DART+ (DART Expansion)

When the stadium was built, were any kind of sub-surface diaphragm walls put in at either side of the section where the DART runs under the entrance area for the stands?

If this wasn't done, then any lowering will be very expensive in order to avoid interference with the stadium foundations.

I don't think it would be small. currently I believe the max Gradient on the the Irish rail network is around 2% (or 1:60)

So a 3 metre change would in mean starting elevation 200 metres (roughly) either side of the bridge, and that's assuming the area is flat (Like if there is already a 1% grad, then you could be going back near 400 metres on one side.)

There has been talk of increasing the allowable grad to 5% specifically relating to the level crossings on the south side of the city. There are bound to be knock on affects of doing that however. (Trains don't do well on hills, possible extra wear and tear on Motors)

Finally, it's my opinion that all bridges need to be of sufficient height to allow a bus under them. Anyone who lives or works near the East Wall Road will remember the weekly bridge strikes pre port tunnel construction. Some idiot will always ignore the height restriction and hit it.

Once a bridge is struck, an inspection has to happen on the bridge…. big delays

Very interesting. The “Central” station in that plan would have been right in the centre of Temple Bar, which explains why CIÉ was so keen on buying properties around there in the late 1970s.

Which Level Crossings are you attempting to eliminate?

1-5 or 2-4?

You cant raise this, as there is height restriction for the Dart.

There is already a grad there (It's small though) the rail climbs approx 7M from Booterstown to Lansdowne road.

Booterstown 1M
--900M--
Strand Road LC 3M
--680M--
Sydney Parade 4M
--980M--
Sandy Mount 6M
--879M--
Lansdowne Road 8M
--1000M--
Grand Canal Dock 9M

I get what you're saying about eliminating the LC's but if you're going 3M you may as well go 6M (And try and lower the road by 4, or just raise by 10m), especially if you're gonna use a platform to elevate by 3M rather than using Ballast/Soil. Plus you'd be removing the risk of someone hitting the bridge (which 100% will happen)

he might be, but the problems that exist now will exist after the election too. The issue with this project and many others is the planning system, it's too slow and it's too easy for well-heeled objectors to use that slowness to kill projects that they don't like. Any fundamental change to the planning system would probably require a referendum that would be unlikely to pass.