DART+ (DART Expansion)

Victor · 24-04-2012 1:13am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Victor, you don't think it was a plan. I also don't think it was a plan.

The fact remains that the DOT, CIE, the RPA and everybody else in the publicly-owned transport sector acted as if it was a plan. Why else would there have been T21 logos on practically every bus and bus shelter in the country?

Advertising and political advantage.

strassenwo!f · 29-04-2012 3:17pm

Victor wrote: »

Just proving the point that T21 wasn't a plan.

So, okay Victor, that wasn't a plan.

The DTO had an earlier plan, which in fairness involved a lot of crayon work, and now there's a lot of designing being done on the Luas BXD line, which was not part of that plan.

So it looks like their back-of-the-envelope plan isn't being implemented either.

It seems that, 12 years in, there is no plan from this millenium which is being implemented.

JeffK88 · 07-08-2013 5:18pm

Some talk of the Dart extension to the airport today IE want to include as part of the Dart Underground project. Looks like it could possibly happen within a decade or so says IE

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/airport-link-tunnel-included-in-expanded-dart-plan-29479191.html

moyners · 08-08-2013 11:25am

JeffK88 wrote: »

Some talk of the Dart extension to the airport today IE want to include as part of the Dart Underground project. Looks like it could possibly happen within a decade or so says IE

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/airport-link-tunnel-included-in-expanded-dart-plan-29479191.html

I wonder would this mean changing or having to get a whole new railway order? Because the airport link is mentioned nowhere on the existing one: http://www.dartundergroundrailwayorder.ie/

Or would they hope to start on the existing plan and add in an airport link later? Either way it'd probably be the end of Metro North.

bk · 08-08-2013 12:43pm

moyners wrote: »

Or would they hope to start on the existing plan and add in an airport link later? Either way it'd probably be the end of Metro North.

It would be a separate project and there is no point in doing the airport link until DART underground is completed and the northen line electrified due to the current capacity constraints on the Northern Line.

Also even then it is very unlikely to go ahead.

It will take significantly longer to take a DART from the airport to the city center then it would take Metro North. Hell even the 747 and Aircoach today will be quicker into the city center!!

Really the only people who would benefit from this are folks who live along the northern line.

For everyone else, you would get to the airport quicker by changing onto Metro North.

Intercity and commuter trains from Hueston won't be able to operate directly to the airport as they can't use the DART Underground tunnel, at least not until the intercity trains are electrified, which isn't going to happen for at least 30 years if ever!

It will also cause a significant increase in journey times for people travelling on the northern line who aren't going to the airport, as they have to leave the current alignment to go west to meet the airport and then go back east. Alternatively you could put in place a shuttle service, but again that would slow things down even more versus Metro North.

On the whole an Airport DART link is a very poor and costly project with little real benefit and many downsides.

Perhaps creating a BRT between Howth Junction and the airport would be a much cheaper and equally effective way of doing this.

Sam Russell · 08-08-2013 12:55pm

bk wrote: »

Perhaps creating a BRT Dart line between Howth Junction and the airport would be a much cheaper and equally effective way of doing this.

This to me is a no-brainer. Howth Junction to the airport is all open coutyside with only a few graveyards to avoid. It would be cheap and quick to build because of this and could provide a quick link into the city centre. It would also allow an interchange for travellers from northern staions on the line.

A bus link was tried before (AirDart iirc) but it failed because buses could not turn right at some point because of traffic but it might be better now because of the upgrade of the roads on the route.

Howth Junction is not a station I would like to change from train to bus at night in the winter. It is a dark, bleak place.

bk · 08-08-2013 1:17pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

This to me is a no-brainer. Howth Junction to the airport is all open coutyside with only a few graveyards to avoid. It would be cheap and quick to build because of this and could provide a quick link into the city centre. It would also allow an interchange for travellers from northern staions on the line.

Actually Howth Junction is surrounded by houses, check google maps. A new station between Howth Junction and Portmarnock would be the likely best solution.

Or alternatively a spur off the northern line further north of Howth Junction, where a feeder DART operates between Howth and the airport. There would be then no direct DARTs to either the airport or Howth, instead you would always change at Howth Junction.

And that is why it isn't a good idea. It would disimprove the service to Howth (now you have to wait and change DARTs) and would be significantly slower to get into town then just simply taking the 747 or Aircoach into town.

Basically is would cost us 200 million and give very little advantage.

MrDerp · 08-08-2013 1:32pm

bk wrote: »

Actually Howth Junction is surrounded by houses, check google maps. A new station between Howth Junction and Portmarnock would be the likely best solution.

Or alternatively a spur off the northern line further north of Howth Junction, where a feeder DART operates between Howth and the airport. There would be then no direct DARTs to either the airport or Howth, instead you would always change at Howth Junction.

And that is why it isn't a good idea. It would disimprove the service to Howth (now you have to wait and change DARTs) and would be significantly slower to get into town then just simply taking the 747 or Aircoach into town.

Basically is would cost us 200 million and give very little advantage.

I don't think the Howth Junction spur thing is to be taken literally, rather it'd be the changeover station for the airport, just as a passenger coming from Balbriggan might today change for the Howth Dart, or for intermediate stations like Raheny not serviced by commuter services.

Airport bound Darts might run non-stop from here, even if they must pass through Clongriffen station, to avoid using and overloading stations not equipped for changeovers.

Sam Russell · 08-08-2013 1:36pm

bk wrote: »

Actually Howth Junction is surrounded by houses, check google maps. A new station between Howth Junction and Portmarnock would be the likely best solution.

Or alternatively a spur off the northern line further north of Howth Junction, where a feeder DART operates between Howth and the airport. There would be then no direct DARTs to either the airport or Howth, instead you would always change at Howth Junction.

And that is why it isn't a good idea. It would disimprove the service to Howth (now you have to wait and change DARTs) and would be significantly slower to get into town then just simply taking the 747 or Aircoach into town.

Basically is would cost us 200 million and give very little advantage.

I am not suggesting that the line would run from Howth Junction, but would spur off the Northern Line form somewhere between Howth Junction and Portmarnock. It would be chosen to minimise cost. It could be designed to continue through Ballymun and onto the Phoenix Park tunnel and Heuston.

It need not be a Dart as such and could be a non-stop service to Connolly, and additional to current Dart services.

Heathrow had an Underground extension but it stopped at all staions to Cockfosters, (Not a rapid transit solution) but then they introduced an express service (at high cost) to Paddington (which is not central London and not very well served). They are currently talking about a through East-West link.

How would it cost €200m for such a simple link? 4-5km of open country-side two-rail with no stations (except at the airport).

Journey time to Connolly should be less than 30 mins - perhaps 20 min. Frequency should be 15 mins or 30 mins. If the station was well integrated with the airport terminals, then it would be very popular with travellers as journey times would be certain.

patrickmooney · 08-08-2013 2:26pm

I travel a lot and when presented with rail or bus connections from an airport into a city I ALWAYS take rail. It's safe and has a clear route. I never take cost or time into account. Can't see why tourists arriving into Dublin wouldn't do the same. And in most cities there is a surcharge to exit or board at the airport, so the tickets would/could cost a little more.

bk · 08-08-2013 2:43pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

How would it cost €200m for such a simple link? 4-5km of open country-side two-rail with no stations (except at the airport).

That is Irish Rails estimate, so I assume it is correct.

Remember it would require lots of works and a new station at Dublin Airport.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Journey time to Connolly should be less than 30 mins - perhaps 20 min. Frequency should be 15 mins or 30 mins. If the station was well integrated with the airport terminals, then it would be very popular with travellers as journey times would be certain.

That isn't what Irish Rail are proposing, the capacity simply isn't there on the Northern Line for such a service.

Here is what they are proposing:

http://www.slideshare.net/PatrickKing1/dart-link-to-dublin-airport-10182754

Basically:

- Dart Airport to Bray / Greystones, calling at all DART stations.

Note this will mean Howth will have to become a shuttle service from Howth junction, thus increasing journey times and adding a change for people going to Howth.

- 25 minute journey time to Connolly

This will mean about 35 minutes to O'Connell St with a change to LUAS required.

And all for 200 million!!

Now to put this in context, it currently takes Aircoach 40 minutes to reach O'Connell St at zero cost to the tax payer!

So basically they are proposing spending 200 million just to save 5 minutes journey time and with the added inconvenience of the horrible bag unfriendly hike from Connolly down to the Luas by BusAras!! And all while making dis-improving the service to Howth!!

I'm sorry but it just doesn't make any sense. There is a reason why this plan has never been taken seriously and why it has never been included in any strategic plans.

Now when DART Underground opens, it may make more sense then, so I would certainly be totally in favour of the alignment being reserved now for future use.

In the meantime I think a BRT between Howth Junction and the airport would be a much cheaper and better solution for serving people who live along the DART line.

Yes I'm aware of the AerDart and it's failures, but I'm proposing something more substantial then that. A BRT with dedicated road and any necessary road building and changes that are needed to make it fast and reliable, in conjunction with through ticketing for the DART.

It would give you most of what a DART link would give you at a fraction of the cost.

Amirani · 08-08-2013 2:47pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Heathrow had an Underground extension but it stopped at all staions to Cockfosters, (Not a rapid transit solution) but then they introduced an express service (at high cost) to Paddington (which is not central London and not very well served). They are currently talking about a through East-West link.

They're doing a lot more than talking about it.

Aard · 08-08-2013 2:54pm

bk wrote: »

In the meantime I think a BRT between Howth Junction and the airport would be a much cheaper and better solution for serving people who live along the DART line.

Not to say that I endorse such a BRT line (haven't considered its merits yet), but I think that if line is built then it should follow the exact same reservation of any future railway line. No point in doing the land acquisition twice.

Zebra3 · 08-08-2013 2:56pm

bk wrote: »

Basically:

- Dart Airport to Bray / Greystones, calling at all DART stations.

Note this will mean Howth will have to become a shuttle service from Howth junction, thus increasing journey times and adding a change for people going to Howth.

- 25 minute journey time to Connolly

This will mean about 35 minutes to O'Connell St with a change to LUAS required.

And all for 200 million!!

Now to put this in context, it currently takes Aircoach 40 minutes to reach O'Connell St at zero cost to the tax payer!

So basically they are proposing spending 200 million just to save 5 minutes journey time and with the added inconvenience of the horrible bag unfriendly hike from Connolly down to the Luas by BusAras!! And all while making dis-improving the service to Howth!!

I'm sorry but it just doesn't make any sense. There is a reason why this plan has never been taken seriously and why it has never been included in any strategic plans.

Now when DART Underground opens, it may make more sense then, so I would certainly be totally in favour of the alignment being reserved now for future use.

You seem to assume that everyone wants to go to O'Connell St from the airport.

bk · 08-08-2013 3:12pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

You seem to assume that everyone wants to go to O'Connell St from the airport.

It is what most people consider to be the city center, along with Grafton Street, which Aircoach stops near a few minutes later. It is also where the majority of Dublin Bus routes operate from and thus a major connection point for onward journeys.

Also Aircoach also serves the o2 area too, so no great time saving for people living near Connolly either. In fact the Aircoach o2 stop is closer to where more people live then Connolly.

Victor · 08-08-2013 3:15pm

AerDART died because of the disruption caused by the DART upgrade works.

bk · 08-08-2013 3:21pm

Aard wrote: »

Not to say that I endorse such a BRT line (haven't considered its merits yet), but I think that if line is built then it should follow the exact same reservation of any future railway line. No point in doing the land acquisition twice.

Interestingly the BRT could also be continued from the Airport along the M50 to Castleknock and Cheery Orchard station from where it could pick up Kildare and Western line based passengers heading to the airport.

monument · 08-08-2013 5:02pm

BRT via Swords Road
Luas via BXD and Finglas
Dart link

Aard · 08-08-2013 6:51pm

bk wrote: »

Interestingly the BRT could also be continued from the Airport along the M50 to Castleknock and Cheery Orchard station from where it could pick up Kildare and Western line based passengers heading to the airport.

Very interesting concept. Dare I suggest extending it a little further down the road to meet up with the Luas at the Red Cow?!

cgcsb · 08-08-2013 6:57pm

That old chestnut. They have that in the 2030 vision document released in 2011. It seems it was reprinted in a paper in 2013 to grab a headline. Maybe they think it'll make the public think the managers in IÉ are worth their salt in the wake of the recent DB strike.

cgcsb · 08-08-2013 7:06pm

bk wrote: »

Interestingly the BRT could also be continued from the Airport along the M50 to Castleknock and Cheery Orchard station from where it could pick up Kildare and Western line based passengers heading to the airport.

essentially what metro west proposes to but at a higher cost

Victor · 09-08-2013 6:31am

cgcsb wrote: »

essentially what metro west proposes to but at a higher cost

Not quite. Stick BRT on the M50 will only serve a few specific points where there are interchanges. The M50 is generally away from residential areas, although at Red Cow, it is lots of commercial development on one side. The BRT would take substantial capacity away from the M50 - capacity that we have just spent more than €1bn creating.

Metro West is slated to have 21 stations that are actually at places where people live and work.

So it might cost less, but it would also likely deliver less. So it isn't "essentially what metro west proposes".

cgcsb · 09-08-2013 3:57pm

Victor wrote: »

Metro West is slated to have 21 stations that are actually at places where people live and work.

So it might cost less, but it would also likely deliver less. So it isn't "essentially what metro west proposes".

The only difference is you propose a heavy rail solution for an orbital railway, quite bold, and with different station locations than are currently proposed. Why not simply move the proposed metro west stations if they are indeed that inconvenient?

loyatemu · 09-08-2013 4:08pm

bus services to the airport are excellent, largely as a result of the 100s of millions of euro spent on the port tunnel. I don't see the point in spending any money on a rail link connecting to the northern line - well maybe if it could be done for €20m, but €200m? - no way. (Metro North is a different matter as it serves a whole load of new areas, though I'm not convinced by the economics of that either).

as an example - I live in Greystones, currently I can get to the airport on the Aircoach in 80 minutes with no changes (and thats allowing for the bus going through some fairly congested areas on the southside). The proposed Dart would take exactly the same length of time. (Greystones - Connolly is 55 mins, + 25 to the airport). I suspect that from most areas of Dublin bus (using the M50 or the tunnel) would beat rail every time.

Victor · 10-08-2013 8:30am

cgcsb wrote: »

The only difference is you propose a heavy rail solution for an orbital railway, quite bold, and with different station locations than are currently proposed. Why not simply move the proposed metro west stations if they are indeed that inconvenient?

Whut?

strassenwo!f · 11-08-2013 2:54am

Victor wrote: »

Not quite. Stick BRT on the M50 will only serve a few specific points where there are interchanges. The M50 is generally away from residential areas, although at Red Cow, it is lots of commercial development on one side. The BRT would take substantial capacity away from the M50 - capacity that we have just spent more than €1bn creating.

Metro West is slated to have 21 stations that are actually at places where people live and work.

So it might cost less, but it would also likely deliver less. So it isn't "essentially what metro west proposes".

Very good points, Victor. BRT would be a poor relation to the metrowest, which will hopefully be built some day.

Thankfully, though, the metrowest has quite correctly been binned for the moment. Dublin needs to be concentrating on getting people (i) rapidly into and out of the city. When that has been achieved, getting them (ii) across the city. And then, when all that has been accomplished, turning heads towards getting people (iii) around the city.

The planned metrowest would not have delivered a single person directly into the city. In other words, it represented a totally arseways way of dealing with the city's most immediate and important transport needs.

There's not a lot of money now for the big stuff. But what money there is needs to be spent on dealing, in the correct order, with priorities (i) to (iii) above. BRT around the city should not figure highly at the moment.

markpb · 11-08-2013 7:46am

I agree that arterial routes are the most important ones for capital investment but it would be a folly to ignore the estimated hundred thousand cars a day that use the M50 - the majority of them in the morning and evening peaks and the busiest exits being at places of employment. A lot of people in Dublin commute around the m50 to get to the airport, Citywest and Sandyford and no combination of public transport arterial routes is going to beat that drive on time.

I work in Sandyford and the three main origins are M50, Wicklow and the Luas (in that order). Several people from the first category tried taking public transport (bus + luas or train + luas) when petrol prices spiked but their journey times went up by between 200% and 300% and -none- of them kept it up despite the huge savings on money.

Victor · 11-08-2013 8:58am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The planned metrowest would not have delivered a single person directly into the city. In other words, it represented a totally arseways way of dealing with the city's most immediate and important transport needs.

Direct services to the city centre aren't everything. MW had the potential to feed several other rail lines and while exact service patterns weren't decided, it is possible there would have been Blanchardstown to St. Stephen's Green / Luas Green Line services.

Then there is the huge number of people who travel, especially on the Tallaght-Blanchardstown axis. Possibly building the MW bridge and operating a QBC might be useful in the interim.

AngryLips · 11-08-2013 8:37pm

If radial services were successful then DB would have a lot more of them. Cue a handful of replies outlining reasons why MW is different because of segregation etc

markpb · 11-08-2013 9:29pm

AngryLips wrote: »

If radial services were successful then DB would have a lot more of them.

That's a bit of a stretch. Their existing radial services are mostly local services, meandering around housing estates, hospitals and shopping centres taking the longest route possible to serve as much as possible, as poorly as possible. The roads used are rarely main roads, preferring local roads with no bus priority at all.

In the case of the 17a which was actually quite good, they used Network Direct to move it *away* from a brand new QBC into a housing estate with 90 degree bends, speed ramps and a hospital with roads so narrow two buses can't meet without one of them stopping.

DBs experience of proving public transport is rarely a good example to learn from.

Victor · 12-08-2013 2:57am

AngryLips wrote: »

If radial services were successful

Do you mean cross-radial routes?

markpb wrote: »

That's a bit of a stretch. Their existing radial services are mostly local services, meandering around housing estates, hospitals and shopping centres taking the longest route possible to serve as much as possible, as poorly as possible. The roads used are rarely main roads, preferring local roads with no bus priority at all.

Hospitals and shopping centres are big trip generators, not just for patients/shoppers, but also staff.

The 17a serves Howth Junction station, DCU, Beaumont and Blanchardstown hospitals, industrial areas in Baldoyle, Coolock, Clonshaugh, Santry, Ballycoolin and shopping at Donaghmede, Coolock, Northside, Ballymun, Finglas, Blanchardstown village and Blanchardstown Centre.

There may be the issue that the cross radial routes 17, 17a, 18, 75, 76/a, 102, 104, 114, 236* serve local journeys too much and act as medium/long distance routes / connectors to radial routes too little.

* The 45a, 63, 84/a, 111 are more radial routes from Dún Laoghaire than cross-radial from Dublin; similarly the 184 and 185 from Bray; 33a and 33b from Swords; 44b from Dundrum; however the the 59, 116, 161, 220, 238, 239 are just strange.

Victor · 12-08-2013 3:27am

This is straying a bit off-topic, so I'd be grateful if we could get back on-topic.

Feel free to start a new thread.

Moderator

strassenwo!f · 12-08-2013 11:42am

Victor wrote: »

This is straying a bit off-topic, so I'd be grateful if we could get back on-topic.

Feel free to start a new thread.

Moderator

Is it straying off-topic? Discussion of the metrowest is surely very relevant to discussion of the DART underground project.

The various plans produced by the Department of Transport and the offshoots (Platform for Change, Transport21) talk about building both the metrowest and the DART underground project.

What wasn't specifically mentioned in the plans, unsurprisingly, is that the DART underground project will (if built) be operating for many years at seriously below the theoretical capacity of the tunnel.

Obviously both the tunnel itself and additions to the services which run in it are a long way off. But some cities, e.g. Munich, have shown that it is possible to arrange a system which both fulfils metrowest-like functions and, critically, utilises the most expensive tunnel infrastructure to good effect.

The capacity issue will have to be dealt with if the tunnel is ever to be built, especially given the opposition which is likely to emerge, primarily because of cost and the fact that "Dublin gets everything".

It can't obviously, all be done immediately, but I think Dublin needs to start thinking about both the DART underground project and the metrowest being incorporated into one.

Aard · 12-08-2013 6:22pm

Of relevance too (to both MW and DU) is if/when the new town of Clonburris is built. It will incorporate two stops on the future Dart, one of them being an interchange with Metro West, in what is currently a greenfield site. Density is likely to be a minimum of 50 units/ha in the vicinity of the stations. At an occupancy rate of at least 2 per dwelling on average, which means there will be an overall population density of 10,000/sqkm around each station.

I know it might look like a bit of a pipe dream given the current state of the property market, but this is Ireland finally getting the hang of long-term planning, and it will have a positive effect on the future patronage and viability of DU.

murphaph · 12-08-2013 6:31pm

Clonburris will be built. The question is whether DU will be there to greet it!

strassenwo!f · 12-08-2013 10:56pm

murphaph wrote: »

Clonburris will be built. The question is whether DU will be there to greet it!

Confident prediction here: it won't be.

Putting together all the SDZs along the Hazelhatch line, together with all the other places along the route, you are probably looking at max demand of 4-5 trains per hour along the four-tracked Kildare Route into Heuston.

I think you could double that to 8-10 trains per hour if the trains eat further into the city, i.e. if the interconnector is built.

But that is still well short of the capacity which the tunnel is capable of carrying and, I'd guess, well short of the throughput which the tunnel needs before it will be built in the first place.

The way to go seems, to me, to plan on sticking the metrowest route, in its various pieces, through the tunnel as well.

Aard · 12-08-2013 11:30pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The way to go seems, to me, to plan on sticking the metrowest route, in its various pieces, through the tunnel as well.

If the MW alignment was built to heavy gauge, trains from the west could bypass the city and go straight to the airport or even through to the Belfast line.

strassenwo!f · 13-08-2013 12:19am

Aard wrote:

If the MW alignment was built to heavy gauge, trains from the west could bypass the city and go straight to the airport or even through to the Belfast line.

Possibly they could.

However, that is something for another day, as such traffic is mostly confined to people who are making such journeys on a very occasional basis. The inconvenience of changing at Heuston and travelling across the city to Connolly, or vice versa, is not a priority problem, I feel.

The greater demand is for regular access to the city. People along the metrowest route have as much need to rapidly get into and out of the city as people in Clonburris, Adamstown or Hazelhatch do.

strassenwo!f · 13-08-2013 12:39am

And the failure of IE to incorporate extra platforms at their proposed Spencer Dock station, for turnback purposes, is a very clear indictation that they don't understand the potential of the interconnector.

D.L.R. · 13-08-2013 9:20am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

And the failure of IE to incorporate extra platforms at their proposed Spencer Dock station, for turnback purposes, is a very clear indictation that they don't understand the potential of the interconnector.

I think they struggle to understand railway transportation in general!

murphaph · 13-08-2013 12:36pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The greater demand is for regular access to the city. People along the metrowest route have as much need to rapidly get into and out of the city as people in Clonburris, Adamstown or Hazelhatch do.

Why can't they just change from MW to DART at a purpose built interchange at Kishoge (Clonburris)?

Why do the actual trains have to divert into the tunnel?

strassenwo!f · 13-08-2013 1:39pm

murphaph wrote: »

Why can't they just change from MW to DART at a purpose built interchange at Kishoge (Clonburris)?

Why do the actual trains have to divert into the tunnel?

They could change. Indeed they could.

But since the greatest demand is to get into the city, isn't it just easier for all concerned if the train is diverted into the tunnel and brings the passengers directly into the city, without having to change?

Especially if the tunnel has capacity in bucketloads.

strassenwo!f · 19-08-2013 1:15am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Especially if the tunnel has capacity in bucketloads.

Which, if it is built, it will have. Capacity in shedloads, bucketloads, whatever superlative you wish.

My own belief is that the main pressure for the DART Underground project needs to come from the West of the city. If built, the DU project will have a lot of capacity, much more than can be satisfied by trains between Hazelhatch and the City, travelling via various SDZs.

The available capacity should, I feel, be filled by spurs from this line: for example, to locations north and south of the main Kildare line by locations which can feed capacity into a tunnel which is currently proposed to run for many years (perhaps for ever) at considerably below its capacity.

There are numerous locations in West Dublin which would welcome, and benefit from, such a service.

The failure of IE to pencil in extra platforms at their proposed Spencer Dock station, for turnaround purposes, shows that they didn't understand the potential of this project. The fact that IE's arrangement for Spencer Dock was given the go-ahead from ABP, without question, shows that ABP didn't understand the potential either.

Thus far, much of the focus about the DU project has been about the relief it will provide for the beleagured rail services in the East of the city.

Even though it has been parked,and probably won't emerge again as a feasible project for a long time to come, I believe it will be a more viable project if it is envisaged as a project which can deliver large numbers of people from West Dublin into the city, than if it is seen mostly as a way of solving the capacity problems on the DART line.

Aard · 19-08-2013 2:40am

Interesting post.

I wouldn't necessarily agree that the best way to funnel people into the DU tunnel is by adding spurs to the line. The construction of such spurs would be very expensive and would travel through largely residential areas -- sensitive and with few trip generators. West Dublin (specifically the Lucan-Clondalkin area) has a very good orbital road network that lends itself to an array of orbital bus services. Considering DU's unique penetration into the CBD, a bus+train trip could still prove more attractive than a respective bus-only trip, and much cheaper than a rail spur.

You are absolutely correct in saying that much of the pressure will come from the West. Looking at various Development Plans and Settlement Strategies, it is clear that the population in the West will continue to increase at a higher rate than elsewhere overall. Most of the area abutting the railway between Hazelhatch and Clondalkin is greenfield. As I mentioned in a previous post, these lands (once developed of course) will have population densities nearing 10,000/sqkm beside stations, and likely at least 5,000/sqkm elsewhere. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Adamstown/Clonburris style SDZ for the lands around Hazelhatch.

antoinolachtnai · 19-08-2013 7:24am

You are talking about serving the southwest city. If DU were altered to connect with the Maynooth line as well as the Northern Line, it would allow fast access from the Northwest city to St Stephen's Green. .

The place that really has the population to merit a spur is Blanchardstown.

Cool Mo D · 19-08-2013 5:07pm

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

You are talking about serving the southwest city. If DU were altered to connect with the Maynooth line as well as the Northern Line, it would allow fast access from the Northwest city to St Stephen's Green. .

The place that really has the population to merit a spur is Blanchardstown.

As I understand it, the plan is that the Maynooth line will connect to DU, but it will be a crappy single track connection: http://www.dartundergroundrailwayorder.ie/assets/files/site_files/5%20Railway%20Works%20Drawings/Area%20106/03_RO_Alignment_Details/DU-RO_106_B-C.PDF

antoinolachtnai · 19-08-2013 5:16pm

Yes, not adequate to run services on (or at least not more than a few services per hour). The plan for DU is to rely on a change at Pearse Street.

The point is well made that the tunnel should have lots of capacity and the key is to design the network to take advantage of that capacity.

AngryLips · 19-08-2013 8:14pm

Well it doesn't make sense to serve Haslehatch from Maynooth-originating trains. Yes, much of the traffic wont want to travel the entire route but it is far more likely that people will want to do Malahide-Haselhatch than any point on the Maynooth line to any point on the south city via a detour through the Docklands...

antoinolachtnai · 19-08-2013 8:40pm

Very few people ever want to travel the full length of any 'pendular' route but I take your point.

You would terminate a lot of the services at Inchicore, or better still, Cabra. You would still run Hazelhatch-Malahide as well.

(The DART Underground plan only ever served as far as Inchicore. Going to Hazelhatch was provided for but is not part of the plan.)

strassenwo!f · 22-08-2013 10:59pm

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The place that really has the population to merit a spur is Blanchardstown.

Blanchardstown probably makes sense, if spurs are ever to be built to the DART underground project.

The main one though, is surely Tallaght. What is it, the fifth biggest urban population in the state?

Of course, as mentioned above, proper railway lines are expensive. And they also take time to design and plan.

An important point here is that there is time.

The DART Underground project is now, realistically, on the very long finger.

But there have got to be benefits if there's eventually a 20-minute rapid connection between the two most populous urban areas in Greater Dublin, rather than a 45-50 minute one, using the considerable excess of capacity available under the current DART underground proposals.

DART+ (DART Expansion)

Comments