Joan Burton gets written reply from Cullen wrt Spencer Dock

philip · 31-03-2006, 12:33

Quote:

The Minister for Transport has acknowledged in a written Parliamentary reply that the new railway station at Spencer Dock to be constructed by Irish Rail will in fact be located on the north side of Sheriff street adjacent to the east side of the Royal Canal.

Deputy Joan Burton said she has been quite shocked by this admission by the Minister as this puts the new Spencer Dock station a considerable distance away from Connolly station and the proposed extension to LUAS in the Docklands. The Minister is arguing that the distance from the new station to the LUAS stop is approximately 350 metres, but that is almost a quarter of a mile, while the station will be some 800 metres from the new pedestrian footbridge across the Liffey. That is a walk of half a mile.
Commuters had understood that the new Spencer Dock station would be very close to the Quays and LUAS to facilitate people walking across to the south side to work, or wishing to get the LUAS back to the city centre.
The Minister has also confirmed that the proposed Clonsilla to Dunboyne line is not expected to be reopened until 2009 and that at that point all services from Dunboyne will go to Spencer Docl
Deputy Burton said there is a problem that most of the commuters using the line want to go to the south side of the city to the central business district. What they’re being offered in Spencer Dock is very definitely half a loaf and an extremely limited access to the city centre.
Deputy Burton said “the Minister and Government have taken years to realise the Spencer Dock proposals. I support the building of Spencer Dock. We had been given to understand that Spencer Dock would be based on the old CIE Headquarters near the river Liffey which would leave people in a much more central location I want the Minister to tell us what has happened to the original Spencer Dock site. Why can Iarnrod Eireann and Government not let the trains go right to the edge of the Liffey and provide proper integration of Spencer Dock the LUAS and the Liffey Quays and footbridge.”
If the Minister thinks that half mile, quarter mile and mile long walks for commuters are nothing, let him get out of his car and actually walk the distance himself and then decide whether or not what he is proposing to do is acceptable.

joanburton.ie

Mark · 31-03-2006, 14:11

Without hampering the construction of the instrumental underground Spencer Dock station and interconnector which will provide the real future infrastructure I can't see the 'Docklands' station being located anywhere else. Route 90 it'll have to be, throw in a frequent bus service and combined bus and rail tickets and there shouldn't be too many problems.

I feel all of this could have been avoided though if IE had fast tracked the Maynooth electrification and restructured the network to Greystones - Maynooth and Northern Line - Connolly.

If IE had actually come out with the truth and reasons for its location from Day 1 all of this could have been avoided.

philip · 31-03-2006, 14:26

I can't really agree that it's as simple as that Mark. There's more to this than meets the eye. They could have run it along Spencer Dock to the river but Treasury Holdings more than likely wouldn't agree to that. I reckon CIE Property and Treasury Holdings are thick as thieves in all this. I reckon they could have come up with a much better temporary station than this rubbish really.

Mark Gleeson · 31-03-2006, 14:28

Everyone is jumping up and down complaining but the facts are simple, there was a time when there was no planned station. Platform 11 did make a presentation at the Spencer Dock forum in late 2003 promoting the fact a station in addition to the interconnector station was required as the delivery timeline on the interconnector was and still is uncertain

The station site chosen is about the best site possible given all considerations and is in fact closer to O'Connell Street than the previous site. The platforms where never south of Sherrif Street. Looking at the site and the layout and dimensions it would have required Mayor Street extension to be a bridge

The route 400 (yes its the super 90 route) proposed in the recent DB will serve the area. DB have plans to extend the 90 to the docklands that was in the previous route review

Mark · 31-03-2006, 14:43

Spare a thought for the scenario where IE build a station on the site of the Spencer Dock station and use it for all Maynooth line services etc. Then the line is allowed expand and meet demand. It is also connected to the Luas red line extension and suddenly the government says 'hang on a second, we don't need the interconnector..'

There are issues with platform length I believe which dont make it feasable for the surface station to be located south of Sheriff Street.

With additional infrastructure such as the Macken Street Bridge and Luas Red and Green line extensions and not forgetting the massive developments both sides of the Liffey the landscape and potential connections down near the new 'Docklands' station will be very different in 2009.

My only real beef is the way they announced and branded it.

Remember the metro north project will have gone out to tender by July 2007, just before the elections in September 2007. There is still the possibility of the interconnector being delayed or worse still scrapped if anything drastic happens politically.

The interconnector is still the goal and we cant let anything happen that might endanger it. My guess is that it's a cert but wont be completed by 2015. However in my experience of political meddling anything is possible. Union issues might also come into play

philip · 31-03-2006, 15:00

I guess we'll agree to differ on this one. I keep seeing those pics of a vast empty site in public ownership and suddenly we can't put a station here or here or here because there are apartments in the way. I'm sure if they'd really wanted one it could have been put in a trench under Sheriff and Mayor Streets and put the line in at sub-basement level. That's what many of us here thought was going to happen a few months back. I hear what you're saying about the station being too good though-in this silly country that could indeed be a bad thing vis a vis the interconnector.

Navan Junction · 31-03-2006, 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by philip

there are apartments in the way. I'm sure if they'd really wanted one it could have been put in a trench under Sheriff and Mayor Streets and put the line in at sub-basement level.

Why not just go back to Broadstone??

There is no longer any benefit to Spencer Dock that I can see..

philip · 01-04-2006, 08:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

Everyone is jumping up and down complaining but the facts are simple, there was a time when there was no planned station.

Ad this is the crux of what's wrong with CIE. Huge site, city centre capacity has been dwindling for years and they knew it, yet flogged a site which had 100% flexibility to locate a station anywhere on that site to TH for apartments. That's NOT what a good public transport operator does, that's what CIE Property does.

The Station should have been further south, right down to the river to allow people a fast walk across the new Liffey bridges to the southside. Being close to O'Connell St. should never have been the goal as it's not the primary destination.

Derek Wheeler · 01-04-2006, 11:07

Sick and stressed out as I am, I agree with Philip on this one. On the Spencer Dock site, property development came first, rail infrastructure came second.

I think some of you are missing Philips point. It was a vast brownfield site. Almost anything was possible in terms of rail against a backdrop of dwindling capacity in the city centre.

As things stand amid the current development, the chosen site is all that can be done. But we must take stock of the fact that CIE collaborated on the development of this site and sold it off without any apparent benefit to rail transport in the city.

With a remodelling of Sheriff St bridge a new large terminus(complete with interconnector) underneath office and apartment buildings could have been a reality. In my opinion Heuston could have been closed and by using the 2 alignments, PPT and the interconnector, frequent and non-conflicting movements could have been achieved. The cities rail hub could have been located in the one area and Hueston could have been sold off to balance any financial loss in the property area.

IMHO, this is real vision that is beyond those in charge.

A similar project was built in Slovakia.

I get the feeling that it will comeback to haunt us in the years ahead.

Mark · 01-04-2006, 11:48

Dont think for one minute that I dont realise what could have been at Spencer Dock. The enormous potential of that site was there for us all to see. Developing it as a rail terminus could still have allowed property development to continue overhead. Back then the foresight, the money and the courage wasnt there. Sadly Thomas and Derek arrived on the scene just after CIE sold it's soul to the devil.

31-03-2006, 14:28	#4
Mark Gleeson Technical Officer Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Coach C, Seat 33 Posts: 12,669	Everyone is jumping up and down complaining but the facts are simple, there was a time when there was no planned station. Platform 11 did make a presentation at the Spencer Dock forum in late 2003 promoting the fact a station in addition to the interconnector station was required as the delivery timeline on the interconnector was and still is uncertain The station site chosen is about the best site possible given all considerations and is in fact closer to O'Connell Street than the previous site. The platforms where never south of Sherrif Street. Looking at the site and the layout and dimensions it would have required Mayor Street extension to be a bridge The route 400 (yes its the super 90 route) proposed in the recent DB will serve the area. DB have plans to extend the 90 to the docklands that was in the previous route review Last edited by Mark Gleeson : 31-03-2006 at 14:30.

31-03-2006, 14:43	#5
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Northern line Posts: 1,311	Spare a thought for the scenario where IE build a station on the site of the Spencer Dock station and use it for all Maynooth line services etc. Then the line is allowed expand and meet demand. It is also connected to the Luas red line extension and suddenly the government says 'hang on a second, we don't need the interconnector..' There are issues with platform length I believe which dont make it feasable for the surface station to be located south of Sheriff Street. With additional infrastructure such as the Macken Street Bridge and Luas Red and Green line extensions and not forgetting the massive developments both sides of the Liffey the landscape and potential connections down near the new 'Docklands' station will be very different in 2009. My only real beef is the way they announced and branded it. Remember the metro north project will have gone out to tender by July 2007, just before the elections in September 2007. There is still the possibility of the interconnector being delayed or worse still scrapped if anything drastic happens politically. The interconnector is still the goal and we cant let anything happen that might endanger it. My guess is that it's a cert but wont be completed by 2015. However in my experience of political meddling anything is possible. Union issues might also come into play Last edited by Mark : 31-03-2006 at 14:59.

01-04-2006, 11:48	#10
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Northern line Posts: 1,311	Dont think for one minute that I dont realise what could have been at Spencer Dock. The enormous potential of that site was there for us all to see. Developing it as a rail terminus could still have allowed property development to continue overhead. Back then the foresight, the money and the courage wasnt there. Sadly Thomas and Derek arrived on the scene just after CIE sold it's soul to the devil. Last edited by Mark : 01-04-2006 at 11:57.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

31-03-2006, 14:11	#2
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Northern line Posts: 1,311	Without hampering the construction of the instrumental underground Spencer Dock station and interconnector which will provide the real future infrastructure I can't see the 'Docklands' station being located anywhere else. Route 90 it'll have to be, throw in a frequent bus service and combined bus and rail tickets and there shouldn't be too many problems. I feel all of this could have been avoided though if IE had fast tracked the Maynooth electrification and restructured the network to Greystones - Maynooth and Northern Line - Connolly. If IE had actually come out with the truth and reasons for its location from Day 1 all of this could have been avoided.

31-03-2006, 14:26	#3
philip Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 632	I can't really agree that it's as simple as that Mark. There's more to this than meets the eye. They could have run it along Spencer Dock to the river but Treasury Holdings more than likely wouldn't agree to that. I reckon CIE Property and Treasury Holdings are thick as thieves in all this. I reckon they could have come up with a much better temporary station than this rubbish really.

31-03-2006, 15:00	#6
philip Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 632	I guess we'll agree to differ on this one. I keep seeing those pics of a vast empty site in public ownership and suddenly we can't put a station here or here or here because there are apartments in the way. I'm sure if they'd really wanted one it could have been put in a trench under Sheriff and Mayor Streets and put the line in at sub-basement level. That's what many of us here thought was going to happen a few months back. I hear what you're saying about the station being too good though-in this silly country that could indeed be a bad thing vis a vis the interconnector.

01-04-2006, 11:07	#9
Derek Wheeler Registered user Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Kildare Posts: 1,555	Sick and stressed out as I am, I agree with Philip on this one. On the Spencer Dock site, property development came first, rail infrastructure came second. I think some of you are missing Philips point. It was a vast brownfield site. Almost anything was possible in terms of rail against a backdrop of dwindling capacity in the city centre. As things stand amid the current development, the chosen site is all that can be done. But we must take stock of the fact that CIE collaborated on the development of this site and sold it off without any apparent benefit to rail transport in the city. With a remodelling of Sheriff St bridge a new large terminus(complete with interconnector) underneath office and apartment buildings could have been a reality. In my opinion Heuston could have been closed and by using the 2 alignments, PPT and the interconnector, frequent and non-conflicting movements could have been achieved. The cities rail hub could have been located in the one area and Hueston could have been sold off to balance any financial loss in the property area. IMHO, this is real vision that is beyond those in charge. A similar project was built in Slovakia. I get the feeling that it will comeback to haunt us in the years ahead.