Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

Long term aspirations for the Docklands line?

  • 29-08-2015 2:00pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 2 citybus


    So fingers crossed, DART Underground might get built in the next few decades (I know, maybe too much optimism there). I can sort of see how the Phoenix Park line could remain as a diesel route for longer distance services, while the interconnector is devoted purely to electric commuter trains. Has the government ever stated their long term aspirations for the Docklands - Royal Canal - Glasnevin line. As a two track railway in the north inner city relegated to a mere 1tph peak hour trains, it must be the most underutilised bit of rail infrastructure in the country. So I was wondering if there was a way they could increase usage out of this line when the Maynooth line gets taken over by DART?

    Obviously there are restraints on the line being upgraded. It has no ideal terminus location before it merges with the Maynooth line. It's not electrified, and might be difficult (though probably not impossible) to link with the Underground Spencer Dock station, etc. I don't know, any ideas?


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭ crc


    I know that I don't have many posts myself, but who are you citybus? This is literally your first post. Are you a government spy? :P

    I think that future of the Docklands line can't be separated from DU; it only really exists to offer city centre terminal capacity as far as I can see. Won't the city centre resignalling offer a more attractive termination option for Dunboyne trains (i.e. GCD)?
    I heard somewhere that it only has temporary planning permission anyway.


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭ McAlban


    I always thought they missed a trick by not putting a station in under the Davin End in Croker. (and a Platform or two behind hill 16. Which Probably was too great a planning and engineering challenge). Match Day Specials would probably justify this. Westport direct to Croker next Saturday for example.

    Match Day at the Aviva always sees busy Dart Services.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,781 ✭✭✭ Carawaystick


    McAlban wrote: »
    I always thought they missed a trick by not putting a station in under the Davin End in Croker. (and a Platform or two behind hill 16. Which Probably was too great a planning and engineering challenge). Match Day Specials would probably justify this. Westport direct to Croker next Saturday for example.

    Match Day at the Aviva always sees busy Dart Services.

    You can't get from Westport to the line at the canal end, without going into Connolly Station. The PPT line only leads to the Hill16 end.
    There's no room for a platform at the Hill, and the line is on a bend, so new platforms are not allowed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭ McAlban


    Don't tell me, they'd have to change the layout of Glasnevin Junction AGAIN?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,100 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Sam Russell


    McAlban wrote: »
    I always thought they missed a trick by not putting a station in under the Davin End in Croker. (and a Platform or two behind hill 16. Which Probably was too great a planning and engineering challenge). Match Day Specials would probably justify this. Westport direct to Croker next Saturday for example.

    Match Day at the Aviva always sees busy Dart Services.

    They could even extend the overhead electricity lines from Connolly to that point. That would allow match day Darts.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,776 ✭✭✭✭ LXFlyer


    McAlban wrote: »
    Don't tell me, they'd have to change the layout of Glasnevin Junction AGAIN?



    Well given that the basic layout hasn't changed since 1936, almost 80 years ago, I'm not really sure where you're coming from with this apparent indignation?


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭ McAlban


    Well perhaps a bit more sarcastic than indignation. For the sake of 400m of track and some resignalling this could be easy / relatively inexpensive to re-lay this section and improve connections into / out of Docklands/Connolly. It could be done out of the budget for the PPT scheme and as I said in the PPT thread, albeit enaging in blatant crayonism, there is potential on the PPT line with Glasnevin Station, and possibly a Cabra Station south of Fassaugh Road.

    In the Long term I think the existing Docklands station may become surplus to requirements if DU is actually built as planned originally.

    As for Croker, it may be a pipe dream, I can see most fans wanting to exit at Drumcondra or Connolly is only about 1.5k away. Plenty of watering holes between there and Croke Park.

    Also if the GAA get their wish and are able to redevelop Croke Villas/Sackville Gardens/Ardilaun Road then there's room for a station (ignoring the curved track under ballybough bridge.) Incidentally I'm against the demolition of the houses on this corner. Any willful destruction of Georgian Dublin is a shame.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,776 ✭✭✭✭ LXFlyer


    Adding a double crossover would actually be several million - hardly inexpensive, and for what benefit? Several trains a year?

    There are far more important projects on our railways that need that money than a station at Croke Park that would see minimal use.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 61,016 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    Why do points cost that much? Really sounds like some metal fabricators taking part in an antitrust setup or something


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,220 ✭✭✭✭ Victor


    citybus, welcome to boards.ie
    crc wrote: »
    I know that I don't have many posts myself, but who are you citybus? This is literally your first post. Are you a government spy? :P
    It is against the site rules to speculate as to someone's identity.

    Play nice.

    Moderator


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,776 ✭✭✭✭ LXFlyer


    L1011 wrote: »
    Why do points cost that much? Really sounds like some metal fabricators taking part in an antitrust setup or something



    It's not just the points. It's the associated signalling as well, which pushes up the cost.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 61,016 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    lxflyer wrote: »
    It's not just the points. It's the associated signalling as well, which pushes up the cost.

    That work is still needed when points are nicked moved from somewhere else, as we had at North Wall<->Docklands recently though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,651 ✭✭✭ BowWow


    Using my new crayon set...........

    I'd like the following -

    1. Main double line from Belfast to Dublin diverts at Lusk and runs cross country to new station in Swords, then continues cross country to new Airport station, then continues from airport to new Finglas station then underground to join "Canal Line" and thence to Connolly. There would have to be underground sections in Swords, Airport and Finglas to Canal line. Line would be electrified enabling Dart commuter services serving Lusk, Swords, Airport and Finglas. Advantages are that Dublin and Belfast city centres are now directly connected to Airport.

    2. Existing main line would initially become a 100% Dart only Commuter line from Lusk to Connolly, but would eventually connect to DU.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,328 ✭✭✭ AngryLips


    McAlban wrote: »
    I always thought they missed a trick by not putting a station in under the Davin End in Croker. (and a Platform or two behind hill 16. Which Probably was too great a planning and engineering challenge). Match Day Specials would probably justify this. Westport direct to Croker next Saturday for example.

    Match Day at the Aviva always sees busy Dart Services.

    A station at Ballybough on the main Maynooth line would be just as good also.


  • Registered Users Posts: 785 ✭✭✭ Paddico


    Victor wrote: »
    citybus, welcome to boards.ieIt is against the site rules to speculate as to someone's identity.

    Play nice.

    Moderator

    Jeeez....
    Some people take their rules very seriously.
    Thought that smiley face after the comment would have meant something


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 61,016 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    And was planned (about 100 years ago) behind Clonliffe Ave.


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭ McAlban


    BowWow wrote: »
    Using my new crayon set...........

    I'd like the following -

    1. Main double line from Belfast to Dublin diverts at Lusk and runs cross country to new station in Swords, then continues cross country to new Airport station, then continues from airport to new Finglas station then underground to join "Canal Line" and thence to Connolly. There would have to be underground sections in Swords, Airport and Finglas to Canal line. Line would be electrified enabling Dart commuter services serving Lusk, Swords, Airport and Finglas. Advantages are that Dublin and Belfast city centres are now directly connected to Airport.

    2. Existing main line would initially become a 100% Dart only Commuter line from Lusk to Connolly, but would eventually connect to DU.

    Somewhere I had drawn this crayon drawing before. I think It was to extend the original MN plan to Rush & Lusk Station which is largely surrounded by Farm Land. Into Swords and follow the MN route from there.

    I had said about a Ballybough Road station earlier in this thread.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,781 ✭✭✭ Carawaystick


    McAlban wrote: »
    Somewhere I had drawn this crayon drawing before. I think It was to extend the original MN plan to Rush & Lusk Station which is largely surrounded by Farm Land. Into Swords and follow the MN route from there.

    I had said about a Ballybough Road station earlier in this thread.

    You probably thought about connecting MN to Donabate station. MN was originally planned to go to Lissenhall

    https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.4754209,-6.1682653,14z/data=!5m1!1e1?hl=en


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,269 ✭✭✭ Pete_Cavan


    The line along the Royal Canal is our best chance of providing a high capacity rail link from the airport to the city centre. Similar to the HR8 option in the Aecom report but using the lower line along the canal rather than the elevated Maynooth line. The tunnel would be as per the Luas spur proposal (bored under Glasnevin Cemetery and cut and cover under Ballymun Road) although whatever it costs to go directly to the terminals is worth it rather than requiring a bloody people mover.

    Services currently terminating at Docklands would have to be diverted to the elevated line and terminate at Connolly so the line along the canal could be dedicated for the airport services. This allows a high frequency of services and journey times should be good as there would be few stops on the route. The frequency and journey times on the northern line would be an issue with the spur from Clongriffen. The Royal Canal line could easily be electrified along with the new route north without affecting other services. Services from the airport could eventually continue through the DU tunnel to St Stephens Green, Heuston, etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭ McAlban


    You probably thought about connecting MN to Donabate station. MN was originally planned to go to Lissenhall

    https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.4754209,-6.1682653,14z/data=!5m1!1e1?hl=en

    Nope. I know where Donabate is. and if you went out there you'd realise there is no space around it. Rush and Lusk would be a better option I think..

    Found it anyway. in the DU thread...

    Abject Crayonism...
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=96264876&postcount=228
    McAlban wrote: »

    Now thinking holistically, I would extend MN from the proposed Lissenhall/Belinstown depot out to Lusk & Rush station (Link up with IE Intercity and Commuter on the Northern Line). Reason being there is lots of empty agricultural land close to this station (Unlike any other on the Northern Line). Linking two towns that have grown massively during the Celtic Tiger, and also increase connectivity for Balbriggan/Skerries/Drogheda area commuters (There is always only standing room in commuter trains at this stage) the route from Belinstown to Lusk/Rush is almost all agricultural land and would require maybe one overbridge on the motorway and another one or two bridges on the route.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2 citybus


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    The line along the Royal Canal is our best chance of providing a high capacity rail link from the airport to the city centre. Similar to the HR8 option in the Aecom report but using the lower line along the canal rather than the elevated Maynooth line. The tunnel would be as per the Luas spur proposal (bored under Glasnevin Cemetery and cut and cover under Ballymun Road... THE ROYAL CANAL LINE COULD EASILY BE ELECTRIFIED

    Would the proximity of the canal (water) be an issue for electrification, and would the road bridges over the railway offer enough clearance for overhead wires? Overall your idea has merit but the Metro North advocate in me has me wishing it doesn't gain traction.

    As for people's calls for stations at Ballybough, I was surprised DART Underground didn't include something like that, after all they were willing to finance Inchicore which arguably has less potential passengers. For me the combination of both the Canal line and the Maynooth line offer a few possible sites for stops, the former would be particularly good for Cross Guns bridge.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,781 ✭✭✭ Carawaystick


    McAlban wrote: »
    Nope. I know where Donabate is. and if you went out there you'd realise there is no space around it. Rush and Lusk would be a better option I think..

    This is where there's no space?
    https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.4847723,-6.1513931,129m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

    I can't really see building a metro to somewhere in the middle of nowhere being better than going to a town centre station.


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭ McAlban


    This is where there's no space?
    https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.4847723,-6.1513931,129m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

    I can't really see building a metro to somewhere in the middle of nowhere being better than going to a town centre station.

    The Land to the Left has already had development refused by ABP (PL 06F.206624)

    And to the Right, well it's zoned Residential, however Smyths Pub (Beside the Bridge) and the adjoining uninhabited "Vernacular" buildings are Protected as far as I know. Further Residential development in this area according to the LAP.

    To the West is Newbridge Demesne, Can't see you running a Railway through it. and to the South, there's a combination of Reclaimed Land, the Kilcrea Estate, Marshland and Special Conservation Area. The Most likely, and probably only possible route for MN would go the same route as a proposed, and badly needed distributor road.

    As for being in the Middle of No-Where. Yes Rush and Lusk is in the middle of Nowhere but it is as busy as any other station on the Northern Line. From 2006 to 2011 Lusk population increased by 34% and Rush by 11%. Also, as an interchange you could be getting Commuter passangers from Further north changing here and Maybe a P&R. When I worked in Town I always used this station even though it's 11k from home.


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭ McAlban


    Here is the Link to the LAP which are now extended to 2015.

    http://www.fingal.ie/media/2.4.4.E.2.%20Donabate%20LAP%20Map.pdf

    Specific Objective 4. Is in case the DART gets extened from Malahide. Not likely at the moment.


Advertisement