question, if there was just a shuttle to howth, how many darts could serve the airport an hour? 2 each way or just 1 ? also they have mentioned this plan before, would it be single or twin track?
Just to be clear, a planning amnesty is not anything which I would ever support. Properly legislated changes to general rules are a different matter.
I think you need to read the post I was replying to.
We'll see with luas finglas then since that's newly submitted. Here's hoping it gets an RO in May but I have my doubts
I said new cases are progressing relatively quickly. I didn't mention those in the backlog. Those are also now starting to move, but as they've been there for so long already it doesn't really make a noticeable difference to their timelines.
Christ no. That would just lead to massive problems down the line. And it would be highly unlikely to be legal anyway.
That's leaving the state wide open to issues down the line, from substandard designs, to possible drainage and flooding issues, to unsafe roads. It would be like signing a blank check for future court cases by those affected.
It's probably also against EU law given the environmental impact of projects on European sites in particular wouldn't be assessed.
What projects are moving along within their required time scales? The 6 month mark has long past on all such projects AFAIK.
The Luas Fingls application went in November, due to be decided 26th of May 2025. Luas Finglas is also a very good quality submission. I'll eat my hat if it has an RO by that date.
They're getting JRs anyway so saving 2 years by cutting out the middle man could be the ticket to clear a backlog
A planning amnesty right now seems like a great idea, assuming the legals can deal with it. I would advocated any infrastructure project and and any urban housing scheme over 100 units be granted for the next few years until our situation stabilises.
ABP was hugely understaffed at the time and got hit with a barrage of SHDs. Then you had the scandal with the board.
All these issues have been resolved now though. They are fully staffed, have a reconstituted board and are moving new cases through the system pretty much within the required timescales.
ABP already has an infrastructure department to handle these kinds of things, so I think it's already prioritised. Perhaps not to the extent we would all like, but it is.
On that rule, that's a sure fire way of getting JRed, and almost certainly successfully at that.
In the case of strategic infrastructure like most transport projects, the Government should have the power to direct ABP to move such projects up the queue. ABP can of course still act independenty when making a judgment.
Alos once the ABP backog is substantially alleviated, there should be a new rule: if ABP does not give a verdict within 6 months, then planning consent can be assumed. Put a gun to their heads.
Bog standard housing applications in the middle of a housing crisis are frequently taking 2+ years for a decision from ABP, it shouldn't take that long but still definitely a possibility unless they finally start getting their house in order this year.
Has there been any word on what disruption there'll be to services during the construction? Just thinking whether construction will need to be staggered so as not to clash with any adjacent BusConnects routes
If the depot is moved, there is still a need for a further application for West of Maynooth, as the RO was cut off at Bond Bridge, just beyond the station.
Kilcock extension is meant to be in design currently and will presumably handle that, but if not, they may need to do a basic planning app for the electrification and maybe some additional turnback sidings.
Thanks for the update, good to know where things stand.
I think that you might be overly pessimistic on the RO for the depot though, I doubt that it would take two years. It is solely going to be a depot, and bar the tie in works, will have nothing else. It can't take two years to look over just a depot.
Update, the facts:
The option to take a JR against DART+ Southwest has now expired and DART+SW now has an operable railway order and may now proceed to tender for works, pending final funding approval from the NTA/DoT. Expect to see some tenders this year, perhaps even tender review/award by year end.
DART+W is in the JR process. ABP were to submit it's case to the court in early December but have failed to do so, they have indicated that they will be unable to do so until the end of January. If that is met the case can proceed around the end of February. Hopefully this will be concluded swiftly.
We could even see some early works on both projects in 2025 to prepare for the main works. Main construction is now highly likely to get started in 2026 and really ramp up in 2027. There is no final construction programme yet given the variables but a completion date of 2031 is possible.
The Elephant:
Depot-gate. The DART+ scheme may be built but completely inoperable without a Depot, a revised RO application for the Depot is unlikely in 2025. This is a major challenge, if the application can be made in 2026, experience tells us that ROs take 2 years, meaning 2028 before a decision. Tendering and constructing the Depot in time for completion of the rest of the scheme seems unlikely at this point. However reforms to ABP and the planning courts may relieve some of these issues, it's a wait and see scenario.
They’re two private engineering companies. IDOM is a Spanish company, (Ingeniería y Dirección de Obras y Montaje, “Engineering, Construction Management, Installation”), ROD is Irish (Roughan - O'Donovan)
Happy new year all. Can I ask what IDOM and ROD stand for?
Atkins won a competitive tendering process to take on the next stage of the work. There were lots of other bidders. IDOM, ROD and others were also appointed to the same client side framework so are likely to have future involvement still.
So ROD and IDOM did the Dart Plus applications but Atkins are going to do future planning applications for them?
Good news if so, if the Dart Plus applications were substandard.
And thus no surprise when Irish Rail decided to bring Atkins in to take over it, such was the dissatisfaction with the product IDOM and ROD provided to them.
They tend not to do joining/splitting in the UK on a two track railway blocking the running lines though as doing it at Raheny would. It’s usually at stations where they can be overtaken and not risking causing a blockage, and would block the line until the signal section is cleared.
It really isn’t an option. Changing to a shuttle is a much more efficient approach - it’s just going to need a similar approach as that at Broombridge to make Howth Junction a location that people feel safe to change at.
People tend not to visualise the more frequent services that would be running and look at it in the here and now. Twenty years ago could anyone imagine Broombridge being somewhere that people would be using as an interchange - that’s the change in mindset that’s needed in this case.
Plus people changing from the shuttle need assurances that they will be able to get on the connecting DART to city - maximising connections with Clongriffin starters would be key at peak times.
Incidentally, I seem to recall that you have raised this several times here over the years, and I’m pretty sure that I explained that they did make a significant effort at splitting and joining trains during the day at Connolly and Bray back when the economy tanked, but that my understanding was that the whole process actually didn’t save money after all, due in part to the additional driver resources needed to do the shunting back and forth of units to/from Fairview and the constant switching around in Bray which proved challenging to say the least!
The lack of any facilities to stable trains at the northern ends of the DART lines (or easily in the case of Malahide) doesn’t help either. It restricts the option to Connolly and Bray which makes the whole operation that bit trickier.
Sometimes it’s just easier and more cost effective to keep the capacity in service given the infrastructure constraints and to keep the drivers on revenue earning services.
As a Dublin Bay North constituent, all the major candidates' leaflets I saw mentioned opposition to the removal of direct DARTs to Howth, including the Green Party candidate. The objectors will have plenty of political clout behind them when the time comes.
As an aside, I read the luas finglas RO application. It's a very high quality set of documents. Hopefully this is a new standard for public projects which will be much more robust against court action.
In contrast, the DART+ West documents were littered with typos, poor sentence structure, wrong document references and figure references etc. A playground for solicitor really.
ah I never really considered that. I think they are still going to try and challenge it with another path, but even then based on their complaints nothing they are objecting to is infrastructure related.
I imagine though they will still find a way to protest the changes, as to how they will do that or if it will even work, I am not sure, but they will find a way.
The do this (or did maybe) with Galway/Mayo trains. More suited for long distance, where the time to split is a small fraction of the total journey time.
JR's are frequently taken for reasons completely unrelated to the actual grievance people have though. The usual way it works with JR's on housing is NIMBYs don't want extra traffic/disruption/whatever but will hire someone to find a technicality around environmental surveys or some directive that wasn't followed to the letter. So the fact they have a grievance in the first place is a good indicator they'll at least try their hand at a JR
On high frequency suburban services?
DART+ N is an infrastructure project. It won't remove the physical infrastructure allowing for howth to city centre trains. IÉ do not need planning permission to change service patterns so it's not really anything for abp to consider. The residents may seek a JR and whether they get one or not will be telling since the issue is imaginary.
The second driver is only needed to be there during the split. Then there are two trains with each needing its own driver.
They do this a lot in the UK system. It works for them - do they have a different type of train? Are the Dart trains not designed for splitting while in service?
