Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

DART+ (DART Expansion)

1360361363365366394

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    there’s nothing implicit about it, it’s explicitly spelled out in the text you quoted.

    “application shall not affect the validity of the railway order and its operation unless, upon an application to the High Court, that Court suspends the railway order until the application is determined or withdrawn”

    But the net effect is the same, IE won’t do anything until it’s resolved - however that isn’t the same as “can’t” do anything.

    Nice find on Gowan Motors, their objection was 100% inevitable, the arrangements at Ashtown essentially put them out of business and presumably there will be another coming from Burke Bros wholesalers. I misread the thread, I thought the implication was that the JRs were supposed to be from local residents.

    People may not appreciate the application for a JR but this isn’t some woman who doesn’t want a bus stop outside her house, these are businesses that have been there for years and years and are being sent to the wall. Yes, I know they’ll be compensated but that isn’t the point.

    If the applications are frivolous, the High Court won’t entertain them. My bet is that any decent lawyer will be able to show that IE and ABP didn’t give due consideration to the impact on these businesses.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,588 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    NTA were in a Wicklow CC meeting recently and said the consultation on (what's left of) Dart South would start next month.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,320 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    But surely it has been obvious for years that their businesses would not be viable? I'm pretty sure once the location of the overpass was decided we all discussed that possibility on this thread.

    In which case surely the TII have been discussing compensation already.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    But maybe they don't want compensation, maybe they want to keep their businesses open.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,416 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    The land isn't suddenly worthless. It's only of no use for a business that requires car access. As a residential development site, though, it would very valuable.

    Gowans will live, this isn't their only site, or their only business activity.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,505 ✭✭✭p_haugh


    Jusding by the plans, it only looks like they're losing a small portion of their parking anyways? It's not like their whole site is being CPO'd.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,206 ✭✭✭Economics101


    If that were the general attitude, every Tom, Dick and Harry near a piece of new infrastructure could veto it. That does not rule out properly determined compensation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Gowan Motors are losing 80 car spaces. For a business that buys and sells cars, that is a pretty significant impact.

    IE's own assessment is that Burke Bros cannot continue to trade after the work.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,751 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Gowan Auto (Bright since a sale of the retail arm last year) have multiple other sites across the city and could easily move one or more brand from Navan to one of those and reduce the space demands. Indeed, they only recently enough moved the Ford dealership in to the site, despite knowing this might happen.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    I don't disagree, and of course there's no solution that will keep everyone happy.

    But look at it from their perspective, Plan A comes out, IE have been working on this for years, this is the preferred option.

    Only then there's a big public uproar about the loss of the stables, so IE come back with Plan B and suddenly the stables are saved but these businesses are facing the axe. So now we don't know, is this really the best solution for the train line, or the most expedient one?

    So if I'm Mr Burke, I'm going to wonder why the stables are sacrosanct and my business (which was there long before IE gave a shite about this train line) is suddenly expendable. Sure, IE can say "we'll compensate you" but what if they don't want that, what if they want to continue the business they've spent years and years building up?

    Again, I understand that there's no perfect solution here, but at the same time, characterising the objections as 'delaying tactics' or 'disrupting things for everyone else' is unfair IMO. Expecting people to just roll over and suck it up for the greater good is not realistic. People are just as entitled to apply for a JR as IE are to apply for an RO, particularly if their objections during consultations were not addressed.

    My takeaways here are;

    1. If IE thought this RO was going to be granted and no-one was going to raise further objections, they are at best incredibly naive and at worst grossly incompetent.
    2. If IE did not have a contingency plan to identify parts of the work that could proceed in the event of a JR for certain sections (noting that this is explicitly foreseen in the legislation), then they are at best lazy and at worst grossly incompetent.
    3. If the objections are as frivolous and petty as are being made out here, then the High Court will not entertain them, so let's see how it goes. But if a randomer on the internet can pick gaping holes in IE's position, imagine what some sleazy barrister will do.

    I'll say it again, like I've been saying since the start of this process - IE simply cannot handle anything of this magnitude. Any objections are manna from heaven for them because it gives them a scapegoat for not having done anything. It has to be taken out of their hands and they should be brought on board when the work is done and the trains need to be driven.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,776 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    I haven't seen anyone "pick gaping holes" in IR position. It really seems like you're angry about things which have zero evidence. As far as I have seen, with everything I have read, it comes across as if government bodies are well aware of the potential for JRs, and indeed expect them regardless of the length of consultation.

    The fact is that IR could indeed have taken due consideration of the closure of these businesses, and going ahead with these plans would still be the right path. With planning like this, it is not necessary to completely satisfy every objection along the plan, otherwise there would be no CPO for the motorway projects, there'd be no CPO for the Intel Leixlip plant.

    These crowd are perfectly entitled to take a JR, but that doesn't mean that they will win, nor does it mean that IR made a mistake in following this course.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26 DrivingSouth


    There is a 2nd judicial review on the courts.ie search in the name of Burke Brothers.

    I can't post links yet but the reference is H.JR.2024.0001140



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    It really seems like you're angry about things which have zero evidence.

    As someone who actually uses the Maynooth train line. I can assure you I'm only angry about the length of time it is taking IE to progress this project. If you need evidence of this, please scroll up, and up, and up, and up. I'd go down tonight and burn Gowan Motors to the ground if I thought it would speed things up, but they are not the rate-limiting factor here.

    I'm just bemused by the inability of IE to deliver anything remotely complex, I'm long past angry on that front. If you need evidence of this, ask anyone who's needed to get a train or DART in the last few weeks how they would rate the PM skills of IE.

    These crowd are perfectly entitled to take a JR, but that doesn't mean that they will win, nor does it mean that IR made a mistake in following this course.

    I never said they will win it, and maybe this is genuinely the best solution for Ashtown, but IE's handling of this issue meant a JR was inevitable. Calling it a "horse's ass" would be an affront to horses and asses everywhere.

    and indeed expect them regardless of the length of consultation.

    This is my fundamental problem. What if the deadline for lodging a JR had passed with no submission? Do you honestly thing IE were ready to break ground?

    Why aren't they proceeding asafp with improvement works that have nothing to do with Ashtown?

    I haven't seen anyone "pick gaping holes" in IR position.

    I'd be happy to do so but people really don't like it when I do.

    Post edited by Former Former Former on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26 DrivingSouth


    I don't know how the cpo process works but could this simply be down to horse trading? I mean presumably an independent valuation has been done, and then a cpo offer of valuation+x has been made. Then maybe a bit of haggling between the legal teams with ultimately IE making a final (and hopefully fair) offer, and then if the owner doesn't want to accept they threaten the JR. And now it's let's see who blinks first?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,000 ✭✭✭✭cgcsb


    I think you are correct, the Burkes and McGownes are waiting for a golden handshake on the steps of the high court. That's why they haven't sought media attention for their JRs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 236 ✭✭scrabtom


    It's not a great precedent but at this stage and with the importance of the project just give them what they're asking for.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,438 ✭✭✭VonLuck




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,751 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    I think the Maxol on Constitution Hill that was very much in the way of Luas Cross City may have got a wedge on a similar basis.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    It's in the responses to the consultation process.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,438 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    I see. I thought there were some judicial review documents available somewhere. Is it available on the DART+ website?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,098 ✭✭✭Citizen  Six


    That's not how it works. It just goes back and forth for years, at huge costs, and the deal gets done at the last minute. Everyone wins except Irish Rail and the tax payer.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 748 ✭✭✭loco_scolo


    Good to see some focus on this. The disaster of the recent timetable changes proves how much this is needed. One would almost think it was disaster by design!!! Either way, the 4-tracking will certainly have increased support now.

    Hopefully it can be fast tracked.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/transport/2024/10/09/irish-rail-to-unveil-plans-for-new-tracks-through-north-dublin/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭AngryLips


    The dogs in the street could have predicted the need for four tracking the northern line, but it feels like IE and NTA have only woken up to this reality far too late IMO.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 236 ✭✭scrabtom


    Irish Rail is going to be focused on Dart Plus for the next while, it would be brilliant if they could have four tracking of the Northern line going through the planning process as Dart Plus is being constructed, and then ready to start construction as soon as Dart Plus is finished.

    And hopefully the line to Navan as well.

    Post edited by scrabtom on


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,776 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    In fairness, they haven't had funding to do more than the bare minimum for decades. The need for the various Dart+ projects have been incredibly obvious for decades too, but it's only when Irish politicians signed up to reduce emissions that IR got the funding to even look into these projects.

    I get that IR hasn't exactly been a beacon of good governance and forward planning, but it's a bit over the top to solely blame them for issues that ultimately stem from decades of public transport hostile governments.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,906 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    Cannot really blame IÉ for the lack of funding from the government for such projects.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 299 ✭✭Thunder87


    I suppose it's good to see it at least acknowledged but it'd presumably need mass CPO of gardens and some houses as well as lots of disruption and line closures, so it'll just end up the same as everything does, bogged down in delays and controversy and increasingly watered down with every iteration.

    Also it isn't in the NDP so why are they spending time and money on this instead of focusing resources on the glacial progress of their existing projects?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,751 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Because there's specific EU funding for this stage of the process.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,000 ✭✭✭✭cgcsb


    As if there has been funding for new projects chucked at them right left and centre for century?

    The state is only starting to fund a modest amount of public transport infrastructure after 100 years of managed decline.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,000 ✭✭✭✭cgcsb


    More money can't really change the current glacial projects which are victims of Ireland not having a usable planning process.



Advertisement