Terminate Heuston trains at Docklands express bus connection to airport

falconio

Traveling up to the airport today I couldn't help but think how convenient it would be for my train to terminate in the docklands and for for me to step on to an express bus to the airport via the port tunnel. I'd estimate it would shave ~ 60 minutes off my journey (possibly more at busy times?).

There have been many grand schemes to link the airport with the city centre (and I like most of them) but in reality if you take out the city centre part of the journey, the docklands to the airport by bus is damn quick.

I know the sligo line junction would be difficult but otherwise what's the difference between terminating southern / western trains a few miles further on instead of at Heuston? Almost all grade separated double track all the way to the docklands with similar luas/bus walking connections to the city centre?

L1011

Heuston trains cannot get to Docklands without reversing and blocking the Maynooth line for a very considerable period.

Rebuilding the junction would be expensive - some hideous sums have been quoted here before.

falconio

Ok so that's the big blocker but in comparison to the alternatives (under or overground railway, luas extensions) would this not be at least worth examining?

If Heuston was closed I assume the site would have a good redevelopment value and might mitigate the cost of doing this somewhat?

L1011

falconio wrote: »

Ok so that's the big blocker but in comparison to the alternatives (under or overground railway, luas extensions) would this not be at least worth examining?

If Heuston was closed I assume the site would have a good redevelopment value and might mitigate the cost of doing this somewhat?

Docklands is not large enough to replace Heuston. The Luas would need to be rerouted closer. The cost of flogging off Heuston would not cover this.

The track capacity Glasnevin Junction inbound to both Docklands and Connollu is too small to take all the trains that serve Heuston and extending this would be near impossible and extremely expensive - its in cuttings or on enbankments.

end of the road

the rail link is the only show in town really. it will cost but will be worth it and will be something useful indefinitely. dealing with the issue of glasnevin junction would be hugely expensive, but i believe it would give great benefits long term, long term being what we need to act on rather then short term like we currently do. the reality is we need to deal with anything that causes inflexibility and capacity issues on the dublin rail network and if it costs huge money so be it, it will be beneficial not just to dublin but to the railway as a whole. of course such spend on the railway won't be happening.

Isambard

not all passengers currently using Heuston are headed to the City Centre and you'd probably be inconveniencing more people that you'd be helping

Idbatterim

Traveling up to the airport today I couldn't help but think how convenient it would be for my train to terminate in the docklands and for for me to step on to an express bus to the airport via the port tunnel. I'd estimate it would shave ~ 60 minutes off my journey (possibly more at busy times?).

is there no direct airport bus from where you are going?

n97 mini

This is the junction as it used to be. Access from the PPT to Docklands is possible.
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V2,714822,736526,11,9

This is the same place now. The required section of track has been lifted, and the junction relaid out.
https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3666988,-6.2747067,485m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

The land is still there... I'm sure it's do-able.

beauf

Seems hard to justify when there is a LUAS that links even better than the Docklands, between Heuston and the Airport bus.

I'm aware of the problems with capacity and speed of the LUAS.

I'd prefer the money was spent on the Mayooth/Sligo line peak capacity. It might even be easier to to drive to the Sligo line in the first place.

end of the road

all of it needs doing.

NiallBoo

beauf wrote: »

I'd prefer the money was spent on the Mayooth/Sligo line peak capacity. It might even be easier to to drive to the Sligo line in the first place.

maybe this is a pie-in-the-sky notion...

But is it practical to make double-decked railway lines?

Quad-tracking is so sorely needed on several routes, but there's points where the land isn't available. Would it be cheaper and less hassle than CPOing land?

MrMorooka

There's already a plan that would bring trains from the Heuston network to the Docklands where you could interchange with airport bus services, it's called DART Underground. It was fully planned and scoped and had planning permission. Can we just build that instead of re inventing the wheel?

beauf

Just not funded...

Jamie2k9

MrMorooka wrote: »

There's already a plan that would bring trains from the Heuston network to the Docklands where you could interchange with airport bus services, it's called DART Underground. It was fully planned and scoped and had planning permission. Can we just build that instead of re inventing the wheel?

Never a plan to bring IC trains on DU. They have spoken about possibility of running to the airport however I don't ever see it!
____
The germinal idea is crazy.

falconio

Obviously having no expertise in these matters I'm not sure as to whether there's a suitable site in the docklands to relocate southern/western trains (although IE do have a lot of rails connected land there IIRC) but would some people not agree this is a better location for a main intercity rail station? Much closer to the south city center,  as close to the north city centre, luas adjacent, nearer to the Dart? 

An underground railway taking in the airport would be fantastic,  I personally would support building an underground metro network to cover Dublin from scratch or DU. However right now there is an excellent, super fast connection from the airport to the city centre by bus via the port tunnel that compares to any european city and I guess I'm just wondering would it not be possible to harness that in a better way than we do today so people can avoid the chaotic traffic in Dublin.

thomond2006

Was an opportunity missed to build an underground rail link to the airport in the Port Tunnel alongside the road for vehicles?

beauf

falconio wrote: »

...I'm not sure as to whether there's a suitable site in the docklands to relocate southern/western trains (although IE do have a lot of rails connected land there IIRC) but would some people not agree this is a better location for a main intercity rail station? Much closer to the south city center,  as close to the north city centre, luas adjacent, nearer to the Dart?....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DART_Underground#/media/File:DART_Underground.jpeg
http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-airport-rail-links-1780490-Nov2014/

BonnieSituation

beauf wrote: »

Just not funded...

No money to start digging but we'll find the cash to pay back people for water bills.

beauf

BonnieSituation wrote: »

No money to start digging but we'll find the cash to pay back people for water bills.

In 2010, the estimated projected cost for DART Underground was €4 billion,

BonnieSituation

beauf wrote: »

In 2010, the estimated projected cost for DART Underground was €4 billion,

It was. But not at all the point I'm making. When it comes to infrastructure we always cry poor mouth but today we get Exchequer returns about 200mil more than expected and without batting an eyelid we are proposing paying back IW customers.

When the Railway order for DU was in place we could have used such cash to get it going. But we didn't. Cos we're moronic.

beauf

Thats a bit like using the rent money for a Ferrari brochure.

BonnieSituation

beauf wrote: »

Thats a bit like using the rent money for a Ferrari brochure.

It's nothing of the sort and you are clearly not getting the point.

WE cry poor mouth all the time and forever for infrastructure.

WE always find money for vote winning policies where we give away cash.

These two things shouldn't happen at all.

beauf

One tends not to happen with out the other.

Good luck trying to sell the idea of billions on a DU in the middle of a housing crisis.

BonnieSituation

beauf wrote: »

One tends not to happen with out the other.

Good luck trying to sell the idea of billions on a DU in the middle of a housing crisis.

We couldn't sell DU when we had money and no housing crisis (well it was a crisis but of a different sort)

DU would solve some serious housing issues in this city as well funnily enough but we're beyond help at this stage and completely devoid of any leadership or joined up thinking. I lament. But at this stage I actually don't care. I won't be living here. I'm tired of Dublin.

beauf

I think you need the housing first.

BonnieSituation

beauf wrote: »

I think you need the housing first.

More sprawl with no transportation links? You know, like what we've always done!

If you build transportation links and build housing in conjunction you make places more attractive to people to live in and that decreases pressure on high demand areas like the CC and inner suburbs.

You of course know that.

If you can get to Heuston in ten minutes and Pearse in 20 from Kishogue as you would be able to with DU wouldn't that encourage people to live in such places?

beauf

People are living in the Midlands because they cant afford Kishogue. You can't move into affordable housing that doesn't exist.

The DU should be built. No one is going to argue it shouldn't. But I dunno how you are going to cram these extra people on trains that are already at capacity (maybe beyond that already) at peak.

That 4 billion would built a lot of housing in the city, or near existing lines. So that people don't need to use a car or a new train to get to work. More housing would allo people to change where they live to suit work. Instead everyone is commuting from unsuitable locations.

Idbatterim

No money to start digging but we'll find the cash to pay back people for water bills.

yeah and 225,000,000 going out this week on the welfare bonus! yet we have a third world rail system! Wont allow even medium rise building either, which would make better transport even more sustainable!

tabbey

beauf wrote: »

I think you need the housing first.

Yes. But there are vast numbers of units in the city deliberately kept empty by the property speculators, in order to keep rents and prices at bubble levels.

Put housing on the market at fair prices in Kishogue and elsewhere, and there would be no need for people to move out of Dublin.

kc56

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Never a plan to bring IC trains on DU. They have spoken about possibility of running to the airport however I don't ever see it!
____
The germinal idea is crazy.

See http://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/rail-vision-2030 where such an idea is proposed.

beauf

Maybe we should have a Xmas reduction in welfare and Xmas increase in taxation, bills, to fund the DU.

BonnieSituation

beauf wrote: »

People are living in the Midlands because they cant afford Kishogue. You can't move into affordable housing that doesn't exist.

The DU should be built. No one is going to argue it shouldn't. But I dunno how you are going to cram these extra people on trains that are already at capacity (maybe beyond that already) at peak.

That 4 billion would built a lot of housing in the city, or near existing lines. So that people don't need to use a car or a new train to get to work. More housing would allo people to change where they live to suit work. Instead everyone is commuting from unsuitable locations.

You're honestly in a feedback loop. You really haven't grasped anything that's really being said here.

Fine let's build a load of houses with the 4 billion. Problem solved. What's next?

But wait, why build houses when we can use that money for the health service. That's probably more important than houses eh?

---

Housing problems are caused by demand. Demand (and therefore prices) rises because of desirability of certain areas.
In order to dampen demand we need to make other places more attractive ie. Spread the demand about.
By doing so you also make seeming peripheral areas more attractive for development. (See the Adamstown and Clonburris SDZs)

The most cost effective way to do this is to improve public transportation links.

In this country we would sooner spend money on tax breaks for development to encourage building than build transportation links to encourage demand. We even have evidence (real and anecdotal [sic]) to show how improved transportation links encourage demand and house pricing.

This is all of course without considering the other "unseen" benefits of a comprehensive transport network such as improved health outcomes and productivity and the obvious economic benefits of same.

But yes, let's build a load of semi-detached houses in the Naul and Kinnegad.

beauf

BonnieSituation wrote: »

...Housing problems are caused by demand. Demand (and therefore prices) rises because of desirability of certain areas.
In order to dampen demand we need to make other places more attractive ie. Spread the demand about.
By doing so you also make seeming peripheral areas more attractive for development. (See the Adamstown and Clonburris SDZs)

The most cost effective way to do this is to improve public transportation links.

In this country we would sooner spend money on tax breaks for development to encourage building than build transportation links to encourage demand. We even have evidence (real and anecdotal [sic]) to show how improved transportation links encourage demand and house pricing.

This is all of course without considering the other "unseen" benefits of a comprehensive transport network such as improved health outcomes and productivity and the obvious economic benefits of same.

But yes, let's build a load of semi-detached houses in the Naul and Kinnegad.

Your solution will accelerate the problem of people moving to Naul and Kinnegad. If you improve the links and make other areas more attractive you just move the problem further out, and make new accessible areas more expensive.This is exactly what happened in other places.

What you need is to provide housing where people need it, so they don't have to travel all over the place. or provide work where people live.

We already have an imperfect solution to the OP suggestion in the LUAS. Even if there was more capacity on that, you'd still have the capacity problem on the mainline. We also have a huge potential in improving the cycle infrastructure across the city. People spend 30-50 mins using cars, public transport to avoid a 15 min cycle.

falconio

Ok I'll have a go at refocusing the thread:

There is a excellent, fast bus connection from the docklands to the airport that exists today. It is superb, no traffic jams, drops you right at the terminals, no delays - it is a very short trip.
The bus service passes two railheads before entering the traffic logjam, one near the point depot and one with an existing if under-utilised railway station.

Assuming DU / metro will not be operational for the next 20 years at least (which I think is realistic in the current political climate) is it possible that there is an interim solution to better connect current railway services with the airport that could be examined?

L1011

The only realistic addition could be some Maynooth Line services. They won't add anything else.

beauf

falconio wrote: »

.. is it possible that there is an interim solution to better connect current railway services with the airport that could be examined?

The bus link to the airport from city centre I'm told is excellent. Not used it personally. Its just far quicker to drive to the airport directly for me anyway.

Idbatterim

yeah when you get into the port tunnel is is excellent, the traffic on the quays is a joke. The public transport bridge over the dodder is urgently needed... It will double the road capacity on that section of the quays. The eastlink toll should be scrapped too. Id lower the cost of the port tunnel toll, the peak one anyway, lower it down to the point, where it is operating safely, with the max amount of vehicles in it, thus generating more revenue from this expensive bit of infrastructure.

The proper solutions are so far away, we need to take all simple measures that we can now, to buy more time...

the other thing I am thinking of is, could a metro west, (but using buses for the time being) with large park and rides at key road and rail interchanges, be built on concrete stilts, that way down the line, you could convert to electric rail running, when funding allowed?

BonnieSituation

Idbatterim wrote: »

yeah when you get into the port tunnel is is excellent, the traffic on the quays is a joke. The public transport bridge over the dodder is urgently needed... It will double the road capacity on that section of the quays. The eastlink toll should be scrapped too. Id lower the cost of the port tunnel toll, the peak one anyway, lower it down to the point, where it is operating safely, with the max amount of vehicles in it, thus generating more revenue from this expensive bit of infrastructure.

The proper solutions are so far away, we need to take all simple measures that we can now, to buy more time...

the other thing I am thinking of is, could a metro west, (but using buses for the time being) with large park and rides at key road and rail interchanges, be built on concrete stilts, that way down the line, you could convert to electric rail running, when funding allowed?

The infrastructure to run these buses would be the jaw-droppingly most expensive part. So, no way would it happen.