DART+ (DART Expansion)

tharlear

DLR wrote

We need more of this kind of attitude actually impacting policy: State can't afford rural Ireland - Moran

Under Mr Moran's plan, the State's future investment would be concentrated on the growth of regional cities - as opposed to the preservation of rural living. Calling for the recreation of Ireland as a 'global city', he laid out his plan.

So unless your suggesting that "regional cities" means Dublin, Fingal and Dunlaoire then completing the national motorways system is what's needed. Or we could extend the western rail to cork.
The main problem with Dublin is that developers used the spoke and wheel motorway system in Dublin to build lots of housing that are really only accessible by car. You can blame the rural TD all you want but it was Dublin city councilors who controller the development of Dublin and the suburban motorways that enriched Dublin developers.3 motorways out of Dublin would have been enough . M1 north, m4 west splitting once clear of Dublin, m11 south. Instead you have m1, m2 m3 m4 m7, n81 m11, all those people drive.
Until Dublin's councilors change their priorities (and Backers), then DU and metro are always going to lose out to the next dual carriageway to the next new suburb.

D.L.R.

tharlear wrote: »

So unless your suggesting that "regional cities" means Dublin, Fingal and Dunlaoire then completing the national motorways system is what's needed. Or we could extend the western rail to cork.
The main problem with Dublin is that developers used the spoke and wheel motorway system in Dublin to build lots of housing that are really only accessible by car. You can blame the rural TD all you want but it was Dublin city councilors who controller the development of Dublin and the suburban motorways that enriched Dublin developers.3 motorways out of Dublin would have been enough . M1 north, m4 west splitting once clear of Dublin, m11 south. Instead you have m1, m2 m3 m4 m7, n81 m11, all those people drive.
Until Dublin's councilors change their priorities (and Backers), then DU and metro are always going to lose out to the next dual carriageway to the next new suburb.

100% agree with all of this. The motorway system was created with zero intelligence and now we have to fork out for a massively expensive M17-M18-M20 because of it. You're quite right, all politicians who brought about this stupidity are to blame but the buck stops with central govt.

hans aus dtschl

D.L.R. wrote: »

100% agree with all of this. The motorway system was created with zero intelligence and now we have to fork out for a massively expensive M17-M18-M20 because of it. You're quite right, all politicians who brought about this stupidity are to blame but the buck stops with central govt.

How would we have avoided having to do the M17/18/20, with better planning?
A different overall approach than spoke-and-wheel?

L1011

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

How would we have avoided having to do the M17/18/20, with better planning?
A different overall approach than spoke-and-wheel?

M20 wise:

Combined motorway for Cork/Limerick that would have used one road from Dublin until much, much further along - the feeders for Cork/Limerick would have acted as the M20.

M18 is still fairly needed at least as DC, M17 could have been heavily reduced in scale.

As goes other roads:

M9/M11 could have been built combined for a considerable distance *or* just widened/bypassed the difficult bits of the N11 and built an M30/M25 for much the same access to Waterford, bypass of New Ross etc.

N4/N5 could yet have some changes to reduce duplication but that's still far off.

There was far too much slavish adherence to replacing the existing N routes with motorways rather than building a motorway network.

Sam Russell

Mod: can we keep this to DU. Start a new thread if you want to discuss non DU stuff, like our infrastructure planning (or lack of) and the decision to build motorways when DC would have done.

annfield1978

Reuben1210 wrote: »

What is the source? do you have a link?

No source, tender documents were issued at part of a NTA framework call off.

strassenwo!f

I understand the city now has actual plans to pedestrianise College Green.

LeinsterDub

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I understand the city now has actual plans to pedestrianise College Green.

Yup and as you well know we've an entire thread on this very subject

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055854451

strassenwo!f

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Yup and as you well know we've an entire thread on this very subject

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055854451

Yes, thanks, I'm aware of the thread. But that's really about the pedestrianisation per se, whereas I'd be more interested in the public transport possibilities it might open up, hence the post in this thread.

MJohnston

It doesn't open up any new possibilities, it just makes things like DU more critical.

McAlban

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Yes, thanks, I'm aware of the thread. But that's really about the pedestrianisation per se, whereas I'd be more interested in the public transport possibilities it might open up, hence the post in this thread.

Do you mean like an Underground station or the like??

Tell me more

Sam Russell

Mod: Strassenwolf take warning. Do not try to take this thread off topic again. A thread exists for Pedestrianisation. A thread was started for your pet subject - College Green. Post there if you wish to discuss it, not here.

D.L.R.

Less warning more banning. We're at that stage now.

For now, don't feed the troll.

Sam Russell

D.L.R. wrote: »

Less warning more banning. We're at that stage now.

For now, don't feed the troll.

Mod: Do not back seat mod or you will see how the bans work out.

Action was already taken.

plodder

Controversial €3bn Dart back on table

Silly season filler, or genuine ?

prunudo

plodder wrote: »

Controversial €3bn Dart back on table

Silly season filler, or genuine ?

Was just reading that article, if there was every a reason to take these major infrastructure projects away from political inference this is it, less than a year since one minister cancels the next one wants it back.

Sam Russell

jvan wrote: »

Was just reading that article, if there was every a reason to take these major infrastructure projects away from political inference this is it, less than a year since one minister cancels the next one wants it back.

The minister that cancelled it last year is now in charge of expenditure. How do you think that will work out?

plodder

jvan wrote: »

Was just reading that article, if there was every a reason to take these major infrastructure projects away from political inference this is it, less than a year since one politician cancels the next one wants it back.

Can't say I agree with that. You have to make the political case that the 3 billion should be spent on DU. Up to now, that hasn't been successful.

Sam Russell

plodder wrote: »

Can't say I agree with that. You have to make the political case that the 3 billion should be spent on DU. Up to now, that hasn't been successful.

Can't say I agree with that. You have to make the political case that the 3 billion should be spent on DU. Up to now, that hasn't been successful accepted.

The political response has been more with the cost and the lack of funds - not the need.

plodder

Sam Russell wrote: »

The political response has been more with the cost and the lack of funds - not the need.

Not sure about that. I'll confess that I'm selfishly in favour of Metro North as it'll be of more benefit to me, but objectively DU is more strategic and more important. Extending the DART to Balbriggan (which I might benefit from indirectly) is even less strategic and pure pork barrel.

To our pols, DU still sounds like a rail link between Heuston and the city centre. The full potential just doesn't register with them. Maybe it does with the new minister.

Sam Russell

plodder wrote: »

Not sure about that. I'll confess that I'm selfishly in favour of Metro North as it'll be of more benefit to me, but objectively DU is more strategic and more important. Extending the DART to Balbriggan (which I might benefit from indirectly) is even less strategic and pure pork barrel.

To our pols, DU still sounds like a rail link between Heuston and the city centre. The full potential just doesn't register with them. Maybe it does with the new minister.

To me, the value of DU is enhanced by the addition of the Clongriffin spur, MN adds very important public transport to the north side of the city. The Clongriffin spur allows DU to provide direct connection between the airport (25 million passengers per year) and the full rail network. MN allows the workers at the airport (25,000 direct and indirect) to get to work - these go to work more than 200 times a year each way. That is workers make 10 million journey per year. MN would suit workers, Clongriffin would suit passengers. (IMHO)

Currently the only options are bus, coach, taxi and cars. Passenger numbers on each mode is about :-
Dart/train = 2,000, Metro = 1,000, tram = 260; bus = 70, coach = 60, taxi = 4, car = 4.

cgcsb

plodder wrote: »

Not sure about that. I'll confess that I'm selfishly in favour of Metro North as it'll be of more benefit to me, but objectively DU is more strategic and more important. Extending the DART to Balbriggan (which I might benefit from indirectly) is even less strategic and pure pork barrel.

To our pols, DU still sounds like a rail link between Heuston and the city centre. The full potential just doesn't register with them. Maybe it does with the new minister.

DARTu will mean better rail services, across all of Ireland. The capacity gains would be massive. TDs from all regions should support this.

cgcsb

Sam Russell wrote: »

To me, the value of DU is enhanced by the addition of the Clongriffin spur, MN adds very important public transport to the north side of the city. The Clongriffin spur allows DU to provide direct connection between the airport (25 million passengers per year) and the full rail network. MN allows the workers at the airport (25,000 direct and indirect) to get to work - these go to work more than 200 times a year each way. That is workers make 10 million journey per year. MN would suit workers, Clongriffin would suit passengers. (IMHO)

That depends on where passengers are going to/coming from. For people travelling to Dublin City Centre metro would be best. for those travelling elsewhere DART to one of the mainline stations.

In my opinion a better project would be to move the Belfast line, between Drogheda and Dublin, inland to serve the airport and continue via a tunnel to liffey junstion and under the park to Heuston, extend Heuston down to platform 10 and run direct Belfast-Dub Airport-Heuston-Lmrk Jnct-Cork services and then just have the existing Drogheda-Dublin for DARTs and you avoid having to build the airport spur and four tracking the existing line.

Sam Russell

cgcsb wrote: »

That depends on where passengers are going to/coming from. For people travelling to Dublin City Centre metro would be best. for those travelling elsewhere DART to one of the mainline stations.

In my opinion a better project would be to move the Belfast line, between Drogheda and Dublin, inland to serve the airport and continue via a tunnel to liffey junstion and under the park to Heuston, extend Heuston down to platform 10 and run direct Belfast-Dub Airport-Heuston-Lmrk Jnct-Cork services and then just have the existing Drogheda-Dublin for DARTs and you avoid having to build the airport spur and four tracking the existing line.

True but the spur is nothing like the cost of the new mainline to Liffey Junction. Would the existing PPT infrastructure work for that? What would that cost vs the cost DU and the Clongriffin spur?

As a passenger, the spur and DU would suffice for most people going to CC or elsewhere Airport - Connolly/Luas or Airport - Pearse/SSG/Heuston. Workers would be much better served by Metro - Swords to Dublin CC.

Anyway, nothing is going to happen any time soon.

Strategically speaking, financially speaking, politically speaking we are in an almost-perfect climate to invest in long term capital projects and infrastructure. (infrastructure deficit, long term debt servicing cost minimal, economy growing whilst medium term outlook is unsettled, opportunities to attract a certain potential Non-EU member's FDI to setup here, a construction sector that hasn't got fully back into gear yet - it's almost a perfect storm!).

If DART underground is ever to make sense, then the time is right for it now. Same applies to a whole host of other infrastructure upgrades. I hope that the dust gets blown off a whole host of shelved plans and we start to get to work on the necessary upgrades for Ireland to bring up to speed with the modern world and beyond!

cgcsb

Sam Russell wrote: »

True but the spur is nothing like the cost of the new mainline to Liffey Junction. Would the existing PPT infrastructure work for that? What would that cost vs the cost DU and the Clongriffin spur?

PPT would need some upgrade I'd imagine. It'd cost more than the airport spur but probably less than the airport spur+ CPOing some of Ireland's most expensive coastal properties for a 4 track system.

D.L.R.

Its good to keep Dart Underground on the radar, but that's really all this amounts to. The Irish state remains fixated on rural motorways.

cgcsb

I see connecting rural south Wexford and Waterford with motorway is now of the highest importance, even an intercity motorway between Limerick and Cork is secondary.

nowecant

Can anyone tell me was Dart Underground meant to be able to accommodate Intercity trains?

e.g. Belfast - Dublin Docklands - Heuston - Cork

Also, as planning has lapsed is there any way that it can be fast tracked the second time if it was decided to go ahead with it?

Thanks

Grandeeod

nowecant wrote: »

Can anyone tell me was Dart Underground meant to be able to accommodate Intercity trains?

e.g. Belfast - Dublin Docklands - Heuston - Cork

Also, as planning has lapsed is there any way that it can be fast tracked the second time if it was decided to go ahead with it?

Thanks

No and No.