DART Underground

okioffice84

Some lady from Iarnród Eireann called to my door today to talk about the DART Underground although I missed her (she left a note)
I looked up the route around the proposed Christchurch stop and noticed the proposed route is due to go beneath my apartment building.
Does anyone have any advice on what to expect if works do go ahead and what questions should i ask at any public consultation.....

Stupido

if you are in Christchurch the tunnels could be 40m below ground.

Don't think it will have much effect.

okioffice84

Could there be any issues with subsidence/property damage at that depth?

Stupido

go up to Croke Park for the Metro North Oral Hearing...I am sure there will be experts talking about it for that project

sdanseo

Stupido wrote: »

go up to Croke Park for the Metro North Oral Hearing...I am sure there will be experts talking about it for that project

Metro North is a different project.

This is re the DART interconnector.

Stupido

hmmmmm......are they not also examining the same issues?

G_R

sdonn_1 wrote: »

Metro North is a different project.

This is re the DART interconnector.

they're both underground trains, disruption caused by one cant be that different to disruption caused by the other

krugerrand

As far as I can see, the project is going ahead. Personally, I think it's a great idea.

There will be some public consultation meetings this month.

Iarnrod Eireann states at http://www.irishrail.ie/projects/dart_underground.asp:
The public consultation meetings will outline to communities and businesses along the route the benefits of the project, and the impacts on these areas during construction. They are scheduled to take place as follows:

• Inchicore/Heuston: Monday 20th April, 17.00-20.00, Hilton Hotel, Kilmainham.
• Christchurch: Thursday 23rd April, 17.00-20.00, Central Hotel, Exchequer St.
• Docklands: Monday 27th April, 17.00-20.00, Sean O’Casey Community Centre, St Mary’s Road, East Wall, Dublin 3.
• St Stephen’s Green/Pearse: Thursday 30th April, 17.00-20.00, Alexander Hotel, Fenian St, off Merrion Square, Dublin 2.

Further public consultation will take place in the lead-up to the Railway Order application.

There's a current thread on the Commuting & Transport Forum of boards.ie entitled Iarnrod Eireann plans dart extension to Inchicore:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055531246

The change in the project plan announced last week was that the tunneling will start at CIE lands in Inchicore (rather than at Hueston or Guinness) and a DART station will be provided in Inchicore.

Commencing tunnelling at Inchicore (rather than at Hueston or Guinness)makes a lot of sense as it means that the road and rail infrastructure in the vicinity of Heuston will not suffer massive disruption during the construction phase.

geeser

I was at the public consultation meeting in Kilmainham last night. Three different people there to inform the public gave three distinctly different stories. the basic idea of this DART underground is great. But read past the hype. There is NO guarantee of a DART station in Inchicore, it is a proposed future station.
More importantly, the current proposals appear to route both tunnels directly under existing housing and put an emergency access/vent in a back garden rather than put the tunnels under Con Colbert Road and put the access in the Memorial Park.

murphaph

So what? The Metro North also includes "proposed future station" locations along the route. This is not unusual internationally either!

And a back garden needs to go to provide a shaft and you'd rather reroute the entire tunnel to avoid that? Have you heard of the national interest at all?

Tunneling under houses is not even an issue save for the fact the engineers will have to take account of vibration during the construction period. It is NOT a reason to divert. The tunnel will pass under many more properties along the route as will the metro tunnels. No big deal. Tunnels have been dug under cities for hundreds of years now.

geeser

You're missing the points I made Murphaph. First of all I said I agree with the basic idea of DART underground. The rail interconnector is the key piece of infrastructure in the whole public transport strategy for Dublin. Next, I think you need to have some idea of what a "shaft" involves. We're talking about a major construction project akin to building an eight to ten storey building to accomodate two stairways and a lift along with ventilation and firefighting/rescue facilities. And finally, the route. The main proposed route at present is along the southern side of the existing rail line out of Heuston. This is under the new Eircom development and Royal Hospital (no residents there) and then right under housing alll the way to the CIE works. The alternative is to the north of the existing line under the old Clancy Barracks which is unoccupied and currently under development and then under the Park before swinging south and into the works. No housign that I can see involved and to my mind a much superior option giving far better access to the proposed Emergency Intervention shaft in the War Memorial Park. Not a lot of difference there that I can see except that hundreds of peoples lives are left undisturbed. but the big point you are missing is that people are being misinformed by those who have been employed by public money to inform them.

murphaph

Neither you nor I have any of the sub surface geology along your alternative route. You can't just throw out an alternative route and say "they could put it there". It's a complicated piece of engineering and yes a shaft is going to be deep and will likely result in a CPO for the entire property (as will happen at a couple of points along Metro North at Drumcondra and Mater at least). Losing a property or two is still irrelavant in the scheme of things.

I don't believe your main point was clear, if your main point is indeed that the public are being (deliberately?) misinformed about the scheme. Could you specify exactly what misinformation has been given out? I'm not doubting this aspect of your complaint-government agencies are notorious for this so I believe it's perfectly possible that IE are making a hash of it.

geeser

murphaph wrote: »

You can't just throw out an alternative route

Okay. When I attended the meeting, the first representative told us there was no possible alternative route. when I walked across the room, there was another map showing the other route along with the so-called vent (deliberately misleading title in my opinion) in the garden. He then proceeded to tell us they had not yet considered how they would get access to the vent. A third gentleman then told us they were already in discussions with the office of public works to get access through their properties.
Sorry, but I don't believe this level of misinformation (at a so called consultation) is due to incompetence.
Apart from not wanting this under my home and a major construction project in the garden next door, my main point is that what is being called consultation is a farce.

bg07

geeser wrote: »

Okay. When I attended the meeting, the first representative told us there was no possible alternative route. when I walked across the room, there was another map showing the other route along with the so-called vent (deliberately misleading title in my opinion) in the garden. He then proceeded to tell us they had not yet considered how they would get access to the vent. A third gentleman then told us they were already in discussions with the office of public works to get access through their properties.
Sorry, but I don't believe this level of misinformation (at a so called consultation) is due to incompetence.
Apart from not wanting this under my home and a major construction project in the garden next door, my main point is that what is being called consultation is a farce.

Would you not be grateful for the long term benefits that the project will bring to you? Such as a nearby decent rail connection to the city centre and the resulting increase in the value of your house. It’s not like they are burying nuclear waste under your house. Nearly all the negative consequences of the project for you will disappear once the construction phase is completed.

murphaph

geeser wrote: »

Okay. When I attended the meeting, the first representative told us there was no possible alternative route. when I walked across the room, there was another map showing the other route along with the so-called vent (deliberately misleading title in my opinion) in the garden. He then proceeded to tell us they had not yet considered how they would get access to the vent. A third gentleman then told us they were already in discussions with the office of public works to get access through their properties.
Sorry, but I don't believe this level of misinformation (at a so called consultation) is due to incompetence.
Apart from not wanting this under my home and a major construction project in the garden next door, my main point is that what is being called consultation is a farce.

Is your main point that;
1) you don't want the project under your house
2) you don't want a ventilation shaft next door to your house
3) you think the consultation is misleading and or incompetent?

I believe if the project ran under someone else's house you'd have no complaints about it. Is this a fair assessment?

The vent will not be belching out exhaust fumes. It's just so people can breathe down there! Did they show you a render or design drawings for he vent building?

Irish and Proud

geeser wrote: »

Apart from not wanting this under my home and a major construction project in the garden next door, my main point is that what is being called consultation is a farce.

NIMBY! :mad::mad::mad:

Stupido

geeser wrote: »

my main point is that what is being called consultation is a farce.

How would you define consultation? Is this not what they are doing?

You have to remember the scheme is still in the design stage. They have selected a route and are trying to design it. It will change when engineering problems arise, so what they are presenting now is a 'as far as we have got' phase.

If you will be directly impacted then there will be one-to-one consultation.

The 'consultation' you refer to is a form of public information / feedback session.

However, if the staff are not fully up to speed they should not be on the stand!

layke

murphaph wrote: »

3) you think the consultation is misleading and or incompetent?

The rest of the info aside. I would have to agree with this. From what I have seen with previous projects funded by the government every single one has been far past it's due date and cost millions more then it should have.

Is it a good idea and needed badly? Yes, most certainly. Do I have the confidence in Ireland's current government to carry out this plan effeciantly? Not on your life.

Perhaps some one in the know can tell me why we don't include in our construction contracts: If it's ****ed up or late the construction companies don't have to fix it at their cost?

geeser

Yes, of course I am a NIMBY. Just like any other sane person, I dont want it under my house. I've already got mainline trains at the end of the garden and they give all the noise, vibration and pollution I need in my life. The point however is that the route could go under lots of dwellings or virtually none. Which do you think would be better?
As for the Vent shaft. It is being described as a vent, but it is actually an Emergency Intervention point. It will be directly behind four houses and next door to mine. We are talking about a construction project that would rival a substantial appartment block. And all constructed underground. And even when finished, it will require vehicular access for large vehicles, i.e. Fire Brigade etc and hard standing to allow for an emergency to be dealt with, and dispersal for at least 1500 people, the capacity of the current DART. Would you want 1500 people in your back garden? Again, this could be done in this location or in part of a park that is already segregated from the main park and is virtually unused by the public. So again, which location do you think is better?
As for the consultation, I believe it was both misleading and incompetent. Nor was it informative to any great extent due to the conflicting information being bandied about.

geeser

Stupido,

"How would you define consultation?" I would define consultation in regard to something like this as an opportunity for the project team to impart meaningful, substantive and accurate information to those likely to be affected and a discussion of that information. The discussion cannot have meaning if the information is misleading, scarce and inaccurate as it was.

"You have to remember the scheme is still in the design stage. They have selected a route and are trying to design it". Yes, it appears they have selected a route. The Dublin Transportation Initiative identified six routes around the Inchicore area for LUAS. They didn't recommend three of them and the final route wasn't any of them! There were also supposed to be public hearings into the LUAS before construction, but they didn't happen to my knowledge. The route down Davitt road was selected because of very effective lobbying by a special interest group even after much design/development work on the identified and recommended routes had taken place. I'd like to see as much effort put into investigating the alternative route they have identified and then discuss both routes with the pros and cons. They seem reluctant to do this and it makes me wonder.

"If you will be directly impacted then there will be one-to-one consultation". I think there is a distinct likelihood that part of my property could be CPOd, and there will be significant impact on at least four other houses near me due to the construction of the Emergency Intervention Point (EIP). There has already been direct contact with the owner of the property on which the EIP is proposed but no direct contact with me or the other four property owners.

"The 'consultation' you refer to is a form of public information / feedback session." Not if the information is poor and inaccurate and probably misleading.

"However, if the staff are not fully up to speed they should not be on the stand!" This would be at least two of the three I spoke to then.

murphaph

geeser wrote: »

Yes, of course I am a NIMBY. Just like any other sane person, I dont want it under my house.

Well, I disagree that every sane person would oppose a temporary disturbance when they will end up with world class infrastructure in their area as a result.

geeser wrote: »

I've already got mainline trains at the end of the garden and they give all the noise, vibration and pollution I need in my life.

The Great Southern and Western Railway has been at the end of your garden for well over 100 years so I'm guessing you knew it was there when you decided to live at your present address!

geeser wrote: »

The point however is that the route could go under lots of dwellings or virtually none. Which do you think would be better?

You don't know it can go any other way with certainty. You are guessing that it can. It may be significantly more difficult and/or impossible to take the route you suggest.

geeser wrote: »

As for the Vent shaft. It is being described as a vent, but it is actually an Emergency Intervention point. It will be directly behind four houses and next door to mine. We are talking about a construction project that would rival a substantial appartment block. And all constructed underground.

If it's underground, I presume only a small surface building will be the end result? Lots of people have real apartment blocks built beside their houses which are not hidden underground but which tower over their property. Planning law is clear-you are not entitled to a view.

geeser wrote: »

And even when finished, it will require vehicular access for large vehicles, i.e. Fire Brigade etc and hard standing to allow for an emergency to be dealt with, and dispersal for at least 1500 people, the capacity of the current DART. Would you want 1500 people in your back garden?

How often do you envisage DARTs being evacuated in the tunnel, directly under your property? Seriously, it will probably never happen in your lifetime!

geeser wrote: »

Again, this could be done in this location or in part of a park that is already segregated from the main park and is virtually unused by the public. So again, which location do you think is better?

Whichever is easier for construction because emergency intervention points are so rarely used it is materially irrelevant. The period during construction will be your only disruption (maybe) and even that is no worse than many other smaller projects going on all over the city today. The fact that it's a vertical shaft will conceal most of the noise from you-the cranes lowering materials in make no noise!

Irish and Proud

geeser wrote: »

Yes, of course I am a NIMBY. Just like any other sane person, I dont want it under my house. I've already got mainline trains at the end of the garden and they give all the noise, vibration and pollution I need in my life. The point however is that the route could go under lots of dwellings or virtually none. Which do you think would be better?
As for the Vent shaft. It is being described as a vent, but it is actually an Emergency Intervention point. It will be directly behind four houses and next door to mine. We are talking about a construction project that would rival a substantial appartment block.

You live in a relatively large city mate - what else do you expect? :rolleyes: Also, you have little say in anything to do with activity in excess of 10m below your garden (AFAIK) - the only say you have concerns any structural damage to your house etc.

About construction activity - poor you! :mad:

D.L.R.

The irritability of certain homeowners along the route will not affect things too much. Geniune concerns must be addressed, but just being annoyed at it being near/under your property is not enough reason to reroute.

It will always be going under somebody's property. If it wasn't it wouldn't need to be a tunnel in the first place.

ihatewallies

The unmitigated selfishness of BANANAs like geeser is a blight on society.
What he/she means by 'consultation' is he wants to give the orders.

I'd be of the view that geeser should be press ganged in to a forced labour crew to work on the project for free to save money for the rest of the country.

dmeehan

or maybe consultation = compensation ??

G_R

ihatewallies wrote: »

I'd be of the view that geeser should be press ganged in to a forced labour crew to work on the project for free to save money for the rest of the country.

now there's an idea worth lookin at.......:D

spacetweek

Wow, it's amazing to finally meet a fully-fledged NIMBY. You, sir, are truly hardcore.

geeser wrote: »

Yes, of course I am a NIMBY. Just like any other sane person, I dont want it under my house. I've already got mainline trains at the end of the garden and they give all the noise, vibration and pollution I need in my life. The point however is that the route could go under lots of dwellings or virtually none. Which do you think would be better?

Well I am a perfectly sane person and I would have no objection to this whatsoever; in fact I would be very excited about it. As for the route, you know absolutely nothing about where it could or could not go, you probably spent the whole meeting talking down to the experts instead of asking them their opinion. The primary criterion here is geology; the soil and rocks, and presence of underground rivers. In the grand scheme of things, the buildings on the surface are only temporary structures which can be removed if necessary.

geeser wrote: »

As for the Vent shaft. It is being described as a vent, but it is actually an Emergency Intervention point. It will be directly behind four houses and next door to mine. We are talking about a construction project that would rival a substantial appartment block. And all constructed underground. And even when finished, it will require vehicular access for large vehicles, i.e. Fire Brigade etc and hard standing to allow for an emergency to be dealt with, and dispersal for at least 1500 people, the capacity of the current DART.

Just how often do you think there will be a fire and emergency evacuation? The last time I believe there was a fire in the Tube was the Kings' Cross fire in the 1980s. We can expect something similar here; there probably won't be a fire for decades.

geeser wrote: »

As for the consultation, I believe it was both misleading and incompetent. Nor was it informative to any great extent due to the conflicting information being bandied about.

No it wasn't; you just wouldn't listen to them. You've shown yourself to be misinformed but even after having it explained to you, you still prattle on about "misinformation". You've already made your mind up and there's no talking to you.

thebman

I have to question the idea that a route that does not go under residential area would be preferential.

Isn't the whole idea of the project to serve commuters? Most of those people live in residential areas I would have thought.

That is before you even get to the geology aspect that other people here obviously know a lot more than me about it.

If it is underground, noise isn't an issue, if it is a Dart, pollution isn't an issue and fire is less likely as it will be electric.

The Darts are relatively quiet even above ground. The Luas runs just behind my brothers house and he says he can't even hear it anymore when it goes by. I was over at his house and said "whats the noise?" and he just said "what noise?".

So if its underground it will be even less noisy. I have lived beside buildings being constructed before and although unpleasant at times, most of the time it has little or no impact.

I don't see what the big fuss is about with this poster TBH. If this is the be biggest problem in your life, I'd love to swap with ya, lol.

G_R

tbh i think that its pretty selfish that someone would expect a trainline to be rerouted jus so that the arent caused any disturbance, even though any disturbance they do encounter will be pretty minimal. An evacuation shaft will hopefully never be used but if it is it wont be very often, posibly once every 10/15 years.

jus put up wit it