It would be grounds for a JR to be successful which is what they are trying to avoid (well, they are trying to avoid one being granted full stop ideally).
Question still stands though, if ABP grant an RO but then a JR is granted against a specific area of the project (let’s say Charlemont with regard to local parking or traffic flow for residents) can construction start in swords, or is the whole project blocked while JR is ongoing?
No, a successful JR would rule out the entire application and send it back to the planning stage. Entirely possible that it would be an easy fix, but it would raise the prospect of a consultation being required.
Best to do everything in your power to get it through first time.
Forgive me if I'm misreading tom, but I think the question is more if an application to take a JR is granted what happens. Whether a stay is put on part or all of the project.
I think that is a case-by-case court judgement but I admit I don't really know.
He's looking after the legal profession of course, generating man hours where none would otherwise exist.
Application granted essentially means that no meaningful work can take place until the JR is over. Legally speaking, at least as far as I know, you could definitely continue planning, tendering (on a conditional basis), but no actual work could take place, no CPOs, etc.
Sorry yeah I meant if an application for a JR is applied for, and is successful (as in the BC case), does the entire project go back to the drawing board. @catinabox has answered above. It’s absolutely ludicrous that could happen IMO.
Thanks for the response, why do the people of ACP want a station? It'd be a 2 minute walk to Collins Avenue, would there even be enough commuters to fill 2 stations that close? Shame a railway order probably wont be given till next year, this metro really needs to start construction.
The current plan for ACP is to build a ventilation/evacuation shaft, and the locals there would prefer to have no works at all, or a station. ABP have been at pains to point out that the numbers kinda dictate the station locations chosen, which unfortunately means that a shaft is required in ACP.
Has anyone heard what's happening with this? 4 months now since the hearing ended and ABP sent it back to public consultation but it's just been radio silence ever since. The last update on the metrolink website was October last year
Depending on who you ask it's either all going to plan or it's dead and buried
Schrödinger's metro
it's really at the mercy of the general election now as it's unlikely to get planning before the Dail dissolves.
But weren't they supposed to re-do public consultations based on the new info they shared in the oral hearing? Presumably it shouldn't take half a year to organise that when all the detail was already available in the hearing
Presumably they are taking a belt and braces approach, making damn sure that everything that was raised in the oral hearing is addressed and is legally watertight.
Look at the disaster that Irish Rail have made of the dart plus project, I'd much prefer TII to take their time and get everything right first time.
Well, the whole cause of this extra delay is that they didn't get everything right the first time around and had to submit so much extra documentation that it's been sent back to consultation stage. But I take your general point
You mean they couldn't predict the future?
Some of the mistakes they made were fairly basic ones like not knowing a building had been demolished and replaced entirely.
How many years? Ten? One hundred? A thousand, maybe. And it will be perfect.
The Irish Times is at it again !
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2024/08/07/is-the-metrolink-really-the-best-way-to-provide-a-rail-link-to-dublin-airport/
I'm only referring to the trope in the headline because I didn't bother clicking on it. If Transport Infrastructure Ireland dropped the airport station, the Irish Times Brigade would have nothing to write about.
It's really not worth clicking into.
A less rambling ramble that he normally has, but a ramble none the less. Nothing of any value in it - no data, numbers, alternative plans or any facts to back up his argument. He sounds like he's resigned to the reality that Metrolink will be constructed.
The only figures he mentions are the "11 billion" cost, which inexplicably becomes "12 billion" later in the article. Obviously both of these are a typo and he meant to say "9.5 billion"!!
McDowell will always find an axe to grind about metrolink without ever mentioning the elephant in the room that is his house being quite close to the Ranelagh station which is his real only problem with it.
Even if I had taxpayer-funded city-centre parking, I’d be delighted if a Metro station opened at the end of my road, with a service every 5-10 minutes that could take me to the airport in 30 minutes.
But maybe I’m just odd.
The increasingly un-serious Irish Times continues to burn through it's rapidly diminishing credibility with nonsense like this and daily opinion pieces headed "The Irish Times View…" that are as pompous as they are vacuous.
My view of the Irish Times…Move on from Dublin in The Rare Oul Times and move into the 21st Century.
Dublin urgently needs Metrolink and the Irish Times continues to be obstructive.
Every time McDowell or some other dinosaur writes something like that, there needs to be a formal reply from a pressure group until either the IT or McDowell get embarrassed for being called out.
Whatever happened the Dublin commuter coalition, they used to be fairly proactive on things like that.
The comments on the IT article are 100% critical, calling him all manner of things, it seems he's regarded as somewhat dothery or out of touch
Still are, but it takes time to sort out a response, and there's no guarantee that it'll make the news either. They went quite big on the recent Shakespeare Dublin City Centre stuff, so I've no doubt that they'll hit back.
McMD mentions very light rail, and trackless trams. Are these buses he is writing about?
Did he not realise the All Ireland Strategic Rail Review excluded commuting infrastructure?
Did he even read it?
Now all we need is that other relic of a retired economist to throw in his ill-informed nonsense into the argument.
Yes, the McUseless two
I've no interest in reading his article, but I assume he is talking about the ART (Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit) system they are experimenting with in China.
You are right that they are a bus, but they are also sort of something more then a bus. They look like a Luas, ride like a Luas due to the weight of the batteries they use, so much smoother then a typical bus and at 30 meters long, they are longer then the longest typical articulated buses which is 24m (18m max in Ireland).
Typically a bus driver wouldn't be able to handle a 30m long bus, but the use of Lidar and guided markings and other automation to allow for longer vehicles then buses normally allow.
It certainly isn't suitable for serving the airport for various reasons. However it could be possibly an interesting option in future for the "Luasification" of some of the BusConnects routes.
