DART+ (DART Expansion)

I note that the new timetable they announced back in May is to commence on the 25th of this month, so that date would make the most sense for opening it

Sounds like the remnants of the old Liffey Junction station.

Assuming line is down west of Broombridge, passengers can disembark at Broombridge, then train continues a short distance to siding, the train then is brought back to Broombridge and train heads west again.

Ah yes, that would make sense alright.

Regarding Kilcock, I think it would be fine with one platform provided there were one or two bypass tracks. Unlike Maynooth which has two universities, and so makes a good interchange between Sligo/Longford services and short haul Commuter soon-to-be-DART.

It would be perfectly fine IMHO for Kilcock to be put onto the DART network with terminal platform(s) while Sligo/Longford services bypass the town altogether.

South West includes four-tracking the approach to Heuston, which in turn means reworking some heavily trafficked road bridges, notably the complex where N4 meets the South Circular. Doing that work without jamming the entire western approach to Dublin will take a lot of careful, and expensive, planning.

Electrification of the PPT is also in this package, and that's going to be expensive job just as a result of the confined space.

Initial paths per hour I read from Dart+ west plans connected to dart+ coastal south were

• Drogheda Bray - 5 tph
• Malahide Greystones - 2 tph
• Clongriffin Bray - 2 tph
• Maynooth Bray - 3 tph

Always struck me as odd that the closure of all the level crossings on the Dart+ West line was an absolute non-negotiable from the start, but for the Coastal South line, they only talked about examining the options and then just threw their hat at the entire thing.

The problem LCs in Coastal South are on streets that can’t easily be just turned into cul-de-sacs - often the street that DART is cutting through is the only east-west road until… the next street that the DART cuts through. Bridges will be required, but there are really only a couple of places (e.g., Sepentine Ave) where there’s good room either side for a road bridge over the railway. Unlike West, where the line is bounded by the natural barrier of the Royal Canal, the city crossings in South cut right through residential streets.

Lansdowne Road is probably the most difficult example. Here any permanent removal of the LC would require a bridge to carry traffic (even just pedestrian/bikes) over the tracks, because the stadium and the River Dodder mean that there’s no other short way between one end of the road and the other. Raising the DART over the road is impossible, as the height of the station is governed by the stadium that hangs over it - even lowering the level of the DART tracks to reduce the height of the necessary road bridge is likely to be impossible, because that would require rebuilding the station. It’s a difficult problem.

Some of the commentary around this has been unhelpful too. Framing this problem as the objections of a load of old rich snobs who won’t give up their drive-everywhere lifestyle is lazy and incorrect: blocking these streets would dramatically reduce permeability for everyone and would increase congestion elsewhere, but most importantly it would put up obstacles to active travel - by forcing a long detour for any journey across the rail lines, you pretty much guarantee additional car use.

I suspect the designs may end up as a mixture of road-over-rail bridges at a couple of crossings, but at other places, the car route will be stopped, and only cycle and foot access will be provided over the rails. For instance, I think this latter idea is the only practical option available at Lansdowne Road.