nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

When will the penny drop that we cannot keep building large roads?

monument

It seems the penny isn’t dropping with a lot of people that continuing to build an unsustainable transport system isn’t compatible with acting on climate change — car use alone amounts to ~13% of Ireland’s carbon emissions, then there’s build and maintenance, poor land use etc.

Meanwhile, it's said off-line and on boards.ie etc that anything to do with rail is a white elephant -- it's like an echo of that Sunday Independent article from before the Dart opened calling the Dart a white elephant and saying it would be cheaper to pay for taxis for everybody.

EDITED: I should stress that I think rail is only a part of the sustainable transport mix -- my point about is how jarring it is that people have no problem with laods of dual carriageways to towns start calling rail in city a white elephant.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

bk wrote: »

And this is terrible. But the solution isn't a 5 Billion+ rail line 130km to Enniscorthy and having people commute this far, turning half of Ireland into a spread out suburb of Dublin.

Dublin isn't London, it is a relatively small city of just over 1 million (urban, not Metro or GDA). There really isn't any reason why the majority of people working in Dublin shouldn't be living within roughly 30km of the city.

The issue here really isn't roads/rail to far flung towns, it is one of proper planning and politics. It is building the affordable, decent quality housing in Dublin and reasonably close to it.

Certainly, but when rents go mental as they did in Dublin then that's what'll end up happening.
When getting around the city by PT is so hard it encourages it further.
As an example you can either commute from Drogheda, get the train and then the Luas/Bus elsewhere. Or live further north than Drogheda and drive and it'll likely take the same amount of time.

Deleted User wrote: »

An 80km commute *shudder*

Aye, and when I first got the early bus almost 15 years ago I saw people and thought "Jesus how do they do this every day?". Over a decade later and I occasionally saw the same people doing the same commute. But at the end of the day a €50k job in Dublin is a €30k job here and for most of the time the rent difference is huge as well. Without being lucky enough to live close by work in Dublin you can still quite easily be looking at an hour's commute by PT.

Seaswimmer

Deleted User wrote: »

An 80km commute *shudder*

All relative I suppose. if you happen to be living on the outskirts of Athlone for example and working on the outskirts of Galway or vice versa it is probably an hour. A lot of driving and mileage on your car but probably a lot less commuting time than living in Swords and working in Sandyford for example.
But not for everyone..

GT89

Seaswimmer wrote: »

All relative I suppose. if you happen to be living on the outskirts of Athlone for example and working on the outskirts of Galway or vice versa it is probably an hour. A lot of driving and mileage on your car but probably a lot less commuting time than living in Swords and working in Sandyford for example.
But not for everyone..

Driving long distances with little traffic on the road is more mentally tiring than driving in urban stop start driving scenarios or using public transport. A long 80km commute each way is going to take more out of you than a 20km commute each where you are sitting in traffic most of the time. Even if both take the same time.

DublinWriter

Dublin needs to be devolved. It's insane. Dublin is the most populous area in Europe and outside Dublin it's the most unpopulous area in Europe.

Otherwise, wear hemp, spend €20 on designer coffee and travel to work on a bicycle maaaaaaaaaaaaaan.

adocholiday wrote: »

I actually have been remote working since last March and some level of remote work will likely be something that's available to me from now on, but the point I'm making is for commuters in general rather than just myself. Also I could afford to live in Dublin but for multiple reasons for another thread we prefer to live rurally. The commute was and is a price I'm willing to pay to live here but I still have strong feelings on how it could be better.

Great, then problem solved.

If you are talking in general about people commuting from these towns, then we have to talk about if it is good planning policy to encourage people to commute so far?

Or is it better to spend the same money on public transport projects closer to the city and intensifying the transport networks there?

It is absolutely not good planning policy to promote commuting over such large distances.

adocholiday wrote: »

I do understand the issues facing an upgrade of the Rosslare line but again I come back to the Brexit scenario. In January the freight through Rosslare increased nearly 500% on the same month last year. Any lorry coming into Rosslare who has to deliver anywhere east of the Wicklow mountains right up to Dublin are likely to use the M11. Possibly even those heading for the M1, N2 or N3 but they could also use the N81. The point is that the N11 is going to face more traffic from Rosslare now anyway.

Rosslare is a roll-on, roll-off port, there is no demand for rail freight there and you certainly not going to be fitting much rail freight to Dublin on the already over-congested Dublin rail network.

While the increase of business at Rosslare is great, it certainly isn't anything that the road network can't handle.

adocholiday wrote: »

Why not build a new track? Why not link the Luas to Bray/Greystones DART stations? There are options that can be considered I'm just throwing out ideas.

Where are you going to build a new track?

Those of us who are interested in this subject have looked at it over and over and there is simply no easy and cheap way to improve services or simply "build a new track".

While of course technically anything can be done. Any new alignment would require massive amounts of tunnelling and/or CPO'ing of land in South Dublin, some of the most expensive property in the country.

Any new alignment would end up costing many billions of Euro. And for what a couple of small towns which are too far for regular commuting anyway?

If you are interested, I can go into the details of Brunnels Folly, etc.

Luas to Bray? Yes, that is on the cards, but won't change anything in terms of Rosslare line.

adocholiday wrote: »

Add to that the significant housing developments going on in Gorey, Arklow, Wicklow, Greystones, Bray... the capacity is going to be gone before they even complete the upgrade. We can bury our head in the sand and say ah it's too difficult/expensive to upgrade the rail line but not doing anything isn't viable either.

Bray and Greystones are fine, they are within normal commuting distance and are commuting towns.

But the rest are utter madness. Fine if these people are buying to live and work in their local areas, but if they are planning to commute to Dublin from there, then they are fooling themselves.

It is the usual old problem, people want the big house in the country, for a low price of course, but then want a quick commute into the city for their well paying job!

You can't have your cake and eat it. And why should the people of Ireland fund this lifestyle to the tune of Billions, for a relatively small number of people living so far out?

It wouldn't be a good way to spend our infrastructure money and it isn't sustainable living.

Zebra3

DublinWriter wrote: »

Dublin is the most populous area in Europe

Have I missed something????

Citrus_8

Zebra3 wrote: »

Have I missed something????

You haven't, he's just making a joke. Dublin doesn't come into TOP 30 Europe cities neither by population, nor by density. Dublin is a small capital, comparing to other capital cities in Europe. And it's very badly designed due to no planning ahead for decades. I'm still surprised how many people in Dublin are against public transport priority and other changes to make it easier for more amount of people to get around the cities (not in cars obviously, as cars have very low capacity).

GT89

bk wrote:

Bray and Greystones are fine, they are within normal commuting distance and are commuting towns.

But the rest are utter madness. Fine if these people are buying to live and work in their local areas, but if they are planning to commute to Dublin from there, then they are fooling themselves.

It is the usual old problem, people want the big house in the country, for a low price of course, but then want a quick commute into the city for their well paying job!

You can't have your cake and eat it. And why should the people of Ireland fund this lifestyle to the tune of Billions, for a relatively small number of people living so far out?

It wouldn't be a good way to spend our infrastructure money and it isn't sustainable living.

I agree that this commuting long distances is madness. However most people who buy houses outside of Dublin don't do so by choice they do so out of nessecity as they have been priced of the Dublin market and only afford to buy or rent property in places as far away as Gorey, Portlaoise, Mullingar and in some cases even as far away as Cavan or Monaghan.

Whilst there are some who do so because they want a larger house in the country. Most people who move out of Dublin move to housing estates in towns and villages.

donvito99

Luas capacity issues aside, it's about 25 minutes from Sandyford/Stillorgan to Stephen's Green by tram. If you modified the N11/M50 between junction 11 Greystones and junction 14 Sandyford like the N4 between Leixlip and Liffey Valley (i.e. to include bus lanes), a bus + tram commute would offer a competitive journey time to the CC.

This would require the elimination or remodelling of some junctions, clearing and partial widening of the N11 and strengthening of road margins (especially in the Glen of the Downs) and would mean a reduction in speed limits for the N11 stretch to 80 as well as impacting cyclists.

buffalo

donvito99 wrote: »

Luas capacity issues aside, it's about 25 minutes from Sandyford/Stillorgan to Stephen's Green by tram. If you modified the N11/M50 between junction 11 Greystones and junction 14 Sandyford like the N4 between Leixlip and Liffey Valley (i.e. to include bus lanes), a bus + tram commute would offer a competitive journey time to the CC.

This would require the elimination or remodelling of some junctions, clearing and partial widening of the N11 and strengthening of road margins (especially in the Glen of the Downs) and would mean a reduction in speed limits for the N11 stretch to 80 as well as impacting cyclists.

Just make one of the existing lanes a bus lane - no work needed and you still get the journey time improvement.

GT89

donvito99 wrote: »

Luas capacity issues aside, it's about 25 minutes from Sandyford/Stillorgan to Stephen's Green by tram. If you modified the N11/M50 between junction 11 Greystones and junction 14 Sandyford like the N4 between Leixlip and Liffey Valley (i.e. to include bus lanes), a bus + tram commute would offer a competitive journey time to the CC.

This would require the elimination or remodelling of some junctions, clearing and partial widening of the N11 and strengthening of road margins (especially in the Glen of the Downs) and would mean a reduction in speed limits for the N11 stretch to 80 as well as impacting cyclists.

I can't see many using a bus that goes for the entire journey on the m50 off peak. I can't see what advantages your proposed bus + Luas combo would offer over taking the Dart directly from Greystones to the cc or the Peak only 84x.

hurleronditch

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Absolutely I agree. But how can we speed up Greystones to city centre. We could make the east coast line (Wexford to Greystones) much faster by investing but we are always going to be stuck with 1 hour travel time for the last bit from Greystones. Which seems to me a bit too long to encourage people onto the train from further afield.

Would removing level crossings between Pearse and Greystones, improving signalling, driver training and likely some automation of how close the trains could travel be efficient enough to allow Greystones become a change hub? Set up very large park and ride facilities either in the town or at a new greenfield station just south of it, and run high(ish) speed darts every 5-10 mins in from Greystones to Pearse at rush hour. All of the Wexford trains terminate at Greystones and you change to an always waiting Dart. Cut out some of the **** stops en route in, or maybe allow one train an hour to be a stopper that stops everywhere, all others run semi express just picking up the main commuter stations on the way in.

Seaswimmer

hurleronditch wrote: »

Would removing level crossings between Pearse and Greystones, improving signalling, driver training and likely some automation of how close the trains could travel be efficient enough to allow Greystones become a change hub? Set up very large park and ride facilities either in the town or at a new greenfield station just south of it, and run high(ish) speed darts every 5-10 mins in from Greystones to Pearse at rush hour. All of the Wexford trains terminate at Greystones and you change to an always waiting Dart. Cut out some of the **** stops en route in, or maybe allow one train an hour to be a stopper that stops everywhere, all others run semi express just picking up the main commuter stations on the way in.

I don't know enough about rail to answer your suggestions but I do know that getting a large park and ride in Greystones is probably a non runner with the cost of land there.
With the bit I know about rail you couldn't run an express because with a 10 minute Dart frequency then there would be 3 or 4 Darts to pass out.
also Bray to Greystones is single track so unless you have somewhere to stack a pile of carriages in Greystones you wouldn't be able to provide a 5 or 10 minute frequency at rush hour.

the solution is a 3rd track between the 2 existing ones... a bit like the ghost bus in Harry Potter where the train can shrink when it meets another train:):)

monument

bk wrote: »

Well I'd point out that people really shouldn't be commuting from the likes of Arklow, Gorey, Enniscorthy. They are far too far from Dublin for a daily commute. It doesn't matter if it's by road or a high quality rail, folks shouldn't be giving up so much of their day to commuting and commuting such large distances.

I know people are commuting these distances, but I just don't think it is healthy, it isn't good for their physical or mental health.

And at these distances I don't think the discussion should be road or rail, we are asking the wrong questions then IMO.

Instead we should be asking why are people commuting so far? Why can't they live closer to Dublin or why can't they find work in their own towns?

I suspect part of the answer is more high quality affordable housing closer to and in Dublin, supported by high quality public transport, rather then building more road or rail to distant towns like these.

Dublin also clearly needs extra and more affordable housing (extra housing alone won't address the issue of people moving away to find cheaper housing).

The reality is some people don't want to or cannot live in cities and still have to travel to them if not daily then weekly -- and work isn't the only reason. Part of the solution will be to have more commuter towns or grow the existing ones close to Dublin.

But part of the solution is also to provide for longer-distance regional rail too. Keeping the motorway as the most attractive option will just push more people into pushing for more and more lanes. I don't think such commutes are ideal but by rail is in many ways more sustainable and healthier than by car. Eindhoven to Amsterdam is 120km and around 1hr 17 min by train -- the frequency is a train about every 15 min (including connecting services with little delay). Improving the services around their cities in the south east of the country is part of their plan to make rail more attractive than the motorway network.

I'm not saying Arklow or Longford etc will support that level of service any time soon, but calling such commutes "utter madness" isn't dealing with reality. Even if these places were grown to mainly be for working from home and working in local jobs, they'll still be a need for improved rail services compared to now. In saying all of that, I still think the main focus should be on what you call normal commuter distances.

PhilOssophy

There is no easy answer to these issues, but continuing to put big industrial estates in Sandyford, Carrickmines, etc without properly integrating them with high-density residential housing (a combination of apartments and 3-4 bed houses and schools, shopping centres, pubs, etc) is just going to continue to cause us problems.
But the reality is, I think Irish people are becoming like the US in terms of filling the road to breaking point. So we could put another 3 lanes on the M50 and cars will fill it and it encourages more driving.
Our small towns aren't providing the point-to-point case for a high-speed rail lines for example. So if 5 people are living in Greystones, maybe 1 of them is working in City Centre, 3 are working in Sandyford, and 1 somewhere else.
I still think there is merit to an orbital metro service around the M50, connecting with several industrial estates and interchanging with the DART at Shankill and maybe connecting with several of the existing services at Tallaght and Broombridge for example.
Again, its all about giving people an option. If I had a choice between 1 hr of driving or 1 hr on a decent bus/tram/metro service, I would pick the latter every day of the week once it was reliable and on-time.

GT89

What do other people here think of these plans. I think they are quite good hourly service on the majority of the network outside of Dublin is surely a very good thing and will genuinely encourage a modal shift. I'm not saying everyone in rural areas is going to drop the car in favour of the train but I think many will especially those living in towns.

Good link up with Bus Eireann regional services would also be preferable for those living outside the cities. Especially if train and bus times are linked. https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1368909934532960260?s=19

adocholiday

GT89 wrote: »

What do other people here think of these plans. I think they are quite good hourly service on the majority of the network outside of Dublin is surely a very good thing and will genuinely encourage a modal shift. I'm not saying everyone in rural areas is going to drop the car in favour of the train but I think many will especially those living in towns.

Good link up with Bus Eireann regional services would also be preferable for those living outside the cities. Especially if train and bus times are linked

I would definitely be much more favourable to using the Rosslare service if it were more frequent but only if they were to extend the operating hours. The last train to Rosslare departs Dublin Connolly at around 18:00 in non-Covid times. I'd love to see another service or 2 added for later in the evening so as a commuter I have actual usable options to get home!

At a quick glance and without getting into the details, it looks pretty good. Exactly the type of development that the rail network needs and which can attract passengers out of their cars.

GT89

adocholiday wrote: »

I would definitely be much more favourable to using the Rosslare service if it were more frequent but only if they were to extend the operating hours. The last train to Rosslare departs Dublin Connolly at around 18:00 in non-Covid times. I'd love to see another service or 2 added for later in the evening so as a commuter I have actual usable options to get home!

Yeah that's true same in Waterford last train is 18:00

GT89

bk wrote: »

At a quick glance and without getting into the details, it looks pretty good. Exactly the type of development that the rail network needs and which can attract passengers out of their cars.

I would also hope the entire hourly is eventually electrified. Generally on the continent any line that has an hourly service or better is electrified. In most European countries anything of any significance is electrified with diesel trains used exclusively on lightly used branch lines with low levels of service.

cgcsb

I notice in that document they avoid mentioning specific journey time improvements on intercity, I guess because they failed to deliver on the last round.

They also avoid mentioning the high speed rail study and instead refer to the electrification of Dub-Bel and Dub-Cork becoming a 'a high-quality InterCity spine'. the improvements in the 2027 strategy are welcome but ultimately not nearly ambitious enough to see us to 2040 (or even to 2027, in my opinion). Most of what's described has been promised for about a decade or more now. Hopefully they'll focus on carrying this out now, rather than just writing more reports on it.

Particularly liked the increase of long distance commuters to every 20 mins at peak times. Also Dublin-Cork going to a half hourly frequency at peak with a reduced journey time is welcome. Although we were supposed to have a 2 hour journey by now as standard.

On the subject of rail journeys and carbon emissions, I wonder will the government now cease subsidising 1hr (plus min 2 hrs extra for security boarding and onward travel) flights from Dublin to Kerry when they've invested enough to slash Dub-Kerry rail journeys to under 3 hrs.

cgcsb

GT89 wrote: »

I would also hope the entire hourly is eventually electrified. Generally on the continent any line that has an hourly service or better is electrified. In most European countries anything of any significance is electrified with diesel trains used exclusively on lightly used branch lines with low levels of service.

I believe Germany is converting their lesser used diesel lines to hydrogen.

cgcsb wrote: »

They also avoid mentioning the high speed rail study and instead refer to the electrification of Dub-Bel and Dub-Cork becoming a 'a high-quality InterCity spine'. the improvements in the 2027 strategy are welcome but ultimately not nearly ambitious enough to see us to 2040 (or even to 2027, in my opinion). Most of what's described has been promised for about a decade or more now. Hopefully they'll focus on carrying this out now, rather than just writing more reports on it.

Because true high speed rail is pie in the sky stuff and never going to happen in any of our lifetimes.

It is horrendously expensive with little demand for such a relatively small island.

On the other hand this plans looks far more reasonable and doable. While they don't specify what speed improvements, they do say that there will be speed improvements and with the changes being made throughout the network, they could well be quiet significant.

I think this is a good, well grounded plan, that is achievable and something we might actually see happen. If they blabbered on about high speed rail, etc. I'd be far more dubious that it was "just writing more reports".

cgcsb wrote: »

I believe Germany is converting their lesser used diesel lines to hydrogen.

Yes, I was thinking that or EV trains.

In the short term, it seems they will cascade existing Diesel trains from around Dublin to these other services as the new Dart+ trains arrive.

However in the long term, as those trains age and require replacement, they will then need to think about the next step.

Full electrification is one option. But as you say Hydrogen trains or Battery EV are also possibilities.

Isambard

High speed rail Dublin to Cork and Belfast can never happen because it implies non-stop and there simply aren't enough potential passengers for that and too many passengers from intermediate points who will be left with a worse service than they have now.

Pete_Cavan

cgcsb wrote: »

They also avoid mentioning the high speed rail study and instead refer to the electrification of Dub-Bel and Dub-Cork becoming a 'a high-quality InterCity spine'.

I'm pretty sure the references to high speed rail originally came from the agreement to get the parties at Stormont back together, and even that was just to consider it; just aspirational political waffle really. I assume IE have used different wording because they understand what high speed rail means and know that it is not realistic.

cgcsb

bk wrote: »

Because true high speed rail is pie in the sky stuff and never going to happen in any of our lifetimes.

It is horrendously expensive with little demand for such a relatively small island.

Right, but the definition of 'high-speed rail' is 200km/h plus. It's not pie in the sky to say that Cork-Belfast should have 210-220km/h speeds by 2040, in fact it should be expected of any modern European state. Aim low and you get less, which is a standard Irish cultural attitude I suppose.

With regard to high speed rail we're going to be left in the dust by smaller, more sparsely populated and poorer countries like Latvia by 2030, we need to be moving faster on these things if we've a hope of eventually reaching infrastructural parity with the mainland.

Rail Baltica connecting the capitals of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia (the 3 countries combined have 6 million people), €16bn, over 600km of track and a 250km/h speed. Similiar project for Ireland is really not pie in the sky or over ambitious. They're at detailed design stage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_Baltica

Remember, compared to Ireland these are basically second world countries.

cgcsb

Isambard wrote: »

High speed rail Dublin to Cork and Belfast can never happen because it implies non-stop.

No it doesn't. High-Speed = 200km/h +

[Deleted User]

cgcsb wrote: »

It's not pie in the sky to say that Cork-Belfast should have 210-220km/h speeds by 2040

Belfast as a city has closer ties through Heritage to Glasgow and Edinburgh than it has to Cork. The example given to justify billions of euro of infrastructural spend doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Putting a fleet of electric propeller commuter aircraft at Belfast City Airport when they become COMMERCIALLY viable would make sense.

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

Belfast as a city has closer ties through Heritage to Glasgow and Edinburgh than it has to Cork.

wtf??

Deleted User wrote: »

The example given to justify billions of euro of infrastructural spend doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

again wtf??

Deleted User wrote: »

Putting a fleet of electric propeller commuter aircraft at Belfast City Airport when they become COMMERCIALLY viable would make sense.

and a third wtf??

cgcsb wrote: »

Right, but the definition of 'high-speed rail' is 200km/h plus. It's not pie in the sky to say that Cork-Belfast should have 210-220km/h speeds by 2040, in fact it should be expected of any modern European state.

If that can be achieved with the existing alignment, without building new greenfield track and for a reasonable cost, I'd be completely supportive of that.

They are talking about ordering new Belfast Intercity trains and I wouldn't be surprised if they might be capable of that.

cgcsb wrote: »

With regard to high speed rail we're going to be left in the dust by smaller, more sparsely populated and poorer countries like Latvia by 2030, we need to be moving faster on these things if we've a hope of eventually reaching infrastructural parity with the mainland.

Rail Baltica connecting the capitals of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia (the 3 countries combined have 6 million people), €16bn, over 600km of track and a 250km/h speed. Similiar project for Ireland is really not pie in the sky or over ambitious. They're at detailed design stage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_Baltica

Cringe and then you have lost me again.

You are talking about a line that crosses 5 countries!

Warsaw on one end, Metro population 3m with Helsinki at the other end, population 1.5m, with Riga in the middle, population 1m and a couple of other 500k cities along the way. A line that is considered strategic due to connecting Finland to the EU.

It is nowhere near comparable to Ireland and really it shows why Ireland is so unsuited to highspeed rail. An isolated island, with only one 1m+ city.

If we had 16bn spare, it would be vastly better spent on building 5 Metro lines. Can you imagine how that would transform our cities.

And where is the demand for this service? As a Corkonian living in Dublin, I can certainly tell you it isn't there in Cork. Belfast only has a train every two hours and there isn't even enough demand for an air route between Cork, Dublin and Belfast. That is how low demand is.

It is complete nonsense, building true high speed rail in Ireland (separate line) would be a MASSIVE waste of money.

cgcsb wrote: »

Remember, compared to Ireland these are basically second world countries.

That is a pretty poor attitude!

By that definition we are a third world country. 1st world = NATO aligned, 2nd world = Soviet aligned, 3rd world - Neutral countries like Ireland, Switzerland, etc.

People from the Baltics hate being called 2nd world, as it reminds them of being trapped behind the iron curtain and the terrible things the soviets did to them. They feel the same way about being called this, as we do about being called British or the British Isles.

As for you throwing shade about these being "poorer countries", you might want to take a trip to them, it would be an eye opener for you.

These are very beautiful countries, with fantastic people, long, fantastic history, absolutely beautiful old historic cities and very quickly developing economies.

Dublin is a kip compared to Vilnius. Beautiful, historic old town and then the new city quarter with actual sky scrapers, unlike us!

In many ways they are far ahead of us, in terms of quality of life, infrastructure, etc. Even if they happen to be behind in terms of GDP and income.

These countries for centuries were part of a very rich and powerful empire that ruled much of Europe for centuries. They basically only got knocked back as a result of the two wars and subsequent 60 years of Soviet meddling.

I wouldn't be getting on my high horse about them being "poor" when we have only gotten sort of "wealthy" over the past 30 years and have non of the history and architecture they have.