Loop Line Bridge – specifically the ads…
- This topic has 166 replies, 51 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
@Morlan wrote:
They should paint a mural on it of the Custom House and the Liffey.
I never presume a person’s age so Morlan your idea was first mooted by President Erskine Childers back in the early seventies. He probably got the idea from the ‘muriel’ panted in Johnny Mac’s in Leestown (aka Dunboyne) in The Riodan’s. Childers had been Minister for Post & Telegraphs with broadcasting under his mandate so I’m sure that someone with a slim black laptop case can get €80,000 to write a report as to how he came up with the thought. (You know the type of report, the health service is a mess (€126,000), the poor don’t like being poor (€105,000) or most people have ten toes, except those who had been in accidents resulting in injuries to their lower limbs (€63,000). The last one was particularly interesting reading.
@Morlan wrote:
They should paint a mural on it of the Custom House and the Liffey.
@lunasa wrote:
I never presume a person’s age so Morlan your idea was first mooted by President Erskine Childers back in the early seventies.
Funny enough I independently had almost the same fanciful notion a few years ago. My idea was less expensive and less permenant than a paint job; I was thinking more along the lines of using that (pastic/canvas?) material they use to drape over scafolding to cover the side of the bridge. The idea was to create a large temporary trompe d’oeil to hide most of the bridge (I don’t think the supports could be hidden effectively this way). The perspective trick would only work from near one particular vantage point so the obvious candidate would be the center of O’Connell Bridge. I started some calculations to work out the limits of where the trick would be effective in terms of distance from the central vantage point.
I didn’t have time to dedicate to the project and to be honest was a bit embarassed by the whimsical nature of the idea to research it properly. If I get a couple of hours I might try to dig out what I had done at the time. Maybe someone would give me €80k to properly spec. the idea 😀
the loop line is a scar on the capital.. its needs to be replaced by a tunnell from connolly to Peirce at least
yep all we need is a few more billion to spend on what would be a vanity project. It would be cheaper to dismantle the Custom house brick by brick and move it to Eden Quay than to build another rail tunnel under the Liffey!
Am I the only one not deeply offended by this bridge? I know it’s ugly but it fails to make my blood boil.
€1bn for a beautiful vista over the Quays… well worth it IMHO. Maybe not this decade but one to look out or in the next decade
@alonso wrote:
yep all we need is a few more billion to spend on what would be a vanity project. It would be cheaper to dismantle the Custom house brick by brick and move it to Eden Quay than to build another rail tunnel under the Liffey!
Am I the only one not deeply offended by this bridge? I know it’s ugly but it fails to make my blood boil.
Not at all, Alonso. I feel it’s pretty acceptable and is extremely essential. Even without these mitigating factors, can you imagine the difficulties in getting the dart to a safe depth under the river, given the elevation it rides at currently through the city centre?! That would be a HUGE job, for only a superficial visual improvement.
I accept that it ruins a nice view, but I don’t really believe it is as big a factor in the division between the docklands and the city centre as, say, Pearse St or North Earl St/Talbot St are.
Incidentally, here are a few shots from weeks ago of the repainting and sandblasting.
Im afraid the loopline is going nowhere. 🙁
The problem is that you cant move the line underground as Connolly station been deemed unsuitable for underground tunneling (which is why the Metro ‘Tram’ North and the Interconnector don’t go near Connolly). And even if you could, the tunnel would have to start all the way back near the Killester stop as the track is elevated above ground level shortly after Killester all the way into Connolly. The track doesn’t go to ground level until before Lansdowne Rd. So moving it underground would require a long tunnel which or course be VERY expensive. It is a pity as it would be ideal.
For me, painting the bridge light grey would be a very good idea as it will look good and bright but it would help (in a small way) to not be as much as a eyesore to Customs Hse.
There is another option (a very long longshot) which is replace it with a new, more slender bridge, possibly a suspension bridge with a single tower at Tara St station. :confused:
Perhaps some cosmetic changes can be put in place. For example can the overhead wires be removed and replace with an electricity source at track level? And an imagnative lighting display could at least make more of a feature of the bridge.
Im not sure the “Hungerford” idea is any use though as a predestrian route already exists between Tara and Connolly (Butt Bridge) and Pearse and Connolly (Shaw Bridge)
@StephenC wrote:
Perhaps some cosmetic changes can be put in place. For example can the overhead wires be removed and replace with an electricity source at track level?
retrofitting the entire DART fleet to be compatible with track power might be a tad pricey and disruptive.
@StephenC wrote:
Im not sure the “Hungerford” idea is any use though as a predestrian route already exists between Tara and Connolly (Butt Bridge) and Pearse and Connolly (Shaw Bridge)
I actually didn’t really mean it as a connection to the train station when I suggested it. It was more of a way of getting people up above the city to see the view, without having as much of a visual impact as the proposed cable car would have on the city as a result.
@weehamster wrote:
Im afraid the loopline is going nowhere. 🙁
There is another option (a very long longshot) which is replace it with a new, more slender bridge, possibly a suspension bridge with a single tower at Tara St station. :confused:
integrating the station into the bridge structure..where they want a high rise anyway,. i like it brilliant idea…
@weehamster wrote:
Im afraid the loopline is going nowhere. 🙁
The problem is that you cant move the line underground as Connolly station been deemed unsuitable for underground tunneling (which is why the Metro ‘Tram’ North and the Interconnector don’t go near Connolly). And even if you could, the tunnel would have to start all the way back near the Killester stop as the track is elevated above ground level shortly after Killester all the way into Connolly. The track doesn’t go to ground level until before Lansdowne Rd. So moving it underground would require a long tunnel which or course be VERY expensive. It is a pity as it would be ideal.
For me, painting the bridge light grey would be a very good idea as it will look good and bright but it would help (in a small way) to not be as much as a eyesore to Customs Hse.
There is another option (a very long longshot) which is replace it with a new, more slender bridge, possibly a suspension bridge with a single tower at Tara St station. :confused:
Why is moving from an elevated track down into a tunnel, say after Grand Canal Dock and before Pearse, a problem? Not enough room?
If they did put the line underground it would release a large amount of prime city centre land that could be used to part finance it. For example if the Pearse stop was underground Pearse station could be sold on and redeveloped. As could Tara and all the track in between.
They could also get rid of Tara street stop altogether in favour of looping a bit further up to a cross liffey station next to the metro north cross liffey station: so O’Connell bridge stop would be the transfer point for metro north, DART, luas red and green. The Lucan luas stop might be quite close as well.
@Maskhadov wrote:
€1bn for a beautiful vista over the Quays… well worth it IMHO. Maybe not this decade but one to look out or in the next decade
you forget the “art” that’s going to ruin the vista further down
@JoePublic wrote:
Why is moving from an elevated track down into a tunnel, say after Grand Canal Dock and before Pearse, a problem? Not enough room?
If they did put the line underground it would release a large amount of prime city centre land that could be used to part finance it. For example if the Pearse stop was underground Pearse station could be sold on and redeveloped. As could Tara and all the track in between.
They could also get rid of Tara street stop altogether in favour of looping a bit further up to a cross liffey station next to the metro north cross liffey station: so O’Connell bridge stop would be the transfer point for metro north, DART, luas red and green. The Lucan luas stop might be quite close as well.
there’s already plans to develop the land over and around Tara and Pearse. Airspace is something IE have tragically failed to exploit up to now.
The DART will connect with Metro North at stephens green anyway, What you’re proposing would effectively shut the DART for the best part of a decade. That’d be one hell of an EIS to write!
I’m not 100% on the ‘swing’ required, but it’s a shame the opportunity wasn’t taken when the DART was being developed to investigate moving/replacing the Loop Line further to the east behind the Custom House. Perhaps doing away with Tara Street and taking advantage of the vast acres of derelict land north and south of the river, including the IFSC site for the new line. The new Platforms 5, 6 and 7 could have been purpose-built to the east of Connolly instead, with the current 1890’s platforms given over to further terminating space that Connolly has so desperately needed for the past decade.
It would have created extra rail capacity, and improved the wider city, partially funded by selling off Loop Line sites. The Custom House Liffey vista would largely have been restored, as well as the Gardiner Street vista of same, and indeed ironically that of Connolly Station itself down Talbot Street.
@alonso wrote:
there’s already plans to develop the land over and around Tara and Pearse. Airspace is something IE have tragically failed to exploit up to now.
The DART will connect with Metro North at stephens green anyway, What you’re proposing would effectively shut the DART for the best part of a decade. That’d be one hell of an EIS to write!
There’s a lot of land between Pearse street and grand canal dock where trains are parked etc where perhaps a tunnel could be sunk without affecting the current line. I’m not familiar with the dart line north of Connolly. Obviously the current line would have to remain open until a tunnel was built. I’m not an engineer perhaps it can’t be done. Anywho, there’s no harm in tossing out ideas, just in case the money is still rolling post transport 21!
It’s just not going to happen. The whole point of the underground interconnector is to increase capacity on the loop line.
Poor auld Custom House, sitting there ignored by the old city. Now we have the DDDA threatening to block its view from the east with some horrendous sculpture. I don’t care what the DDDA’s proposal is, leave the river alone.
© Copyright hanscmueller@JoePublic wrote:
There’s a lot of land between Pearse street and grand canal dock where trains are parked etc where perhaps a tunnel could be sunk without affecting the current line. I’m not familiar with the dart line north of Connolly. Obviously the current line would have to remain open until a tunnel was built. I’m not an engineer perhaps it can’t be done. Anywho, there’s no harm in tossing out ideas, just in case the money is still rolling post transport 21!
It’ certainly couldn’t be done, unless the dart was turned into a roller-coaster.:)
No way on earth this is ever going to happen, and given that rail commuters were hacked off by the closure of the Dart line for the demolition of the West Stand at Lansdowne for a weekend there is bugger all chance of the busiest rail lines in the country being closed for such a long period of time just so a ‘nice view’ could be made available to the 50 or so people in Dublin who are interested!!!
@Rory W wrote:
It’ certainly couldn’t be done, unless the dart was turned into a roller-coaster.:)
I’m sure you’re right and that you know what you’re talking about, but I don’t see why it is totally obvious that is impossible to build a tunnel next to an existing rail line while keeping the existing line open. I’m sure such a thing has never been accomplished anywhere in the world before. I look forward to seeing the roller coaster loop-the-loop at heuston station as the interconnector emerges next to/under/around the existing lines. 😀
Anywho, I concede that it will never happen and there are many more important transport projects required for Dublin, but the original point I was making was that if they did do it it would release acres of city centre development land to part finance it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
