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 (Swords to Charlemont only)

Options
1117118120122123189

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,300 ✭✭✭pigtown


    Well they wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't raise all concerns. I wonder if these concerns were raised during the design process and then dismissed by TII?

    What park are NPWS worried about?



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,776 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Well TII and senior government officials probably should have held a separate meeting with state agencies, their concerns would be listened to but it is impossible to negate every concern so don't push it. It should have been pointed out to the likes of DAA in particular that they are going to benefit hugely from the project so don't rock the boat.

    Metrolink is government policy and state agencies have to follow government policy, I'm sure they are all over policy when it suits them.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,798 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    There concerns presumably were listened to during the multiple rounds of consultations. If they are raising anything new in their submissions to ABP they need to be fired into the sun.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,147 ✭✭✭RobertFoster


    I believe it's the park at the corner of Berkeley Rd. and Eccles St., opposite the old Mater entrance: https://maps.app.goo.gl/oksZGFzAsAbyZjGf9



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭JohnnyChimpo


    Which is kept under lock and key by some nuns with no public access. They should count themselves lucky not to be turfed out in the street, nevermind having a massive gated garden in the city centre to themselves.

    Post edited by JohnnyChimpo on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,300 ✭✭✭pigtown


    Fair enough but if it turns out that the location of the airport station has a knockon impact on some future development at the airport I'm quite sure the DAA want it on record that it's not their fault



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    There has been 7 years worth of time for consulting with TII about the various features of the project. Is there that much new information that only came out when the railway order was submitted in 2022, or was there an opportunity to address any potential issues in house before getting ABP involved?



  • Registered Users Posts: 122 ✭✭ArcadiaJunction


    Cognitive Dissonance All Over Again.

    Just like 15 years ago time to 'delay' the plan for another CGI effort down the road. MetroFast might be a good name for the new design in 10 or 20 years from now. I can't wait for the new graphics of yet more stuff they have no intention of building once the consultants have had their sufficient snout time in the trough.

    Looking forward though to the Finglas Luas going to the airport and the politicians acting like its a CrossRail level project.



  • Registered Users Posts: 910 ✭✭✭brianc89


    Also was the original Metro North plan not the same (more or less) north of DCU? I thought T2 was designed with Metro in mind years ago??...

    Maybe they're secretly planning T3 on those expensive lands between the runways and don't want to admit it!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,301 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    The bottom paragraph was a highlight of 2015. We have three 'big' projects ready to go, Metro North, DART U, and Luas BXD, FG picks the cheapest of the 3 then the FG brit obsessed press office says its our Crossrail 😂


    It's definitely a pattern of behaviour that one can see being repeated with luas finglas



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,590 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    “It should have been pointed out to the likes of DAA in particular that they are going to benefit hugely from the project so don't rock the boat.”

    Unfortunately the DAA might prefer if this project didn’t go ahead and people were instead forced to use their expensive parking at the airport! They make a lot of their revenue from parking.



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


    All of those gobshites are given far too much of a platform... just build it... if you appease them, you piss someone else off... the circus has gone on for decades...



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,776 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    FCC aren't too keen on letting them expand parking and the CCPC mightn't let them operate the former Quick Park site so increasing parking proportional to passenger growth probably isn't an option for DAA. Also having a Metro with long operating hours would make attracting and retaining staff much easier. Plus some of the surface car parks could be much more valuable if redeveloped (even if parking is retained at ground level) with Metrolink in place.

    Basically, the government should be telling DAA that if you are going to make this more difficult for us, don't come looking for us to ease your problems later.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,300 ✭✭✭pigtown


    You all seem to be taking a pretty standard element of the planning process personally.

    We don't actually know what the individual bodies have said in their submissions. Wouldn't it be strange if these bodies had no comment on possibly the largest infrastructure project ever in the city which will directly affect their interest?

    I'd be pretty annoyed if the OPW didn't take the opportunity to reinforce just how the project will negatively affect Stephen's Green. It's up to TII to argue for the greater good of the city and ABP to take a balanced view.



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


    Further delays costing millions every single day in Inflation ... if this project isn't built. I hope they just say we have no appetite to build infrastructure on this scale in this country. Never waste this kind of time and money again redesigning the wheel for a third time, if there is no intention of building it..

    Post edited by Murph85 on


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,434 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Mod: Off topic post deleted.

    This thread is not a platform for a political diatribe. Read the charter before posting.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,979 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    From the SBP article :

    "The project is expected to cost more than €10bn, with a worst case scenario putting the bill at €23bn."

    The official guidance figure is 9 billion and the 23 billion is so far-fetched that it borders on misinformation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,179 ✭✭✭prunudo


    The media love to mention the top end figure, they love to stir the pot, evoke emotions and before we know we'll hear, think how many houses, schools and hospitals could be built for the same price, sure the luas and buses do the job, maybe a connection to the dartline would be better!

    The sooner this gets through abp and granted approval the better, the sooner it starts, the sooner the naysayers will disappear.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,434 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Colm McCarthy, economist, stated a long time ago that the airport public transport needs for passengers (and I presume workers) could be served entirely by buses.

    Of course, the car parks at the airport are now totally insufficient, and the traffic congestion makes adequate prediction of travel times difficult or impossible. The only answer is a proper rail connection, which Metrolink is the obvious answer, as MetroNorth was before it.

    The Irish Times, for reasons best understood by its editor, is utterly opposed to MetroLink, Busconnect, and most almost any attempts to restrict car based traffic. RTE are not far behind them in this regard.

    The original cost for the metro was €3 billion, and opening should have been around now. The Children's Hospital should have been open years ago at a cost of €250 million. The M20 Limerick to Cork motorway was shovel ready over a decade ago.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    The cost of shelving all these has resulted in serious cost increases alongside the obvious lack of benefits from them not being built.

    Whilst some of these projects were too ambitious to be constructed during 2011-2016 there really was no excuse to not get them through planning. Even smaller schemes like DART Expansion which could have been segmented. We had serious excess availability of labour back then too and we have labour shortages across the entire construction sector.

    The lack of stuff built between 2016 and 2020 was a serious mistake but at that we were building more stuff then than we are now (Luas BXD, M11, N25, M17/M18 etc). This time next year we’ll have 1 major road project under construction and the only rail works being some engineering advance works for the Cork Suburban Rail project.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,434 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    And to make matters worse, the plan is to fund these projects through PPP* funding.


    *PPP - Public funds into Private Pockets. Given that the state is awash with € billions, why would we pay higher interest rates to fund private sources of funds. The state can always get lower cost of funds.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,776 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Stupid alternative acronym aside, only one of the Metrolink contracts is to be done through PPP, the others (three civil works contracts) will see the contractors paid directly for works satisfactorily done in the traditional way.

    The PPP will be for the line-wide services and rolling stock. This will involve many complex systems all of which must be integrated and work in sync. It makes sense to have a single point of responsibility (the PPP company, which will likely be a JV between the providers of some of these systems, they will subcontract others) and for them to be paid over the life of their contract, rather than paying them everything thing and letting them walk away.

    It isn't about the cost of finance, it's about getting what you pay for and if the same people who install the systems are responsible for running them for the next 20 - 30 years and get paid over that time, you can be sure they will do a better job than if they can walk away with the money in their pocket and any issues can be blamed on the operator (who also won't take responsibility for any issues).

    Seems like we have this conversation every year.



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


    Headed to the airport earlier. Was given a lift. But even if they build metrolink, coming from Dundrum id probably drive or take the bus ideally if it were reliable.im going to have to change from luas to metrolink, then go how many stops to airport? Including from Dundrum on ? 20? Pretty insufferable...

    The decision to run the initial Green line onscreen, was a farce, metrolink it duplicating its route for or as good as, for several km. . Along with luas being glacial in city centre, the disruption during the build...



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    I've gotten the Piccadilly line into London loads of times, then changed to another train to finish the journey. Well over an hour on the train. Sure, you can get a taxi to the airport, but the cost would be astronomical in comparison to the price of a trip on the Luas & Metro. Even without the price difference, you'd be surprised at how many people will choose to use the Luas & Metrolink combo, Irish people don't really have a grasp of how transformative having two high capacity, high reliability, and high frequency lines meet.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,588 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    What a load of absolute nonsense.

    How hard would it be to get a LUAS for 11 minutes from Dundrum to Charlemont and then switch to Metrolink for 20 minutes to the Airport.

    So all told about 35-40 minutes journey time from Dundrum to Dublin Airport if we include the time switching at Charlemont, all for €2.

    And no, it’s not 25 stops. It’s 6 on the LUAS and then 11 on Metrolink.

    If that’s “insufferable” you have problems.

    People in cities all over the world use train, metro, bus and tram combinations to get from A to B but for some Irish people that is “insufferable”. This sort of mentality is bonkers.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,179 ✭✭✭prunudo


    As a society we're going to have to accept transfers between lines or services. This applies to bus connects as well. It works in every other country so no reason it won't work here. Once the infrastructure and service is there, it will become second nature and much more accepted.

    Coming from north Wicklow, the idea of Dundrum to airport being troublesome on public transport is laughable.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭orangerhyme


    It would be much better if they could extend it to Sandyford though.

    I'm hoping they can revisit it. Maybe the objectors in Ranelagh will have died.

    Lots of development room in Sandyford for high rise apartments and offices.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,179 ✭✭✭prunudo


    Or all the way to the coast to meet the Dart, somewhere between Shankill and Dun Laoghaire, but that's ot and I'll be told there's a thread for that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 704 ✭✭✭marathon2022


    You guys never learn, this is a dead duck. The leader of the green party has been angling for a delay, that really says it all. A public transport solution even the green side of government doesn't want.

    If only it was a southside project, would have been built and lauded as great success by now.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,179 ✭✭✭prunudo


    If this doesn't go ahead now, it will never be built. If this metro plan falls to the side we'll be spending the next 25 years repeating the same problems and never progressing as a country. It simply has to be built, and more lines planned.



Advertisement