Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
DART+ (DART Expansion)
Options
Comments
-
lucernarian wrote: »Even that lout Micheal Martin can point out that much of the extra cost of the proposed metro, is going to serve areas on the luas green line which already has a very decent and far more frequent service than the dart. So how can Dart Underground be criticised for serving existing areas? Ones which have a train every hour outside of peak times. Practically all of the commuter railway lines right now have lots of green land to let building happen.
The "very decent and far more frequent service" is there to make up for the enormous capacity deficit.
Dart Underground relieves the loop line, sure. But as you say, it's connecting green fields in west Dublin to the city centre and a Northern line that can only muster 4 Darts per hour as is.0 -
He's not wrong. It's duplicating an existing, very good, public transport system - albeit one that the planners are trying their best to destroy with LUAS cross city. Apparently you have to live in Sandyford and the N11 corridor to get superb public transport, I wonder why.lucernarian wrote: »Even that lout Micheal Martin can point out that much of the extra cost of the proposed metro, is going to serve areas on the luas green line which already has a very decent and far more frequent service than the dart.
Instead of building a duplicate system going to the same part of the city, Metro South should have gone somewhere else less well served with the capability of hosting high density housing. It doesn't matter anyway, it will be changed once the politicians get their hands on it again.0 -
Below is the full text of the DART expansion programme. The main claim is that it will provide "a very substantial increase in peak-hour capacity on all lines from Drogheda, Maynooth, Celbridge/Hazelhatch and Greystones." but that this will be achieved through "re-signalling, junction and station changes"
Can anyone explain how you can get very substantial increases in capacity without a new tunnel? I had always understood that the Connolly-Pearse corridor restricted hourly movements and unless you bypassed it then not much could be done.
Would it be possible for Maynooth Darts to terminate at Connolly platform 7 and head back towards Maynooth/M3 Parkway a couple of minutes later thereby not inferring with the traditional Dart line?0 -
I hear the echoes of a poster from days gone by who warned this exact thing would happen. The re-branding of Metro North to "Metro Link" so FG could claim it as their own project while dragging it through another planning process was called to the letter!
This post in the Metro thread from the 27th of July 2011 sums it up for me.We are a nation that's used to being lead so much that we lack real leaders. When potential leaders appear, they are shot down. It's insecurity. There's a Chinese proverb that I always equated with Ireland. It goes something like this, " The nail that stands tallest will always be hit with the hammer first."
Both you and I have come full circle now after a dubious start. Personally I predict many more years of talk, talk, talk and then when it seems like we may have money to do something, we will re-plan everything all over again. History repeats itself, unless you cry stop! We don't do that in Ireland.
I have been right about so much and took a lot of abuse on Boards.ie for my opinions. However it is all coming to fruition now. I check in here daily and already see the "alternative" ideas being promoted. It is only a matter of time before this filters down to political level. It will. MN and DU will be reinvented in the coming years and yet more talk and debate will ensue. I stake my reputation (which isn't too bad) on it.
Thankfully I won't be here to get emotionally embroiled in it.
A perfect summation of what's happened and that was nearly 7 years ago.:eek:0 -
Well, that's my opinion which Micheal Martin seems to have purloinedHe's not wrong. It's duplicating an existing, very good, public transport system - albeit one that the planners are trying their best to destroy with LUAS cross city. Apparently you have to live in Sandyford and the N11 corridor to get superb public transport, I wonder why.
Instead of building a duplicate system going to the same part of the city, Metro South should have gone somewhere else less well served with the capability of hosting high density housing. It doesn't matter anyway, it will be changed once the politicians get their hands on it again.
does anyone else get a whiff of an election?
For whatever reason, comparing the merits of a metro line's linkup with Luas, and Dart Underground, has been a controversial thing to do on this forum at times. Its need has in some way or other been recognised since the 1920s. It's acknowledged that we need more housing. We can't densify if our own Taoiseach stands up for the poor residents of Blanchardstown in getting 3 or 4-storey limits on apartment blocks within 5 minutes of Castleknock station.
Greenfield sites, what's left of them in Co. Dublin away from the Naul, are where planners and politicans can be braver.0 -
Advertisement
-
You are in the Metro thread complaining about the "political" contributions getting mixed in with the "technical" discussion and you come onto this thread spouting on about the political reality. Seriously.:rolleyes:
While I note your acceptance of DU as being a valuable piece of infrastructure, you are absolutely wrong if you think that Metro and DU were never pitted against each other at a political level. As far back as 2003 there was a very poor political response to DU not long after a metro concept was announced for Dublin. Believe it or not a voluntary organisation did more work to put DU in the public and political domain than any politician or IE themselves. But if you want one single piece of evidence that DU is off the political radar well it has to be the lack of funding provided for the CPO aspect, which was a pittance compared to the apparent overall figure of 116 billion for this latest "plan". This act of attrition was made on the basis of redesigning DU to make it cheaper. Yeah right!
As for your point about the differences between Metro and DU, I agree that it may not be possible to fund both together, but to claim that Metro is preferred because it opens up a new rail alignment in Dublin, is an example of everything that is wrong. You fix what you have first and then expand. The current IE network in Dublin has been savaged in terms of delivering a decent service. When DART started in 1984 it offered a 5 minute peak frequency, a 15 min off peak frequency and a 20 minute frequency on a Sunday. Since then it has been strangled by additional commuter services added as people bought houses in the GDA, because that's all they could afford. DART lengths were increased along with platform lengths, but this was a sticky plaster solution to try and improve it capacity issues. We now find ourselves in a situation where its a case of people renting, not buying, outside the city in the same GDA. But the same problems remain and the only way to improve the rail network in the GDA is DU.
Its almost as if we have realized that exporting Dublin workers to Meath, Laois, Kildare, Louth, Westmeath and beyond etc. was a mistake and we have decided that light rail, metro etc. is the way forward now in the city environs along with proper residential planning. I think that's a drawbridge mentality. There still exists commuters in those counties. Nothing has changed for them. There are new commuters in those counties now because they can't afford to buy or rent in Dublin. The same issues remain.
I disagree with the redesign of Metro and I disagree with the shelving (and thats what it is) of DU. DU should have come first. This was a political decision and the funny thing is that Metro is no nearer completion than DU.
So...you're agreeing with me then? I don't disagree with the importance of DU, I think the order of their construction is debatable but can easily see the case for DU first, but ultimately I'm just pointing out that Metro probably looks like a more politically advantageous choice of project because of how they can frame it as providing new areas for residential development (which is exactly what they've done).
The reason I think politics is relevant in this thread is because it is what is causing this project to be essentially cancelled, whereas Metro Link is in an active state of progress.0 -
Bray Head wrote:Below is the full text of the DART expansion programme. The main claim is that it will provide "a very substantial increase in peak-hour capacity on all lines from Drogheda, Maynooth, Celbridge/Hazelhatch and Greystones." but that this will be achieved through "re-signalling, junction and station changes"Bray Head wrote:Can anyone explain how you can get very substantial increases in capacity without a new tunnel? I had always understood that the Connolly-Pearse corridor restricted hourly movements and unless you bypassed it then not much could be done.
1. Did you notice what section of DART line is missing from that?
2. I can't see DARTs running through PPT in electrified mode
3. The cynic in me also thinks the high frequency hazelhatch trains won't all go through the PPT0 -
What new areas though? The land around the airport is miniscule compared to Kishoge, Rush&Lusk, all the land west of Clonsilla, the North Leixlip environs... The govt haven't described the new metro in that way from any of this week's announcements or the released doc. What could they say? That we can house people right by the airport and that will solve our problems?So...you're agreeing with me then? I don't disagree with the importance of DU, I think the order of their construction is debatable but can easily see the case for DU first, but ultimately I'm just pointing out that Metro probably looks like a more politically advantageous choice of project because of how they can frame it as providing new areas for residential development (which is exactly what they've done).
The reason I think politics is relevant in this thread is because it is what is causing this project to be essentially cancelled, whereas Metro Link is in an active state of progress.
I'd say by linking in the luas green line, they've ensured even more well-developed areas with lots of voters will add to the political support for it. It comes at the price of giving even more people a reason to object to the expanded scope though.0 -
So...you're agreeing with me then? I don't disagree with the importance of DU, I think the order of their construction is debatable but can easily see the case for DU first, but ultimately I'm just pointing out that Metro probably looks like a more politically advantageous choice of project because of how they can frame it as providing new areas for residential development (which is exactly what they've done).
The reason I think politics is relevant in this thread is because it is what is causing this project to be essentially cancelled, whereas Metro Link is in an active state of progress.
I understand that political discussion is warranted in this thread and we both agree on the reasons. However I firmly believe that it is also warranted in the Metro thread. Despite it being renamed and "technically" an active project, the thread is full of justified posts about the political aspects going back years. Ultimately its politics that will deliver or not. I see know reason for people expressing doubts about Metros delivery to be removed from the discussion. From a personal point of view, I have been interested in these project since the beginning and its only right that new/younger posters are informed about what has gone on before.0 -
Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,395 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 14090
Can we remind ourselves of the attitude of the Minister for Transport towards the DART Underground projectShane Ross wrote:5. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the future of the proposed underground rail interconnector linking Heuston Station and Spencer Dock; if this interconnector will be included in the new national capital plan; and, if not, the way in which he plans to increase the capacity of the rail network. [7883/18]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: In 1972 the report on the transportation in Dublin study carried out by An Foras Forbartha stated we should build an underground rail connection between Heuston Station and Pearse Street and Connolly Station. In 1975 the report on the Dublin rapid rail transportation study stated the same and that it should be the second phase after the introduction of the Howth to Bray DART line. In 2001 the plan A Platform for Change stated the project was more important than anything else and should take precedence over the widening of the M50. That did not happen. A railway order was issued in December 2011 but subsequently cancelled. The report on the NTA greater Dublin draft transport study for the period 2016 to 2035 brought the measure back in and stated we had to have it. Does the Minister intend to build it? Will it happen? Are we for real on this issue? Will it be in the plan that will be announced tomorrow?
Deputy Shane Ross: As the Deputy is aware, the National Transport Authority's, NTA, transport strategy for the greater Dublin area 2016-2035 proposes implementation of the overall DART expansion programme. In the Government’s budgetary framework for capital investment, Building on Recovery: Infrastructure and Capital Investment 2016-2021, funding was allocated to progress a number of key public transport projects in the NTA's strategy, including the DART expansion programme.
The DART expansion programme has a key role to play in delivering an efficient transport system. When fully implemented, the enhancements to the heavy rail system provided for in the NTA's transport strategy will create a full metropolitan area DART network for Dublin with all of the lines linked and connected. This integrated rail network will provide the core high capacity transit system for the region and will deliver a very substantial increase in peak-hour capacity on all lines from Drogheda, Maynooth, Hazelhatch and Greystones.
The original cost of the overall DART expansion programme, including the DART underground tunnel element, was estimated, as the Deputy will be well aware from his own experience, at €4 billion, of which €3 billion was in respect of the tunnel as originally designed. The Government decided in September 2015 that the original proposal for the tunnel should be redesigned to provide a lower cost solution. I understand that the NTA is working with Irish Rail on a revised proposal that is expected to be completed soon.
In the meantime, significant investment to upgrade signalling and turn-back facilities in the critical city centre area allowed the upgrade and reopening of the Phoenix Park tunnel in 2016. At the time of its opening, the NTA stated that the opening of the tunnel was an opportunity in the short term, at modest cost, to bring commuters from the west and south west to the city centre and the business district in the south of the city. It stated also that the opportunity of developing the DART underground is to be protected for the future.
The upgrade to the Phoenix Park tunnel in 2016 at a cost of €13.5 million has seen commuters on the Kildare to Dublin Heuston line benefit from having the option of direct trains to Connolly, Tara Street, Pearse and Grand Canal Dock stations.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
Following the mid-term review of capital priorities, budget 2018 increased the multi-annual capital investment funding envelopes for the coming four-year period, including providing an enhanced capital envelope of €2.7 billion for Ireland's public transport investment between 2018 and 2021. This enhanced capital envelope includes funding in the order of €230 million for mainline rail and DART capacity enhancement and will allow acceleration of the initial stages of the overall DART expansion programme, focusing particularly at this stage on providing additional fleet to enhance capacity and extending the electrified DART system. Specifically, it will allow substantial progress on electrification of the Northern rail line as far as Balbriggan, now expected to be delivered in 2022, and commencing work on the Maynooth line.
Planning for longer term investment will form part of the national development plan, the Government's overall ten-year investment plan which we will be launching later this week alongside the new national planning framework for the period to 2040.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: That is the same no nothing answer the Minister gave me a year ago. I am clear on what the Minister is saying; it is not going to happen. I have no faith in the Minister's ability to protect public transport or deliver public transport in this city. Our city is grinding to a halt and he is sitting back and watching it happen. It was galling to read in the newspapers today the front-page news that the metro will open up lands in the north of Dublin. We knew that 20 years ago. We were planning that 20 years ago in A Platform for Change, which was a proper plan about how we would make this city function and work. Critical to it, as well as the metro, was the DART interconnector because the two go together. There would be joint stations that complimented each other and we would start to have a public transport system that works. The Minister has given up on that. There is nothing happening. He has been saying for a year and a half that he is doing plans and looking at it. If he had been doing it, he would have answered this question today and he would be announcing tomorrow the building of the DART interconnector, but we will get nothing.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Thank you, Deputy.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The city is in gridlock and it will kill this country's growth prospects because it will not work. All the roads the Minister is building will not work. We need public transport.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): You will have a further minute, Deputy.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Edgar Morgenroth is right. The Minister is killing our cities, particularly Dublin, and I am sad that is happening at a time when we have the money and the opportunity.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Deputy, you know that you have a further minute, so do not abuse the time.
Deputy Shane Ross: Deputy Ryan was a little bit histrionic.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I am sorry. I am slightly emotional. I am 20 years waiting on this.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Please allow the Minister give his reply.
Deputy Colm Brophy: Deputy Ryan's party bankrupted the country in that 20 years.
Deputy Shane Ross: During that 20 years
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): The Minister without interruption, please.
Deputy Pat Deering: He has a short memory.
Deputy Colm Brophy: A very short memory.
Deputy Shane Ross:
I believe the Deputy was in government.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Yes.
Deputy Shane Ross: I did not interrupt the Deputy. He was in government for that period of time. I do not know when this particular project was cancelled but I think the DART underground was deferred by the previous Government in November 2010.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: No. It was 2011.
Deputy Shane Ross: When you were not so busy deferring bankrupting the country, bankrupting the banks and propping up Brian Cowen and Bertie Ahern, which he did with alacrity, I do not know what you were doing about transport but we inherited a situation in transport from you guys which was an absolute and utter disaster. You get up here day in, day out wanting to spend money like water, as you did the time you were in government. I will not sit here and take that as though money comes out of the sky when you are in opposition but when in government you just spend it and bankrupt the country.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Address the Chair, Minister.
Deputy Shane Ross: That is the outrageous type of narrative Deputy Ryan comes out with day after day. We should be spending €4 billion on an underground
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Thank you, Minister.
Deputy Shane Ross: We are doing an extremely progressive job. We will not bankrupt the country for infrastructure.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The Minister will spend €4 billion on roads in the next four years. He is bankrupting the country now because the traffic system in this city is grinding to a halt. He is the Minister for transport today. He should stand up to that responsibility in a country where we do have budgets. I heard European Investment Bank, EIB, representatives tell the Committee on Budgetary Oversight that there is no counter-party for us to lend to. They have no public projects ready to go. We protected this project when we were in government. We had the metro in the four-year plan. Fine Gael then killed it, which was the worst decision by any Government because it was the perfect counter cyclical plan that would have provided us not just with a transport system that works but it would have opened up those transport lines for housing. Instead, this Government is saying, "Aren't we great". It is 30 years late in opening up those lands for housing. What are the people in Kildare and beyond going to do when that rail system is not good enough to carry the numbers we need to be carried into this city? The Minister is a failure as Minister for transport.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Thank you, Deputy.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: He should stand up to that failure today. His key failing is that he does not believe in public transport. He does not believe in walking, cycling or any such mode of transport. All he wants to do is spend on roads. He has given no money to the cities
Deputy Brendan Griffin: We are clearing up your mess.
Deputy Eamon Ryan:
and it is killing our country. That is why I am annoyed.
Deputy Brendan Griffin: We are clearing up your legacy.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Deputy, please.
Deputy Pat Deering: We are clearing up the mess you left behind.
Deputy Brendan Griffin: We are clearing up the mess you left after you, which took ten years.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Gentlemen, this is Deputy Ryan's question.
Deputy Brendan Griffin: It is very hard to listen to this rubbish.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Minister, will you address the Chair, please? The Minister has one minute to reply.
Deputy Pat Deering: You cannot let him away with that.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Deputy Deering
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Cannot get away with what? It is just the truth.
Deputy Brendan Griffin: The truth is
Deputy Eamon Ryan: It is the bloody truth.
Deputy Brendan Griffin:
that you presided over the bankruptcy of the country.
(Interruptions).
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Deputy Ryan
Deputy Eamon Ryan: How long did it take you
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): I ask Deputy Ryan and the other Members please to desist. The Minister has one minute to reply. I ask Members to let the Minister reply.
Deputy Pat Deering: It is very difficult
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Please, Deputy Deering. Your question will be dealt with shortly. I will not allow you your time if you continue to interrupt.
Deputy Pat Deering: Sorry.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): If you want your question taken, let the Minister respond.
Deputy Shane Ross: I am speechless
Deputy Mick Barry: Correct. That is a first.
Deputy Shane Ross:
having to listen to this extraordinary narrative which you come in here day after day
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Minister, will you address the Chair, please?
Deputy Shane Ross: Yes. I wish to know the pills this man is taking.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: How long did it take the Minister to drive in here today?
Deputy Shane Ross: This man must be smoking amnesia
Deputy Eamon Ryan: How long did it take him to drive in here today?
Deputy Shane Ross: There is a thing called an amnesia pill, and it makes one forget everything.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Minister, will you address the Chair?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: How long did it take you to drive in today?
Deputy Shane Ross: For his years in the wilderness, he took his amnesia pills. He has forgotten he was in government when the country was bankrupt.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Where we
Deputy Shane Ross: He has forgotten about the four-year plan to which he referred. His plan went up in smoke because he spent money like there was no tomorrow. We are at least producing a plan, which is a ten-year plan that is responsible
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Roads, roads, roads.
Deputy Shane Ross:
gradual and realistic. I will not listen any longer to the sort of hypocrisy I have to put up with from Deputy Ryan. He comes in here day after day and forgets that he was in government when the country went bankrupt.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: You forgot the people of Dublin.
Deputy Shane Ross: You were the great prop of Cowen and Ahern when they had magic coming out of the sky, with castles in the air that never existed and were never built.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: You are crippling this city
Deputy Brendan Griffin: I have heard of a goldfish memory. I have never heard of a green fish memory.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): Members, it would be good if we calmed down for the next set of questions. Do not irritate yourselves too much. Question No. 7 is grouped with Questions Nos. 18, 22
Deputy Colm Brophy: I have Question No. 6.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Eugene Murphy): My apologies, Deputy Brophy. My train of thought has been interfered with. Is it any wonder?
We have no money for DART Underground but reopening unviable Garda stations by an "anti pork barrel politics" politican is fine.0 -
Advertisement
-
A politician based in Dundrum would like to see the luas line get the Metro treatment, if at possible at the expense of CIE projects... what a surprise. I read that debate once, I'll save myself the grief of reading it again.0
-
lucernarian wrote: »A politician based in Dundrum would like to see the luas line get the Metro treatment, if at possible at the expense of CIE projects... what a surprise. I read that debate once, I'll save myself the grief of reading it again.
And we need to completely remove the oul union chestnut from the debate. If any politician in Leinster House really thinks that DU shouldn't be built because of CIE unions then they should either resign or actually deal with the issues within CIE. That's their job. If any joe soap thinks that's a valid reason too, then they should stay away from the internet.0 -
lucernarian wrote: »A politician based in Dundrum would like to see the luas line get the Metro treatment, if at possible at the expense of CIE projects... what a surprise. I read that debate once, I'll save myself the grief of reading it again.
it's less "at the expense of" and more "in priority over".
Metro is to the green line what the KRP was for the Kildare alignment - capacity. Principally, you get more bang for your buck with Metro, given that the Northern Line necessarily needs more paths and the Kildare and Maynooth lines need total electrification. The Green Line is good to go but for platform rejigging and sealing off at grade crossings.0 -
I understand that political discussion is warranted in this thread and we both agree on the reasons. However I firmly believe that it is also warranted in the Metro thread. Despite it being renamed and "technically" an active project, the thread is full of justified posts about the political aspects going back years. Ultimately its politics that will deliver or not. I see know reason for people expressing doubts about Metros delivery to be removed from the discussion. From a personal point of view, I have been interested in these project since the beginning and its only right that new/younger posters are informed about what has gone on before.
I'm not a mod, so I didn't make that decision, just a request. Here I'm merely highlighting why politics might have favoured Metro over DU, which I think is fairly factual, objective reasoning. I just find the complaints about the political process in Ireland, while accurate, rather repetitive and cyclical. In other words - you can probably just browse back a few pages and the exact same thing will have been said already. It makes it really irritating to follow the threads when you're hoping for substantive updates.0 -
lucernarian wrote: »What new areas though? The land around the airport is miniscule compared to Kishoge, Rush&Lusk, all the land west of Clonsilla, the North Leixlip environs... The govt haven't described the new metro in that way from any of this week's announcements or the released doc. What could they say? That we can house people right by the airport and that will solve our problems?
You can read all about that here:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/metro-north-plan-focuses-on-developing-areas-along-line-1.3392415
My other point was that DU improves transport quality to areas already served by commuter rail services whereas to the general public, Metro (the north section anyway) is going to be serving areas that don't have any high quality transport at all yet (Glasnevin, Ballymun, Swords).
Additionally, it seems like the government are pushing the idea of not waiting on DU before improving frequency and quality of service on the west Commuter rail lines, an idea I'm not sure is practical, but it even further reduces the political weight behind DU.I'd say by linking in the luas green line, they've ensured even more well-developed areas with lots of voters will add to the political support for it.
Yes, this was the point I made on the Metro thread itself. The bigger scope of the project, the more politically solid it becomes.0 -
I don't like your parochialism tbh but I understand it even less because the rail project that is favoured (on paper, this time round) actually cuts a path right up the middle of the Northside.Lennoxschips wrote: »Forgot, the lads from Ballsbridge take a Taxi to the airport through their shiny Port Tunnel. No need to even look at the North Side.0 -
Sorry but DU would bring tens of thousands of people into the catchment area of quality public transport. DU would deliver the capacity required to almost overnight reroute all the buses in West Dublin to feed into the Kildare route. The buses wouldn't be sitting in city traffic but running to tight, reliable schedules feeding into DART.You can read all about that here:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/metro-north-plan-focuses-on-developing-areas-along-line-1.3392415
My other point was that DU improves transport quality to areas already served by commuter rail services whereas to the general public, Metro (the north section anyway) is going to be serving areas that don't have any high quality transport at all yet (Glasnevin, Ballymun, Swords).
Additionally, it seems like the government are pushing the idea of not waiting on DU before improving frequency and quality of service on the west Commuter rail lines, an idea I'm not sure is practical, but it even further reduces the political weight behind DU.
Yes, this was the point I made on the Metro thread itself. The bigger scope of the project, the more politically solid it becomes.
It's been done time and again elsewhere. Not rocket science.0 -
Sorry but DU would bring tens of thousands of people into the catchment area of quality public transport. DU would deliver the capacity required to almost overnight reroute all the buses in West Dublin to feed into the Kildare route. The buses wouldn't be sitting in city traffic but running to tight, reliable schedules feeding into DART.
It's been done time and again elsewhere. Not rocket science.
Please, I beg you, please actually read the post you are replying to. I'm talking about the public perception of these projects, and therefore what the political calculus becomes about them.0 -
Please, I beg you, please actually read the post you are replying to. I'm talking about the public perception of these projects, and therefore what the political calculus becomes about them.
What public perception? There is no public perception unless you are making one up. Rail projects over the last 45 years were never, ever an election issue. They still aren't. However politicians may well listen to some of the BS that is talked about on forums like these.0 -
Yup.What public perception? There is no public perception unless you are making one up. Rail projects over the last 45 years were never, ever an election issue. They still aren't. However politicians may well listen to some of the BS that is talked about on forums like these.
I live in a commuter town west of Berlin and take the regional train in to the city every weekday more or less. There is another parallel line about 5km south of our line and the Deutsche Bahn proposes some changes to its operation. The locals (somewhat justified IMO) have mobilised an online campaign to get the Landtag (state parliament) in Potsdam to reconsider. It's a major election issue in the upcoming state elections. Totally different attitude.0 -
Advertisement
-
What public perception? There is no public perception unless you are making one up. Rail projects over the last 45 years were never, ever an election issue. They still aren't. However politicians may well listen to some of the BS that is talked about on forums like these.
You're still agreeing with me - there is a reason the public have no awareness of DU. These things aren't one way: the politicians don't see a positive enough political weight with DU to push for it, so the media don't bother to report on it, so the public know feck all about it, so they don't put pressure on their politicians to make it happen, so the politicians remain unwilling to commit to it.
I certainly agree that the benefits of DU will improve the catchment area for potential residential population, but that's a fairly complex argument to get across to a public that have little interest in the details. Not to mention DU is wrapped up with the negative perception of CIE, and rail in Ireland in general. It's a tough sell.
Compare to Metro Link: brand new service on a new alignment that serves parts of the city without any kind of transport other than the bus. That's a really simple argument to make to that same general public. Throw in the fact that it's more closely perceived as a "Luas thing", and that the Luas generally has an excellent public perception. By comparison, this is an easier sell.0 -
You're still agreeing with me - there is a reason the public have no awareness of DU. These things aren't one way: the politicians don't see a positive enough political weight with DU to push for it, so the media don't bother to report on it, so the public know feck all about it, so they don't put pressure on their politicians to make it happen, so the politicians remain unwilling to commit to it.
I certainly agree that the benefits of DU will improve the catchment area for potential residential population, but that's a fairly complex argument to get across to a public that have little interest in the details. Not to mention DU is wrapped up with the negative perception of CIE, and rail in Ireland in general. It's a tough sell.
Compare to Metro Link: brand new service on a new alignment that serves parts of the city without any kind of transport other than the bus. That's a really simple argument to make to that same general public. Throw in the fact that it's more closely perceived as a "Luas thing", and that the Luas generally has an excellent public perception. By comparison, this is an easier sell.
I don't agree with you. How long are you around the whole DU/Metro thing? You are talking absolute crap.0 -
What public perception? There is no public perception unless you are making one up. Rail projects over the last 45 years were never, ever an election issue. They still aren't. However politicians may well listen to some of the BS that is talked about on forums like these.
Maybe the two of you are getting confused about what public perception means?
He didn’t talk about it being an election issue, but the poor public perception does lower the changes of it being an election issue.Sorry but DU would bring tens of thousands of people into the catchment area of quality public transport. DU would deliver the capacity required to almost overnight reroute all the buses in West Dublin to feed into the Kildare route. The buses wouldn't be sitting in city traffic but running to tight, reliable schedules feeding into DART.
It's been done time and again elsewhere. Not rocket science.
Other cities the size of Dublin retain bus or tram routes even after rail routes are put in place. Even NYC with its extensive rail network still has buses and London Bus carries more people than the tube.0 -
-
The Inchicore station would be new, Christchurch would be new. The docklands station is as good as a new station considering how little utility residents of the docklands would get out of the existing mon-fri service.
Considering the number of people living within 1km of those 3 places alone, it's completely wrong to say DU only serves existing rail customers. The political perception of this is bizarre but there's no need to augment that with dodgy claims.
Edit:
As for the Irish Times article, the less said about that drivel the better. They gave specifics on the sum total of nothing, especially as large parts of Ballymun have only just been redeveloped from being brownfield sites. The planned alignment for Swords would unlock very little unless ABP can be convinced to have the line go further (that shortening was one of their conditions for Metro North ironically). There is far less potential for new housing along the metro route compared to DU, it's incontrovertible. there's no way to ram 5 minute darts on the existing infrastructure, and this is already known from the solutions being looked at for DU going west of Heuston. If darts simply stopped at Heuston, they'd still not be able to deliver a 5-minute service without 4 tracks going west of Heuston somehow.0 -
lucernarian wrote: »The Inchicore station would be new, Christchurch would be new. The docklands station is as good as a new station considering how little utility residents of the docklands would get out of the existing mon-fri service.
Considering the number of people living within 1km of those 3 places alone, it's completely wrong to say DU only serves existing rail customers. The political perception of this is bizarre but there's no need to augment that with dodgy claims.
That's fine, but there's very little scope for promoting the idea of new residential development in those areas compared to Ballymun, Swords, and the unnamed undeveloped lands that Metro will pass through. Again, it's much simpler to sell the idea of an expansion of house building with Metro compared to DU.
Again I'll point out that I'm very much aware of the benefits of DU in this regard, but politics is nothing but a PR game these days, which means these projects succeed more easily if they have very short and simple premises.
I'll also point out that I don't like this being the case at all.0 -
The false comparison remains that. There is no land to be unlocked by metro north, barring the airport environs *as things stand*.
There is tonnes of land in West Dublin that could be unlocked to a limited extent without the DU tunnel, but it's an extremely limited extent.
I can see for myself why the metro would get the nod over DU by govt, but the pandering to this view and "rationale" behind not even doing the CPOs for Dart Underground and now the redesign is just silly.0 -
Other cities the size of Dublin retain bus or tram routes even after rail routes are put in place. Even NYC with its extensive rail network still has buses and London Bus carries more people than the tube.
Yes buses would still be retained but they'd just feed into DU stations rather than going all the way into the CC. Passengers would use a feeder bus then change to DU or Metro whichever serves nearest their area instead of getting a bus all the way into the CC.
This would reduce the amount of buses in the city centre making it more pedestrian friendly and improve bus services as shorter journey times would mean more frequent buses and shorter journey as buses aren't stuck in traffic in the CC.
Buses in other cities are used to serve areas not served by Metros and trains yes there will still be a use for buses to serve areas not included in the DU and Metro plans. London is slightly different it seemed when I was in London most people using buses did so because they were poor as bus fare is much cheaper than tube fare, by people going to areas not served by the tube, if the bus journey is more convient than the tube e.g. a direct bus v a few tube changes or people who had disabilities or mobility impairments which would prevent them using the tube.
Dublin would not have these issues as it's smaller, I would hope fares on the Metro and DU would be the same as bus fare or at least close enough and the stations would be modern with lifts and step free access meaning people with disabilities could use the system.0 -
lucernarian wrote: »The false comparison remains that. There is no land to be unlocked by metro north, barring the airport environs *as things stand*.
There is tonnes of land in West Dublin that could be unlocked to a limited extent without the DU tunnel, but it's an extremely limited extent.
I can see for myself why the metro would get the nod over DU by govt, but the pandering to this view and "rationale" behind not even doing the CPOs for Dart Underground and now the redesign is just silly.
I'm not pandering to anything, I'm attempting to understand the reasoning behind the political failure of DU to be taken on as a project compared to Metro. The sad reality is that the only current examination of DU that can be done is on a political level.
That all said, to say that no land is unlocked by Metro is very inaccurate.0 -
Advertisement
-
You think we'd keep the existing bus network in West Dublin even after DU? Maybe you're getting confused about what DU would deliver. I am under no illusions that the bus will continue to be the workhorse of public transport in Dublin no matter what. It's how those buses operate that would (unless we are truly insane) change completely (at least in areas within the bus catchment of the resulting DART (and metro) lines.Maybe the two of you are getting confused about what public perception means?
He didn’t talk about it being an election issue, but the poor public perception does lower the changes of it being an election issue.
Other cities the size of Dublin retain bus or tram routes even after rail routes are put in place. Even NYC with its extensive rail network still has buses and London Bus carries more people than the tube.0
Advertisement