DART+ (DART Expansion)

monument

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Yes, as I pointed out (in DARt Underground's funding category) in areas where (i) the government is unable to finance it alone via PPP and/or (ii) where fares for use are inadequate to cover project expenditure over a set time.

It's almost inconceivable that in 2016 either of the two above could be said about DARTU.



No. I'm sorry they absolutely did not.

The only funding under the TEN-T EA was Priority Project 26 which included only the design and railway order phase of DARTU specifically related to the "City Centre Re-signalling Project" (see page 121) and only even mentions DARTU insofar as it would "support the realisation of a study to design a new signalling system between Connolly Station to Sandymount Station" to deal with "future increases as part of the Dart Underground Programme".

The EIB did not indicate that they would specifically provide any funding for Dart Underground, especially not pursuant to TEN-T.

Leo on the Dail record and it's a written answer so not just said in the heat of a debate or something...

On 4 December 2013 in Brussels, I met with Transport Commissioner Siim Kallas and later with officials from DG MOVE and the TEN-T Executive Agency, who confirmed their positive views towards DART Underground.

DART Underground has been included in the new Ten-T Core Network and is part of one of the nine Core Corridors crossing the EU. This means that if DART Underground or elements of the overall programme are funded by the Exchequer they will be eligible for some co-funding under Ten-T in the period 2014-2020.

The EIB had also indicated a keen interest in supporting DART Underground and this interest was confirmed to me at a meeting with the EIB Management Board including President Werner Hoyer and Secretary General Alfonso Querejeta on 29 April last. I expect to have a further meeting with senior EIB officials next month when access to funding for transport projects will be further discussed.

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2014-02-18a.1925

Reuben1210

monument wrote: »

Leo on the Dail record and it's a written answer so not just said in the heat of a debate or something...

On 4 December 2013 in Brussels, I met with Transport Commissioner Siim Kallas and later with officials from DG MOVE and the TEN-T Executive Agency, who confirmed their positive views towards DART Underground.

DART Underground has been included in the new Ten-T Core Network and is part of one of the nine Core Corridors crossing the EU. This means that if DART Underground or elements of the overall programme are funded by the Exchequer they will be eligible for some co-funding under Ten-T in the period 2014-2020.

The EIB had also indicated a keen interest in supporting DART Underground and this interest was confirmed to me at a meeting with the EIB Management Board including President Werner Hoyer and Secretary General Alfonso Querejeta on 29 April last. I expect to have a further meeting with senior EIB officials next month when access to funding for transport projects will be further discussed.

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2014-02-18a.1925

Thank you! I meant to research this further this eve

FreudianSlippers

monument wrote: »

Leo on the Dail record and it's a written answer so not just said in the heat of a debate or something...

On 4 December 2013 in Brussels, I met with Transport Commissioner Siim Kallas and later with officials from DG MOVE and the TEN-T Executive Agency, who confirmed their positive views towards DART Underground.

DART Underground has been included in the new Ten-T Core Network and is part of one of the nine Core Corridors crossing the EU. This means that if DART Underground or elements of the overall programme are funded by the Exchequer they will be eligible for some co-funding under Ten-T in the period 2014-2020.

The EIB had also indicated a keen interest in supporting DART Underground and this interest was confirmed to me at a meeting with the EIB Management Board including President Werner Hoyer and Secretary General Alfonso Querejeta on 29 April last. I expect to have a further meeting with senior EIB officials next month when access to funding for transport projects will be further discussed.

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2014-02-18a.1925

1) Keen interest means absolutely nothing in politics and lesser even so for international banking.
2) "elements of the overall programme" is exactly what I said is included in TEN-T for which I provided links to EIB.

Leo can spin it all he wants, but it's not nor has it ever been expressed by the EIB to the public that the EIB would provide investment for DARTU. I would love to be wrong, so I invite you to check the EIB publications!

I would suggest it is particularly less likely under the current EIB funding guidelines. So even if I did believe Leo was being fully honest over 2 years ago, I suggest that he would not be receiving such positive vibes at present.

Carawaystick

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

nor has it ever been expressed by the EIB to the public

Can you give examples of the EIB expressing they would provide funding for any specific project, before it is agreed?

FreudianSlippers

Carawaystick wrote: »

Can you give examples of the EIB expressing they would provide funding for any specific project, before it is agreed?

No, because as I pointed out that's not how banking works :rolleyes: it's either approved and in the finance plan or it isn't. Applications must be made pursuant to the funding guidelines at the time and no matter what EIB might have said to Leo over 2 years ago, the EIB funding guidelines are clear at present.

I've now pointed to them multiple times. No amount of wishful thinking by you is going to change that. Maybe if you ask nicely enough and remind them that over 2 years ago they said they might fund "elements of the overall programme" (which by the way I have linked to under Priority Project 26) they might just pay for the whole thing! YAY!

Carawaystick

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

No amount of wishful thinking by you is going to change that.

Where have I posted about wishful thinking? Maybe you should check who you're responding to.

FreudianSlippers

Carawaystick wrote: »

Where have I posted about wishful thinking? Maybe you should check who you're responding to.

*by anyone

There is little to no evidence, other than old anecdotal evidence, that EIB would fund DU alone under its present funding guidelines/

strassenwo!f

I think the Inchicore station is a good idea.

It seems that whenever I (or [perhaps others) post anything about this project it gets split off onto a new thread.

I have experienced several occasions where my posts have been split off from this thread. To no obvious benefit to the board. Today, for example, a post of mine was split off from this thread into a new thread, and then the thread was locked. All within a few hours, and with no reference to other posters.

I am, of course, delighted, that it received such a quick response. Thrilled. You've made my day by locking that thread.

It seems like my message is one the city might listen to, even if it is painful for those who had been basing their plans on other slolutions.

Munich, Frankfurt, many other citiies, could be worth a look for what's best to do in Dublin.

Van.Bosch

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I think the Inchicore station is a good idea.

It seems that whenever I (or [perhaps others) post anything about this project it gets split off onto a new thread.

I have experienced several occasions where my posts have been split off from this thread. To no obvious benefit to the board. Today, for example, a post of mine was split off from this thread into a new thread, and then the thread was locked. All within a few hours, and with no reference to other posters.

I am, of course, delighted, that it received such a quick response. Thrilled. You've made my day by locking that thread.

It seems like my message is one the city might listen to, even if it is painful for those who had been basing their plans on other slolutions.

Munich, Frankfurt, many other citiies, could be worth a look for what's best to do in Dublin.

I appreciate you feel you are being victimised or not given a fair hearing on this board. As someone who seldom posts I enjoy reading about people's opinions on various public transports initiatives in Ireland. I share their/you're passion for better services in Ireland. To be honest though, when I see you post in a thread I just leave, you are passionate about it but your constant bias against st. Stephens green for example is tedious. You constantly allude to some agenda for this being chosen and that it is an area with nothing going on because it is a park, which in my opinion is ludicrous. People have provided you with heat maps of employment which show it as a prime spot for a PT interchange but you choose to ignore them.

It is right to question things, that's how we improve things but you can't just make statements, ignore the logical responses and then complain or allude to hidden agendas against you.

If I were you I would look at your approach to posting on the forum rather than looking for a bias against you.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I think the Inchicore station is a good idea.

It seems that whenever I (or [perhaps others) post anything about this project it gets split off onto a new thread.

I have experienced several occasions where my posts have been split off from this thread. To no obvious benefit to the board. Today, for example, a post of mine was split off from this thread into a new thread, and then the thread was locked. All within a few hours, and with no reference to other posters.

I am, of course, delighted, that it received such a quick response. Thrilled. You've made my day by locking that thread.

It seems like my message is one the city might listen to, even if it is painful for those who had been basing their plans on other slolutions.

Munich, Frankfurt, many other citiies, could be worth a look for what's best to do in Dublin.

You are still full of absolute **** and an insult to the DU project and the members of the public that campaigned for it. Your constant diatribe about changing the route, has been debated to death on this forum and you have yet to produce a decent argument in favour of your "idea".

Now that the outgoing Government has killed the project off on the basis of finding a cheaper alternative, you still persist with an idea that would be even more expensive for many already explained reasons. I'm not sure if you are naieve or just taking the mickey at this stage, but its tiresome and only conducive to facilitating the political agenda that I can explain to you quite clearly.....

THEY DON'T WANT TO BUILD IT IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM...EVER!

Note to MODS: If Strassie reports me, please have some leniency. I'm exasperated!

strassenwo!f

IGrandeeod, or as I would really like to call you, Derek, because I know that you have made an enormous contribution to Dublin's transport plans, and I truly admire the work you have done, and have tried to do, to make Dublin better.

I hope we will have a chance to meet some day. It would certainl;y be a privilege for me.

But this,is essentialy a straightforward project. An east-west line, underground, through the city. Should be pretty simple, no big loops required.

Van.Bosch

strassenwo!f wrote: »

IGrandeeod, or as I would really like to call you, Derek, because I know that you have made an enormous contribution to Dublin's transport plans, and I truly admire the work you have done, and have tried to do, to make Dublin better.

I hope we will have a chance to meet some day. It would certainl;y be a privilege for me.

But this,is essentialy a straightforward project. An east-west line, underground, through the city. Should be pretty simple, no big loops required.

It would be no where near "pretty simple", do you know what a "loop" is?

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

IGrandeeod, or as I would really like to call you, Derek, because I know that you have made an enormous contribution to Dublin's transport plans, and I truly admire the work you have done, and have tried to do, to make Dublin better.

I hope we will have a chance to meet some day. It would certainl;y be a privilege for me.

But this,is essentialy a straightforward project. An east-west line, underground, through the city. Should be pretty simple, no big loops required.

I think you have the wrong person.

strassenwo!f

Van.Bosch wrote: »

It would be no where near "pretty simple", do you know what a "loop" is?

Yes I do. I know what a loop is.

And the St. Stephen's Green 'loop' in Dublin involves adding on around 100 million, or more, to the cost of the proposed 'DART Underground' project,

To no obvious benefit for the city or the citizens.

liamog

Dart Underground is not an East West line.

The plan was to connect the Western Lines to the Northern lines whilst also expanding the area served by mainline rail transport such as Docklands and Stephens Green.

The planned route achieved this whilst also avoiding the architecturally sensitive area of Trinity.

Multiple sources have been provided to show why a station at Stephens Green is not just an ideal building location but also an advantageous area for employment and access reasons.

strassenwo!f

Grandeeod wrote: »

I think you have the wrong person.

Grandeeod, I beg your pardon. I am clearly mixing you up with someone else.

Though, along with the person I thought you were, I am confident that you are also worthy of my respect.

Logue no2

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Grandeeod, I beg your pardon. I am clearly mixing you up with someone else.

Though, along with the person I thought you were, I am confident that you are also worthy of my respect.

Grandeeod is indeed something else!! :-D

Look DU is effectively dead. Some forty plus years since it was proposed and not a sod has been turned. The only hope for now is that any incoming government has the guts to stand up to the anti rail mentality in the Department and put DU back on the agenda. Joined up thinking is badly needed.

Adds: one crucial piece of infrastructure I would propose would be to create a new bus and rail central station at Spencer Dock. It's ridiculous that one batch of mainline trains terminates away at Heuston, another batch at Connolly, some BÉ buses inside Busaras, some outside and the private bus operators on the streets around Westmoreland St.

If we have to go back to the drawing board this would be a sensible way forward imho.

BoatMad

Adds: one crucial piece of infrastructure I would propose would be to create a new bus and rail central station at Spencer Dock. It's ridiculous that one batch of mainline trains terminates away at Heuston, another batch at Connolly, some BÉ buses inside Busaras, some outside and the private bus operators on the streets around Westmoreland S

!!!, Temple Bar come back all is forgiven

BoatMad

liam24 wrote: »

Fair enough. We'll relocate the IFSC, Dublin airport, Dublin port, all government departments, all the national museums, at least one of the Dublin universities, and the headquarters of every national organization to Cork or Limerick and let you off on your own. Let's see how long you last.

It won't take long to discover that Dublin is not richer than the rest of the country because of its amazing natural resources, or because of the superior DNA of its inhabitants, or because one of the least impressive capital cities in Western Europe is the main reason tourists visit the country, but because it is permitted to be by the grace of the Irish taxpayer.

Its richer because its has a huge proportion of business and workers. A centre attracts more then regions .

DUblin is richer precisely because its Dublin and the capital, its taxes pay for most of the country , its simple economics

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we get back on topic. No more talk of redesigning or re-routing DU outside of the Dept.'s proposals. Nor talk about how Dublin gets too much or too little of the tax/investment. As the DU project has been cancelled, I am minded to close it but I will leave it open to see if anything worthwhile develops.

BoatMad

Sam Russell wrote: »

Mod: Can we get back on topic. No more talk of redesigning or re-routing DU outside of the Dept.'s proposals. Nor talk about how Dublin gets too much or too little of the tax/investment. As the DU project has been cancelled, I am minded to close it but I will leave it open to see if anything worthwhile develops.

with a remit like this and a cancelled project, I cant see what you want discussed , so Id close it if I was you .

unless perhaps you might give a list of the things "you" will allow at least we might be able to continue then

Sam Russell

BoatMad wrote: »

with a remit like this and a cancelled project, I cant see what you want discussed , so Id close it if I was you .

unless perhaps you might give a list of the things "you" will allow at least we might be able to continue then

1. If you want to discuss mod issues that is best done by PM.

2. I do not care what you discuss - but not issues of rural vs Dublin investment or dragging the route around College Green.

3. This has been discussed for years and should have been built by now, but unless there is a change of heart by our Government (should we get one soon), I do not expect any further discussions would carry any merit but it is up to contributors to the thread.

BoatMad

Sam Russell wrote: »

1. If you want to discuss mod issues that is best done by PM.

2. I do not care what you discuss - but not issues of rural vs Dublin investment or dragging the route around College Green.

3. This has been discussed for years and should have been built by now, but unless there is a change of heart by our Government (should we get one soon), I do not expect any further discussions would carry any merit but it is up to contributors to the thread.

with respect , I am not discussing mod issues as none as of yet have occurred

its merely that given you have indicated that there might be a future mod issue and have closed the discussion on many aspects of DU, I dont quite see what you want to achieve. we can hardly discuss the impact of the existing route , given that there is in effect no route at all. The project is now back at the justification phase , which is where both the urban rural investment issue is and the new route selection.

but Ive no dog in this fight any more , cheers

For ever odd

Forgive me if this has been asked before, I have only read the last page of this thread, but what became of the underground station built at Pearce street station, is it ever going to used?

D Trent

For ever odd wrote: »

Forgive me if this has been asked before, I have only read the last page of this thread, but what became of the underground station built at Pearce street station, is it ever going to used?

What ?
An already built underground station on Pearse St??
Surely not ....

Grandeeod

D Trent wrote: »

What ?
An already built underground station on Pearse St??
Surely not ....

I think the poster is mixing up some work that took place a few years ago at Pearse St. that was a precurser to DU. There is no underground station at Pearse.

Grandeeod

Logue no2 wrote: »

Grandeeod is indeed something else!! :-D

Look DU is effectively dead. Some forty plus years since it was proposed and not a sod has been turned. The only hope for now is that any incoming government has the guts to stand up to the anti rail mentality in the Department and put DU back on the agenda. Joined up thinking is badly needed.

Adds: one crucial piece of infrastructure I would propose would be to create a new bus and rail central station at Spencer Dock. It's ridiculous that one batch of mainline trains terminates away at Heuston, another batch at Connolly, some BÉ buses inside Busaras, some outside and the private bus operators on the streets around Westmoreland St.

If we have to go back to the drawing board this would be a sensible way forward imho.

You're right, I am.

The rest of your post is cool.:D

For ever odd

Grandeeod wrote: »

I think the poster is mixing up some work that took place a few years ago at Pearse St. that was a precurser to DU. There is no underground station at Pearse.

No,not mixing it up at all, I was just asking as I have not been following the subject for awhile. There is a sub station there and ready to be connected too, if anything was to go ahead.

Grandeeod

For ever odd wrote: »

No,not mixing it up at all, I was just asking as I have not been following the subject for awhile. There is a sub station there and ready to be connected too, if anything was to go ahead.

There is no underground station beneath Pearse.

For ever odd

Well what is the structure under Pearse that looks like a station?and was paid for as a underground station?