DART+ (DART Expansion)

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Grandeeod certainly has his work cut out here. The only public consultation about this project - what, nine years ago now, with nothing built - involved three possible routes which were basically exactly the same (Spencer Dock - Pearse - St. Stephen's Green (the LUAS) - Christchurch - Heuston), the only differences being things like the number of entrances/exits from particular stations.

A total sham.

In contrast, the RPA's metro consultations involved three different routes, with the route finally chosen being pretty much a combination of two of them, thanks in at least some measure to the input of the public.

Or contrast it with the public consultation projects which happened in relation to, for example, crossrail in London or the second cross-city underground line in Munich.

There have to be other routes which ticked, or were going to tick in a few years, and indeed are now ticking, all the boxes required of this project. It is frankly a sad joke, and should be a national embarrassment, that such a charade should have been allowed to happen.


Ouch!

I do not have my work cut out and I don't appreciate you agreeing with me and then trying to discredit me by floating your college green idea as an example. DU was ready to go in a city that has a rail network constrained by capacity. Since the early 70s we have talked the talk and still nothing has been really achieved. That said, you carry on talking about College Green because you are actually entitled to at this point because DU is back amongst the pidgeons.

monument

Grandeeod wrote: »

I said earlier that you were moving goalposts. Your point about public/political involvement is wrong. The public had their say on DU many many years ago. So you reinvent it by basing it on a "selection of options" as presented after Paschal O'D shelved the project. Two of the options then presented were/are and always will be bonkers. You seem to think that by accepting this fudge and discussing it again and again that we will eventually accept the original project as planned. Wrong. You might. Others might, but your politicians won't because the very fact that the alternatives are rediculous highlights the obvious fact that its a charade.

Strassenwolfs point about MN is completely irrelavent because that was a new build and nothing like DU which is a project that is designed to link an existing rail network. Now considering that you, Monument, dislike Strassenwolfs suggestion of routing DU under college green (the only alternative I have ever seen anywhere, why are you suddenly so caught up in a "selection of options"?

I'm not caught up on the selection if options idea, but that's the context of what you were quoting, I am not now moving the goal posts. Here's my post you originally quoted:

monument wrote: »

A matrix of all options and their pros and cons is a good way of highlighting the better option and making sure there's no better option than the main preferred one to date.

Allowing more public and political involvement in this process from the start will give the public and politicians both a greater understanding and more ownership of hard decisions.

My point is that a greater selection of options gets greater buy in and it's best to this from the start, but I was not suggesting the planning was invalid or anything.

And I'd also like to make it clear that the options presented recently did not seem to be best practice because it was not a very public process and there wasn't much open debate over the pros/cons of previous plan vs the cut down options.

Idbatterim

Id have loved to have been a fly on the wall when decisions were been made over Du and MN in government buildings.

One of the proposed cost reductions for MN is surface running in ballymun, in the original project wasnt it put underground in the original plan or ABP ordered it underground?

jd

Idbatterim wrote: »

Id have loved to have been a fly on the wall when decisions were been made over Du and MN in government buildings.

One of the proposed cost reductions for MN is surface running in ballymun, in the original project wasnt it put underground in the original plan or ABP ordered it underground?

Originally it was an elevated line overground at Ballymun, then it was changed to underground as far as Santry Cross, now it is overground with surface running..

Idbatterim

thanks, but who changed it? public pressure before original scheme went for planning, following public consultation or submissions to abp afterwards?

my question basically is, this is put forward as a cost saving measure, can abp simply force it underground again, if they agree with the residents? my point being, this could turn out to be one right sham!

Idbatterim

the whole things is a blatant sham, but I suppose I mean a next level sham, if one of the big cost savers, is overruled by abp or following public consultation...

strassenwo!f

Grandeeod wrote: »

I do not have my work cut out and I don't appreciate you agreeing with me and then trying to discredit me by floating your college green idea as an example.

I certainly didn't wish to discredit you and I'm very sorry if you feel that's what I did or tried to do. (I didn't, however, mention College Green in my post).

Grandeeod wrote: »

DU was ready to go in a city that has a rail network constrained by capacity. Since the early 70s we have talked the talk and still nothing has been really achieved.

Both points here are quite correct.

The DRRTS plan was a very good one, and there might have been scope for broadening its E-W line from Heuston-Temple Bar-Connolly to Heuston-Temple Bar-Pearse-Spencer Dock in later years. I'm not aware that this was or has been looked at.

It is important to remember that the St. Stephen's Green loop idea - moving the proposed E-W DART line several hundred metres to the south of its original route - rather than having a direct route across the city (as proposed in the DRRTS study), only emerged when Mary O'Rourke funked the idea of building the LUAS north of St. Stephen's Green.

Grandeeod wrote: »

That said, you carry on talking about College Green because you are actually entitled to at this point because DU is back amongst the pidgeons.

I would feel I was always entitled to, thanks.

It was inevitable that Mrs O'Rourke's position would eventually be reversed, as indeed it has been. We will soon see the LUAS heading north from St. Stephen's Green, towards locations where it could have had a meaningful connection with the original DRRTS plan and where it can have meaningful connections with the DU project. There is now no need to force the DU project to have a big loop via St. Stephen's Green.

I'm very disappointed that this has all taken so long. It should have been possible for the powers that be to see that this was inevitable, and pressed on with a direct cross-city DU route with which other services (like the LUAS cross-city) would eventually connect. As they are now doing.

Reuben1210

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I certainly didn't wish to discredit you and I'm very sorry if you feel that's what I did or tried to do. (I didn't, however, mention College Green in my post).



Both points here are quite correct.

The DRRTS plan was a very good one, and there might have been scope for broadening its E-W line from Heuston-Temple Bar-Connolly to Heuston-Temple Bar-Pearse-Spencer Dock in later years. I'm not aware that this was or has been looked at.

It is important to remember that the St. Stephen's Green loop idea - moving the proposed E-W DART line several hundred metres to the south of its original route - rather than having a direct route across the city (as proposed in the DRRTS study), only emerged when Mary O'Rourke funked the idea of building the LUAS north of St. Stephen's Green.



I would feel I was always entitled to, thanks.

It was inevitable that Mrs O'Rourke's position would eventually be reversed, as indeed it has been. We will soon see the LUAS heading north from St. Stephen's Green, towards locations where it could have had a meaningful connection with the original DRRTS plan and where it can have meaningful connections with the DU project. There is now no need to force the DU project to have a big loop via St. Stephen's Green.

I'm very disappointed that this has all taken so long. It should have been possible for the powers that be to see that this was inevitable, and pressed on with a direct cross-city DU route with which other services (like the LUAS cross-city) would eventually connect. As they are now doing.

If anything, they should look at broadening this loop you despise so much to take in the liberties, Harold's Cross, Ranelagh and Rathmines and then Stephen's Green!

The trafic choke up in these areas is worsening by the month.

mickmmc

The 5 TDs and 2 Senators in Fingal are still divided on the issue of a directly elected Mayor; 5 in favour and 2 against. Those against: Senator James Reilly FG and Brendan Ryan TD (Lab). The North County Leader published articles from the TDs and Senators before Christmas.

Fingal County Council was voted Local Authority of the Year for 2016 (Chamber Ireland Awards).

Keyzer

Just think initial discussions for London's underground system began in 1830 with the first line opening in 1863 - 154 years ago.

D.L.R.

Keyzer wrote: »

Just think initial discussions for London's underground system began in 1830 with the first line opening in 1863 - 154 years ago.

Dublin had a strong start too. It actually got its first railway before London did - 1834 vs 1836. Hard to believe. The Loop Line (1891) predates the NY subway and Paris metro.

Of course that was a different regime. Today we've no apparent interest in rail. You get the feeling its an inconvenience for Irish govts to even have to discuss it.

strassenwo!f

Reuben1210 wrote: »

If anything, they should look at broadening this loop you despise so much to take in the liberties, Harold's Cross, Ranelagh and Rathmines and then Stephen's Green!

The trafic choke up in these areas is worsening by the month.

Yes, adding on another 4-6 kilometres to the length of this underground tunnel, and another 1-2 billion euro to the price. That would be a surefire winner.

BonnieSituation

But we can do a turn back and make the station boxes smaller to save money.

Think outside the box.

strassenwo!f

Bonniesituation, could you expand on what you're thinking, to give us an overall idea of the route, or, perhaps, system, that you're envisaging?

brownbeard

mickmmc wrote: »

The 5 TDs and 2 Senators in Fingal are still divided on the issue of a directly elected Mayor; 5 in favour and 2 against. Those against: Senator James Reilly FG and Brendan Ryan TD (Lab). The North County Leader published articles from the TDs and Senators before Christmas.

Fingal County Council was voted Local Authority of the Year for 2016 (Chamber Ireland Awards).

Did it mention their reasoning for not wanting a directly elected mayor? Is there a link to the articles?

Sam Russell

Mod: Keep politics for the appropriate forum please.

BonnieSituation

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Bonniesituation, could you expand on what you're thinking, to give us an overall idea of the route, or, perhaps, system, that you're envisaging?

It was a joke. You see on of the proposed re-imaginings of the route is a turn back at Pearse. Remember?

And as someone quite rightly pointed out, there's some merit in expanding the route to take in Camden St, The Green South etc...

Reuben1210 wrote:

If anything, they should look at broadening this loop you despise so much to take in the liberties, Harold's Cross, Ranelagh and Rathmines and then Stephen's Green!

The trafic choke up in these areas is worsening by the month

If we're gonna go through the pain of doing this whole project again we may as well get as much bang for our buck as possible. Thankfully I won't ever have to use it on a regular basis as I'm out of here as soon as my degree is done. But good god it would be nice to think we had a brain cell among the powers that be somehwere out there.

Reuben1210

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Yes, adding on another 4-6 kilometres to the length of this underground tunnel, and another 1-2 billion euro to the price. That would be a surefire winner.

It would have more of a future-proofing effect, and make whole areas of the city very accessible without car.
Invest now and reap rewards for generations.
Sure-fire winner.

Grandeeod

Reuben1210 wrote: »

It would have more of a future-proofing effect, and make whole areas of the city very accessible without car.
Invest now and reap rewards for generations.
Sure-fire winner.

Now you see Strassenwolf, it has become even bigger than your route via College Green. As politicians fudge, public opinion changes. With these changes comes even more demands. That feeds into a completely different mindset from a completely different generation.

The longer it goes on, the longer it will take. 40+ years so far and maybe another 40 years to go.

Hotblack Desiato

Maybe I'll get to use my free travel pass on opening day? It might happen in my lifetime. I'm 45...

D.L.R.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Maybe I'll get to use my free travel pass on opening day? It might happen in my lifetime. I'm 45...

Well we're 20 years away, easy. The state is too dysfunctional to deliver this stuff, it can't prioritise effectively. We now have the former transport minister who shelved DU calling for it to be prioritised. Says it all really.

strassenwo!f

Grandeeod wrote: »

Now you see Strassenwolf, it has become even bigger than your route via College Green. As politicians fudge, public opinion changes. With these changes comes even more demands. That feeds into a completely different mindset from a completely different generation.

The longer it goes on, the longer it will take. 40+ years so far and maybe another 40 years to go.

Hang on. The Department of Transport received my suggestion that the DART Underground project might be routed through College Green in early-mid 2005, before the T21 stunt occurred and before there had even been any public consultation on the project. As I have mentioned before on the board, I have always been surprised that the Department did not invite me to spend even 15 minutes of their precious time to expand on what I had written. But, maybe they received many other submissions along the same lines, and didn't have time for mine.

It was in any case not included in the possible routes in that public consultation, probably partly because it wouldn't have been able to show a (then) current connection with the LUAS, which might have been difficult for some people to grasp. There's also no doubt that St. Stephen's Green was, at the time, often perceived as the 'centre' of Ireland, what with the success of Anglo-Irish Bank and the appointment of many of its high-ranking officials to quangos and state-boards.

What a great idea that was.

The College Green idea should be easier to get as the LUAS heads north from St. Stephen's Green, and as the city ponders and plans for pedestrianisation of the area. In my opinion, it dealt well with more than 30 pages of scrutiny on the 'DART Underground - alternative routes' thread, while the possible route through St. Stephen's Green took something of a battering.

Unfortunately that thread was closed, but it would have been ideal for this latest suggestion, supported by the posters BonnieSituation and Reuben1210, of a Hazelhatch-Heuston-Harold's Cross-Rathmines-Ranelagh-St. Stephen's Green-? route.

To me, it looks initially like a route that you might see in Dublin Zoo - so that you can zigzag around and see all the animals - or something one might see in the Japanese Gardens at the National Stud, so we can experience the 'walk of life'. Perhaps one or both could present a potential route for discussion, and we shall see what scrutiny it can withstand.

As I have said a number of times on this board, my own feeling is that the metro north should be continued south (after an interchange with the DART Underground project), towards perhaps a station at or near the 'Bleeding Horse', then split into two routes: one would go initially to Rathmines, Rathgar, Terenure, etc., the other would go to Harold's Cross, Kimmage and onward to Walkinston Cross. There would hopefully be overground sections, but much would probably have to be underground.

That, I think, would the best and most efficient way to fulfil the function of the DU project and to improve the public transport options in those areas of the city mentioned by the two posters.

D.L.R.

Deedsie wrote: »

I was thinking that with Brexit and an isolationist US president in Trump, the Irish electorate could elect a conservative government perhaps a FFFG government with 2.5 years each as Taoiseach agreement. Might finally streamline projects such as this.

I find it hard to see FG or FF as the solution to anything.

Grandeeod

Deedsie wrote: »

I was thinking that with Brexit and an isolationist US president in Trump, the Irish electorate could elect a conservative government perhaps a FFFG government with 2.5 years each as Taoiseach agreement. Might finally streamline projects such as this.

Is this a joke or are you actually serious?

Zebra3

FFFG pretty much is the current government. :rolleyes:

ringostare

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Hang on. The Department of Transport received my suggestion that the DART Underground project might be routed through College Green in early-mid 2005, before the T21 stunt occurred and before there had even been any public consultation on the project. As I have mentioned before on the board, I have always been surprised that the Department did not invite me to spend even 15 minutes of their precious time to expand on what I had written. But, maybe they received many other submissions along the same lines, and didn't have time for mine.

It was in any case not included in the possible routes in that public consultation, probably partly because it wouldn't have been able to show a (then) current connection with the LUAS, which might have been difficult for some people to grasp. There's also no doubt that St. Stephen's Green was, at the time, often perceived as the 'centre' of Ireland, what with the success of Anglo-Irish Bank and the appointment of many of its high-ranking officials to quangos and state-boards.

What a great idea that was.

The College Green idea should be easier to get as the LUAS heads north from St. Stephen's Green, and as the city ponders and plans for pedestrianisation of the area. In my opinion, it dealt well with more than 30 pages of scrutiny on the 'DART Underground - alternative routes' thread, while the possible route through St. Stephen's Green took something of a battering.

Unfortunately that thread was closed, but it would have been ideal for this latest suggestion, supported by the posters BonnieSituation and Reuben1210, of a Hazelhatch-Heuston-Harold's Cross-Rathmines-Ranelagh-St. Stephen's Green-? route.

To me, it looks initially like a route that you might see in Dublin Zoo - so that you can zigzag around and see all the animals - or something one might see in the Japanese Gardens at the National Stud, so we can experience the 'walk of life'. Perhaps one or both could present a potential route for discussion, and we shall see what scrutiny it can withstand.

As I have said a number of times on this board, my own feeling is that the metro north should be continued south (after an interchange with the DART Underground project), towards perhaps a station at or near the 'Bleeding Horse', then split into two routes: one would go initially to Rathmines, Rathgar, Terenure, etc., the other would go to Harold's Cross, Kimmage and onward to Walkinston Cross. There would hopefully be overground sections, but much would probably have to be underground.

That, I think, would the best and most efficient way to fulfil the function of the DU project and to improve the public transport options in those areas of the city mentioned by the two posters.

David Icke levels of self delusion there I'm afraid. There will never be a tunnel built under Trinity College. This has been ruled out and will not be revisited.

Grandeeod

Deedsie wrote: »

I can't read the future, just a possibility of what might happen, anyone who is 100% sure of anything politics related is full of it.

Remind me though, do you not have your own thread for why DART Underground will never be built?

So its not a joke. You are serious eventhough its a suggestion. Fair enough.

As for your last sentence, its irrelevant to the question I asked. Don't let the chip on your shoulder that you have in relation to my opinions on DU, ruin a thread. There was no need for that remark.

Sam Russell

Mod: Can you leave the handbags at the door please.

strassenwo!f

ringostare wrote: »

David Icke levels of self delusion there I'm afraid. There will never be a tunnel built under Trinity College. This has been ruled out and will not be revisited.

Source, perhaps, Ringo?

strassenwo!f

Sorry, to keep in with the style I like to use, when answering other posters, that should have been:

Source, perhaps, Ringo?