DART Underground - Alternative Routes

GerardKeating · 27-09-2015 11:32am

TMOrules wrote: »

Does anyone know why the dart underground is two seperate tunnels vs one tunnel with lines running both directions for metro north, im guessing it is something to do with the size of the trains or a safety issue with running trains side by side??

Imagine a head on collision between two crowded rush-hour DARTS's 80 meters below surface.

Sam Russell · 27-09-2015 12:52pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

Imagine a head on collision between two crowded rush-hour DARTS's 80 meters below surface.

Imagine a Dart leaving the tracks in a tight tunnel 80 metres below the surface with the tunnel filled with mangled train and passengers in various states of distress. Or even a Dart on fire = we saw this the other week in the port tunnel.

GerardKeating · 27-09-2015 2:00pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Imagine a Dart leaving the tracks in a tight tunnel 80 metres below the surface with the tunnel filled with mangled train and passengers in various states of distress. Or even a Dart on fire = we saw this the other week in the port tunnel.

So you rather the DART Interconnector stay above ground?

Sam Russell · 27-09-2015 2:08pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

So you rather the DART Interconnector stay above ground?

What makes you think that? How can Dart Underground be above ground?

Every design has its problems and advantages. Single tunnel is cheaper but could have problems following a derailment. A twin bore has significant problems in the case of a train crash and in the case of a fire. You take your choice.

I do not know the facts required to make a choice - I would allow the engineers who know to make those choices.

GerardKeating · 27-09-2015 7:31pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

What makes you think that? How can Dart Underground be above ground?.

I said "DART Interconnector" not "DART Underground".

That was actually a plan, in the late 19th Century, to build a rail line from the Loop line near Tara Street to Hueston, this would have crossed Westmoreland, D'Ollier streets and roughly followed Fleet Streert, Essex Street, Cook Street till it reached Hueston Station.

monument · 27-09-2015 7:37pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

I said "DART Interconnector" not "DART Underground".

That was actually a plan, in the late 19th Century, to build a rail line from the Loop line near Tara Street to Hueston, this would have crossed Westmoreland, D'Ollier streets and roughly followed Fleet Streert, Essex Street, Cook Street till it reached Hueston Station.

Yeah, that's now less likely to happen than the above ground versions of the eastern bypass.

GerardKeating · 27-09-2015 8:25pm

monument wrote: »

Yeah, that's now less likely to happen than the above ground versions of the eastern bypass.

My crayons, my Route

StonyIron · 27-09-2015 8:35pm

This stuff should have been planned a long time ago. That's the major issue with everything. Short term, constantly changing plans.

A lot of Dublin could have been served by above ground heavy rail if it has been planned in when the surburbs were originally being built.

It's like building your kitchen first and then suddenly realising you'll need water, gas and electricity!

D.L.R. · 27-09-2015 9:10pm

Elevated rail like high rise its just something the Irish psychology rejects as being too much of an infringement on the senses.

But personally quite like overground railways in cities. Berlin has some great examples, and London. And it might be unpopular with some but I like the loop line too.

Sure parts of Dublin couldn't be any worse aesthetically and socially, can't see the harm an elevated railway would do.

StonyIron · 27-09-2015 9:23pm

Vancouver's Skytain actually looks quite cool.

random_guy · 28-09-2015 8:22pm

D.L.R. wrote: »

Elevated rail like high rise its just something the Irish psychology rejects as being too much of an infringement on the senses.

But personally quite like overground railways in cities. Berlin has some great examples, and London. And it might be unpopular with some but I like the loop line too.

Sure parts of Dublin couldn't be any worse aesthetically and socially, can't see the harm an elevated railway would do.

Very true.
Recently I was in the area around Zoo and Savignyplatz and they've some great cafes, restaurants etc in under the line. It's very well done.

McAlban · 28-09-2015 10:42pm

random_guy wrote: »

Very true.
Recently I was in the area around Zoo and Savignyplatz and they've some great cafes, restaurants etc in under the line. It's very well done.

Yes it's non obtrusive. Very handy to get the S-Bahn into Hackescher Markt of an eveing and pop into one of the Bars/Restaurants under the arches.

liam24 · 28-09-2015 11:29pm

random_guy wrote: »

Very true.
Recently I was in the area around Zoo and Savignyplatz and they've some great cafes, restaurants etc in under the line. It's very well done.

It wouldn't work in Dublin. It fits perfectly in Berlin because it has wider streets and taller buildings.

BowWow · 29-09-2015 4:47pm

All the info today on Metro North quotes times to the Airport from O'Connell St. According to many posters on this thread the centre of Dublin is SSG. Should the times quoted not be from SSQ? :rolleyes:

donvito99 · 29-09-2015 6:21pm

BowWow wrote: »

All the info today on Metro North quotes times to the Airport from O'Connell St. According to many posters on this thread the centre of Dublin is SSG. Should the times quoted not be from SSQ? :rolleyes:

SSG is a trip generation centre. The traditional centre of Dublin is the GPO on O'CS.

I think you knew that too.

alias no.9 · 30-09-2015 2:55pm

It would seem that the now funded revised Metro North will melt the wax in the crayons

The College Green Interchange just revised its status from Imaginary Utopia to Guinness Light

/thread

strassenwo!f · 04-10-2015 10:15am

I do want to place on the record of this thread my sincerest apologies for a reprehensible slur on the poster Monument.

Monument is one of the few posters on boards.ie whose identity I know. From what I know of him, he is a hardworking person, who is trying to improve things in Dublin, and in Ireland generally, in many ways. And I hope he will continue to do so.

Ireland is undoubdetly a better place for having Monument in it. If I was living in Ireland, I'm not absolutely sure I could say the same about myself.

I haven't always agreed with him - on this thread, the thread about metro north, or the main thread about DART Underground project - but this was mostly about his interpretation of the facts presented.

In many cases, those facts were presented to the board by Monument. Not by me, not by anybody else. Monument found them by hard work, diligence and persistence, presented them to the board, and helped improve our understanding of the issues at hand.

Monument, my most sincere apologies for an unforgivable slur. I am appalled that I was able to post such stuff.

strassenwo!f · 18-10-2015 8:10pm

alias no.9 wrote: »

It would seem that the now funded revised Metro North will melt the wax in the crayons

The College Green Interchange just revised its status from Imaginary Utopia to Guinness Light

/thread

This thread has been almost entirely about the routing of the DART Underground project, the public consultations related to it, the costs involved, the throughput of trains through the tunnel, and a number of related issues. I think this project, done right, makes enormous sense, and I would love to see this project happen.

From the NTA's latest report and plan for Dublin, for the years up to 2035, which does not include any DART Underground project, of whatever route, I think we should unfortunately say:

/project

I believe this is a major error. While it probably wouldn't initially have had the passenger volume you'd like to see, because of the limited number of trains initially envisaged to go through it, the capacity of this tunnel, once it was seen in operation, should have eventually encouraged much greater use of it.

Apart from that, it would have ensured that any future LUAS or metro lines travelling between the north and the south of the city would have had access to the highest capacity DART line, pretty much whatever route they had to take.

It is a major mistake not to build it.

strassenwo!f · 23-01-2016 6:36pm

The main argument which has been used here against building something approximating Telchak's nice route above is: 'it's too busy'.

It seems to me that, in most cities, the 'it's too busy' argument leads to construction at that location, underground, in order to make it less busy, overground.

Dublin is the only city I have yet found where this 'Its too busy' argument has been used to build an underground station at somewhere other than the location which is too busy.

Can anyone think of another city where this has happened?

murphaph · 24-01-2016 9:48pm

Thread's dead man.

MJohnston · 25-01-2016 4:15pm

murphaph wrote: »

Thread's dead man.

strassenwo!f · 31-01-2016 10:25am

It is abominably hard to visit boards.ie these days. And I'm not sure what that last post was about. A guy revving up a motorbike (was that Bruce Willis?). Difficult to see the relevance.

Anyway, this thread's not dead. An interconnector would be a very important project for the city, to link lines in both the west and the east of the city, to increase the capacity of the lines in both those areas, and also to provide access for whatever north/southLUAS/Metro lines are to be built in the future to the overground rail network.

Most of this thread has been taken up by discussion of College Green (which I favour)as an alternative to St. Stephen's Green, for the most central station on this important project which, in my opinion, will have to happen at some stage.

Other ideas may emerge.

If they do, then this would be the most apropriate thread for discussion of their merits.

Grandeeod · 03-02-2016 8:10pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

It is abominably hard to visit boards.ie these days. And I'm not sure what that last post was about. A guy revving up a motorbike (was that Bruce Willis?). Difficult to see the relevance.

Thread is dead and then a little vid showing a motorbike speeding off. It's rather obvious.

Anyway, this thread's not dead. An interconnector would be a very important project for the city, to link lines in both the west and the east of the city, to increase the capacity of the lines in both those areas, and also to provide access for whatever north/southLUAS/Metro lines are to be built in the future to the overground rail network.

We know.:rolleyes:

Most of this thread has been taken up by discussion of College Green (which I favour)as an alternative to St. Stephen's Green, for the most central station on this important project which, in my opinion, will have to happen at some stage.

Sure lets tear down Temple Bar and build a new bus/rail station as originally envisioned. We can route the interconnector under that instead. Hey, we can spend the next 30 bloody years talking about it too!

Other ideas may emerge. If they do, then this would be the most apropriate thread for discussion of their merits.

It sure would.

While nothing ever gets built.

strassenwo!f · 06-02-2016 1:35am

I was interested to see an article in one of the Irish papers this week, about the City Council proposing full pedestrianisation (bar the LUAS) of College Green.

This proposal may all, of course, be total bollix, but my ha'p'worth would be that the plans of DCC - and the other bodies involved - should primarily focus on how this proposal might be used to eventually improve public transport through that specific area, over what it now has.

(Much as discussed earlier in the thread)

Central plazas are nice, and good.

Central plazas which are nice, and good, and whose construction is aimed at being directly very useful to the citizens of that city, are considerably better.

strassenwo!f · 06-02-2016 9:51am

It hardly needs to be added for the board - though I'm going to add it now just to be sure - but there is really no point in going through the considerable disquiet from local businesses, the general upheaval in the city and, most importantly, the disruption to current public transport operations that would be involved in such a proposal, if you're not eventually going to produce something better for the city as a whole.

Building a nice plaza to allow people to wander from one outdoor cafe to another, while admiring the nice view of/in this plaza, would fall a long way short of that, for me.

strassenwo!f · 08-02-2016 7:34am

As discussed earlier in the thread, Irish Rail told An Bord Pleanala that they looked at two station possibilities in this key area - College Green wasn't one of those two.

I think that the City Council and Irish Rail might benefit from sitting down together to discuss their proposals: pedestrianisation of College Green and the Dart Underground.

strassenwo!f · 08-02-2016 10:08am

It could be a good opprtunity to remove the rather large St. Stephen's loop from the plan

As discussed extensively on this thread, that big St Stephen's Green loop never seemed to be very convincing, in terms of passenger uptake, and would certainly have been longer - and thus probably more expensive.

In most cases, though certainly not always, the direct route between A and B is the sensible one. It's very hard to see why Dublin is an exception to the rule.

That username is already in use. · 08-02-2016 11:12pm

strassenwo!f · 09-02-2016 10:10am

I would think that the tumbleweed really belongs on the original 'Dart Underground' thread, wherever that might be.

To me, it makes considerable sense to link the rail lines in the East and West of the city and deliver a rail connection to the very busiest parts of the city. It is a project which Dublin should do, and very probably needs to do if it is to remain up there.

murphaph · 09-02-2016 12:58pm

The original 'Dart Underground' thread is dead. This one is too of course, but you have it on a life support machine and refuse to pull the plug :pac:

Sam Russell · 09-02-2016 1:03pm

Mod: I tend to agree. Thread closed.

strassenwo!f · 16-08-2019 10:29pm

As I see it, uptake for a DART Underground project would be maximised by building it through a very central location like College Green, where people would readily be able to pile into the station from all sides and be dispersed usefully in all directions. This cannot happen at St. Stephen's Green where half of the most effective part of the catchment area is a park.

The numbers of of workers and other users within a 7-10 minute walk of such a station are also more favourable than they would be at St. Stephen's Green.

Pedestrianisation of the College Green area would, I feel, be great for the city, but I think it would be 10000% better if it can retain its current public transport function by the earth under the pedestrianised area being used to deliver people to and from the city.

To make such a station happen on a Docklands - Heuston route, it would probably be necessary to have an underground station at Pearse which is parallel to the current station. This would certainly involve considerable, but presumably manageable, disruption along Pearse Street for a period of time.

The route would thus involve - heading east-west - a curve between the Docklands and Pearse, then broadly straight on to College Green, Christchurch and Heuston.

(Much of this has been discussed on the 'DART Underground - Alternative Routes' thread, for new readers of the board).

A difficulty arises with metrolink, as one would normally see a proposal with smaller capacity trying to 'fit in' with a larger capacity line, but of course now the metrolink is on the table and the DART Underground project is not.

As I see it, the authorities are doing all they can to make metrolink construction as simple as possible, and they appear to be ignoring any future DART Underground almost entirely.

Thus, they don't want to build a metro station on St. Stephen's Green West as they don't want to disrupt the current LUAS. News for the authorities is that underground stations are being built under tram (or other rail lines) every day of the week and it's not a problem. Occasional closures at weekends, yes, during construction, but absolutely not a reason to reroute.

So they decide to build at St. Stephen's Green East, to avoid disruption - and understandably to avoid TCD's - and Ireland's - most treasured library. This then means that they have to knock an apartment block and a gym in order to go along that route to St. Stephen's Green East.

(This whole Tara Street thing is very annoying: if the country is eventually planning to build a DART Underground, the whole routing of the metrolink between O'Connell Street and St. Stephen's Green via Tara Street is pointless).

If a DART Underground is going to be built, the obvious thing to do is to build the metrolink directly between Swords and St. Stephen's Green (and wherever), with city centre stops at the busiest areas, namely O'Connell Street, College Green or circa College Green (interchange with DART Underground), where there is loads of space for a north-south metro station, and St. Stephen's Green West.

Faffing around with a potential metro station at Tara Street is pointless if that option is on the agenda.

strassenwo!f · 16-08-2019 11:03pm

CatInABox wrote: »

Welcome back.

Irish Rail still want a DU station at Pearse (they keep objecting to all developments at Sandwith street). A station at Park Lane on North Wall Quay, followed by a station at Sandwith street would mean any curve to College Green would be too sharp.

I've no idea of the final route, but I'd be shocked if it didn't include St Stephens Green. It's got downsides, but it's also got way more upsides.

Sandwith Street? That's very much a street aligned in a North-South direction, isn't it? Very much the route you would take if building a looping Docklands - Heuston railway line via St. Stephen's Green.

Especially if you needed to connect with a LUAS line which, may I remind you, has now been extended into the city.

If you were building an east-west route, such as a direct Docklands - Heuston route via Pearse Station, without all the major curves involved in going via St. Stephen's Green, then Sandwith Street would be peripheral.

Pearse Street is even wide enough to periodically have 5 lines of traffic, and surely plenty of room to have an underground station constructed underneath it, with a good connection to the overground station, at the junction of Pearse Street, Lombard Street and Westland Row.

Obviously, if you were in the Docklands and you were planning a route to Heuston, and your next station was an underground one broadly North-South along Sandwith Street, it might be tight to twist things around to get to College Green.

But if you were in Docklands and you were planning a route to Heuston, and your next station was an underground one broadly parallel to the current station at Pearse, there would be no twisting involved and getting to College Green would be fairly straightforward.

marno21 · 17-08-2019 2:49pm

MOD:

Thread re-opened. Feel free to use your crayons here.

Last Stop · 17-08-2019 9:15pm

The absolute nonsense being posted above being treated as gospel is unbelievable. How can you make vague statements and not back it up with any form of credible facts.
So let’s clarify a few things.

1. It would not be possible to build a station on Pearse St. it’s not wide enough to fit a station box (5 lanes*3.5=17.5m a DU station will be upwards of 25m wide). Throw in room for major utility diversions and there definitely isn’t space. That’s also ignoring the major traffic issues.

2. A station at college green would have the same issue if not worse.

3. A college green station would offer far poorer connections to Luas and metro than one at SSG. Distance between SSG metro and Luas is around 300m. DU will be 100m to each. College green to metro and NB would be 500m+

4. A DU station at SSG will link metro and Luas underground creating a world class interchange station.

5. Your criticism of Tara Metro station is absolutely ridiculous. That station is going to be the busiest on the line and even if DU is build, it still provides interchange with the Dart line and the city centre.

6. Running a direct line through college green would have more of an impact on trinity if that what’s you’re concerned about with metro (its over 10m deep so it certainly isn’t an issue for metro) and would force the alignment deeper to pass under metro adding to the cost of a college green and pearse stations. Running it via SSG means that yes SSG is a deep station but it can rise up to a lower depth at Pearse.

7. As has been pointed out a number of times, there are a significant number of offices served by an SSG station. It is justifiable and arguably more so than a college green station given it increases the area served by DU to further into the south of the city.

8. Your suggestion that Metro is not a high capacity line is yet more nonsense.

While this is a discussion board, throwing out comments about a route without any consideration of basic engineering principles and arguably common sense takes the biscuit. There is plenty of sources of information regarding transport economics which could be of use before putting out misleading statements and making them appear as facts

strassenwo!f · 17-08-2019 11:48pm

Last Stop wrote: »

The absolute nonsense being posted above being treated as gospel is unbelievable. How can you make vague statements and not back it up with any form of credible facts.

Nothing in the above is being treated as Gospel, and I don't know how you're interpreting it that way. Nobody - apart from you - has yet replied to my earlier comments.

Last Stop wrote: »

So let’s clarify a few things.

1. It would not be possible to build a station on Pearse St. it’s not wide enough to fit a station box (5 lanes*3.5=17.5m a DU station will be upwards of 25m wide). Throw in room for major utility diversions and there definitely isn’t space. That’s also ignoring the major traffic issues.

I would envisage 3 tracks being built in that station: an island platform for westbound trains, initially to accomodate trains from the Docklands, but provision being made during construction for eventual incorporation of at least some trains from the Southside DART line. That last bit probably won't happen for many years, but it makes sense to have the station ready for when it does (rather than digging everything up years later). And one eastbound platform.

6 or so metres for the island platform, 4 metres for the eastbound platform, 3 or so metres for each of the tracks. 20-25 metres under the street should be quite comfortable, once you take in the width of the street, and the pavements along it.

Last Stop wrote: »

2. A station at college green would have the same issue if not worse.

No. Here you've reduced the width of the required station box to just two tracks, because the eventual Westbound lines have now become just one. Strangely, the street above is getting even wider (currently around 6-8 lanes in College Green) but the required station box might even have got smaller. (Because College Green is such a busy area of the city, I would hope for an arrangement where any station there would have an island platform and two side platforms, to facilitate an 'in one side, out the other' arrangement. The so-called 'Spanish style' system.

Last Stop wrote: »

3. A college green station would offer far poorer connections to Luas and metro than one at SSG. Distance between SSG metro and Luas is around 300m. DU will be 100m to each. College green to metro and NB would be 500m+

An underground DART station at College Green would have fantastic connections with the LUAS. The LUAS is right there now.

I think it would probably be necessary to close the Green Line, in that central part of Dublin, for a number of months, while the DART Underground is being built, but there are obvious measures which can be taken to reduce disruption.

And building a metro station box at that time, and at College Green, to slot in nicely with the one for the DART Underground, would make sense.

Last Stop wrote: »

4. A DU station at SSG will link metro and Luas underground creating a world class interchange station.

A station at College Green could do the same thing. It could integrate DART, metro and LUAS, if the will was there to utilise the proposed pedestrianisation of that space to (i) build the DART Underground through it and (ii) to build the metro through it. The LUAS is already there.

Last Stop wrote: »

5. Your criticism of Tara Metro station is absolutely ridiculous. That station is going to be the busiest on the line and even if DU is build, it still provides interchange with the Dart line and the city centre.

If the authorities are going to ignore the enormous potential of a pedestrianised College Green as a public transport hub, then yes, go right ahead and waste a great opportunity and build the transport hub at Tara Street.

Last Stop wrote: »

6. Running a direct line through college green would have more of an impact on trinity if that what’s you’re concerned about with metro (its over 10m deep so it certainly isn’t an issue for metro) and would force the alignment deeper to pass under metro adding to the cost of a college green and pearse stations. Running it via SSG means that yes SSG is a deep station but it can rise up to a lower depth at Pearse.

As I envisage it, the DART Underground would be the line closer to the surface at College Green. Remember, the metro line would have just gone under the river. I would see an interchange where the metro would be on the bottom, the DART Underground would be above that, then there'd be a mezzanine level for your ticket machines, flower shops and sandwiches, and several outlets onto the pedestrianised square and the LUAS.

Last Stop wrote: »

7. As has been pointed out a number of times, there are a significant number of offices served by an SSG station. It is justifiable and arguably more so than a college green station given it increases the area served by DU to further into the south of the city.

There certainly are several offices in or near St. Stephen's Green, but the figures posted on this thread seem to indicate that greater numbers would be directly served by building through College Green.

Last Stop wrote: »

8. Your suggestion that Metro is not a high capacity line is yet more nonsense.

The metro is a high-capacity line if you compare it to, for example, LUAS. But beside the potential capacity of any DART Underground project it is small. A DART project running even only 16 trains per hour from the West of Dublin, directly into the centre, would dwarf anything that a metro can deliver.

Last Stop wrote: »

While this is a discussion board, throwing out comments about a route without any consideration of basic engineering principles and arguably common sense takes the biscuit. There is plenty of sources of information regarding transport economics which could be of use before putting out misleading statements and making them appear as facts

If you can show the board where I have misled them, or attempted to do, as you allege I have done, please do.

MJohnston · 18-08-2019 12:38am

Are you really dragging Metrolink back to the drawing board in order to satiate this bizarre obsession with having a College Green station? That project has to proceed on its own merits without waiting around for something that's clearly never going to happen like DARTu.

strassenwo!f · 18-08-2019 1:21am

MJohnston wrote: »

Are you really dragging Metrolink back to the drawing board in order to satiate this bizarre obsession with having a College Green station? That project has to proceed on its own merits without waiting around for something that's clearly never going to happen like DARTu.

We've seen, with Metrolink, that it can go back to the drawing board. There's, thankfully, no proposal now to have a wasteful replacement of the Green line south of the canal.

Everybody knows that the key north-south corridor in Dublin is the St. Stephen's Green - College Green - O'Connell Street corridor.

People are faffing around this, and it is easy to do this because College Green is currently clogged with buses and it is impossible to see what it would be like without them.

Relieve College Green of all its buses and it could be a wonderful space.

I believe it could be even much better than it is now, if it was working hard underground to deliver an even better transport system for Dublin. Cities like Munich have a wonderful central square, but their central square is working hard underneath to serve over a hundred outlying stations on its S-Bahn, and several dozen on its' equivalent of the metro.

It is clear from many other cities in Europe that underground rail under large public spaces is the way to go. Dublin is hoping to pedestrianise College Green, and I think it would be a great waste not to try to use that plan to make it as effective as possible.

donvito99 · 18-08-2019 8:26am

Dublin's "large central square" is O'Connell Street.

College Green is a medium size traffic island with an Abercrombie & Fitch. More people work in and around Harcourt and SSG than do at CG. There is more scope for development at Stephens Green (literally Dublin's "large central square") considering that there are mutterings of finally replacing the shopping centre once Dunnes stop opposing.

strassenwo!f · 18-08-2019 11:48am

I didn't suggest that this thread be reopened, I merely suggested that people look at this thread.

DonVito's contention above, that more people work in the St. Stephen's Green catchment than the College Green catchment, can easily be refuted by informed posts on this very thread.

I think it's in around pages 21-26 of this thread, but I must look. And I will find it.

CatInABox · 18-08-2019 12:48pm

You keep saying "it's obvious" and "everyone knows" and other phrases that are specifically designed to suppress discussion Strassenwo!f, please stop. Maybe instead of using those phrases, you could start by say "I believe" or "I think", because you don't really have anything to back up your assertions.

I don't really know why I bother, as anytime you're confronted with facts and figures, you slink away, lick your wounds, and then reappear weeks or months later, and start the same discussion all over again, but with no more information or facts, just the same thoughts banging around with no proof.

Anyway, here goes attempt number 513 at convincing you that you're wrong.

The Metrolink project has examined College Green in depth. They came to the conclusion that any station built there would have to be mined, which adds significant risk and cost to the project. They are allergic to both. For example, in the midst of the worse homeless and housing crisis in the states history, they're planning on CPOing 70 apartments and knocking them at Tara St, instead of mining the station out from underneath.

They also found that putting a station at College Green meant that they could no longer put a station at Tara St OR SSG. While more people would have used College Green as a station, it would have had massive knock on effects on the rest of the stations and the ability to interchange.

Numbers from the alignment options for a station at College Green:

Station|Potential Trip Demand (trips/24 hours) within 500m2
Charlemont|5250
College Green|18750
O'Connell Street|17500
TOTAL|41500

Numbers from the alignment options for the current Metrolink:

Station|Potential Trip Demand (trips/24 hours) within 500m2
Charlemont|5250
SSG East|9200
Tara St|12250
O'Connell Street|17500
TOTAL|44200

As you can see, the Metrolink serves more people by not serving College Green. Also, this doesn't take into account the people that will interchange at Tara St, which, as you yourself have just said, as a heavy rail line will dwarf the potential of the light rail Luas.

Quite frankly, the most bizarre aspect of this is that you wish to build a multi-billion euro project that requires ANOTHER multi-billion euro project, just to have what you think might, just might, be a better interchange potential. There is no guarantee that DU will ever be built, hell, there's no guarantee that Metrolink will ever be built, so to cripple the first one just for a potential pipe dream is stupid.

There's an old saying that applies pretty well here Strassenwo!f, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I'd far prefer to get the current Metrolink project built as is, than to bet it all on your harebrained scheme.

Last Stop · 19-08-2019 12:52pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Nothing in the above is being treated as Gospel, and I don't know how you're interpreting it that way. Nobody - apart from you - has yet replied to my earlier comments.

I would envisage 3 tracks being built in that station: an island platform for westbound trains, initially to accomodate trains from the Docklands, but provision being made during construction for eventual incorporation of at least some trains from the Southside DART line. That last bit probably won't happen for many years, but it makes sense to have the station ready for when it does (rather than digging everything up years later). And one eastbound platform.

6 or so metres for the island platform, 4 metres for the eastbound platform, 3 or so metres for each of the tracks. 20-25 metres under the street should be quite comfortable, once you take in the width of the street, and the pavements along it.

No. Here you've reduced the width of the required station box to just two tracks, because the eventual Westbound lines have now become just one. Strangely, the street above is getting even wider (currently around 6-8 lanes in College Green) but the required station box might even have got smaller. (Because College Green is such a busy area of the city, I would hope for an arrangement where any station there would have an island platform and two side platforms, to facilitate an 'in one side, out the other' arrangement. The so-called 'Spanish style' system.

An underground DART station at College Green would have fantastic connections with the LUAS. The LUAS is right there now.

I think it would probably be necessary to close the Green Line, in that central part of Dublin, for a number of months, while the DART Underground is being built, but there are obvious measures which can be taken to reduce disruption.

And building a metro station box at that time, and at College Green, to slot in nicely with the one for the DART Underground, would make sense.

A station at College Green could do the same thing. It could integrate DART, metro and LUAS, if the will was there to utilise the proposed pedestrianisation of that space to (i) build the DART Underground through it and (ii) to build the metro through it. The LUAS is already there.

If the authorities are going to ignore the enormous potential of a pedestrianised College Green as a public transport hub, then yes, go right ahead and waste a great opportunity and build the transport hub at Tara Street.

As I envisage it, the DART Underground would be the line closer to the surface at College Green. Remember, the metro line would have just gone under the river. I would see an interchange where the metro would be on the bottom, the DART Underground would be above that, then there'd be a mezzanine level for your ticket machines, flower shops and sandwiches, and several outlets onto the pedestrianised square and the LUAS.

There certainly are several offices in or near St. Stephen's Green, but the figures posted on this thread seem to indicate that greater numbers would be directly served by building through College Green.

The metro is a high-capacity line if you compare it to, for example, LUAS. But beside the potential capacity of any DART Underground project it is small. A DART project running even only 16 trains per hour from the West of Dublin, directly into the centre, would dwarf anything that a metro can deliver.

If you can show the board where I have misled them, or attempted to do, as you allege I have done, please do.

Wow. Where to start with this one...
I think the lack of replies is down to the fact that other posts are not entertaining your logic anymore.

1. Right so you’re going for an even wider and longer 3 track station at Pearse? As I mentioned earlier Pearse st is around 17.5m wide (5*3.5). So using your figures for the station 6+4+3+3+3=19m which doesn’t even allow for the 1m diaphragm walls and utility diversions.
Having a 3 track station allows increased the length from around 200m to around 400m meaning you’d have to close between Westland Row and Pearse Square!!

2. College green currently has 2 lanes eastbound and 1 lane westbound with a 2 way cycle lane and a bus stop. So a total of 6 lanes (not 6-8). Again a wider station with an island platform would push the box all the way from outside Trinity to past George’s St!!

3. The Luas is not right there now! Trinity stop is around 100m away and Westmorland around 200m If you’re suggesting closing the green line at college green (absolutely nonsense) then you are also suggesting closing the main N-S bus route though the city!
Metro is not going to college green end of!

4. Metro is going to Tara so can we stop this suggestion.

5. See point 4

6. Tunnelling requires the tunnel to be a minimum of 1 tunnel diameter below the surface. Metro will be pretty much at that level so there’s no way DU could go over it.

7. It’s not just about the number of office but the catchment area. Going further south extends the catchment area.

8. 16 trains would be one every 3.75 minutes pushing near the max capacity of the system. But let’s take your word on it. 16x1000=16,000 passengers per hour. Metro is going to deliver 20,000 based on 30 trains per hour and a train capacity of around 700.

Finally (we got there) your constant assertion of vague statement as facts such as those above is misleading to those who are less knowledgeable about such projects

gjim · 25-08-2019 4:53pm

MJohnston wrote: »

Are you really dragging Metrolink back to the drawing board in order to satiate this bizarre obsession with having a College Green station?

Unless I'm mistaken, Strassenwolf has been banging this drum for more than a decade. At least there was a poster with the same handle on the archiseek forum, 10 or 12 years ago, whose main contribution was the same - an unshakeable fixation with having underground station at College Green. They've never managed to change the mind of a single person, from what I've seen. You almost have to admire the perserverence given the futility of the effort.

marno21 · 25-08-2019 8:45pm

MOD:

Posts about DART Expansion moved to the proper thread. Please retain this thread for fictional stuff and discuss the actual plans on the other thread

strassenwo!f · 11-11-2021 1:57pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/111078408#Comment_111078408

Good idea, Marno. Since the DART Underground project has now been consigned to Dublin's plans for something post-2042, twenty years hence, this seems a good place to start a discussion of longer term DART plans. Anybody?

Sam Russell · 11-11-2021 2:01pm

Mod: This thread has been dead for 3 years. Start a new thread if you want to discuss this type of topic.

Thread closed.

DART Underground - Alternative Routes

Comments