DART+ (DART Expansion)

gjim wrote: »

I think a station on the North Strand Rd (which is only about 200m East) would be preferable because it intersects one the busiest arterial routes in the city. Particularly, there would be the potential to interchange with some of the heaviest bus routes on the north-side which pass under the bridge at North Strand/Nottingham St. You're still over 1km from Connolly here.

I would add extensive bus stopping facilities on both sides of the road and have the station platforms run over the road to allow entrances on both sides of the street. And I'd CPO the triangle of crappy little buildings with the PP bookies to provide extra space for bus interchange, bicycle parking and the station building.

What journeys you thinking of? Is it for people to get on there and going outbound (where)? Or people disembarking there to go to work (no real offices/attractions there)?

Shedite27 wrote: »

What journeys you thinking of? Is it for people to get on there and going outbound (where)? Or people disembarking there to go to work (no real offices/attractions there)?

it would be a good bit closer to East Point than either Connolly or Docklands. Obviously Clontarf Rd. is closer again but for someone coming off the Maynooth line, disembarking at North Strand and walking up would be far quicker than going to Connolly and changing onto a northbound Dart.

CatInABox wrote: »

The Docklands/Newcomen line is only 600 metres from Connolly, so it's need on that line is reduced. The other line though, is a kilometre away.

I know that it might not happen for various reasons, but the idea that, post Dart Expansion, we could have two mass transit lines running through a densely populated area and no way for residents there to avail of them is bananas.

It's also part of a possible urban regeneration. Right now, that area would be considered.... less than ideal. Having a Dart station there could make it more attractive to people.... maybe. Anyway, it's an area that's suffered from a lack of investment for a long time, and it'll suffer for longer if investment isn't started there.

As already posted though, the line from Ossory Road Junction through North Strand Junction until the overbridge at Clonliffe Avenue is on a constant and fairly major curve.

Building new stations on long curves (other than very mild ones) isn't something that the rail regulators are fond of anymore, due to the inevitable large gaps between the train and the platform that arise.

MJohnston wrote: »

You could potentially get away with a station that spanned Clonliffe Avenue, as there's about 100m of relatively straight track, which could be used to provide safe access for less-able passengers. You'd have to have part of the platform on the curve though, for longer trains.

What are the minimum sizes for DART/Commuter platforms?

Looking at the 2020 Network Statement you're talking about 170-175m.

You can see the widening of the embankment for the original proposed station to the right of that image as it is.

ncounties wrote: »

When was the proposal? Relatively recently or going back a long time?

When the line was built, 1906 I think

There were major works in the early 1900s to link together the various terminals

ncounties wrote: »

I know it would be a lot of expense for just one station, but if new DARTs were spec'd like this we could potentially open up more opportunities for stations across the network.

Those are bodges for dealing with past issues and are not foolproof. They also don't come close to reducing the risks enough and they have an impact on dwell time as the steps must come out after stopping and before the doors open and vice versa going back in - abroad they are mostly used on rural routes with unmanned stations

They won't be causing a rollback of the rules

All reports suggesting Eamon Ryan is the next minister for Transport

Who's the Junior Minister for Keeping an eye on the Greens Road policy?

cgcsb wrote: »

2372.

No seriously this won't happen the project is being managed by CIE so forget about it. The trains might become hybrid though.

What a stupid glib comment.

Pretty much every investment project that Irish Rail has carried out in recent years has been delivered on time and within budget.

The problem isn’t at project management or delivery stage, it’s at the political level.

People need to move on from this kind of nonsense.

cgcsb wrote: »

Like the 2hour Dublin to Cork journey that was going to be coming in circa 2018 thanks to track replacement. Ended up just not happening. No more said about it. They still will not schedule a train between Dublin and Belfast to arrive in either city by 9am. That's before younger into the bridge a that they let literally fall into the sea.

The Cork track bed was found to need greater work than originally thought necessary due to the pounding from the Class 201 locomotives - there is going to be a complete relay taking place - the track bed work is ongoing. The level crossings south of Limerick Junction are currently being eliminated, and the down platform at Limerick Junction is in place..

The ballast cleaning work needed to be done - the relay will deliver far longer term benefits.

I’m not sure what the Dublin/Belfast schedule has to do with capital investment being delivered - neither company has committed to a pre-9 am arrival prior to now. I’m not sure what relevance that has to projects such as DART expansion being delivered? Realistically for that to happen more trains would be required - you’re only going to have one path per hour.

We all know that the Malahide Viaduct collapse shouldn’t have happened, and it was a disgrace, but plenty of capital investment projects have been delivered.

cgcsb wrote: »

Have you an inside source because I can't actually see anywhere on the internet where they explain this folly to the tax payer.



It demonstrates organisational ability. If you are the company tasked with operating the intercity rail network and you fail to deliver a pre-9am connection between the 2 biggest cities. That is an utter failure. It simply would not be tolerated in any other European country. Can you imagine that anywhere else? Try telling the tax payers of Denmark that they'll not be able to get between Odnese and Copenhagen for a 9am meeting by train and they'll have drive instead.


It's beyond a disgrace especially when it was inspected only a few weeks before the incident and the recommendations from the report marked 'urgent' were ignored.

None of this stuff has anything to do with DART expansion and the ability to deliver it.

You're just going off on tangents, ignoring the fact that various other projects including all of the line re-signalling projects, trackwork changes etc. have been delivered on time.

DART expansion is the most likely of the rail projects to be delivered, and frankly it has to be delivered. We don't have a choice.

cgcsb wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it delivered. Can't see it happening though. The delivery date for all elements of DART Expansion (excl undergound) is 2027 and we're nowhere near putting the wires up and closing crossings on any part of it, so at this point it's safe to say it won't be entirely delivered by 2027. I've no doubt we'll get hybrid train sets branded as DART before then at an increased frequency but I doubt the project will get much further than that by 2027. Eelctrification to Maynooth was also included in the National Transport Integrated Implementation Plan 2013-2018, but was never done.

Its snails pace stuff. The state isn't serious about rail. They've been waffling on about the city centre resignalling program for 10 years and its still not done. Kildare Rail project still not done. Metro South cancelled. Level crossing program still not done. We'll close Merrion Gates ahhh but not right now.

Does anyone seriously think they can organise a project like Dart Underground?

LXFlyer wrote: »

Again the issue is a political one. That’s where the delays are happening.

The projects are deliverable - but they need the political will to do so. That’s when you hit the brick wall that is the civil service.

Incidentally, as I understand it, the final phase of the city centre resignalling project which is Connolly Station is due to be commissioned this Autumn.

That's good news, but it should have been delivered 5 years ago.

Projects like DU don't just need political will, they need political DETERMINATION, because they're not easy and will always encounter push back. The state always seems to fold on the slightest public objection. Look at Metrolink - a sewer pipe and a level crossing scuppered the entire Southern half of the project. Pathetic!

More backbone required.

L1011 wrote: »

I don't believe there was any solid proposal to reopen it. Various people have called for it but nothing from Irish Rail

They are currently proposing - DCC planning file 2848/20 - to permanently remove it from use by converting it to offices.

The various anti-social behaviour events that happened there over the years, and there were an awful lot of them, some quite serious (and this was when it was actually staffed), I suspect militate against that second entrance to Connolly.

As you say there has never been a formal proposal to re-open that entrance, only suggestions here, and it's now earmarked for offices.

ncounties wrote: »

Where exactly on Amien Street would this entrance be?

The building is still there - just beyond the overbridge.

LXFlyer wrote: »

The building is still there - just beyond the overbridge.

This one? https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3524693,-6.2492025,3a,19.3y,87.25h,90.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFRLJocXEKQSH74XsqVdAag!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

LXFlyer wrote: »

The various anti-social behaviour events that happened there over the years, and there were an awful lot of them, some quite serious (and this was when it was actually staffed), I suspect militate against that second entrance to Connolly.

As you say there has never been a formal proposal to re-open that entrance, only suggestions here, and it's now earmarked for offices.

Were those not primarily related to it having a public toilet right inside the door, which basically became an unsupervised, uncontrolled injection centre?

Fixing the problems rather than moving them elsewhere / cutting off ones nose is the proper thing to do.

LXFlyer wrote: »

No. Several serious assaults on staff as I understand it.

The main station allows for better supervision and is that bit further away from the street to deter the local protagonists.

The area has been dragged somewhat upmarket since (Foley Street building and so on) and I would realistically expect it to be completely unstaffed like the secondary entrances to Tara and Pearse these days. TVMs and a barrier line.

Worked in the area for two years - found the pigeons under the bridges more of a risk than any of the people; but I was usually away by 5:30.