Advertisement
Boards are fundraising to help the people of Ukraine via the Red Cross at this horrific time. Please donate and share if you can, you will find the link here. Many thanks.

DART+ (DART Expansion)

1246247249251252270

Comments

  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,106 Mod ✭✭✭✭ CatInABox


    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".


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


    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.


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


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,749 ✭✭✭✭ BonnieSituation


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ FrankN1


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


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,162 ✭✭✭ 1huge1


    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:


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,923 ✭✭✭ cgcsb


    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.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 20,888 Mod ✭✭✭✭ bk


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,923 ✭✭✭ cgcsb


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,923 ✭✭✭ cgcsb


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 143 ✭✭ yascaoimhin


    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.

    This is working under the assumption that all these people want to go into town.

    What if someone works in Park West? What if they work in James' Hospital? Or Tallaght?

    The next Dublin Transport Network has to enable fast and frequent journeys to be made from one part of the city to other parts of the city and not just to town.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 20,888 Mod ✭✭✭✭ bk


    I get what you are both are saying. However how many people are making those journeys? Enough to justify the cost of an extra station? Enough to justify the extra time you add to journeys for an extra stop? Do those people have alternatives like buses, etc. for those journeys?

    The reality is the vast majority of people are heading into town, if you take those out, then a business case would look much weaker.

    One thing you need to be careful of is trying to squeeze in too many stations. You risk becoming like Dublin Bus then with too frequent stops and too slow a service.

    I think we need to ask the question, what is DART+ supposed to be? A frequent stopping service or more a mid distance commuter service? Commuter services tend to have quiet a different stopping pattern to something like a Luas/Bus or even a Metro.

    Having said that, with DU I think the cost of an extra stop would certainly be worth it, without, I can see it being somewhat marginal.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,021 ✭✭✭✭ loyatemu


    there are stops on the existing Dart line that are less than 1km apart. This line will have 10km with no stations.

    Everyone is heading for the city centre because our entire transport system is focussed on that, and it's very difficult to make other journeys.

    It's hare-brained to spend 10s of millions upgrading a line that has hardly any stations on it. if they're not built as part of this project, they won't be built for decades. This is up there with the original unconnected Luas lines for short-sighted penny-pinching.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,152 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Peregrine


    Kylemore Road was absolutely part of the project until recently. If it's not in the scope of the project now then that means it was removed from the scope of the project when or after design started.

    It was proposed as a station in the 2018 report which established the emerging preferred route for the Hazelhatch-Heuston section. It was costed in that report and again in the 2018 DART Expansion options report. It was specifically mentioned in the 2019 tender for the consultants who are now designing DART+ South West. Yes, it says "may" but it was important enough to name check and it means someone later decided that it should be dropped.

    50wFvAK.jpg
    IE 222 wrote: »
    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.

    I'm not entirely sure because they were both from cost breakdowns of the entire DART+ South West project where Kylemore Road was part of the project before this "not in the scope of the project" stuff started. So it's difficult to separate them.

    One of the biggest costs for Kylemore Road is the gradient. The tracks are on a slope and will have to be stabilised for the length of the station. If they're building in provision for a future station, it's likely that they will do this part now. Otherwise, it's not really provision for a future station if you have to lower the tracks later.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,923 ✭✭✭ cgcsb


    bk wrote: »
    I get what you are both are saying. However how many people are making those journeys? Enough to justify the cost of an extra station? Enough to justify the extra time you add to journeys for an extra stop? Do those people have alternatives like buses, etc. for those journeys?

    The reality is the vast majority of people are heading into town, if you take those out, then a business case would look much weaker.

    One thing you need to be careful of is trying to squeeze in too many stations. You risk becoming like Dublin Bus then with too frequent stops and too slow a service.

    I think we need to ask the question, what is DART+ supposed to be? A frequent stopping service or more a mid distance commuter service? Commuter services tend to have quiet a different stopping pattern to something like a Luas/Bus or even a Metro.

    Having said that, with DU I think the cost of an extra stop would certainly be worth it, without, I can see it being somewhat marginal.

    On that basis we should pull all the orbital bus routes from bus connects as the don't go to town.

    There's no fear of there being too many sations by adding three to this line. At present the line goes right past the country's largest intercity station and doesn't stop. :pac:

    It's a 10k run without stopping, completely unsuitable for an urban rail system. Dublin is only about 12km across from Sea to M50, it's a mental proposal to have a high capacity rail system doing that, nothing short of mental. It wouldn't even happen in Tokyo, yet alone a relatively small city like Dublin.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,749 ✭✭✭✭ BonnieSituation


    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.

    That's "An Lár-ism" of the highest order.

    Kylemore opens and all of a sudden commuting to Naas is viable from Ballyfermot etc. It's not all about the city.

    Opening stations is never a bad idea especially one that is in such a prime spot.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,110 ✭✭✭ Pete_Cavan


    IE 222 wrote: »
    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.

    Which document shows platforms will run under the bridge? The Consultation Brochure shows a section through the bridge with the central tracks very close to the intermediate bridge support. Lots of space outside the outer tracks so certainly doesn't look like platforms will run under the bridge.

    The documents also state "a potential future railway station to the west of the bridge", so to one side rather than under.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,749 ✭✭✭✭ BonnieSituation


    bk wrote: »
    I get what you are both are saying. However how many people are making those journeys? Enough to justify the cost of an extra station? Enough to justify the extra time you add to journeys for an extra stop? Do those people have alternatives like buses, etc. for those journeys?

    The reality is the vast majority of people are heading into town, if you take those out, then a business case would look much weaker.

    One thing you need to be careful of is trying to squeeze in too many stations. You risk becoming like Dublin Bus then with too frequent stops and too slow a service.

    I think we need to ask the question, what is DART+ supposed to be? A frequent stopping service or more a mid distance commuter service? Commuter services tend to have quiet a different stopping pattern to something like a Luas/Bus or even a Metro.

    Having said that, with DU I think the cost of an extra stop would certainly be worth it, without, I can see it being somewhat marginal.

    I'm sure you'd have no issue with Sandymount closing given the proximity of Sydney Parade and Lansdowne Road.

    The removal of the stop from the plans didn't bother me that much as I figured it would be a separate project and would streamline Dart+SW overall. But I have a feeling that it was merely classist. It makes no sense to remove it if the works being done at the bridge are happening anyway. Not a lick of sense.

    The fact is, the people of Ballyfermot have put up with the air and noise pollution given their proximity to the line and the Works and have had no station.

    A station between Le Fanu Road and Kylemore Road with entrances at both ends would revolutionise the area and completely open up the light industrial area to the south of the line to development. And are you telling me if you told people in the area that they could be in Heuston in 4min or Drumcondra within 20 that they wouldn't use it?

    If a station in Cabra and Ballyfermot isn't viable then you need to tell me why we have Kishoge and Fonthill on the line.


  • Registered Users Posts: 322 ✭✭ Tomrota


    That's "An Lár-ism" of the highest order.

    Kylemore opens and all of a sudden commuting to Naas is viable from Ballyfermot etc. It's not all about the city.

    Opening stations is never a bad idea especially one that is in such a prime spot.

    Naas isn’t getting DART. Despite the Dublin Suburban Rail Strategic Review recommended electrification of the line as far as Sallins/Naas or Kildare. And a platform for change - an integrated transportation strategy for the greater Dublin area recommending four tracking from Cherry orchard to Sallins. The area already lacks public transport infrastructure and has some the largest amounts of housing developments in the entire country. As Kildare’s largest metropolitan area/commuter town, I think it’s scandalous it is not included with this project.

    The government really isn’t serious about getting cars off the N7.


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


    bk wrote: »
    I get what you are both are saying. However how many people are making those journeys? Enough to justify the cost of an extra station? Enough to justify the extra time you add to journeys for an extra stop? Do those people have alternatives like buses, etc. for those journeys?

    The reality is the vast majority of people are heading into town, if you take those out, then a business case would look much weaker.

    One thing you need to be careful of is trying to squeeze in too many stations. You risk becoming like Dublin Bus then with too frequent stops and too slow a service.

    I think we need to ask the question, what is DART+ supposed to be? A frequent stopping service or more a mid distance commuter service? Commuter services tend to have quiet a different stopping pattern to something like a Luas/Bus or even a Metro.

    Having said that, with DU I think the cost of an extra stop would certainly be worth it, without, I can see it being somewhat marginal.

    You seem to be forgetting this ain't just a little jaunt into Hueston. The PPT is the difference here and we've seen just how much demand the PPT has created in the rural areas already with restricted capacity.

    Dart+ will be a blend of both frequent stoppers and mid range commuting trains. The longer distance trains will run semi express with pick up points at terminal stops for the skipped stations.


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


    Peregrine wrote: »
    Kylemore Road was absolutely part of the project until recently. If it's not in the scope of the project now then that means it was removed from the scope of the project when or after design started.

    It was proposed as a station in the 2018 report which established the emerging preferred route for the Hazelhatch-Heuston section. It was costed in that report and again in the 2018 DART Expansion options report. It was specifically mentioned in the 2019 tender for the consultants who are now designing DART+ South West. Yes, it says "may" but it was important enough to name check and it means someone later decided that it should be dropped.

    50wFvAK.jpg



    I'm not entirely sure because they were both from cost breakdowns of the entire DART+ South West project where Kylemore Road was part of the project before this "not in the scope of the project" stuff started. So it's difficult to separate them.

    One of the biggest costs for Kylemore Road is the gradient. The tracks are on a slope and will have to be stabilised for the length of the station. If they're building in provision for a future station, it's likely that they will do this part now. Otherwise, it's not really provision for a future station if you have to lower the tracks later.

    I'd imagine it's a cost of just putting the actual station structure in. The bridge works and associated clearance and ground works would've driven that way up.

    Yeah the gradient is been leveled out. It didn't seem to bad but it will be well within the limits as it needs to be done for the bridge either way.


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


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Which document shows platforms will run under the bridge? The Consultation Brochure shows a section through the bridge with the central tracks very close to the intermediate bridge support. Lots of space outside the outer tracks so certainly doesn't look like platforms will run under the bridge.

    The documents also state "a potential future railway station to the west of the bridge", so to one side rather than under.

    I can't seem to link it but it's well and truly detailed and explained in the Annex 3.5 technical klymore area. Page 41 shows diagram of platforms ect and then there is also details regarding this and how the station will be built.


  • Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭ MyLove4Satan


    IE 222 wrote: »
    I can't seem to link it but it's well and truly detailed and explained in the Annex 3.5 technical klymore area. Page 41 shows diagram of platforms ect and then there is also details regarding this and how the station will be built.


    The Ballyfemot Station issue is gaining serious traction in the mainstream media and like Cabra (old cement terminal) isn't going to go away.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,923 ✭✭✭ cgcsb


    Solidarity and SF could make this a class war of attrition and to be honest, I wouldn't usually side with them but on this occasion will back them 100%


  • Registered Users Posts: 143 ✭✭ yascaoimhin


    The Ballyfemot Station issue is gaining serious traction in the mainstream media and like Cabra (old cement terminal) isn't going to go away.

    We (Dublin Commuter Coalition) sent a tip to Dublin Inquirer a few weeks back and they did a big story about it and then a press release to all the major outlets and all the local councillors and TDs the morning it was announced.

    It's a good thing we did because most outlets didn't even report that the Consultation was open never mind consider any of the pushback.

    we had a load of requests for comment late yesterday as they all seem to picking up the story now that others are reporting it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,110 ✭✭✭ Pete_Cavan


    Anyone else not getting into the Consultation Room site now?


  • Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭ VeryOwl


    I agree that the stations should have been included and IE/NTA are rightly being blasted in the media for taking half a decade to cook up a plan for an urban railway that doesn't include any new stations in dense parts of the city. What were they thinking??

    If we're going to be doing these upgrades we need to get the most out of the infrastructure. The project is good and necessary, but decisions like that really undermine it, and make the optics poor too.

    Hopefully the public consultation response will make them see sense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭ AngryLips


    bk wrote: »
    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.


    There's capacity for 12 trains per hour - is there even close to that many services towards Docklands/Grand Canal Dock at the minute in addition to other Heuston services? You could provide a clockface service through the PPT without hitting that capacity.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 20,888 Mod ✭✭✭✭ bk


    Maybe this is all a really smart plan by IR to get the government parties, plus SF all riled up about this and then get them to throw extra money at the project to build extra stations :)

    In particular if they can get SF to make a big deal on it, that could be very helpful to keep the project going in future if they end up in government.


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


    bk wrote: »
    Maybe this is all a really smart plan by IR to get the government parties, plus SF all riled up about this and then get them to throw extra money at the project to build extra stations :)

    In particular if they can get SF to make a big deal on it, that could be very helpful to keep the project going in future if they end up in government.

    I think this could be part of it alright. The whole project, well parts that have been publicly confirmed and released so far, all seem to just fall short in one way or another. Connolly upgrade, extensions, new stations not been in the scope ect. I feel it's all purposely been done to get more money for a revised and cheaper DU.

    Adding the likes of Cabra, Klymore, Kilcock into a DU project will add very little cost to but drive the ridership numbers way up. There will be plenty of capacity to run a PPT service to Bray or Dun Laoghaire with DU.

    Oddly, SF have been sticking their ore in on rail projects over last few years. They've been somewhat vocal in Galway, Navan ect the last few years.


Advertisement