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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

DART+ (DART Expansion)

1215216218220221228

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 263 ✭✭DaBluBoi


    You'd think that with the clear struggles on the western line from the new rail timetable, that they would then prioritise DART+ West to get a new and improved terminus built to decrease congestion at Connolly, but nope. I'm aware that the timetable will soon revert, tho I can't imagine much or any expansion of services is possible without DART+, given how stretched the rail network has clearly become.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 244 ✭✭specialbyte


    The High Court is examining the decision as a whole. The High Court really only has two options:

    • Upload the decision of ABP to grant permission
    • Quash the decision of ABP

    When quashing the decision they can decide to remit it back to ABP for another decision from scratch or they can effectively declare the whole process invalid and require a new planning application from Irish Rail, which would require updated environmental analysis, which would take months-years to prepare.

    For long linear infrastructure projects should the Oireachtas give more nuanced powers to the High Court to allow for more nuanced decisions? Yes. Is that in the new 700 page planning bill? No, because the new planning bill is the dreams of private developers who almost exclusively deliver very site specific projects rather than public projects that tend to be larger in scope.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,713 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    A JR is taken against the grant of planning permission as a whole, not just a particular part of it. Even if the person taking the JR is only interested in a small park of the planning permission, they are challenging the whole lot.

    This isn't true. While you can challenge the whole RO, you can equally challenge only a part of it. And the High Court can choose to reject even smaller parts of that part while leaving the rest intact.

    "Where an application is made for judicial review in respect of part only of a railway order, the High Court may, if it thinks fit, declare to be invalid or quash the part concerned or any provision thereof without declaring to be invalid or quashing the remainder of the railway order or part of the railway order"

    Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Act, 2001, Section 47 (irishstatutebook.ie)

    So they can plough on with all of it, at least until the High Court suspends the RO. Will they? No.

    But until this is confirmed by a reliable source, it's all speculation.

    Post edited by Former Former Former on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,222 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    I didn't realise that they can quash only part of a RO. It would be hilarious if the High Court quashed the underpass at Ashtown but allowed the LC closure to proceed.

    IÉ can proceed with anything until the outcome of the JR has been decided. The decision can still be to quash the whole lot. Even a partial quash could materially effect the rest of the project.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,226 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    The schadenfreude in me actually hopes that this is exactly what will happen! It would serve the locals right.

    As for the JR, yes nothing can happen until it’s decided. So now it’ll be interesting to see how long it’ll take for the case to be heard. In a country with a functional legal system, this would only be 2-3 months hence.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,361 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    I just feel sorry for the vast majority of local people who want this to happen when it's the very small minority who manage to disrupt things for everyone else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 223 ✭✭Bsharp


    Also feel sorry for the project team working on it, really saps the life out of them. Work endlessly trying to meet all the requirements these days, consultation after consultation, deadline after deadline, endless pressure, finally thinking something might get built, and then another prolonged waiting period which could unravel everything you've committed to over a number of years. The industry is struggling to attract people as it is, that's without the completely broken system.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 256 ✭✭danfrancisco83


    I was just thinking about the presentation given by Paul Hendrick, decarbonising Ireland's railways, and at the beginning he lists a number of successful projects he's been part of. I imagine it's definitely something people think about before committing to work on a project.

    "…Do I want to be 30 years old and the only project I have on my CV is a failed railway upgrade that took 10 years and ultimately got canned?"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,713 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    As for the JR, yes nothing can happen until it’s decided.

    the legislation explicitly says the exact opposite.

    But I’ll repeat, it’s claimed that leave for two judicial reviews has been granted by the High Court against a multi-billion euro state infrastructure project… and this hasn’t made the news?

    There is something very strange going on there, the most likely explanation being it isn’t true.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 190 ✭✭Thunder87


    Fairly sure this is one of them, Gowan = Bright Motor Group which is the car place next to Ashtown Stables

    https://services.courts.ie/high-court-search?caseRecordId=H.JR.2024.0001133

    On the legislation, the part you quoted doesn't say anything about being able to continue, just says the specific section being JR'd can be declared invalid. Another clause in your link says it's up to the court whether to suspend the railway order while the review is being decided. I'd say that implicitly means they can't continue until the court decides one way or the other.

    "Notwithstanding an application for leave to apply for judicial review under the Order against a railway order, the 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."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,713 ✭✭✭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: 15,329 ✭✭✭✭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: 5,226 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: 6,713 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


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



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,030 ✭✭✭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: 1,365 ✭✭✭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: 1,998 ✭✭✭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: 6,713 ✭✭✭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: 71,143 ✭✭✭✭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: 6,713 ✭✭✭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: 10,524 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: 12 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: 6,713 ✭✭✭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: 12 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: 9,846 ✭✭✭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: 169 ✭✭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: 2,361 ✭✭✭VonLuck




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,143 ✭✭✭✭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: 6,713 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    It's in the responses to the consultation process.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,361 ✭✭✭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: 2,897 ✭✭✭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: 679 ✭✭✭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: 2,790 ✭✭✭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: 169 ✭✭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: 10,524 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: 7,805 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


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



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 190 ✭✭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: 71,143 ✭✭✭✭L1011


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



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,846 ✭✭✭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: 9,846 ✭✭✭cgcsb


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



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,998 ✭✭✭Economics101


    Agreed, but IE, TII and NTA should have had a Northern Line 4 tracking draft project prepared for many years, so that least they could get moving if funds became available. To me the real scandal is why 4-tracking was not in the DART+ Northern Programme from the start, and even if it got dropped at least the transport operators could say "I told you so" when the inevitable acute congestion arises.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,846 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Including quad tracking in dart+ could have added a billion to headline costs. Politicians are simple creatures, they react emotionally to headline figures.

    The recent timetable chaos in IÉ isn't surprising to IÉ. They knew it wasn't doable with current infrastructure but doing it none the less served as a demonstration of the need for quad tracking to those in power



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,280 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    They would still have needed funding to prepare the options for the project - that has only been provided via the EU recently.

    I absolutely agree that DART+ North and additional track capacity should have been one project, but again this is all dependent on funding and what is being made available by government.

    The good thing is that the timetable issues have put the lack of capacity to the fore in terms of the travelling public and politicians.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,132 ✭✭✭spillit67


    Those projects are fairly advanced though in terms of what they can do.

    They are also already funded.

    What I think is happening here is that Irish Rail are using the recent publicity on the timetables to look for a slice of the Apple money. Election szn.

    I’d prefer DART Underground but I’m fairly sure the NTA are hostile to it and we won’t get movement on that until DART+.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,280 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    To be fair the 4 tracking feasibility study was awarded funding last year by the EU and started earlier this year.

    Jim Meade was at the Oireachtas Transport Committee yesterday and was asked when there would be an update, and he stated that the study was nearing completion, and he expected that it could be published early next year.

    That's where this is coming from.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,803 ✭✭✭prunudo


    i know money wasn't always available, but at the very minimum they should have been pushing the government to sterilise the land so it couldn't be built on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,805 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    Even that would cost money. Denying planning permission to someone can be an expensive process.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,290 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    Irish Rail is a government operation, they are told to tow the line and stick with the political goals of the day. You stay in line to get the money, go off script you won't be the CEO for much longer



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 223 ✭✭Bsharp


    Don't think it's started as there was a tender out for it in August. They did a high level study for it in 2012 and it was also looked at as part of DART+ Coastal North as part of a feasibility study. So IE must have a fair idea of what's possible already.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,280 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Well then he’s not told the Committee the truth as what I’ve posted above is what he said there yesterday.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement