Metro West

An even more pointless project than I originally thought.
It will be excellent, however, should you want to visit three suburban shopping centres in one day – Liffey Valley, Blanch and the Square.
Who is going to use this?
I’m originally from Blanch and can’t even begin to imagine how this could be of any use to anybody out there.

I agree, its a bit of a nonsense. Why not just install a high quality bus service between these areas and at least see if there is a demand! T21 should be a plan that prioritises the transport projects needed to keep the city functioning (and its desperately needed as anyone involved in yesterdays farce on the M50 and N11 will testify – reports of 7 hour round journeys to and from workplaces!!). This is certainly not a priority. The Interconnector which along with Metro North are the essentail elements in the system should be in place within 4 years and not the 6 planned for Metro North and 9 planned for Interconnector.

@StephenC wrote:

The Interconnector which along with Metro North are the essentail elements in the system should be in place within 4 years and not the 6 planned for Metro North and 9 planned for Interconnector.

I totaly agree a lot of T21 is very suspect such as the Citywest extension and this whilst more and more pressure is placed on the loopline.

Haven’t we been here before…

Paddy O’Pundit’s Guide to Urban Rail Transport.

“the Tallaght Luas is feckin useless, no better than the bus…”

“the Sandyford Luas, was of money, runs on the street in town…”

“that Luas yoke is the biggest waste of money. No better than a bus!…not even connected! will be a total flop!”

Paddy O’Pundit Saint Paul-Type Revelation After his First Trip on Luas.

“Sure Jaysus this is briliant!” (and Paddy joins the 60 million users of Luas which have made it one of the most successful light rail project on the planet)

No offense lads, but we can complain about the Metro West till we are blue in the face, but we all know it’s going to be a huge success and if the level of density increase along the two Luas lines since they opened is anything to go by, then I can only imagine what Metro West will do for the edges of the city. I suspect it’ll put a lot of past wrongs to right.

The luas lines go into town where you can do without a car. Metro west brings you between places where you need a car. it can’t work. Not even a candidate for a QBC.

I disagree it is gauranteed to be a success; take the red line beyond James’ Hospital and it is patchy a best whilst Tara Street is a serious health & safety blackspot at peak times.

T21 is significantly flawed in that it does not prioritise on the basis of capacity deficits it prioritises on constituency concerns

@jdivision wrote:

Opinions please. I think it’s an awful plan, at least one third of Route 2 is through greenfield, the other one is not much better. I feel sorry for anybody living in Lucan given they’re being missed out.[/url]

Route two passes through Lucan village
Route one leaves it too far away, But every bus from the northside of Liffey Valley goes through lucan. But I wouldn’t fancy a metro then a bus from LV.

A combination of the two would work much better

A Western Rail Corridor for Dublin.@WB Yeats wrote:

What can I but enumerate old themes

@StephenC wrote:

This is certainly not a priority.

@PVC King wrote:

a lot of T21 is very suspect such as the Citywest extension and this whilst more and more pressure is placed on the loopline.

@ PVC King wrote:

T21 is significantly flawed in that it does not prioritise on the basis of capacity deficits it prioritises on constituency concerns

Hi guys, first post here.

I’m a regular reader of the board and have to say I’m pretty suprised at some the responses here. Orbital (public) transport is an important element of any city and whether or not it has existed in Dublin in the past is neither here not there. It is a common sight in other cities.

The route passes through green fields, but aren’t we always saying that infrastrucutre should be in place before development? This project will help with regeneration and increased density in west dublin, surely this is a viable alternative to more sprawl, while providing a public transport alternative to further M50 congestion.

Also why do people assume that this is some pie in the sky idea? The DTO have done the numbers on journey demand in the city and proposed an orbital metro in A Platform for Change back in 2001.

Criticism of the route is a little premature because as the RPA have shown with the swords metro, they are quite open minded about mixing and matching routes.

While serving new areas, the line will also integrate with the radial luas, suburban and metro lines going into the city center. So with 1 change more people will have city center rail access. Not to mention any current/future QBC’s that cross the line.

To me it just seems to make a lot of sense.

The Irish are by their nature a nation of instinctual Luddites (“Creeping Jesus types” as Bertie correctly pointed out ) when it comes to anything away from the familiar. Normal engineering transport design and approaches which are standard/proven methodology in every other country on earth inspire fear, loathing and doomsday scenarios among the hysterical and timid Irish.

Here are my reason why the MetroWest is going to be a major success:

A) Them Shopping Centres are busy as hell and transport to them is almost 100% private car orientated. Metro West will free-up a huge amount of capcity on the M50 and create a more sustainable retail transport culture in West Dublin and beyond. This is worth its weight in gold.

B) The integration between the Maynooth and Kildare railway lines is really sweet in itself. You want to get to Lucan from Tallaght it’s a one change – no biggie. You live in Maynooth and work in Kildare, MetroWest liberates you from the car. When the Interconnector comes on stream the frequency, capacity and integration on the combined MetroWest, MetroNorth and DART/Suburban Rail will be superb. You want to go to the Airport or City Centre from MetroWest – then change with MetroNorth at Ballymun. People all over the world do this, the lazy Paddies have to learn to do this as well.

I am really amazed how people view MetroWest as a stand-alone project as if is has no integrational relationship to any other Metro line, Heavy Rail or Luas. Look at the T21 maps – it’s an integration dream.

We also have to get away from the endless spit and polish of the CIE victorian rail infrastructure approach which is alright for a quick fix, but it is extremely limited over the long term.

We are a nation of slow learners who like old CIE Victorian railways lines to get a bit of an upgrade now and again or throw CIE a few extra buses with “An Lar” on the destination board so the BAC Supreme Soviets can be saluted as the new buses pass the reviewing stand on Upper O’Connell Street. Then the same Irish who are happy and safe with such traditional approaches to public transport investmenr can constantly wonder why our public transport is among the worst, if not the very worst in the Western World.

Anyways, it is going to be built and that’s that so you might as well start to learn to accept it as you have already done so with the fantastic and gloriously successful Luas, which also went through the same Chicken Little response upon announcement and which delayed it for years and led to the gap when the Chicken Little’s got their way (before the same muppets demanded the lines be joined ASAP as soon as they scratched their baldy shopkeeper heads watching the packed trams stop at the Green).

@Cute Panda wrote:

We are a nation of slow learners who like old CIE Victorian railways lines to get a bit of an upgrade now and again or throw CIE a few extra buses with “An Lar” on the destination board so the BAC Supreme Soviets can be saluted as the new buses pass the reviewing stand on Upper O’Connell Street.

CP it would be appreciated if you kept perspective and moved away from dated 1980’s neo-liberal concepts of all provate ventures being good and all public services being a disaster.

Taking London as a model the tube works whilst in public ownership can compare favourably to any transit network in the World; its success is built is based on ease of connection with a number of lines disecting the most densley used areas of the centre city and in this light the central, Bakerloo and Victoria lines are the nub of thb success behind the tube and all of these lines run on frequencies between 2 and 4 minutes these lines move millions of people and lines such as the Jubilee line have successfully expanded into up and coming areas such as Canary Wharf and Stratford; whilst the orbital route from Clapham to Willesden to Hackney run every 15 minutes are more often than not 90% empty.

No-one is saying that this route is not a valid aspiration but in the light of other deificit areas constructing this route before the Interconnector and electrification of the Maynooth, Sallins and Balbriggan stretches is daft.

We do not require governemnts to decide where lines look good on maps we appoint them to make hard choices as to the division of scarce resourses and this line being built at this time is totally premature.

i’m amazed that people still believe urban rail can become a failure. Look at what the very first railway did to the SE of Dublin, look what the DART did for the entire coast, LUAS for Milltown, Dundrum and sandyford. This is the Frank McDonald approach to transport planning (remember he said we’d have to demolish most of west dublin to justify this? lunacy. and people believed him). Anyway a few names that will become very important development areas in the next 20 years – Balgaddy, Ballycoolin, Abbotstown, Fonthill, Metropark, Cappoge and Sillogue, and some old ones that will see massive metro related boosts – west tallaght, Liffey Valley, Clondalkin Village and Carpenterstown. These will be to MetroWest what Cherrywood and Dundrum were to LUAS

In relation to other projects, the northern line is a disaster because housing was built along where it should have been doubled so it’;ll always be this way. The sallins line is part of the Kildare route project, which is underway, but the order has yet to be signed. They’ve started groundwork on the interconnector also. However it’s Metro West and the Interconnector that are the most essential, along with the city centre resignalling, which is not as obvious, but essential nonetheless, to allow more trains through the pearse-connolly bottleneck. The only question on Metrowest is why was the M50 upgrade commenced before it?

As for Lucan, T21 has a LUAS going from the south docks to Lucan. Add in the Navan Rail, the Spencer Dock station, and all the other elements of the strategy and if it’s built, the network will be there…

if it’s built…

dammit can you not delete double posts? mod can you delete this please, and you! stop reading. there’s nothing to see here

@alonso wrote:

As for Lucan, T21 has a LUAS going from the south docks to Lucan. Add in the Navan Rail, the Spencer Dock station, and all the other elements of the strategy and if it’s built, the network will be there…

if it’s built…

Ask anyone in Lucan what they would prefer i.e. a Luas to Dublin 2 or at least the nearest National Rail line or a line to Tallaght, Liffey Valley , Blanchardstowen and the Airport and I am sure that most would opt for connectivity to the City Centre where the jobs, shops and restaurants are.

If you examine Luas it is rammed anywhere the population Density is High i.e. Ballaly to Town and James’s Street to town but beyond on both lines it slows to a trickle as the lack of bus integrations kicks in and the car becomes the more efficient mode of transport.

Developing existing landbanks on the existing rail lines is a far more balanced approach to take given the concentration of employment in the centre and established heavy rail lines. The trick with this is to support Admastown, Pelletstown, Grange Road etc and not provide an orbital before communities of 10,000 plus are supported, a real solution for Lucan would be a Luas from Lucan to the Red Cow to be built with a stop at the new Station to be built at Park West creating a multi-modal interchange.

A number of Luas Trams could then operate from Tallaght to Park West supporting an established local need; in time terms Tallaght to Park West 10 minutes Park West to Stephens Green 15 minutes via interconnector and Stephens Green to Airport 20 minutes; total journey time 45 minutes

Hi,

I have my concerns about this. I have recently completed an analysis of population changes at the ED level for 1996 – 2006 (see link below). In the past 10 years we have had substantial low-density sprawl around Dublin in particular but also around other cities and smaller towns. The construction of an orbital route before the arterial routes are in place appears premature to me. I would think it better value for money to build transport systems that result in the greatest benefits being returned from the outset. Furthermore, the development of the arterial system would foster high-density development along these routes and slow the sprawl process, perhaps to the point of not needing the orbital route (unlikely, but you never know). High Density, High Quality, High Rise

Cheers,

D

http://www.teagasc.ie/publications/2006/06-wp-re15.htm

Can someone please clarify the metro west concept for me? It runs at grade, intersects traffic and can clearly not achieve “high speeds” without the risk of ploughing into some bag laden shopper. Isnt it just a fat luas?

@PVC King wrote:

Ask anyone in Lucan what they would prefer i.e. a Luas to Dublin 2 or at least the nearest National Rail line or a line to Tallaght, Liffey Valley , Blanchardstowen and the Airport and I am sure that most would opt for connectivity to the City Centre where the jobs, shops and restaurants are.

Well, infact, the people of lucan will be happy to know that they will get a direct line to the city center under transport21. As seen in the t21 map:

T21 map

@ihateawake wrote:

Isnt it just a fat luas?

I don’t really know but it does seem to be like a normal luas line. Metro looks to be a bit of a misnomer.

@Cute Panda wrote:

The Irish are by their nature a nation of instinctual Luddites (“Creeping Jesus types” as Bertie correctly pointed out ) when it comes to anything away from the familiar. Normal engineering transport design and approaches which are standard/proven methodology in every other country on earth inspire fear, loathing and doomsday scenarios among the hysterical and timid Irish.

You sound like Kevin Myers. Hyperbole city. But I’m enjoying it so keep it coming.

Here are my reason why the MetroWest is going to be a major success:

A) Them Shopping Centres are busy as hell and transport to them is almost 100% private car orientated. Metro West will free-up a huge amount of capcity on the M50 and create a more sustainable retail transport culture in West Dublin and beyond. This is worth its weight in gold.

each area served by metro west has a shopping centre and each has the same shops. What kind of nutcase would visit these stores without a car?

B) The integration between the Maynooth and Kildare railway lines is really sweet in itself. You want to get to Lucan from Tallaght it’s a one change – no biggie. You live in Maynooth and work in Kildare, MetroWest liberates you from the car. When the Interconnector comes on stream the frequency, capacity and integration on the combined MetroWest, MetroNorth and DART/Suburban Rail will be superb. You want to go to the Airport or City Centre from MetroWest – then change with MetroNorth at Ballymun. People all over the world do this, the lazy Paddies have to learn to do this as well.

What about this: you want to get into town: 30 minutes 1 minute frequency. You want to get out of town: 30 minutes: 1 minute frequency. Change in town. I’m sure there is someone somehwere who wants to get from Tallaght to Lucan without a car but not enough to build a railway between them.

I am really amazed how people view MetroWest as a stand-alone project as if is has no integrational relationship to any other Metro line, Heavy Rail or Luas. Look at the T21 maps – it’s an integration dream.

Why not intersect in the city or build an inner city circle line?

Anyways, it is going to be built and that’s that so you might as well start to learn to accept it

As you know, ther is a fair chance that much in T21 will never come to pass given past form and economic cycles.

As you know, ther is a fair chance that much in T21 will never come to pass given past form and economic cycles

So true if all plans were exectuted fully we wouldn’t need trains because we’d never have stopped dancing at the crossroads and if we abandoned that the DRTS plan of 1976 would have had Dart to Tallaght, Blanchardstown and the Airport by 1985 with an interchange at Stephens Green.

What really annoys me about this is that a second outer ring road has been built on largely the same route as route B from Tallaght to Lucan and no QBC was built to test demand for public transport on this route.

Worsrt case scenario is that this route gets built and delivers a passenger load equivelent to Luas beyond St James and if the global economy sneezes the interconnector is deferred along with the Luas line to Lucan which as yet has no firm timescale.

@ihateawake wrote:

Can someone please clarify the metro west concept for me? It runs at grade, intersects traffic and can clearly not achieve “high speeds” without the risk of ploughing into some bag laden shopper. Isnt it just a fat luas?

Defined by the RPA as “a flexible mass transport system that can be segregated through areas were segregation is required…The Metro concept is for vehicles up to 90 metres in length operating at up to every one and a half minutes at ultimate capacity through the busiest stations. “

I don’t think it will hav to wait at road junctions, it will be more of a level crossing scenario

@Bren88 wrote:

Route two passes through Lucan village

But doesn’t stop there!!!

@jdivision wrote:

But doesn’t stop there!!!

I believe it says on RPA website that ‘Stops will be located at Major Centres’, which probably will include Lucan.

It also says that the final route may be a combination of both of the routes which have been proposed, so get those submissions in now!!!!

I’m a Lucanian and I’m already having nightmares about how this thing, which isn’t even a metro since a good section of it is running above ground, it should be honest about itself and call itself DARTwest or Iarnród Eireann West Dublin Corridor.

Thinking of the traffic chaos which is our Village every morning and evening coupled with the Adamstwon build which will funnel even more traffic into our congested town and this thing going through Lucan like a massive gash blocking everything up really doesn’t sit well in my mind.

The place has been a general disaster for the past few years and this makes me feel:( .

the term “metro” has absolutely nothing to do with whether the thing runs underground or not. I don’t know why people have this misconception. calling it Iarnrod Eireann West would be ridiculous seeing as it’s nothing to do with Iarnorod Eireann, it’s the RPA

it’s a concern for Lucan but hopefully in the long term, the effects of adamstown rail station, the lucan luas and metro west will ease problems… Of course, bus is the short term answer but the govt have dicked around on this issue for years… plus the M50/N4 insanity shows no signs of abating… so you’re right to feel as you do.

In any case, the most likely alignment will not run through Lucan village but through Liffey Valley. Why do these things take sooooo damn long???

“Metro” is not a technical term. It can be, and is used to describe anything from a street tram to a underground heavy rail network located in a urban or suburban location. This site is a goldmine of information on the subject: http://www.urbanrail.net

MetroWest will be based on the Oporto metro. Essentially it is a soup-up Luas, but with the capacity of the DART and faster speeds. The crossings at grade will no cause trains to stop. Operationally it’ll provide a service similar to Amsterdam’s Route 51 SnellTram http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/ams/amsterdm.htm

Nobody knows were the stops will be yet as this is a route consultation. Stops will be announced when this part of the consultation is finished. So that’s all still to play for.

Hundres of people work in the shopping centres. This will form a major part of the commuter aspect of the MetroWest similar to Dundrum and Sandyford on the Green Line but on a much larger scale.

I think Kevin Meyer’s is great and I like most of what Frank McDonald says as well, but he is WAY wrong in his criticism of the Dublin Metro.

I think it’s a good idea. It’ll stimulate development around the outskirts of Dublin, and could reduce congestion in the city centre.

@Blisterman wrote:

I think it’s a good idea. It’ll stimulate development around the outskirts of Dublin, and could reduce congestion in the city centre.

How exactly will it reduce congestion in the City Centre?

The majority of public transport trips in Dublin involve the City Centre]
Firstly that three of the corridors converge between Barrow Street and just North of Connolly Station and this line will run out of capacity with in 2-3 years this is an undisputable fact and has been flagged by Irish Rail since 1997 10 years later we have no more than a proposal than it may be done in a further 9 years[/LIST]

[list=2:1ot1bjvk]
The fourth corridor ends 2 miles from the core business district at Hueston Station where commuters are forced to pay a second fare to reach the city centre this is done in cattle truck conditions at peak times and deprives the inner suburbs like Smithfield a quality service

This will as many other posters have said ferry people in unproven numbers from the centres of car-centric towns to other car-centric towns; if they want to reach the City Centre they must pay an additional fare; why would you bother when you can drive?

@alonso wrote:

it’s a concern for Lucan but hopefully in the long term, the effects of adamstown rail station, the lucan luas and metro west will ease problems… Of course, bus is the short term answer but the govt have dicked around on this issue for years… plus the M50/N4 insanity shows no signs of abating… so you’re right to feel as you do.

In any case, the most likely alignment will not run through Lucan village but through Liffey Valley. Why do these things take sooooo damn long???

Hopefully the two changes to junctions of the N4 (M50 and Lucan) will improve the flow of traffic.
But the Lucan junction of the N4 is a nightmare at the moment. The proposed overpass at esker church will help but during construction I shudder to think what the road will be like.

I also feel that it is worth pointing out that Route One passes through the eastside of lucan village. The bridge that crosses the N4 at this point is being widened. To twice its currently size, and a footbridge was built to remove people from the main bridge. Would putting a station/stop be of any use to Lucan or liffey valley here.

27 November 2006 17:58
The Labour Party has committed to doubling the Dublin Bus fleet and tackling congestion in the capital city if it is in Government after the next General Election.

The party’s latest policy document, ‘Getting Dublin Moving’ has been launched on the first day of the annual Operation Freeflow in the capital.

The party says the Government’s Transport 21 programme needs to be rescheduled to prioritise a rail inter-connector to increase rail commuter capacity.

It is also proposing the curtailment of city centre delivery times and greater policing and parking enforcement on the capital’s main arteries.

The party claims average peak time bus speeds in Dublin are now as low as 8mph, with even Quality Bus Corridors recording average speeds as low as 6mph.

Spokesperson for Transport, Roisin Shortall says an increase in Dublin buses and a €1 per trip fare will help encourage people use public transport.

With business groups estimating the cost of the city’s gridlock in excess of €2 billion, Labour says the issue needs to be addressed urgently.

Fianna Fáil has criticised Labour’s latest proposals.

The party’s Dublin MEP, Eoin Ryan has accused Labour and Fine Gael of being at loggerheads with regards to their Transport policies. .

It will be interesting to see if a coherent policy can be reached between both Parties; I would support a doublin of the number of busses if those buses were used to serve the rail network i.e. feeder buses in the suburbs linking to rail and Luas lines. The continentals have this down to an artform and it is hoped that Joe Meaghars rail expertese can be drawn upon in his new position as Dublin Bus supremo

they’re right about the interconnector. it’s the number 1 element of the transport strategy. No mention of the new authority then?

Their interim report was rejected by Martin Cullen

eh no it wasn’t… it was launched by him a fortnight ago and legislation is gonna be published by Christmas

http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/8464-0.pdf

The key recommendation was that the body would have an input into Land Use Planning this has been rejected as ‘undemocratic’

yeh i know, but that’s different to being “rejected” One element was significantly watered down, while the rest passed cabinet. Further news, the NBRU is threatening to strike over the consultation issue

I disagree that it watering down as opposed to a rejection;

The proposal was that an independent body would be set up to regulate transport for Dublin; which basically replicated the DTO position in 1997 in terms of scope and power.

If such a body cannot control land use what use are they i.e. what do they do that the CIE group companies and the RPA do not do?

If they must go to the local authorities they are not independent and other than Dublin City Council transport planning as part of an intergrated sustainable land use control is virtually non-existant.

sorry, yeh the land use section itself was more or less rejected. The DTO doesn’t regulate transport It co-ordinates all the other agencies and works with county councils on transport issues. I don’t think they have any real power at all, as far as I can tell. Correct me if i’m wrong but that’s my understanding,,,,

I agree with you on the substantive issue. The major problem is that local authorities make poor planning decisions with no regard to transport stategies. The original DTA document sought to overcome this through the DTA havin the power to reject develpemtn plans and major planning aplications but this has disappeared. And I’d remove “virtually” from your last statement…

MetroWest is only going to make the M50 more congested and off-set any improvements resulting from the widening of the motorway. Those greenfield sites along the route will become new suburbs in no time and the metro will be the reason why planning permission will be granted

just like the port tunnel is going to further crowd up the M50,taking up what ever breathing space is left!i think we need to cut back on the number of interchanges on the M50 so as to cut down on the number of cars using it to travel from massive housing estates to shopping malls and leave it for people going from one side of the city to the other or so people can bypass it completly!this might actually force more intigrated developments because people will need closer shops instead of relying on giant warehouse like complexes,it might even cut back on car reliance!?
if not for the M50 at least for the new outer ring road!

@Urban_Form wrote:

MetroWest is only going to make the M50 more congested and off-set any improvements resulting from the widening of the motorway. Those greenfield sites along the route will become new suburbs in no time and the metro will be the reason why planning permission will be granted

but there’ll be a congestion free high speed rail link as a viable option. Surely that;s a good thing. By your ,logic we’d have a moratorium on public transport related growth. Would you rather see present trends continue? 500 unit housing estates scattered throughout the outer counties? with no option but to drive? that’s insane.

Metro West should have been built before the M50 upgrade works. However it is only one part of a much wider network and a much more in-depth land use and transport strategy. It cannot be looked at in isolation.

archipimp, I agree about mixed uses. Liffey Valley is being regenerated into a true town centre, Tallaght is becoming more mixed, while places like Balgaddy and Metropark will also be developed in that manner.

Also the M50 requires demand management, ie barrier free tolling at all accesses, but that will never happen

alonso: By your ,logic we’d have a moratorium on public transport related growth.

Development on the greenfield sites in question will lead to greater congestion on the M50; with or without MetroWest. Metro will account for a portion of total journeys in the present and future neighbourhoods it serves on the proposed route, but not all journeys. Yet these new neighbourhoods on greenfield lands will be rezoned and redeveloped on the singular basis that a Metro is being built through these areas. They wouldn’t get approval otherwise.

My point is that there are plenty of areas in Dublin that could really do with a service such as MetroWest – a field outside of the urban area is not one of them. Transport21 is being sold as the solution to the capital’s transport problems. Yet MetroWest won’t so much cater to current demand, instead it will cater to new demand (created specifically for the Metro) while totally ignoring current demands. The two Luas lines demonstrate how there is a demand in existing neighbourhoods so why is that not being address first?

There’s 2 very different things going on here, related firstly to urban growth and secondly to governemnt decisions on transport.

In the first instance, what you’re saying re rezonings is absolutely true (in fact most is already zoned), and yes only a proportion of trips will be catered for by Metro. However, at present, development is being scattered around the region in places where there is no chance that any trips can be catered for by public transport. Therefore we should be promoting development along future transport corridors, such as Metro West. Also it will finally link the western new towns by proper public transport, to each other, as well as the Airport

Your second paragraph is also spot on. the DTO strategy proposed serving these places with LUAS and Metro. Places such as Templeogue. Kimmage, Finglas, Kilbarrack have all lost out in Transport 21, as has the current Dundrum line, which was supposed to be upgraded to Metro. T21 took the easiest elements of A PLatform for Change, and re-presented them as a new strategy. These, as you rightly say, ignore current demand. Martin Cullen needed a good news story, so they concocted T21, simple as that. However, the DTO Strategy is still the guiding document, and it’s still likely to be updated in the future.

Jerome Casey did this piece on an alternative route for Metro West for the commercial property section in The Sunday Business Post yesterday. There’s a map accompanying it setting out the route, where it would be underground etc but I can’t scan it in.

MetroWest route should be rethought
29 April 2007
Building MetroWest outside the M50 will reinforce urban sprawl in Dublin, but building it inside the motorway could help to revive some declining inner suburbs, writes Jerome Casey.

It is not unknown for economists to possess best friends. But the patience of best friends can be tested when economists, after prefacing their remarks by forswearing any gifts of prophecy, prattle on even-handedly about how some event might turn out.

Luckily economists’ reputation for relevance and judgement is rescued every five years or so when the Central Statistics Office (CSO) publishes its Census of Population. The census is a 100 per cent sample of all residents in Ireland and, because its mainly demographic results emerge slowly but surely, it can endow the meanest economic analysis with unusual sagacity.

The CSO’s 2006 census did not disappoint. Probably its most arresting result was the change in population in areas of the capital and its surrounding counties. From 2002 to 2006, the counties of Fingal, Dublin South, Kildare and Meath were among the fastest growing counties in the state and were also the counties with the lowest age profiles. In recent years, a high proportion of young families with children have chosen to set up home in dormitory towns around Dublin, probably for reasons of housing affordability.

This population growth puts enormous pressure on such dormitory towns to provide extra schools, hospitals and other social infrastructure – a pressure they have coped with poorly. The contrast with the experience of Dublin city could not be more startling. The city is divided into 163 electoral divisions and of these, 55 divisions north of the Liffey and 37 south of the river showed declines in population from 2002 to 2006.The decline was concentrated in the city’s traditional suburbs, ranging from Kilbarrack in the north through Glasnevin to Ballyfermot in the west, to Drimnagh, Terenure to Booterstown in the south.

The most egregious recent example of this suburban decline is the impending closure of Greendale Community School in Kilbarrack – the school where Roddy Doyle taught has simply run out of pupils. In terms of the National Spatial Strategy, it makes no sense to encourage settlement in dormitory towns where expensive social infrastructure is virtually non-existent while at the same time allowing the population to decline in established suburbs where there is a surplus of social infrastructure.

Reversing this will require an initiative to make suburban housing affordable again for young families with children, and will also necessitate an orbital public transport facility connecting these suburbs. Unlike other capital cities, Dublin is unfortunate in possessing only radial routes (both fixed-line and road) from its outskirts to the city centre. When the M50 was added as a major orbital road route, it was not surprising that it was initially popular nor that it is currently overused.

In late 2005, Transport 21 decided that a public transport alternative to the M50 was required, and Metro West was conceived. MetroWest would run through the new towns of Tallaght, Clondalkin and Blanchardstown to join with Metro North on its route to the airport. In January of this year, the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) set out two possible routes for Metro West. Both ran west of the M50 and parallel to it, one about one kilometre away from the motorway and the second about two kilometres from it. No costings were given, but it is probable that the more westerly route, running over more underdeveloped land, would cost less.

Minimising the investment cost of a metro is an important consideration, and it is one which the RPA is determined to master in building Metro North. But a much more important consideration is that a metro should be built in the right place. Building MetroWest outside theM50 will copperfasten Dublin’s physical character as a US style ‘‘edge city’’, with such a low density of population that a high-frequency, low-subsidy public transport system cannot be supported.

The decision in principle on MetroWest was made a number of years ago. Since then, public awareness of climate change and the unsustainability of Ireland’s dependence on imported oil for car transport has deepened considerably. The architectural, planning and economic establishments are broadly united in the view that the M50 should be the new Pale for the capital, meaning settlement should be intensified within that generous spatial envelope rather than be encouraged to locate outside it.

The diagram which accompanies this piece outlines how an orbital MetroWest within the M50 could be accommodated in two building phases. Phase 1 would have a mainly tunnelled northern loop from Marino to Beaumount Hospital, linking the town centres of Santry, Ballymun and Finglas. The cost overrun on the Dublin Port Tunnel has damned tunnelling among Irish policymakers, but the bored section of that tunnel came in at competitive rates, whereas the cut and cover stretch was over budget. Alternative surface routes along Collins Avenue or up the Santry river valley are unsatisfactory, as they would miss the hospital.

Phase 1 would also see the mainly-surface southern section built. This would proceed from Ballyfermot roundabout along the R112 to Walkinstown, continue along the R112 through the DodderValley between Terenure and Rathfarnham, on to the UCD campus and then via a road reservation to Rock Road and Booterstown Dart station.

Phase 2 of Metro West would be partly-tunnelled and partly surface running, and would link Finglas to Ballyfermot across the relatively-unpopulated Phoenix Park and Liffey Valley. When complete, Metro West would act as an outer orbital loop linking all radial train, Dart and Luas lines in the city. It would complement the inner loop proposed in the Dargan Project (http://www.darganproject.com) – this would re-open the Phoenix Park rail tunnel and connect Heuston through Broadstone to Connolly in the north, to finish the loop with the southern interconnector proposed in Transport 21 to link Connolly through Stephen’s Green to Heuston.

To revive Dublin’s older suburbs and make them affordable locations of choice for young families will require not only public transport investments such as MetroWest, but will also require fiscal changes. In addition to a considerably reduced rate of stamp duty, Dublin probably needs a location tax/subsidy introduced instead of rates. Under a location tax, property located close to efficient public transport such as MetroWest would pay an annual levy, while properties disadvantaged by being distant from efficient public transport would receive an annual subsidy from the city authorities.

However, building public assent for such a change may take longer than deciding to locate MetroWest within the M50.

Jerome Casey is a construction economist and publisher of Building Industry Bulletin.

That is a very well thought out article some excellent quotes such as

The architectural, planning and economic establishments are broadly united in the view that the M50 should be the new Pale for the capital, meaning settlement should be intensified within that generous spatial envelope rather than be encouraged to locate outside it.

This needs to be accepted in the Dept of Transport

Building MetroWest outside theM50 will copperfasten Dublin’s physical character as a US style ‘‘edge city’’, with such a low density of population that a high-frequency, low-subsidy public transport system cannot be supported.

His order on the above quotes undermines to a small degree the logic of his article which is for me one of the best transport pieces in recent years.

I ask just one question, what happened to the Cherry Orchard scheme?

I live near Cherrywood and it’s a disaster. There are no amenities whatsoever. There’s a Spar near the office blocks, but the residential and office areas are separated with one massive roundabout. Very bleak place I’m afraid. 🙁

And another thing, they have just dumped an office block right in front of the Harcourt Street Line Viaduct, so no chance of ever having a metro going across it. Fucking disgrace, but oh so typical of Ireland. 🙁

definitely agree with the logic of this but tallaght, clondalkin/liffey valley, blanch & the couple of hundred thousand people who live there aren’t going to dissappear.

Still not convinced about Metro West anyway, it certainly doesn’t deserve the priority over the interconnector which its getting.

The m50 is an obvious line to contain development within … so much space on the city side yet to be utilised.
No chance of the councils having the balls or will to do anything about it. Calls in to question the sub-division of the corporation in the first place. SDCC is gung ho for further development on its patch & Mansfield own’s every poxy green field site going.

Higher planning authority to direct these calls so badly needed, fuck all chance of it being initiated though.

@PVC King wrote:

So true if all plans were exectuted fully we wouldn’t need trains because we’d never have stopped dancing at the crossroads and if we abandoned that the DRTS plan of 1976 would have had Dart to Tallaght, Blanchardstown and the Airport by 1985 with an interchange at Stephens Green.

Not quite. In that plan, the interchange was to be somewhere around Dame Street/Temple Bar/College Green, rather than at St. Stephen’s Green.

As everyone knows, these are consistently busier areas than St. Stephen’s Green, and it probably therefore makes much more sense to route the proposed interconnector towards these areas.

It’s hard to know why St. Stephen’s Green seems to currently be the favoured spot for a station, rather than these busier areas. I’ve yet to see any convincing argument.

The fact that the Luas couldn’t go any further is probably the main reason!!!!

I’m not so sure that the Dame Street area is that much busier than the Green during the week; there has been a lot of office development over recent years in areas such as Harcourt St, Hatch Street, Kevin Street, Golden Lane etc. The logic is that people will walk from High St to Dame St but would be unlikely to walk from Dame St to Charlemont Street or Portebello.

Catchment for underground is I reckon 400-750m depending on the individual.

Integrated ticketing is a must whatever they do and 3 years after the RPA launched theirs with great fanfare it doesn’t work.

@PVC King wrote:

The fact that the Luas couldn’t go any further is probably the main reason!!!!

The LUAS can, and eventually will, go further (as part of the link-up). But basically, I agree with what you say. The DTO’s plans wouldn’t have looked anything like as neat if a cross-town railway line didn’t meet up with the LUAS.

I’m not so sure that the Dame Street area is that much busier than the Green during the week]
The Dame Street area is considerably busier. There is effectively no demand to get to any of the streets you mention (Charlemont St, Harcourt St., Hatch St., Kevin St. and Golden Lane) after 9 a.m. on weekdays, and none at weekends. It’s possible that demand to get to those streets approaches that of the Dame St./Temple Bar area before 9 a.m., but I’d be surprised. After that time there would simply be no contest.

I think you may be forgetting about the metro north project. It is inevitable that this will be extended southwards at some stage (assuming that the thing is built at all!!). As many of the streets which you mention are 600-800 metres from the top of Grafton St. (approx location of the initial metro terminus), it seems very likely that there would be a metro station at a location which would be more convenient for streets such as Hatch St., Charlemont St., Charlotte Way, etc.

It would seem a pity to be incorporating a big diversionary loop into the interconnector route – If you’ve seen the proposed route you’ll know what I mean – to try to serve areas which in any case will be well served by the metro north project, but make it more difficult to reach areas of the city where there is consistent demand.

Integrated ticketing is a must whatever they do and 3 years after the RPA launched theirs with great fanfare it doesn’t work.

I fully agree. I understand the main problem is how revenue is to be shared among the various transport providers. I’d be surprised, however, if this problem has not been encountered (and solved) in other cities. The authorities really need to pull the finger out and start treating the matter seriously. It is quite frankly laughable that 40 million euro has already been spent on this project, without any visible progress being made.

From RTE Breaking News:

Preferred route for Metro West to be announced
Thursday, 5 July 2007 11:32
The Minister for Transport, Noel Dempsey, and the CEO of the Railway Procurement Agency, Frank Allen, are to announce the preferred route for Metro West in Dublin this afternoon.

Both proposed routes would serve broadly the same areas, running from Tallaght via Clondalkin, Liffey Valley and Blanchardstown and linking with Metro North south of Dublin Airport.

http://www.rte.ie/news/images/MetroWestMap.jpg

However, the two routes offer different stops in these areas.

AdvertisementRoute Option 1 starts in Tallaght on the Belgard Road serving Tallaght Institute of Technology, The Square and Tallaght Village. It also serves Clondalkin Town Centre, Liffey Valley and Blanchardstown Town Centre.

Route Option 2 starts at the Tallaght stop of the existing Luas Red Line. It runs along the Luas Line as far as Cookstown Road. It travels through Grange Castle and Clondalkin, serving the Blanchardstown Town Centre and the Blanchardstown Institute of Technology.

Two options for how Metro West would service Dublin Airport and Swords are also being considered. The first is that Metro West would run directly on to Metro North, sharing the track to the airport. The second option would be for Metro West passengers to transfer on to Metro North.

It is estimated that the construction of Metro West, which will be up to 28km long, will take up to five years. The service is due to open on a phased basis that would be completed in 2014.

@DGF wrote:

From RTE Breaking News:

Preferred route for Metro West to be announced
Thursday, 5 July 2007 11:32 .

Any news on this? The word was that Route 1 (via Liffey Valley/Clondalkin/Newlands Cross to Tallaght) was the hot favourite?

Certainly makes most sense in my professional opinion (and I got 47% in transportation studies)!:D

Yes route 1 was the winner. I can’t see it getting any traffic but the RPA predicts 20m passenegers and I hope they are correct.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

Yes route 1 was the winner. I can’t see it getting any traffic but the RPA predicts 20m passenegers and I hope they are correct.

A lot of traffic is predicated on a major new junction with mainline rail on the line out of Heuston. All the traffic coming out of the West, Limerick, Cork, Waterford, and all the commuter rail out of Kildare could change there to access Dublin Airport, Tallaght and all the other points in between without having to go into the city. That and a combination of Blanch & Liffey Valley shoppping centres as well as the 2 ITs will likely generate a lot of traffic.

BTW geat site, congrats to all involved.

@neiljung wrote:

A lot of traffic is predicated on a major new junction with mainline rail on the line out of Heuston. All the traffic coming out of the West, Limerick, Cork, Waterford, and all the commuter rail out of Kildare could change there to access Dublin Airport, Tallaght and all the other points in between without having to go into the city. That and a combination of Blanch & Liffey Valley shoppping centres as well as the 2 ITs will likely generate a lot of traffic.

BTW geat site, congrats to all involved.

Also South Dublin County Council have just advertised an LAP for lands at Newlands Cross – and the chosen route passes these lands and indicates a future stop there.

These lands could contribute commuters in due course and, if a park and ride is provided, cars coming from Limerick/Cork etc on the M7/N7 can pick up the Metro there and travel anywhere in the city region from there by rail/Luas? (I don’t mean the car – the occupants!)

Ah yes, the burgeoning Ballymun-to-Tallaght economic corridor. Their passenger estimates are off by about six decimal places. This is a ludicrous waste of money.

wtf are people on about. If you add in the growth predicted for Tallaght, Balgaddy, Porterstown, and the corridor north of the M50, there’ll be plenty of trips on this line. We need an orbital line to connect the suburbs without going into town. It’s a public transport alternative to the M50, and it will be successful. The same people were saying the same thing about the DART and the LUAS. When will people learn that suburban rail is an engine for growth. Public transport based growth. It’s not about what’s there now. It’s about what will be there inm 20, 50, and 100 years. Oh yeh and Liffey Valley is gonna be rebuilt, as well as the Naas road corridor. Christ lads will ye ever be happy?

andrew the ballymun to tallaght econimc corridor, as you call it, just happens to contain the largest retail areas on the island, and will contain office parks and high density residential areas. Look at the Tallaght LAP for a start, then newlands, naas road, balgaddy, metropark etc etc etc…

The difference with the DART and the Luas is that they both run through the centre! The DART isn’t packed with Dalkey people who have to get to their desk in Kilbarrack in the morning. It’s busy because the bulk of its work is carrying people into town.
How many people have to get from Clondalkin to Ballymun every day? Or from Tallaght to Blanch? I’m speaking as someone who travels from north to west by public transport- bus and Luas – at least once a week, and a metro would make my life a lot easier.
By all means connect the outer suburbs, but the transport network in the centre has to be consolidated first. Surely there are plenty of neighbourhoods closer to town that could be linked more cost-effectively than this, with the effect of increasing housing densities where we need it.

yeh but the further in you get the more diffcicult and expensive it becomes. The example of the DART is difficult because there aren’t the same number of employent centres in the suburbs along the line as there are around the M50/Metro west alignment. (Although i’d say a fair whack of people travel from south Dublin to East Point/Clontarf and from the northside to Dun Laoghaire and Blackrock, it’s not on the same scale.)

And I agree the network in the centre should be consolidated first, but remember the schedule for the interconnector is only 1 year after MW. Luas BX and Metro North will pre-date it, as will the Lucan LUAS (line F). Also we’ll have the Dunboyne/Navan line on the way and the Kildare Route Project completed. And last year the Docklands station opened and on Monday the north quay QBC will open while the Rock Road opening is imminent. So radial routes are being looked after as is the city centre network. I haven’t mentioned Broadstone’s reopening either, mostly coz I don’t understand it.

Of course, most journeys will involve an interchange, it seems unlikely many people would want to travel from Tallagh to Blancherstown, presumably most will interchange at one of the many radial routes the line intersects.

It is clear that density along this line is low, however, it is also clear that it will increase and, more importantly, the government is correct to base the resourcing of transport projects on social as well as transport criteria and the line does go through some crappy areas.

@AndrewP wrote:

By all means connect the outer suburbs, but the transport network in the centre has to be consolidated first.

Bit of sense there, & this elaborate elephant (wont quite say its white, cause my mind is not quite made up) is scheduled to be finished before the dart underground. Now, as much as that deadline is a pile of shite, the stated priority from gov & everyone else should be to have city centre oriented projects completed asap.

The alignment for ‘metro’ west has to swing inside the m50 after blanch, the RPA are suggesting that it serves nothing for a staggering stretch, encouraging north dublin to follow the development of west dublin … and an hour from tallaght to the airport is pretty crap, most will take the car, i can do it in 25 minutes off peak.

The dart underground tunnel can deliver on a scale that this semi glorified luas simply cannot, if it wasn’t for the the two interchanges with the maynooth & hazlehatch lines, metro west would be entirely useless.

If an orbital metro route roughly followed the NCR/SCR instead of the M50, it could link Phibsboro to Ballsbridge running through densely populated areas that could actually sustain a train service. It could join the DART at both ends (Connolly and Sydney Parade, say), and both Luas lines at Kilmainham and Charlemont Street. Or it could be run on out to UCD and join the DART further south. Obviously it would be a lot more expensive as it would have to be underground, but it would be paying for itself from day one, like the Luas.
In the long run it would be money well spent and in the greater interests of the city, unlike this harebrained scheme to give a full train service to two or three guys in Tallaght who happen to work in Liffey Valley.

Peter MW doesn’t cross inside the M50 at all. I think you’re all falling into the same trap as people did with LUAS. A corridor of high density development is already under construction along this line. No suburban rail line is ever a white elephant these days. It interchanges with 2 radial DARTs and 2 radial light rails. Some of the comments re the interconnector read as if it’s an either/or scenario, when in fact we’re getting both. However I fully agree that the Interconnector should have been expedited from the start and should be well under construction by now.

Andrew the line you describe would be extremely good for Dublin – an inner orbital if you like (it could even go outside the DART line and serve Poolbeg). And I agree that it still could be done. However it would require very presuasive leadership to convince the skeptics that such a line would be worth building, given it’s cost could equal T21 in it’s entirety. But on Metro West, i think you’ll be proven wrong. But will we all still be posting on archiseek in 2014? ah sure why not 🙂

@alonso wrote:

Peter MW doesn’t cross inside the M50 at all. I think you’re all falling into the same trap as people did with LUAS. A corridor of high density development is already under construction along this line.

Alsono re-read my post, I’m aware that metro west does not cross inside the m50, I am suggesting that it should. The stretch from Abbotstown to the Airport serves nothing & will facilitate mass sprawl outside the M50 with acres of land remaining undeveloped just inside.

Selected alignment outlined below together with what are in my view some of the problems with it.

sorry peter when you wrote “has to” i read it as trains on the current alignment having to cross the motorway , not that the alignment should cross it –

Just on some of your issues:

Distance to Tallaght LUAS: what’s the actual distance? Is it any further than you have to travel even within some rail stations to another platform. It seems to be less than 400 metres, which isn’t that far in the grander scheme of things. people walk further from their cars in Liffey Valley to the shops!!!> 🙂 And the whole area is being rebuilt anyway, the hospital has a LUAS stop and everything can’t be served by every mode. For a rail mode such as this, walking distance is regarded as 800 to 1000metres. Do any of these things fall outside that distance (is it much further, for example, than Dun Laoghaire DART to George’s St. surely you wouldn’t argue DL town is unserved – hopefully Tallaght will end up with a proper urban structure to lessen the impact of walking distances as it redevelops.) In any case as a pair of termini where interchange between them occurs only a smidgeon upstream, how much movement is expected between these 2 stops?

Totally agree on Liffey Valley – given the imminent redevelopment I don’t know why Neilstown Road wasn’t chosen bringing it into the heart of the centre. This seems to be over 1 km from the entrance, which is way too far for shoppers. It leaves Liffey Valley pretty much unserved by rail, unlike the square. I can’t see this stop acting as a force for development.

Northern Section – I completely understand what you’re saying. However, all policy at all levels precludes low density development along rail lines. And it is not happening now, so I don’t see why it will happen in the future.Metropark is planned to be extremely high density, as is Charlestown in N Finglas. The only sprawling/extensive development planned here are Abbotstown Sports Campus and Bohs new ground (IKEA too i guess). And as it will most likely intersect an extended N2 QBC at the Huntstown P+R, this is ideal for a high density development. Also remember that it’s likely Luas Line BX will eventually be extended to Finglas and meet Metro West

Development just south of the M50 going on now is high density residential and office mostly. Therefore there’s no reason to believe that jumping the M50 to an area directly serviced by rail will urge developers or local authorities to revert to old fashioned sprawl. What I believe will in fact happen is that the pre-existing sprawl of the Ballycoolin Industrial estates and logistics parks will do a “Sandyford” as Metro comes in.

The nature of the development I predict along this section will be the antithesis to what’s happening in Drogheda Navan, Ratoath, Cavan, etc etc and help to suck the commuter belt in a bit towards the city, if it’s not too late (which we all know it probably is)

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

Alsono re-read my post, I’m aware that metro west does not cross inside the m50, I am suggesting that it should. The stretch from Abbotstown to the Airport serves nothing & will facilitate mass sprawl outside the M50 with acres of land remaining undeveloped just inside.

Selected alignment outlined below together with what are in my view some of the problems with it.

The plans include a short extension to the red line to link up with the Metro stop in Tallaght, you can see the dotted red line on the map posted, (there is a press release with that map on the RPA website that explains a lot of this)

And mass sprawl along a high capacity transport corrisdor is a bad thing?

Population of Dublin is predicted to continue to rise rapidly in the future and these people have to live somewhere, it would seem logical to develop this area south of the airport at some stage. Hopefully with a precednet of proper planning now in place a number mini-Adamstowns could be developed along this stretch.

The biggest plus of running this line through currently undeveloped land is the cost factor, it should be pretty cheap to build those sections of the line before any development takes place. If this kind of forsesight had been shown 20 years ago we wouldn’t have many of the issues we have now.

With regard to Liffey Valley I’d be pretty sure the S.C. and retail park will be putting a feeder bus in as it’s in there interests more than anyone to get people in to the shops. The alternative of undergrounding into the S.C. is not something I could see justified in spending public money on, if the S.C. want to pay for it themselves fair enough.

The biggest benfit oof all for this particular line though will be the urban regeneration of Clondalkin, Fonthill Road and Neilstown. Of all the possible Metro and Luas options, this seems to me to be more viable than any plan not included in Transport 21. Plus as mentioned previously the connection with all the rail lines coming into Dublin will generate lots of traffic with both commuters and links to the airports.

From a glance around the web there seems to be a lot folk intent to moan about this having come to a pre-determeined conclusion that it won’t work, thus missing some facts (like the Tallaght red line extension) and all the other knock on benfits that any decent public transport system will bring.

@neiljung wrote:

With regard to Liffey Valley I’d be pretty sure the S.C. and retail park will be putting a feeder bus in as it’s in there interests more than anyone to get people in to the shops. The alternative of undergrounding into the S.C. is not something I could see justified in spending public money on, if the S.C. want to pay for it themselves fair enough.

I wouldn’t count on it. Blanchardstown is a mere 20 minute walk from the Maynooth line but no feeder bus was ever mentioned. Obviously Maynooth Commuter won’t have the appeal of Metro (Luas?) West but I regularly take the train rather than face the horrors of the 39 to get there.

Three pieces from yesterday’s Sunday Business Post

Metro West between Hunstown and Airport
By Neil Callanan

Developer Bernard McNamara severely criticised the fact that the Metro West routes drawn up by the Railway Procurement Authority (RPA) would not serve Dublin Airport.

A submission drawn up by Keith Simpson & Associates for Grattan Property Company, one of McNamara’s property vehicles, stated that the two routes proposed by the RPA would result in the line “serving lands zoned for agriculture, warehouse and open space — it makes no sense!!”

Instead, McNamara lobbied for an alternative route which would serve Dublin airport’s western campus and onto a third terminal at Dublin airport, which his submission stated could be needed by 2012. “With a simple two kilometre extension, Metro West would serve ten million passengers on day one of opening, increasing to 20 million within ten years,” the submission stated.

The submission said that the route would cost an extra e72 million but generate additional ticket income of e10 million per annum and cater for 15,000 jobs which will be created on lands zoned for airport development.

McNamara owns just under 94 acres to the west of the airport, 44.5 of which are not in any public safety zone.

Also close to the airport, Blackrock Land chairman Carl McCann pointed out that the second route, which would serve Huntstown, Harristown and Sillogue, would dissect Blackrock’s 50 acres of land at Dubber, south of the airport. “This solution is significantly less attractive than the alternative and would adversely affect the value of our property,” he wrote.

As a result he felt option one, which would link Huntstown to Meakstown and then Sillogue was “therefore better for us and seems generally better for everyone intended to benefit from the new infrastructure since it would take the line closer to more people and to existing development rather than to future development”.

The Marshalsea Property Company added its voice to the support of that route as it “would have the largest potential catchment and would best serve employees and businesses” within its North Park development. It pointed out that there was around 350 acres of land zoned for light industrial use and additional land zoned for about 2,150 housing units were within walking distance of the Huntstown stop.

It argued the alternative route “would not provide sufficient service to the large residential catchments of Meakstown and indeed the district centre of Charlestown and it is considered to be of less benefit to the overall land area”.

The Bailey brothers and Liam Carroll also made their views known on the proposals for this area, with each making similar submissions.

Carroll said his Horizon lands, which are between the M2 and Naul Road, some of which is jointly owned by the Dublin Airport Authority, had various zonings but that their density of development could be greatly increased.

The Louth-born developer gained control of his stake in the site following his takeover of Dunloe Ewart and his submission says the land has huge potential: “Although the area currently has various different zonings it may be possible, in the interest of sustainability, to develop these lands in a manner which benefits the environment, the metro operations and ensures development of areas close to rail stations in an appropriate fashion”.

It points out the Harristown bus depot is immediately adjacent to the site and that a proposed stadium (which is for Bohemians) is also earmarked for the site. A stop there would “provide for a high capacity crowd and would generate significant patronage for the metro service to access major sporting events and concerts”.

Both Carroll and the Bailey brothers said a stop in Baleskin, where the Baileys have land, should be looked at instead of a stop in Huntstown. The Baileys, through their company Bovale, pointed out that they own a significant landbank “which can contribute positively to the business case for metro, through reduced construction costs and increased patronage through suitably integrated development on the lands”.

Their land at Baleskin, which is to the north east of the M50-M2 interchange, “has a huge potential”.

Also in Finglas, CRH subsidiary Roadstone Dublin pointed out that both of the proposed routes would pass between their lands and the ESB substation in Finglas. “We presume the route will probably have to be located on our property,” the submission states.

“We call on the RPA to keep an absolute minimum the area of our lands severed by the proposed metro. Please note that we will seek the RPA to acquire any and all of our lands severed by the scheme.”

CRH also signalled that it was “interested in exploring the possibility” of developing a park and ride facility on part of its quarry. It said operations at the quarry were expected to continue for the foreseeable future.

Metro West between Porterstown and Hunstown
By Neil Callanan

Green Property and Cosgrave Developments are facing off over the planned route of metro west through Blanchardstown.

Green has lobbied the RPA to use the proposed metro west route two through Blanchardstown which would stop in Whitestown near the town centre and continue to IT Blanchardstown and Ballycoolin. It stated in its submission that a wayleave within its lands, which is on the proposed route two, had already been left “free of development for in excess of 20 years” by Green Property for such a rail track.

The existing retail park and fashion park as well as the surface car parking had all been designed to allow this rail line to pass through the development. “It is submitted that the lands within the established wayleave have a lower land value than prime town centre lands and are remote from any sensitive land uses, including residential use and sub surface systems,” it stated. This made it the most convenient and cost effective option to serve the town centre and it would be “favourably disposed to discussing the transfer of these lands to Fingal County Council to deliver the proposed metro line”. They were also willing to discuss the general possibility of varying the route to make it closer to the town centre.

The property company was however much less inclined to transfer lands in their ownership to deliver the route one option because it is “prime town centre land and would significantly disrupt existing operations and future development opportunities on their lands within Blanchardstown town centre”. It said this route would cause traffic disruption and contribute to congestion as well as being more costly, more problematic to deliver and difficult to integrate within the existing town centre. It would also be on the opposite side of the recently constructed bus interchange.

The Cosgraves own the 22.7 acre West End mixed use development which comprises a retail park, residential, shops, leisure uses and offices. It argued in its submission that the route proposed through the town centre is the best one and has drawn up a strategic development plan for its land which would include “an appropriate densification of retail and other mixed-use activity within the overall town centre” and significanty enhanced pedestrian links between Blanchardstown Town Centre and the lands controlled by the Cosgraves. It argued that this will also improve links between the Town Centre and the village’s main street.

“This will finally alter the current perception of the town centre as being little more than a car-dependent shopping centre, notwithstanding the extent of non-retail uses therein,” Cosgrave stated. It added that there is little scope for commuter car parking via the route favoured by Green.
The RPA has yet to make up its mind on the issue and is looking at a number of route options in the area that “will be investigated in greater detail”.

In Castleknock, the owners of Luttrellstown demesne – John Magnier, JP McManus and Aidan Brooks – said that the metro line should not run inside the boundary of the 567-acre estate “because it would not be appropriate from a commercial, planning or conservation perspective”. The route through the demesne had been suggested by a number of members of the public but said it would not be suitable. In a submission drawn up by Brian Meehan & Associates, they wrote that it “would detract and devalue this important asset” and reduce the commercial viabilty of a proposed tourism and recreational complex for which planning permission has been granted.

The submission said that routing the metro through the demesne, which was acquired by the trio for about e200 million, would not maximise its accessibility to the general population and routing it farther east would be more sustainable. “In land use planning terms, the routing of metro through the demesne lands would be viewed as an incongruous feature that would be at variance with the character and exclusive nature of the package that is Luttrellstown Castle resort,” it argued. “It is also envisaged that the metro would contribute to difficulties in the area in terms of privacy and security – real and perceived – as a result of the breach in the estate walls.” The demesne wall is a protected structure, it pointed out.

Magnier, Brooks and McManus were not alone. Paul Monahan of Monarch Properties wrote to the RPA stating that he owns Castleknock golf club and “as previously indicated to you, I formally now request that this line does not go through these lands as it will have an adverse impact on the amenity of the golf course”.

Eugene Larkin’s Twinlite Developments suggested that a third option through Blanchardstown should be looked at. Twinlite argued that the routes proposed by the RPA were “deficient because they did not serve “high value employers in north Blanchardstown and other high demand areas such as Blanchardstown Corporate Park and Tyrrelstown”. It said these areas were the economic driver for the region and using either of the proposed routes would represent ” a lost opportunity to create a self sustaining place in which to work and live and which is focussed on sustainable modes of travel”.

Instead Larkin said a route from Ballycoolin Road to Kilsharne would provide greater integration of land use and transport planning and said that the additional financial cost of constructing this route “will be more than offset by the greater potential for development levies” because it “goes through substantial undeveloped, zoned lands that have significant development potential”.

The line was an opportunity to raise just under e350 million extra in levies than either of the other routes if it was 100 per cent built out and could continue across to the Northern Fringe, north of Darndale, where a new town called Clongriffin is being developed. Larkin’s route was not acted upon by the RPA.

Stadium Investments, which is owned by Maurice and Catherine Hennigan, owns a significant amount of land in the Ballycoollin/Cappoge area and outlined the case for a metro stop to be developed on or adjacent to their lands to the east of Cappagh Road. Space has already been allocated for such a stop and the submissions pointed out that 63,000 square metres of light industrial and warehousing space had already been granted planning permission there. It was also close to Cappagh hospital and would create an opportunity for higher density employment uses. If the metro was to stop near their site “it is possible that a further application, increasing the intensity of uses at this location, could be made”.

Metro West between Tallaght and Porterstown

By Neil Callanan

The owners of Liffey Valley shopping centre said they were prepared to provide free to the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) any land within Liffey Valley that was required to allow metro west to serve the centre. They offered to build an integrated metro station and public transport interchange at their own cost and were prepared to pay a capital contribution towards the cost of diverting metro west into Liffey Valley.

Owen O’Callaghan, Grosvenor Properties and Morley Fund Management also stated that under current proposals the shopping mall at the centre will increase from 28,000 square metres in February 2007 to 68,000 square metres in 2010. The developers also expect to have 7,000 people working in Liffey Valley by 2010. So far the RPA have not signalled that they will allow the detour to the shopping centre.

Their submission was drawn up by Simon Clear & Associates and suggested that 15 per cent of the annual visitors to the town centre would use the metro service, equating to 5.5 milllion passengers annually.

A company called Dietacarron, based at O’Callaghan Properties offices in Cork, owns land in Balgaddy and lobbied for the first metro west route stating it would provide links “between the existing and emerging urban areas of Tallaght, Liffey Valley, Blanchardstown, Clondalkin and Balgaddy-Clonburris. In particular, it said the Fonthill Road station would provide an interchange between rail and the future metro, providing a link with Heuston station.

Garrett Kelleher’s Shelbourne Development supported route one because it”would connect Metro North and Tallaght via substantial shopping centres, local town centres, large commercial areas and high density residential development”. Shelbourne owns the former Cable & Wireless site at the junction of Belgard Road and Airton Road and thus would benefit from that option, which is included in the RPA’s emerging preferred route.

Brendan Hickey of Davy Hickey Properties asked for a variation of the second route to be considered because the company believes the principle objection of Metro West should be to link Tallaght, Clondalkin, Lucan and Blanchardstown to each other and to the airport. It proposed therefore an alternative route, which would have been shorter to build and therefore cheaper, quicker and less disruptive to build. It would also provide a quicker journey time to Tallaght from Clondalkin. It wouold also be suitable for a future metro stop at Baldonnel.

Hickey said the main deficiency of route two was that it did not serve Clondalkin village and suggested that the route should turn east at Priest Town and follow the Cammock River where it could link up with any of the other route options. The RPA however have not followed Hickey’s advice in their emerging preferred route.

In Tallaght the Cookstown Development Partnership lobbied for the metro to serve their land because “the area will be transformed in the coming years with existing low grade low intensity uses being replaced with higher density mixed use developments”. The partnership owns 12 acres there and choosing the route that served it “would improve the economic viability of the line by generating significant development levies”. It would also increase the population and catchment area on the line. It lobbied for the first route, stating that a sub-option that would serve the estate and Belgard station would help create an integrated transport hub.

Also in Tallaght, CRH’s subsidiary Roadstone Dublin pointed out that the proposed route two was aligned adjacent to the boundaries of its Belgard quarry lands. It says it had recently completed negotiations with South Dublin County Council for lands required for the outer ring road linking the N7 and the N81 and “we would hope that sufficient lands were acquired at that time to accommodate metro west without the need to acquire additional areas of our Belgard lands, should this route be decided upon”. It also stated their hope that there would be no disruptions to the traffic flow from their quarry if that route was selected.

Alken brothers Gregory and Anthony, who bought the SDS site beside the Red Cow roundabout for e107 million in 2006, supported the first option.

The brothers, who are behind the Febvre wine importation business, also said the potential for an interchange between the metro and Luas at Red Cow or Newlands Cross should also be explored further. They said that they aim to develop a public transport interchange at the SDS site which “will connect with a variety of transport modes to provide a new level of accessibility across the metropolitan area”. They said a metro stop at the Luas depot would further improve that interchange and would be better than a station at Newlands Cross or St Brigid’s. That suggestion has not been taken on board by the RPA.

Businessman Bill Cullen’s Glencullen Motor Properties also lobbied for route one, which went via Newlands and St Brigids. Its Newland’s Renault site on the Naas Road in Dublin 12 is between the two stops.