DART+ (DART Expansion)

D.L.R.

Judgement Day wrote: »

And good riddance! Get rid of CIE before spending another cent on DART underground.

Although I want to see Dart Underground built, I also have grave doubts in CIE's ability to deliver it.

When you think about it, incompetence and corruption, not capital, are the underlying problems for DU.

strassenwo!f

Jack Noble wrote: »

With Metro North and Dart Underground holding 10-year railway orders, I will be very surprised if FF, SF, LA and Greens won't be making their own 'promises' re Metro and Dart come 2016.

Yes, but will they hold railway orders? This is a strategic infrastructure project. Will the order be granted if the project has been shelved?

strassenwo!f

Just to clarify, if the project is shelved, then speed is not of the essence.

So it's position as a strategic infrastructure project might be in doubt. Going by the thrust of the relevant Act.

No?

Jack Noble

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Just to clarify, if the project is shelved, then speed is not of the essence.

So it's position as a strategic infrastructure project might be in doubt. Going by the thrust of the relevant Act.

No?

My understanding is that the projects will get the ROs to allow them to proceed in the future.

For example, Metro West application currently before ABP is for a 15-year RO - with 25-year lifespans on some stops - for precisely that reason.

Nothing has changed wrt Dart Underground because it had already been 'deferred' to post-2015 by the previous government AFTER the RO application had been submitted.

cgcsb

In my humble opinion all of the capital spending in the transport budget should go into DATu and integrated ticketing.

We have enough motorway as it is. Once the M20 is built, there's no more need to build another motorway in Ireland for another 20 years at least. The M17/M18 can go and sh1t. The WRC can go and sh!t. The most essential rail project, and most important project overall in the state is DART underground. Everything else is secondary.

However this is Ireland and we'd rather tour the country filling in potholes on back roads that serve 2 families.

DWCommuter

cgcsb wrote: »

In my humble opinion all of the capital spending in the transport budget should go into DATu and integrated ticketing.

We have enough motorway as it is. Once the M20 is built, there's no more need to build another motorway in Ireland for another 20 years at least. The M17/M18 can go and sh1t. The WRC can go and sh!t. The most essential rail project, and most important project overall in the state is DART underground. Everything else is secondary.

However this is Ireland and we'd rather tour the country filling in potholes on back roads that serve 2 families.

Proportional Representation.:D

etchyed

DWCommuter wrote: »

Proportional Representation.:D

Overrepresentation and powerless local councils. STV has nothing to do with it.

dowlingm

thing is when you see the sons/daughters/nieces of gombeen TDs warming seats on the councils it's difficult to be tempted to give them more powers.

Victor

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Yes, but will they hold railway orders? This is a strategic infrastructure project. Will the order be granted if the project has been shelved?

There is no relationship between the planning permission and the funding. The order can still be granted even if the minister decides that the project is de-prioritised.

strassenwo!f

Even though the plan for this has been "deferred", can it be presumed that ABP will still carry out its work on the railway order?

Their observations may be useful in ironing out flaws for when the project does actually happen. Likewise with the metro.

strassenwo!f

Victor wrote: »

There is no relationship between the planning permission and the funding. The order can still be granted even if the minister decides that the project is de-prioritised.

Thanks for that, Victor. I'm afraid I hadn't seen this post before.

So, I'm guessing that ABP will press on with their deliberations. I don't know when their decision is expected, but as said above the details of their decision may help to iron out flaws in the proposed line, whether permission is granted or not.

BrianD

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Their observations may be useful in ironing out flaws for when the project does actually happen. Likewise with the metro.

Hopefully they'll outline the real flaw - the project is a crock and will remain so for the next 50 years.

Be thankful for this deferral - it's actually a service to the taxpayer. We won't be required to subsidise this white elephant. The next step should be a complete review as to how this project was allowed to get so far down the line.

monument

BrianD wrote: »

Hopefully they'll outline the real flaw - the project is a crock and will remain so for the next 50 years.

Be thankful for this deferral - it's actually a service to the taxpayer. We won't be required to subsidise this white elephant. The next step should be a complete review as to how this project was allowed to get so far down the line.

Just like we were told in the 70s that the Dart was a "white elephant on rails"? http://dublinobserver.com/2011/03/white-elephant-on-tracks/

For the record: I agree with deferral of both projects at this time, just not for the same reasons as you.

cgcsb

BrianD wrote: »

Hopefully they'll outline the real flaw - the project is a crock and will remain so for the next 50 years.

Be thankful for this deferral - it's actually a service to the taxpayer. We won't be required to subsidise this white elephant. The next step should be a complete review as to how this project was allowed to get so far down the line.

are you joking?

DWCommuter

BrianD wrote: »

Hopefully they'll outline the real flaw - the project is a crock and will remain so for the next 50 years.

Be thankful for this deferral - it's actually a service to the taxpayer. We won't be required to subsidise this white elephant. The next step should be a complete review as to how this project was allowed to get so far down the line.

I really can't wait for you to explain that opinion. Over to you.

BrianD

DWCommuter wrote: »

I really can't wait for you to explain that opinion. Over to you.

Jeez ... thought that would be a no brainer. No problem! Too much money spent on a project that doesn't have the passengers on the route to justify the capital expenditure. Flawed from the start.

Of course if I was in Swords, I'd love it to be built. As would everybody else in the city. Metro anybody?

At least FG have the sense to quietly start putting this one to one side. Perhaps it should have one of those notices on the file "Do not recusitate".

Let's put the money (and future budgets) into good projects that will yield more utility and value for Dublin.

monument wrote:

Just like we were told in the 70s that the Dart was a "white elephant on rails"? http://dublinobserver.com/2011/03/wh...ant-on-tracks/

For the record: I agree with deferral of both projects at this time, just not for the same reasons as you.

The creation DART line (which obviously goes beyond just electrification) was never a white elephant, in fact the biggest "white elephant" was not moving immediately to continue the programme onto other suburban lines. Would have played some part in how the city developed in the past 20 years.

The primary problem is that the manner in which Dublin has developed over the past 20 -30 years has rendered any metro type projects unfeasible. They are only feasible if you have buckets of money to throw at them and happy that they will never reach their true capacity.

I'm in favour of rail transport and would love to see a proper rapid rail integrated service in Dublin. Metro North or it's ugly sister Metro West were certainly never going to be that.

murphaph

At rush hour MN would be operating at or near capacity from day one. Outside rush hour there are basically no metro systems that operate at full capacity, certainly none in Europe.

The fact that MN would/could hit so many large trip generators (large suburban town, international airport, 2 universities, 2 large hospitals and 1 or 2 small ones, central business district, central shopping district, other public transport modes (heavy rail at at least one point, though Tara is close enough to consider it 2 and if DU was built it would be 3)) without deviating all that much from a straight line is pretty incredible. I imagine it would have been built long ago in many other European cities tbh.

markpb

BrianD wrote: »

Jeez ... thought that would be a no brainer. No problem! Too much money spent on a project that doesn't have the passengers on the route to justify the capital expenditure. Flawed from the start.

How do you know a) it doesn't have the passengers right now and b) the number of passengers won't grow over time?

The creation DART line (which obviously goes beyond just electrification) was never a white elephant, in fact the biggest "white elephant" was not moving immediately to continue the programme onto other suburban lines. Would have played some part in how the city developed in the past 20 years.

How do you know that the Dart line had the passengers on the route before it was built?

Zebra3

BrianD wrote: »

The creation DART line (which obviously goes beyond just electrification) was never a white elephant, in fact the biggest "white elephant" was not moving immediately to continue the programme onto other suburban lines. Would have played some part in how the city developed in the past 20 years.

I think it's fair to say that the MN route has a much higher opulation density than the Maynooth line so what you're saying there doesn't make sense.

L1011

Zebra3 wrote: »

I think it's fair to say that the MN route has a much higher opulation density than the Maynooth line so what you're saying there doesn't make sense.

Part of that is due to dreadful planning - towns along it were built away from the railway not towards it from the 1970s onwards. Resultingly the line runs through open countryside too often.

Even Dunboyne with its 'new' branch, planned for decades, effectively ends at the train line and mostly got built away the opposite side...

Obviously it'd still be lower density, but not as much lower.

Wild Bill

Folks - ye blew it!

All the haggling over Dart v Luas v DU v MN and the endless delays these "debates" caused.....you got nothing

At least the motorway network constructors ignored the begrudgers, Greenies and Nimbys and left us with something valuable in terms of infrastructure.

Pathetic that the one project going ahead (Luas BX) isn't even going to start construction till 2015! (At a cost of one quarter of what we dumped into Anglo's unsecured gamblers on one day last Tuesday)

Or at less than 10% of the "accounting error" of the Dept of Finance debt calculation.

Seems that only infrastructure spending is analysed and examined for return on investment; for the banks the money pours out unaccounted, unexamined and zero return is OK.

How typically FG/Lab lame is that? :cool:

dowlingm

Wild Bill wrote: »

... a bunch of drivel...

Get a few in before the match did we?

Cathaoirleach

dowlingm wrote: »

Get a few in before the match did we?

Save yourself the hassle

paulm17781

Wild Bill wrote: »

Folks - ye blew it!

All the haggling over Dart v Luas v DU v MN and the endless delays these "debates" caused.....you got nothing

I didn't realise it was discussions on boards that were delaying it. If only we'd known we held such influence.

Wild Bill

paulm17781 wrote: »

I didn't realise it was discussions on boards that were delaying it. If only we'd known we held such influence.

Certainly no positive influence!

Not just on boards - also in the Irish Times and all the other tedious trainspotting fora that make such huge "controversies" of very basic infrastructure projects.

DWCommuter

BrianD wrote: »

Jeez ... thought that would be a no brainer. No problem! Too much money spent on a project that doesn't have the passengers on the route to justify the capital expenditure. Flawed from the start.

Of course if I was in Swords, I'd love it to be built. As would everybody else in the city. Metro anybody?

At least FG have the sense to quietly start putting this one to one side. Perhaps it should have one of those notices on the file "Do not recusitate".

Let's put the money (and future budgets) into good projects that will yield more utility and value for Dublin.



The creation DART line (which obviously goes beyond just electrification) was never a white elephant, in fact the biggest "white elephant" was not moving immediately to continue the programme onto other suburban lines. Would have played some part in how the city developed in the past 20 years.

The primary problem is that the manner in which Dublin has developed over the past 20 -30 years has rendered any metro type projects unfeasible. They are only feasible if you have buckets of money to throw at them and happy that they will never reach their true capacity.

I'm in favour of rail transport and would love to see a proper rapid rail integrated service in Dublin. Metro North or it's ugly sister Metro West were certainly never going to be that.

So you were spouting off about MN. I thought you were talking about DU.

Sponge Bob

paulm17781 wrote: »

I didn't realise it was discussions on boards that were delaying it. If only we'd known we held such influence.

Every time I mentioned the Missing Link ( KRP2) west of Inchicore all sorts of strange contributors used to show up here to get really snippy at me. :cool:

Then they FINALLY published the plan for it and then it was cancelled. Maybe if they got the finger out years ago something would have been done...perhaps only KRP2 itself as 'enabling works' but that would have been a useful start.

Wild Bill

Sponge I thought you were the Missing Link - till I discovered Dowlingm above :cool:

But what is KRP2?

Sounds rude.

Sponge Bob

You need but search this thread Bill. The original interconnector ( surfacing Heuston) would have shared a bottleneck 3 (then 2) tracks from Heuston to Park West. This was ridiculous.

After CIE correctly ( if belatedly and after lots of abuse here and in other fora) replanned the tunnel to surface further west in Inchicore there was still a glaringly missing bit of quad track Inchicore - Park West.

CIE genuinely hoped nobody would notice this glaring omission and that they could get their railway order anyway and their occasional bitches on here used to be very very cross at me for noticing. It would and will affect some back gardens in Joe Duffy central...and that is unavoidable as I pointed out.

So the "Missing Link" became "KRP2" .....bit late but nevertheless it finally appeared out of the planning department.

There is no point in DU unless express and local trains are completely separated and that requires 4 tracks all the way. Course the same logic applies north of Connolly/Fairview as far as Clongriffin at least once the north bound traffic exits the tunnel.

Doing KRP2 first as an enabling work for DU, not as a fag end add on afterwards, would:

a) be cheap , really it is a small bit of land acqusition ( if any) and raising/widening 2 bridges...one in Kylemore road.
b) mean that tunneling traffic and spoil would be separated from trains coming to and from Heuston if DU ever went ahead.
c) presently they plan to truck the spoil through the East Wall, a lot of that could be trained out west instead to fill a bog somewhere.

and it would mean in the short term that there are minimum 3 tracks ex Heuston instead of the current 3 then 2 then 4 configuration.

Doing the northern line as Quad track (from Fairview - Clongriffin) would have the same effect if it were brought forward. Then the 2 tracks peeled off into the tunnel are separated and usable as spoil lines and equipment movers during tunneling without affecting other services that must express through the slow commuter trains.

On the scale of the overall DU project which was a €4bn ish integrated vision thing those two 'Quad to the Portals' projects would make perfect sense early on and would have immediate benefits even if the tunnel never happened.

Sadly all the money has been stolen by bankers, consultants lawyers and accountants in South Dublin under the pretext of saving their banks (again). We bailed all these cnuts out in the 1980s as well with their ICI scam which money could better have been spent on vital Roads or Dart to Malahide instead.

There ya go.

D.L.R.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

There is no point in DU unless express and local trains are completely separated and that requires 4 tracks all the way.

Not entirely true. Vienna I believe has an S-Bahn network which features 2-track stretches, which also carry longer distance routes in addition to the suburban. It can be done. Obviously 4-tracking the Northern line would be ideal though.

But in any case, I'd like to see someone other than Irish Rail overseeing this project. Don't think they're qualified frankly. They can barely keep their bridges up, don't fancy using tunnels built by them. :eek: