Dublin Airport Metro to have unconnected terminus?
- This topic has 259 replies, 61 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
@Rory W wrote:
What were you expecting from the Institute of Engineers – pretty pictures?
If those are supposed to be representations of what the stations will look like, then that’s exactly what I would expect.
@AndrewP wrote:
It will send a clear signal out to the junkies and winos to move in and within months the costliest piece of infrastructure in the country will be an underground toilet. Would you spend a million euro on a new house, then not paint the walls to save a few quid?
Lets wait and see, far bigger cities with a lot more social problems than Dublin seem to be able to manage their undergrounds. Agree that stations should be well painted etc.
The ‘stripped back’ style of the stations is very reminiscent of the Copenhagen Metro which I saw last year. I thought the overall feel was minimal but sleek and modern also. Certainly did not feel cheap/tacky or in any way dangerous.
@DGF wrote:
The ‘stripped back’ style of the stations is very reminiscent of the Copenhagen Metro which I saw last year. I thought the overall feel was minimal but sleek and modern also. Certainly did not feel cheap/tacky or in any way dangerous.
From what I recall of the media coverage of the cost-cutting measures a while back in terms of station finish, it was said that the Dublin metro WON’T have high quality finishes like the Copenhagen metro – personally I haven’t been on it.
We’re not really talking about buckets of paint here, it’s the architectural quality of the stations in general. Personally I think it would be ok to scrimp on all but four stations – St. Stephen’s green, O’Connell, Parnell square and the airport.
I agree finishing some of the central stations and airport to a higher degree with the same finish to the rest to follow if / when more funding is available might be a good option.
Some stations in London such as Westminster are well finished but most of the others are hardly works of art and people don’t seem to mind too much.
JoePublic wrote:From what I recall of the media coverage of the cost-cutting measures a while back in terms of station finish, it was said that the Dublin metro WON’T have high quality finishes like the Copenhagen metro – personally I haven’t been on it.Well, thats certainly interesting. I hadn’t heard that comparison being made. There definitely is a point to be made about the quality of the public environment in the metro as anything that ages/deteriorates quickly has the potential to cause problems in the medium-long term. Lets just hope that a lower budget can be utilised with a bit of imagination to provide something that is acceptable.
@JoePublic wrote:
If those are supposed to be representations of what the stations will look like, then that’s exactly what I would expect.
I dont think those were accurate representations of the metro train – unless we are getting Romania c1950 coaches.
I don’t have particular faith in those renders
@CC105 wrote:
Lets wait and see, far bigger cities with a lot more social problems than Dublin seem to be able to manage their undergrounds.
I’m not sure the cities you’re talking about have the same tolerance of littering, graffiti, public drunkenness etc that Dublin has. Bare concrete might look OK if it’s left bare but we all know it won’t be. And as soon as it starts deteriorating, passengers will start feeling uncomfortable and staying away from it.
I’m not talking gold leaf on the walls here. What’s wrong with plain white tiling? On a practical level, if would be a lot easier to keep clean than concrete.@AndrewP wrote:
Bare concrete might look OK if it’s left bare but we all know it won’t be. And as soon as it starts deteriorating, passengers will start feeling uncomfortable and staying away from it.
Total joke, very valid point… cost/benefit on station finishes cant warrant this crap can it?
I seem to remember a headline “splash out on under-liffey station” or whatever???
What is p11 position on this?mouse
i
c
k
e
yhold on for the ride!!!! I hope they come to there senses fast…
make a new framework plan with DCC for parnell to st stephens green limit traffic on the quays to 2 lanes and pedestrinise dublin… working with the public
Spend millions cleaning dublins buildings from pollution…
Does any one have a photo of the roof above connolly station where the trains park its black!!! and the air so clean…
Only then will dublin come close to calling itself a world class city…@JoePublic wrote:
If those are supposed to be representations of what the stations will look like, then that’s exactly what I would expect.
Yes I imagine they are what the stations look like _to an engineer_, someone who sees the engineering layout which , I am sure, is all they have thought about to this point, I am with Rory W, the engineering points are probably worth discussing: isn’t it cool that the O’Connell bridge station stretches so far north, is it really a good idea not to have long elevators, the design is also worth discussing, but not, I would guess, based on these pictures.
And for what its worth, at least it doesn’t have shamrocks.
Although I agree that concrete is not the only option, I think plain white tiles may look a bit like you’ve entered an underground public toilet.
I was on the Copenhagen metro just last week and it is extremely bland and indescript.
Ideally, i would like to see a bit of expression but into the design of the individual stations but at least leaving them bare faced now paves the way for future fit-outs and perhaps even competions for artistry and individualism in the stations…correct me if im wrong but weren’t Paris’ art nouveau metro station entrances an after design?
I’d prefer the stations to be ordinary now with the possibility of being attractive later rather then rushing a cr*p fit-out. We do need to get the thing built urgently to ease some congestion and provide the link to the airport
@shed wrote:
I was on the Copenhagen metro just last week and it is extremely bland and indescript.
Ideally, i would like to see a bit of expression but into the design of the individual stations but at least leaving them bare faced now paves the way for future fit-outs and perhaps even competions for artistry and individualism in the stations…correct me if im wrong but weren’t Paris’ art nouveau metro station entrances an after design?
I’d prefer the stations to be ordinary now with the possibility of being attractive later rather then rushing a cr*p fit-out. We do need to get the thing built urgently to ease some congestion and provide the link to the airport
The purpose of mass transit is to move people from points A to wherever they want to go in a fast and reliable manner. They do not exist to provide an aesthetic experience. Once the thing does the job who give a toss.
@Cute Panda wrote:
The purpose of mass transit is to move people from points A to wherever they want to go in a fast and reliable manner. They do not exist to provide an aesthetic experience. Once the thing does the job who give a toss.
Surely one of the ultimate aims of building the metro is to persuade people to use public transport rather than the private car. With this aim in mind it makes sense to spend a few bob making the stations nice places to be rather than cheap or shabby looking.
I think that it seems likely that the stations will end up like the boardwalk – full of junkies and bums.
@Cute Panda wrote:
The purpose of mass transit is to move people from points A to wherever they want to go in a fast and reliable manner. They do not exist to provide an aesthetic experience. Once the thing does the job who give a toss.
the rest of the world must be wrong then!!! and ireland right…
calatrava has done at least 3 metro stations… and he is an engineer so its ok then?
new york
valencia
lisbornto name some…
gaudi must not be an engineer!!!
And yet we are happy to fork out millions for the james joyce bridge that does nothing for the city… It takes away just so a few hundred cars can cross a bridge…
The same goes for the proposed bridge in docklands sure there nice but they don’t add to the identity of the city
they take a piece of spain and put it in ireland… its a joke…its like saying why get richard rogers to design madrid airport???? Ive been there a few times and I can say it made the experience better…
This station will be the face of ireland the first and last thing tourists remember / see more popular than the book of kells and the guinness factory put together and they spend 14 million euro on one tv commercial
and in the uk they spend 800 million pounds on one station…are you saying you want the new airport to be concrete to???
so go figure…
@Cute Panda wrote:
The purpose of mass transit is to move people from points A to wherever they want to go in a fast and reliable manner. They do not exist to provide an aesthetic experience. Once the thing does the job who give a toss.
@damcw wrote:
Surely one of the ultimate aims of building the metro is to persuade people to use public transport rather than the private car.
Exactly, damcw. I know a significant number of people who will willingly get the Luas but who’d never consider the bus, the given reason usually having something to do with the perceived higher standard. And these are people for whom the 46A would be a better option on a journey time basis but who still choose the Luas Green Line instead.
There’s no better antidote to anti-social behaviour than large crowds, so if spending a little bit more money achieves that, do it.
Having said that, I still maintain that bare concrete can look good in stations. And whatever material is chosen, maintnenace will be key. You could gild the whole thing in gold leaf, but if it’s not swept or cleaned it will go downhill rapidly.
EDIT: sham-rockmetro- might be worth doing a bit of research on the actual purpose of the two Calatrava bridges- a few hundred private cars indeed.
As with any surface – properly maintained Concrete can look great
Attached are some images from the jubilee line extn including Fosters Canary Wharf which has a bare concrete finish, Canning town stn with a bare concrete finish and even heathrow central which also has a bare finish. They all look fine to me.
IMO White (or any colour) tiles would look hideously dated at this stage.
Again: the renders, I dont believe they will look like that at all and are for representative purposes only and there is a lot of huffing and puffing going on about nothing here. Doesn’t anyone remember the Luas renderings and how bad they looked
And any time that I’ve been in London, Berlin, Paris or Barcelona I haven’t thought – ugh the underground stations are dirty or dated etc I’ll never come back to this city again. It’s all down to maintenance of the station, a security presence (which I’m sure they will have – top prevent ‘boardwalkism’) and the service of the trains themselves.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
