Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Irish Rail (Boston Sidings) For Sale

Comments

  • #2
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    They have gone up for sale.......

    http://www.daft.ie/dublin/commercial-property-for-rent/development-land-for-rent/grand-canal-dock-south-docklands-grand-canal-dock-dublin-485024/#img=1

    What's left now just Pearse? Is the GCD bay platform really enough to justify the sale?

    How else are the unions going to get their 'gravy' then commrade?


  • #3
    highdef
    Registered Users Posts: 6,129 ✭✭✭highdef


    Your link suggests that the site is up for rent, not for sale. Has the status changed since you posted?


  • #4
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,540 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    There will still be space for two eight car trains to be stored between Pearse and GCD, in addition to the bay platform at GCD.

    However it's one more bit of flexibility removed south of the river - you could split another eight car train and store it in the two Boston sidings.


  • #5
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,757 ✭✭✭cython


    highdef wrote: »
    Your link suggests that the site is up for rent, not for sale. Has the status changed since you posted?
    Daft wrote:
    Register you interest with Lisney, for access to the bidding documentation including a building 5 year licence (agreement for lease) and a 300 ground year lease (subject to a premium rent.
    It's effectively for sale with a lease like that, at least from the perspective of ever serving another purpose.


  • #6
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Apparently sidings close on Sunday, currently 2x4 29000 park during the day.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭Effects


    They close as in cease to function? Where will they store the trains, that are usually stored there, going forward?


  • #8
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Effects wrote: »
    They close as in cease to function? Where will they store the trains, that are usually stored there, going forward?

    Yes they will be disconnected from network and fully removed shortly afterwords.

    Not sure what the plan is, maybe Connolly can take one or could be sent elsewhere.


  • #9
    thomasj
    Registered Users Posts: 4,785 ✭✭✭thomasj


    Might explain the reasoning behind the reluctance to terminate half hourly maynooth services in pearse


  • #10
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,582 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    Effects wrote: »
    They close as in cease to function? Where will they store the trains, that are usually stored there, going forward?

    It's things like this which makes you realise that CIE seems more interested in reaping the benefits of making money via the property market, than ensuring that their transport companies have adequate infrastructure for their operations.


  • #11
    trellheim
    Registered Users Posts: 5,854 ✭✭✭trellheim


    A simple solution might be to sell air rights over the top of the damn things and build on top if them .


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,523 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    thomasj wrote: »
    Might explain the reasoning behind the reluctance to terminate half hourly maynooth services in pearse

    Lack of drivers is what started that


  • #13
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭Effects


    trellheim wrote: »
    A simple solution might be to sell air rights over the top of the damn things and build on top if them .

    That's what I was assuming they were going to do in the first place!


  • #14
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Air rights, in a city without high rises and a planning office that rejects them?


  • #15
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,950 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    devnull wrote: »
    It's things like this which makes you realise that CIE seems more interested in reaping the benefits of making money via the property market, than ensuring that their transport companies have adequate infrastructure for their operations.

    Well it has been the policy of the Kildare Street beancounters to expect CIE to cash in more and more on it's landbank assets to cover deficits and network investments and wages rather than do it from the subvention that it should get, a la most western European nations.


  • #16
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    Is Docklands not free during the off the peak?

    They could tidy up North Wall alot and add some additional parking in there. Most of the sidings are to short as it is. Any freight trains been stored need to be split. They should reinstall the sidings where the oil wagons use to be stored to allow trains be parked straight from Alexandria road without shunting ect.

    If they ever did grow container traffic out of Dublin Port North Wall in it's current layout would be a serious bottle neck.

    I think they've pocket wagons parked down there at the moment, they could easily be stored in inchicore.


  • #17
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,234 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    trellheim wrote: »
    A simple solution might be to sell air rights over the top of the damn things and build on top if them .

    CIÉ don't like air rights over tracks (although they seem to be doing it at Tara Street). The possibility of a train fire setting fire to a building or vice versa may be the issue.


  • #18
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    Victor wrote: »
    CIÉ don't like air rights over tracks (although they seem to be doing it at Tara Street). The possibility of a train fire setting fire to a building or vice versa may be the issue.

    Pretty sure the new plans for Connelly will see parts of the sidings at least with offices above it.

    I'm sure in this day and age proper fire suppressing equipment would be put in place.


  • #19
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Victor wrote: »
    CIÉ don't like air rights over tracks (although they seem to be doing it at Tara Street). The possibility of a train fire setting fire to a building or vice versa may be the issue.

    More like not enough profit partly due to our height problem however this would not apply at GCD.

    Stations would not have been built like those on KRP and Clongriffin where the 29000 had problems if they really had an issue.


  • #20
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    IE 222 wrote: »
    Is Docklands not free during the off the peak?

    They could tidy up North Wall alot and add some additional parking in there. Most of the sidings are to short as it is. Any freight trains been stored need to be split. They should reinstall the sidings where the oil wagons use to be stored to allow trains be parked straight from Alexandria road without shunting ect.

    If they ever did grow container traffic out of Dublin Port North Wall in it's current layout would be a serious bottle neck.

    I think they've pocket wagons parked down there at the moment, they could easily be stored in inchicore.

    N Wall isn't signalled that well, most is manual operated and millions would be needed.

    Not sure about Docklands however take up a lot of a drivers shift to do all the shunting of sets.


  • #21
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    Well it has been the policy of the Kildare Street beancounters to expect CIE to cash in more and more on it's landbank assets to cover deficits and network investments and wages rather than do it from the subvention that it should get, a la most western European nations.

    Come on now, while those on Kildare St have a lot to answer for equally do CIE. Not a single penny from this sale will go into “investment”.

    CIE would have sold this even if they didn't need to.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    N Wall isn't signalled that well, most is manual operated and millions would be needed.

    Not sure about Docklands however take up a lot of a drivers shift to do all the shunting of sets.

    Docklands is only going to take 2 sets, 4 if it's an 8 car train. A bit of pre planning will remove alot of the shunting if the sets are scheduled into the timetable to terminate there at the end of a service for parking. Drivers can walk up to Connolly afterwards which I believe some do.

    Doesn't need to be signalled too well if sidings are designed properly, I don't think Connolly sidings are signalled all that much once there on the shut/wash road. Sets will be out of service as well which will reduce the level of protection needed.

    Pretty sure there is staff based down there during the day that could operate manual points ect. Often see staff and sometimes drivers making their way back towards Connolly on foot once the morning Ballina trains comes up from Alexandra road.


  • #23
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,523 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Victor wrote: »
    CIdon't like air rights over tracks (although they seem to be doing it at Tara Street). The possibility of a train fire setting fire to a building or vice versa may be the issue.

    CIE have sold extensive air rights at Connolly already


  • #24
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,234 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    L1011 wrote: »
    CIE have sold extensive air rights at Connolly already

    Over tracks?


  • #25
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,523 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Victor wrote: »
    Over tracks?

    Yes. The yard to the East side of the station.


  • #26
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    Are IE making any changes in the layout of this new area? Is the car been kept or are IE going to take it over for sidings?


  • #27
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users Posts: 24,468 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    So why are they even allowed to seel this. Can the minister as shareholder not deny the sale in the public interest?


  • #28
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,523 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Victor wrote: »
    Over tracks?

    Plans literally arrived today

    https://theconnollyquartershd1.ie/library/Architecture/Drawings/05_SITE%20LAYOUT%20PLAN_LEVEL%2003.pdf shows the car park deck that will be first above the tracks

    https://theconnollyquartershd1.ie/library/Architecture/Drawings/06_SITE%20LAYOUT%20PLAN_LEVEL%2004.pdf shows the apartment blocks extending over it at the next level


  • #29
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    L1011 wrote: »
    Plans literally arrived today

    https://theconnollyquartershd1.ie/library/Architecture/Drawings/05_SITE%20LAYOUT%20PLAN_LEVEL%2003.pdf shows the car park deck that will be first above the tracks

    https://theconnollyquartershd1.ie/library/Architecture/Drawings/06_SITE%20LAYOUT%20PLAN_LEVEL%2004.pdf shows the apartment blocks extending over it at the next level

    Looks like their reducing the sidings from 6 to 4 in them plans but extending them which would increase the number of sets they can hold.

    Would it be worthwhile taking out the valet shed and squeeze another 3 sidings in and use the new structure above as part of a new bigger valet shed. This would need a roof to be extended beyond the new structure.


  • #30
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    They have parked an 8x29 in front of the 7 ICR so looks like no space lost however still a very poor decision.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    How much did it go for?


Advertisement