Connolly Station redevelopment

Rud

Somehow i can't see this happening

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cie-pulls-out-all-the-stops-with-massive-connolly-development-2678714.html

mikemac

No shortage of hotels around that area and the IFSC isn't lacking vacant office space for sure.

It is an excellent location but they are a few years late with this

I don't see it happening either

And even as I say a few years late I remember the fantastic plans for Ceannt Station in Galway during the Celtic Tiger and again nothing happened there

Bluetonic

mikemac wrote: »

No shortage of hotels around that area and the IFSC isn't lacking vacant office space for sure.

The majority of the office space in the IFSC is too small for any very large companies who want to base them self in the one buidling

There is a serious lack of high quality modern large office space in Dublin city.

Hungerford

Rud wrote: »

Somehow i can't see this happening

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cie-pulls-out-all-the-stops-with-massive-connolly-development-2678714.html

Unsurprisingly, Barry Kenny failed to mention that the plan involved the removal of all stabling capacity at the station. But then again, CIE is a transport property speculation company dedicated to operating destroying the state's railways.

Bluetonic

Is this going to turn into another excuse to slag CIE/IR/Barry Kenny?

Totally and utterly pointless.

Run_to_da_hills

Train stations and hotels don't mix.

http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/115332.html

n97 mini

It amazes me how disconnected CIE is from reality. Leo, do something!

mikemac

Bluetonic wrote: »

There is a serious lack of high quality modern large office space in Dublin city.

Fantastic office space at HSQ by Heuston and much of that is vacant.
Eircom have very impressive offices out there

foggy_lad

Maybe they could build a proper train station when they are doing all their developing? Connolly station is an awful mess with platforms spread all over the place and only one entrance which seriously inconveniences all dart and suburban commuters who use platforms 5, 6 and 7. They should really reopen the old commuter entrance but maybe there is some reason apart from the usual security fears for not doing this? is that part of the building in a good state of repair? maybe it is falling down or has some critical defect? why else would Irish Rail inconvenience most of their daily bread and butter passengers?

mikemac

The motorcycle dealer is closed down now so it should be possible to reopen the old entrance.

It wasn't possible while they held the lease.
I'm not sure what the delay is

If it's security fear and people getting hassled in a narrow walkway, well nobody better then the ex Serbian paratroopers :P to move them on.
They do a good job with security

mgmt

From The Article
13 new buildings, ranging in height from two to seven storeys, on the space currently occupied by offices and the car park.

Where's the new intercity bus station they planned to put in the car park? The NTA should take over this asset and build the new bus terminal.

dowlingm

Hungerford wrote: »

Unsurprisingly, Barry Kenny failed to mention that the plan involved the removal of all stabling capacity at the station. But then again, CIE is a transport property speculation company dedicated to operating destroying the state's railways.

What trains are stabled? If these are commuter trains deadheading in the mornings, they should be stored nearer their morning startpoints. In Toronto they have stabling yards east and west of Union Station to store trains mid-day but none in the station itself which is dedicated to optimizing track placement.

Run_to_da_hills

mikemac wrote: »

The motorcycle dealer is closed down now so it should be possible to reopen the old entrance.

I doubt if it will get the numbers, since its closure we have now got the Luas, most commuters taking this will continue to use the current entrance particularly if it is raining.

BrianD

Hungerford wrote: »

Unsurprisingly, Barry Kenny failed to mention that the plan involved the removal of all stabling capacity at the station. But then again, CIE is a transport property speculation company dedicated to operating destroying the state's railways.

Is stabling required? There should be no train storage at Connolly. Trains should be either passing through in the case of commuter trains and for intercity pull in and out.

Perhaps CIE should get a bit of a pat on the back for breaking the traditional mould.

Redeveloping Connolly makes sense. There's also value in well located properties. It's an asset that should increase in value.

DWCommuter

"Preparing for the future"

More like clinging to the past.

CIE can't do transport and they certainly can't do property development. Despite the biggest ever development boom in the history of the state, they consistently failed to redevelop large tracts of land successfully. They destroyed the Spencer Dock site on the premise that the money would roll forever and the interconnector would be built. Their little surface station that was intended to be temporary was sited based on developers interests, thereby negating its connectivity to other lines. It currently occupies a derelict site that may never see the planned development, while freight activity was squeezed down towards the Point yard and more or less abandoned. But low and behold, CIE now want to forge ahead with planning permission for yet another part of their rail facilities that they deem unnecessary.

All that said, I'm still amazed at the attitude to property development in this country despite the greatest ever boom and bust scenario. While I accept that in the future, development will recover to a point, these CIE plans are akin to the crazy OTT crap that ultimately put us in the ****ter in the first place. Had they done it when it was easier to finance, we'd have it regardless and perhaps make it work eventually. But I believe they have missed the boat as is always usual with anything CIE attempts.

Only CIE could fail to develop their land during the freaky building boom we experienced. I witnessed Pitch and Putt courses turn into apartment complexes within months. Yet CIE trot out grandiose plans when the arse has completely fallen out of building in this country and will never (because its right) reach the levels they are currently aspiring to.

CIE - The absolute worst semi-state ever.

BrianD

DWCommuter wrote: »

"Preparing for the future"

More like clinging to the past.

CIE can't do transport and they certainly can't do property development. Despite the biggest ever development boom in the history of the state, they consistently failed to redevelop large tracts of land successfully. They destroyed the Spencer Dock site on the premise that the money would roll forever and the interconnector would be built. Their little surface station that was intended to be temporary was sited based on developers interests, thereby negating its connectivity to other lines. It currently occupies a derelict site that may never see the planned development, while freight activity was squeezed down towards the Point yard and more or less abandoned. But low and behold, CIE now want to forge ahead with planning permission for yet another part of their rail facilities that they deem unnecessary.

All that said, I'm still amazed at the attitude to property development in this country despite the greatest ever boom and bust scenario. While I accept that in the future, development will recover to a point, these CIE plans are akin to the crazy OTT crap that ultimately put us in the ****ter in the first place. Had they done it when it was easier to finance, we'd have it regardless and perhaps make it work eventually. But I believe they have missed the boat as is always usual with anything CIE attempts.

Only CIE could fail to develop their land during the freaky building boom we experienced. I witnessed Pitch and Putt courses turn into apartment complexes within months. Yet CIE trot out grandiose plans when the arse has completely fallen out of building in this country and will never (because its right) reach the levels they are currently aspiring to.

CIE - The absolute worst semi-state ever.

In fairness, where else would the Docklands station have been sited? It is at the end of the line.

At the same time, perhaps CIE were wise to participate in the boom. They would never have been selling the land and that's where a lot of the money was being spent in the boom. Plus it's likely they would have been in one of these crazy joint venture projects and probably be goosed now. Most of the "developers" in Ireland never had real cash. They either borrowed or if possible pony up with a state company on a joint venture. The risk was with somebody else. You can guess who'd be holding the baby now.

I do recall various plans for both Connolly and Ceant Stations in the past. There most have been something distinctly unattractive about the deals for them not to go ahead. Perhaps it was that CIE couldn't do a deal or there was some reason that developers couldn't get the finance.

Within reason, now is a good time to develop. They still have the land, building costs are down and the CIE sites are in good locations. They will always be valuable.

opinion guy

Madness. If they are investing any money is should be on upgrading rail infrastructure so they can increase capacity through the place, not on property speculation. Don't they watch the news or are they really so far out of touch.

Run_to_da_hills

When the proposed project fails they could use it to rehouse the Fry Model Railway Museum.

dowlingm

The best argument against IE doing this is the balls made of similar proposals at Tara Street, Cork and Galway. If IE have surplus lands suitable for development they should be transferred to a State body whose function would be to aggregate such surpluses and strike deals with developers or commission their own projects. IE could then acquire lands in places like Maynooth/Enfield for a suburban/DART depot to migrate the stabling areas to where they are needed.

BrianD

dowlingm wrote: »

The best argument against IE doing this is the balls made of similar proposals at Tara Street, Cork and Galway. If IE have surplus lands suitable for development they should be transferred to a State body whose function would be to aggregate such surpluses and strike deals with developers or commission their own projects. IE could then acquire lands in places like Maynooth/Enfield for a suburban/DART depot to migrate the stabling areas to where they are needed.

Speaking of Tara St., I notice some demolition work on the buildings on the Tara St. side of the plot that that makes up the proposed development (as far as I remember). ANybody know what's going on there?

DWCommuter

BrianD wrote: »

In fairness, where else would the Docklands station have been sited? It is at the end of the line.

It could have been sited so that it connected with the Drumcondra line and onwards to the PPT. It wasn't, because the developers (CIE & Treasury Holdings aka SDDC) decided that it should be sited on the edge of the proposed development, which (lets face it) won't see development any time soon. Docklands station may become a long term option, but its possibilities have been compromised by greed. The entire Spencer Dock affair was a diabolical misuse of railway property devoid of vision and driven by the incessant greed and disregard for rail based options in the short term. The Luas interchange is poor and the entire project is now without any long term future.

We are now back at short term rail options.

Spencer Dock could have been the main rail head in Dublin and included the development aspects. It was rail connected to every line in the country at one point. All Inter City services could have terminated there. Add in DU and Luas connection and you have a very central rail hub. Heuston could have been redeveloped. Connolly shed could have been the same, leaving the through line for DART and commuter services.

Hungerford

dowlingm wrote: »

What trains are stabled? If these are commuter trains deadheading in the mornings, they should be stored nearer their morning startpoints.

The trains which are stabled overnight at Connolly start there in the mornings - it is the terminus for three intercity lines - Belfast, Sligo and Rosslare. If they remove the stabling at Connolly, the trains would presumably have to deadhead from Portlaoise, Drogheda or Bray.

Lapin

Hungerford wrote: »

If they remove the stabling at Connolly, the trains would presumably have to deadhead from Portlaoise, Drogheda or Bray.

Mullingar no ?

Victor

BrianD wrote: »

In fairness, where else would the Docklands station have been sited? It is at the end of the line.

A similar, two platform station could have been built right at the corner of Guild Street and North Wall Quay (next to the Beckett Bridge), within the south part of Spencer Dock site. This would have meant that it would have had a direct connection to the Luas Red Line and the proposed North Wall Quay QBC (mostly for express buses using the Port Tunnel).

And while Irish Rail don't like buildings over station platforms, a little re-jigging of the site could have arranged that.

Losty Dublin

Victor wrote: »

A similar, two platform station could have been built right at the corner of Guild Street and North Wall Quay (next to the Beckett Bridge), within the south part of Spencer Dock site. This would have meant that it would have had a direct connection to the Luas Red Line and the proposed North Wall Quay QBC (mostly for express buses using the Port Tunnel).

And while Irish Rail don't like buildings over station platforms, a little re-jigging of the site could have arranged that.

That site wasn't considered due to the fact that there are in fact buildings in the way, Victor

Seriously though, there was issues with the potential construction of the underground station and canal that made it handier to put it where it now is; it can also be kept open if need be where it is. IRRS Journal 169 refers to this FTR.

BrianD

Hungerford wrote: »

The trains which are stabled overnight at Connolly start there in the mornings - it is the terminus for three intercity lines - Belfast, Sligo and Rosslare. If they remove the stabling at Connolly, the trains would presumably have to deadhead from Portlaoise, Drogheda or Bray.

Can they not be left at platforms where they operate from now?

D.L.R.

Jaysus, the Brits really screwed us up as a race didn't they. Apparently the only way to make money in this kip is to be a landlord and acquire tenants. No other ideas forthcoming, even after the worst property crash in our history its still the only idea our state bodies can come up with!! How about some transport ideas CIE!

And so many talented people out of work/leaving, while these chimps continue to feed off taxpayer's money dreaming up useless fantasy football projects.

Whoever suggested CIE need to go, I agree entirely. They can join Fianna Foul, the Kid-o-lick Church, and RTE.

dowlingm

Hungerford wrote: »

The trains which are stabled overnight at Connolly start there in the mornings - it is the terminus for three intercity lines - Belfast, Sligo and Rosslare. If they remove the stabling at Connolly, the trains would presumably have to deadhead from Portlaoise, Drogheda or Bray.

Given that Rosslare has now been pushed back beyond rush hour in the draft timetable, the case for stabling there as opposed to sending out an incoming service has reduced.

The first Belfast service leaves 0735 which is early but not so early that the set couldn't run in from elsewhere like Heuston (like the sidings currently being occupied by shiny new 22Ks) or North Wall if the Mark 3s met their scrapper. There are early services ex Connolly to Maynooth (0530, 0610, 0640) but how many of them would be justified if the option existed of return services based from a Maynooth or Enfield yard.

The only way I see a successful development happening in Connolly is to construct something that a) doesn't exist elsewhere in the City of Dublin in terms of floorplan or facilities and b) has potential tenants unsatisfied by their current options. Damned if I can think of something to fit the bill.

LXFlyer

For this to happen you would need alternative stabling locations overnight, and an alternative train care depot location for the servicing of trains - two Sligo sets are serviced there during the day along with the Rosslare sets - but this could be done.

Overnight in Connolly there are normally at least 6 commuter sets (some 4 and some 8 car) for Maynooth/M3, two commuter sets for Rosslare, three 3-car ICR units and a Belfast set.

They could not be all accomodated in the four terminal platforms!

But as several posters point out with some re-jigging around these could be stored elsewhere.

DWCommuter

Losty Dublin wrote: »

That site wasn't considered due to the fact that there are in fact buildings in the way, Victor

Seriously though, there was issues with the potential construction of the underground station and canal that made it handier to put it where it now is; it can also be kept open if need be where it is. IRRS Journal 169 refers to this FTR.

You are referring to post development of Spencer Dock South. The story goes back further than that. In the original master plan for the site, the overground station was to be incorporated into the South development beside where the luas now runs. That would have been the sensible thing to do as it was a brown field site.

Losty Dublin

DWCommuter wrote: »

You are referring to post development of Spencer Dock South. The story goes back further than that. In the original master plan for the site, the overground station was to be incorporated into the South development beside where the luas now runs. That would have been the sensible thing to do as it was a brown field site.

It would have been in an ideal world. But regardless of any land grabbing speculation, there is still practical issues in locating a temporary station around and under a canal basin that's due to be dug under in the mid term.

Going back a few posts, the need to stable trains at Connolly and indeed Pearse and Heuston will be minimal in the future provided Dart Underground goes ahead. Remember, most trains serving the city will be electried through services to and from Maynooth and Drogheda, sites of proposed service depots for same.

bk

I'm amazed at all the posts from people saying it is crazy to do property development now in a recession, it seems we Irish never learn!

People thinking the current recession will last forever is just as bad as people thinking the property bubble would last forever.

The economy goes in cycles, the current recession will eventually end and there will be again a big demand for office space, specially for very large buildings in a premium city center location like the IFSC.

Dublin in particular is lacking in such large office buildings in such a premium location. So the 50,000 ft of free office space spread out over small locations throughout the county is irrelevant to the likes of a large multinational like Google or Facebook looking to open a massive HQ here.

Now is the perfect time to at least plan for such a future development, ideally you want to be building such projects just at the end of a recession, so that you benefit from cheap land prices, labour and building supplies. Ideally with construction completing in the middle of the upturn so you can sell the property then.

The reason Tara St., Cork, Galway, etc. developments failed, is because they only seemed to get started on them in the middle of the property bubble, rather then be ready with them to sell when the property bubble emerged.

Hasn't anybody in Ireland ever heard of counter cyclical economic policy? Basically you massively reduce development during the good times, hoarding the money instead and taking a little heat out of the economy and then in the bad times you massively increase spending (financed from the money you previously hoarded) to help the economy pick up a little and get the best bang for your buck.

It is this lesson Irish people so badly need to learn, all economies go in cycles.

However I'm not saying this particular project is a good idea or not or arguing that CIE has been far too focused on property development rather then the needs of commuters. I just wanted to make this general point.

dowlingm

bk

I agree with your premise to a large extent - the problem is that planning is timelimited so this works against forward planning. I realise CIE are looking for a longer time horizon here but there may be objections to this by developers who can't claim their buildings as infrastructure.

EDIT: In the case of the M3 trains the intent was that these would start from Navan once completed, freeing up storage in central Dublin. Needless to say we'll be a while waiting for that to happen now!

Victor

Losty Dublin wrote: »

It would have been in an ideal world. But regardless of any land grabbing speculation, there is still practical issues in locating a temporary station around and under a canal basin that's due to be dug under in the mid term.

This seems a bit confused. The canal basin is being left untouched.

Going back a few posts, the need to stable trains at Connolly and indeed Pearse and Heuston will be minimal in the future provided Dart Underground goes ahead. Remember, most trains serving the city will be electried through services to and from Maynooth and Drogheda, sites of proposed service depots for same.

And what happens if you need to fuel or repair a train coming from Belfast or Sligo?

opinion guy

Victor wrote: »

This seems a bit confused. The canal basin is being left untouched.
And what happens if you need to fuel or repair a train coming from Belfast or Sligo?

Get everyone out and push

Losty Dublin

Victor wrote: »

This seems a bit confused. The canal basin is being left untouched.

The canal is untouched but the fact that it is there curtails the space on the ground. Meanwhile, any issues with below surface work would have neeedlessly risked closing off the station where it located there.

Victor wrote: »

And what happens if you need to fuel or repair a train coming from Belfast or Sligo?

Nothing; they are serviced from platform 1 and 2 in the main so there isn't any issue with them. It's Northern, southern and Western railcars that stable in Connolly; most of them will become through services when the tunnel comes to, hence no need for stabling space.

dowlingm

Have just looked at the renderings on SkyscraperCity and compared to Bing Birds Eye.

It's a lot of siding/shed space to lose - more than I expected. I imagine the cleanup on those sites will be massive too given the years of fueling/repair operations. I suppose some of the fueling could be done by Irish Rail North Wall but that's awkward and uses up approaches capacity unless something is done to increase the current 2-trackage parallel to Stoney Road and West Road.

There is an assertion on IRN that one of the buildings will have a shed under it but I can't see it in the published material and unless it was completely IE owned/tenanted I can't imagine the noise being acceptable to tenants above, plus how would that be safe compared to a simple passenger station with no fueling/repair ops?

Moving CTC is probably no small job either, even if done during one of IE's 48 hour shutdowns at Christmas. Add to that - where do the buses go?

IE need to be proactive with their "forward planning" and present an operations plan which envisages maximum utilisation of Connolly in this new configuration - Maynooth DART, hourly Enterprise and so on, including fallback should Interconnector be delayed beyond the time horizon of this development plan. One option could be to do it in two stages - the first only involving the buildings east of Commons Street/Cobourg Street and the current car park until such time as alternative yards etc are commissioned, then do the larger second stage.

Also - 7 storeys max beside Connolly and LUAS and supposedly intended for large single-site property requirements. Be still my beating heart.

DWCommuter

Losty Dublin wrote: »

It would have been in an ideal world. But regardless of any land grabbing speculation, there is still practical issues in locating a temporary station around and under a canal basin that's due to be dug under in the mid term.

From the Treasury Holdings Spencer Dock north implementation framework dated January 2004;

A new surface station accommodating three tracks will be provided on Spencer Dock south site on the Mayor Street Square. The line of the railway tracks run under the existing Sheriff street bridge.

This corresponds with the phasing of construction which states;

The construction is likely to commence to the western side of the site (Spencer Dock north) overlooking the canal. This will allow the construction of the railway line to the east

Since then we got no surface station in Spencer Dock south which would have been better from an integration point of view and the existing station was built in a different place that was originally planned. The canal had nothing to do with it.

DWCommuter

bk wrote: »

I'm amazed at all the posts from people saying it is crazy to do property development now in a recession, it seems we Irish never learn!

People thinking the current recession will last forever is just as bad as people thinking the property bubble would last forever.

The economy goes in cycles, the current recession will eventually end and there will be again a big demand for office space, specially for very large buildings in a premium city center location like the IFSC.

Dublin in particular is lacking in such large office buildings in such a premium location. So the 50,000 ft of free office space spread out over small locations throughout the county is irrelevant to the likes of a large multinational like Google or Facebook looking to open a massive HQ here.

Now is the perfect time to at least plan for such a future development, ideally you want to be building such projects just at the end of a recession, so that you benefit from cheap land prices, labour and building supplies. Ideally with construction completing in the middle of the upturn so you can sell the property then.

The reason Tara St., Cork, Galway, etc. developments failed, is because they only seemed to get started on them in the middle of the property bubble, rather then be ready with them to sell when the property bubble emerged.

Hasn't anybody in Ireland ever heard of counter cyclical economic policy? Basically you massively reduce development during the good times, hoarding the money instead and taking a little heat out of the economy and then in the bad times you massively increase spending (financed from the money you previously hoarded) to help the economy pick up a little and get the best bang for your buck.

It is this lesson Irish people so badly need to learn, all economies go in cycles.

However I'm not saying this particular project is a good idea or not or arguing that CIE has been far too focused on property development rather then the needs of commuters. I just wanted to make this general point.

Yes, as a rule economies go in cycles. However the Irish economy is very different to many others. Our only boom cycle to speak of was based on construction which was unsustainable and did untold damage to our credit reputation

People thinking the current recession will last forever is just as bad as people thinking the property bubble would last forever.

I don't believe it is as bad. I believe its based on the doubts about what will deliver decent and sustainable growth to our economy.

The reason Tara St., Cork, Galway, etc. developments failed, is because they only seemed to get started on them in the middle of the property bubble, rather then be ready with them to sell when the property bubble emerged.

As I alluded to in an earlier post, I believe the failure to redevelop these sites was due to the lack of real commercial drive within CIE.

It is this lesson Irish people so badly need to learn, all economies go in cycles.

Positivity is a good thing, but Irelands economic cycle is very much in its infancy. The real lesson Irish people need to learn should be about consistent single digit growth that is sustainable. Construction isn't. Add to that an absolute rejection of mass development until our planning and legal system has been tailored to make it sound.

bk

DWCommuter wrote: »

Yes, as a rule economies go in cycles. However the Irish economy is very different to many others. Our only boom cycle to speak of was based on construction which was unsustainable and did untold damage to our credit reputation

Sigh, just like what people use to say during the boom times, Irelands economy is different and the good times will last forever.

DWCommuter wrote: »

Positivity is a good thing, but Irelands economic cycle is very much in its infancy. The real lesson Irish people need to learn should be about consistent single digit growth that is sustainable. Construction isn't. Add to that an absolute rejection of mass development until our planning and legal system has been tailored to make it sound.

Agree 100%

DWCommuter

bk wrote: »

Sigh, just like what people use to say during the boom times, Irelands economy is different and the good times will last forever.



Agree 100%

Hmmm...

Forget about anything the so called positive thinkers said during the boom times. Ireland's economy IS different and needs to be treated accordingly. To equate what I said, to assholes who wanted to promote a fantasy, is wrong.

Positivity is a good thing, but Irelands economic cycle is very much in its infancy. The real lesson Irish people need to learn should be about consistent single digit growth that is sustainable. Construction isn't. Add to that an absolute rejection of mass development until our planning and legal system has been tailored to make it sound.

If you agree with this then you have no need to equate my original statement with anything to do with the morons who rode the country to high heaven.

Once again, Ireland's economy IS different and in these times, those that say it can do so amid reality as opposed to the Celtic Tiger mirage that so obviously clouded the thinking of many people.

bk

DWCommuter but the thing is Ireland really isn't different. Irelands economy goes in financial cycles, the same as any other economy.

The difference is why thought we were special and we left a massive bubble develop in our economy which when burst lead to a massive and much more painful recession.

That is completely the opposite of for example the German approach, where they believe in slow steady growth, taking money out of the economy in the good times, so the economy doesn't overheat and pumping money into the economy in the bad times so it doesn't stall.

We should be aiming for the same model as Germany here.

But really I fail to see why Irelands economy is different? Of course there are differences in our economy with Germany (for instance they have a lot of heavy industry), but from a macro economic view, Irelands economy acts the same as every other countries.

Zebra3

Indigenous manufacturing companies are the backbone of the German economy.

Couldn't be more different to here.

bk

Zebra3 wrote: »

Indigenous manufacturing companies are the backbone of the German economy.

Couldn't be more different to here.

Yes of course, and IT, financial services and pharmaceutical are the back bone of the Irish economy. But it doesn't change the fact that they both experience the same macro economic trends.

penexpers

mikemac wrote: »

Fantastic office space at HSQ by Heuston and much of that is vacant.
Eircom have very impressive offices out there

Actually there is very little office space left in HSQ from the looks of things. The Eircom building is completely occupied and the other building is part occupied by AOL. The rest is apartments.

Zebra3

bk wrote: »

Yes of course, and IT, financial services and pharmaceutical are the back bone of the Irish economy. But it doesn't change the fact that they both experience the same macro economic trends.

Indigenous companies don't repatriate their profits though.

Hence the larger than normal difference between GDP and GNP in Ireland.