DART+ (DART Expansion)

I have just read about Shane Ross blocking an enda kenny crony appointment and also in my local area trying to reduce scale of a housing development due to local concerns. I'm not sure whether he believes this is right or only does it for self gain, but do you think a letter should be penned to him asking him why a schemes capacity is being cut by one third to save peanuts? Pressure does have to be put on the politicians and planners. They don't do anything here until something is passed crisis point and they are shamed into it!!! Although I ca see public pressure in general seriously ramping up when the schools and colleges go back in the autumn , the weather gets bad and the city goes into even more gridlock than that time last year...

Would Frank McDonald in the irishtimes be worth trying? Also an raise supports metro north, will get in contact with them also, they may have some clout... I'm wondering is now the right time to exert pressure? Before we even see proposed plans for the new schemes? I find it beyond any comprehension that members of the public pointing out a33% cut in capacity for 5% of scheme (much of which will go back to government coffers) is beyond a joke!

Also with 90m trams, couldn't they run every second 90m tram to airport and the next 60m one Simply follows the cross city route to Hi Kiki. I hope you are keeping well! Do you have any availability to take on a private tuition? Thanks. Shane

Idbatterim wrote: »

rte the media etc do nothing to push this though. Rye are beyond a joke, anything the bleeding hearts can tune into is fm given endless air time. It also appears nobody in the media has the slightest clue about transport!!!

RTE and the media in general do nothing to push it because there is no alternative voice anymore. If the media have a credible source, they will push it. I remember a time, not so long ago, when operators and politicians where confronted in the media by a lobby and journalists like Frank McDonald actually consulted the same lobby.

marno21 wrote: »

Funny how we have no groups lobbying for infrastructure to be built - yet we do have a huge organisation dedicated to blocking improved infrastructure - Fine Gael.

Has anyone ever started one though?

Another bit of news here...at least some councillors seem to recognise it's importance!

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyhYHfrfzNAhUrJMAKHcXUBE0QqQIIGygAMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fsocial-affairs%2Fdart-underground-needed-to-enable-17-000-new-homes-1.2725448&usg=AFQjCNHEb_XBR8OqXzlnHhiI-lD_0Hpmwg&sig2=PRGh0vdv2MBK8sOf7uanVQ&bvm=bv.127178174,d.ZGg

Reuben1210 wrote: »

Another bit of news here...at least some councillors seem to recognise it's importance!

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyhYHfrfzNAhUrJMAKHcXUBE0QqQIIGygAMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fsocial-affairs%2Fdart-underground-needed-to-enable-17-000-new-homes-1.2725448&usg=AFQjCNHEb_XBR8OqXzlnHhiI-lD_0Hpmwg&sig2=PRGh0vdv2MBK8sOf7uanVQ&bvm=bv.127178174,d.ZGg

DU was ready to go last year with full planning, where were these councillors when the Gov. pulled the plug on it?

It's positive that decent PT is being highlighted as a prerequisite for large scale development, let's have this type of support before the next important infrastructure decision.

DU was ready to go last year with full planning, where were these councillors when the Gov. pulled the plug on it?

at the time, I remember writing to Pascal Donohue about this! It was so bloody obvious things were picking up again and we were heading right back to bloody chronic congestion city and also the fact that the joke transport system here, massively hinders housing development...

And yet here we are a mere 9 months, 9 months after the project was axed. It is simply beyond a joke. Let me guess how things play out from here, they get worse, a whole lot worse...

Do these IDIOTS not remember what happened a few years ago, because its happening again right now!

We should start calling it the 25-county government :pac:

Idbatterim wrote: »

I was thinking about this earlier. They simply move position Nd there is no consequence. They couldn't care less, even if a multinational said we didn't move here due to shocking transport network. I doubt they'd care anywhere near as much about that as how its perceived outside Dublin or to the hoards of ignorant idiots who think it's excessive. They care about them come vote time...

Again with minister of transport. How much influence do they actually have in the big projects? It's beyond insane there is a money no object to Mickey Mouse motorways connecting villages down the country. Yet in Dublin any excuse to spend less and get worse value is embraced!!!

Agree, complete double standards and economically moronic too.

Sam Russell wrote:

What Dublin needs is for the four councils to be merged into one council, with the number of councillors reduced to about 63 which is the number on DCC.

London boroughs are actually about the same size as Dublin county councils. It might not be a bad idea to split cities into smaller political units so prep pole don't feel entirely disconnected from their representatives.

London boroughs and Dublin counties haven't devolved all their responsibilities, some are shared between them to prevent duplication. In London, this is done by GLA, in Dublin it's done by DCC. The key difference is that GLA has actual powers to set policy and a budget to pay for it. In Dublin, DCC generally does it in cooperation with the other councils.

The biggest problem that I can see is not a single local authority, nor a single mayor with power (although I would love to see that) but the fact that the local authorities have relatively little ability to fundraise so large projects need to be approved by and funded by central government.

Sam Russell wrote: »

What Dublin needs is for the four councils to be merged into one council, with the number of councillors reduced to about 63 which is the number on DCC.

The Mayor (or Lord Mayor) could then be an executive mayor replacing the City Manager.

Dublin doesn't have a surplus of councillors. It has the same proportion as anywhere else. The 4 councils could remain in place as boroughs of a centralised Dublin authority.

Looking at what the govt have broadly suggested for DU "lite", what do people think about these elements?

Tunnel to Heuston instead of Inchicore
I think this is reasonable (if its feasible). The tunnel to Inchicore just follows the existing surface line anyway. But would building a portal right in the throat of Heuston be any cheaper? I have my doubts.

Line from Heuston to Pearse only, with a turnback at Pearse
In the context of being a "first phase", this could be a viable strategy. As long as the Docklands connection is earmarked as a future second phase then splitting up DU seems logical in terms of financing it. A Heuston-Pearse line still delivers a lot of benefit. But would it deliver enough savings to be an economically sound strategy?

No station at Christchurch
Again as an interim measure it could work to get DU off the blocks. But future provision is the key, a station here would really open up this part of the city.

Just do it and do it properly.

We build unnecessary motorways that cost a fortune and will continue to cost us a fortune for decades, lets just build DU up to standard.

cgcsb wrote: »

A tunnel portal at Heuston is a problem because there are only3 tracks between Heuston and Inchicore so you'd be creating bottleneck from day one. Nevermind the logistics of trying to get a tunnel portal into Heuston

Terminating at Pearse is ridiculous. The main point of the project is to provide a bypass of Connolly and the loop line. So this would defeat the purpose. Also the cost of building an underground turn around facility would be prohibitive. You also have the logistical impossibility of digging a trench in or around Pearse station to extract/implant a TBM.

The station at Christchurch isn't all that essential but it would be a much needed boost for the south west of the city

The only was to resurface at Heuston would be like this:


The road would probably have to be changed, and the park would lose some area, but it is doable. The line to Park West would have to be four tracked for it to make any sense though.

There's no point in building it if it doesn't connect the existing lines at each end. The electrification of the lines out to Maynooth and Hazelhatch could be started now, along with the removal of at grade junctions, to at least get some of the systems infrastructure in place. A DART system from Maynooth to Docklands without the dart underground would still provide some much needed services.

BonkeyDonker wrote: »

Why does it need to surface at Heuston. An underground station with pedestrian access to the current concourse would serve the purpose and possibly cost a lot more.

Assuming the line would be underground by the time it reaches Heuston station.

D.L.R. wrote: »

Why did they extend the tunnel to Inchicore? I get the sense it was thrown in as an "extra" at the height of the boom when money was cheap.

But if there's no reason to tunnel out to Inchicore other than convenience, why not revert to the original plan if its cheaper.

Quite the opposite in fact. When the plans were first drafted, it was a case of funds not being so available. When the ineviatable boom came, it made sense to draft a plan where the tunnel sufaces in Inchicore. Sufacing in Heuston would cause unnecessary congestion. Also remember that surfacing in Inchicore was also part of the KRP Phase two.

D.L.R. wrote: »

Exactly my point - it was to avoid the disruption. Its still do-able though, right? Looking at the Heuston rail yard from above, it easily large enough to accomodate portal works. And the only real constraint to 4 tracking right into Heuston is Con Colbert roundabout. Which needs to be upgraded anyway.

Potential for a major overhaul of this area for the better.

It actually makes more sense to complete the four tracking from Park West to the Tunnel portal in Inchicore works. This completely seperates IC services from Heuston from DU services.

For the record the major constraint to four tracking into Heuston is the cutting from Con Colbert out to Inchicore along with bridges etc. Keep the TBM going into the works and its far easier and much more beneficial. I doubt there would be much difference in cost considering the additional work needed if the tunnel surfaces in Heuston.

the proposed 60m stops on revised metro north, are a joke, far beyond anything else I have heard, it makes the toll on the m50 and roundabouts look visionary!!!

How long does it take for the "experts" on these projects to cost alternatives and to see if the "savings" are worth bothering with...

for example, if you want to bring the headline cost in lower, ok order less rolling stock, simple. Reducing platforms lengths for 100,000,000? i.e. less than 5% of project cost a joke, that should immediately be struck off. Surface running in Ballymun, I am not sure of the logistics or claimed "savings" on this front...

I dont believe DU or MN were overengineered, that notion in this country is laughable. I believe they were werent compromise solutions for a change and now as usual here, the bloody powers that be are looking to do things on the cheap or fudge...

If they absolutely insist on cutting corners, removing the Christchurch stop might work

how much would that singular measure save? From a logical perspective and that is a very different one, than a politician has. IF you are going to kick these projects back 5 years minimum, you would want to be getting fairly major savings for minimal compromise. If that cant be achieved, why bother. I said this back in September, if there is nothing wrong with the projects and its the timing that is wrong, i.e. public finanaces "wont allow it" or the issue of perception outside of Dublin with the then imminent election. Why not simply say "they projects as designed are good, timing isnt" would there be a problem with those snakes being honest for a change?!

in relation to the above. Say you deem these projects necessary / worthwhile. 5 years of new planning and bull****? give me a break, we already have the original plans which the revised ones will broadly follow. How long does it take to see if a revised plan is worth actually going with? a year tops if there was any will!

Im not talking about putting it through planning etc, just having the revised cost reduction measures put out there and saying right this measure "this has some merit" - "this one isnt worth bothering with" etc. If you come to the conclusion, that only one of the options is worthwhile, say dropping a station, are you seriously going to delay a project years and go back through planning for small fry in the scheme of things and a compromised version?

I hope the councilors now dont rezone new land or give go ahead to Clonburris SDZ and extra housing in adamstown. Dont do anything until contracts are signed. They want these for their area, they have the politicians by the balls in a way, they wont get this chance again...