DART+ (DART Expansion)

IE 222 · 20-04-2021 1:41am

spacetweek wrote: »

That's a huge slippage. It was supposed to be submitted end Q2, like in a couple of months.

That's if everyone gave the thumbs up at the first attempt. You'd be doing well to get a garden shed passed on the first attempt these days.

Former Former Former · 20-04-2021 9:29am

IE 222 wrote: »

That's if everyone gave the thumbs up at the first attempt. You'd be doing well to get a garden shed passed on the first attempt these days.

It was a wildly ambitious (i.e. completely unrealistic) timetable. The second public consultation was supposed to happen in Q4 2020, but the first one was still ongoing in Q4. Even if everyone did give it a thumbs up, there would have been slippage. They were behind from day one and they have yet to publish a revised timetable.

As an advertisement for IE's project management skills, it's not the best.

And don't forget, there are some MASSIVE parts of the Maynooth line works which simply didn't feature in the first consultation. The second public consultation is likely to generate just as much interest as the first.

If we see a railway order application lodged before 2023, I'll be surprised.

IE 222 · 20-04-2021 11:46am

Former Former Former wrote: »

It was a wildly ambitious (i.e. completely unrealistic) timetable. The second public consultation was supposed to happen in Q4 2020, but the first one was still ongoing in Q4. Even if everyone did give it a thumbs up, there would have been slippage. They were behind from day one and they have yet to publish a revised timetable.

As an advertisement for IE's project management skills, it's not the best.

And don't forget, there are some MASSIVE parts of the Maynooth line works which simply didn't feature in the first consultation. The second public consultation is likely to generate just as much interest as the first.

If we see a railway order application lodged before 2023, I'll be surprised.

Well the NTA are in charge of it. It was only announced the end of August you're been very optimistic to think a project of this scale and cost will go through all the processes in number of months.

What massive parts where left out?

Former Former Former · 20-04-2021 1:33pm

IE 222 wrote: »

Well the NTA are in charge of it. It was only announced the end of August you're been very optimistic to think a project of this scale and cost will go through all the processes in number of months.

I'm not optimistic at all, that's exactly my point. It absolutely cannot go through the processes in anything like the time allotted, that's why it's a bit of an indictment of the basic competency of whoever put it together.

Delivering on the current plan requires time to flow backwards so I would rate its chances of going to schedule as fair to middling at best.

That said, I am not a project management consultant so perhaps there is a way to disrupt the very fabric of space and time that the NTA are planning to use here.

IE 222 wrote: »

What massive parts where left out?

IIRC, there are protected bridge structures at Broombridge and Maynooth that are too low for the electric lines to pass under, plus a very complicated setup at Castleknock station, all of which were TBD in the first go-around.

IE 222 · 20-04-2021 7:39pm

Former Former Former wrote: »

I'm not optimistic at all, that's exactly my point. It absolutely cannot go through the processes in anything like the time allotted, that's why it's a bit of an indictment of the basic competency of whoever put it together.

Delivering on the current plan requires time to flow backwards so I would rate its chances of going to schedule as fair to middling at best.

That said, I am not a project management consultant so perhaps there is a way to disrupt the very fabric of space and time that the NTA are planning to use here.

IIRC, there are protected bridge structures at Broombridge and Maynooth that are too low for the electric lines to pass under, plus a very complicated setup at Castleknock station, all of which were TBD in the first go-around.

Well it's making a statement that "where happy with what we're presenting and ready to go" its then put to the public and government to decide if their onboard.

What's complicated about Castleknock. Jackson bridge is a case of what the local authority approve off. It will go around it or the bridge altered or removed.

Bsharp · 21-04-2021 7:32am

Former Former Former wrote: »

It was a wildly ambitious (i.e. completely unrealistic) timetable. The second public consultation was supposed to happen in Q4 2020, but the first one was still ongoing in Q4. Even if everyone did give it a thumbs up, there would have been slippage. They were behind from day one and they have yet to publish a revised timetable.

If we see a railway order application lodged before 2023, I'll be surprised.

Timeframe was never realistic but they got someone to sign up to it. IE seem to be one of the better agencies at keeping costs down on major projects: so maybe they put forward a short timeframe to minimise consultancy spend for a fixed fee budget. The consultants signed up so will find it harder to make a claim if they've added to the delay.

The issue with this approach is you've guaranteed the delays will happen. The project will have less staff allocated than needed because it's a fixed fee (and fees are made up of no. of staff at grades working per hour).

Government agencies still haven't got their heads around demands for public consultation. A few rounds of non-statutory consultation, possibly not all planned, will ruin any programme. It's led by the desire to head into ABP with planning risks minimised as much as possible.

spacetweek · 21-04-2021 6:54pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2020/0831/1162347-woodbrook-dart-station/

New station PP gone in for between Shankill and Bray.

PP for Woodbrook was lodged back in autumn 2020. Looks like a decision was never made. Anyone got another update?

Peregrine · 21-04-2021 7:02pm

spacetweek wrote: »

PP for Woodbrook was lodged back in autumn 2020. Looks like a decision was never made. Anyone got another update?

Further information regarding signage, landscaping, fencing etc. was requested in December. They have six months to provide the information.

Peregrine · 11-05-2021 6:39pm

DART+ South West public consultation will start in the next week or so.

Edit: Tomorrow

p_haugh · 12-05-2021 12:11am

Peregrine wrote: »

DART+ South West public consultation will start in the next week or so.

Edit: Tomorrow

New Website for Dart + has been made available today, likely in advance of the public consultation going live.

https://www.dartplus.ie/en-ie/home

Rulmeq · 12-05-2021 9:44am

p_haugh wrote: »

New Website for Dart + has been made available today, likely in advance of the public consultation going live.

https://www.dartplus.ie/en-ie/home

Navigated to the "virtual consultation room" they linked: https://www.dartplusvr.ie/ and they haven't set up their certs correctly.

The certificate used to encrypt your connection to this website does not match the domain it was issued for. Attackers might try to steal sensitive information from you, such as passwords or credit cards.

cgcsb · 12-05-2021 9:53am

So looks like no stations between Parkwest and Glasnevin.

Given the rural nature of the remaining stations I'd say might aswel cancel the project. Its a massive spend to boost capacity at under used stations basically

loyatemu · 12-05-2021 10:19am

cgcsb wrote: »

So looks like no stations between Parkwest and Glasnevin.

Given the rural nature of the remaining stations I'd say might aswel cancel the project. Its a massive spend to boost capacity at under used stations basically

it seems like it's primarily a park and ride service to take traffic off the N7.

But it's ridiculous to not include extra stations, are they seriously going to build a mass-transit system with only 6 stops over 11km? At least the Kylemore and Cabra stations should be included from the start. It's like building Metrolink and only including the stops at Swords and the Airport.

AlmightyCushion · 12-05-2021 10:45am

loyatemu wrote: »

it seems like it's primarily a park and ride service to take traffic off the N7.

But it's ridiculous to not include extra stations, are they seriously going to build a mass-transit system with only 6 stops over 11km? At least the Kylemore and Cabra stations should be included from the start. It's like building Metrolink and only including the stops at Swords and the Airport.

Well, that would save a few quid so don't be giving them ideas.

Peregrine · 12-05-2021 10:51am

So there will be four stations between Hazelhatch and Heuston and all four of them currently face a field on one if not both sides.

There will be a 9km distance between Park West and Glasnevin.

AngryLips · 12-05-2021 11:44am

There is so much that could be done with Dart+ Southwest that they're not doing. It's a wonder they're bothering with the project at all. Why go to the bother of upgrading the line without adding any additional stations? Why not build a spur to better serve Celbridge? I really don't see what this upgrade is going to achieve that isn't already being achieved with the existing infrastructure.

1huge1 · 12-05-2021 12:07pm

Obviously I agree that I would like to see more stations in between, but even with the current plans, it is worth it. Electrifying the network plays a role in the decarbonising of our transport sector and this will increase the capactiy/frequency of the Phoenix Park Tunnel service.

I think much could be done around Park West & Cherry Orchard in terms of creating a large P&R as mentioned above. (though on second thought, there doesn't seem to be great M50 access to that train station).

Nothing to stop them adding more stations in the future, similar to what is currently happening between Ashtown & Broombridge (the new stations name escapes me).

loyatemu · 12-05-2021 12:24pm

1huge1 wrote: »

Nothing to stop them adding more stations in the future, similar to what is currently happening between Ashtown & Broombridge (the new stations name escapes me).

there's nothing to stop them doing anything at all in the future, but this is the big project to upgrade the line, it doesn't make sense to go to all this trouble and expense to provided high frequency services to a handful of semi-rural stations.

riddlinrussell · 12-05-2021 12:24pm

1huge1 wrote: »

Obviously I agree that I would like to see more stations in between, but even with the current plans, it is worth it. Electrifying the network plays a role in the decarbonising of our transport sector and this will increase the capactiy/frequency of the Phoenix Park Tunnel service.

I think much could be done around Park West & Cherry Orchard in terms of creating a large P&R as mentioned above. (though on second thought, there doesn't seem to be great M50 access to that train station).

Nothing to stop them adding more stations in the future, similar to what is currently happening between Ashtown & Broombridge (the new stations name escapes me).

I think they simply didn't have the budget when all this started planning to scope actual stations at Kylemore/Cabra (and possible extension to Sallins/Newbridge.

I'd like to see ancillary projects begun ASAP to get these stations planned and built with the additional funds the Greens are supposed to have secured for PT, its a much smaller outlay, and if the planning is at an advanced stage while South West is going to construction then preparatory stuff can be done simultaneously, making final install (say in the months after south west is completed) comparatively trivial.

How feasible would it be for them to triple track Hazelhatch to Newbridge with One dedicated DART track and one shared IC/DART (Outbound DARTs when IC/Commuters are mostly inbound in the morning, and vice versa in the evening) Or would it be impossible/more worthwhile to quad all the way to Newbridge?

Pete_Cavan · 12-05-2021 1:26pm

Virtual Consultation Room now live. Its pretty cool the way they have a room for the various different elements of DART+. There will be a consultation on Fleet.

Overall DART+ South West looks basic enough but they want to do a big job to get four tracks under the bridge at SCR approaching Heuston.

The Key Infrastructural Elements board states;

Feasibility report and concept design for a potential new Heuston West Station.

The ‘Emerging Preferred Option’ will be compatible with future stations at Kylemore and Cabra, although the construction of these stations is not part of the DART+ South West Project

cgcsb · 12-05-2021 4:37pm

1huge1 wrote: »

Obviously I agree that I would like to see more stations in between, but even with the current plans, it is worth it. Electrifying the network plays a role in the decarbonising of our transport sector and this will increase the capactiy/frequency of the Phoenix Park Tunnel service.

I think much could be done around Park West & Cherry Orchard in terms of creating a large P&R as mentioned above. (though on second thought, there doesn't seem to be great M50 access to that train station).

Nothing to stop them adding more stations in the future, similar to what is currently happening between Ashtown & Broombridge (the new stations name escapes me).

P and R actually adds very little in terms of passenger numbers to a transport network. In terms of value for money, improving walking and cycling links to stations is about 5 or 6 times more beneficial.

The current plans for DART+SW seem to add effectively nothing to the network. We'll have a high capacity DART line providing an express service to four rural stations to Glasnevin that passes through some High density suburbs and a couple of hectars of prime brownfield development land.

This rips up their business case basically. Maybe IE don't want a functional business case?

Either way it's a laughable attempt at building an urban rail network.

cgcsb · 12-05-2021 4:40pm

riddlinrussell wrote: »

I think they simply didn't have the budget when all this started planning to scope actual stations at Kylemore/Cabra (and possible extension to Sallins/Newbridge.

I'd like to see ancillary projects begun ASAP to get these stations planned and built with the additional funds the Greens are supposed to have secured for PT, its a much smaller outlay, and if the planning is at an advanced stage while South West is going to construction then preparatory stuff can be done simultaneously, making final install (say in the months after south west is completed) comparatively trivial.

How feasible would it be for them to triple track Hazelhatch to Newbridge with One dedicated DART track and one shared IC/DART (Outbound DARTs when IC/Commuters are mostly inbound in the morning, and vice versa in the evening) Or would it be impossible/more worthwhile to quad all the way to Newbridge?

Might aswel take the tracks out to save money. We'll have a frequent rail service that serves nowhere without new stations. 3 new stations is a tiny ask

Phil.x · 12-05-2021 4:43pm

12 years ago this topic started and not a single overhead wire installed, how many more decades before it even starts.

Qrt · 12-05-2021 4:46pm

Hopefully everyone’s primary comment on the consultation is the lack of stations and they cop on, much like the initial BusConnects land take.

bk · 12-05-2021 6:16pm

cgcsb wrote: »

The current plans for DART+SW seem to add effectively nothing to the network. We'll have a high capacity DART line providing an express service to four rural stations to Glasnevin that passes through some High density suburbs and a couple of hectars of prime brownfield development land.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't build these stations, but I'd assume that the 4 "rural" stations will see very large scale developments (maybe even SDZ's) right next to the stations. Being greenfield sites, they have the potential to end up much higher density then more mature areas. Also given an option, developers prefer greenfield sites to brownfield sites.

I think it is silly to say "add effectively nothing to the network." when they are a brilliant opportunity to add 10 of thousands of new homes to Dublin.

This line will basically open up massive scales of development in South West of Dublin.

gjim · 12-05-2021 8:50pm

cgcsb wrote: »

Might aswel take the tracks out to save money. We'll have a frequent rail service that serves nowhere without new stations. 3 new stations is a tiny ask

Let's not go overboard. Everyone would have liked to have seen more ambition in DART+ but you can't be serious suggesting handing back any money offered to improve commuter rail in Dublin after decades of underinvestment.

Anyway, given the heavy IC traffic on this section, the only way this line can ever support high quality commuter services is with the upgrades planned for Dart SW. New rail stations appear now and then in Ireland without huge fanfare or decades of political toing and froing - if the DART SW infrastructure is in place I don't see why the same shouldn't happen along this line.

And the development potential along this corridor is huge - there's a big swath of brownfield and light industrial land perfect for conversion to high density residential right beside these tracks that could easily accommodate 20,000 people. Development of this area will produce levies to fund station building.

Cyndaquil · 12-05-2021 8:53pm

It's Northsiders that have truly missed out on rail investment over the years. Most Luas concentration is on the south side apart from Broombridge

1huge1 · 12-05-2021 9:13pm

Metro link should correct a lot of that.

cgcsb · 12-05-2021 9:20pm

bk wrote: »

I'm not saying that they shouldn't build these stations, but I'd assume that the 4 "rural" stations will see very large scale developments (maybe even SDZ's) right next to the stations. Being greenfield sites, they have the potential to end up much higher density then more mature areas. Also given an option, developers prefer greenfield sites to brownfield sites.

I think it is silly to say "add effectively nothing to the network." when they are a brilliant opportunity to add 10 of thousands of new homes to Dublin.

This line will basically open up massive scales of development in South West of Dublin.

If you're referring to clonburris, then forget it. Like Poolbeg West it's a government/Council led project which means it takes decades to deliver if at all and will only be half what's promised. Remember the glass bottle site has been earmarked for housing since about 1997. 0 units delivered or under construction in 2021.

cgcsb · 12-05-2021 9:28pm

gjim wrote: »

Let's not go overboard. Everyone would have liked to have seen more ambition in DART+ but you can't be serious suggesting handing back any money offered to improve commuter rail in Dublin after decades of underinvestment.

Anyway, given the heavy IC traffic on this section, the only way this line can ever support high quality commuter services is with the upgrades planned for Dart SW. New rail stations appear now and then in Ireland without huge fanfare or decades of political toing and froing - if the DART SW infrastructure is in place I don't see why the same shouldn't happen along this line.

And the development potential along this corridor is huge - there's a big swath of brownfield and light industrial land perfect for conversion to high density residential right beside these tracks that could easily accommodate 20,000 people. Development of this area will produce levies to fund station building.

Deadly serious. We could have a very good cycle network for the same money. The project as it stands does nothing for Dublin, its a property value booster for horse enthusiasts of North Kildare.

Residents got consultation docs today. Prepare yourself for an onslaught particularly the communities in cabra that already had the disruption of luas construction. Today they found out multiple bridges will be taken out and replaced in their areas and they'll have years of construction but unlike luas there'll be no new service offered.

You thought busconnects was bad?

IE 222 · 13-05-2021 12:16am

Klymore is a missed opportunity here. The bridge works would absorb a lot of the building costs. Seems stupid not to relocate that crossover between the Dart and IC lines further west from the beginning.

They should also preserve access and a walkway from Le Fanu bridge along the northern boundary to the point of the Up Dart platform seen as they'll be doing clearance works right up to the boundaries between the 2 bridges.

Park West getting a turn back platform as well.

Looks like Dart will take up a lot of space and platform capacity in Hueston also. The track layout looks as though platform 7 and 8 will be solely for Dart. Is it possible to extend platform 6 or reduce platform 5 and turn 6 into island platform? A Hueston West would save the need of having to bring Dart into Hueston and use the spare paths for an hourly Hueston - Kildare/Newbridge service.

It looks like they'll reduce the tracks to 2 at platform 10. It would probably be sensible to keep a 3rd track for holding freight ect trains in case of delays. They'll need a clear run from North Wall to Hazelhatch or Naas.

Bsharp · 13-05-2021 8:21am

I see the report includes future provision for a station Kylemore. They're having yet another go at DART underground so maybe the station's being looked at in this context before commitment to it's final location.
When you looking at development proposals for Naas Road area, and capacity issues on the red line that can't be resolved easily, it's madness not to have a station there.
For all the talk of combining transport and land use planning we're still making an absolute shambles of things.

murphaph · 13-05-2021 8:39am

None of the proposed works prohibit the addition of further stations later. Of course it would be preferable to see the "reserved" stations at Heuston West, Cabra etc. delivered at opening but the most important thing is to deliver the capacity.

We always complain about housing being delivered without the requisite infrastructure. For once the infrastructure will go in first and the underutilised corridor from Adamstown to Park West can be planned sustainably with priority given to north-south pedestrian and cycle access to stations from new housing developments.

CatInABox · 13-05-2021 11:09am

In the grand scheme of the project, how much extra would the stations add on? Will they do enabling works so that putting in the stations in the future isn't as disruptive? Can they add the stations in future without disrupting services?

Those are questions that I'd need answered before I'd accept their excuse that stations aren't part of this project

Peregrine · 13-05-2021 11:55am

CatInABox wrote: »

In the grand scheme of the project, how much extra would the stations add on? Will they do enabling works so that putting in the stations in the future isn't as disruptive? Can they add the stations in future without disrupting services?

Those are questions that I'd need answered before I'd accept their excuse that stations aren't part of this project

€16.5m for Cabra.
€6.3m or €8.5m for Kylemore depending on which consultant you ask.

Putting in provision for stations now may involve spending some of those costs now. The total cost of DART+ South West is €450m (minus fleet).

Basically peanuts.

AngryLips · 13-05-2021 1:22pm

bk wrote: »

I think it is silly to say "add effectively nothing to the network." when they are a brilliant opportunity to add 10 of thousands of new homes to Dublin.

This line will basically open up massive scales of development in South West of Dublin.

The line is already there, the capacity is already there. There's nothing stopping them from proceeding with any nearby development as is. This project does nothing for Dublin commuting.

Pete_Cavan · 13-05-2021 1:24pm

Page 24 of the Public Consultation Brochure (on the table in the middle of the room) states;

8.3.2 Area around Kylemore Road Bridge
This section of the railway comprises two existing tracks and one bridge structure (Kylemore Road Bridge). The bridge does not have adequate span length to fit four tracks and is not high enough for the DART line electrification infrastructure to pass under. There are a number of constraints in this area including:
•The railway corridor is bounded on both sides by soil slopes.
•To the north and south of the bridge are road junctions and access points that that significantly restrict alterations that may be required to the road geometry.
•Kylemore Road is a potential route for a future LUAS line. Therefore, the design must consider this potential new infrastructure.
•The west of Kylemore Road Bridge has been identified for a potential future railway station to the west of the bridge.

The designs for this area must not prejudice its delivery in the future. The Emerging Preferred Option for Kylemore Road Bridge replaces the bridge with a longer span to facilitate the additional track width. To overcome the lack of height available for the electrification infrastructure, the road level will be raised in combination with lowering the rail track.
Retaining walls are required to the north and south of the corridor to allow the widening of the corridor while minimising the impact on the adjacent properties. The raising of the road level will also mean that retaining walls will be required along the road to the north and south of the railway.
The proposed new bridge is presented above in sectional elevation looking east

With all that work done, what would be the additional things needed for a station? The plaforms themselves (could potentially be one island platform instead of two platforms to save costs), ramps down from the new bridge (with supports and connections designed into the bridge structure), some railings and gates, couple of TVMs and info screens, some lighting, etc. Shouldn't need a footbridge as the road bridge fulfills that duty and ramps remove the need for lifts. Can't see how it would cost several million when already doing large civil and electrical works in that exact location. Same mostly goes for Cabra too.

bk · 13-05-2021 1:55pm

AngryLips wrote: »

The line is already there, the capacity is already there. There's nothing stopping them from proceeding with any nearby development as is. This project does nothing for Dublin commuting.

While the line is there, the services currently servicing it certainly do not have the capacity to take on 10's of thousands of extra passengers that massive new developments would bring.

DART+ is needed to bring the needed capacity and it also tends to increase the attractiveness for both developers and buyers.

DART has been extremely successful and DART+ will open up West Dublin in much the same way.

xper · 13-05-2021 2:22pm

For those who aren't inclined to read the full documentation, here's what the report has to say about the proposed new stations:

10.3.1. Future Stations at Kylemore and Cabra
The DART+ South West Project requires consideration of potential future stations along the line insofar as avoiding track alignments which would prejudice their delivery in the future. Potential future stations along the DART+ South West line, are:
• A future station at Kylemore. The DART Expansion – Rail Four-tracking from West of Hazelhatch to Phoenix Park Tunnel (2018) identified a location to the west of Kylemore Road Bridge for this station. In terms of the design of the replacement Kylemore Road Bridge (OBC5A), the Emerging Preferred Option will be compatible with a future station to the west of the bridge.
• A future station at Cabra. The track alignment proposals for DART+ South West will be compatible with a future station (the exact location of which has yet to be determined).
A preliminary assessment for the location of a future station in this area was undertaken by the Project Team to identify the most suitable location for the future station and determine potential implications for the horizontal alignment of the railway. In this regard, a design concept for the station will be dictated by the rail corridor solution and site constraints. The findings confirmed that the horizontal alignment will remain largely unchanged, with no interventions likely to the existing retaining walls or additional land acquisition outside of the existing rail corridor.
These future stations will be the subject of further detailed assessment and will be brought forward where appropriate, as individual projects.

They're simply out of scope of this particular project and this project will do nothing to hamper progressing them as separate projects, in parallel or otherwise under the Dart+ umbrella or even later.
I'd say the possible re-emergence of the DART Underground proposal along serves to treat these station proposals as separate projects. DU may influence the exact location of Kylemore and could also affect the business case or cost/benefit of the Cabra station if DU will mean fewer trains using the Phoenix Park Tunnel route.Not art all saying that would be the case but would explain a separate evaluation for each.

spacetweek · 13-05-2021 2:50pm

I had a look at Google Maps. Part of the reason for not going ahead with Kylemore/Cabra may be that both future station locations are only 15 mins walk from Luas.

I'm well aware of capacity issues on Luas, and the fact that areas further away are effectively out of walking distance, but it probably doesn't help the business case for adding the stations now.

Personally I would go ahead with the stations anyway, but that's just me.

Was up in Ashtown over the weekend, my friends live across the road from Pelletstown, which is flying along. Due to open in September I believe.

CatInABox · 13-05-2021 2:53pm

xper wrote: »

For those who aren't inclined to read the full documentation, here's what the report has to say about the proposed new stations:
They're simply out of scope of this particular project and this project will do nothing to hamper progressing them as separate projects, in parallel or otherwise under the Dart+ umbrella or even later.

Yes, but why are they out of scope? The stations are needed now. The people are already there. The construction of the stations will require major work, will that mean lengthy disruptions?

It's a total cop out to just say "these are out of scope".

IE 222 · 13-05-2021 3:05pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Page 24 of the Public Consultation Brochure (on the table in the middle of the room) states;

With all that work done, what would be the additional things needed for a station? The plaforms themselves (could potentially be one island platform instead of two platforms to save costs), ramps down from the new bridge (with supports and connections designed into the bridge structure), some railings and gates, couple of TVMs and info screens, some lighting, etc. Shouldn't need a footbridge as the road bridge fulfills that duty and ramps remove the need for lifts. Can't see how it would cost several million when already doing large civil and electrical works in that exact location. Same mostly goes for Cabra too.

The plans show station platforms will run under the bridge. An island won't work due to bridge design and the proximity of Inchicore. It will be a 4 platform station. The bridge is also designed to be widened for future Luas line which I'd suspect is where a station entrance/building would be located.

Personally I would've thought adding this extension section in now would offer a considerable saving. Likewise putting the platforms in now or at least the sections under the bridge would also save on disruption at a later date.

IE 222 · 13-05-2021 3:07pm

Peregrine wrote: »

€16.5m for Cabra.
€6.3m or €8.5m for Kylemore depending on which consultant you ask.

Putting in provision for stations now may involve spending some of those costs now. The total cost of DART+ South West is €450m (minus fleet).

Basically peanuts.

Is the Klymore figure after the prep work been done in the us project?

Seen as Oranmore is been allocated €12 million for a new loop and second platform €7 million for a complete 4 platform Dart station in Dublin is literally peanuts.

BonnieSituation · 13-05-2021 3:19pm

spacetweek wrote: »

I had a look at Google Maps. Part of the reason for not going ahead with Kylemore/Cabra may be that both future station locations are only 15 mins walk from Luas.

I'm well aware of capacity issues on Luas, and the fact that areas further away are effectively out of walking distance, but it probably doesn't help the business case for adding the stations now.

Personally I would go ahead with the stations anyway, but that's just me.

Was up in Ashtown over the weekend, my friends live across the road from Pelletstown, which is flying along. Due to open in September I believe.

You'd easily know you don't know the area.

You'd want to be some spanner to walk from Kylemore Bridge to the Luas stop to get a Luas.

The 79/a could take you to Wolfe Tone Quay in that time.

FrankN1 · 13-05-2021 3:30pm

Isn't this line meant to be completed to Maynooth by 2024?

1huge1 · 13-05-2021 3:33pm

FrankN1 wrote: »

Isn't this line meant to be completed to Maynooth by 2024?

https://www.dartplus.ie/en-ie/projects/dart-west
2025 according to this...:rolleyes:

cgcsb · 13-05-2021 3:46pm

CatInABox wrote: »

In the grand scheme of the project, how much extra would the stations add on? Will they do enabling works so that putting in the stations in the future isn't as disruptive? Can they add the stations in future without disrupting services?

Those are questions that I'd need answered before I'd accept their excuse that stations aren't part of this project

Well that's my main point. There are some pretty basic DART stations in Dublin as is, a platform and a ticket machine. We're spending more than €2bn on the network and developing a new hub station at Glasnevin, seems ridiculous to pennypinch out 3 stations. Especially in the context of this particular DART line (SW) being rendered effectively useless by the lack of stations. Pissing away half a billion on empty running trains.

bk · 13-05-2021 3:54pm

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The 79/a could take you to Wolfe Tone Quay in that time.

Which kind of shows why it might not make sense to build a station here yet, at least until DART Underground comes along.

The 79/a will already get you into town from there pretty fast with no changes. A DART station there wouldn't be any faster either and likely quiet a bit slower. DART from there into Heuston, then the long walk out to change onto the Luas (if you can get on it, already well overcrowded by Heuston). I can't see it being a particularly popular option.

Of course with DU, that would all change and would be well worth it then.

cgcsb · 13-05-2021 3:55pm

spacetweek wrote: »

I had a look at Google Maps. Part of the reason for not going ahead with Kylemore/Cabra may be that both future station locations are only 15 mins walk from Luas.

I'm well aware of capacity issues on Luas, and the fact that areas further away are effectively out of walking distance, but it probably doesn't help the business case for adding the stations now.

Personally I would go ahead with the stations anyway, but that's just me.

Was up in Ashtown over the weekend, my friends live across the road from Pelletstown, which is flying along. Due to open in September I believe.

Being close to other stations increases interchange potential. The presence of luas makes these sites more attractive.

cgcsb · 13-05-2021 4:02pm

bk wrote: »

Which kind of shows why it might not make sense to build a station here yet, at least until DART Underground comes along.

The 79/a will already get you into town from there pretty fast with no changes. A DART station there wouldn't be any faster either and likely quiet a bit slower. DART from there into Heuston, then the long walk out to change onto the Luas (if you can get on it, already well overcrowded by Heuston). I can't see it being a particularly popular option.

Of course with DU, that would all change and would be well worth it then.

It's not just about getting people into town fast, it's about building a network with sufficient capacity and interchange opportunity. If getting into town fast was the only goal the best thing for Ballyfermot would be to buy everyone an e scooter. Think of how much more attractive PT to the airport from the South west of the city would be with Darts running between Ballyfermot and Glasnevin for example.

DART+ (DART Expansion)

Comments