NTA - GDA transport strategy approved

lil5 · 06-04-2016 1:35pm #1

Greater Dublin Area Transport Strategy 2016 – 2035 approved by Minister
https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/greater-dublin-area-transport-strategy-2016-2035-approved-minister/

The National Transport Authority today (April 6th) announced that its work in preparing a Transport Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area (GDA), 2016-2035 has concluded (in accordance with Section 12 of the Dublin Transport Authority Act, 2008), that it has been approved by the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, and has been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.
...

The following documents were published today and can be downloaded on the Greater Dublin Area Transport Strategy 2016-2035 page of our website:
- Transport Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2016-2035
- Public Consultation Submissions Report – summarising and setting out the Authority’s response to each of the submissions received during the second round of public consultation, which comprised the publication of the Draft Transport Strategy, and the subsequent changes made to the strategy report
- Environmental Report – setting out, as part of the Strategic Environmental Assessment, the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the draft Strategy, in compliance with Article 9(1) of SI 435 of 2004.
- SEA Statement – prepared on approval of the Strategy
- AA Natura Impact Report – in compliance with EU Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, commonly known as the Habitats Directive, an Appropriate Assessment has also been carried out and a Natura Impact Statement has been prepared to determine if the draft Strategy will impact on the integrity and conservation objectives of relevant Natura 2000 sites.
- Appropriate Assessment Conclusion Statement – prepared on approval of the Strategy.

MrMorooka · 06-04-2016 2:10pm

More plans, more words, more consulting, still no money or real action.

MrMorooka · 06-04-2016 2:39pm

By the way, I assume you all made submissions last year, so you can look for your name and see their response to it here https://www.nationaltransport.ie/planning-policy/greater-dublin-areatransport-strategy-2016-2035/ (Public Consultation Submissions Report )

Having said that, I made a submission but I don't see it here.

MrMorooka · 06-04-2016 2:50pm

The most interesting thing I see is that they frequently state that :

The extensive transport modelling work done to date indicates that, based on predicted passenger usage, a rail link from Navan to Pace, with services travelling onwards to Dublin City Centre, is not economically justifiable.

But they propose protecting the alignment at least.

Chris_5339762 · 06-04-2016 2:52pm

This is pretty much unchanged since the last time. All I see that is new is the idea of Metro South (tunnel to Rathmines) as well as a Luas extension to Poolbeg. Other than that, we pretty much know about the rest of it. And we also know that none of it is actually funded at the moment.

They are protecting the alignment of the Eastern Bypass and a few other bits and pieces, which is good.

Also, they mention the N7 Naas - M50, but also mention the same deal from Leixlip on the N4 inwards, as well as N3 widening, additional M1 capacity to Drogheda, M50 widening between J14 and the M11 and what reads like a collector/distributor setup for the N11 and upgrades all the way to Ashford.

Alkers · 06-04-2016 3:32pm

What are the differences against the draft plan?

Carawaystick · 06-04-2016 3:55pm

It's a wee bit daft that Lough Sheelin and Carnew are included, but Drogheda is not...

the groutch · 06-04-2016 4:13pm

MrMorooka wrote: »

More plans, more words, more consulting, still no money or real action.

Yep, good chance none of this will ever happen.

LXFlyer · 06-04-2016 4:44pm

Carawaystick wrote: »

It's a wee bit daft that Lough Sheelin and Carnew are included, but Drogheda is not...

The Drogheda- Dublin corridor is included though.

thomasj · 06-04-2016 6:06pm

I have just realised I'll be 10 or so years off retirement when it finally comes to the time that nothing has happened

cdebru · 06-04-2016 6:21pm

19 years why not have a 2 or 3 year or even 5 year plan of stuff they could actually achieve in that time. Lumping everything into a plan for 19 years seems a bit pointless.

strandroad · 06-04-2016 10:41pm

cdebru wrote: »

19 years why not have a 2 or 3 year or even 5 year plan of stuff they could actually achieve in that time. Lumping everything into a plan for 19 years seems a bit pointless.

That's the point though, it's easier to explain why nothing whatsoever happens after 3 years if you still have 15+ left.

Banjoxed · 07-04-2016 8:36am

I'm looking forward to finally travelling from Harcourt Street to Bray by rail so I can give a big "f*%# you" to the ghost of Tod Andrews and all his miserable acolytes since.

cdebru · 07-04-2016 9:00am

Banjoxed wrote: »

I'm looking forward to finally travelling from Harcourt Street to Bray by rail so I can give a big "f*%# you" to the ghost of Tod Andrews and all his miserable acolytes since.

I hope you aren't too old or it may be the ghost of banjoxed that's delivers that to the ghost of Tod Andrews.

Pete_Cavan · 07-04-2016 9:00am

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Also, they mention the N7 Naas - M50, but also mention the same deal from Leixlip on the N4 inwards, as well as N3 widening, additional M1 capacity to Drogheda, M50 widening between J14 and the M11 and what reads like a collector/distributor setup for the N11 and upgrades all the way to Ashford.

So roads which will quickly fill up again are likely to get the majority of funding while high capacity public transport will get the crumbs. The NTA are not planning it this way but history has shown that this is what our politicians choose when it comes to actually putting up the money for projects. I haven't had a chance to read the strategy yet so maybe it makes things clearer but shouldn't these plans be more focused on managing capacity on the existing roads and providing alternatives to using your car? Aren't TII in charge of the national road network and how does this fit in with their plans? Funding needs to be tipped in favour of public transport but when there is another road project on the table, our politicians are likely to opt for the road.

cdebru · 07-04-2016 9:04am

mhge wrote: »

That's the point though, it's easier to explain why nothing whatsoever happens after 3 years if you still have 15+ left.

And most of those currently responsible will have retired before the clock runs out on this plan.

monument · 07-04-2016 2:26pm

MrMorooka wrote: »

More plans, more words, more consulting, still no money or real action.

This isn't just about the multi-billion euro projects -- the plan in this case is very wide ranging and will have an impact on transport and other planing in the GDA.

cdebru wrote: »

19 years why not have a 2 or 3 year or even 5 year plan of stuff they could actually achieve in that time. Lumping everything into a plan for 19 years seems a bit pointless.

Because long term plans are needed as well as short term ones.

LeinsterDub · 07-04-2016 10:14pm

monument wrote: »

Because long term plans are needed as well as short term ones.

Yup it's important we dream up short and long term plans we've no intention of doing. Sure while we are at it what about a long long term plan of a hyperloop between metro South (snigger) and dart underground

Idbatterim · 08-04-2016 2:39am

in terms of the new "metro north" when can we start making observations on this, 60m instead of 90m to save peanuts! This is the most moronic proposal I have heard in this country and that is some statement!

this is a 2.5,000,000,000 euro project and capacity should be reduced by one third to "save" E100,000,000! So for 4% of the total budget spend, we want to limit capacity by 33% on UNDERGROUND stations?! also how much of that 100 mill goes back to the government?

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

if they want to lie about demand not as high as forecast during boom, despite the fact there are probably more cars on the road now, massive new development taking place, dublin airport busier than ever, as we are just emerging from the boom! Right its a joke and they are lieing, but for god sake purchase less rolling stock then, at least that can be easily rectified!!!!

monument · 08-04-2016 11:55am

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Yup it's important we dream up short and long term plans we've no intention of doing. Sure while we are at it what about a long long term plan of a hyperloop between metro South (snigger) and dart underground

Have you read the document?

How many of the ~100 pages relates to the larger projects?

Carawaystick · 08-04-2016 1:12pm

Read through the Doc,

My main points
Its has a very "All roads lead to Rome" focus, with little mention of orbital traffic.
Little mention on routes like Naas/Maynooth
Drogheda/Navan
Dunshaughlin/Rathoath/Ashbourne/Swords

The section on Busses has no mention of a later or earlier times of services.
The map of Orbital bus services has no links to Dublin airport, so Letterkenny will have a no change servcie but Raheney, or Finglas won't

The section on cycling has a primary cycle route out to Clarehall, but fails to connect to Malahide. It does propose a dedicated cycling route up howth head from the harbour though :rolleyes:
There is also no proposal to build dedicated cycling infrastructure alongside the motorwaying of the N7 from Naas to Newlands cross.
There is no cycle route planned to go North/South from Parkgate street west to Lucan

I'm not sure why there are only 2 points for education explicitly mentioned

Transport Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area wrote:

Accompanying the emphasis on enforcement will be educational campaigns, undertaken, where
appropriate, in conjunction with other agencies, with the objective of developing a stronger ethos of good
road use behaviour. Particular areas of focus will include the behaviour of cyclists on urban streets and
pedestrian safety at road crossing points

I'd have thought increasing capacity on the Motorway network,
Behaviour of motorists towards cyclists & cycling infrastructure might give better bang for the buck.

I'm unsure of what figure 9.1 is supposed to represent. is it suggesting Arklow will have 10-15k extra population from 2011? And there will be less than 20 extra people in Laytown/Bettystown?

Figure 9.11 gives very optomistic public transport coverage for the Wicklow mountains, compared to now...
But dissappointing journey times from Swords and the Airport along with the times for the Northern line.

LeinsterDub · 08-04-2016 8:52pm

monument wrote: »

Have you read the document?

How many of the ~100 pages relates to the larger projects?

Nope I prefer Science fiction to out and out fiction. Being serious I have just read it. Don't believe most of it. Sure the DB expansion has hit the rocks too and that's the simplest of project

LXFlyer · 08-04-2016 10:07pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Nope I prefer Science fiction to out and out fiction. Being serious I have just read it. Don't believe most of it. Sure the DB expansion has hit the rocks too and that's the simplest of project

What do you mean about the "DB expansion has hit the rocks"?

LeinsterDub · 08-04-2016 11:25pm

lxflyer wrote: »

What do you mean about the "DB expansion has hit the rocks"?

http://www.kevinhumphreys.ie/national-news/dublin-bikes-expansion-framework/

1 phase out of 14. An impressive display of either incompetence or just lack of caring.

LXFlyer · 08-04-2016 11:50pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

http://www.kevinhumphreys.ie/national-news/dublin-bikes-expansion-framework/

1 phase out of 14. An impressive display of either incompetence or just lack of caring.

Sorry you confused me.

Most people in C & T use "DB" to mean Dublin Bus!!

LeinsterDub · 09-04-2016 12:27am

lxflyer wrote: »

Sorry you confused me.

Most people in C & T use "DB" to mean Dublin Bus!!

Sorry. Should of clarified. Too use to the infrastructure forum.

cdebru · 09-04-2016 11:29am

monument wrote: »

Because long term plans are needed as well as short term ones.

Yep nothing wrong with that but this includes what should be short term measures like extending leap card and simplifying fare structures and just generic bull like increasing capacity with no specifics as to where, how or when.
At a minimum stuff should be given a timeframe this by 2019, that by 2025 instead they can literally do nothing for the next 10 years and say ah but we have a plan we are following and it has another 9 years to run.
It's all well and good to have a plan, and have it approved but what we need is a timeframe and a commitment by Government, or preferably cross party commitment to fund and implement it and a timeframe for each element.

monument · 10-04-2016 12:20am

Carawaystick wrote: »

Read through the Doc,

My main points
Its has a very "All roads lead to Rome" focus, with little mention of orbital traffic

I'm don't think they have it right but 'orbital' is mentioned 30 times, so it's a bit unfair to claim there's little mention of orbital.

Carawaystick wrote: »

Little mention on routes like Naas/Maynooth
Drogheda/Navan
Dunshaughlin/Rathoath/Ashbourne/Swords

The rail routes or road routes or bus or what do you mean?

Carawaystick wrote: »

The section on Busses has no mention of a later or earlier times of services.

I thought I remembered that in an earlier draft or maybe the previous-never-approved plan.

Carawaystick wrote: »

The map of Orbital bus services has no links to Dublin airport, so Letterkenny will have a no change servcie but Raheney, or Finglas won't

Agreed on that -- and the orbitals seem a bit strange in way -- the orbital are such a big ask / shift, I think they need their own constipation.

Some of the routes look very questionable -- ie running via back roads in the Phoenix Park and, by the look of the inner routes, likely minor residential streets where cross-city buses do not belong.

Carawaystick wrote: »

The section on cycling has a primary cycle route out to Clarehall, but fails to connect to Malahide. It does propose a dedicated cycling route up howth head from the harbour though :rolleyes:
There is also no proposal to build dedicated cycling infrastructure alongside the motorwaying of the N7 from Naas to Newlands cross.
There is no cycle route planned to go North/South from Parkgate street west to Lucan

To Malahide seems strange alright -- I'm gussing they want the funding and focus to be on the East Coast Trail.

To Naas: It does not directly follow the N7 and isn't as direct as it could be but from Saggart there's a link to Kill and onwards to Naas (D5, K14, and K4). See page 7 of this:

https://fe49d9ec8511d2dc0553-f8f415f79bf5d37d632aa2f721fb6d7c.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Proposed_Network_Rural11.pdf

Parkgate Street west to Lucan is East/West and primary route 6 follows Parkgate Street to Lucan. See PDF page 9 here:

https://fe49d9ec8511d2dc0553-f8f415f79bf5d37d632aa2f721fb6d7c.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Proposed_Network_Dublin11.pdf

There's a few bits I'm unsure about with the GDA cycle network, but it's a massive bit of work. See here: https://www.nationaltransport.ie/publications/transport-planning/gda-cycle-network-plan/

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'm not sure why there are only 2 points for education explicitly mentioned

I'd have thought increasing capacity on the Motorway network,
Behaviour of motorists towards cyclists & cycling infrastructure might give better bang for the buck.

It also includes:

"Cooperate with other agencies in the enforcement of laws in relation to parking on cycle lanes and cycle tracks" AND "Cooperate with other agencies in the enforcement of laws in relation to parking on footpaths;" ...and maybe more?

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'm unsure of what figure 9.1 is supposed to represent. is it suggesting Arklow will have 10-15k extra population from 2011? And there will be less than 20 extra people in Laytown/Bettystown?

Figure 9.11 gives very optomistic public transport coverage for the Wicklow mountains, compared to now...
But dissappointing journey times from Swords and the Airport along with the times for the Northern line.

On population: There's a lot of supporting reports related to the plan but I'm not searching them all... a guess: census or what's zone or allowed in the development plans?

Re coverage: I'm gussing because it looks at a mix of buses and trains and the buses along the northern line on that section suffer from a confined road network / congestion? ...I think random bits of the report are a bit optimistic (often when it comes to buses).

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Nope I prefer Science fiction to out and out fiction. Being serious I have just read it. Don't believe most of it. Sure the DB expansion has hit the rocks too and that's the simplest of project

You don't have to believe any of it -- but the NTA has the power and funding to do a lot of it, they will be able to make transport authorities and councils to do or follow a lot, and other bodies such as An Bord Pleanala will take it serious.

cdebru wrote: »

Yep nothing wrong with that but this includes what should be short term measures like extending leap card and simplifying fare structures and just generic bull like increasing capacity with no specifics as to where, how or when.
At a minimum stuff should be given a timeframe this by 2019, that by 2025 instead they can literally do nothing for the next 10 years and say ah but we have a plan we are following and it has another 9 years to run.
It's all well and good to have a plan, and have it approved but what we need is a timeframe and a commitment by Government, or preferably cross party commitment to fund and implement it and a timeframe for each element.

Short-term and long-term plans often overlap and in this case this plan is what give the NTA a lot of legal authority to do what it wants to do (important when you're looking to force state companies to change fares etc).

As for "generic bull" -- you're bound to get some aspirations etc but most of what I've read in it is supported directly or in supporting documents.

Re timeframe: From the main on PDF page 88 onwards, there's this:

5.12 Delivery and Phasing

Section 13 of the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008 requires the preparation of an Integrated Implementation Plan within nine months of the adoption of a transport strategy. That Integrated Implementation Plan is required to set out the investment priorities and proposals for the subsequent six years. Successive Integrated Implementation Plans will deal with the remaining years of the Strategy.

While the Integrated Implementation Plan will establish short-term priorities, aligned with available funding, it is appropriate to set out a sequencing of the major elements of the Strategy to guide the development of those Integrated Implementation Plans.

...there's more -- read the report, I'm just not copying it here because it's long.

LeinsterDub · 10-04-2016 1:06am

monument wrote: »

You don't have to believe any of it -- but the NTA has the power and funding to do a lot of it, they will be able to make transport authorities and councils to do or follow a lot, and other bodies such as An Bord Pleanala will take it serious.

DBikes one of the (arguably) most accepted, publicly praised and low cost infrastructure projects in the history of the state has been left to languish under the NTA

schemingbohemia · 11-04-2016 11:59am

LeinsterDub wrote: »

DBikes one of the (arguably) most accepted, publicly praised and low cost infrastructure projects in the history of the state has been left to languish under the NTA

Yeah the expansion from 500 to 1,500 bikes had nothing to do with the NTA :rolleyes:

How much more expansion do you want and where should it go next?

NTA rely on funding from Government to implement their Dublin Bikes scheme, they don't just magic it up. They have a plan for expansion but haven't been given the money.

Dublin Bikes wasn't initially universally accepted, even those who were for it were against the JC Decaux link and subsequently the Coke Zero sponsorship, the NTA can't win!

LeinsterDub · 11-04-2016 1:02pm

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Yeah the expansion from 500 to 1,500 bikes had nothing to do with the NTA :rolleyes:

How much more expansion do you want and where should it go next?

NTA rely on funding from Government to implement their Dublin Bikes scheme, they don't just magic it up. They have a plan for expansion but haven't been given the money.

Dublin Bikes wasn't initially universally accepted, even those who were for it were against the JC Decaux link and subsequently the Coke Zero sponsorship, the NTA can't win!

I never said the NTA didn't go anything . I said 1 phase achieved out of 17 is a very poor track record and to get this back on thread . Given how relatively cheap , quick , non disruptive and almost universally accepted DB is I don't see them being able to deliver on this long term plan except for maybe some piece meal things

NTA - GDA transport strategy approved

Comments