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

[Article] Cullen set to approve new tracks and stations on Kildare rail route

  • 01-05-2006 7:45am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭


    Cullen set to approve new tracks and stations on Kildare rail route
    Tim O'Brien, Irish Times
    01/05/2006

    Iarnród Éireann's plan to spend €357 million on new railway stations and tracks on its Kildare route is expected to be approved by Minister for Transport Martin Cullen after he receives the public inquiry report into the project this month.


    The company is planning to double its tracks from two to four between Cherry Orchard and Hazelhatch, Co Kildare, in a move which would increase peak capacity from 600 passengers per hour to 4,800.

    However, the work, which involves the demolition and replacement of three bridges, will see extensive road closures for periods of up to six months. It will also involve minor speed restrictions and some reductions in the timetable during the three-year construction period.

    The new tracks will allow Iarnród Éireann to separate its intercity trains from its suburban service, while stations at Clondalkin and Cherry Orchard will be relocated to Fonthill Road and Park West respectively.

    New stations at Kishoge and Adamstown are also proposed alongside the upgrading of the station at Hazelhatch.

    The Kildare route is Iarnród Éireann's busiest intercity route, carrying services between the capital and places as diverse as Waterford and Mayo.

    Recent population growth in west Dublin, Kildare and Laois has seen demand for commuter services far outstrip what can be provided by the two existing lines.

    When the four lines are in place the current level of one inner-suburban service from Hazelhatch to Dublin per hour will be increased to four per hour.

    The outer suburban service beyond Hazelhatch is to be increased from three services per hour to four services per hour.

    Improvements to the inter-city services to Waterford, Cork, Tralee, Limerick, Galway, Westport and Ballina will increase from three to four services per hour.

    The track configuration is designed to accommodate the faster inter-city services on the outside tracks, with the suburban services using the middle lines.

    Funding for the €357 million project is to be eased by the donation of land from local authorities and property developers whose schemes could be expected to benefit from the service. It will also be helped by developers directly funding station enhancements and car parks. The balance is to be funded by the Department of Transport.

    Department sources told The Irish Times that the report of the public inquiry was "due", and that Mr Cullen was anxious to move ahead with the project as soon as possible. If he approves the scheme construction is expected to start in the autumn and be complete by January 2010.

    © The Irish Times


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 696 ✭✭✭Transport21 Fan


    The track configuration is designed to accommodate the faster inter-city services on the outside tracks, with the suburban services using the middle lines.

    I love the Kildare Route project and was delighted when CIE announced it. But I was also delighted about Docklands station as well for a long time...This above quote has set off alarm bells for me.

    Alright. I swear I am not just trying to nit-pick for the sake of it...but honest to God, I cannot think of any 4 track rail lines I have used were the suburban lines are in the middle and the express lines on the outside. This would defy operational logic in terms of fast loading and unloading of commuters at rush hour for starters.

    Express services use the central lines, while local/suburban services used the outer lines. This is what I recall from DB, FS, Long Island Rail Road, MetroNorth (NY), SNCF and MTA. I think BR is/was the same configuration too?

    The reason for the local/suburban services on the outer lines is fairly logical as there are more stations and stops, and island platforms only create extra tunnels and footbridges (in effect more hassle for rushing commuters) to exit the station. With local/suburban station the street is right outside, because the track are located on the outer lines. No footbridges, no hassle. They just walk out the station exit and onto the street.

    This could just be a typo and O'Brien got it wrong. But isn't it normal practice to have express lines ALWAYS in the middle of 4 track rail lines so Inter-City and Fast service can just go from points A-Z with the outer local lines taking care of the intermedtiate local station on the outer tracks?

    Express lines are from what I recall are always in the central tracks. Is this not the case and the reasons for it are sound and international best practice if you are building a true 4 track railways with intelligent local/express seperation and interoperatability?

    Please don't tell me this is about Spencer Dock pre-fab approach to save platform concrete and make the project come in under budget at the espense of busy commuter passengers having to walk unnecessary long distances over foot bridges to get out of station?

    No, surely CIE wouldn't go this far. Why? Simply because footbridges are cheaper and quicker to install than proper Express/Local platform arrangements on 4 track lines - that CIE would defy international best operating practice for fast/local services on 4 track lines to save money and bring the job in "on time and under budget"? Even I cannot not beleive they would do this. Please tell me this is a typo in the Times or there is a perfectly sound explaination.

    Even by CIE incredible low standards as exmplified by the Sherriff Street isloated pre-fab this would be the farce to put even that to shame and there would be no way out of it. It would work sure, but not like it should. Another halfassed, corner cutting exercise by CIE?


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,015 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    I was under theimpression that the southern pair of tracks would be IC with the northern pair local. The problem with having the outside pair as local is that for trains to head back from whence they came they must cross over two IC tracks. (destroying the available frequency to IC trains) This problem is eliminated by pairing the local tracks together, either in the centre or two the side (as I think IE are proposing).


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,819 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Hopefully it's a typo.

    It defies logic to have high-speed trains hurtling through stations packed with commuters passing by within a couple of feet of them as opposed to the trains being on the inside the tracks and further away from congested platforms.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    Its not unusual to have the slow tracks in the middle, not common but under the specific requirements of Kildare Dublin it makes a whole lot of sense

    In this case 2 independent rail lines are being built the outer tracks are fast the inner too slow, this means slow trains can turn back without having to cross in front of any trains. Adamstown and Hazelhatch have 3 suburban platforms to allow a totally conflict free operation. It also allows intercity and freight to use the slow lines if required

    Its all very very well thought out solution and avoids the timetabling mess that the other choices leave you with


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 45 Charles Darwin


    Maybe there is an issue with future electrification of the line. If they only intend electrifying for suburban services its probably sensible to have those two tracks side by side.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    Maybe there is an issue with future electrification of the line. If they only intend electrifying for suburban services its probably sensible to have those two tracks side by side.[/QUOTE
    Does this mean there has to be four different platforms at each station?:rolleyes:

    Also one of those bridges wouldnt be the M50 over the rial line, would it?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    There is an island platform at each station with the slow tracks on each side. The station buildings are in most cases built over the line on road bridges offering excellent accessibility

    Hazelhatch will have 5 platforms, 2 intercity and 3 suburban, one of which is a central turnback. Hazelhatch will be an interchange station in a similar way to Bray

    Only those 2 tracks designated suburban will be electrified and there is no requirement to electrify any section of track inwards from Inchicore

    The M50 bridge is wide enough and tall enough for 4 tracks and will require no modifications at all. All bridges put in since the 1980's will not require demolition

    Despite what the prophet of doom T21 fan says on a design basis the Kildare Route Project is well thought out an reflects both current and future needs, his earlier post is totally unfounded just because the track layout somewhere else is different doesn't imply it is the solution for Dublin. Walking distance to the platforms will be minimal and will be done in current best practice open with no dark corners or hidden areas its all open plan


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,107 ✭✭✭John R


    Seperated fast and slow lines is a very common configuration in the UK, Europe and elsewhere. Fast inner, slow outer is also very common and while probablt the least used I can think of several lines where the outer pair are fast as well.

    As long as conflicting movements are not necessary there is very little difference between any of them. There are slight advantages to all three in terms of cost of building conflict free operations, to have several turnback platforms or headshunts outer slow lines are a distinct disadvantage though so of all three this would be the worst option.

    The only slight niggle with the proposed layout is that southbound slow services going past Hazelhatch will have to cross the north fast line. A flyover would deal with that however.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    John R wrote:
    The only slight niggle with the proposed layout is that southbound slow services going past Hazelhatch will have to cross the north fast line. A flyover would deal with that however.
    No they don't

    Its
    Up Fast
    Up Slow
    Down Slow
    Down Fast

    So you can go from fast to slow in the same direction without any hassle


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 696 ✭✭✭Transport21 Fan


    Wll OK then they seems to be a sound reason for it with the overhead suspended stations. Fair enough, I am happy with that.

    Hey Marko aren't you the the prophet of doom who said the RPA were finished once the Luas was completed and well, just about a million other examples regarding the RPA's supposed incompetence including the possible destruction of human blood by Luas wires?

    I think I am still way behind you there in the phophet of doom stakes me oul china.

    BTW I asked a question in relation to the Tim O'Brien quote and did not make a statement on the matter, and I said that I hoped it was typo. And yes, I do not trust CIE after the 2900s on the Sligo route and Docklands pre-fab. CIE management can't be unconditionally trusted to do the right thing - they are a shower of chancers. I really don't know what more they have to do to prove this.

    BTW 2: your letter to Barry Kenny in the Indo was really good. Nice to see you appear to have discovered objective evaluation at last. Keep it up please.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 696 ✭✭✭Transport21 Fan


    Zebra3 wrote:
    high-speed trains hurtling through stations



    Deco the CIE union train driver only did speed when he was down the Grove in the late 70's.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 524 ✭✭✭DerekP11


    Ah...the oul Kildare route project....always a good excuse for a laugh.

    Personally, who cares what way the trains run. This way, that way, both ways, back ways, front ways. So what.

    As IE prepare to spend nearly 400million on this ego trip, they have to be coerced into Sunday services on the line after over 10 years and even then only dump people out at Heuston, because Inchicore drivers aren't allowed drive to Connolly (FACT) and Myles McHugh (the line manager) tells us that people from Kildare only want to go to the Jervis Centre on Sunday and sure Luas does the trick for them. He said that with a straight face, eventhough a show of hands at a public meeting in Newbridge proved him wrong. Your taxes pay this dudes wages.

    In the interim, IE have said in the Kildare press that they can't provide any additional services, but the new carraiges being built in Korea, will solve the problem. So I guess that means the Sligo 29000s may pay a visit to Kildare sometime in the future. Whoppee F**kin Doo. But Im not banking on it. More IE spin and bull.

    As for the infamous Park Tunnel, it remains unused for any type of scheduled passenger service from Kildare and IE are quite happy to ignore the potential and the densely populated areas of Blackhorse avenue and Cabra in the process. After much research over the last couple of months, I can reveal that IE, in the late 80s, proposed a new service from Clondalkin through the Tunnel, serving two new stations in the Cabra area, on the way to Connolly and Pearse. Political pressure for improvements along the Maynooth line scuppered this, initially, and the unions finally nailed it in the mid 90s.

    The Kildare route project is nothing but a high profile engineering "safe solution" , that will offer better operation, a prelude to the interconnector, and most importantly, a hassle free project for the unions. That is until electrification and the interconnector arrive. Then Deco and micko will cause holy war.

    Transport21fan aka T Sheridan, coined the following phrase in P11 regarding the Park Tunnel 3 years ago......."the best kept rail transport secret in Europe". I'd like to update it and I think He'll agree.

    "The Phoenix Park Tunnel is the best kept rail transport secret in SIPTU and the NBRU."

    Its amazing how a little stretch of line can hold the entire Dublin network to ransom. Only in Ireland.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,107 ✭✭✭John R


    MarkoP11 wrote:
    No they don't

    Its
    Up Fast
    Up Slow
    Down Slow
    Down Fast

    So you can go from fast to slow in the same direction without any hassle

    Yes of course, sorry for the mix-up. Was thinking of a layout elsewhere that needed access for a branch line.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 696 ✭✭✭Transport21 Fan


    More prophet of doom (in waiting) stuff. Well more Angela Landsbury in Murder She Wrote. But this whole Kildare route for some reason leaves me uneasy in terms of commuter trains crossing express lines and possible conflicts.

    Are there any detailed maps on line of the Kildare Route project in terms of station design? This is still niggling at me. Especially in regards to Adamstown. The only drawing I have seen of that station is one with the passenger building adjacent to the outer tracks next to the development. How realistic is this drawing or is this just artistic licence? And what's the story with the bay platform there? Won't local commuter trains have to cut across the main fast lines to reach the bay platform if is not located between the local and express lines?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 696 ✭✭✭Transport21 Fan


    DerekP11 wrote:
    "The Phoenix Park Tunnel is the best kept rail transport secret in SIPTU and the NBRU."

    Works for me.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11



    Are there any detailed maps on line of the Kildare Route project in terms of station design? This is still niggling at me. Especially in regards to Adamstown. The only drawing I have seen of that station is one with the passenger building adjacent to the outer tracks next to the development. How realistic is this drawing or is this just artistic licence? And what's the story with the bay platform there? Won't local commuter trains have to cut across the main fast lines to reach the bay platform if is not located between the local and express lines?

    The full plans where on public view for several weeks at advertised locations including Heuston, copies where available for purchase from IE and I got a full copy on CD, it contains 400Mb of documents

    And yes the turnback platfrom is between the two slow lines in Adamstown, as is the one in Hazelhatch

    T21 fan you might want to read up on all this before yet another prophecy


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 696 ✭✭✭Transport21 Fan


    You're a gas man for putting words in my mouth Marko. I never asked about Hazelhatch - I asked about Admastown. There is absolutely nothing wrong with me asking these questions about the KRP on an internet message board. If that makes me a prophet of doom then so be it. CIE managerment are chancers. I don't feel any need to unconditionally respect them for how they plan and develop public transport solution - their past record would suggest otherwise.

    Cheers for the answer anyway.

    How many people here think the KRP like ever other great solution which IE come up with will fail to live up to the promises? Not many I bet. It's patriotic for Irish people to deeply distrust CIE.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    It would be illegal not to follow the plans as approved. In fact the design work and planning is done by a 3rd party just like how the RPA get everything designed.

    I'd post the Adamstown graphic but is not very clear as its on a section boundary and of course Adamstown station is not part of the KRP it had pre-existing permission

    It by no means 100% perfect there are some issues but overall the KRP achieves what it was mean't to achieve, the issues with it are mainly feature and scope issues which don't have any impact on the service most of those issues are separate projects anyway funded in T21

    Its only a waste of time to critise something for faults which doesn't actually exist.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    I thought the idea was the 4 line layout was temporary and would be changed when the tunnel was built?


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    T21, attack the post, not the poster.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,917 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Especially in regards to Adamstown. The only drawing I have seen of that station is one with the passenger building adjacent to the outer tracks next to the development. How realistic is this drawing or is this just artistic licence? And what's the story with the bay platform there? Won't local commuter trains have to cut across the main fast lines to reach the bay platform if is not located between the local and express lines?
    AFAIK when Adamstown station opens (early 2007?) the two existing lines will be the intercity and commuter up and down lines respectively, but when the KRP is finished they will become the two up lines and the two new ones will be down. (Or perhaps the other way around - but in any case they are adding the two new ones to one side, not one on either side.)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,829 ✭✭✭JackieChan


    I see work has started on the train station.
    Currently some foundation work has been done and a footbridge installed.
    Along with the construction of the link road nothing much else has happened. No buildings have been started near the station. Although there are still appartments going up adjacent to the link road.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    The plans for Adamstown goes like this

    Station is built and open sometime 2007, initially Kildare bound trains will call at a platform on the existing down (Cork) line, this platform is on the opposite side of the main Adamstown development for reference

    Dublin bound will call at the southern face of the Island platform

    Depending on how the scheduling pans out a further temporary platform may be required on the new up fast line

    When complete the layout will be
    Temporary Platform
    Up Fast
    Up Slow
    Island Platform with turnback platform at city end
    Down Slow
    Down Fast
    Platform


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    How does up/down relate to towards/away from Dublin? I can never remember how that goes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,015 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    dowlingm wrote:
    How does up/down relate to towards/away from Dublin? I can never remember how that goes.
    Up is towards Dublin, Down is away from Dublin. So you go UP to Dublin from Dundalk etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    And if you were going to Down? :p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    Victor wrote:
    And if you were going to Down? :p

    From Dublin you'd take the down Down down and on the return journey, the up Down up. Simple really ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,015 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    BendiBus wrote:
    From Dublin you'd take the down Down down and the up Down up. Simple really ;)
    Wouldn't it be the 'down Down up' and the 'up Dublin down' :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭mackerski


    Dunno about all that, but I was on a train full of Down GAA supporters once, and they were all shouting "up Down, up Down".

    Dermot


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    murphaph wrote:
    Wouldn't it be the 'down Down up' and the 'up Dublin down' :D

    I've clarified my post. You never refer to the up Dublin, as you could be coming up from anywhere (all other places being down - including Down).


Advertisement