Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026
HR8+ - DART and Intercity link to Dublin Airport, reusing Metro North Route plus more
-
19-04-2015 12:06AM#1This started on the Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study thread but I'm going to break it out of there because it has wider appeal and it's no harm pushing the idea at this point. This idea isn't fully in the Fingal transport study report mentioned that thread, it's mostly a mix of a few options in the report.
...plus maybe add the orange bit, and also use of the Glasnevin to Heuston link mainly for a Belfast - Dublin Airport - Heuston - Cork service:
Larger image here. Please excuse the rushed and poor Photoshopping! A and B around Swords are options, but A clearly would be better for Intercity. All but the orange bit between Glasnevin and the Docklands portal are part of the report.
Here's another type of overview:- Orange = Dart Underground (which this hinges on)
- Red = Current route Docklands Dart Underground portal to Glasnevin Junction to be upgraded to Dart
- Blue = Glasnevin Junction to Phoenix Park Tunnel Heuston
- Yellow = core HR8+ new track and tunnel works (same as Metro North route between DCU and north Swords)
The benefits of the route:- Serves most of Metro North route and more
- Serves Dublin Airport with regional, local and Intercity links
- More local connectivity -- ie a service which would take in the north Dublin coastal towns (ie Balbriggan, Skerries, Rush and Lusk, Donabate) to Swords, Airport and onwards. This would connect workplaces and shopping/entertainment centres to nearby residential areas -- a link with currently is heavily used by motorised traffic on a congested and (largely poor) road network and poorer public transport.
- More regional connectivity: Directly connecting places like Drogheda to Swords/DUB; Kildare to Swords/DUB; West Dublin to Swords/DUB etc.
- More national connectivity: Intercity services to Dublin Airport; at the very least direct Cork - Dublin - Dublin Airport - Belfast services. You could also terminate some Galway etc services at Dublin Airport.
- For the above it has more local and national appeal and is more likely to be built.
- Would make up part of the T-TEN route which is better for funding.
4
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
One of the major advantages of HR8-"Optimised" (thank you, NTA, for that wonderful suffix) is redundancy in the Northern line. Without major and complex CPO'ing it'll be difficult to increase capacity into Connolly. With the proposed project, capacity into Central Dublin would be doubled. This option would have major positive impacts for a Drogeda and other towns north of Swords. I'm really surprised that those local councillors (even TDs) are not cheerleading such a project. I guess it shows the calibre of our elected representitives.
Exactly.
HR8+ has huge and widespread benefits. But I suppose it needs vision and understanding -- and those things have to be pushed. Irish Rail are still finding it hard to get Dart Underground over the line so adding on HR8+ might be too much for them until Dart UG is in the bag.Pete_Cavan wrote: »I think what you are getting at is using the rail line along the Royal Canal for HR8 instead of the elevated line via Drumcondra Station? I have suggested this before elsewhere.
This makes a lot of sense because the line along the Royal Canal could be exclusively for airport/Swords services which offers huge capacity and fast journey times, airport/Swords could travel to SSG via the DU tunnel and services from Hueston could travel to the airport using the PPT and HR8 tunnel. The cost of a new junction at Glasnevin would be significant but the space is there to do it, it makes use of an existing underutilised line and the result would be fast and reliable airport services with great interconnectivity with existing (and expanded) Dart, Intercity and Luas services. It also makes better use of the DU tunnel (if it ever gets built) giving more bang for your buck for that particular piece of infrastructure.
Exactly what I had in mind, should have included something like this in the opening post:
Dark grey = Maynooth line / elevated line via Drumcondra Station
Orange = Dart Underground (which this hinges on)
Red = Current route Docklands Dart Underground portal to Glasnevin Junction to be upgraded to Dart
Blue = Glasnevin Junction to Phoenix Park Tunnel Heuston
Yellow = core HR8+ new track and tunnel works (same as Metro North route between DCU and north Swords)
- Heuston: should have a triangular junction allowing access to interconnector eastbound.
Sadly the potential for circle line services is not there because Dart Underground will not surface in Heuston.end of the road wrote: »BRT and express bus services aren't a good reason not to consider this project at least. for me, the grave yard would be an issue but with a bit of luck it could be got around some way as it is a hystoric site and its not worth potentially aultering or god forbid destroying in any way for a rail link
I think you could go underground in or around Glasnevin junction and avoid the graveyard, but I think the graveyard is the better option over a larger residential area and the historic buildings end of the Botanic Gardens.lucernarian wrote: »... And disruption to any combination of or ALL of the following: The only train line to link the eastern and northern train network with the southern and western lines until Dart Underground is built; ALL Intercity, Commuter (and DART if built after DU) services between Connolly/Docklands and Broombridge; a secondary school; nearby residential streets and apartment blocks; a canal; one of Ireland's most important historic sights and its largest graveyard is completely surrounded in one part by the railway lines in question, and the main cemetery area which is to be tunnelled underneath has less than 250 metres separating it from where the tracks are to emerge and join the existing line.
I think the engineering and cost considerations of building a DART Underground station at College Green instead of Stephen's Green would be trivial in the face of the above but that's just my own estimation.
A few things: There's no apartment blocks of note near Glasnevin junction; nobody is suggesting digging up the graveyard; HR8 would clearly follow Dart Underground as it hinges on it; we're talking about a multi-billion-euro project so a secondary school could be moved if needed; dealing with railways when upgrading or putting in new lines around old one is commonplace all around the world.
Building an underground station at College Green in one of the most dense city centre locations, with a very high volume of high grade historic buildings (many with basements), and a location which is one of the busiest bus and pedestrian streets in the country, and one which will soon have Luas tracks over it is not comparable to building building 1 or 2 tunnel portals around railway tracks, some green sites, railway sites and (historically speaking) unprotected, low density housing (which can be CPOed if needed).
Look at Cross Rail -- most of its sites are far more confined that around Glasnevin junction.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
lucernarian wrote: »A few more things: How long is a piece of string? There is terraced housing and a block of flats where Clermont Lawns and Clermont Court are. I'm sure the residents would feel rather differently. That is just your opinion...
Indeed there is a small number of terraced houses and a small block of flats. It's not just my opinion, the option of CPOing houses has to be kept open for any large project, be it rail or motorway or even key normal road etc.lucernarian wrote: »"Nobody is suggesting digging up the graveyard" - Then explain how a tunnel portal supporting a gentle gradient can be accommodated on a piece of land that's 100 by 150 metres, or 200 by 150 metres if we assume that
There's more than one potential tunnel portal site.lucernarian wrote: »relocating, building and then demolishing a secondary school in Dublin 7 isn't going to cost much. Because I can't fathom how it could be done with St. Vincent's left standing.
I'm not saying the only option is to use the school land or demolish the school (there'd be no need for the option of CPOing houses if that was the case), but do you know the area well? Can you not think of any sites within 500m which could more than accommodate the school temporarily or otherwise?
Where did I say it was not going to cost much? I said: we're talking about a multi-billion-euro project so a secondary school could be moved if needed, and nothing about it not costing much.
lucernarian wrote: »And the tunnel boring machines can't just pop out like moles at the back of the school and wave to everybody. There'll be some length of cut and cover tunnel needed along with the actual TBM portal, leading up to the Sligo/Maynooth line.
Yes, that's standard.
It's included in what Cross Rail refers to "285m long ramp structure that takes the Crossrail tracks from ground-level down into the underground tunnels".lucernarian wrote: »I have seen no proposal yet to "deal" with the minor issue of Maynooth/Sligo/PPT tracks so I shall assume that means closing said lines for many months to a couple of years, along with whatever cost is involved of lost pax and replacement bus services. I don't know what evidence you have to show the economic costs of surmounting these challenges are.
The PPT tracks importance lowers once Dart Underground is in place.
My suggestion would be to keep the Maynooth/Sligo open except for the usual short-term closures it takes to divert the line / built cut and cover under it / etc. As I said: It is common place to build railway lines around other live ones: You'll find with many metro and intercity projects around the world.
In the event that the Maynooth/Sligo line had to be closed, for the short-term or long-term, trains could terminate at Broombridge where people could switch to Luas and get close to the city centre than Connelly or Docklands station. The network effect at work!lucernarian wrote: »I've also seen nothing yet concerning either the canal and the impact on it, or what Waterways Ireland's response will be. Nor have you yet mentioned how the graveyards wouldn't be impacted upon. One part of the cemetery is literally surrounded by the Glasnevin Junction lines and the flyover and at most is 250 metres away from the main (and most historical) part of the cemetery and at a minimum it is only 100 metres away.
They managed large scale engineering works around working canals in the 1800s, I'm sure we'll come up with something.lucernarian wrote: »Here's something relevant from CrossRail: http://www.crossrail.co.uk/construction/tunnelling/western-tunnels-royal-oak-to-farringdon/royal-oak-portal. Tunnel portal is only 21 metres wide, but a whopping 285 metres long.... and at Royal Oak, the tunnel entrance is aligned in parallel to the existing main line tracks out of Paddington. HR8 involves a tunnel alignment almost perpendicular to both the PPT line and the Sligo/Maynooth line.
Here's four sites, all larger and most far larger than those requirements, and all without lasting damage to the Sligo line or the canal or any demolition of houses or schools or graveyards:
Although there may be a more optimal and single-site portal site with a small bit of demolition of a few houses. It's not a good idea to rule that out at this point.lucernarian wrote: »It's disingenuous to leave out the possible impact on the cemetery sites in the immediate vicinity, unless you're referring to them as two of the green sites:eek:
All I said was: "nobody is suggesting digging up the graveyard".
What impacts are you talking about? The risk of tunnel collapse? There's always that risk.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
lucernarian wrote: »You've answered your own question I think. And it's a particularly spurious question considering the straw man you made earlier. You could have saved us a whole lot of grief if you simply said what the RPA actually did propose. Actually let's save everyone another few lengthy reads. Took me a while there to find Infrastructure as the boards.ie index is all moved around for me but anyway... Members of the jury, I give you:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94067888&postcount=295. It mentions Stephen's Green as the southern end, albeit without the linking of tracks and therefore not leaving any lasting impact on Stephen's Green. I'm wondering where the the tunnel would emerge to join the green line in the future, which was exactly what I was doing earlier.
Just to be clear: I only asked that particularly spurious question because you went on about it after it was said there is no plan for a tunnel portal near SSG.lucernarian wrote: »This isn't even a matter of opinion here - ascribing that space near where the PPT line meets Blackhorse Avenue to being useful for HR8, HR8+, HR8 + HR4 or whatever else it can be called is like saying triple-tracking Clontarf Road to Killester will help get DART underground built. HR8 and HR9 are two fundamentally different schemes with completely different city centre (If Heuston is even central Dublin) corridors and terminii. There's a reason (or a few) why HR9 wasn't forwarded to the govt. alongside HR8. Same cost but far greater city centre, modal transfer opportunities and overall utilisation of DART Underground... Building a line that serves the Phoenix Park Tunnel, via Airport to Malahide is of good use to the Heuston lines and the Northern commuter/Enterprise line and DART as far as what, Killester? Further south on the DART to Greystones, and obviously the entire Sligo/Maynooth line won't benefit one bit from a tunnel built to serve just the Phoenix Park line. Unless the HR8 tunnel takes a very very meandering loop around Dublin 7 and 9 as explained above.
Have you looked at the HR8+ maps already posted?
What possible services do you think HR8+ includes?lucernarian wrote: »So how many of the cemetery plots will have to be dug up and reburied? And before anyone thinks I'm being a smartass I've discussed this with somebody who works there and he says there is a way to have this done legally although who knows what the relatives would say. I'd also like if you took the discussion I'm having seriously rather than chalk it down to imaginings.
How many of the cemetery plots will have to be dug up and reburied?
0. Zero. None. Not a single one. I'm nearly sure I've already said that there is space to shift the tracks?lucernarian wrote: »It will be closed *if* the blue patch is used - unless it's expanded and some of Claremont Lawns is taken out of it. Space for a TBM tunnel box with two tracks going beside it and onwards to the Phoenix Park just don't go into 25 odd metres width. I'm no lawyer but if there's another valid site in the area then the residents could block any kind of demolition of their homes owing to it being an unnecessary option.
If that box is used, the line won't be close. Just one end of it will realigned and repurposed, and it would then be used far more than it is now.lucernarian wrote: »The other options would have to be ruled out first for good reasons or more severe environmental impact to the cemetery or the canal.
What impacts on the canal or graveyard are you taking about?lucernarian wrote: »True. Although St. Paul's cemetery isn't a protected site, it is still a massive cemetery.
Which won't be infringed on.lucernarian wrote: »This is of course compared to the virtually unknown level of support for HR8 and its variants. Though my point was initially worded for the "optimised" Metro North proposal. I had to drop it as the overground aspects along the Ballymun road, and a station plan for O'Connell St to a certain extent, will need some serious planning permission changes. Apart from those very specific changes, optimised Metro North is already factored into planning and zoning decisions and if the R108 section of those changes gets approval, the project as a whole should be easily rubberstamped.
The optimised metro would have stronger opposition from residents who already had to fight to get the line underground along the Ballymun Road.
HR8+ is effectively Dart Underground Phase 2 with an Intercity element. It's supporters could include people who want:
-- anything but Metro North (who are not just anti-rail)
-- rail services to the airport (and not trams or long trams)
-- a Cork-Dublin--DUB-Belfast rail service; including any body or group that wants better connectivity for Cork, Dublin or Belfast and anywhere along the way, including connecting Intercity services
-- public transport connectivity between the costal towns and Swords, the airport, DCU etc
-- rail services from the Kildare route project section of the Kildare line to Glasnevin, Dublin Airport, Swords etc
So, basically: Far more potential for more people to be (a) actively supportive, (b) passively supportive, or (c) indifferent.0 -
Advertisement
-
But the RPA specifically show a plan on paper, kindly uploaded by jd, which would have a tunnel ending at St. Stephen's green. Now such a proposal doesn't have to allow for a seamless merging onto the existing green line, but how else did you forsee construction of the "luas underground" section without some kind of tunnel portal?! It was a speculative question to begin with, as I had explained. Even if that future station is built in tandem with DART underground, a future extension beyond that to join the green line seamlessly would need to be accounted for or else there will be more significant disruption on Stephen's Green. "It was said" nothing, I have already tried to explain that I wasn't making any red herring claims and yet it seems you had no basis for what "was said" to begin with.Just to be clear: I only asked that particularly spurious question because you went on about it after it was said there is no plan for a tunnel portal near SSG.
Could you elaborate on that answer with evidence? Could you describe what lies immediately to the north of the train line lying at the edge of the red plot on the map you provided?How many of the cemetery plots will have to be dug up and reburied?
0. Zero. None. Not a single one. I'm nearly sure I've already said that there is space to shift the tracks?
If there is less than 25 metres available at a minumum, where a tunnel portal will lie, how will another two tracks be aligned around the mouth of the tunnel? Into what, St. Paul's cemetery or into Claremont Lawns?If that box is used, the line won't be close. Just one end of it will realigned and repurposed, and it would then be used far more than it is now.
Completely agree with you there. With the caveat that there is no detailed engineering or cost information about such a plan and it's not going to gain widespread support with *any* price tag.So, basically: Far more potential for more people to be (a) actively supportive, (b) passively supportive, or (c) indifferent.0
Advertisement