beauf wrote: » Moving the Docklands was always a bit dubious.https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irelands-newest-train-station-could-move-because-of-major-shortfall-in-passengers-36916197.html They want to move it to increase numbers. But they had made that train is shorter than it used to be and numbers had exploded on it, and was dangerously overcrowded. It also only runs at peak, and not at the weekend. Its literally a 5 min walk (400m) between the station and Spencer Dock. It could be made quicker if they just made a walkway through from the Bus Park at the Docklands to Spencer Dock And sign posted it. The sign to direct people leaving the station could be made a lot more obvious. Considering the time it takes to get into Connolly and walk back out of it. Its as quick to go to the Docklands and walk back past Connolly. But most people won't be aware of that. Spencer Docks (going city center) is/was very crowded at peak in the evenings. I wonder what are the number stats on it. Docklands always seemed underutilised to me.
IE 222 wrote: » That's old news. The reason for moving it is to increase capacity overall with the number of trains and routes using it and to better accommodate Dart Underground while also making use of Luas. It allows frequency increases on all 3 lines by avoiding Connolly. The question now is whether this move is required with the scaled back services. The new routes downgraded the need for it and Docklands can suffice with Kildare. Although the number of trains using it will increase passenger numbers are expected to pretty much remain the same or even drop at peak time given Docklands only operates at peak times currently.
Dats me wrote: » What do you mean by scales back services? What are the services now and what are they scales back compared to? Sorry if this has been said already
MJohnston wrote: » The counterpoint to that is that perhaps Docklands/Spencer Dock is in a location that's much more oriented towards where the majority of Dubliners will be working in the near future.
beauf wrote: » I wonder how much of companies around that area are WFH. A lot I would imagine.
IE 222 wrote: » This has since been revised and only Kildare lines will serve it in favour of running most Maynooth and Drogheda service through the LLB. Kildare line services will focus on passengers transferring at Glasnevin or Hueston for city centre. The current M3 service will move to Connolly. Spencer Dock will effectively just be used as a turn back facility and DU is still nothing more than a pipe dream really at the moment. With the €165 million price tag and the fact Docklands will be capable of handling the revised services, minor works are needed, you'd have to ponder if this should be taking precedence over more vitality important projects such as Connolly upgrade. Connolly upgrade would offer immediate benefits to all Connolly services while Spencer Dock will sit idly under used as Connolly continues to struggle with capacity limits.
gjim wrote: » Why would it be left sit idle while Connolly struggles when there would be the option of shifting any northern, Kildare or Maynooth services to the new Spencer Dock station? The LLB cannot handle everything that the northern, Kildare and Maynooth DART services would be capable of delivering into Dublin so there's no option except to terminate some services before the LLB. And surely there would be advantages in terminating any DARTs coming from Kildare or Maynooth in the new Spencer Dock station rather than Connolly as they'd have an unimpeded run to Spencer Dock without having to merge with a congested northern line? I also find the location quite attractive and it delivers people into the centre of what will be one of the densest parts of the docklands with direct access to Luas and a much shorter walk to the south docks. With ML and an interchange at Cross Guns, the connectivity options will be great - which would drive all-day demand instead of the into-town-in-the-morning, home-in-the-evening current pattern of usage in then Docklands station. Finally, the way the current docklands station is laid out represents very inefficient use of land and if you decommissioned it, the land under it would have high value for development - it's a bigger plot than the high density Connolly Quarter development being built a block away. The land freed up would surely be worth 60-80m.
IE 222 wrote: » I think you've misunderstood the point I'm making. I'm not against the development and increased level of services into Spencer Dock. If you look through the original reports and plans you will see the huge benefits Spencer Dock can deliver and how it can play a big part in the expansion of capacity and frequency throughout the Dart network. In fact I'd go further and look to add an hourly Mullingar, Carlow and Portlaise at peak times. The points you raised in terms of Connolly and LLB congestion are well known and documented by everyone. The new Dart service was to offer a new complete overhaul of routes with Spencer Dock and Dun Laoghaire playing a big part in that although both of these have been vastly scaled down. For whatever reason, presumably cost cutting, the NTA later requested Jacobs to revise the plans by taking the Connolly upgrade out. In order to facilitate this capacity had to be cut. This result in a reshuffle of routes and frequency levels and in favour of more through trains for Maynooth and Drogheda while also wanting to boost the BCR of Glasnevin with transfers the Kildare line was sacrificed. The newest modelling report will clearly show you the long term vision of the network. It's not envisioned to use Spencer Dock within the next 15-20 years. What's the point of spend such a large sum of money on a purpose built station if your not going to use it for what it was intended for. Aside from that, for Spence Dock to reach it's full operating potential it actually needs Connolly to be upgraded so Maynooth and Kildare lines won't conflict at Glasnevin and North Strand while the Northern Line has now resorted back to terminating in Malahide due to route changes. The cost of both projects are a lot closer than you may think. Connolly upgrade was €203 million while Spencer Dock was coming in at €168 million. As you say Connolly is in dire need of an upgrade to improve capacity in through running. The return benefit of upgrading Connolly for a mere €35 million extra well and truly outweighs the benefits of Spencer Dock especially when it's not going to be used as it intended for.
Dats me wrote: » I doubt too much stock could be put into those cost estimates though, even intuitively keeping Connolly operational and doing major work would be an outrageous cost. Has Connolly upgrade been shelved in the Emerging Preferred proposal published for Maynooth? Or just it was removed for a modelling exercise?
IE 222 wrote: » The cost of both projects are a lot closer than you may think. Connolly upgrade was €203 million while Spencer Dock was coming in at €168 million. As you say Connolly is in dire need of an upgrade to improve capacity in through running. The return benefit of upgrading Connolly for a mere €35 million extra well and truly outweighs the benefits of Spencer Dock especially when it's not going to be used as it intended for.
gjim wrote: » What was the Connolly upgrade going to involve? The plans seem to be changing so fast it's hard to keep up. Any chance of a quick summary to avoid wading through technical annexes? I suppose, I don't understand how upgrading Connolly can improve the situation if the choke point is the LLB? And if it's to allow more terminations in Connolly, then surely terminating Kildare/Maynooth trains in Spencer Dock would be much better as they can completely avoid any interaction with the trains going through Connolly? The money calculations are interesting. But they don't seem to take into account that removing Docklands station releases nearly 4 hectares of what is now valuable development land. City block 3 across the street is only around half the size of the Docklands station plot (although in a slightly more desirable location) and it sold for 110m last year. Selling the Docklands station land could probably pay for the Spenser Dock station.
CatInABox wrote: » To be honest IE 222, I still think that the NTA are going down my route. I.e. Build Spencer Dock, and then use it and Docklands as a replacement for Connolly Station during its upgrade. This avoids the pain of having to upgrade Connolly without being able to maintain a good level of service, which is probably their main concern. They probably believe that if they announce that there'll be significant, lengthy disruption to service on all lines that currently use Connolly, then opposition to the plan will be much higher. The extra cost involved is a bargain when you consider that this will significantly reduce opposition. Also, the NTA seemingly have a show, don't tell policy, whereby they wait until the problem is staring politicians in the face, and then produce their preferred solution. I can well imagine them saying to politicians "yes, we've finished the Dart+ project, but now to unlock all the extra potential, we've only got to spend €200 million, and no, there won't be much much disruption to services"
Dats me wrote: » I've looked at the reports quickly there, sorry IE222 it was all there. Looks like very little at Connolly alright. In terms of the modelling it looks like there's a lot of alighting at Glasnevin with the metro and Connolly so planning for Connolly terminations seems reasonable. In terms of routing Kildare line all to Docklands I'm not sure that's the case is it? Even the modelling report says that this service structure mightn't be the last one and that was just a few months ago, and the Connolly reports seem very occupied with a crossover either at Newcomen Chord or at Glasnevin. So I don't think that Kildare line will all necessarily end up at Docklands. And then I agree with the comment I'm replying to here, Loop Line is surely still a choke point and more than 16tph per direction is impossible right? Or not? If it is still the choke point we need Docklands either as a terminus or through route with Dart Underground, if the station is designed with DU in mind then a terminus that's high quality and connects to the Luas and plonks you right in the Docklands seems like a good option. Am I misunderstanding what the potential Connolly upgrades could do though? Would it be possible to get, say, 25tph per direction over the Loop Line and the real choke point is actually Connolly?
IE 222 wrote: » Another point which I feel hasn't been completely factored in is the extra stop at Glasnevin and level of transfers. Not only will trains be required to stop but more emphasis needs to be put onto the length of time all these transfers are going to take especially with 3 lines converging at Glasnevin and with the close proximity of North Strand. It could be better operationally to transfer at Drumcondra.
strassenwo!f wrote: » (In relation to the fourth point, especially, I restate that I have long been in favour of a Drumcondra route for the metrolink, something similar to what was proposed in the original metronorth proposal, but with a bit of tweaking, so that there could be a full 'DART'-metro interchange at Drumcondra. PPT/Maynooth/Dunboyne train passengers could then do all 'non-metro' transferring at Glasnevin).
IE 222 wrote: » You're missing the point that Newcome will only be used by Connolly - M3 services. Using the cord allows them to turn back on Platform 7 resulting in only P5&6 been through platforms. This means the remaining Maynooth services will have to operate via North strand and Ossory Rd which infringes onto the Northern line. The impact of all this means Kildare line needs to be reduced and can only operate into Spencer Dock. Also as a result of this clonflict between Northern and Maynooth lines at Ossory road maximum capacity of the LLB is not reached. Jacob's have highlighted clearly that although this may work in simulation it may not be achievable in practice. Another point which I feel hasn't been completely factored in is the extra stop at Glasnevin and level of transfers. Not only will trains be required to stop but more emphasis needs to be put onto the length of time all these transfers are going to take especially with 3 lines converging at Glasnevin and with the close proximity of North Strand. It could be better operationally to transfer at Drumcondra. As outlined, Spencer Dock is a purpose built station and will be hugely beneficial but I can't see how to justify the cost of it if it's not going to be used for what it's designed for. Docklands is more than capable of providing the planned capacity. If and when its decided to use Spencer Dock as it was intended for then build it otherwise it will be left sitting idly in the back round while Connolly continues to struggle. If it is a reason of cost then use the Spencer Dock cost to install the Connolly upgrade and revisit Spencer Dock later. The Connolly upgrade would allow more through services including from the Kildare line while Docklands could maintaine its M3 services and even some Kildare line with some minor track renewal works. Connolly upgrade is the only way of unlocking LLB maximum capacity.
strassenwo!f wrote: » I've been broadly following this discussion as best I can, but there are a few curious things about this part of the earlier post. Firstly: 'Not only will trains be required to stop (at Glasnevin)' - it is normal that trains stop at an interchange if the system is designed so that passengers on those trains have the ability to change to other trains at that location. Secondly: 'but more emphasis needs to be put onto the length of time all these transfers are going to take' - I'm surprised by this. An interchange is a location X which is designed for interchange between line A--B and line C--D (and possibly others). If someone gets off line C--D and wants to go to B, they get off at X and they wait for the next train. The train doesn't wait for them. So the trains on both lines stick to their timetable and the length of time for transfers is irrelevant. Thirdly: 'especially with 3 lines converging at Glasnevin': as with the second point, it is hard to see that this is an issue. On all three of the lines which are proposed to serve a station at Glasnevin the frequency is very high. Changing between these trains should really be quite seamless and quick. Fourthly: 'It could be better operationally to transfer at Drumcondra': but how would this be done, given that there is currently no proposal for a rail interchange of any sort at Drumcondra? (In relation to the fourth point, especially, I restate that I have long been in favour of a Drumcondra route for the metrolink, something similar to what was proposed in the original metronorth proposal, but with a bit of tweaking, so that there could be a full 'DART'-metro interchange at Drumcondra. PPT/Maynooth/Dunboyne train passengers could then do all 'non-metro' transferring at Glasnevin).
cgcsb wrote: » Will be interesting to see how glasnevin station is built. Presumably there'll be construction on maynooth DART long before there's metro construction. Assuming the projects are actually delivered and too their current programmes
Dats me wrote: » What's the cost of the other elements of the project then? Looks like they very possibly won't do Spencer Dock and surely there's massive hunger in IÉ to do Connolly, are they short €200m? Surely they'd rather get Maynooth and Kildare right than worry about Drogheda
