this case I think it's fair. TII were given no choice at all as to where the metro station would be located within Dublin Airport. DAA have reserved that plot of land by the chapel and the bus station since before Metro North. They are the ones who decided the metro station should be further away from the front-door than the short-term car parking. It's DAA's job to figure out how they want to connect the metro station at their preferred location into their ground infrastructure.

And DAA have 7-8 years from the moment TII start building MetroLink to design, seek planning permission, tender and build the changes to their ground infrastructure. They could even start the design work now before TII even begin constructing MetroLink. DAA are one of the much better public bodies in this country. I suspect that's a task that they can pull off. I have much more hope in DAA than I did in Irish Rail who failed to deliver the new passenger bridge at the Broombridge station in preparation for Luas Cross City.

Demolishing that church was never considered - it was the two houses to the right of it - while keeping their facades.

But that entire option (the Peter Place link up) doesn't seem to have been advanced from the first survey of options - before the canal sewer issue was noticed - although I believe it solves a number of significant issues particularly in terms of cost for stations at Charlemont, Ranelagh and Beechwood/Cowper.

You're mixing up the options - the one we're talking about link-up was 3(C). There was no severing of any road involved. It involved cut n' cover under Earlsfort terrace and under Adelaide road before emerging south of those Georgian houses joining with the green line just south of the Charlemont stop. Options 1 and 2 involved elevated or at street-grade tracks so were never going to be considered never mind the church.