DART+ (DART Expansion)

markpb

1huge1 wrote: »

I'm slightly more positive after reading this, better deferred than cancelled, though I don't know how you could build one that is more efficient. Also, where is the €3 billion cost of the tunnel coming from

Dart to be extended to Balbriggan by 2022 (via @IrishTimes) http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/dart-to-be-extended-to-balbriggan-by-2022-1.2361505

Politicians almost never cancel projects, they just defer them or send them back to consultants repeatedly. This is nothing new. DU is dead.

brandodub

Once again more fudge labelled as redesign. Another 20 years while the capital city grinds to a halt.

annfield1978

The National Transport Authority has carried out a review of the key transport infrastructure projects that were proposed to support the growth of the Greater Dublin Region. The Authority has now recommended to the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport that the DART Underground project be re-examined in order to deliver the required rail connectivity in the capital city with a lower cost technical solution. DART Underground is a rail link proposal, predominately underground, from the Northern Line just north of Connolly Station, to Inchicore on the Kildare Line, and with stations proposed at Docklands, Pearse, St. Stephen’s Green, Christchurch, Heuston and Inchicore. The project received planning consent in 2011, which became operative in March 2014 following judicial review proceedings taken by a number of third parties. The estimated cost of the currently designed DART Underground Project is €3 billion and the cost of the currently envisaged DART Expansion Programme is €4 billion. The DART Expansion Programme comprises DART Underground, as outlined above, plus:
• Electrification of the Northern Line to Drogheda;
• Electrification of the Cork Line from Heuston to Hazelhatch and completion of 4 tracking from Park West to Inchicore;
• Electrification of the Sligo Line from Connolly to Maynooth, together with removal of level crossings and re-signalling; and
• Expansion of fleet and depot facilities.
The DART Expansion Programme remains a key project in the delivery of an integrated rail transport network for the Dublin region. The overall DART Expansion Programme has been assessed as a positive project from an economic perspective. While the DART Underground Project has received planning approval from An Bord Pleanála, the business case for that project, prepared by Iarnród Éireann, indicates that its development alone under the current railway order is not economically justified. Given the very significant cost of the DART Expansion Programme, and recognising that a lower cost alternative for the tunnel element is possible, it is intended that the CPO for the DART Underground Project is not activated and that a new Railway Order is sought for a lower cost revised scheme. The Authority has recommended the following:
1. That the compulsory acquisition powers of the approved railway order for the DART Underground Project are not activated - i.e. the “notices to treat” are not issued;
2. That the DART Underground Project is redesigned to provide a lower cost technical solution for the project, whilst retaining the required rail connectivity;
3. That a new railway order is sought for the revised, lower cost DART Underground Project, together with any remaining elements of the overall DART Expansion Programme which have not already been approved under separate approval processes;
4. That the design and planning work of the revised DART Underground Project is advanced in order to be available for commencement of construction after 2020; and
5. That the non-tunnelled elements of the DART Expansion Programme be progressed in line with available funding.
The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport has indicated that the forthcoming Capital Investment Plan will make provision for advancing this expansion programme.
For more details please see:
DART Underground Expansion presentation
DART Expansion Programme revised Business Case

plodder

Looking for a redesign shows they just didn't get it. It's partly Irish Rail's fault for not selling the concept properly, and it goes without saying, a chronic lack of vision at government/political level. Extending the line to Balbriggan just about sums up the level of vision we're dealing with.

D.L.R.

Maybe drop the tunnelled section from Heuston to Inchicore? Although that creates new logistical headaches.

Can't help but feel that the "savings" from a more efficient design will just be eaten up by the redesign process, more red tape, and the 5 extra years of economic drag resulting from its absence. Moronomics.

Disappointing, but not surprising.

random_guy

markpb wrote: »

Politicians almost never cancel projects, they just defer them or send them back to consultants repeatedly. This is nothing new. DU is dead.

He hoofed that can as far as he could.

NuMarvel

The NTA has published the revised business case as well as a presentation.

Some of the cost saving alternatives suggested in the presentation include tunnelling to Heuston instead of Inchicore; a shorter tunnel between Heuston and Pearse (i.e. turn back at Pearse with no connection to the northside), and a shorter tunnel with fewer stations (eg none at Christchurch).

The first suggestion is the least contentious to me, though we should remember that was the original plan, with an extension to Inchicore proposed later. The shorter tunnel is completely bonkers because it does nothing to take pressure off the loop line. And I don't see how dropping one station, even in conjunction with a shorter tunnel saves much money.

Pete_Cavan

I know most people are going to lose their **** over this announcement but it might not be all that bad. The last point in the NTAs recommendation is encouraging; the non-tunnelled elements of the DART Expansion Programme be progressed in line with available funding. Hopefully the capital plan will include further electrification of the Northern Line and KRPII before 2020 (electrification of the Maynooth Line would also be great), after which the redesigned tunnel can be built. DU in some form still being on the agenda would be fantastic.

Neworder79

Links to Irish Rail and NTA presentations here https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/lower-cost-re-design-of-dart-underground-project-proposed/

Suggested cost savings are:
Cutting Inchicore
Cutting Inchicore and Docklands sections "Turn back" at Pearse
"Revised Tunnel" (Barcelona single bore?)

Grandeeod

NuMarvel wrote: »

The NTA has published the revised business case as well as a presentation.

Some of the cost saving alternatives suggested in the presentation include tunnelling to Heuston instead of Inchicore; a shorter tunnel between Heuston and Pearse (i.e. turn back at Pearse with no connection to the northside), and a shorter tunnel with fewer stations (eg none at Christchurch).

The first suggestion is the least contentious to me, though we should remember that was the original plan, with an extension to Inchicore proposed later. The shorter tunnel is completely bonkers because it does nothing to take pressure off the loop line. And I don't see how dropping one station, even in conjunction with a shorter tunnel saves much money.

There is no cheaper option. This is a blatantly callous way to kill off DU. Its dead, like I said over the last few months.

plodder

One of the options is fewer stations. Seriously?

Neworder79

But, at a press event in Dublin today, Mr Donohoe said a business case review of the plan determined that projected number of passengers at the time of its design have not materialised and now a reduced design will be commissioned.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/40m-dart-underground-project-scrapped-in-favour-of-scaled-down-version-31549135.html

cgcsb

D.L.R. wrote: »

Maybe drop the tunnelled section from Heuston to Inchicore? Although that creates new logistical headaches.

Can't help but feel that the "savings" from a more efficient design will just be eaten up by the redesign process, more red tape, and the 5 extra years of economic drag resulting from its absence. Moronomics.

Disappointing, but not surprising.

This alternative would save only a handful of pennies from an engineering perspective, and add untold sums in planning, and then subsequent retrofitting after it's found to be inappropriate.

cgcsb

constructing an underground turn around facility (for high frequency urban heavy rail) north of Pearse would require some innovative mining techniques. How would you get the TBM back out of the ground for example? I actually don't know of any such design in Europe (I'm open to correction on that one) but underground turn arounds would be generally considered to be on the upper limit of daft, if at all possible to avoid.

Such a facility would be expensive, possibly even as expensive as just continuing the line to docklands station.

Brian CivilEng

So not only are they effectively cancelling the DART Underground, they are also promising to increase the congestion by extending the DART further north. I don't know sometimes.

At least with the Luas it only took 12 years to realise the mistake of not constructing the central portion.

I'm an engineer, I know that sometimes it seems that our brains work completely differently to normal people. But the benefits of DART Underground are numerous and self-evident, to quote Joan Burton "a no-brainer". I cannot fathom how the people in power do not see this. Next time around, I recommend that Irish Rail present the exact same plan as previously, add an extra €500 million to the proposed cost and spend that €500 million on PR.

BoatMad

I'm an engineer, I know that sometimes it seems that our brains work completely differently to normal people. But the benefits of DART Underground are numerous and self-evident, to quote Joan Burton "a no-brainer". I cannot fathom how the people in power do not see this. Next time around, I recommend that Irish Rail present the exact same plan as previously, add an extra €500 million to the proposed cost and spend that €500 million on PR.

no doubt the people in power see its advantages , they also have a stack of competing projects, DU lost - simple

Captain Chaos

BoatMad wrote: »

no doubt the people in power see its advantages , they also have a stack of competing projects, DU lost - simple

Id love to see the project that beat it and why. If you are going to do something do it right and not half arsed. Half arsed is MN and Luas to the airport. It may be cheaper but it's cheap for a reason.

Spend more, get more. It's an investment that will pay for itself over the realist of going with an inferior options and then having to re do that option and upgrade it. Measure twice, cut once.

BoatMad

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Id love to see the project that beat it and why. If you are going to do something do it right and not half arsed. Half arsed is MN and Luas to the airport. It may be cheaper but it's cheap for a reason.

Spend more, get more. It's an investment that will pay for itself over the realist of going with an inferior options and then having to re do that option and upgrade it. Measure twice, cut once.

The Gov has a capital budget, that budget is spread around the country , there are lots if competing projects. a list has to be picked , DU didn't make the cut, end of this story

That doesn't mean it cant be re-introduced as a proposal at some later time in some form or other either

Banjoxed

BoatMad wrote: »

The Gov has a capital budget, that budget is spread around the country , there are lots if competing projects. a list has to be picked , DU didn't make the cut, end of this story

That doesn't mean it cant be re-introduced as a proposal at some later time in some form or other either

Well as JM Keynes said, "In the long run we are all dead".

Another game of kick the can down the road. Da lads in Nesbitts must have p*ssed themselves laughing at the serfs when this proposal was run by them.

BoatMad

Banjoxed wrote: »

Well as JM Keynes said, "In the long run we are all dead".

Another game of kick the can down the road. Da lads in Nesbitts must have p*ssed themselves laughing at the serfs when this proposal was run by them.

Theres no kicking the can down the road, the project is effectively dead

Winters

As a transport engineer involved in this since 1999 today fills me with more dismay. The alternative is congestion. Today's decision has set Dublin back at least 50 years.

To countenence any other project as an alternative to the Interconnector plan (or DART Underground as it was also known) shows a complete lack of foresight, leadership and common sense.

Shame on any engineers that put forward those alternative tunneling plans. You are an embarrassment to the profession.

Bray Head

BoatMad wrote: »

The Gov has a capital budget, that budget is spread around the country , there are lots if competing projects. a list has to be picked , DU didn't make the cut, end of this story

That doesn't mean it cant be re-introduced as a proposal at some later time in some form or other either

I am not so sure it is only a regional thing. It is as much a project thing.

It suggests that there is an upper limit of €300m per annum that any single capital project can absorb. This is about 0.2% of GDP by the way.

Lots of little projects are preferred to a few big ones. Unlikely that anything that requires tunnelling or a big stretch of motorway will get built anymore with this criterion.

BoatMad

To countenence any other project as an alternative to the Interconnector plan (or DART Underground as it was also known) shows a complete lack of foresight, leadership and common sense.

actually it shows good engineering sense, engineers are always being asked for alternatives

Ren2k7

There's an election next year so voice your disapproval for this monumental cock-up by voting for alternatives to FGLAB. It doesn't have to be the Shinners, the SD's or even Renua would be a welcome alternative to this bunch of wasters.

Grandeeod

BoatMad wrote: »

actually it shows good engineering sense, engineers are always being asked for alternatives

But the only alternatives are weaker ones.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

This alternative would save only a handful of pennies from an engineering perspective, and add untold sums in planning, and then subsequent retrofitting after it's found to be inappropriate.

Complete waste of money - are Irish people stupid???

The idea of a rail inter-connector is to eliminate turn back operations in the city thereby increasing capacity. FFS, that's what the Crossrail project in London is about!!!

Irish people drink too much and think too little!

Banjoxed

BoatMad wrote: »

Theres no kicking the can down the road, the project is effectively dead

Indeed. That is why I imagined the rich and thick cream of upper middle class Dublin laughing at pulling the wool over people's eyes on this.

BoatMad

Grandeeod wrote: »

But the only alternatives are weaker ones.

good engineers look at weaker , stronger , cheaper , dearer

Middle Man

BoatMad wrote: »

actually it shows good engineering sense, engineers are always being asked for alternatives

WTF???

The DART Underground is a no brainer!!!

Banjoxed

Ren2k7 wrote: »

There's an election next year so voice your disapproval for this monumental cock-up by voting for alternatives to FGLAB. It doesn't have to be the Shinners, the SD's or even Renua would be a welcome alternative to this bunch of wasters.

At this stage I'll be voting for the Social Democrats.