View Single Post
Unread 31-03-2018, 18:09   #9
James Shields
Member
 
James Shields's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Drogheda, Ireland
Posts: 1,275
Default

I'm torn on this.

I think the Ireland 2040 project lacks ambition for the main development plan for the country for the next 22 years. It leaves out a number of key projects such as DART Underground, and I fear will leave the country in a position where it is far too reliant on private single occupancy road transport for another generation. With projected population increases, it's hard to imagine what congestion in our capital will be like in 2040.

The Metro is obviously just one part of that plan. On the surface it seems a welcome inclusion, but there are a number of aspects of the project that give me cause for concern.

Primary among these is the Sandyford leg of the route, and the resultant disenfranchisement of the Green Luas Line. While I agree with Metro continuing into the south city, I feel that taking over the Green Line is the wrong way to do this. First of all, because the original embankment of this route was removed, introducing many road crossings, I question whether the line has the capacity for 2 minute frequencies promised by Metro. Second, requiring multiple changes for existing users of the Green line punishes users, many of whom waited for decades for the line to arrive or moved into housing to suit their work commutes.

Instead, I feel Metro should continue to the south city on a new alignment, carrying on underground to a suitable overground terminus.

So the question for me is should we accept an imperfect route and embrace and campaign for, in fear that the alternative would be nothing at all?

Or should we point out the failings of this route, and other failings in the Ireland 2040 plan, and campaign for a plan with more ambition that will start to move the country away from its dependence on private cars?
James Shields is offline   Reply With Quote