Metrolink — Make a Better Plan
Introduction
The Metrolink project is in its second period of public consultation. While we are in favour of a modern and comprehensive network of public transport for the city, the National Transport Authority (NTA) is compounding underlying social issues, namely a lack of housing and accessible public amenities. We are against the destruction of Markievicz Pool & Gym, College Gate and the residents of Townsend St.
Various alternative planning options have been discounted by the Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) in their Emerging Preferred Route design report (EPR). The public is expected to take them at their word that they are not viable.
In this document, our campaign outlines only some of our objections to the current plan. If our public submissions are truly considered, we are convinced Dublin can have a state of the art Metro system that fulfils the project’s original mandate without destroying the quality of life of a large number of city residents and depriving a community of one of it’s few public facilities.
What you can do
Show your support for the pool and gym and affected residents by making a submission of objection to Metrolink using their submission form. How does the destruction of the Markievicz Pool & Gym / College Gate / Townsend St apartments affect you? Other Dublin communities have shown that objections to Metrolink can cause significant changes to the plan. Help us preserve Dublin 2!
The destruction of Dublin city’s only easily accessible 25m pool and gym.
The Markievicz Leisure Centre is the only public pool and gym in the city centre with extended hours, pricing concessions and a pay-as-you-go option. The pool and gym have only just been renovated at a cost of over €1 million of taxpayers money.
Not only is it used by the local community, but many commuters also use the resource daily. It provides a vital social outlet, allowing young and old to participate in sporting activities. It is fully accessible to those with disabilities. The NTA and Dublin City Council have provided no concrete plan to create an alternative facility in Dublin 2.
The destruction of homes in the city centre.
Without question, the Tara St Metrolink development will have the most negative impact of any affected community along the metro line. 78 homes are to be destroyed:
- The 70 apartments of College gate
- 8 townhouses on Townsend street
The destruction of homes must be a last resort. Our campaign is not convinced with the justifications given by the TII as to the inability to find an alternative location with adequate proximity to the Tara St. Dart station. There are numerous commercial and derelict sites in the area of Tara St station that should be demolished before residences:
- Build under Hawkins St.
- Move the station South with station exit on Townsend St
- Build East of Tara St station affecting commercial premises, not homes.
Compared to other Metrolink stations, the scale of the above ground development is very large. A public plaza will be created consisting mainly of empty space. Original Metrolink plans propose the potential commercial development of this area at a later date! Are the NTA making a land grab here to profit from commercial development in the future?
Ref 2: Proposed Tara St Metrolink development
Public consultation has not been adequately advertised to the public
Many residents of College Gate and members of the Markievicz leisure centre remain unaware of the current plan to demolish the complex. There was not even a courtesy call to peoples doorsteps of the intent to compulsory purchase their homes. By the time residents found out, the first public consultation deadline (May 2018) had ended, so there was no time to submit proper objections.
We are now in the second non-statutory phase of public consultation which began on 26th March 2019. The complete EPR was only publicly released on the 8th of April.
Public Consultation has primarily been a public relations exercise led by the TII. The NTA has been barely represented during the consultation events. They are ultimately responsible for Metrolink planning. They are stalling on providing a full cost-benefit analysis for the project.
Residents of Townsend St. were only informed of the planned Compulsory Purchase Order in April 2019. This is at least a year since public consultation began!
Given the scale of the Metrolink project and its cost to the taxpayer, their engagement with primary stakeholders (i.e. the public) has been insulting. Who is ultimately accountable for these planning decisions? The fragmented responsibility of this project suits the NTA, the TII, Dublin City Council and our Ministers. A huge amount of money is already being spent on this project but financial transparency and adequate justifications for expenditure are not available to the public. Who is safeguarding the quality of life for Dublin City communities?
Inconsistent justification for preferred option (option 0) in the revised plan.
Our campaign has reviewed Appendix M of the Emerging Preferred Route Design Report (EPR).
The TII has justified the demolition of buildings in the vicinity of Tara St station. These buildings are at the beginning of their life cycle and have been preferred to derelict sites in the area. We are not convinced by the justifications given for these planning decisions:
The specification of the “Alignment standards” and the Tunnel Boring Machine is not clearly defined.
The engineering consultants, Jacobs Idom and the TII go to great lengths to emphasise the limits of how a Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs) can turn while drilling. For example, regarding option 1 in the (EPR. pg 288):
“unacceptably low track radii needed to align both stations, which are incompatible with TBM tunnel construction. As such, this Option 1 is not viable”
It is on this basis that a number of alternative planning options are discounted. They say that all TBMs have this constraint and that significant arcs in the tunnel direction will adversely affect:
- The ability to line the tunnel walls with concrete panelling.
- The comfort of the commute.
For the Dublin Metrolink project, a TBM must be designed and built for the project. An existing TBM will not be used. This is a crucial point. Surely this machine should be built not only to complete the Northern line of Metrolink but to continue to build all extensions of Metrolink in the future? Wouldn’t this be a prudent use of taxpayers money? If the TBM has not yet been built, why is the arc of the tunnel such an issue? A TBM that would allow for greater turning could be built. This would make the trajectory for tunnelling alternative options viable.
When questioned, Metrolink Project Manager Aidan Foley said that no Tunnel Boring Machines (TBM’s) can turn corners of less than 300 feet and such machines do not exist. However, TBM’s do exist that can turn sharper corners despite NTA’s claim to the contrary:
“Due to the complex geometry of the alignment, steering the TBMs accurately through the tight curves (min R 137 m) is one of the key challenges of the project. To accomplish this it was necessary to articulate the TBM shields.”
https://www.therobbinscompany.com/san-francisco-central-subway/
‘TBMs can make turns, but they’re not exactly the hairpin variety. “A typical radius for a turn is between 300 and 400 ft,”. “But we build special TBMs if jobs call for tighter turns. The tightest radius we ever dug was a 90 turn in 75 ft in a South African gold mine.’
Technical Reports have not been released
Appendix M of the EPR is all the technical detail of the Tara St development made available to the public. No background technical reports or information to support their analysis have been published. It is an opinion given without the facts or background details that have formed the opinion.
Conclusion
Metrolink can be successfully completed without the destruction of homes in the Tara Street area and the destruction of the Markievicz pool and gym; the most valuable community resource in the inner city. Our public representatives must stand up to ensure that sense prevails. Too many are in hiding on this issue. There is a blatant disregard for the human factor in planning in Dublin. We accept there has been an improved level of engagement by the TII with the public from what started at a very low baseline. The executive of Dublin City Council, however, has been at best, uninterested in our arguments. Their apathy poses a serious threat to the quality of life of residents in the city as they continue to favour a version of Dublin as a place to commute to rather than a place to live in. We encourage all concerned citizens to make a submission to Metrolink to support our campaign and set a benchmark for positive planning in the city.
