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

DART+ (DART Expansion)

Options
16869717374334

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,099 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    At least the levy for the Green Line extension (to Cherrywood) was actually eventually spent to build the extension.

    I wonder is the cash collected for other projects on a very long finger (Metro West for example) being protected?


    Im not entirely sure that Cherrywood got the money from the developers.

    Tom Manning...RPA.
    However, Tom Manning of the Railway Procurement Agency said the property developers' difficulties had not affected the line's development.

    "There is a 30-year timeframe for the State to recoup the money, so that could be as many as three or more economic cycles," he said.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,099 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    From 2012 in relation the the Cherrywood luas.
    An estimated €150 million of the €300 million cost of the Luas Cherrywood extension was to be funded by development levies but much of this has yet to be paid for reasons generally associated with the downturn.

    Source.

    http://irishplanningnews.ie/planning-levies-expected-to-be-reduced/


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    murphaph wrote: »
    MW has one for sure.

    Yep with Fingal and South Dublin. Given that DU is far more likely to go ahead than MW, I'm surprised the city council didn't draw up a development contribution scheme for it.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Schadenfreudia


    An estimated €150 million of the €300 million cost of the Luas Cherrywood extension was to be funded by development levies but much of this has yet to be paid for reasons generally associated with the downturn.

    I assume that means that whatever was collected went towards the extension??

    All very opaque, isn't it? :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭AngryLips




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 888 ✭✭✭Telchak


    AngryLips wrote: »

    This isn't news, it's been planned for years. I recall news stories and drawings within a year or two of Transport 21's announcement of the possibility of going as far as Drogheda.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭AngryLips


    Looking beyond DU - could we see the underused Phoenix Park Tunnel alignment becoming a possible future Luas line once Dart Underground is built?


  • Registered Users Posts: 888 ✭✭✭Telchak


    AngryLips wrote: »
    Looking beyond DU - could we see the underused Phoenix Park Tunnel alignment becoming a possible future Luas line once Dart Underground is built?
    As part of what route? Doesn't seem to be any obvious one suited to light rail.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    AngryLips wrote: »
    Looking beyond DU - could we see the underused Phoenix Park Tunnel alignment becoming a possible future Luas line once Dart Underground is built?

    Doubt it, it is still in active daily use.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Schadenfreudia


    Is the tunnel single track?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭AngryLips


    Telchak wrote: »
    As part of what route? Doesn't seem to be any obvious one suited to light rail.

    Well given that every single disused alignment into the city is currently Luas (Green Line) or about to be (BXD), I'm sure that they'll come up with some way of getting better utility from this section. Doesn't one of the crayon plans for Fingal include a service from Heuston northwards?

    Doubt it, it is still in active daily use.

    There is plenty of space on that alignment, they could reduce IR from two tracks down to one and potentially have plenty of space leftover for Luas.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,845 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Should be possible to gauntlet the two gauges through if needed


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    In my view, it was one of the daftest decisions that the Luas project made was to go with the UK gauge rather than the Irish one.

    A similar mistake is going to be made with the BRT design if they go with bendy buses.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,845 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    In my view, it was one of the daftest decisions that the Luas project made was to go with the UK gauge rather than the Irish one.

    A similar mistake is going to be made with the BRT design if they go with bendy buses.

    Ancient mythology is that it was done on purpose to stop Irish Rail getting their hands on it. It has reduced rolling stock costs too but had definitely cost in flexibility.

    With Harcourt St. Station mostly empty since Pod closed we could have been looking at a proper reopening of the Harcourt line if it was 1600mm.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,099 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    L1011 wrote: »
    Ancient mythology is that it was done on purpose to stop Irish Rail getting their hands on it. It has reduced rolling stock costs too but had definitely cost in flexibility.

    With Harcourt St. Station mostly empty since Pod closed we could have been looking at a proper reopening of the Harcourt line if it was 1600mm.

    I don't believe that ancient mythology had anything to do with the guage. First of all, it was CIE that started the project in the first place through their Light rail office back in the mid 90s. The were removed from the project when the RPA was created in 2001 through an ammendment of the Transport Act. The guage is the international standard and was always going to be. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest the luas guage was ever going to be 1600mm and nor should it have ever been.

    As for Harcourt St Station, it was never a runner to reopen and would not have provided a better service than the current luas line.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,099 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    AngryLips wrote: »
    Looking beyond DU - could we see the underused Phoenix Park Tunnel alignment becoming a possible future Luas line once Dart Underground is built?

    Even in post DU world, I think the PPT route should be retained as a heavy rail alignment.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Daft question and probably done to death but was there much advantage or saving in going for the slightly narrower gauge ?

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Even the old Victorian trams were the 1.6m gauge. It made no sense and probably saved very little - given the saving only applied to the rolling stock. It is the same rail, only slightly further apart.

    Think of the benefit to tourism if we had a few geriatric trams running from Amien St (Connolly) to Kings Bridge (Heuston)? Other countries do this. London still run a few RouteMaster buses on heritage routes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    Even the old Victorian trams were the 1.6m gauge. It made no sense and probably saved very little - given the saving only applied to the rolling stock. It is the same rail, only slightly further apart.

    Think of the benefit to tourism if we had a few geriatric trams running from Amien St (Connolly) to Kings Bridge (Heuston)? Other countries do this. London still run a few RouteMaster buses on heritage routes.

    I think the problem with that idea is more to do with lack of enterprise, than gauge.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,775 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Markcheese wrote: »
    Daft question and probably done to death but was there much advantage or saving in going for the slightly narrower gauge ?
    Probably made it easier to get "off the shelf" (i.e. less customised) trams from Europe.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    SeanW wrote: »
    Probably made it easier to get "off the shelf" (i.e. less customised) trams from Europe.

    Again, it only saved on the trams themselves, not any of the infrastructure.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Could DU be built using a single bore tunnel something like those used for the Dublin Port Tunnel? It should be a lot cheaper, and a lot of the London Underground uses this type of tunnel.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,045 ✭✭✭afatbollix


    Only the older tunnels are single bore. The standard is twin bore now for safety.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,099 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Again, it only saved on the trams themselves, not any of the infrastructure.

    Trams were part of the "infrastructure". What is your point regarding building luas to a 1600mm gauge?


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Standard gauge for Luas was absolutely the right decision. Being able to buy off the shelf makes a huge difference to your bargaining power.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,254 ✭✭✭markpb


    Markcheese wrote: »
    Daft question and probably done to death but was there much advantage or saving in going for the slightly narrower gauge ?

    The question should be the other way round - what advantage would there have been in building to the less-common Irish standard? You can't mix trains and trams on the same line (for safety) so none of the existing rail stock could use it anyway. If you ever wanted to convert it to train operation, you'd need to change the power and signalling which would be expensive. And, even then, no-one in their right mind (except Los Angeles in the 90s) would run heavy rail on-street.

    So, given that we're never going to run Irish trains on it, why build it to an Irish train standard?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Even the old Victorian trams were the 1.6m gauge. It made no sense and probably saved very little - given the saving only applied to the rolling stock. It is the same rail, only slightly further apart.

    Think of the benefit to tourism if we had a few geriatric trams running from Amien St (Connolly) to Kings Bridge (Heuston)? Other countries do this. London still run a few RouteMaster buses on heritage routes.

    And would they only be single decker trams (were there single decker trams) or would we all raising the cabling height too? Would we be happy delaying the actual trams behind the heritage trams for sake of a few tourist?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    I for one would not travel on the open top deck sitting a short distance from the overhead power line. Maybe we could make some look-a-like old trams - the way 'old vintage' wedding cars are done (based on Ford Granada parts).

    Maybe I mean trams that look old but are not.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    We'd better give this a bump, because this thread is about to fall off the front page of the forum.

    Let's try this:

    I see SF are having their conference this weekend. Where are they on the interconnector project?


Advertisement