Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Leo says Dart Underground likely to part of next investment proposals

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    AugustusMinimus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,541 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    Those 2+1 sections of Cork to Mallow, I view as being incredibly dangerous. The M20 needs to be prioritised.

    However, Varadkar will go ahead with just about every Dublin vanity project under the moon before the M20 will be touched.

    If Cork and Limerick voters have any sense next time out, they'll hold back on giving FG votes. Cork having the FF leader could be a FG wasteland next time out.


  • Options
    #63
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    The N20 2+1, which I hate, has actually saved lives because it has eliminated unprotected right turns.

    As a road however it is a disaster, with everything reduced to the speed of the lowest common denominator , often a tractor and then a mad scramble to overtake with just 1 km in which to do it.

    That it is now the location for a Gosafe van will show you that it is not a particularly safe road...most of the N20 is dangerous and given the volume of traffic should have been replaced long before other roads already done.
    That someone should rate the M20 project alongside re-opening Charleville to Patrickswell and Limerick is astounding to say the very least


  • Options
    #64
    Copyerselveson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 299 ✭✭Copyerselveson


    I think you're missing the point of the debate, it's not whether a poster's opinion is "astounding", it's about highlighting the willingness of government to spend money (money which is justified imho) on a dangerous stretch of road, but not willing or indeed pouring cold water on an additional transportation option which could be built on the same alignment, for maybe less cost if the two were developed separately.

    Indeed the Charleville-Patrickswell alignment might be a far cheaper option for a combined M20/Rail link than giving "compo" to lucky landowners.

    All too often in this country different opinions from the consensus are suppressed and if we are going to drag this country back from the brink we need to encourage not discourage different opinions as they may offer a new and better way of doing things.


  • Options
    #65
    robd
    Registered Users Posts: 951 ✭✭✭robd


    Lads seriously. Take the M20 stuff to another thread. It's nothing to do with Dart Underground.


  • Options
    #66
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    yes it is , the thread is about the the next investment proposals, at least partially.

    Wanting to combine the M20 project with a no hope /not needed project like Charleville to Limerick will set back the M20 by years


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    2+1 has saved lives here in Ireland, however after trailing it and analysing the outcomes it was decided that it isn't worth doing anymore here in Ireland.

    The primary reason is that it was found that it was almost as expensive to build and maintain 2+1 as it is 2+2, in particular where the 2+2 has relatively narrow lanes, no hard shoulder and minimum central concrete divider. It turns out the land take for such a road is almost the same as a 2+1, while offering higher safety (no crashes at merge points on 2+1) and higher, more consistent speeds. So the NRA has wisely decided to go for narrow 2+2 for all future builds.

    Also it turned out to be quiet expensive to maintain the wire central barriers, concrete barriers of 2+2 roads turn out to be much cheaper to maintain.

    I'm sorry but Jamie is talking absolute nonsense when he says roads don't kill people.

    It has been absolutely proven that when you replace a road with no central barrier with a road with a central barrier, it immediately leads to a significant reduction in collisions and deaths. Central barriers stop the worst and scariest type of collisions, the head on collision. Two cars travelling at 60km/h hitting head on has a combined mass equivalent to a car hitting a wall at 120km/h. Such head on collisions are almost always fatal.

    Add to that improved road surface, sight lines, 2 lanes making over taking easy and no possibility of head on collisions, oh and the elimination of drives onto the road and you end up with roads that are significantly safer and safe lives.

    I think anyone who drives regularly in Ireland knows that the new motorways are vastly safer then the old national roads and are almost single handly the reason for the reduction in deaths on our roads over the past few years.

    It is engineering for safety, over leaving it to people and legislation.

    The M20 is desperately needed and will absolutely save lives.


  • Options
    #68
    Copyerselveson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 299 ✭✭Copyerselveson


    bk wrote: »
    2+1 has saved lives here in Ireland, however after trailing it and analysing the outcomes it was decided that it isn't worth doing anymore here in Ireland.

    The primary reason is that it was found that it was almost as expensive to build and maintain 2+1 as it is 2+2, in particular where the 2+2 has relatively narrow lanes, no hard shoulder and minimum central concrete divider. It turns out the land take for such a road is almost the same as a 2+1, while offering higher safety (no crashes at merge points on 2+1) and higher, more consistent speeds. So the NRA has wisely decided to go for narrow 2+2 for all future builds.

    Also it turned out to be quiet expensive to maintain the wire central barriers, concrete barriers of 2+2 roads turn out to be much cheaper to maintain.

    I'm sorry but Jamie is talking absolute nonsense when he says roads don't kill people.

    It has been absolutely proven that when you replace a road with no central barrier with a road with a central barrier, it immediately leads to a significant reduction in collisions and deaths. Central barriers stop the worst and scariest type of collisions, the head on collision. Two cars travelling at 60km/h hitting head on has a combined mass equivalent to a car hitting a wall at 120km/h. Such head on collisions are almost always fatal.

    Add to that improved road surface, sight lines, 2 lanes making over taking easy and no possibility of head on collisions, oh and the elimination of drives onto the road and you end up with roads that are significantly safer and safe lives.

    I think anyone who drives regularly in Ireland knows that the new motorways are vastly safer then the old national roads and are almost single handly the reason for the reduction in deaths on our roads over the past few years.

    It is engineering for safety, over leaving it to people and legislation.

    The M20 is desperately needed and will absolutely save lives.

    Got to say I agree with the above for the most part. How much will the M20 cost to build?


  • Options
    #69
    robd
    Registered Users Posts: 951 ✭✭✭robd


    corktina wrote: »
    yes it is , the thread is about the the next investment proposals, at least partially.

    Wanting to combine the M20 project with a no hope /not needed project like Charleville to Limerick will set back the M20 by years

    It has descended into that and has become are fares. Title of thread clearly states what it is about. Dart Underground is a Dublin Rail project. M20 is a Cork - Limerick Road. Totally different and unrelated.


  • Options
    #70
    donvito99
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    AugustusMinimus wrote: »

    However, Varadkar will go ahead with just about every Dublin vanity project under the moon before the M20 will be touched.

    This.


  • Options
    #71
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    it could well be argued that the M20 should be "part of the next investment proposals".

    Indeed it could be argued that it should be part of it ahead of DU, DU is merely a commuter boon whereas the M20 WILL save lives and maybe should take precedence on that basis.

    I contend that it therefore on topic


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Copyerselveson wrote: »
    Got to say I agree with the above for the most part. How much will the M20 cost to build?

    Reports say it will cost €800 million for the entire length.

    Not cheap, but desperately needed, you could break it down to cheaper phases.

    To put it in context, the other motorways cost in the region of €8 Billion and the Newlands Cross Upgrade is costing €300 million and Dart Underground will cost about €3 Billion.

    It is the final major piece in completing Ireland's Motorway network and saving lives. It is also vitally important economically to try and help Link Cork/Linerick/Galway to help them to counter balance Dublin.


  • Options
    #73
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    corktina wrote: »
    a no hope /not needed project like Charleville to Limerick will set back the M20 by years
    how do you know its not needed? the only way it will set back the m20 is if its built to a high speed and more people use it over the road, just because galway limerick (or ennis athenry to be exact) was badly built doesn't mean that a rail link between galway and limerick and limerick and cork isn't viable if done right or that the waterford limerick section of the rosslare limerick line can't be revived instead of being deliberately ran down toards closure like the rosslare waterford section

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #74
    Copyerselveson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 299 ✭✭Copyerselveson


    bk wrote: »
    It is also vitally important economically to try and help Link Cork/Linerick/Galway to help them to counter balance Dublin.

    This is the very crux of what's needed and I wholeheartedly agree with this too.

    Getting the counterbalance of infrastructure in place means that the south and west have a compelling offer in terms of road and rail links to allow the freeer movement of freight and people.

    A big weakness of our transport system whether road or rail is that it is too Dublin-centric. It's fine for getting people and goods to and from Dublin but cross-country journeys are on second-rate roads and rail links.

    Tourists want to be able to travel quickly up and down the north, west and south, because that's where our most beautiful scenery is and we have a real lack of proper infrastructure on our roads and railways to get them there.

    Ireland needs to be re-invented, getting our roads and railways in place to link the biggest non-Dublin cities and towns together would be a real start.


  • Options
    #75
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    end of the road wrote: »
    how do you know its not needed? the only way it will set back the m20 is if its built to a high speed and more people use it over the road, just because galway limerick (or ennis athenry to be exact) was badly built doesn't mean that a rail link between galway and limerick and limerick and cork isn't viable if done right or that the waterford limerick section of the rosslare limerick line can't be revived instead of being deliberately ran down toards closure like the rosslare waterford section

    you can judge whether or not an improved transport link is needed by the number of passengers travelling that route by coach.
    One 53 seater an hour for the most part.
    Balance against that a few hundred cars plus umpteen trucks and vans and it is obvious that a second rail link is nowhere near as important as the M20 project.


  • Options
    #76
    schemingbohemia
    Registered Users Posts: 5,606 ✭✭✭schemingbohemia


    AugustusMinimus wrote: »
    Those 2+1 sections of Cork to Mallow, I view as being incredibly dangerous. The M20 needs to be prioritised.

    However, Varadkar will go ahead with just about every Dublin vanity project under the moon before the M20 will be touched.

    If Cork and Limerick voters have any sense next time out, they'll hold back on giving FG votes. Cork having the FF leader could be a FG wasteland next time out.

    This post to me says all that there is wrong with this country.

    To describe the DART Underground as a "vanity project" shows severe ignorance of the project itself and it's game-changing aspect.

    To then state that the M20 is more important and that the party that bankrupted the country should gain should it not be brought forward reeks of the kind of parochial self-interest that has ruined this country.


  • Options
    #77
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    schemingbohemia wrote: »
    To describe the DART Underground as a "vanity project" shows severe ignorance of the project itself and it's game-changing aspect.

    While I certainly agree that DU is not a vanity project and is a very important project, I would have to say that I don't think it is the number one priority.

    I think Metro North is more important, followed by the M20.

    Yes, DU will greatly improve the existing network, but it won't actually bring rail based transport to any new people. It will just mean those who already have rail based transport will get closer into the city center and potentially higher frequency of services *.

    MN on the other hand will almost completely serve parts of the city that have never had rail based transport. North Dublin is actually the most densely populated part of the city, actually more densely populated then the already well served south side of the city. And of course it brings a rail link to the airport and a rail link to Swords (the largest town in Ireland) and many other important landmarks like DCU, Croke Park, Mater Hospital, etc.

    To me, MN is far more important then DU for those reasons.

    I fell the M20 is more important on the grounds of improving safety and saving lives and also creating a greater balance between Dublin and "the regions".

    However I don't think it is a case of M20 or DU. They cost very different amounts of money.

    I'd guess that it is a case of DU versus MN AND M20 versus a variety of smaller road projects.


  • Options
    #78
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    mn and DU should be 1, bringing MN into the dart network would allow for full integration and would ultimately lead to slightly less costs such as maintenence and so on, i also believe once the luas infrastructure becomes old enough to need replacing it should also be brought into the heavy rail network and put underground meaning a faster and potentially more frequent rail service and also would mean integration and easier maintenence, but i don't think it will happen

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #79
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    MN and DU can't both be no1!

    No1 depends on your point of view, my opinion is M20 should be top as it would save lives (and of course is local to me).

    What there I no doubt I guess that these three are the top priorities and nothing else should get the go ahead before them


  • Options
    #80
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,667 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Metro North won't happen between 2016 and 2020, DU will and its more important at the minute for the city.

    M20 cost of 800 million surly is well reduced now with materials, labour and land costs all well below 2007-8 levels when planning. If funding isn't available for the whole route possibly certain areas may being constructed. Remember reading an article in 2012 about progressive upgrades to improve the road.


  • Options
    #81
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    that would be a good idea, bypassing Buttevant at least would help


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    corktina wrote: »
    Perhaps you'd like to explain that? No-one is going to die because we don't re-open this line, people will die if something isn't done to improve the N20

    improvements can be made to the N20 in dangerous sections without constructing a billion euro motorway.


  • Options
    #83
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Vanquished wrote: »
    A bafflingly illogical statement! It smacks of "well if I can't have my railway then you can't have your motorway!":o

    Are you seriously suggesting that a western rail corridor mark two type project (where much of the alignment has been lost anyhow!) is a more worthy one than replacing one of the worst and most dangerous stretches of national primary route in the country?!

    Again, it's about journey times between the cities. Rail needs to be faster than road to be competitive, and the railway company is state subsidised so it's in our interests to improve it's revenues. The safety issues can be addressed without motorway.


  • Options
    #84
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    corktina wrote: »
    motorways are a very safe form of transport. The opening of them is mostly responsible for the reduction in road deaths, although the RSA claim responsibilityfor this.

    incorrect the majority of fatal accidents occus on minor roads, the new motorways have not changed this. Up until the late 90s the rules of the road simply weren't enforced, that's the problem.


  • Options
    #85
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    MGWR wrote: »
    And last I heard, the electrification on the Northern Line was supposed to end at Balbriggan instead of Drogheda.

    afaik it'd be more expensive to construct a new turn around facility at Balbriggan than to electrify as far as Drogheda and get the benefits of DART services to Drogheda.
    MGWR wrote: »
    IE always seems to have "high hopes" of making it into the latter half of the 20th century; 125 mph (200 km/h) top speed on the rails as best practice was achieved by the 1970s. Replacing rolling stock too frequently simply to waste money will merely get the country back into the doldrums, especially since such spending would be coupled by other government waste.


    IÉ had 1970's rolling stock up until 2009


  • Options
    #86
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    It's incorrect to say that DU won't bring or at least have the capacity to bring rail based travel to new passengers/areas. The massive increase in capacity that DU envisages would only make sense if the bus network was overhauled to take account of such new capacity into and out of central Dublin. People in Celbridge, Newcastle, Rathcoole, Lucan, Palmerstown, parts of Tallaght West should be much more likely taking a north/south feeder bus a couple of miles to a station in West Dublin and then from there continuing their journey right into the city centre by rail. Same goes for the Maynooth line as it receives a massive capacity increase.

    This is how successful networks like Munich operate, the bus feeds the rail network which does the heavy lifting underground in the city centre. It's a perfectly symbiotic relationship: the bus can operate over uncongested wide suburban roads while the rail aspect is grade separated in the congested city centre.

    MN is important, very important, but given the choice between the DU and MN I still believe after all these years that DU is the most important project and should take priority.


  • Options
    #87
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    AugustusMinimus wrote: »
    Those 2+1 sections of Cork to Mallow, I view as being incredibly dangerous. The M20 needs to be prioritised.

    However, Varadkar will go ahead with just about every Dublin vanity project under the moon before the M20 will be touched.

    If Cork and Limerick voters have any sense next time out, they'll hold back on giving FG votes. Cork having the FF leader could be a FG wasteland next time out.

    Oh right, :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #88
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    corktina wrote: »
    you can judge whether or not an improved transport link is needed by the number of passengers travelling that route by coach.
    One 53 seater an hour for the most part.
    Balance against that a few hundred cars plus umpteen trucks and vans and it is obvious that a second rail link is nowhere near as important as the M20 project.

    you can hardly expect a motorway to be built to accommodate one bus, a few hundred cars and upteen trucks. A single lane road would be sufficient.


  • Options
    #89
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    cgcsb wrote: »
    IÉ had 1970's rolling stock up until 2009
    2007/8 actually, the mark 3s were from the 80s, other railways still have some stock from the 70s running, the UK has 1970s rolling stock still doing 125 MPH in mainline service on a dayly basis, the only problem with us however is that we left our newer 1970s stock to rot, the earlier mark 1 stuff was life expired though

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #90
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    cgcsb wrote: »
    you can hardly expect a motorway to be built to accommodate one bus, a few hundred cars and upteen trucks. A single lane road would be sufficient.

    ... an hour, in each direction....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    cgcsb wrote: »
    improvements can be made to the N20 in dangerous sections without constructing a billion euro motorway.

    It was €800 million I believe and will be less now I'm sure.

    By all means improve the dangerous sections and let's bypass Mallow, Buttevant and Charleville whilst we are at it. There wont be too many kilometres left to so then! (won't happen in my lifetime)


Advertisement