[Article] Dempsey says Broadstone line to Luas, Docklands can stay open

murphaph · 07-02-2008 6:06pm

KC61 wrote: »

You really are dealing in "what if" territory here.

The reality is that the ONLY reason Broadstone raised its head was the political spat between CIE and the RPA. Nothing else. Remember where it came from. An interview with the Chairman of CIE last summer.

I would certainly not see any situation where Docklands station would be closed if the Interconnector did not happen. But until anyone suggests otherwise I really do think that all of this nonsense is that - pure conspiracy theory.

Broadstone opening/shutting was never anything to do with the interconnector.

Well, if and when it's built I'll hold my hands up and say I was paranoid but our history wrt political meddling in our transport system hasn't done much good. Generally involves stupid things like Greystones DART or cutting back (DART to Tallaght/Luas link up, Mary O'Rourke) etc. The "good stuff" is usually provided by the agencies themselves, in spite of government meddling.

marmajam · 07-02-2008 6:29pm

Facts mean nothing to the paranoid conspiracy theorist. Because they KNOW the whole thing is a trick. When the IC is 95% built they will still find some devious scam in it.
It's a psychological condition. A sort of emotional cowardice - if the prophecy of doom fails to transpire, weeelllll......they can recover some credit by announcing: ' Well done! I never thought you would do it.....'
But glory be to God, if they are right: 'I told you so!'
It's a sort of loser mentality. It remind me of those old paddys, working in US or UK, half decrepit themselves who would visit Ireland and never tire telling you how everything here was crap. A projection of their own insecurity.
Amen.

markf909 · 07-02-2008 7:48pm

marmajam wrote: »

Facts mean nothing to the paranoid conspiracy theorist. Because they KNOW the whole thing is a trick. When the IC is 95% built they will still find some devious scam in it.
It's a psychological condition. A sort of emotional cowardice - if the prophecy of doom fails to transpire, weeelllll......they can recover some credit by announcing: ' Well done! I never thought you would do it.....'
But glory be to God, if they are right: 'I told you so!'
It's a sort of loser mentality. It remind me of those old paddys, working in US or UK, half decrepit themselves who would visit Ireland and never tire telling you how everything here was crap. A projection of their own insecurity.
Amen.

I'd like to know what percentage of public transport projects promised since the original DRRTS study 33 years ago have been delivered on.

Marmajam, any cold, hard facts handy?

marmajam · 07-02-2008 8:01pm

markf909 wrote: »

I'd like to know what percentage of public transport projects promised since the original DRRTS study 33 years ago have been delivered on.

Marmajam, any cold, hard facts handy?

The normal facts or the conspiracy perception facts?

markf909 · 07-02-2008 8:05pm

marmajam wrote: »

The normal facts or the conspiracy perception facts?

Straight up normal ones, it has been 33 years since publication.

KC61 · 07-02-2008 8:34pm

murphaph wrote: »

Well, if and when it's built I'll hold my hands up and say I was paranoid but our history wrt political meddling in our transport system hasn't done much good. Generally involves stupid things like Greystones DART or cutting back (DART to Tallaght/Luas link up, Mary O'Rourke) etc. The "good stuff" is usually provided by the agencies themselves, in spite of government meddling.

I would totally agree with your comments regarding political meddling. It has damaged the development of proper public transport in Dublin for decades.

However reopening Broadstone to heavy rail was (as I have to repeatedly state) not part of long term planning, but rather was a back of the envelope reaction by the current Chairman of CIE to the RPA gaining some of "his" property. And no matter how much anyone tries to twist it into something else, that is what it was.

murphaph · 07-02-2008 8:44pm

marmajam wrote: »

Facts mean nothing to the paranoid conspiracy theorist. Because they KNOW the whole thing is a trick. When the IC is 95% built they will still find some devious scam in it.
It's a psychological condition. A sort of emotional cowardice - if the prophecy of doom fails to transpire, weeelllll......they can recover some credit by announcing: ' Well done! I never thought you would do it.....'
But glory be to God, if they are right: 'I told you so!'
It's a sort of loser mentality. It remind me of those old paddys, working in US or UK, half decrepit themselves who would visit Ireland and never tire telling you how everything here was crap. A projection of their own insecurity.
Amen.

See Markf's post. The government (of whatever colour) has failed repeatedly to deliver on transport projects in Dublin. The Interconnector would be just another to the pile my overly optimistic friend.;)

monument · 07-02-2008 8:51pm

KC61 wrote: »

I would totally agree with your comments regarding political meddling. It has damaged the development of proper public transport in Dublin for decades.

However reopening Broadstone to heavy rail was (as I have to repeatedly state) not part of long term planning, but rather was a back of the envelope reaction by the current Chairman of CIE to the RPA gaining some of "his" property. And no matter how much anyone tries to twist it into something else, that is what it was.

In all fairness, it's pretty logical that one would react to ones property being given away. The back of the envelope reaction, as you describe it, was a political way of reacting. Or more so, was a way of reacting that the political world might understand.

For Irish Rail to have just turned around and said we want the line and station for some unnamed point in the future, is something that would have been brushed aside by the government in favour a shiny Luas line in the short term.

Governments don't think in the long term so they'll have a bias towards the short term and shiny.

marmajam · 07-02-2008 9:07pm

Mostly they were right not to build that stuff. Yure analysis not correct. That's why you take this forum seriously. Hot air.

markf909 · 07-02-2008 9:09pm

marmajam wrote: »

Mostly they were right not to build that stuff. Yure analysis not correct. That's why you take this forum seriously. Hot air.

Where's me WUM smiley?

marmajam · 07-02-2008 9:27pm

markf909 wrote: »

Where's me WUM smiley?

Yiz have got very sleepy on this forum. It took ya a million yrs to get it.

KC61 · 07-02-2008 9:51pm

monument wrote: »

In all fairness, it's pretty logical that one would react to ones property being given away. The back of the envelope reaction, as you describe it, was a political way of reacting. Or more so, was a way of reacting that the political world might understand.

For Irish Rail to have just turned around and said we want the line and station for some unnamed point in the future, is something that would have been brushed aside by the government in favour a shiny Luas line in the short term.

Governments don't think in the long term so they'll have a bias towards the short term and shiny.

I stand over my comments because at no point prior to this did CIE even suggest reopening Broadstone to heavy rail - and had in fact pushed for Docklands instead. It never featured in any of the plans produced.

As soon as an alternative was suggested, then all of a sudden the Chairman decided that should be reopened. Hence my significant degree of cynicism towards this completely unnecessary station reopening suggestion.

monument · 07-02-2008 10:48pm

It is their property. Having another State body (the RPA) who could take that property is something they never have to deal with before. They had no need to act before.

popebenny16 · 08-02-2008 2:38am

marmajam wrote: »

Yiz have got very sleepy on this forum. It took ya a million yrs to get it.

not everyone, pal.

between you and that loonie who wants to flatten O'Connell Street and Parnell Square this place is getting a lot more interesting.

loyatemu · 08-02-2008 11:35am

monument wrote: »

It is their property. Having another State body (the RPA) who could take that property is something they never have to deal with before. They had no need to act before.

its our property - we own CIE. If the govt want to use the land for something else then so be it.

I actually don't think Luas lines BX and F will be built - too much money and disruption for relatively little benefit, but that doesn't mean Irish Rail should be allowed waste money up there either.

trellheim · 08-02-2008 12:41pm

The necessary revisions have arisen for a range of reasons including changes to the scope of projects arising from public consultation, planning issues, procurement issues and archaeological difficulties and are set out below for individual projects. · Portlaoise Train depot will be completed in the first half of this year, rather than end 2007; the short delay arose because the planning approval process took longer than anticipated.· Cork Commuter Rail Service to Midleton: The construction timetable is yet to be finalised with the contractors, but Iarnród Éireann is optimistic that passenger services will start in early 2009.· Linking of the existing Luas lines: Dublin City Council is in the process of completing traffic modelling work as part of its examination of revised traffic management arrangements in the city centre, which will be required for the delivery of the Luas city centre link (line BX) and the further extension to Liffey Junction (line D). Following completion of further detailed design work and subject to a satisfactory outcome to the city centre traffic management planning work, the RPA plans to submit a Railway Order application for Luas Line BX to An Bord Pleanála this year. · The Tallaght to Citywest Luas project involves a longer alignment than originally planned and the timescale for completion has, therefore, been revised to 2010. · The revised completion date for the Connolly to Docklands Luas is 2009, rather than late 2008 as originally scheduled mainly because the RPA devoted a substantial period to addressing and resolving the concerns of businesses in the IFSC about the impact of construction on their operations.· Metro West: The projected completion date for the entire project remains 2014. The project has been identified as a PPP and the RPA, when announcing the emerging preferred route alignment, indicated that the possibility of phasing implementation would be discussed with prospective PPP bidders.. There were delays in the start of the Limerick Southern Ring Road due to tendering issues, which meant that the contract award process did not progress as quickly as was originally hoped. Completion is now scheduled for 2010. Although Construction on both the M3 and the N25 Waterford City Bypass were delayed because of archaeological issues at Tara and Woodstown respectively, the completion date for both projects remains 2010. · Dublin City Centre rail resignalling project was expanded to include the Maynooth line, resulting in a longer construction period and a 2011 completion date.· Due to a slight delay in the submission of the Railway Order application, Phase 1 of the Navan Line will now be completed in 2010.· Metro North: The scheduled completion date is now 2013 to take account of scope changes made arising from public consultations.

Ham'nd'egger · 08-02-2008 12:56pm

loyatemu wrote: »

its our property - we own CIE. If the govt want to use the land for something else then so be it.

I actually don't think Luas lines BX and F will be built - too much money and disruption for relatively little benefit, but that doesn't mean Irish Rail should be allowed waste money up there either.

It isn't "our" property as such, Loyal; it is that of the company. The CIE companies are private concerns that are owned by the sitting Minister but managed by their own board. CIE was a private undertaking until about 1948, and with it came the many sites, stations, gatekeeper houses, good sheds etc that the many railway companies owned in their 100 or so years of private undertaking. As these assets would have been inherited by CIE, they as a company own them outright and would be entitled to procure money for the release of same or to charge some rent for it's use. If it was the Office of Public Works who held the land, it would be an entirely different story as to the Minister directing alternate use for the land.

loyatemu · 08-02-2008 2:43pm

Hamndegger wrote: »

It isn't "our" property as such, Loyal; it is that of the company. The CIE companies are private concerns that are owned by the sitting Minister but managed by their own board. CIE was a private undertaking until about 1948, and with it came the many sites, stations, gatekeeper houses, good sheds etc that the many railway companies owned in their 100 or so years of private undertaking. As these assets would have been inherited by CIE, they as a company own them outright and would be entitled to procure money for the release of same or to charge some rent for it's use. If it was the Office of Public Works who held the land, it would be an entirely different story as to the Minister directing alternate use for the land.

swings and roundabouts - if the minister owns the companies then they are publicly owned.

monument · 08-02-2008 3:06pm

My point wasn't really their ownership of the land per say, more so that they are holding it / controlled it / whatever, and having another body take it away from them for public trasnport use is something they never have to deal with before.

So, again, they had no need to act before.

bk · 08-02-2008 3:35pm

If anything I think this may actually make the IC more likely.

Here is my theory. CIE would love to sell the Docklands station land to their developer buddys for lots of money. If the IC doesn't get built and they can't use Broadstone, then they have to continue using the Docklands station indefinietly.

However if the hurry up and build the IC, then they can take the pressure off Connolly, redirect all the Docklands Diesel services into Connolly and then sell the docklands station land to their developer buddys.

I've always seen Broadstone as a detracting from the IC and making it less likely to happen. Perhaps now we will see CIE focus on the IC and make some real progress.

fast1 · 08-02-2008 4:54pm

The transport minister is a moron.

What Dublin needs is a Transport Terminal like ever other city on the planet. 1 "Central" place where everything is joined - whether it be Connolly, Dockland or Broadstone.

All trains go here
All Luas go here
All "metro" go here

From that one stop you can go anywhere it lets you go (even then it won't get you very far)

If most other cities can do it why can't Dublin?

It is stupid having the luas finish here, the maynooth trains go there, the galway train over there, the dart back over here...it just doesn't make sense.

Put all the platforms and rail lines underground until its out of the city.

Look at Sydney's Central and Townhall stations - 30+ platforms all underground. From the street level you would'nt know it was even there.

invincibleirish · 08-02-2008 5:04pm

fast1 wrote: »

The transport minister is a moron.

What Dublin needs is a Transport Terminal like ever other city on the planet. 1 "Central" place where everything is joined - whether it be Connolly, Dockland or Broadstone.

All trains go here
All Luas go here
All "metro" go here

From that one stop you can go anywhere it lets you go (even then it won't get you very far)

If most other cities can do it why can't Dublin?

It is stupid having the luas finish here, the maynooth trains go there, the galway train over there, the dart back over here...it just doesn't make sense.

Put all the platforms and rail lines underground until its out of the city.

Look at Sydney's Central and Townhall stations - 30+ platforms all underground. From the street level you would'nt know it was even there.

Whoa hang on there buddy, that sounds dangerously like joined up thinking! do you know where we are? its Ireland not Bleedin' Germany!

Ham'nd'egger · 08-02-2008 5:23pm

loyatemu wrote: »

swings and roundabouts - if the minister owns the companies then they are publicly owned.

Not so, Loyaltemu. As with Aer Lingus, the Minister can offload CIE at a time of his (or Cabinet's) choosing and the company has to trade legally within company laws etc. It simply is a company owned by an organ of state. That said, it is run in the interests of the State, or is meant to be.

monument · 08-02-2008 5:39pm

fast1 wrote: »

.....If most other cities can do it why can't Dublin? ....

I'm all for integrated transport nodes, but let me get this straight, you want all intercity, commuter, Dart, Luas, and metro rail services to stop at one central rail station?

Never mind about the cost, the cost vs benefit etc... finding the space anywhere in Dublin for this magic station that could accommodate all intercity and commuter services above ground would be near imposable.

And it is not something that happens in "ever other city on the planet". There are normally transport hubs which connect to each other.

fast1 wrote: »

Put all the platforms and rail lines underground until its out of the city.

Think about it for a second: intercity and commuter services can't have underground platforms in Dublin.

D.L.R. · 08-02-2008 8:14pm

Re Docklands station and its "temporary" status.

I always thought this was a bit screwy. Are we so stupidly rich now that we can afford to throw money at transient infrastructure? And for what? As I understand it, the site for the permanent station is only 100 metres or so from the current station. That leads me to ask:

1 - why can't the IC just integrate with the current station?
2 - why build a temp station if it is not suitable in the long run - ie why not acquire the land and build in the permanent location to begin with?

My conclusion is that this country is run by gangsters and that their interests are always put first. The rest of us are just feeding on the scraps. The best we can hope for is they eventually realise that a well planned rail network is actually in their interests too. It is incredible to me how regularly the greater good is forgotten when it comes to Dublin rail. Be it Luas BX, the Park tunnel or the Metro.

As for these rumblings about the IC, well for me it is the only piece of new railway on the drawing board that is truly first-class in its design. Everything else planned comes up short in one way or another. It simply MUST be built.

marmajam · 08-02-2008 10:21pm

D.L.R. wrote: »

Re Docklands station and its "temporary" status.

I always thought this was a bit screwy. Are we so stupidly rich now that we can afford to throw money at transient infrastructure? And for what? As I understand it, the site for the permanent station is only 100 metres or so from the current station. That leads me to ask:

1 - why can't the IC just integrate with the current station?
2 - why build a temp station if it is not suitable in the long run - ie why not acquire the land and build in the permanent location to begin with?

My conclusion is that this country is run by gangsters and that their interests are always put first. The rest of us are just feeding on the scraps. The best we can hope for is they eventually realise that a well planned rail network is actually in their interests too. It is incredible to me how regularly the greater good is forgotten when it comes to Dublin rail. Be it Luas BX, the Park tunnel or the Metro.

As for these rumblings about the IC, well for me it is the only piece of new railway on the drawing board that is truly first-class in its design. Everything else planned comes up short in one way or another. It simply MUST be built.

Yes they're all ludramauns. Lucky you are there to spot it after a few pints. It never occured to them to do as you suggest - just built temporary station for the hell of it. And certainly if they get those new amphibious DARTS that will swim through the Liffey they can EASILY make the permanent stn = the temporary stn. There's no end of whizz ideas that are obvious just by glancing out over the Royal canal.

DWCommuter · 08-02-2008 11:33pm

Re Docklands station and its "temporary" status.

I always thought this was a bit screwy. Are we so stupidly rich now that we can afford to throw money at transient infrastructure? And for what? As I understand it, the site for the permanent station is only 100 metres or so from the current station. That leads me to ask:

1 - why can't the IC just integrate with the current station?
2 - why build a temp station if it is not suitable in the long run - ie why not acquire the land and build in the permanent location to begin with?

My conclusion is that this country is run by gangsters and that their interests are always put first. The rest of us are just feeding on the scraps. The best we can hope for is they eventually realise that a well planned rail network is actually in their interests too. It is incredible to me how regularly the greater good is forgotten when it comes to Dublin rail. Be it Luas BX, the Park tunnel or the Metro.

As for these rumblings about the IC, well for me it is the only piece of new railway on the drawing board that is truly first-class in its design. Everything else planned comes up short in one way or another. It simply MUST be built.

That post contains a semblence of reality.

Yes they're all ludramauns. Lucky you are there to spot it after a few pints. It never occured to them to do as you suggest - just built temporary station for the hell of it. And certainly if they get those new amphibious DARTS that will swim through the Liffey they can EASILY make the permanent stn = the temporary stn. There's no end of whizz ideas that are obvious just by glancing out over the Royal canal.

That post is well.....ahem....humorous, irrelevent and very unlike the previous efforts from the same mind. Hmmmm.......

Another conspiracy theory in the making?

Anyway, as the proprietor of so much debate on this particular thread, I was indeed referring to the Interconnector. In my opinion the retention of Docklands post 10 years suggests a lack of belief for the IC at Government level. Its ambitious, expensive, revolutionary and badly needed. When has an Irish Government delivered a project with those facets, as promised?

If some feel comfortable calling me a conspiracy theorist, then go ahead. There are many here like me and all of them know a thing or two about the subject.

marmajam · 08-02-2008 11:43pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

That post contains a semblence of reality.

That post is well.....ahem....humorous, irrelevent and very unlike the previous efforts from the same mind. Hmmmm.......

Another conspiracy theory in the making?

Anyway, as the proprietor of so much debate on this particular thread, I was indeed referring to the Interconnector. In my opinion the retention of Docklands post 10 years suggests a lack of belief for the IC at Government level. Its ambitious, expensive, revolutionary and badly needed. When has an Irish Government delivered a project with those facets, as promised?

If some feel comfortable calling me a conspiracy theorist, then go ahead. There are many here like me and all of them know a thing or two about the subject.

Any person who was seriously privy to any schemes would not be on this forum.
There is a lot like you.

DWCommuter · 09-02-2008 12:14am

marmajam wrote: »

Any person who was seriously privy to any schemes would not be on this forum.
There is a lot like you.

I never said I was privy to anything. I cast my opinion based on a number of factors, in the economic, historical and political areas. In particular nearly 5 years at the coalface of this entire Interconnector subject.

I don't speak with careless abandon or just for the sake of it. My opinion may be wrong and I will gladly stand up and admit it if it turns out that way. However, you should accept that there is a growing number of interested parties that now doubt the possibility of the Interconnector and indeed a railway to Navan. Personally, I'd love to see both, but I have very little belief, due to the aforementioned criteria.

Just because I post here, it doesn't mean Im an imbecilic moaner with no knowledge of what Im talking about. Many posters here have an in dept knowledge of transport and share it.

marmajam · 09-02-2008 12:16am

DWCommuter wrote: »

I never said I was privy to anything. I cast my opinion based on a number of factors, in the economic, historical and political areas. In particular nearly 5 years at the coalface of this entire Interconnector subject.

I don't speak with careless abandon or just for the sake of it. My opinion may be wrong and I will gladly stand up and admit it if it turns out that way. However, you should accept that there is a growing number of interested parties that now doubt the possibility of the Interconnector and indeed a railway to Navan. Personally, I'd love to see both, but I have very little belief, due to the aforementioned criteria.

Just because I post here, it doesn't mean Im an imbecilic moaner with no knowledge of what Im talking about. Many posters here have an in dept knowledge of transport and share it.

Let's hope it gets built.
It almost certainly will.

[Article] Dempsey says Broadstone line to Luas, Docklands can stay open

Comments