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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Dublin Metrolink - future routes for next Metrolink

1414244464757

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 910 ✭✭✭brianc89


    Any chance a moderator can change this thread to "future routes" rather than "alternative routes"?

    Or perhaps, a new "future routes" thread should be opened and this thread closed, since the current MetroLink route is not up for discussion...



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


    Yes, tom1ie, you are entirely right to ask this.

    For my part, I was - in my last post - attempting to give my little answer to some questions which emerged in the kerfuffle aroused by a recent article in the Irish Times, and the subsequent letters.

    At the stately pace with which rail transport is developed in Ireland, it is my guess that it will be 50 years before a potential rail line along the N11 will be being considered. I will, sadly, not be involved in that discussion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,034 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    At the glacial pace rail (or any other major infrastructure- bar motorways) is developed in this country it could be another 50 years and we are still talking about when MetroLink (or whatever it will be called then) will start!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,068 ✭✭✭Murph85


    Alternatively, what about luas green line extension from westmoreland Street to swords via airport?

    Then do some basic current green line upgrades ...



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    A metro that would make sense would go from from Tallaght to Clongriffen, through Glasnevin (Cross Guns) so the Glasnevin becomes a junction for the Dart+ and Sligo lines and metro. Obviously it could connect with other trip generators en route.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,034 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Once it serves the route I outlined earlier it can end up wherever tbh!

    The Rathfarnham, rathmines, terenure section of the city is absolutely choked with traffic and bus connects won’t make that a whole pile better.

    A metro is the only answer.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,249 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I assume it will get on eventually (whenever that is exactly) but its also comparatively low density with no real room for development so its not going to be a priority.



  • Registered Users Posts: 910 ✭✭✭brianc89


    Dublin's population density is relatively high (I just checked and was surprised). Central London has a population density of 20k people per sqkm, greater London has 6k per sqkm. Amsterdam has c. 5k per sqkm.

    Lots of areas in Dublin are 5-7k, while some central areas are 12-15k, with a few up to 20k. Definitely enough to justify additional Metro lines.

    https://www.citypopulation.de/en/ireland/dublin/



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,034 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Which is completely the wrong attitude.

    The only answer to solving the gridlock in this area is a metro.

    It doesn’t matter that the density is low and sprawling (even though it isn’t really in certain areas I’ve mentioned for the route).

    The traffic gridlock needs to be tackled.

    The DublinSW area absolutely needs a metro regardless of density to solve the traffic which is caused by no viable transport alternatives.



  • Registered Users Posts: 910 ✭✭✭brianc89


    All they need is one or 2 development areas such as Cathal Da Brugha and, let's say, Rathfarnham golf course. God knows the south side has enough of those!!! What a royal waste of space.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,034 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    It’s bad enough as it is without any further development!!!

    Of course I welcome further housing development with medium hi rise (5/6 floors) if this means a second metro line gets built in dublin SW because of an improved business case.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Mod: Posts deleted.

    This thread is not the place for redrawing the current Metrolink design between Swords and Charlemont. That design is with ABP and we await their decision.

    I have changed the title to remove any doubt that this thread is not about the current Metrolink plan that is with ABP.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,951 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Another post deleted.

    Everyone stay on topic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Consonata


    I wonder once ML has gotten through planning, is there scope for TII to immedately start looking at options for the GL tie in as a seperate project in the future. Given the lead time on planning in this country, would be nice to get the ball rolling quickly.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,951 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Here’s hoping. The decision to postpone this should be reversed as soon as construction starts on ML.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25 Brightlights66


    It is abundantly clear, from the metro maps posted on this thread recently, that - with minimal adjustment - it would be possible to build a 'straight' metro station closer to the Red LUAS than the current plan, if the will was there.

    A problem in Ireland is that the complaints of that art gallery owner on Harcourt Street, back when the LUAS Green line was being built, seem to have put the shivers into transport planners in Ireland.

    Must. Not. Cause. Disruption.

    The result, in O'Connell Street, is that the planners build the metro station, behind the closed doors of the erstwhile Carlton cinema, cause almost no disruption and have their PR people tell everyone that there is 'an easy interchange' with the Red line.

    The result is 100 years, or whatever the proposed metro lifetime is, of a desperately poor connection.

    An alternative is to go through the disruption of building a better interchange, i.e. building a station box further up O'Connell Street and close to the Red line, perhaps even something approaching diagonal across the street.

    Then the city could have some disruption, but 100 years (or whatever the metro's lifetime is) of an excellent connection.

    It is preposterous to say that the choice is between a station at Tara Street and a station at an appropriate location on O'Connell Street. The city can clearly have both, with a bit of tweaking of the route on the maps we've been shown.

    Who now remembers the disruption on, for example, Nassau Street, while the LUAS cross-city was being built?

    Given that the metro is underground, the potential for causing even less disruption during construction is there, if the will was.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,437 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    The Metro might be "underground", but its stations are not - they are built by digging a great big hole in the ground, building the platforms, escalators and entrance foyer, and then puttting a roof on top of the whole thing. In the city, it's hard to find an area of unbuilt land that you can just dig down in like this.

    Look at the next block closer to Red line: It's the GPO. I think we can safely say there's no way that's being dug out. Next block south, we have Pennys (the former BHS) but also Easons - a listed building, I believe. You'd have to demolish part of Easons, and all of Pennys to get the box built, then there'd be no frontage at the Pennys site afterward. The owners of that property would want a big payout for that loss.

    South of Abbey Street, it gets harder still: you'll have to CPO multiple high-rent businesses, and a constuction site there would be horrible for Dublin's transport. The same problems are on the opposite side - too many businesses to close down and buy out (and you've got Clery's, another listed building, too).

    Even if you bored out the station, you still need entrances on the surface. These entrances are the size of a medium-sized retail unit if built into the street-side, so the same problem as before applies; and there's no room to build them on the central island of O'Connell Street either, because the GPO Luas stop is using that space, and the next available site is... opposite the Carlton.


    This will be a big problem for any second Metro line - I think it will need to serve the city centre on a North-South alignment roughly parallel to, but west of, the first line (say Corporation offices and the Castle neigbourhood on southside to Four courts or Capel St on the North) would be fun to try to accommodate. At least there's quite a bit of Government-owned space South of the river here, which could make things easier.

    I'd have the line run North-East from the city centre, crossing Metro 1 somewhere at the edge of the city centre, passing Beaumont and Coolock and eventually terminating around Darndale somewhere. South of the city, Harold's Cross, Kimmage.. A third line would then run East-West in the southside, connecting Metro1 and this Metro2 and also connect the coastal DART to Heuston while serving a swathe of very car-dependent neighbourhoods.

    Basically, create a triangle with its points around the city centre core. If I had a bit more time, I'd do a map..



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭orangerhyme


    My preference for Metro line 2 would be from Tallaght out to Poolbeg Peninsula.

    It would go from Tallaght through Ballymount industrial estate and through Crumlin to the Liberties.

    The benefits of this is that it frees up capacity on the red Luas for high density housing in Bluebell/Kylemore and also Ballymount industrial estate can be high density housing. At least 200,000 people could live here. Probably much more.

    This would be supplemented by two Dart stations in Ballyfermot. So the SW of the city would be very well connected. This is where the majority of Dublin's population growth could be, instead of further sprawl and long commuting and traffic congestion. People living here wouldn't need a car.

    This is important for quality of life and the functioning of a modern city (and climate change) as they'd just be 15 minutes from town, work, college. 5 minutes from shops, schools, sports, social etc. By high density I just mean 6 to 8 storey apartments.

    Likewise Poolbeg Peninsula can have it's industry phased out and it can be high rise offices and apartments. 30,000 people could live here easily if you compare the size to the Irish Glass Bottle Site. Along with offices for 50,000 people.

    The city centre and Docklands have almost no development land left so Poolbeg can be like Canary Wharf but much nicer with beaches and parks and marinas. Pigeon house can be a museum maybe.

    I'm not sure exactly where Metro 2 would cross the city centre. Should it be through Tara St and onto Grand Canal Dock and the Glass Bottle Site or else more southern and intersect with Charlemont and Grand Canal Dart and then onto the Glass bottle Site.

    Maybe the southern route is better but each has their merits.

    I'd also CPO Shelbourne Greyhound Stadium, Sportsco and the ESB site. Another 10,000 people could live here.

    Although ambitious this Metro line could be completed in 15 years if they start planning now. Everything else would take decades though but the city would grow into it.

    So it would be two stops in Tallaght - 2 stops in Ballymount - one in Crumlin - 1 or 2 in the Liberties - then it intersects with Metro 1 at either Tara or Charlemont (or maybe St Stephen's Green) - then another stop at Grand Canal Dock - another at the Glass Bottle Site - then two stops at Poolbeg Peninsula.

    I'm sure other parts of Dublin would like a Metro but very few actually have the density to necessitate it.

    This route solves many problems at once like housing, traffic, climate change responsibilities, traffic congestion.

    Post edited by orangerhyme on


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭prunudo


    Except the one problem which you haven't addressed is, what to do with all the container and freight traffic that currently uses the south side of Dublin port.

    I don't understand this desire to squeeze the commercial element of the city all in the name of housing, people still need places to work. As the country and population grows we need to maintain and increase our ability to import and export, not close down large sections of the port and associated industries.


    Yes there's talk of a new deep sea port further up the coast, but there's probably more chance of 3 metrolines and Thornton Hall being built in this century before a new port.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭orangerhyme


    Dublin Port can keep their current port facilities in Poolbeg

    AFAIK Dublin Port will run out of capacity in the near future, so they either expand into Poolbeg or build a new port. Or else make the port more efficient and move out some functions.

    Anyway the Poolbeg element might not be possible, it's more an add on. It involves moving the power stations, the incinerator and either moving the sewage plant or putting it underground. So perhaps it's unrealistic but it's nice to imagine high rise offices and apartments with parks and beaches. Poolbeg already has a park and 3 beaches but nobody really untilises it much. I know people walk to the Lighthouse sometimes.

    The Tallaght to Ballymount aspect is the most important part as that can house 200,000 people close to the city center.

    The council should come up with a masterplan for it now as I've noticed there's planning permission for a big new distribution centre there but that should be outside the M50.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭spillit67


    A East-West line mostly south of the river is what needs to happen next.

    It can go out to Poolbeg, or take a more D+ Tunnel route.

    It can either be through the old heart of the core or near the Canal.

    I personally think the Canal makes the most sense. The S1 R02 option of the Jacob’s study I liked;


    Heuston

    Christchurch

    St Patrick’s Cathedral

    Charlemount

    GCD

    Docklands

    This would:

    • help demand issues on the Red Line dramatically
    • provide the east to west connectivity that the southside has never gotten and justifies given the level of activity there. It also spreads this to more developing areas of the south western core that is getting a lot of development and densification
    • provides a tangible benefit for those living in the south west of the city. Luas (Kimmage) and buses can connect with this line and provide an amazing way to get to other hubs of the city

    The south east up to the south west of the city right now is already built right up to the canal and also over it. Baggot Street Upper, Ballsbridge, Leeson Bridge and Charlemount already are major hubs. The Jacobs study highlights that this has the best traffic numbers.

    The south western corner of the city is also developing quickly. More in the dense residential sense, but there is more than enough out West to attract more than just regular commuters out that way. This line would really fill in the south western core.

    This line is stacked with integrations, benefits a broad geography who can buy into it (if sold right) and will properly rebalance the city than just the “central spine” that the Metrolink fills in so nicely.

    IMO the northside is getting considerable investment with Metrolink and DART+. I would like the focus to be on filling that yawning gap on the southside whilst more stations are added to the Northside DART.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,271 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I'd leave that job for dart tunnel and do

    1) connect metrolink to the green line as originally planned to create a Swords to sandyford line

    2) build a new metro line from Tallaght to darndale serving terenure/rathgar, Harold's x/rathmines, portobello, Kevin St, Dublin Castle/Templebar, Jervis, O'Connnell, Mountjoy, Ballybough with a DART interchange, Marino, Beaumont etc.

    3) build an orbital metro similar to the m50

    4)add more luas lines inside the m50



  • Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭spillit67


    In terms of priorities, I put the East West connector way above them.

    What mode this ultimately takes remains to be seen.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭prunudo


    As Freddie Mercury sang, I want it all, and I want it now.

    I still think an orbital route should be high on the priority list. Linking Shankill (Dart) - Sandyford (Metro 1)- Tallaght/Ballymount - Blanchardstown - Ballycoolin- Northwood (Metro 1). It would link up lots of existing and future public transport and make it much easier for people to get to work. Currently next to impossible to get from south Dublin to west Dublin commuting via PT.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Consonata


    I'm unconvinced to be honest. East West is already being really well served by the the Phoenix Park Tunnel, and even then we haven't really filled out capacity on that line. The South West suburbs and outermost suburbs are really poorly served by rail at the moment. Having an outer ring metro that is high enough frequency also negates somewhat the need of a stub railway between Heuston and GCD, since folk can use it to link between the lines.



  • Registered Users Posts: 453 ✭✭loco_scolo


    It is likely Luas Lucan will be built in the medium term, with a spur from James' to College Green. This would basically double the East-West capacity in the city centre. And that's before you include DartSW via PPT. There's no way additional East-West capacity will be justified, in the medium term, with heavy rail / metro tunnels.

    I suspect the next Metro lines will be Charlemont to Tallaght, and Metro West. The ability to use Metro West to change from one radial to another would reduce pressure on the city centre interchanges, and enable us to 'get by' with the current Dart lines and Metrolink.

    No question Metrolink will be at full capacity fairly quickly, but I still think it'll be years before another heavy line is built under the heart of the city.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,271 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I wouldn't bother with lucan luas, too far for an on street tram to deliver good city-suburb journey times, the C buses would be preferred by commuters for better journey times. Luas extensions outside of the M50 are a dead end, too slow not enough capacity long term. Either Make it a segregated Lucan-Ringsend metro or build dart underground and a lucan DART spur from Fonthill and Griffeen Park. We could also open a Lucan North Station on DART+ West and bring in frequent feeder buses for cheap in the short term. Spurs from DART+ SW are kind of a requirement given the very low population along the line already. Another one to the centre of Naas wouldn't go a miss either.



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,456 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    One thing to keep in mind is that as far as I know it would all be above ground and most of the route is fields. That should make it much cheaper and quicker to build then any underground line. It would be more inline with the costs of Luas extensions, then underground, probably somewhere in the middle.

    It could be quiet an affordable option with I'd guess a strong Cost Benefit Analysis.

    If it is built as Metro rather then Luas, imagine someone in Blanchardstown or Tallaght jumping on the Metro and having it bring them all the way direct to Dublin Airport [1]

    They could even carry on to Swords and onto Rush and Lusk to interchange with a train heading to Belfast.

    [1] Yes if it was built as Metro, then Metro West trains could share track with the Metrolink line into the Airport and onto Swords, etc.

    As an aside, if we do a East to West tunnel, then that should absolutely be DART.



  • Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭spillit67


    Not on the Southside it isn’t.

    The problem with the area between Tallaght to the Green Line is that it is semi D land.

    There isn’t even the space for a N11 style road. The densities are mediocre. The end of the line is the mountains. There are few larger employment bases, few educational areas- very little to drive activity there aside from those who live there.

    I expect that the Knocklyon Luas will be a pain to construct, at the moment is is crayons.

    Juxtapose that with the south east of the county, has a much different profile.

    The southside city core needs ways to get around it quicker. This will be of benefit to a lot of Dubliners (including Northsiders).



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭orangerhyme


    I agree that I think Tallaght to Charlemont/Tara/SSG should be next metro line.

    Maybe it goes to Charlemont - Grand Canal Dart - then under the river to the Docklands station. I'm not sure.

    Very few areas of Dublin have the density to necessitate a Metro.

    If Dart+ has enough capacity, that could serve Lucan. Just needs a few feeder buses.

    I'm not sure about Metro West. It's just connecting sprawling suburbs. Most of these people are commuting to town.



Advertisement