DART+ (DART Expansion)

DWCommuter · 27-11-2010 1:46am

Furet wrote: »

Great post. I wonder if you could share your thoughts on the above sentence a little more. I agree with it by the way, and I have my own suspicions as to why it is the case, but I'd like to read your views on it.

"Irish politicians just don't do public transport".

Thanks for the compliment Furet. In sharing my thoughts on the comment I made above, there is no other option bar the direct route. While people may disagree and have their own opinions I, personally, make this comment repeatedly because I believe it is of the utmost importance to the development of public transport in Ireland. So here we go...

The vast majority of TDs in Dail Eireann are from rural backgrounds. Since the foundation of the state, this has been the way and through no real fault of its own. Because of this many many TDs do not understand the reality of living, working and commuting in a city like Dublin. In fact the majority of them have no historic comprehension of what its like.

After the demise of railways in rural Ireland the car was king. In fact in many cases it was the car that sentenced the same railways to death. Once rural Ireland could afford cars, it made the one off house viable and the small boreens became dependent on the car as the houses were built along them. Meanwhile Dublin was experiencing the same car culture but without the current gridlock we know. However the amount of cars soon increased and the roads couldn't cope. Our answer was to build bigger and more roads because our political establishment couldn't understand the concept of how railways could assist. They were seen as a long distance means of transport and not as a means of commuting. This is rooted in the rural mentality of the time. Perhaps the biggest evidence of this was the closure of the harcourt street line in 1959. The route subsumed to the car and it was accepted that the car could handle it and another road based form of transport, the Bus, could fullfill the service the railway provided to those that used it. This was a rural mentality being applied to a growing city and ultimately it failed. Its worth considering that rogue bus operators in rural Ireland served the boreens and took many passengers away from the rail lines that existed at the time. This "solution" was adopted by TDs because they knew nothing else. It wasn't necessarily wrong in rural Ireland, but in Dublin, the bus was never going to be the saviour. Yet 50 years of bus dependency in the capital has created this "bus culture"

As the car started to dominate and money was spent on roads, Irish politicians simply adpoted the bus as being an adequate solution to a public transport crisis as opposed to railways. (which were deemed costly based on estimates of running branch lines in rural Ireland) The concept of commuter lines just never occurred to them due to the population density of the country and the fact that its predominately rural in nature.

In more recent times, I believe that this mindset has been steadfastly dictated by history. Since the massive closure of branch line railways in Ireland circa 1960 and the replacement of services by bus, Irish politicians see railways as a drain on public finances and the bus as the cheaper option. Invest in roads and buses and you kill two birds with the one stone. But we know that it didn't work out like that.

But ultimately I stand by the opinion that Irish Politicians have no real ambition to deliver rail based transport solutions in Dublin because they havent a fcuking clue what its like trying to get around a city on a regular basis. If we examine closely what they did fund in Dublin (and Cork) then we quickly come to the conclusion that it was done (relatively cheaply) for the benefit of housing development. (Midleton/KRP/Pace etc.) The big money projects such as DU (like its DART predecessor in the 70s) that deliver real benefits for actual commuters are simply beyond a politician that was raised seeing the train as a means to going to Dublin for a match or Christmas shopping.

Transportuser09 · 29-11-2010 4:02am

DWCommuter wrote: »

"Irish politicians just don't do public transport".
The vast majority of TDs in Dail Eireann are from rural backgrounds. Since the foundation of the state, this has been the way and through no real fault of its own. Because of this many many TDs do not understand the reality of living, working and commuting in a city like Dublin. In fact the majority of them have no historic comprehension of what its like.

Not neccessarily. In the last few decades, even the 'culchies' will have experience in commuting to Dublin, sharing that same gridlock with city dwellers. I think the emphasis on using the private car (how many TDs actually use public transport?) has more to with it than them being from a rural background.

DWCommuter wrote: »

After the demise of railways in rural Ireland the car was king. In fact in many cases it was the car that sentenced the same railways to death. Once rural Ireland could afford cars, it made the one off house viable and the small boreens became dependent on the car as the houses were built along them. Meanwhile Dublin was experiencing the same car culture but without the current gridlock we know. However the amount of cars soon increased and the roads couldn't cope. Our answer was to build bigger and more roads because our political establishment couldn't understand the concept of how railways could assist. They were seen as a long distance means of transport and not as a means of commuting. This is rooted in the rural mentality of the time. Perhaps the biggest evidence of this was the closure of the harcourt street line in 1959. The route subsumed to the car and it was accepted that the car could handle it and another road based form of transport, the Bus, could fullfill the service the railway provided to those that used it. This was a rural mentality being applied to a growing city and ultimately it failed. Its worth considering that rogue bus operators in rural Ireland served the boreens and took many passengers away from the rail lines that existed at the time. This "solution" was adopted by TDs because they knew nothing else. It wasn't necessarily wrong in rural Ireland, but in Dublin, the bus was never going to be the saviour. Yet 50 years of bus dependency in the capital has created this "bus culture"

As the car started to dominate and money was spent on roads, Irish politicians simply adpoted the bus as being an adequate solution to a public transport crisis as opposed to railways. (which were deemed costly based on estimates of running branch lines in rural Ireland) The concept of commuter lines just never occurred to them due to the population density of the country and the fact that its predominately rural in nature.

The emphasis on the road based transportl happened (to a lesser extent perhaps) in the UK.

DWCommuter wrote: »

In more recent times, I believe that this mindset has been steadfastly dictated by history. Since the massive closure of branch line railways in Ireland circa 1960 and the replacement of services by bus, Irish politicians see railways as a drain on public finances and the bus as the cheaper option. Invest in roads and buses and you kill two birds with the one stone. But we know that it didn't work out like that.

Similar rural closures happened in the UK, yet their major cities have adequately developed transport systems.

DWCommuter wrote: »

But ultimately I stand by the opinion that Irish Politicians have no real ambition to deliver rail based transport solutions in Dublin because they havent a fcuking clue what its like trying to get around a city on a regular basis. If we examine closely what they did fund in Dublin (and Cork) then we quickly come to the conclusion that it was done (relatively cheaply) for the benefit of housing development. (Midleton/KRP/Pace etc.) The big money projects such as DU (like its DART predecessor in the 70s) that deliver real benefits for actual commuters are simply beyond a politician that was raised seeing the train as a means to going to Dublin for a match or Christmas shopping.

You may have a point on the housing development thing, but it may come back to hit them in the face looking at the likes of Hansfield station and some of the Luas extension stops.

I'm not too sure though about theory that the country politicians don't know what's needed to get around the city. If anything the development of rail services around the city has been better than on the provincial routes. The original aborted plans for the Dart indicates that they did (and do) have some inclination of what is needed. The problem all along has been getting it implemented. Likewise the Luas and Metro schemes have tetered out in fits and starts for the last decade and a half, if they'd been implemented in the so-called boom times we'd have them by now instead being up in the air still. As you've said in other posts we're stuck with a poorly integrated system STILL. Fair enough funding wasn't great in the 1980s but if our supposed leaders had made a decision and got the ball rolling while the country was in reasonable financial shape we'd have a proper Dublin network by now. But I don't think the 'culchie politician' is much of a factor here.

Empire o de Sun · 29-11-2010 7:08pm

I have to solution for you as to why politicans love busses and motorways.

Railways take longer to build and plan and get up an running, usually longer than you average Dáil and are therefore useless to our TDs when going up for election.

Motorways are quicker, use more material (quarries), look impressive, and maps look better.

Wild Bill · 29-11-2010 11:02pm

Empire o de Sun wrote: »

I have to solution for you as to why politicans love busses and motorways.

Railways take longer to build and plan and get up an running, usually longer than you average Dáil and are therefore useless to our TDs when going up for election.

Motorways are quicker, use more material (quarries), look impressive, and maps look better.

I'm a great supporter of commuter rail; less so of inter-city. But this isn't motorways v. Dart/Luas etc. We need both.

The notion that motorways are quicker to plan is risible - most have been in planning for a decade before they were built. In the case of the M50 parts were 30 years in planning!

DWCommuter · 30-11-2010 6:22pm

Transportuser09 wrote: »

Not neccessarily. In the last few decades, even the 'culchies' will have experience in commuting to Dublin, sharing that same gridlock with city dwellers. I think the emphasis on using the private car (how many TDs actually use public transport?) has more to with it than them being from a rural background.

Okay lets leave the term "culchies" out of the debate. Im talking about TDs from rural Ireland and the mindset they can bring to a Government and the Dail in general when it comes to public transport. Rural Ireland is more car dependent. Cities are less car dependent and rely on continuing upgrading of public transport infrastructure. A person from car dependent rural Ireland is already predisposed to using a car due the dispersed nature of housing. Even towns in rural Ireland (until quite recently) were dependent on trade from people living in randomly built houses in the surrounding countryside. The building of large estates in these towns brought traffic chaos because it wasn't combined with public transport infrastructure. But thats a separate argument.

Similar rural closures happened in the UK, yet their major cities have adequately developed transport systems.

You are comparing chalk with cheese. The amount of urban areas in the UK vastly outnumbers those in Ireland. We are a predominantly rural country. The urban mindset and understanding of urban needs is much more developed in the UK.

I'm not too sure though about theory that the country politicians don't know what's needed to get around the city. If anything the development of rail services around the city has been better than on the provincial routes. The original aborted plans for the Dart indicates that they did (and do) have some inclination of what is needed. The problem all along has been getting it implemented. Likewise the Luas and Metro schemes have tetered out in fits and starts for the last decade and a half, if they'd been implemented in the so-called boom times we'd have them by now instead being up in the air still. As you've said in other posts we're stuck with a poorly integrated system STILL. Fair enough funding wasn't great in the 1980s but if our supposed leaders had made a decision and got the ball rolling while the country was in reasonable financial shape we'd have a proper Dublin network by now. But I don't think the 'culchie politician' is much of a factor here.

The original DART plans had nothing to do with politicians. But the failure to implement them was unquestionably the fault of politicians. Your point about the development of Dublin rail services compared to provincial rail services is not a valid argument against the theory that rural TDs lack the intellectual ability to understand the importance of public transport. In fact it strengthens the case. One only has to look at the state of public transport in rural Ireland and the closure of the likes of the Rosslare - Waterford rail line if you need any evidence to support my theory. They don't care about rural Ireland either. The car is king and a mickeymouse bus service is usually flung at a problem. What Dublin has struggled to get so far (and is far from enough) was borne out of a desperate necessity rather than enthusiastic politicians.

My theory may seem bizarre to some, but it is conceivably possible that one off housing in rural Ireland lead to a car dependent culture and the creation of a mindset that has permeated its way up through the ranks of senior civil servants and TDs. Thereby inflicting our cities, especially Dublin, with outrageous housing policies and car dependency because public transport wasnt funded enough to help it keep pace. Dublins one off car dependent housing are the sprawling estates built in the GDA. Its as socially and environmentally destructive and lacking in sustainable public transport options as the three bed bungalow up a lane in Connemara. The sad irony is that DU was designed to bring a tangible public transport option to some of these areas. We were wrong to build them. But theyre built and we need to service them and ease the pressure on our roads. Whats done is done. Then we can address MN and some high density development to support it. We cannot have a drawbridge mentality and surrender this sprawl to the car.

Transportuser09 · 30-11-2010 11:23pm

Fair enough. I just think the car-orientated mindset (indeed a factor) is a trait of TDs in general, regardless of what part of the country they come from.

DWCommuter · 01-12-2010 12:27am

Transportuser09 wrote: »

Fair enough. I just think the car-orientated mindset (indeed a factor) is a trait of TDs in general, regardless of what part of the country they come from.

The car orientated trait is one that is ingrained in all people in the modern world. Why wouldn't it be? The car is an instant mode of transport outside our doors. But my point is not about car culture Vs public transport. Its about its role and influence on political decision makers in our country and how they fail to prioritise public transport. The make up of our parliament is based on a majority of TDs that do not come from urban/city backgrounds. So where they come from is hugely important.

dowlingm · 03-12-2010 5:27pm

as far as electric or hybrid transportation goes, priority should be given to vehicles with highest utilisation:

Rail electric: Maynooth line (probably not Kildare until DU happens)
Road hybrid/electric: buses, all new city taxis, Dublin councils' work vehicles as powertrains become available, incentives for private delivery vehicles (dedicated loading bays etc)

In short - private vehicles purely used for commuting (say 15-20hrs use a week) should not be incentivised to be made hybrid or plug-in. That's just another subsidy for the SIMI to increase the value of imports into Ireland.

FF and proud · 03-12-2010 8:55pm

murphaph wrote: »

New propoganda here but it really whets the appetite.....who knows if we'll have the nerve to do it though....

Sure what does Dublin need one of them underground trains for, sure half of the country has substandard roads with holes in them and yet we are just supposed to ignore them to fund vanity projects up in the big smoke? Put another luas line in, Dublin is hardly New York or London now is it needin an underground.

Transportuser09 · 04-12-2010 12:34am

In fairness a metro system is probably better geared towards carrying airport passengers with lots of luggage, etc... Aside from that though I am beginning to wonder if a luas system would make more sense in terms of having as standard a transport system as possible. Anyway the horse has long left the stable in this case so let's make the most of it.

As has been pointed out the RPA seem to have already committed more to the project than IÉ have to DU so it makes sense to go ahead. I also believe MN serves more new areas. However IÉ have spent a lot of money on the DU project and I would hope that after 2014 this does get the go ahead. Whilst I think MN opens up new areas it has to be said DU has some worthwhile merits.

Wild Bill · 04-12-2010 2:44am

Having seen the Luas Green Line extension to Cherrywood canceled for two days because of the snow I'd not be inclined to recommend anything overground,

'Pathetic' hardly begins to describe this toy railway. :mad:

We had buses driving parallel to the line today on cleared roads while the abandoned €100 million Luas track remained covered in pristine snow.

Figure that.

bilibob · 04-12-2010 4:03am

FF and proud wrote: »

Sure what does Dublin need one of them underground trains for, sure half of the country has substandard roads with holes in them and yet we are just supposed to ignore them to fund vanity projects up in the big smoke? Put another luas line in, Dublin is hardly New York or London now is it needin an underground.

Your right on one point, Dublin is not London or New York. Cars can move around London and New York quickly. In Dublin they can't! The traffic situation, especially on the quays is getting worse- especially with the new speed limits. If we ever want to get Dublin and the country back making money, It has to be efficient to get to work and shop and LIVE in the city, not for hours in the car. The city is screaming for a proper rapid transport system.

Regarding the roads, the vast majorty of areas have seen huge improvements in road access between motorways and bypasses etc. Why should the government spend millions repairing some boreen for a few people when building a (self funding) proper transit system would serve hundreds of thousands of people, and ease up the congestion on roads for those who really need to drive.

Pete_Cavan · 04-12-2010 2:06pm

FF and proud wrote: »

Sure what does Dublin need one of them underground trains for, sure half of the country has substandard roads with holes in them and yet we are just supposed to ignore them to fund vanity projects up in the big smoke? Put another luas line in, Dublin is hardly New York or London now is it needin an underground.

Yip that settles it, you are a troll. This is the guy who was on the thread about one off houses saying no one can tell him where to live, yet he is here now complaining about substandard country roads "with holes in them" and giving out about "vanity projects up in the big smoke"! It is taxes for Dublin that pay for all the services and infrastructure he has in the middle of nowhere. It is that kind of mentality that is ruining this country.

weehamster · 04-12-2010 2:40pm

Yip that settles it, you are a troll.

I think the user-name really says it all. :cool:

Aard · 04-12-2010 4:05pm

Transportuser09 wrote: »

Aside from that though I am beginning to wonder if a luas system would make more sense in terms of having as standard a transport system as possible.

It would be possible to brand it as "Luas" or "Dart", while keeping everything else about it exactly the same. People won't necessarily notice that the gauge/vehicles are different.

DWCommuter · 04-12-2010 11:30pm

Transportuser09 wrote: »

Aside from that though I am beginning to wonder if a luas system would make more sense in terms of having as standard a transport system as possible.

Its an interesting point, but luas is representative of failure on the part of our politicians to fully grasp and fund public transport projects. Anyone with a serious interest in Dublin transport, knows that the luas was in actual fact, a watered down version of the original DART plan. (Both initiated by CIE) It was then taken from CIE hands and placed as the incentive for the launch of the RPA. I've already mentioned the defragmentation of Dublins public transport and the RPA are merely just another example. I once heard them quoted as the "bastard child of CIE". Believe it or not this is very true, because the RPA was built out of the CIE light rail office. But why? Because despite the states insistence of leaving CIE in place, there is an inherent dislike/distrust of them, but no balls to do anything about it. Furthermore in the original Transport act that created the RPA, they were entrusted with building the interconnector and the railway to Navan. The mind boggles.

There is so much political interference devoid of real intention that it beggars belief and leads to further defragmenation of Dublins public transport. The RPA are now to be merged with the NRA. For what? To save on office space? We now have the RPA/NRA/NTA/CIE (with it subs) and still nothing gets done efficiently. Whats the point of the NTA so? And why did it become the NTA in the first place? How did the proposed DTA become the NTA?

What a ****ing mess and the sooner those interested wise up to it, then the better the chance that eventually a lobby of sorts will be created to do something about it. The media are useless and politicians don't care. Its the only available option.

Transportuser09 · 05-12-2010 3:34am

Exactly. The development of the Dublin rail systems has been rather wishy-washy to say the least. We're left with a part Dart/Commuter (fair enough the tracks were there anyway), part tram, part metro. What other country would leave us with a tram line that 'may be converted to metro at a later date'. As DWCommuter points out most of the lines should have been done long ago under the original Dart plan. That didn't go ahead, so you would at least expect to go ahead with a standardised system for any further new projects, not this a bit of metro, bit of tram approach. But these are same powers brought us two new tram lines not connected because of seemingly terminal indecision.

Transportuser09 · 05-12-2010 3:38am

Aard wrote: »

It would be possible to brand it as "Luas" or "Dart", while keeping everything else about it exactly the same. People won't necessarily notice that the gauge/vehicles are different.

What I meant was if instead of building both tram and metro lines and decided on one costs could be saved, standardised vehicle types, possibly fewer depots, more consolidated administration, etc... Obviously the heavy rail systems are seperate but it would have made more sense to choose one type of system for new light rail projects. But anyway it's too late for that now.

Telchak · 05-12-2010 1:28pm

Settling on a standard system for any future lines could just prove ridiculously expensive. There are some areas in Dublin that currently, and will only ever need a tram. There are however areas that could use something with a lot more capacity, but building another heavy rail Dart line would be massive overkill. The technical details of the system have a great effect on price, but they don't effect the average commuter. S/he just needs to get on a reliable rail service that goes a decent speed for a decent ticket price. Braqnding an ticket integration are the only things that need to be standardised, having a few types of rail specification is irrelevant to most people.

Pete_Cavan · 05-12-2010 1:41pm

Transportuser09 wrote: »

Exactly. The development of the Dublin rail systems has been rather wishy-washy to say the least. We're left with a part Dart/Commuter (fair enough the tracks were there anyway), part tram, part metro. What other country would leave us with a tram line that 'may be converted to metro at a later date'. As DWCommuter points out most of the lines should have been done long ago under the original Dart plan. That didn't go ahead, so you would at least expect to go ahead with a standardised system for any further new projects, not this a bit of metro, bit of tram approach. But these are same powers brought us two new tram lines not connected because of seemingly terminal indecision.

The lack of a standardised system is not an issue IMO. I dont see any advanatges in getting off a train to get onto another train, as opposed to getting off a train and getting onto a tram/metro.

The real issue (as DWCommuter pointed out) is the lack of cohesion in the agencies charged with delivering our public transport system. Merging RPA and NRA achieves nothing if CIE and IE are not touched. The NRA has actually become quite efficient (by this country's standards at least) at what it does and should not be allowed to become infected by the RPA. If all the public transport bodies (bus and rail) were merged we would have an authority that would be focused on meeting the needs of commuters. Instead of the current situation where RPA and CIE compete for funding and the result is DU is two years behind MN. Also integrated ticketing would have been a priority and no doubt would have been a lot cheaper.

Transportuser09 · 06-12-2010 1:30am

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The real issue (as DWCommuter pointed out) is the lack of cohesion in the agencies charged with delivering our public transport system. Merging RPA and NRA achieves nothing if CIE and IE are not touched. The NRA has actually become quite efficient (by this country's standards at least

Exactly, there is little cohesion. If the various planners and agencies spent half the time they did chopping and changine plans without any result we would have had alot of these new lines up and running before the financial crisis. Now it looks like we'll be even longer waiting for them. You really have to ask why it takes decades to fully implement these things.

bilibob · 07-12-2010 4:46pm

Did anybody hear if they mentioned anything in the budget about the shelving of Dart Underground or perhaps cutbacks in other Transport 21 projects?

spacetweek · 07-12-2010 6:30pm

bilibob wrote: »

Did anybody hear if they mentioned anything in the budget about the shelving of Dart Underground or perhaps cutbacks in other Transport 21 projects?

Looked, can't see anything.

mgmt · 07-12-2010 8:57pm

bilibob wrote: »

Did anybody hear if they mentioned anything in the budget about the shelving of Dart Underground or perhaps cutbacks in other Transport 21 projects?

Someone on RTE radio said delayed for at least 5 years. Probably his guesstimate.

DWCommuter · 07-12-2010 10:52pm

The specific transport spend will unfold over the next 24 hours.

EDIT: Apologies, just read the DOT release. Its detailed enough and in another thread here.

DWCommuter · 08-12-2010 1:02pm

DART Underground is off the radar. The more optimistic will say its included in the "other transport projects".

We will continue to spend on vital public transport programmes such as railway safety, traffic management, accessibility and real time passenger information across the country. The planning and procurement processes for Metro North will progress in 2011 and enabling works will also begin next year. In Dublin the Luas extension to Citywest will be complete in 2011 and a new public transport bridge at Marlborough Street will commence construction. Planning will continue on a range of other public transport projects including Luas BXD, the cross-city link, Luas extensions to Lucan and Bray, and Metro West. Funding is available to commence construction on the Navan Line in 2013. Money will also be provided for the purchase of new buses for PSO services. Some initial planning and design for Phase 2 of the Western Rail Corridor will also happen next year.

Judgement Day · 08-12-2010 2:53pm

As long as the Burma Road goes ahead. :rolleyes:

spacetweek · 08-12-2010 3:22pm

The Navan Line Phase 2 - that's a surprise. I'd genuinely forgotten about it.

Transportuser09 · 08-12-2010 5:23pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

As long as the Burma Road goes ahead. :rolleyes:

The Burma Road (Coolooney-Claremorris for those who don't know) was never part of the WRC reopening plan. To be honest I can't even see Tuam-Claremorris going ahead.

Jack Noble · 08-12-2010 6:06pm

I wouldn't get too hung up about Dart Underground not being funded next year as it's now only before An Bord Pleanala and, based on how long ABP took with Metro North (26 months), it's unlikely we'll see the Railway Order approved before mid-2012, possibly longer. If ABP make any significant changes that may require another RO or other redesign, it will be highly unlikely that DartU will be ready for construction before mid- to late-2013, at the earliest.

This is really a decision for the next government and supporters really should be now working on lobbying Fine Gael and Labour TDs, candidates and potential ministers to get DartU back on the agenda and into the four-year plan.

Dart U has its supporters in the senior ranks of both parties in the same way Metro North does and these people need to be lobbied.

It also has opponents, including Labour's own transport spokesman, Joe Costello (Dublin Central) - who is coming under serious pressure from his constituents in East Wall. He hit out at its inclusion in the Four-Year Plan (before we all discovered 'the tunnel section' wasn't in said plan) and he is due to make a presentation to the ABP Oral Hearings on DartU - and I'll bet it won't be in favour of the project. He needs to be lobbied too, although it's highly unlikely he'll be transport minister in any new govt.

It looks like Metro North will now go ahead, if the PPP figures stack up, and this could be a positive thing for DartU as MetroN cannot possibly fulfill its potential without interchanging with Dart. This means DartU will be essential and must be built. That needs to be emphasised if and when Metro construction begins. FG and Lab must be persuaded to back the project in government. FF and SF will hardly then oppose it if they do seeing as FF launched the project and SF support such public investments.

DART+ (DART Expansion)

Comments