Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study

If DART Underground and Clongriffin Spur were in place you would take the train from Galway to Heuston and then go directly on the DART from Heuston to Dublin Airport with no further changes.

Bray Head wrote: »

Agreed. But not every DART will go to the Airport. Presumably some will still go to Malahide and Howth.

Citylink can do Galway city to Dublin Airport in 2.5 hours off-peak. This will never be trumped by a rail solution.

I agree there is rationale for DU. But connecting Dublin Airport with the rest of the country is not part of it.

The likelihood would be that Howth would be a branch shuttle if this happened, so DART would split between the Airport and the Northern Line.


As with everyone else you are focussing on speed and also getting from the city centre to the airport, and only looking at airport customers.


What about the fact that people from the North East of Dublin who work at the airport would have a direct service as well - people seem to perpetually ignore the fact that thousands of people actually work at the airport and their transport needs have been largely ignored.


And I don't think that people going to the airport from long distances are going to be that focussed on the time taken necessarily - it boils down to personal choice and convenience.

lxflyer wrote: »

As with everyone else you are focussing on speed and also getting from the city centre to the airport, and only looking at airport customers.


What about the fact that people from the North East of Dublin who work at the airport would have a direct service as well - people seem to perpetually ignore the fact that thousands of people actually work at the airport and their transport needs have been largely ignored.

The report is quite interesting on this. It says that all the heavy rail options around North Dublin have much lower catchment than other options. This is because most of them would run through empty fields. Most of these fields will never be developed on either as they are on flight paths.

lxflyer wrote: »

And I don't think that people going to the airport from long distances are going to be that focussed on the time taken necessarily - it boils down to personal choice and convenience.

Maybe not for you personally, but selection and design of any public transport investment project should have journey time as part of the assessment criteria.

I just don't see the Clongriffin spur adding much value compared to the alternatives, despite its much lower price.

I'm only getting around to this thread now, as I have just finished reading the NTA's document. I won't comment here at length as I will put my thoughts in a more coherent form privately to submit as part of the public consultation, WHICH I URGE EVERYBODY ELSE TO DO TOO!

My main gripe with the document is the focus on connecting Swords, the Airport, and the City Centre, as laid out in the introductory pages. This in and of itself is fine, of course. It's a radial corridor, and there is political impetus to improve travel speeds between Swords and Central Dublin. Fair enough. It's convenient that the Airport sits between the two. Great -- three major destinations.

However, and here is where I have a problem with ranking/rating of each of the couple dozen proposals -- Dublin Airport is a HUGE national piece of strategic infrastructure. I could probably phrase that better. Dublin Airport is the ~25th busiest airport in the world. It's the most important entry and exit point on the entire island. People land/take-off from the Airport, but they also need to get to/from there. The rating criteria mention nothing about the national (even international?) importance of the airport. It's all about speed to/from Swords.

Would it have killed AECOM to investigate how the transport proposals would improve airport accessibility for the entire country? I realise that the scope outlined by the NTA probably did not consider that. But honestly -- any scoping that includes the airport as a specific (along with Swords and Central Dublin) destination but fails to recognise that people access the airport from all over the country is a failure from the get go, imo.

Neither Belfast nor Cork are mentioned in the document. I don't think it is beyond the realms of reason to assume that any heavy-rail proposal to Dublin Airport might at least venture the slightest mention of access from the next two biggest cities on the island.

Option HR8 is on the cards: This is a very interesting proposal as it contains a route that heretofore has not been publicly considered. I think this route could be improved upon if the Swords tail is connected to the main line at Donabate (let's call it "Optimised" Option HR8). It adds redundancy to the system should there be another Malahide Viaduct incident. It makes Swords/Airport directly accessible from the entire East Coast including Belfast. Even without modification, this route keeps a station at Ballymun (forever neglected) and DCU (major trip generator), and includes the possibility of a Cork-Interconnector-Airport route, which would revolutionise rail travel in the Capital region. With a link at Donabate, you could have Cork-Dublin-Airport-Belfast all on one seat. I don't think it's too much to say that, given our current situation, that would be nothing short of incredible.

Option HR2 connects Swords and the Airport to Central Dublin with that amazing dog-leg via Clongriffin. It's cheap, it's slow, and not worthwhile imo.

In the context of having to pick one of the six options, Option LR3 should be strangled immediately. Mainly at-grade Luas is a poor cousin of underground rail with fewer stations. There is poor Airport connectivity, and running time is slow. The only advantage is that it's cheap! Cheap in every sense, imo, compared to the other options.

Option LR7 ("Optimised" Metro North) could work out as more expensive than the heavy rail option. It also has a couple of stations in fields around the M50. It does have Central Dublin penetration, which is good, but crucially (and as has always been a weak point of MN) there is still no indication of what is likely to happen south of St Stephen's Green. Imo, at this stage, any Metro ("Luas Underground") option that does not address what is to happen south of SSG is a cop-out. I wish somebody in the NTA would just admit that if MN goes ahead, its future direction will be down the N11/dualler to UCD/Stillorgan. Which wouldn't be bad, but is way beyond the scope of this document, or indeed this thread. Given the potential of Option HR8, I don't think Optimised MN should go ahead.

I don't want to comment too much on Option BRT5. The current BRT consultation has left a sour taste in my mouth, and judging by the plans provided for the Swords BRT, I would have much hope that BRT5 would be rolled out in a manner that would fulfil the aspirations of this report.

Given my misgivings about Option LR3, I also rule out Option C1.

In case I haven't been clear, I support Option HR8 out of the six put for consultation. I furthermore suggest that it include a connection to Donabate. It's the only option that can address the national importance of Dublin Airport in terms of direct rail accessibility. It could potentially reduce congestion on the Northern Line. If there is a "triangle" interchange at Liffey Junction, it could also direct trains down the Phoenix Park Tunnel, but maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here.

Metro North is the only sane solution. Everything else will be short-sighted and regretted almost immediately.

Aard wrote: »

How are the other 5 options short sighted?

Not enough capacity, travel comfort and too much interference with other modes of transport.

Unfortunately this new study is nothing more than a fudge to push decisions further down the road.

Metro North integrates well and is a fabulous stand alone project. Combined with DU as per that spoof job that was T21, none of us can say that Dublin wouldn't have a really credible rail based system. The plans were made and don't need changing. Anyone making a submission should think carefully. Any deviation from the MN solution will enable the state to waste 10 more years procrastinating. Leave MN as designed. Build both it and DU. I'd rather wait 10 more years to get these projects started rather than 10 more years bullsh1tt1ing around with reinventing the wheel in north Dublin.

This study is a complete and utter waste of time.

Sam Russell wrote: »

It also has the benefit of being easy to build, and could be built quickly, and would integrate into the existing Dart structure. It also could be integrated into the DU project if/when that happens.

It is a few Kms of electrified dual rail across green fields.

Waste of money. Its nothing more than an airport connection. MN is about so much more. Its a commuter project straight through the heart of north Dublin.

Aard wrote: »

The non-airport elements of MN (save perhaps Swords) tend to get overlooked. For example, Ballymun and DCU connectivity, not to mention the potential of Drumcondra being enabled to emerge as a mini-CBD of the northside.

What do you think about "optimised" MN?

I could live with less stops, but not smaller stations or more "at grade" running. So for me, it's a no no. For nearly 40 years this country has accepted "compromise" and then a failure to deliver anything.

The original routing of MN didn't even consider integration with the Maynooth line. It was more concerned with serving a vacant Smurfit site in Glasnevin until non vested interests shouted stop. MN as now designed is the way forward. At grade through Ballymun, for example, is a seriously bad idea that was highlighted years ago. So much "public" consultation has already gone into this, we don't need any more. MN as designed is a no brainer. Do we really need a re-run of how the DART plan was eventually rolled out? No we don't.

Sam Russell wrote: »

It would take 7 mins to get to Clongriffin and then another 10 mins to get to Connolly non-stop. Obviously, traffic is a problem on the northern line, but a 30 min service with a travel time of less than 20 min would be brilliant. With DU, it of course could be integrated into the service, but until DU is built, it still would provide a useful and vital link.

Even if these numbers are achievable and without quad tracking the Northern Line I think they won't be (at least not reliably so) you are looking at 17 mins to Connolly versus 27 minutes to St. Stephen's Green (last time I looked) on MN. That would be about 24 minutes to O'Connell Street. It's just not worth the money when there are so many other holes in the rail network that need filling. At some later point in time I believe the airport should be linked up to the DART network, possibly as part of a new route like Airport-Bray or whatever. It should come some day but not before MN because it isn't cheap enough not to make a big dent in the capital budget and really not before several other Luas extensions and quad tracking of the Northern Line.

MN obviously makes a huge dent in that budget, but the bang for buck is so much greater.

Zebra3 wrote: »

At the very least there should be a well legislated protected route for any future spur from Clongriffin to the airport.

A lot of that land will no doubt be rezoned in the next decade or so.

Luckily the alignment would run directly under the flight path, which is protected and nobody with any sense would want to live under it anyway.