Phoenix Park Tunnel reopening and City Centre Resignalling

spacetweek

Interesting article on the Phoenix Park Tunnel reopening and City Centre Resignalling project:

Heuston station is currently the end of the line for commuters from Kildare, Portlaoise and farther afield, with Luas and bus services taking them the last 3km into town.

Once back in service, the tunnel will allow trains to deliver passengers into the heart of the city, as well as connecting them to the Dart.

The re-opening of the 1877 tunnel was announced last year as part of a €900m transport plan for the capital.

A letter from the National Transport Authority (NTA) to South Dublin County Council last month said the planned train services will operate from the spring or summer of 2016.

The service will begin following the completion of the city centre re-signalling project which will increase capacity through what is described as a "critical city-centre section" between Connolly and Grand Canal Dock stations.

City Centre Resignalling has, I believe, been under construction since around 2009 so a completion next year would be nearly miraculous. Although the PP tunnel is only 4 trains per hour compared to the Heuston-Docklands' 20, it is a lot better than nothing and can be achieved very cheaply (1/200 the cost - €20 million versus €4 billion).

This is a decent interim measure until work starts on the main tunnel in a few years' time.

There will be an intermediate station at Drumcondra which would need to be built but I'm unclear how the service is going to stop at both Connolly and Docklands as the map in the article shows, since there is no direct line connecting them. They must be building this connector.

Carawaystick

spacetweek wrote: »

Interesting article on the Phoenix Park Tunnel reopening and City Centre Resignalling project:



City Centre Resignalling has, I believe, been under construction since around 2009 so a completion next year would be nearly miraculous. Although the PP tunnel is only 4 trains per hour compared to the Heuston-Docklands' 20, it is a lot better than nothing and can be achieved very cheaply (1/200 the cost - €20 million versus €4 billion).

This is a decent interim measure until work starts on the main tunnel in a few years' time.

There will be an intermediate station at Drumcondra which would need to be built but I'm unclear how the service is going to stop at both Connolly and Docklands as the map in the article shows, since there is no direct line connecting them. They must be building this connector.

You do know there is a station in Drumcondra already?
A station in Cabra might be a better plan.

loyatemu

spacetweek wrote: »

I'm unclear how the service is going to stop at both Connolly and Docklands as the map in the article shows, since there is no direct line connecting them. They must be building this connector.

the article is getting it's dock stations mixed up - the service will terminate at Grand Canal Dock, not Docklands.

LXFlyer

Yes the services will operate calling at the existing Drumcondra Station, Connolly, Tara Street, Pearse and terminate at the new turnback platform at Grand Canal Dock.

spacetweek

Carawaystick wrote: »

You do know there is a station in Drumcondra already?
A station in Cabra might be a better plan.

That station is on a different line. That station is here and the proposed station would have to be here.

loyatemu wrote: »

the article is getting it's dock stations mixed up - the service will terminate at Grand Canal Dock, not Docklands.

Thanks, that makes more sense.

Banjoxed

spacetweek wrote: »

That station is on a different line. That station is here and the proposed station would have to be here.


Thanks, that makes more sense.

The line through the Phoenix Park tunnel does indeed go straight to Drumcondra, Connolly and on to Grand Canal Dock beyond Pearse. To serve Docklands it would have to reverse at Glasnevin Junction and go down the lower level Midland line to terminate at Docklands.

MGWR

spacetweek wrote: »

Interesting article on the Phoenix Park Tunnel reopening and City Centre Resignalling project:

Heuston station is currently the end of the line for commuters from Kildare, Portlaoise and farther afield, with Luas and bus services taking them the last 3km into town.

Once back in service, the tunnel will allow trains to deliver passengers into the heart of the city, as well as connecting them to the Dart.

The re-opening of the 1877 tunnel was announced last year as part of a €900m transport plan for the capital.

A letter from the National Transport Authority (NTA) to South Dublin County Council last month said the planned train services will operate from the spring or summer of 2016.

The service will begin following the completion of the city centre re-signalling project which will increase capacity through what is described as a "critical city-centre section" between Connolly and Grand Canal Dock stations.

City Centre Resignalling has, I believe, been under construction since around 2009 so a completion next year would be nearly miraculous. Although the PP tunnel is only 4 trains per hour compared to the Heuston-Docklands' 20, it is a lot better than nothing and can be achieved very cheaply (1/200 the cost - €20 million versus €4 billion).

This is a decent interim measure until work starts on the main tunnel in a few years' time.

There will be an intermediate station at Drumcondra which would need to be built but I'm unclear how the service is going to stop at both Connolly and Docklands as the map in the article shows, since there is no direct line connecting them. They must be building this connector.

The fact of IR's massive investment in DMUs pointed towards a development such as this.

Now if Broadstone were re-developed for commuter and/or LD trains instead of having BXD extended to Broombridge (BXD ought to be underground besides), then there would be more room for trains at Connolly as well as through.

jahalpin

Dublin is a small city in international standards, why would there ever be a need for 20 trains an hour from Heuston to Docklands, 4 trains an hour is probably more than enough

ClovenHoof

jahalpin wrote: »

Dublin is a small city in international standards, why would there ever be a need for 20 trains an hour from Heuston to Docklands, 4 trains an hour is probably more than enough

Dublin is NOT a small city by International standards and is not a low desinty city either. Dublin is comparable to Boston, Amsterdam, Vienna, Munich, Helsinki, Prague and all these cities have vast underground and commuter rail systems.

Stop repeating that 1970's mantra please. Ridiculous to still be hearing this in 2015.

JeffK88

I think the whole way of defining an urban centre /Town/City in this country are deeply flawed. Dublin by how you would view any city outside of ireland has a population of close to 1.8 million. Cork prob has close to 300,000 including its suburbs, Limerick which is the first city in the state to accurately show its population. Dublin should have a metro system in place with tram lines, Dart underground and an efficient bus system all working together. The city sprawls close to 30 km inland to Maynooth from the coast and 40 km along the coast ( Greystones-Malahide) I don't understand why so many people stick to the old boundaries of urban areas in this country while in reality the higher metro area's should be more so quoted. Take my home town of Newbridge. Official population of 21,000 but including its "suburbs" the population is more accurately 26,000. Naas would prob have 30,000 including Sallins,johnstown. With populations like this and i'm sure there are other urban areas with similar higher populations proper planning for public transport could be implemented. Of course all of this is my opinion.

Aard

Even if Dublin were a small city (and it's not) -- city size is hardly a determinant of train frequency! What a concept.

Aard

@JeffK88 -- what you refer to might variously be termed the "morphological urban area" versus the "function urban area". There has been a lot of research done on this for Ireland, although little of it seems to filter down into regional planning in Ireland.

JeffK88

Yes that seems to be exactly what im talking about. Would it not make more sense to plan using this method of defining urban settlements considering these smaller settlements next to the larger one are entirely dependent on the core urban centre. But there seems to a reluctance of proper planning in regards to public transport. For example there is a huge gap in public transport between South Kildare and North Kildare. No buses, trains or even major roads. I remember Metrowest would have helped solve this.

Aard

Very good question as to why MUA/FUA isn't used as standard. There is a general reluctance to look past County lines in a lot of instances. Also a kind of institutional unwillingness that many towns and their peripheries greatly rely on Dublin.

You could do worse than to read Chris van Egeraat or Brian Hughes on the matter of FUAs. NUI Maynooth has a lot of researchers on this and similar topics.

alias no.9

MGWR wrote: »

The fact of IR's massive investment in DMUs pointed towards a development such as this.

Now if Broadstone were re-developed for commuter and/or LD trains instead of having BXD extended to Broombridge (BXD ought to be underground besides), then there would be more room for trains at Connolly as well as through.

Broadstone is a complete non runner for trains from the PPT, the trains would have to go through the tunnel and on to Drumcondra, reverse back to Broombridge before changing direction again to get into Broadstone, leaving passengers a little bit closer but less well connected with the City Centre

GerardKeating

loyatemu wrote: »

the article is getting it's dock stations mixed up - the service will terminate at Grand Canal Dock, not Docklands.

Plus, the tunnel is not actually closed, so not technically being "reopened".

spacetweek

JeffK88 wrote: »

Yes that seems to be exactly what im talking about. Would it not make more sense to plan using this method of defining urban settlements

They do plan that way, all transport plans for Dublin have defined the city as a region encompassing Dublin, Wicklow, Kildare and Meath which is correct as commuters to the city are coming from far out in many cases.

For example there is a huge gap in public transport between South Kildare and North Kildare. No buses, trains or even major roads. I remember Metrowest would have helped solve this.

The M9 runs from North Kildare to South Kildare. Metrowest would have run through west Dublin suburbs and has nothing to do with Kildare.

spacetweek

MGWR wrote: »

Now if Broadstone were re-developed for commuter and/or LD trains instead of having BXD extended to Broombridge (BXD ought to be underground besides), then there would be more room for trains at Connolly as well as through.

That ship sailed a long time ago my friend, there was a big discussion about 10 years ago about whether Broadstone would be used for heavy or light rail and the decision's been made. The Luas is under construction there, no point talking about it now. And what on earth would you have Luas underground for instead of a DART?

spacetweek

Are you guys sure that it's Grand Canal Dock that it terminates at and not Docklands? The map in the article very clearly states that it's Docklands.

JeffK88

spacetweek wrote: »

They do plan that way, all transport plans for Dublin have defined the city as a region encompassing Dublin, Wicklow, Kildare and Meath which is correct as commuters to the city are coming from far out in many cases.


The M9 runs from North Kildare to South Kildare. Metrowest would have run through west Dublin suburbs and has nothing to do with Kildare.

There is still vast areas of Dublin not connected to any rapid transit system. The planned system in place just happened to develop that way along existing rail corridors. I'm mainly referring to future projects involving rail. How long has it taken Dublin to use the Phoenix park tunnel, Connect the Portlaoise/Kildare line to the city centre, Build the DART Underground, finish the KRP2. Not to mention the Metro lines. They should have developed these projects while the city developed not decades afterwards.
In regards to the M9 by Kildare south to North I was more so referring to the interconnectivity between Kildare/Newbridge/Naas to Kilcock/Maynooth/Celbridge/Leixlip.

Polar101

spacetweek wrote: »

Are you guys sure that it's Grand Canal Dock that it terminates at and not Docklands? The map in the article very clearly states that it's Docklands.

Sure, even the text says so:
"It is anticipated that initially, there will be four services per hour from Kildare/Portlaoise through the Phoenix Park tunnel, terminating in Grand Canal Dock in peak hours, with an hourly off-peak service,"

JeffK88

Are all these extra services on top of the existing Heuston services or will we see a reduction of services terminating at Heuston?

n97 mini

"spacetweek wrote: »

The M9 runs from North Kildare to South Kildare. Metrowest would have run through west Dublin suburbs and has nothing to do with Kildare.

No it does not. It runs from south Kildare to Kilcullen in south Kildare where it connects with the M7 which runs to the M50 at the Red Cow. Neither the M7 or M9 come remotely close to the major population centres of the north: Maynooth/Leixlip/Celbridge.

kc56

JeffK88 wrote: »

Are all these extra services on top of the existing Heuston services or will we see a reduction of services terminating at Heuston?

According to RUI, it will not be 4 trains pre hour but rather 4 trains during the peak (6am-8am) and (4pm-6pm) or so. Also, most likely service will runs from Hazelhatch with an interchange there with the existing Portlaoise and some intercity trains or some mix. Nothing definite or even proposed yet.

It would be very difficult to run 4 trains per hour stopping at all stations to Portlaoise or even Kildare without interfering with intercity speeds.

The terminus will be Grand Canal Dock; Docklands cannot be reached from the PPT without a reversing manoeuvre. By serving GDC you get Drumcondra, Connolly, Tara St and Pearse which has a far higher potential traffic than Docklands.

Banjoxed

kc56 wrote: »

It would be very difficult to run 4 trains per hour stopping at all stations to Portlaoise or even Kildare without interfering with intercity speeds.

But hold on, wasn't it the point of four tracking Hazelhatch to Inchicore to separate out suburban from intercity and freight trains? Bit of a botch then if the line can't support extra inbound trains from the Hatch as it was intended to.

LXFlyer

spacetweek wrote: »

Are you guys sure that it's Grand Canal Dock that it terminates at and not Docklands? The map in the article very clearly states that it's Docklands.

The map is wrong. The trains will serve Platform 10 at Heuston, Drumcondra, Connolly, Tara Street, Pearse and terminate at the new turnback platform at Grand Canal Dock.

kc56 wrote: »

According to RUI, it will not be 4 trains pre hour but rather 4 trains during the peak (6am-8am) and (4pm-6pm) or so. Also, most likely service will runs from Hazelhatch with an interchange there with the existing Portlaoise and some intercity trains or some mix. Nothing definite or even proposed yet.

It would be very difficult to run 4 trains per hour stopping at all stations to Portlaoise or even Kildare without interfering with intercity speeds.

The terminus will be Grand Canal Dock; Docklands cannot be reached from the PPT without a reversing manoeuvre. By serving GDC you get Drumcondra, Connolly, Tara St and Pearse which has a far higher potential traffic than Docklands.

There is plenty of scope for additional trains on the Kildare line with some intelligent pathing, using the four track section for overtaking and the three tracks between Heuston and Inchicore. Some adjustments to stopping patterns on the longer distance services wouldn't go amiss, and would facilitate these services.

kc56

Banjoxed wrote: »

But hold on, wasn't it the point of four tracking Hazelhatch to Inchicore to separate out suburban from intercity and freight trains? Bit of a botch then if the line can't support extra inbound trains from the Hatch as it was intended to.

I'm talking about Portlaoise or Kildare not just Hazelhatch. There's plenty of capacity in the four track section but it's sandwiched between 2 track sections esp west of Hazelhatch. Anyway, they're not talking about 4 trains per hour.

thomasj

lxflyer wrote: »

The map is wrong. The trains will serve Platform 10 at Heuston, Drumcondra, Connolly, Tara Street, Pearse and terminate at the new turnback platform at Grand Canal Dock.



There is plenty of scope for additional trains on the Kildare line with some intelligent pathing, using the four track section for overtaking and the three tracks between Heuston and Inchicore. Some adjustments to stopping patterns on the longer distance services wouldn't go amiss, and would facilitate these services.

Yes, but you are forgetting about the fact that maynooth/Longford/Sligo have also to share that part of the line and further down and the bottleneck is still there at north strand accessing Connolly

Nothing has changed, yes there will be still a few Additional paths over the connolly-GCD stretch but the Connolly bottleneck is and will still be there.

Furthermore , unless they resolve the north strand into Connolly bottleneck its not going to be long before you are back comparing heuston-luas to Connolly GCD again.

n97 mini

I was of the impression that Maynooth services would be running into and out of GCD eventually. Is this going to be the case or will HH services be using it instead?

Like on the Maynooth line, hourly off peak services will not encourage usage when there is a competing Dublin Bus bus service that is more frequent.

And... I'd put money on it that broadly speaking connections between the Maynooth/M3 Parkway services and HH line services at Drumcondra will be random. i.e. you still won't be able to get from say Castleknock to Parkwest using the train.

LXFlyer

thomasj wrote: »

Yes, but you are forgetting about the fact that maynooth/Longford/Sligo have also to share that part of the line and further down and the bottleneck is still there at north strand accessing Connolly

Nothing has changed, yes there will be still a few Additional paths over the connolly-GCD stretch but the Connolly bottleneck is and will still be there.

Furthermore , unless they resolve the north strand into Connolly bottleneck its not going to be long before you are back comparing heuston-luas to Connolly GCD again.

There are enough paths at Heuston, between Glasnevin Junction and Connolly, and there will be sufficient paths once the signalling project is completed, including at Connolly.


I really think people are going OTT about this. If you sit down and analyse the timetable, and take into account the revised number of paths, it is perfectly clear that this is a feasible project.

LXFlyer

n97 mini wrote: »

I was of the impression that Maynooth services would be running into and out of GCD eventually. Is this going to be the case or will HH services be using it instead?

Like on the Maynooth line, hourly off peak services will not encourage usage when there is a competing Dublin Bus bus service that is more frequent.

And... I'd put money on it that broadly speaking connections between the Maynooth/M3 Parkway services and HH line services at Drumcondra will be random. i.e. you still won't be able to get from say Castleknock to Parkwest using the train.

Grand Canal Dock turnback platform will be the terminus for trains that currently terminate at Pearse as trains will no longer use the Boston sidings to turn around - that's the Northern, Maynooth and re-routed Kildare line services.

Bear in mind that at peak times some of the Northern and Maynooth line services continue to Bray, so there is scope for the extra paths to use the turnback facility. Of course a timetable recast will be needed once the resignalling is completed.