Maximizing the current Rail Infrastructure

Colonel Claptrap · 06-10-2017 1:57pm

The minister for housing - speaking to 200 town planners at the Irish Planning Institute - had some interesting comments today.

He proposes:
- lifting the numerical height caps on buildings along key public transport corridors.

- reduce mandatory car-parking for developments in certain areas.

- clearly defined geographical catchments within 750-1,000 metres of DART, suburban rail, Luas, QBC or Bus Rapid Transit stops where no minimum mandatory car-parking provision will apply.

- a broader range of urban living solutions including more studio and 1 & 2 bed apartments as well as specialised housing for older people and downsizers.

These solutions would go a long way toward tackling the housing crisis. They also have the double whammy effect of maximising the use of our rail infrastructure.

IE 222 · 07-10-2017 2:48pm

Metro North is a short term stand alone system which will offer very little relief to the Dublin region as a whole in the long. It will reduce traffic volumes from the N1 but not resolve traffic problem on the corridor and thats about it. We need to move away from the idea of just moving passengers from the airport to the city centre as Dublin needs a more radial transport network included and connecting with current routes offers the direct city centre access also. The idea of sending everything via the city centre is not beneficial. Very few people using the airport live in the city centre. A lot of people been served MN would still likely get a lift or use a bus to the airport, so what exactly is MN providing.

Using current Dart and heavy rail infrastructure is a no brainer. Expanding Dart throughout Dublin is a better use than having multiple rail links. MN funds can be better spent.

I think there is better ways of maximising the system by building MN (with Dart) from Malahide to Claremont (Glasnevin) via Swords, Airport, Santry, Ballymun rd(DCU), Glasnevin and Tolka Valley N2 using Dart. With a combined use of tunneling, cut and cover and surface rail costs would be kept low compared to tunnelling undee the city centre. Building a new connecting station on the island strip of land between each line and Luas offers massive connectivity.

Electrify to Clonsilla (with future plans to M3) will offer city centre travel by either Malahide or Claremont while also offering connections into Hueston services via PPT and the Sligo line.

4 tracking between Malahide and Howth Jct and bewteen Connonlly and Killester would resolve capacity issues. Most of space for 4 tracking between Connolly and Killester is there.

DU can come later along with a reconfigured Glasnevin Jct, electrify PPT and Newcome Jct.

uxiant · 08-10-2017 5:33pm

IE 222 wrote: »

Metro North is a short term stand alone system which will offer very little relief to the Dublin region as a whole in the long. It will reduce traffic volumes from the N1 but not resolve traffic problem on the corridor and thats about it. We need to move away from the idea of just moving passengers from the airport to the city centre as Dublin needs a more radial transport network included and connecting with current routes offers the direct city centre access also. The idea of sending everything via the city centre is not beneficial. Very few people using the airport live in the city centre. A lot of people been served MN would still likely get a lift or use a bus to the airport, so what exactly is MN providing.

Using current Dart and heavy rail infrastructure is a no brainer. Expanding Dart throughout Dublin is a better use than having multiple rail links. MN funds can be better spent.

I think there is better ways of maximising the system by building MN (with Dart) from Malahide to Claremont (Glasnevin) via Swords, Airport, Santry, Ballymun rd(DCU), Glasnevin and Tolka Valley N2 using Dart. With a combined use of tunneling, cut and cover and surface rail costs would be kept low compared to tunnelling undee the city centre. Building a new connecting station on the island strip of land between each line and Luas offers massive connectivity.

Electrify to Clonsilla (with future plans to M3) will offer city centre travel by either Malahide or Claremont while also offering connections into Hueston services via PPT and the Sligo line.

4 tracking between Malahide and Howth Jct and bewteen Connonlly and Killester would resolve capacity issues. Most of space for 4 tracking between Connolly and Killester is there.

DU can come later along with a reconfigured Glasnevin Jct, electrify PPT and Newcome Jct.

I think you're completely missing the point about MN. It's not just about creating a rail link to the airport but providing a quick and effective transport system for the people of Swords, Ballymun and ALL of the northern satellite towns. The levels of traffic in Santry, Beaumont, Whitehall and the area surrounding the M1 are just completely unacceptable at the moment but people have no other option except their cars.

One or two park and ride stops would take a ton of traffic off the roads never mind the residential areas serviced either side of MN. By extending the DART through Swords and Glasnevin you're just going to end up with a slow ineffective service because of the bottleneck that is Connolly station.

donvito99 · 08-10-2017 6:22pm

MN also offers a potential thru service from Swords to Sandyford, another major point missed here.

end of the road · 08-10-2017 10:00pm

uxiant wrote: »

I think you're completely missing the point about MN. It's not just about creating a rail link to the airport but providing a quick and effective transport system for the people of Swords, Ballymun and ALL of the northern satellite towns. The levels of traffic in Santry, Beaumont, Whitehall and the area surrounding the M1 are just completely unacceptable at the moment but people have no other option except their cars.

One or two park and ride stops would take a ton of traffic off the roads never mind the residential areas serviced either side of MN. By extending the DART through Swords and Glasnevin you're just going to end up with a slow ineffective service because of the bottleneck that is Connolly station.

connolly will have to be sorted anyway so that shouldn't be an issue in terms of his proposal.

IE 222 · 14-10-2017 8:02pm

uxiant wrote: »

I think you're completely missing the point about MN. It's not just about creating a rail link to the airport but providing a quick and effective transport system for the people of Swords, Ballymun and ALL of the northern satellite towns. The levels of traffic in Santry, Beaumont, Whitehall and the area surrounding the M1 are just completely unacceptable at the moment but people have no other option except their cars.

One or two park and ride stops would take a ton of traffic off the roads never mind the residential areas serviced either side of MN. By extending the DART through Swords and Glasnevin you're just going to end up with a slow ineffective service because of the bottleneck that is Connolly station.

The trains will be filled before leaving the airport so don't be fooling yourself thinking that all these areas will be relieved of traffic. Airport is extremely busy in the mornings as sure your aware of. With the introduction of MN we can be sure to see massive housing projects coming on board as well especially in North Co. Dublin. At the least with my Dart alternative you could reach the city centre travelling either direction. As stated Connolly will receive a major overhaul eventually and might not be as expensive if worked into DU project.

funnyname · 26-10-2017 10:09pm

Are there any timetable improvements in the pipeline? Weren'twe meant to 15 mins knocked off routes into Heuston due to track updates between there and Portarlington.

funnyname · 29-10-2017 2:28pm

Currently delayed in Athlone (enroute to Galway from Dublin) as driver is refusing for safety reasons to go any further due to the 3 carriages being paced with people standing. There were people standing leaving Dublin and it's gotten worse at each station since.

He's looking for a few buses to bring the excess before going.

Bank holiday weekend and only 3 carriages is daft!

end of the road · 29-10-2017 3:38pm

funnyname wrote: »

Currently delayed in Athlone (enroute to Galway from Dublin) as driver is refusing for safety reasons to go any further due to the 3 carriages being paced with people standing. There were people standing leaving Dublin and it's gotten worse at each station since.

He's looking for a few buses to bring the excess before going.

Bank holiday weekend and only 3 carriages is daft!

completely agree. it's not as if they don't actually have the stock to have given more carriges.

good on the driver though for not tolerating what sounds like a potentially dangerous level of overcrowding. i hope people are understanding of his position, even though it's not good enough on the company's part.

funnyname · 29-10-2017 8:05pm

Unfortunately he was overruled and after 15 mins in Athlone we continued as we were.
A wheelchair user got on at Balinasole and it can have been comfortable for them.

Seems to me like there's low hanging fruit but they can't be bothered picking it.

end of the road wrote: »

completely agree. it's not as if they don't actually have the stock to have given more carriges.

good on the driver though for not tolerating what sounds like a potentially dangerous level of overcrowding. i hope people are understanding of his position, even though it's not good enough on the company's part.

Jamie2k9 · 29-10-2017 8:17pm

funnyname wrote: »

Currently delayed in Athlone (enroute to Galway from Dublin) as driver is refusing for safety reasons to go any further due to the 3 carriages being paced with people standing. There were people standing leaving Dublin and it's gotten worse at each station since.

He's looking for a few buses to bring the excess before going.

Bank holiday weekend and only 3 carriages is daft!

I can't see the driver refusing to go any further for safety reasons. More likely given it's Athline they were trying to see if they had spare coaches available to join the train and or if buses were available from Athlone.

It's normally 4 so probably a train failure.

end of the road · 29-10-2017 8:20pm

funnyname wrote: »

Unfortunately he was overruled and after 15 mins in Athlone we continued as we were.
A wheelchair user got on at Balinasole and it can have been comfortable for them.

Seems to me like there's low hanging fruit but they can't be bothered picking it.

not surprising unfortunately. i guess even the galway line isn't immune from shoddy treatment.

GerardKeating · 29-10-2017 9:24pm

funnyname wrote: »

Currently delayed in Athlone (enroute to Galway from Dublin) as driver is refusing for safety reasons to go any further due to the 3 carriages being paced with people standing. There were people standing leaving Dublin and it's gotten worse at each station since.

He's looking for a few buses to bring the excess before going.

Bank holiday weekend and only 3 carriages is daft!

And I gather that one of the carriages was entirely or mostly pre-booked.

funnyname · 30-10-2017 1:12am

In that case surely that would give them an indication that they need to put on more carriages? The train was ready to board 45 minutes before departure.

GerardKeating wrote: »

And I gather that one of the carriages was entirely or mostly pre-booked.

Idbatterim · 01-11-2017 5:11pm

lads would there be significant savings from combining DU and MN? it raises other issues, I get that...

end of the road · 01-11-2017 5:26pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

lads would there be significant savings from combining DU and MN? it raises other issues, I get that...

i don't know if there would be savings but theere would be benefits to it in terms of connecting with a wider network. it's an idea i have actually suggested and supported on here a plenty since i joined the site. sadly it's not going to happen.

Idbatterim · 01-11-2017 5:44pm

say you connect massive trip generators, like dublin airport, swords, etc etc etc. You have DU so people can actually get into the city centre. passenger numbers would go up drastically. Could you then simply introduce competition to Irish rail?

this year I think IR will carry 45 million passengers, I think the projected figure with DU would be 100,000,000

end of the road · 01-11-2017 6:22pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

say you connect massive trip generators, like dublin airport, swords, etc etc etc. You have DU so people can actually get into the city centre. passenger numbers would go up drastically. Could you then simply introduce competition to Irish rail?

this year I think IR will carry 45 million passengers, I think the projected figure with DU would be 100,000,000

realistically competition wouldn't be viable. given the size of the network and no competing lines 1 operator for the lot is our only option.

budhabob · 02-11-2017 2:26pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

lads would there be significant savings from combining DU and MN? it raises other issues, I get that...

I wouldn't see there being significant savings in construction, as route wise the quantum of construction remains the same. there would be some efficiencies gained in construction that would save certainly.

There could be big savings in terms of the operational costs e.g. rolling stock procurement, the bigger the order the better the cost (generally), and maintenance of said rolling stock. Similarly, Operational Control Centres, would only require one etc.

L1011 · 02-11-2017 2:32pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

lads would there be significant savings from combining DU and MN? it raises other issues, I get that...

There'd be some from combining the SSG station build and maybe some minor project management and administration cost savings on top. Not huge gains.

There wouldn't be economies of scale in equipment as basically everything is different. Both projects would be big ebough to already be getting decent value on construction

Rolling stock is completely different, 1600mm heavy rail Vs 1435mm, likely driverless light rail. DU will be controlled from the existing CTC

budhabob · 02-11-2017 3:07pm

L1011 wrote: »

There'd be some from combining the SSG station build and maybe some minor project management and administration cost savings on top. Not huge gains.

There wouldn't be economies of scale in equipment as basically everything is different. Both projects would be big ebough to already be getting decent value on construction

Rolling stock is completely different, 1600mm heavy rail Vs 1435mm, likely driverless light rail. DU will be controlled from the existing CTC

not necessarily true. The original plans was to have a stand alone operational control centre due to the CTC being at capacity / life expired.

bk · 02-11-2017 4:24pm

Sure, if you were to scrap DU and build is as a Metro instead, along a similar but tweaked alignment (maybe extending to Lucan and into the Docks) you would have some major savings from using Metro spec instead of heavy rail spec. Though that has some obvious disadvantages in terms of electrifying the Maynooth line, etc.

No savings would be gained from doing the opposite, of building Metro North as heavy rail, as that would simply significantly increase the cost of the MN project due to the higher requirements of heavy rail.

budhabob · 02-11-2017 4:28pm

bk wrote: »

Sure, if you were to scrap DU and build is as a Metro instead, along a similar but tweaked alignment (maybe extending to Lucan and into the Docks) you would have some major savings from using Metro spec instead of heavy rail spec. Though that has some obvious disadvantages in terms of electrifying the Maynooth line, etc.

No savings would be gained from doing the opposite, of building Metro North as heavy rail, as that would simply significantly increase the cost of the MN project due to the higher requirements of heavy rail.

The benefit of DU is that it increases capacity on all heavy rail lines into and out of Dublin by bypassing the bottlenecks of Connolly and Heuston. Anything other than Heavy rail, and through running onto the Cork and Belfast lines has little or no real benefit!. If you wanted to reduce cost, build the tunnel in its entirety, and only stations at Heuston, Pearse, and if MN is done at SSG.

bk · 02-11-2017 5:55pm

The reality is that intercity trains, etc. were never going to run through it anyway. With DART running at a high frequency there simply wouldn't be the time for them in the tunnel, beyond maybe the odd special train.

That is why it is called DART underground, not cross rail or something like that.

LeinsterDub · 02-11-2017 6:01pm

Given the low numbers using the inter city routes. Should we terminate all IC services outside of the greater Dublin Area and link up with an improved commuter services?

end of the road · 02-11-2017 6:27pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Given the low numbers using the inter city routes. Should we terminate all IC services outside of the greater Dublin Area and link up with an improved commuter services?

the intercity routes do not have low usage. they don't have as much as we would like however.
having pointless changes outside the greater dublin area would destroy those routes and would ultimately bring no actual gains. it would be implementing a change for change sake. the intercity services often ofter express services to the main commuter stations within the greater dublin area (for better or worse) so your suggestion would increase journey times for everybody.
extra tracking would still need to happen within the dublin area, the finishing of the kildare route project and quad or tri-tracking tracking where possible around the connolly suburban lines. the trains running the intercity routes would still have to go to their depots as scheduled, which are in droghida and portlaoise (or inchicore for the motive hauled stock) so would have to run anyway, except they would now be running completely empty within the greater dublin area. not an exceptible option (in fact there is i believe quite a bit of empty running as it is so we don't need to add to it)
it's not cost effective to build a depot for each line either.
so in short, it's not a viable option (hence it will probably happen)

we actually had a thread discussing this back a bit, you might be able to find it. started by the poster sam russell i think. or maybe it was a discussion within another thread. i can't remember off hand.

L1011 · 02-11-2017 6:28pm

budhabob wrote: »

not necessarily true. The original plans was to have a stand alone operational control centre due to the CTC being at capacity / life expired.

CTC is moving for redevelopment (before DU will even start most likely) so if they don't provide enough capacity when that happens, someone needs to be fired.

LeinsterDub · 02-11-2017 6:55pm

end of the road wrote: »

the intercity routes do not have low usage. they don't have as much as we would like however.
.

40,000 passengers per day was reported today. Less than commuter and dart both of which are being hamstrung by IC. IC trains are the equivalent of DB's detours into housing estates. Impacting the entire service to pander to a minority.

I'm no rail expert so correct me if I'm wrong but take the Wexford line. If all the trains terminated at Greystones/Bray to meet a waiting Dart. We'd remove this congestion from the mainline and the Rosslare to Bray service could actually have a decent frequency.

02-11-2017 7:05pm

Some intercity rail is still needed. Dublin to Tralee and Sligo are still much better served by rail. Obviously this could change if the M4 and M21 are ever completed.

end of the road · 02-11-2017 7:23pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

40,000 passengers per day was reported today.

the day after a strike? means jot. still 1 day.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Less than commuter and dart both of which are being hamstrung by IC.

dart and commuter are not being hamstrung by intercity trains. 99% of the intercity trains are carying commuters anyway seeing as people commute long distances these days. infrastructure is the issue, and no amount of making others have less of a service will give you more.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

IC trains are the equivalent of DB's detours into housing estates.

nope. intercity trains are intercity trains. they offer direct services to the capital from the major towns and cities, including providing express services from some of the suburban stations.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Impacting the entire service to pander to a minority.

not impacting anything. of course the railway panders to people who use the railway. that is it's job after all, i mean how dare they use the railway at all. the minority certainly aren't being pandered to. dart has full priority dispite apparently contributing less in fare revenue and slowing up everything else. it's one service where i'm happy to say it gets enough for now.
your suggestion frees up nothing for nothing, brings no actual operational gain and causes waste in the form of lots of empty running.
if people want extra suburban and dart services then like others have had to do to try and get improvements, start telling the politicians to actually pay for the infrastructure required when they come to the door near election time. infrastructure which will be needed whether intercity trains exist or not.

Maximizing the current Rail Infrastructure

Comments