MJohnston wrote: » No need to guess—the bridge is marked as having a 4.6m clearance for the buses. That seems on the low-side for DART contact height?
bk wrote: » Picture probably worth a thousand words. It shows better the difference between Docklands versus Spencerdock. In particular the interconnection between the lines before the stations.NOTE: Spencerdock station may end up looking different to below, maybe three platforms versus 2 and straight. Docklands: Spencerdock:
AngryLips wrote: » So am I correct in thinking that Docklands services could also serve Drumcondra station if the station was to be relocated to Spencer Dock?
lucernarian wrote: » The station plans for Glasnevin showed a drawing for just such realignment of the junction to allow this connection to happen. All quite doable.
LXFlyer wrote: » Container trains ran under the bridge right up to where the lines into the proposed station is located - I seriously doubt excavation would be needed. Surely the bridge would be raised instead if necessary?
MJohnston wrote: » Could it be that they've already sold a portion of that land east of the existing Docklands station for development already? Now that I think of it, I do seem to remember some proposed development there.
Rulmeq wrote: » No replacement for Blakestown LC, I guess it's a minor road.
Geuze wrote: » I need to check, but this sounds good. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's important that trains from both Maynooth and the PPT can travel to either Connolly and Docklands. Also, although it's not mentioned here, if ever the InterConnector is built, a tunnel from Heuston-SSG-Pearse-Docklands, then that would allow a lot more flexible services around all/part of a circular route. So a train from Maynooth should be able to access the PPT, and then go Heuston-SSG-Pearse-Docklands, and onto to, e.g. airport This requires a short new line /chord from Maynooth line to join PPT line between Broombridge and Glasnevin. Am I mad?City Centre to Phisborough and Glasnevin It is proposed that both of the existing lines between Connolly and Spencer Dock to Phibsborough and Glasnevin will be electrified with the installation of overhead electrical equipment, associated upgrades, re-signalling, telecoms, electricity substations and parapet heightening as required. The two rail lines, the Northern Maynooth and Phoenix Park Tunnel lines converge at Phibsborough/Glasnevin, to the west of Cross Guns Bridge. At Phibsborough and Glasnevin, a new fully integrated station serving both the DART+ Maynooth Line project and the proposed MetroLink project is proposed. Iarnród Éireann and Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) are collaborating to provide this new station which will comprise: DART+ surface station. The station will have an east-west orientation on both Iarnród Éireann lines (Northern Maynooth and Phoenix Park Tunnel lines); MetroLink underground station will have a north-south orientation; A shared concourse with full passenger integration; and Street level access and public realm improvements
Geuze wrote: » It's a pity that for the want of maybe 500m of line, Navan/Maynooth trains can't access PPT/Heuston/DU/SSG. OK, those trains could go Glasnevin-Docks-DU-SSG, the other way, okay.
L1011 wrote: » Well, yes - as there is no actual proposal for heavy rail to the Airport; and evne if there was anyone coming from Maynooth would change to Metrolink at Glasnevin and there a good 45 minutes or so before someone doing an underground tour of the city that way! It would need rather more than one short line as there is no PPT->DU connection proposed or indeed plausible if the portal goes where it was originally to go.
MJohnston wrote: » I'd say there will still be significant excavation required to make those arches DART capable, but fair enough, that's a lower cost than an outright tunnel. It is a shame that it will leave a derelict site in the middle of the Docklands for 7+ years though. Such a waste of valuable space!
MJohnston wrote: » Well thanks for explaining the perfectly obvious I think them remaining derelict is the problem, but whatever. Looks like the Spencer North SHD will at least be taking up half of the derelict city block that this new station is supposed to be located in.
Geuze wrote: » So a train from Maynooth should be able to access the PPT, and then go Heuston-SSG-Pearse-Docklands, and onto to, e.g. airport This requires a short new line /chord from Maynooth line to join PPT line between Broombridge and Glasnevin. Am I mad?
MJohnston wrote: » Interesting that they're going for a road tunnel at Ashtown under both the rail line and the canal—that seems much more complex than an overbridge!
Heroditas wrote: » Tunnel makes sense I think. There's little room for the bridge because of the proximity of the apartments and shops like Super Valu. It's challenging to get anything into that area because of how narrow the existing road is and where the buildings are.
L1011 wrote: » They haven't. There is a coach park on it currently, leased to the NTA. There are other sites in the Docklands which have been derelict since being cleared in the late 1990s; its nothing new.
bk wrote: » If you dig into the site, there are more detailed reports, including one looking at different options for Docklands/Spencer Dock. It seems that expanding Docklands station faces a variety of issues, including one less line and thus less capacity to hold trains and difficulty with the line approaching from the North and sufficient elevation. While the Spencer Dock is more expensive, it seems to offer an easier build, more capacity and a variety of benefits for passengers.
L1011 wrote: » As pointed out, Sheriff Street is on a multi-arch/multi-line railway bridge at that point, as this used to be all railway yards. Plenty of apartments have already been built on seconds of this and other railway yards in the area.
MJohnston wrote: » Well, equally I don't know whether I'd go to the likely huge expense of tunnelling under Sheriff St and building a new railway station building when it doesn't seem specifically necessary to achieve the objectives here. The alignment of the Northern/Drumcondra lines just north of the existing station seems relatively flexible, I guess I'm not seeing where the physical constraints come from putting it there. IMO that location where the proposed new station would go would be much more useful as a few hundred apartments, which could potentially be built before the railway order for this is even approved!
