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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

[Article] Dublin Port Tunnel height will not change

  • 21-10-2004 2:58pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭


    http://www.rte.ie/business/2004/1021/dublin.html
    Dublin Port Tunnel height will not change
    October 21, 2004 13:26

    Transport Minister Martin Cullen says the operational height of the Dublin Port Tunnel will not change. This follows extensive consultation and detailed examination of three reports, the Minister said.

    He said the decision was based 'primarily on safety grounds', but that cost and time delays to the opening of the tunnel were also factors. The Government could have be facing an additional cost of at least €33m and up to €65m and seven months delay or more to the completion of the project if the tunnel was made higher.

    The Minister said the options for increasing the height of the tunnel had been fully considered by the National Roads, Authority, NMI Consortium and by independent consultants Atkins. Dublin City Council also considered the matter and it was also discussed at Cabinet.

    He added that the HGV Management Plan for Dublin City will be published next month.

    The Transport Department will also be publishing, for consultation and public comment, proposals in relation to the imposition of maximum height for vehicles in Ireland, the Minister concluded.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,457 ✭✭✭dmeehan


    it would be a lot cheaper (for the govt) to ban trucks over a certain height, rather than raise the tunnel

    from a selfish taxpayer point if view i know which i'd prefer


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 469 ✭✭narommy


    dmeehan wrote:
    it would be a lot cheaper (for the govt) to ban trucks over a certain height, rather than raise the tunnel

    from a selfish taxpayer point if view i know which i'd prefer


    I agree.

    Also those super cubes are intimidating to other road users (but i know that they have probably gone through certain safety hoops)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    http://www.thepost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-869334445-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FNews.asp
    Sun, Oct 31, 2004
    Engineer debunks Cullen tunnel remarks
    24/10/04 00:00
    By Niamh Connolly

    A leading transport engineer has claimed that statistics used by Martin Cullen, Minister for Transport, to justify the decision not to raise the height of Dublin Port Tunnel are inaccurate.

    Cormac Rabbitt, a transport engineer, made a formal submission on behalf of the Transport Umbrella Group (TUG) to Atkins Consultants and the transport minister. He challenged details cited by Cullen in a press statement last week.

    Cullen announced his decision not to raise the tunnel's height to the standard 5metres used for motorway bridges. He cited safety concerns, as well as the cost of up to €65million and a seven-month delay associated with raising the height.

    However, Rabbitt rejected Cullen's statement that "bridges and other structures on the motorways and national roads are not designed to cater for vehicles higher than the current tunnel height'' of 4.6 metres.

    "All the bridges on motorways and national roads built over the last 20 years and planned over the next 10 years are to a standard that facilitate the height sought for the tunnel," he said. "This tunnel is being built 0.4 of a metre lower than the standard being built by the National Roads Authority."

    Rabbitt also challenged the proposed width of the tunnel and height of proposed kerbs.

    Cullen said last week that it was "intuitively apparent that wider traffic lanes offer greater vehicle separation than narrower lanes''. Rabbitt's submission for the TUG sought a seven metre road width for two lanes, which is the standard on European roads and tunnels.

    "All the standards and practice throughout Europe use the 3.5 metre lane, and two lanes would be seven metres against 7.5 metres proposed," Rabbitt said. "When we gave the facts and figures into the minister and Atkins, we expected that they would consider what we submitted."

    Rabbitt also said that failing to raise the tunnel's height would lead to more trucks on the road and an extra 34,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a year.

    A spokesman for the minister said his decision was based on the Atkins report, and it was this report that was quoted in the press statement.

    "Mr Rabbitt may not agree with the decision but our view is that it needed to be made and it was made predominantly for safety reasons."


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 369 ✭✭weehamster


    The average Road tunnel height in Europe is 4m. The Port Tunnel will be 4.65m. I have search the Internet and I still haven’t found a single Road Tunnel in europe that has a height of at least 4.95m, which is the height required to accommodate Supercube trucks.

    This whole debate was started by economist, Dr Sean Barrett and the Transport Umbrella Group he founded who are mainly made up of business. It was in their interest as Supercubes hold more goods than standard trailers and therefore making more money for them. Oh yea, by the way, Dr Sean Barrett advised the government that is would be a very bad idea to build the east-coast DART line and the LUAS lines.Humm…. :confused:


Advertisement