Advertisement
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

DART Underground - Alternative Routes

  • 14-09-2014 11:35am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    The currently proposed circuitous route around the city centre, via St. Stephen's Green, involves building directly under Dublin Castle, and there are obviously a number of security and architectural sensitivity issues there, then it does the big loop to St. Stephen's Green, and then it has another curve under Government Buidings, with another lot of security and architectural issues.

    A route via College Green would really only face those architecture/security obstacles at just one location, viz. the North side of Trinity College.


    ---


    Note from Moderator:

    This thread is for discussing alternative routes for Dart Underground. The main Dart Under ground thread here will be reserved for discussing other elements of the project.

    This is in order to maintain distinction between the proposed project and suggested alternatives.

    For newcomers to the discussion, this thread follows on from discussion of hypothetical DU routing through College Green in the above-linked thread.


«13456717

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 7,658 ✭✭✭ Markcheese


    Does a lot not depend on depth ?? But yeah there could be anything under there ,(did hear of of forgotten cellars/under levels being unearthed near Dublin castle.)

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭ Jack Noble


    The currently proposed circuitous route around the city centre, via St. Stephen's Green, involves building directly under Dublin Castle, and there are obviously a number of security and architectural sensitivity issues there, then it does the big loop to St. Stephen's Green, and then it has another curve under Government Buidings, with another lot of security and architectural issues.

    A route via College Green would really only face those architecture/security obstacles at just one location, viz. the North side of Trinity College.

    God grant me the serenity
    to accept the things I cannot change;
    courage to change the things I can;
    and wisdom to know the difference.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    monument wrote: »
    Not again, please!

    Actually yes Monument. I'm in favour of a direct Heuston-Spencer Dock route, pretty much as illustrated on this board by the poster Telchak.

    Can you just remind me why it's necessary to build a longer, more expensive route, with all those extra curves, and clearly more security/architectural obstacles.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,492 KCAccidental


    Actually yes Monument. I'm in favour of a direct Heuston-Spencer Dock route, pretty much as illustrated on this board by the poster Telchak.

    Can you just remind me why it's necessary to build a longer, more expensive route, with all those curves, and clearly more security/architectural obstacles.

    Can't you just read the last 45 pages of this thread?

    all of the answers are there. Multiple times. Addressed to you, personally.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    KC, I've read the whole lot.

    The most controversial bit of this proposed interconnector route, as far as we are aware from the discussion on this thread, is the bit between Christchurch and Pearse Station.

    The main obstacle to a direct route, as illustrated by the poster Telchak, has been identified as the North side of TCD.

    Compared to the route which Telchak visualised, the current proposal for the interconnector is a longer, more expensive route, with a number of extra curves.

    And despite the fact that it is a rather circuitous route around the city centre, with its most important station being built beside a 22 acre park, which significantly reduces its accessibility to commuters, it also appears that there would be significant architectural and security obstacles in its path. Namely Dublin Castle and Government Buildings.

    Nothing has been produced which shows that the potential passenger uptake from the detour via St. Stephen's Green is greater than just building the direct route as illustrated by Telchak.

    All we know about the St. Stephen's Green route is that it would be longer, it would be more expensive, it would have considerably less efficient uptake of passengers, and it would pass under a larger number of sites of architectural and security sensitivity.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭ Jack Noble


    KC, I've read the whole lot.

    The most controversial bit of this proposed interconnector route, as far as we are aware from the discussion on this thread, is the bit between Christchurch and Pearse Station.

    The main obstacle to a direct route, as illustrated by the poster Telchak, has been identified as the North side of TCD.

    Compared to the route which Telchak visualised, the current proposal for the interconnector is a longer, more expensive route, with a number of extra curves.

    And despite the fact that it is a rather circuitous route around the city centre, with its most important station being built beside a 22 acre park, which significantly reduces its accessibility to commuters, it also appears that there would be significant architectural and security obstacles in its path. Namely Dublin Castle and Government Buildings.

    Nothing has been produced which shows that the potential passenger uptake from the detour via St. Stephen's Green is greater than just building the direct route as illustrated by Telchak.

    All we know about the St. Stephen's Green route is that it would be longer, it would be more expensive, it would have considerably less efficient uptake of passengers, and it would pass under a larger number of sites of architectural and security sensitivity.

    Have you spoken to the NTA, IE, RPA, DTTAS and DCC yet?

    You know, asked the relevant questions of the relevant bodies?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    Jack Noble wrote: »
    God grant me the serenity
    to accept the things I cannot change;
    courage to change the things I can;
    and wisdom to know the difference.

    Jack, totally unrelated to DART underground, I was always taught it as this:

    God grant me the serenity
    to accept the things I cannot change;
    the courage to change the things I can;
    and the wisdom to know the difference.

    It obviously works well with the article and without. I wonder why we got different versions.

    In any case, it's nice to be reminded of this very important piece of advice. Thank you.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,998 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    You have 45 pages of deeply detailed reasons as to why the other routing that you've fallen in love with is impossible. Nobody is going to tell you again.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    With regard to the St. Stephen's Green station, would there be very good passenger uptake from the southside?

    I can see that there would be considerable passenger uptake from the northside of the station, but one wonders about the southside. There is a 22 acre park right beside the station on the southside, with no commuters (bar the 20 or 30 people who actually maintain the park).

    And going farther south, you've got a row of offices including the Department of Foreign Affairs and couple of other things like banks and so forth, then you've got yet another park (the Iveagh Gardens).

    It's certainly difficult to see how this is the most efficient way to deliver and collect Dublin's citizens.


  • Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭ Jack Noble


    With regard to the St. Stephen's Green station, would there be very good passenger uptake from the southside?

    I can see that there would be considerable passenger uptake from the northside of the station, but one wonders about the southside. There is a 22 acre park right beside the station on the southside, with no commuters (bar the 20 or 30 people who actually maintain the park).

    And going farther south, you've got a row of offices including the Department of Foreign Affairs and couple of other things like banks and so forth, then you've got yet another park (the Iveagh Gardens).

    It's certainly difficult to see how this is the most efficient way to deliver and collect Dublin's citizens.

    For the umpteenth time, ask the NTA, IE, RPA, DTTAS and DCC why SSG was chosen. They have the data.

    And FYI, a decision on whether to proceed with DartU under the existing Railway Order has to be taken by September 2015 by order of the High Court. And that is why IE have been asked by Govt to update the business case and prepares CPOs. And it's why the Govt is examining all available funding options, including exchequer, EIB, EU under TEN-T and private sector -- with a view to proceeding with DartU in the 2016-2021 Capital Plan.

    But then, if you were actually paying attention and following DartU --developments instead of living in your own College Green fantasy world -- you would know that.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 437 ✭✭ spillit67


    With regard to the St. Stephen's Green station, would there be very good passenger uptake from the southside?

    I can see that there would be considerable passenger uptake from the northside of the station, but one wonders about the southside. There is a 22 acre park right beside the station on the southside, with no commuters (bar the 20 or 30 people who actually maintain the park).

    And going farther south, you've got a row of offices including the Department of Foreign Affairs and couple of other things like banks and so forth, then you've got yet another park (the Iveagh Gardens).

    It's certainly difficult to see how this is the most efficient way to deliver and collect Dublin's citizens.

    You've got to me kidding me.:confused: There are thousands of workers in the area around St Stephen's Green north and south.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,140 ✭✭✭✭ Geuze


    With regard to the St. Stephen's Green station, would there be very good passenger uptake from the southside?

    I can see that there would be considerable passenger uptake from the northside of the station, but one wonders about the southside. There is a 22 acre park right beside the station on the southside, with no commuters (bar the 20 or 30 people who actually maintain the park).
    .

    To me, SSG is the heart of Dublin 2.

    To say there would just be 20 or 30 commuters is extremely naive.


  • Registered Users Posts: 437 ✭✭ spillit67


    Geuze wrote: »
    To me, SSG is the heart of Dublin 2.

    To say there would just be 20 or 30 commuters is extremely naive.

    Anyone who gets the bus in from the southside will notice the bulk of passangers depart between Leeson Street and Stephen's Green. From the proposed station it will be a 5 minute walk to Leeson Street/Earlsfort Terrace through the Park. It will be 5-10 upto Harcourt Street. In those areas you have some of the major law and accounting firms in the country as well as hundreds of small offices. To the west of the station again there are lots of businesses. It's also as close to Dawson Street/Kildare Street where lots of commuters work as well.

    It's a baffling enough statement from the OP and doesn't tally from my experience of Dublin's commute.


  • Registered Users Posts: 420 ✭✭ kc56


    SSG: interchange with Luas Green Line and Metro North.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 92 ✭✭✭ poteen o hooley


    I see Paddy Power had made Strassenwolf favourite for the gold medal at the world gibberish championships.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 13,991 Mod ✭✭✭✭ monument


    Actually yes Monument. I'm in favour of a direct Heuston-Spencer Dock route, pretty much as illustrated on this board by the poster Telchak.

    Can you just remind me why it's necessary to build a longer, more expensive route, with all those extra curves, and clearly more security/architectural obstacles.

    No. I'm not going to remind you -- this has been covered to death. Look back at the countless of posts that have explained it to you already and if you're still not getting it you never will.


  • Registered Users Posts: 571 BonkeyDonker


    Can you just remind me why it's necessary to build a longer, more expensive route, with all those extra curves, and clearly more security/architectural obstacles.

    Until you can provide costings that prove this please do not keep repeating this. Shorter != cheaper.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,411 Avada


    Are we really doing this again? Really?

    This nonsense argument going back and forth with no facts to go on. The route has been chosen, through SSG and yes, Dublin Castle. I assume they've done a lot more homework than any of us on here Strassenwolf.

    IMO, SSG is a good interchange, with Green line, BXD and eventually Metro North. Also, a lot less disruption when building it because they wont have to dig up the whole of college green.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭ LeinsterDub



    A route via College Green would really only face those architecture/security obstacles

    What security issues?


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,086 ✭✭✭ GerardKeating


    And despite the fact that it is a rather circuitous route around the city centre, with its most important station being built beside a 22 acre park,

    I would have thought this ("beside a 22 acre park") a major advantage if the SSG option, they are taking a portion of the park (during construction) as a base, so they have room to work


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,086 ✭✭✭ GerardKeating


    What security issues?

    All the protestors who want the SSG option would be protesting/rioting at College Green ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,884 ✭✭✭✭ murphaph


    I would have thought this ("beside a 22 acre park") a major advantage if the SSG option, they are taking a portion of the park (during construction) as a base, so they have room to work
    Indeed. No such project's designers anywhere in the world would simply ignore the possibility of using an existing open space when considering the design.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    Against my better judgement, I am posting on this thread.
    What security issues?

    For example, as part of its occasional presidency of the EU, Ireland has hosted meetings in the Castle of the EU heads of state.

    Possibly will do so again, though it's less likely, given that most of those meetings have been moved to Brussels.

    But, it's absolutely not beyond the realms of possibility that a meeting of foreign ministers, or a tribunal, or some other major banquet with a foreign head of state might at the least be seriously discommoded by a well-timed bomb on an underground train travelling directly beneath such an event.

    On a more parochial level, you also don't want a situation where there is a railway line under Government Buildings, so that a well-timed bomb could go off pretty much directly under a cabinet meeting, for example.

    As far as I can see, those would be an example of the security implications of building under Dublin Castle and Government Buildings.

    London's relatively new Jubilee line, for example, seems to conspicuously avoid the Houses of Parliament, even though it did lead to some quite expensive engineering around the Big Ben area.

    I understand this is obviously not an exhaustive list of the security implications, LeinsterDub.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    But, of course, we are digressing from the main issue, which is the much-discussed catchment area problems associated with the proposed circuitous line via St. Stephen's Green.


  • Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭ Jack Noble


    Against my better judgement, I am posting on this thread.



    For example, as part of its occasional presidency of the EU, Ireland has hosted meetings in the Castle of the EU heads of state.

    Possibly will do so again, though it's less likely, given that most of those meetings have been moved to Brussels.

    But, it's absolutely not beyond the realms of possibility that a meeting of foreign ministers, or a tribunal, or some other major banquet with a foreign head of state might at the least be seriously discommoded by a well-timed bomb on an underground train travelling directly beneath such an event.

    On a more parochial level, you also don't want a situation where there is a railway line under Government Buildings, so that a well-timed bomb could go off pretty much directly under a cabinet meeting, for example.

    As far as I can see, those would be an example of the security implications of building under Dublin Castle and Government Buildings.

    London's relatively new Jubilee line, for example, seems to conspicuously avoid the Houses of Parliament, even though it did lead to some quite expensive engineering around the Big Ben area.

    I understand this is obviously not an exhaustive list of the security implications, LeinsterDub.

    You have posted some nonsense on this topic over the last couple of years but this scales Mount Everest in terms of stupidity. And also shows you've lost the substansive argument so much that you're grasping any straw you can see.

    Care to answer this - how in the name of Jaysus is any terrorist group going to get a bloody great bomb, big enough to cause the havoc you suggest, in the exact spot in a tunnel with trains running through it every 5 minutes and covered by CCTV cameras at any time, never mind when there is a massive security operation in place?

    Have you thought this through or did you just batter the keyboard after a brain fart or a night on the jar?


  • Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭ Jack Noble


    But, of course, we are digressing from the main issue, which is the much-discussed catchment area problems associated with the proposed circuitous line via St. Stephen's Green.

    May I refer you the words of Basil Fawlty to the group of Germans in his hotel...


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,998 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    But, of course, we are digressing from the main issue, which is the much-discussed catchment area problems associated with the proposed circuitous line via St. Stephen's Green.

    The problems which only exist in your mind.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ strassenwo!f


    Jack Noble wrote: »
    You have posted some nonsense on this topic over the last couple of years but this scales Mount Everest in terms of stupidity. And also shows you've lost the substansive argument so much that you're grasping any straw you can see.

    As I understand it, the aim of the DART Underground project is to connect all the rail-based modes of transport in the city and to massively increase the potential capacity of one of those modes, namely the DART.

    Building it via a very central location like College Green, even with all the architecturally sensitive buildings there, would achieve both of these aims.

    The route via St. Stephen's Green would also do this. My worry is that it doesn't do so very efficiently, mainly because of the St. Stephen's Green catchment issues.

    One also has to bear in mind the likely development of Dublin's rail-based transport network.

    Is this stupidity?
    Jack Noble wrote: »
    Care to answer this - how in the name of Jaysus is any terrorist group going to get a bloody great bomb, big enough to cause the havoc you suggest, in the exact spot in a tunnel with trains running through it every 5 minutes and covered by CCTV cameras at any time, never mind when there is a massive security operation in place?

    Jack, I've no idea how this would be done. I know that the woman who runs the GPS system in my car is able to tell where I am and which direction I'm going, even if I switch her on when I'm on the outside lane (ie beside the middle hedge) in a traffic jam on a dual carriageway, a mere metre away from a car on the other side of the hedge going in the opposite direction.

    I don't know how she does it. (I don't even know where she is.:D)

    But I imagine that she would also be able to detonate a bomb in my car at a specific location, if she was asked. Even if she can't actually do it now, she's probably getting there.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 92 ✭✭✭ poteen o hooley


    Pity barrell scraping is not an olympic sport. We've a world class performer there in strasswoolf.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,998 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    The route via St. Stephen's Green would also do this. My worry is that it doesn't do so very efficiently, mainly because of the St. Stephen's Green catchment issues.

    That don't exist.

    Jack, I've no idea how this would be done. I know that the woman who runs the GPS system in my car is able to tell where I am and which direction I'm going, even if I switch her on when I'm on the outside lane (ie beside the middle hedge) in a traffic jam on a dual carriageway, a mere metre away from a car on the other side of the hedge going in the opposite direction.

    I don't know how she does it. (I don't even know where she is.:D)

    But I imagine that she would also be able to detonate a bomb in my car at a specific location, if she was asked. Even if she can't actually do it now, she's probably getting there.

    You are aware that GPS doesn't work underground, right?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement