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

DART+ (DART Expansion)

Options
1…2627293132…339

Comments

  • Options
    #842
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Sustainable means we can commute on one charge from Longford to Dublin in our shiny electric cars because there is a Motorway network today :)

    Had we no motorway network the same car with the same batteries could only sustain return travel from Enfield what with all the stopping and starting involved :D


  • Options
    #843
    dubhthach
    Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    MYOB wrote: »
    Around that area, we also have a linear park of sorts on the reserveration for the rail line to the Blanchardstown Town Centre that was planned in the 1980s

    http://maps.google.de/?ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=53.378605,-6.393957&spn=0.00224,0.006899&z=17

    I believe that reservation is to be used as part of "Metro West" I'd have to check the design documents for "Metro west" again though to be certain.


  • Options
    #844
    GizAGoOfYerGee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 355 ✭✭GizAGoOfYerGee


    dubhthach wrote: »
    I believe that reservation is to be used as part of "Metro West" I'd have to check the design documents for "Metro west" again though to be certain.


    Nope. MW goes up beside Diswellstown/Clonsila Road, half a kilometer to the west.


  • Options
    #845
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,076 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Wild Bill wrote: »
    They "sustainable" lobby got what they wanted - tight zoning restrictions in Dublin.

    The results may have been unintended consequences - but consequences nonetheless.

    It was like squeezing a balloon - they pinched the building bubble in Dublin and it expanded somewhere else. Leaving a much worse situation when the balloon burst.

    Developers and speculators were holding massive land banks in Dublin, there's no question of this now. Yet you're trying to blame people who wanted sustainable development and mostly failed in getting their way. Have a think about that.

    Wild Bill wrote: »
    Nobody can calculate or define what "sustainable" means in terms of development - it is a trendy mantra rendered meaningless through mindless repetition.

    The very word has itself become a form verbal and literary pollution.

    Only in your mind has it become nonsense.

    What's easy to say is that living 50km or 100km away from your work place is less sustainable than somebody living 15km. And living 15km is less sustainable than living 5km or less away.

    But you're right, things are not always clear. Because cycling 20km is more sustainable than driving 5km. Or taking a DART train 30km is more sustainable than driving 15km.


  • Options
    #846
    Wild Bill
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭Wild Bill


    monument wrote: »
    Developers and speculators were holding massive land banks in Dublin, there's no question of this now. Yet you're trying to blame people who wanted sustainable development and mostly failed in getting their way. Have a think about that.

    Only in your mind has it become nonsense.

    I think not.

    Developers and speculators were holding massive land banks in Dublin. Yep. And they could do this because the daft NIMBY driven zoning and planning restrictions in Dublin made it possible. :cool:

    Think about that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #847
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,076 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Wild Bill wrote: »
    I think not.

    Developers and speculators were holding massive land banks in Dublin. Yep. And they could do this because the daft NIMBY driven zoning and planning restrictions in Dublin made it possible. :cool:

    Think about that.

    Err but the problem with that theory is that developers and speculators were mostly holding on to land banks already ZONED for development!


  • Options
    #848
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    monument wrote: »
    Err but the problem with that theory is that developers and speculators were mostly holding on to land banks already ZONED for development!


    Sorry Wild Bill, but Monument is right.


  • Options
    #849
    Wild Bill
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭Wild Bill


    DWCommuter wrote: »
    Sorry Wild Bill, but Monument is right.

    Couldn't disagree more.

    Yes - developers were hogging zoned land; nobody disputes that.

    This was facilitated, made possible, by restrictions on the zoning of land by the Nimby element.

    To make it simple: if you rezoned three times as much land the evil developers would need to spend three times as much tying up the land. And their existing portfolio would plummet in value.

    So there was an unholy alliance between Nimbys and owners of the existing zoned land to prevent additional zoning.

    Against which was pitted the brown envelopes of owners of some unzoned land.

    Without the Nimbys and trendy "planners" this whole "zoning" nonsense would have been impossible. :cool:


  • Options
    #850
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    Wild Bill wrote: »
    Couldn't disagree more.

    Yes - developers were hogging zoned land; nobody disputes that.

    This was facilitated, made possible, by restrictions on the zoning of land by the Nimby element.

    To make it simple: if you rezoned three times as much land the evil developers would need to spend three times as much tying up the land. And their existing portfolio would plummet in value.

    So there was an unholy alliance between Nimbys and owners of the existing zoned land to prevent additional zoning.

    Against which was pitted the brown envelopes of owners of some unzoned land.

    Without the Nimbys and trendy "planners" this whole "zoning" nonsense would have been impossible. :cool:


    Have a read of this Bill. It relates to the amount of zoned land available in Dublin around 2004 and not yet built on at that stage.

    My argument and that of monument (i think) concerns the amount of zoned land.


    http://www.businessandfinance.ie/index.jsp?p=450&n=465&a=1764

    I can find no evidence that development of housing land in Dublin was hindered by nimbyism. It may have existed as it does anywhere, but I don't think it caused the problems we are talking about. There are examples of developers sitting on large tracts of zoned and serviced land in Dublin while they were building housing estates in provincial towns.


  • Options
    #851
    Judgement Day
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    Chris_5339762 wrote: »
    God those motorway plans would have been almost as destructive as Ringway 1 in London.

    Interestingly the map shows the woeful Eastern Bypass as running on existing land as opposed to cutting across Sandymount Strand. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #852
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Judgement Day wrote: »
    Interestingly the map shows the woeful Eastern Bypass as running on existing land as opposed to cutting across Sandymount Strand. :rolleyes:

    Every major city had a plan like that in the 1960s. In London it was the "Ringways" idea of which they only built the eastern segment around the Blackwall tunnel and in Paris it was the Péripherique ( which was built, scary road that :( ) .

    Cities then realised the futitilty of what they were doing and built the outer motorways like the M50 and M25 instead and switched to building heavy public transport like Interconnector further in.


  • Options
    #853
    Judgement Day
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Every major city had a plan like that in the 1960s. In London it was the "Ringways" idea of which they only built the eastern segment around the Blackwall tunnel and in Paris it was the Péripherique ( which was built, scary road that :( ) .

    Cities then realised the futitilty of what they were doing and built the outer motorways like the M50 and M25 instead and switched to building heavy public transport like Interconnector further in.

    Yes, but sadly, like 'the boys,' the Eastern Bypass hasn't gone away you know. :( Agree with you about the wall of death in Paris - the only time I ever thought I was going to die!. For anybody not familiar with same, try and imagine the railway cutting between Dun Laoghaire and Sandycove but with 8 (?) lanes of traffic, filled with insane French motorists driving at lunatic speeds and not using their indicators. :D


  • Options
    #854
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,076 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Wild Bill wrote: »
    To make it simple: if you rezoned three times as much land the evil developers would need to spend three times as much tying up the land. And their existing portfolio would plummet in value.

    That's fuzzy logic there. If the land "plummets in value" than they would not need need to spend three times as much on buying up most of the extra land. You have to take into account a lot of the land which was been held by speculators was bought at relatively low prices.

    I think we'll just have to agree to disagree at this stage.
    Judgement Day wrote: »
    Interestingly the map shows the woeful Eastern Bypass as running on existing land as opposed to cutting across Sandymount Strand. :rolleyes:

    3375556245_bf4ae4bdc3.jpg


  • Options
    #855
    gjim
    Registered Users Posts: 1,131 ✭✭✭gjim


    Wild Bill wrote: »
    I am aggressively and unapologetically in favour suburban semi-d housing. It is the most advanced and civilized best quality of life that the masses of humanity have ever experienced.
    Lists of the best cities in the world to live in invariably include places like Vienna, Zurich, Vancouver, Copenhagen, etc. - all of which predominantly feature apartment living. It requires a particularly parochial worldview or very limited experience to believe strongly that the likes of the west Dublin suburban sprawl offers a more civilized and advanced lifestyle than somewhere like Vienna.


  • Options
    #856
    Jehuty42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 560 ✭✭✭Jehuty42


    Correlation != causation.


  • Options
    #857
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,327 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    gjim wrote: »
    Lists of the best cities in the world to live in invariably include places like Vienna, Zurich, Vancouver, Copenhagen, etc. - all of which predominantly feature apartment living. It requires a particularly parochial worldview or very limited experience to believe strongly that the likes of the west Dublin suburban sprawl offers a more civilized and advanced lifestyle than somewhere like Vienna.
    To be fair, Vancouver has a very built up core district but no shortage of semi-ds and commuter towns out in the valley. The difference is a commitment to integrated transportation, especially given that highways, road bridges, cycling infrastructure, heavy rail, light metro, buses (including bendy and electric bendy) and cross harbour ferries are under one Authority (Translink).


  • Options
    #858
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    Either/or should not be the issue. The solutions exist for some of the sprawl and the new found high density in the city of Dublin. Thats actually why both MN and DU are required in tandem. Unfortunately there appears to be a mindset that thinks MN is more important. That would be Government driven and it has picked up a few informed supporters who see it as vital while they conveniently forget the waste land it may leave behind if DU isn't prioritised.

    IEs fudging is typical. However if DU was as important as MN to Government policy I bet it would have been less awkward and fasttracked through design problems and arrived on the table ready to go.

    Does anyone else think that the RPA just play to Government whims and have internal support? Perhaps a throughback to the cowardly anti CIE policy that the outgoing Government held but didn't act upon. Thats how the RPA came about.:D FACT!.


  • Options
    #859
    gjim
    Registered Users Posts: 1,131 ✭✭✭gjim


    dowlingm wrote: »
    To be fair, Vancouver has a very built up core district but no shortage of semi-ds and commuter towns out in the valley. The difference is a commitment to integrated transportation, especially given that highways, road bridges, cycling infrastructure, heavy rail, light metro, buses (including bendy and electric bendy) and cross harbour ferries are under one Authority (Translink).
    Of course. All cities, including those I've mentioned, have hinterlands of commuter towns and areas of suburbia. However they all have extensive areas of high density which is the only pattern of development which can economically support the sort of public transport you describe above. It is simply infeasible in terms of capital and running costs to service large areas of low density semi-d houses with frequent public transport. Yes you can service some areas like this as a by-product of a system sustained by a densely populated core but show me a city dominated by semi-d housing which can support decent public transport.

    But that's not really my point which was more to emphasize that if your experience of urban living has been to live in a badly designed Zoe-built one-bed in an "urban renewal area" for a few years as a semi-impoverished young adult before getting on a bit and moving to a semi-d in Lucan, then perhaps the semi-d will seem like the pinnacle of human lifestyle. But I am constantly frustrated at how reluctant Ireland is to look beyond Britain - the 19th birthplace of the idea of the "garden city"/suburbia - for models of everything when a few 100 km to the east covers the majority of the cities that have been universally judged to be the best places in the world to live.

    I don't deny there are certain advantages to semi-d suburbia but to claim it represents the most advanced and civilized form of human living is nonsense.


  • Options
    #860
    strassenwo!f
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    There hasn't been a huge amount in the papers about the ABP inquiry into this proposed project. (Maybe 'cos it's happening out in the sticks?)

    Any word how things are progressing?


  • Options
    #861
    coolmangg
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭coolmangg


    Why don't we build something like this instead?
    Described below!

    I have altered the Interconnector slightly.
    In my proposal the interconnector runs as a Dublin Inner City Orbital route (Blue Line). It joins up with the Phoenix Park Tunnel. Trains will run in both directions continuously around the city center. There will be interchanges with all other type of service, luas, Metro, heavy rail etc.

    In my proposal also, Sligo / Maynooth / Dunboyne trains will terminate in the Docklands, where they could interchange with the Orbital route. This will free up Conolly services allowing additional Darts to run. There will be an interchange at Ossary Rd between Sligo line and North Line trains also.

    The great thing about this option is that most of the rail is existing. Some new stations would need to be built. The Interconnector would be altered and not run as far as Inshicore, however trains would run from Hazzlehatch to Heuston, interchanging with the Orbital route here.

    I have also shown where I think the Metro West should extend to meet the northern train line.

    I have notionally included the metro south / metro west / Lucan Luas / etc however these are secondary to the concept of the Orbital route. This could be built quickly as half of the route is there today, and it will not interfere with existing lines and will connect the entire system, not only Conolly & Heuston.

    http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...,0.209255&z=13

    1 more point on this option.
    It will encourage a higher density city center, and rejuvenate run down areas
    of the city.
    We need to encourage a higher density city center. Commuting from Hazlehatch / Dunboyne, Balbriggan etc should not be encouraged. The Orbital route allows this.

    Please let me know what you think


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #862
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,863 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    coolmangg wrote: »
    We need to encourage a higher density city center. Commuting from Hazlehatch / Dunboyne, Balbriggan etc should not be encouraged.

    Why not? I don't think communting from those areas is a massive problem. Commuting from places like Arklow and Poirtalington is crazy imo.


  • Options
    #863
    Jack Noble
    Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭Jack Noble


    Fine Gael Transport spokesman Simon Coveney has just committed FG to backing Metro North when in government during debate with Ciaran Cuffe of Greens on Last Word with Matt Cooper on Today FM. No fudging - said he was convinced by business case and the PPP funding model was attractive. But cast doubt on Dart Underground by saying we probably couldn't afford both. That bit is worrying and gives me cause for concern. However, the support for Metro North very encouraging - puts the ball back in Labour's court.

    I would say that part of the problem with these debates in the media is journalists' lack of indepth knowledge of both projects. If Cooper had more than a superficial understanding of either project, he could have questioned Coveney further, particularly on Dart Underground. The problem is most journalists' knowledge and views' on both projects is formed by reading McDonald in the Irish Times, Myers in the Indo and the clueless rants on the likes of Politics.ie. A little solid research really wouldn't go amiss here.


  • Options
    #864
    coolmangg
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭coolmangg


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Why not? I don't think communting from those areas is a massive problem. Commuting from places like Arklow and Poirtalington is crazy imo.

    Well, yes commuting from Dunboyne / Hazlehatch etc isn't as bad as Gorey Longford etc, however the city center has so many abandoned / derelict buildings and plots that there is no reason why we couldn't increase population density here! Reducing the need for long expensive public transport modes to serve the sprawl. Just my take on it!

    <http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203718849652007389080.00049b7409e80af9d8802&ll=53.316518,-6.325378&spn=0.39297,0.837021&z=11&gt;


  • Options
    #865
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQBWvgPwmnROVMqjdBTiZffUVEAclHOLy9Uj_0wuycUI0avuV4-&t=1


  • Options
    #866
    coolmangg
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭coolmangg


    Hi, I'd like to share a Google Maps link with you. Link:

    http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203718849652007389080.00049b7409e80af9d8802&ll=53.316518,-6.325378&spn=0.39297,0.837021&z=11>

    Third times the charm! : )


  • Options
    #867
    strassenwo!f
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    According to this thread, this important project has been delayed.

    Maybe this would be a good time to look at whether the route is the optimum one for Dubliners.


  • Options
    #868
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,076 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    strassenwo!f wrote: »
    According to this thread, this important project has been delayed.

    Maybe this would be a good time to look at whether the route is the optimum one for Dubliners.

    You want to change a project which is currently at public hearing stage with ABP?


  • Options
    #869
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    As far as the criteria dictate, it's pretty much the best it can be already.


  • Options
    #870
    strassenwo!f
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    monument wrote: »
    You want to change a project which is currently at public hearing stage with ABP?

    Yes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #871
    strassenwo!f
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    Aard wrote: »
    As far as the criteria dictate, it's pretty much the best it can be already.

    There's a delay. Now might be a good time to look at all the aspects of this project.

    Including the criteria.


Advertisement