Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study

jd

Idbatterim wrote: »

would there be the option for CIE if its dart or RPA etc, to build massive park and ride and charge for it for airport parking, so drop car there, simply have a stop for it and then next stop is the airport etc?

As i dont subscribe to the sunday times, this is all I could get on it...



could someone please post the full article here? Thank god it appears to be heavy rail though and not luas...

https://twitter.com/highnellybike/status/630344409259884544

strassenwo!f

50m Euro underground DART? My, they have been busy shaving the costs.

jd

strassenwo!f wrote: »

50m Euro underground DART? My, they have been busy shaving the costs.

I think that's what's already been spent.

Bray Head

There's a story in today's Indo called "Ministers tussle on priorities for spending"

It seems to be written by the pol corrs so it's light on facts and heavy on generating personality-driven conflict.

It does note that:

Transport Minister Paschal Donohoe is also understood to have warned Mr Howlin that failure to invest €300m a year in the transport system will raise the prospect of roads and other infrastructure falling into disrepair.


Mr Donohoe is also pressing for significant funding to accommodate the completion of the Metro North project.

Suggesting that MN needs 'completion' (never mind commencement!) shows how little effort has gone into the article, so I wouldn't give it too much weight.

Otherwise, the rural/urban issue is never far away:

Fine Gael ministers are adamant that the plan must satisfy the rural vote. Party strategists see this as crucial as the party attempts to position itself for a second term in government.

Van.Bosch

Bray Head wrote: »

There's a story in today's Indo called "Ministers tussle on priorities for spending"

It seems to be written by the pol corrs so it's light on facts and heavy on generating personality-driven conflict.

It does note that:



Suggesting that MN needs 'completion' (never mind commencement!) shows how little effort has gone into the article, so I wouldn't give it too much weight.

Otherwise, the rural/urban issue is never far away:

I also would not get too excited about it as most of the article is light on facts but that line about the desire for MN is interesting in that it goes against the current thinking of luas for Dublin North and also ignores DU which i believe is universally accepted (apart from Dan White) as being the crucial project.

Sam Russell

Unless he meant Dublin North instead of Metro North - as in the Fingal/Dublin North Transport Study. Could he have meant that?

jd

Talked to a FF councillor I know yesterday, he'd heard that there were worries that tunnelling under the cemetery would have problems with planning, and not to be surprised if what Paschal announces is a Luas from Broombridge through Finglas and on to the airport!!

Van.Bosch

jd wrote: »

Talked to a FF councillor I know yesterday, he'd heard that there were worries that tunnelling under the cemetery would have problems with planning, and not to be surprised if what Paschal announces is a Luas from Broombridge through Finglas and on to the airport!!

I would actually struggle to think of a worse outcome than that.

That option was eliminated I thought though as it doesn't meet a key objective, serving swords.

jd

Van.Bosch wrote: »

I would actually struggle to think of a worse outcome than that.

That option was eliminated I thought though as it doesn't meet a key objective, serving swords.

Well it could go on to Swords too. It would be cr*p.

Van.Bosch

jd wrote: »

Well it could go on to Swords too. It would be cr*p.

Ok, you got me, that is a worse option!

From the study it was "
Eliminated due to excessive journey times, and lower employment catchment served"

68 minutes from Swords to SSG - there is no way this would be built.

Jack Noble

jd wrote: »

Talked to a FF councillor I know yesterday, he'd heard that there were worries that tunnelling under the cemetery would have problems with planning, and not to be surprised if what Paschal announces is a Luas from Broombridge through Finglas and on to the airport!!

That can be filed under 'No Sh1t, Sherlock!'.

I've pointed out time and again here and elsewhere for as long as someone has suggested tunneling under Glasnevin cemetery that it would not get the public - and thus political - support to be approved.

I said it to the RPA reps at one of the public briefings in North Dublin earlier this year and the response was that it was technically possible and planning was nothing to do with politicians.

But funding has to be approved by politicians, I pointed out, and no Cabinet will approve funding for a project that involves tunneling under Glasvnevin Cemetery which is hallowed ground in terms of Irish history.

It's like the RPA have learned nothing with the public and media campaigns against Metro North and tunneling under O'Connell Street and Stephen's Green.

Can you imagine the media and social media reactions to tunneling under Glasnevin? The headlines and #hashtags write themselves.

It was insanity to even suggest a tunnel under Glasnevin.

Unless, of course, it was Balderickesque cunning plan...

Schadenfreudia

Jack Noble wrote: »

It's like the RPA have learned nothing with the public and media campaigns against Metro North and tunneling under O'Connell Street and Stephen's Green.

If we are ever to have any metro we'll have to tunnel somewhere; the Port Tunnel was built under sustained attack from all manner of cranks and vested interests - it got built.

What killed MN ultimately wasn't all the campaigning - it was the economic crash.

It is impossible to build anything in Ireland unless you are prepared to press ahead after due process and ignore the noise.

Jack Noble

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

If we are ever to have any metro we'll have to tunnel somewhere; the Port Tunnel was built under sustained attack from all manner of cranks and vested interests - it got built.

My point is that somewhere like Glasnevin is a no go for tunneling under. The backlash would not be worth it for any politician to approve it.

Pascal Donohoe, for example, is in enough trouble in Dublin Central following the boundary changes without that becoming an election issue if he was to recommend a CC-Airport Swords Luas as proposed.

What killed MN ultimately wasn't all the campaigning - it was the economic crash.

The bad PR around it and unpopularity among large sections of the public and media made it an easy project to kill when the economy tanked.

It is impossible to build anything in Ireland unless you are prepared to press ahead after due process and ignore the noise.

I agree. But there are certain obvious things you should not even suggest if you wish to proceed with a large, expensive, controversial project -- and putting a railway tunnel under the national cemetery containing the mortal remains of hundreds of national icons and historic heroes is one of them.

It was a crazy idea and I cannot understand how it got past the first brainstorming session.

Zebra3

If it comes to tunnelling under people's gaffs or a cemetery, there'll be no contest.

Most people aren't that bothered about a few bones from a century away. This isn't Britain or the U.S. where rabid pathetic patriotism runs riot.

Jack Noble

Zebra3 wrote: »

If it comes to tunnelling under people's gaffs or a cemetery, there'll be no contest.

Most people aren't that bothered about a few bones from a century away. This isn't Britain or the U.S. where rabid pathetic patriotism runs riot.

I disagree.

If anything, tunneling under Glasnevin will garner more opposition than under homes.

It's not just any cemetery.

From that RPA briefing I was at in Santry earlier this year, the tunnel will be under the eastern side of the cemetery. That's under the oldest part of the cemetery, under the Angel's Plot and damn close to the graves of Michael Collins and the Republican plot.

There will be uproar at any suggestion of a tunnel under there.

The National Graves Association will have something to say about it.

And politicians of all hues if they sense enough public opposition.

I'd also expect a few court challenges.

Schadenfreudia

Jack Noble wrote: »

I disagree.
There will be uproar at any suggestion of a tunnel under there.

The National Graves Association will have something to say about it.

And politicians of all hues if they sense enough public opposition.

I'd also expect a few court challenges.

ffs!

What is the big deal about tunnel way below a cemetery :rolleyes:

I've relatives buried there and I can't see what the problem is!

Do some people think the noise might wake them up?!

Jack Noble

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

ffs!

What is the big deal about tunnel way below a cemetery :rolleyes:

I've relatives buried there and I can't see what the problem is!

Do some people think the noise might wake them up?!

To me, nothing. It's perfectly feasible. And if I thought such a Luas line was a good solution for the SSG-Airport-Swords corridor (I don't for the obvious reasons), I would support such a tunnel.

To people who have agendas, it will mean the end of the world.

And if enough people make a lot of noise, then politicians looking for votes will listen and jump on their bandwagon.

I also think Irish Water and water charges are a good idea, but look what's happening with that.

If Pascal Donohoe announces a Luas line with a tunnel under Glasnevin this side of the 2016 General Election, just you watch FF, SF and sundry independents (and probably panicked Labour TDs) in Dublin Central and Dublin North West jump on the '#SaveGlasnevin' bandwagon.

monument

While I was going to and I'd like to disagree with Jack's points, on reflection, he has a point.

Suggesting going under the older section is looking for trouble and anything firmly announced on this side of 100 years after 1916 and before the election could be a PR nightmare.

The RPA have a poor record on this, they never really defended the use of St Stephens Green for Metro North. Or at least they did not win many hearths or minds on it.

They played a blinded on Luas Cross City use of College Green etc, but the reality is the NTA and city council are not getting flank for restrictions mainly needed for Luas and to keep buses moving.

Idbatterim

If Pascal Donohoe announces a Luas line with a tunnel under Glasnevin this side of the 2016 General Election, just you watch FF, SF and sundry independents (and probably panicked Labour TDs) in Dublin Central and Dublin North West jump on the '#SaveGlasnevin' bandwagon.

this might work out fantastically if it buys more time and fudge, things are going so off the walls again, that in a year or two, LUAS would be laughed at, hell it is laughable now, but I mean by those in power and "Planning"... They wont be able to get away with it...

If we want to sort out Dublin once and for all, please do the right thing Pascal, get DU going and kick the can down the road on the swords link, at least until we get something that is actually worth building, which at this stage to me, is either MN or a DART and commuter service that would service the airport / Swords and onto the northern line preferably IMO...

I reckon at this stage, the DU is a straight forward to understand project, has planning and is an easier sell than MN. There is a lot more debate on the whole Swords / airport connection, which method, what route etc etc etc....

Bray Head

I have a technical question. Assume unlimited resources.

Scenario 1) Government approves Metro North today. Given the amount of existing planning, scoping, etc, done, how long before the dig commences?

Scenario 2) Government approves the heavy rail option to airport under Glasnevin (I can't remember the abbreviation sorry). Given that it's little more than crayons on a map at this point, how long before the dig commences? What is the risk of a planning and/or ABP objection?

Schadenfreudia

Bray Head wrote: »

I have a technical question. Assume unlimited resources.

Scenario 1) Government approves Metro North today. Given the amount of existing planning, scoping, etc, done, how long before the dig commences?

Scenario 2) Government approves the heavy rail option to airport under Glasnevin (I can't remember the abbreviation sorry). Given that it's little more than crayons on a map at this point, how long before the dig commences? What is the risk of a planning and/or ABP objection?

Can only answer part of that; an ABP objection is almost a certainty - probably by some "third party" !

cgcsb

ABP objections are certain. They'll be by lobby groups with the likes of carolls gift shop at the helm. They'll no doubt have thunk up a better solution to our transport needs.

Schadenfreudia

cgcsb wrote: »

ABP objections are certain. They'll be by lobby groups with the likes of carolls gift shop at the helm. They'll no doubt have thunk up a better solution to our transport needs.

It is indeed amazing how better solutions/routes pour out of the woodwork as soon as the planners/proposers have spent millions designing one! :rolleyes:

strassenwo!f

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

It is indeed amazing how better solutions/routes pour out of the woodwork as soon as the planners/proposers have spent millions designing one! :rolleyes:

It's not really so amazing. There is a considerable body of knowledge in the country (and elsewhere, from people interested in Ireland's development) about public transport (and, indeed, most other issues), including many people who work, or have worked, in the area in other countries, and people who have studied the area for a long time for any number of reasons.

The production of the DTO's PFC document would be a very good example of the failure to tap into this knowledge. There were never any expressions of interest from the DTO for submissions from the public.

Instead, a group of people (largely) from the DOT, with no known particular interest in, or knowledge of, public transport, who had been seconded to a quasi-independent organisation, produced a public transport 'plan' for Dublin.

Entirely without reference to the aforementioned body of knowledge.

There is a related argument going on on another thread about the Dart Underground project. The initial consultation about this project involved three routes which were pretty much entirely the same, give or take an extra escalator in a station here or there.

That was the initial consultation.

Contrast this with the serious early discussions about the route and use of Crossrail in London or the proposed second city tunnel in Munich. Dublin clearly has some way to go to reach those levels.

Schadenfreudia

strassenwo!f wrote: »

There is a related argument going on on another thread about the Dart Underground project. The initial consultation about this project involved three routes which were pretty much entirely the same, give or take an extra escalator in a station here or there.

I was aware of that thread - it was one of the things I had in mind when I posted...no wonder we never build anything

To say I am unconvinced by the arguments - which you've been gallantly putting up here for yonks to change the DU route - would be an understatement.

strassenwo!f

Fair enough. Of course, when the DART Underground proposal was first mooted, at the time the DTO (from their offices in St. Stephen's Green) produced their plan, the LUAS was stuck at St. Stephen's Green.

It soon won't be, so integration with the LUAS will soon be possible at other areas further north for the DART Underground project.

Wouldn't that have been relevant, at least at the initial consultation stage?

D.L.R.

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Fair enough. Of course, when the DART Underground proposal was first mooted, at the time the DTO (from their offices in St. Stephen's Green) produced their plan, the LUAS was stuck at St. Stephen's Green.

It soon won't be, so integration with the LUAS will soon be possible at other areas further north for the DART Underground project.

Wouldn't that have been relevant, at least at the initial consultation stage?

NO DART UNDERGROUND ROUTE ARGUMENTS OUTSIDE YOUR THREAD PLEASE

:mad:

strassenwo!f

DLR, would you put away the block capitals, at least until you become a moderator. It was a general comment, using a specific issue to illustrate it.

D.L.R.

strassenwo!f wrote: »

DLR, would you put away the block capitals, at least until you become a moderator. It was a general comment, using a specific issue to illustrate it.

Just give it a rest, ffs. Tiresome.

xper

Bray Head wrote: »

I have a technical question. Assume unlimited resources.

Scenario 1) Government approves Metro North today. Given the amount of existing planning, scoping, etc, done, how long before the dig commences?

Scenario 2) Government approves the heavy rail option to airport under Glasnevin (I can't remember the abbreviation sorry). Given that it's little more than crayons on a map at this point, how long before the dig commences? What is the risk of a planning and/or ABP objection?

Scenario 1: If it was the original approved plan that got the green light and they really wanted to press ahead at full speed, you could probably sort out the contracts and start handing out the shovels within a year.

... but the election will come into play
...and there'll probably be an attempted legal challenge or two from some disgruntled party
...and if they go for the bat****crazy shorter platforms proposed in the North Dublin study, I would think that would require resubmission to ABP as a major change
...and the original plans assumed MN would be built before Luas Crosscity (plus we now have the BRT/banish-the-car city centre streets layout changes to consider) so they have to redesign the O'Connell St and Westmorland St build process to some degree.

I forget offhand how long was planned from contracts signed to paying passengers but it ain't quick.

Scenario 2: see scenario 1 without the ten year head start!