The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby ctesiphon » Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:41 pm

I'm getting a bit confused by both sides here, but one thing I wanted to say, to back up alonso's argument:

Seamus O'G wrote:But, since they are all incredibly quiet areas at the weekeend, and outside the hours when people are actually travelling to and from work, it would unfortunately be a mistake to build the city's highest capacity line through St. Stephen's Green in an effort to serve them and to force the largest group of passengers to change to get to where they wish to go, which is the city centre.


What do you mean by 'the largest group of passengers'? The retail cohort?

The real thing knackering this city is the car based journey to work (and school- not particularly relevant here), and I'd argue that SSG is the best location for the interchange if this is the problem that's going to be tackled. If the decision is taken to use an interchange to facilitate shoppers, then the CG argument gains currency, but that approach would be a mistake in my book.
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby SeamusOG » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:14 pm

ctesiphon wrote:What do you mean by 'the largest group of passengers'? The retail cohort?

The real thing knackering this city is the car based journey to work (and school- not particularly relevant here), and I'd argue that SSG is the best location for the interchange if this is the problem that's going to be tackled. If the decision is taken to use an interchange to facilitate shoppers, then the CG argument gains currency, but that approach would be a mistake in my book.


I intend to reply to Alonso's post when I get a chance - it requires more thought than the answer to your question above.

It is necessary to take all train passengers into account - including commuters, shoppers, partygoers, whoever (in other words, everybody who buys a ticket). The rail network does not just exist for commuting, but for commuting and other travel, much of which takes place at times outside the "commuting" hours.

As mentioned above, the O'Reilly report indicated that the busiest station on the originally proposed metro would have been the Trinity/College Green stop. In other words, more passengers would have wished to use that (city) station than any other. This is the largest group. The groups of people who would have wished to use the other stations were all smaller. This includes the St. Stephen's Green group.

For example, on the current network, the largest group of passengers is made up of those passengers who wish to use Tara Street, followed (I think) by the group of passengers who wish to use Pearse Station, etc. It doesn't matter why the people who use Tara Street have decided that it's the best one - whether they are commuters, shoppers, theatregoers, drug dealers, whatever - they are all (hopefully:D) paying for their ticket and it is simply the best station for them.
SeamusOG
Member
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:59 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby ctesiphon » Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:50 pm

Seamus O'G wrote:I intend to reply to Alonso's post when I get a chance - it requires more thought than the answer to your question above.


Ouch! But not so fast, Seamus. I suspect 'more thought' may be required here too. ;)

I say this mainly because I would dispute the transferability of the O'Reilly figures. That analysis was for a very different arrangement from that currently under examination. Did it include passengers from all parts of the city and the wider GDA? Did it examine the full pattern of movement? Did it analyse the network effect? Did it consider the interaction of all modes? Did it include the land use implications of the siting of an interchange?

As I understand it, it was essentially a narrowly focused Metro corridor study. We're talking about an interchange- a very different beast.

1.1 Terms of Reference for Consultants Study

1. Review and hold discussions with Dublin Metro Group, Dublin Chamber of Commerce and Platform 11, all of whom have made submissions to the Joint Committee.

2. Obtain and report on the cost benefit analysis prepared by the RPA for St. Stephens Green/Airport [Route Central 3(b)] giving details on:
a. costs,
b. benefits,
c. assumptions

3. Examine the cost competitiveness of the proposed RPA construction cost estimates for the Metro to Dublin Airport by comparison with international Metro project costs.

4. Consider the case made for the extension of the Metro from Dublin Airport to Swords.

5. Consider the possibility of a bus alternative to the Metro.

6. Consider the possibility of an Iarnrod Éireann alternative to the Metro.

7. Make an assessment of a “do nothing” option, including implications of disbenefits.

8. Provide a comparison between and report on the implications of State funding and a PPP approach.

9. Assess the ongoing financial implications of a PPP approach for the State once the Metro is operational e.g. availability / usage payments.

10. Present the arguments for and against the Metro by international comparison to a comparable size city such as Newcastle or other city, excluding Copenhagen.

11. Give views on how the Metro project should be structured and managed so as to ensure the most effective implementation of the project.

12. Give views on the measures needed in the proposed Infrastructure Bill in order to ensure timely delivery of the project.


Having considered all of the above -

1. Form a reasoned judgement on the viability of the Metro project

2. Prepare a draft report for consideration by the Committee

3. Prepare a final report which reflects the Committee’s views.


http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/committees29thdail/jct/metro-report/Report.doc

It goes without saying that all passengers should be taken into account. However, to state that 'much [travel] takes place at times outside the "commuting" hours' gives a misleading impression that the lion's share of travel is not commuter. If calculated as time, then your answer is right (morning peak + evening peak = 5[?] hours), but if calculated as numbers carried, then it's not; not to mention the latent demand for public transport which isn't being met due to capacity issues at peak time.

There are myriad other factors that should be included here, such as passenger numbers in car in the peak hours vs passenger numbers in car for retail trips, i.e. the actual impact on car commuting. In addition, the likely modal shift in retail vs the likely modal shift in commuting needs to be acknowledged- there is greater potential in the latter case; etc etc.

In essence, I accept your point re servicing retail demand, but as I said before, that's not the primary issue, nor should it be.
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:56 pm

There are as you say a number of key segments of usage to be considered and as you say replacement of car usage has to be the objective.

There are to my mind four key user segments to be considered

1. Commuter of which there are two waves, office and service the former being concentrated in narrow slots and the latter dispersed

2. Retail

3. Leisure

4. Service consumers

Considering mode use is where the observations of DC3 come into it; many people simply don't use public transport and have very little interaction with the city centre and many of those that do tend to do so in terms of leisure uses which generally tend to be concentrated in the burbs where car use still dominates or temple bar where taxi use or tourist use dominates.

The key uses are I think Commuter as this body of people essentially provide the design parameters for maximum loadings and retail/service consumers who if the right connectivity is provided will use the city centre and public transport or if not use similar facilities on the periphery.

The main office sub-districts are

1. Harcourt / Adelaide Rd
2. Dawson St / Baggot Street / Stephens Green
3. IFSC
4. South Docklands
5. Civic Offices / 4 Courts / Smithfield
6. Burlington Road / Wilton Place
7. Spencer Dock / North Wall

If the interconnector route is assessed against these locations you get the following walk times

1. 3-10 mins
2. 0 -10 mins
3. Interchange at Pearse Station existing rail link
4. 5 - 12 minutes
5. 3 - 10 minutes
6. 10 -15 minutes
7 Interchange with Luas BX

To consider the locations that an inner metro alignment would offer the distances would be

1. College Green 5 - 7 minutes from both High St and St Green
2. Connolly a further 5 - 7 minutes interchanging at Pearse

I can appreciate it is easy to talk about walking times of 10 - 15 minutes when one is fit and a parking space beside your office costs €6 an hour with a futher €10 congestion charge; but I have no doubt that if direct trains ran from places like Adamstown and if significant park and ride sites fed the Kildare and Nothern lines in people would go for conveneince and employers if given the choice would not give their staff free parking.

When you compare the route of the interconnector to the metro you have to wonder why the metero was ever prioritised

1. Stephens Green - good location
2. O Connell St - good location
3. Mater - medium density inner suburb
4. Glasnevan or Drumcoundra - low - medium density greying suburb
5. DCU - sprawling suburban campus
6. Ballymun - low - medium density new town
7. Santry - sprawling suburb
8. Airport - good location
9. Swords - good location

The bit in the middle doesn't stack up for significant underground sections; this is luas or qbc territory; I think we need a repeat of the speach CJ gave in 1980 in his blue Charvet shirt
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby alonso » Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:16 pm

Yeh some fair points there PVC but you are, in my opinion, mistakenly assessing the Metro Corridor as it is today rather than the corridor in the future. Ballymun will not be low density in a decade and without intimate knowledge I'd profer that Santry has potential to intensify. DCU certainly has. In any case given the admitted need for Metro at various locations along the route, how does one tighten the belt, quite literally, in the middle? The solution is to identify sites along the route in existing suburbs and build on them. Had your argument applied no suburban rail would ever have been built.

Also "leisure uses which generally tend to be concentrated in the burbs where car use still dominates or temple bar where taxi use or tourist use dominates"

hmm dunno about that. Theatres, Cinemas and all the good pubs that good citizens drink in are nowhere near Temple Bar
alonso
Senior Member
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:33 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby missarchi » Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:04 am

PVC King wrote:4. Glasnevan or Drumcoundra - low - medium density greying suburb

I have a GAA frog in my mouth;)
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby notjim » Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:30 am

PVC King wrote:3. Mater - medium density inner suburb


You appear to have forgotten about the hospital and, um, my house.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby SeamusOG » Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:51 am

alonso wrote:did you not state that it would not be busiest? That's how i read your previous post anyway

My earlier post stated that if the metro line, as originally planned, were to be built, the figures indicated that the stop/station at St. Stephen's Green would not have been as busy as the stop/station at Trinity/College Green. This was for a line along a North-South axis which was proposed to be built through both locations.

The interconnector, which runs approximately along a West-East axis, clearly cannot be built through both St. Stephen's Green and College Green (or a location in its vicinity - such as was originally proposed in the 1970s).

The mistake which appears to be being made is to built the higher capacity West-East interconnector line through the area – of the two - to which there seems to be less demand to travel. And, probably, to spend a lot more money for the privilege.

alonso wrote:those that want to go to work in the South East city office core might differ. Who that works on Leeson st, Fitzwilliam or Harcourt st would prefer College green?

I’ve no doubt that many who work in those locations would differ, and would prefer a station at St. Stephen’s Green rather than College Green. Of course they would. My question is, what is the overall situation which would best suit the passengers on the highest capacity line ever to be built in Dublin, and on the eventual network generally?

alonso wrote:Why? OCSt will have a Metro stop anyway and is served by heavy rail at Tara, and Luas lines.

Well, St. Stephen’s Green will be served by the metro, and is served by a LUAS line – perhaps also others in the future. Precisely why it is so important that the interconnector be built through the location as well, given that people will be able to change as a network is developed, is something that hasn’t been clear from the figures (or other documentation) yet produced.

alonso wrote:And your use of the term "clearly be capable" is dubious, expecially considering this thread is about the sheer scale of the surface disruption necessary. How would you build a similarly scaled interchange on College Green?

Maybe it is dubious. I obviously haven’t been able to do any site investigations. However, the proposed interchange in the rapid rail plan for Dublin produced in the 1970s was located in the vicinity of College Green/Dame Street. I hardly think that a panel of experts would have suggested an underground interchange where it simply wasn’t possible to build one, and I am sure that they would have done some research to that effect.

(Worth noting also, that it was proposed to have an interchange – in that area of the city - between two heavy rail lines, not one heavy rail line and what is effectively an underground tram).

As this is a thread about the proposed impact on St. Stephen’s Green of the metro works, it is vital to remember that the impact on the Green is due both to the plan to terminate the metro at the Green and to build the interconnector through there.

alonso wrote:tongue in cheek. But compared to the Green and the adjacent office core - (an area that I would suggest has the highest density of persons during office hours on the island) it's shag all.

Alonso, that really is not correct. At times of the day when there is no demand to get to or from “the adjacent office core”, areas like College Green, Dame Street, O’Connell Street, etc, see loads of people getting on and off buses. Why don’t you pop down on Saturday or Sunday afternoon, or any weekday between half-nine and around five, and see how many people are trying to get to or from the “adjacent office core.”

alonso wrote:Stephen;s Green is one of those retail areas. Serve it directly.
Hang on a sec, Alonso, you simply cannot pretend that St. Stephen’s Green itself is a serious retail area. (And, nor, obviously, are the adjacent Georgian streets). It has its shopping centre and a couple of other shops dotted around the North side of the Green. What else?

I think you may perhaps be mixing it up with the very important retail area in Grafton Street and its environs which, overall, would surely be as well served by a station at College Green as it would be by a station at St. Stephen’s Green

alonso wrote:On the contrary, College Green is one of the furthest locations away from the large business area of Dublin. I don't honestly get your characterisation of SSG as not being busy. The top of Grafton street is thronged all day and at 9am and 5:30 the area to the south and south west is full of commuters. That sentence makes me think we live in different cities. Try walk up Merrion row at lunch time when these workers get out. You can't. Not without using half the roadway.

I have never said that St. Stephen’s Green is not busy, and I know that Merrion Row is indeed packed at lunchtime. But how many people are trying to get to or from there at that time. Practically nobody.

alonso wrote:Exactly. Exactly Exactly. But SSG is the centre of this retail and office core. College Green is a road artery that severs the city. If, and it's a gigantic if, they decide to shut the entire College Green area for a decade and dig it up and then repave it for pedestrians, i wouldn't be opposed. BUt SSG is still a better location in my opinion because people work there and in the adjacent urban quarter! College Green is a long long way from any major concentration of offices - Hawkins and Apollo House, George's Quay(both served directly by DART already) and Central bank is about it, compared to a massive district of 5/6 storey high density Georgian offices plus mews, with major blocks interspersed in between (BoI, Greencore, Harcourt St, Eircom, Government Bldgs, SSG South, Hatch Street etc) .

Now, Alonso, you can’t honestly say that St. Stephen’s Green is the centre of any retail core. It lies at the edge of a retail area, which could be well served by a more central station such as was proposed in the 1970s.

It also does not lie at the centre of any office core, which requires a station to be built at St. Stephen’s Green. It lies at the edge of an important office area which includes much of Georgian Dublin. Many of us have been able to view the way things are done in other cities, and it is simply not credible that we are expected to view St. Stephen’s Green as the local station for, for example, people working on Adelaide Road or Fitzwilliam Place. These locations must be catered for by extensions of the network. (Building the interconnector through St. Stephen’s Green in order for it to be seen as a location which “serves” these areas is, in my view, a total cop-out). And the Government offices on Kildare Street, Molesworth Street, Nassau Street, etc., well would their staff be seriously discommoded by having to walk to or from Pearse Station or a station in or around College Green?

alonso wrote:what???? Now you;ve totally lost me. Grafton St, S William St, Camden St - Georges st QUIET at the weekends? Jaysus I queued for an hour for a shaggin taxi at the SSG rank a few months ago and as for shoppers, are you serious?.

In fairness, Alonso, those were not the streets which were mentioned in my original post. I mentioned Baggot Street, Leeson Street, Adelaide Road and Hatch Street, the latter two of which are extremely quiet locations at the weekend. There’s also nothing happening on Upper Leeson Street or Lower Baggot Street at that time. Upper Baggot Street is, I hope, not within what is considered to be the catchment area for the interconnector, while most of the the people who are present on Lower Leeson Street at weekends are unlikely to be looking for public transport at any time when it operates.

Grafton Street, South William Street and George’s Street are all busy at weekends. Would it be difficult to get to a station at College Green (or its environs) from any of these locations? Would it be significantly easier to get to a station at St. Stephen’s Green?

Now, I grant you, Camden Street would require more of a walk.

alonso wrote:Where is this city you refer to? What largest group are you referring to? Commuters are by far and away the largest group and far and away the group with the sharpest peak demand. Are you talking about the Shoppers? They want to go to the exact spot this station is located at. The EXACT spot! It IS the city centre. It's "town" Stephen's Green, Grafton Street, Govt Buildings, the Office Core of the city with the highest concetration of workers in Ireland, the domestic nightlife core and a major urban space all to be served at one interchange.

I hope I have answered the basic meaning of “the largest group” in my reply to ctesiphon’s question above, though I will return to that shortly, when work allows (And I hope I didn’t offend him – I was only trying to clarify what I meant by the phrase).

I hope it is clear that I am not talking about the shoppers. I’m talking about the commuters, the shoppers and any others who will use the highest capacity line ever to be built in Ireland. There was an original plan to build this line through the environs of College Green. When Minister Mary O’Rourke decided that the LUAS Green line would not, as planned, be built across the city, the cross-city (East-West) heavy rail plans changed (apparently) to accommodate this. As far as I am aware, we have yet to see any figures which show that this was the correct decision.
SeamusOG
Member
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:59 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:15 am

notjim wrote:You appear to have forgotten about the hospital and, um, my house.


Glad to see you moving up in the World!

In comparison the Mater probably employs the same number of people as Stephens Green Shopping Centre and the HBoS offices next door; it would attract a similar number of patients / visitors as the shopping centre but owing to the number of staff that work unsociable hours I would estimate that a large number of them live within walking distance and would not be tied to a single transit route.

hmm dunno about that. Theatres, Cinemas and all the good pubs that good citizens drink in are nowhere near Temple Bar


That is probably correct in terms of indigenous Dublin patterns but I think it is fair to say that if you remove drinking / dining from Temple Bar / College Green that there is no predominate use and that the land usae intensity in pedestrian terms drops off significantly.

I have a GAA frog in my mouth


You can reasonably give the most successful sporting organisation in the land a €20m grant towards their stadium in the context of double digit GDP growth; you can't build a €4-6bn metro line to serve say 19 GAA weekends, 4 rugby matches and 3-4 Soccer matches the latter 2 which were always served by rail whilst the majority opted for the walk from the city centre and will move back to an almost completed stadium.

Yeh some fair points there PVC but you are, in my opinion, mistakenly assessing the Metro Corridor as it is today rather than the corridor in the future. Ballymun will not be low density in a decade and without intimate knowledge I'd profer that Santry has potential to intensify. DCU certainly has. In any case given the admitted need for Metro at various locations along the route, how does one tighten the belt, quite literally, in the middle? The solution is to identify sites along the route in existing suburbs and build on them. Had your argument applied no suburban rail would ever have been built.


Most rail was never suburban rail to begin with but intercity rail where mostly Victorian developers persuaded rail companies to open additional stations to facilitate the exodus of the midddle classes from slum city centres to model towns which were created. The costs in providing rail to these new suburbs were marginal as the railway companies were buying farmland and only needed to build stations.

The Metro is a multi-Billion euro project which will require over 50% of its Dublin City Council area route underground; the end result being a few stations which are predominently low/ medium density and will have significant nimby brigades who if they have their metro will be hell bent on preventing further development.

In the context of falling GDP and renewed growth from 2010 - 2020 being in a range of 2.50 - 5.00% p.a. the idea of spending €4bn -€6bn on intensifying land use at Santry, Ballymun, DCU is a nonsense.

€1-1.5bn would connect Swords and the Airport to the existing rail network and four track the northern line from Spencer Dock / Connolly to the point where the airport line would depart. This would also release a lot of development land between the existing rail line and the airport.

We are in a much more disciplined fiscal environment where viability is no concept it is the kernal of all investments. Has one study ever been produced that the Metro breaks even on an operational basis and this is excluding the 8% annual funding cost where debt would mature 20 to 30 years down the line.
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby notjim » Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:36 am

But alonso the amenity value added making a general hospital more accessible from the city and the transport network is not comparable to putting to expediting access to the SGC. Having a major hospital on the metro corridor will make this city a better place to live.

It is just a pity not to take the opportunity to turn this area into a medical quarter by moving beaumont to the mountjoy site, of far greater benefit than the usual promised miture of cafes, mens perfume shops and high end apartments. Colocating hospitals is a huge plus for patients outcomes and research and beaumont needs to be demolished and rebuild and is the RCSI teaching hospital, the site will be linked to the current RCSI site in SG and any new site in Swords.

And of course it will save the legs of tourists coming to stand gawping outside my house.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby missarchi » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:41 am

on a side note where there ever shamrock poles on st Stephens green west?
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby Rory W » Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:34 am

Seamus - your arguments for the alignment of the interconnector via college green seem to be wholly based on the 1970s plan - I'd like to think that Dublin has changed since then.
Rory W
Old Master
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2000 12:00 am
Location: Drogheda & Blackrock

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby ctesiphon » Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:31 pm

Seamus O'G wrote:(And I hope I didn’t offend him – I was only trying to clarify what I meant by the phrase)


Not at all- I was playing hurt because I'm jealous of alonso getting all the attention. Always the bridesmaid... ;)

notjim wrote:And of course it will save the legs of tourists coming to stand gawping outside my house.


Some of us prefer to walk- it heightens the anticipation!
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:05 pm

Rory W wrote:Seamus - your arguments for the alignment of the interconnector via college green seem to be wholly based on the 1970s plan - I'd like to think that Dublin has changed since then.



I totally agree; virtually all the big office hubs in Dublin were built early 1980's or post 1995; long gone are the days of upper floor offices in a terrace of interconnecting Georgians. The real traffic generators are the large office complexes such as Harcourt Centre, IFSC 1, etc with pre 1999 development plan parking restrictions.

What surprises me most about this discussion is that people seem to think that the area between O'C St and the Airport is suddenly going to densify to support a €4bn rail. To make a mile stretch of underground and a stop viable you would expect c200,000 passengers a week or 10m a year.

Three stops at best on the proposed metro have that St Green, OC St and the airport which assumes that 50% of passengers using the airport will use metro a statistic not acheived by any European airport. Add another 20m passenger journeys for Swords, Ballymun and you get 50m journeys or 1 journey per week for the entire population of County Dublin which is optimistic.

50m passenger trips a year at €2 a ticket only generates €100m in gross income take off energy costs, ticket issuance, cleaners, maintenance and Health and safety etc and you would be lucky to net €20m of this figure and this assumes that you continue to fry users of other networks by continuing not to introduce integrated ticketing.

To service the debt on the capital costs at Government bond rates would cost in excess of €200m a year.

All so Notjim has a convenient commute to TCD;

€4bn invested elsewhere could provide a sustainable transit network for the entire East Coast region so that the growth of the city is not dependent on going from an unsuitable start of two storey density patterns to waiting for devlopers to errect 8-9 storey schemes with every nimby in existance placing banners titled developer don't put my castle in the dark. This can be done on commuter rail in a hub and spoke development pattern with a fraction of the difficulty and at a fraction of the cost.

Dublin is a great City but it isn't Tokyo
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby notjim » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:01 pm

I can promise to start having lunch at home if that helps the economics of this thing.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby alonso » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:41 pm

PVC we have to remember the Metro North Economic Corridor Plan as well. There will be a degree of intensifcation of the existing urban footprint but we have to look at the route as a whole, and the entire network itself as a whole.

Seamus I see your points and respect your views but we'll probably have to leave it here - we're going round in circles and God help us (and the readers) if we end up discussing an inner orbital rail line ;)

notjim that's the sort of moxy and self-sacrifice for your country we need to drag us out of the mire - fair play
alonso
Senior Member
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:33 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby SeamusOG » Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:50 am

ctesiphon wrote:Ouch! But not so fast, Seamus. I suspect 'more thought' may be required here too. ;)
I'm glad to see - from your subsequent post - that you were not offended. More thought is indeed required to take account of your statements in the post which I am now quoting, but I did mean to clarify (as soon as possible) what I originally meant.:)

ctesiphon wrote:I say this mainly because I would dispute the transferability of the O'Reilly figures.
A sensible approach. As you note below, the factors involved may be very different when the whole city (and surrounding area) is taken into account.

ctesiphon wrote:That analysis was for a very different arrangement from that currently under examination. Did it include passengers from all parts of the city and the wider GDA? Did it examine the full pattern of movement? Did it analyse the network effect? Did it consider the interaction of all modes? Did it include the land use implications of the siting of an interchange?

As I understand it, it was essentially a narrowly focused Metro corridor study. We're talking about an interchange- a very different beast.

I agree. In order for the originally planned major city interchange to be moved from the College Green/Dame Street area to St. Stephen's Green, one would imagine that a proper analysis would have taken place of all of the factors which you mention.

Yet I'm not aware of any such analysis having been carried out or, at any rate, being in the public domain.

Are you?


Or was it the case that, for the West-East high capacity line, which can and should be built across the city, the analysis in the DTO effectively amounted to:

"Hey, lads, c'mere, lookit, if we build it through St. Stephen's Green, we can also connect with the LUAS!!"

(In other words: hang the extra cost; hang the likely damage that this will cause to the Green by interchange construction; and hang the analysis of movement patterns, mode interactions or network effects.)

In the absence of any sign of the aforementioned analysis, I know which I'll believe.:mad:
SeamusOG
Member
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:59 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:39 pm

alonso wrote:PVC we have to remember the Metro North Economic Corridor Plan as well. There will be a degree of intensifcation of the existing urban footprint but we have to look at the route as a whole, and the entire network itself as a whole.


Alonso

I've no doubt you support rail travel to the exclusion of road transport you have a long track record on this site in that respect. I do not accept the Metro North Economic Plan as it lists a very optimistic view of both macro economics and how nimby's (local objectors) impact the planning system and delay the delivery of construction projects for years.

The Irish economy must be taken in the context of the figures below and not a report that is historic; even 2 months ago you could argue that construction and securitisation were the only problem, unfortunately the malaise has now spread right accross the economy; hard choices need to be made and Metro North is now even less viable than before; other methods of linking the Airport and Swords to the City Centre need to assessed.

Retail sales slump 6.2% in September
Friday, 14 November 2008 12:48
The latest figures from the Central Statistics Office confirm the slowing Irish economy. It says the volume of retail sales decreased by 6.2% in September compared with the same time last year, while there was a monthly decrease of 0.5%.

The CSO also says that provisional figures show the volume of retail sales slowed by 5.6% in the third quarter of the year. It says this was the largest annual decline in the volume of quarterly retail sales since the second quarter of 1983.

It is also the third quarter in a row showing an annual decline.

AdvertisementBreaking down the figures, they show sharp falls in areas linked to housing - with furniture and lighting sales down almost 20% while sales of electrical goods slumped by 15.7% and hardware, paints and glass sales fell almost 12%.

Motor sales dropped another 7.4% in the month, while bar sales were down 2%. After increasing in August, sales at department stores declined by 1.4%.

Today's statistics also show that the value of retail sales fell by 3.8% in September of this year compared to September 2007. They increased by 0.6% in the month. The CSO says this is the sixth month in a row of declining values in retail sales.

In the months from June to August, the largest volume decrease was seen in the furniture and lighting sector, with sales slumping by 14.6%. Sales of textiles and clothing rose by 1.1% in the quarter.

Alan McQuaid, chief economist at Bloxham Stockbrokers, said the figures proved the Government had missed an opportunity to stimulate the economy with last month's Budget

He said: 'All in all, the retail sales figures for the year to date are extremely disappointing, and suggest that the risks to GDP forecasts remain clearly to the downside, and all the more reason why the Government should have introduced fiscal stimulus measures in last month's Budget.

'Instead, what we got was an income levy and increase in the standard rate of VAT, which will make Irish goods more expensive at a time when there is already a mass exodus from the Republic across the border to avail of cheaper prices in the North.

'This trend is set to increase in the run-up to Christmas, especially now as the euro is at record highs versus sterling with the British pound effectively at a level of almost 1.09 to the old Irish punt.'
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby jdivision » Fri Nov 14, 2008 6:20 pm

I think one of the problems with the metro north discussion is people fail to realise the number of people who will drive or take a bus to use it. It's simple - people want certainty of service. Last night I waited 30 minutes for a bus that was due about 2 minutes after I got there. It never turned up. Cue huge numbers of people on the bus, a much delayed trip and a journey that should take 30 minutes taking over an hour - at 8.30pm!! People will go to the metro becuase within a degree of certainty they will know the journey time. That will alleviate some of the pressure on the Dart. I predict that if it's built, metro north will exceed passenger projections.
jdivision
Senior Member
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:34 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby lostexpectation » Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:02 pm

exceeding passenger projections isn't success
lostexpectation
Senior Member
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:38 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby jdivision » Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:18 pm

What is? If it exceeds projections, it's working. The point is to give people a better life (call it work-life balance if needs be) by making it easier to get from A to B, even the St Stephen's Green argument falls into this in terms of losing an amenity (for however long it takes) to benefit others
jdivision
Senior Member
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:34 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Sun Nov 16, 2008 9:25 pm

I have no doubt you are right that more people will use the service than currently use buses. However the catchment for a metro will be c1 mile or 15 minutes walk and with the exception of say Swords, Airport and possibly Drumcoundra I can't see the 10m pax stations required to make this stack up at the projected costs.

In London Boris Johnston axed £4bn of previously announced transport projects such as the Thames Gateway Bridge and Docklands Light Rail extension to Dagenham. The reason given was that they weren't economically viable and weren't sufficient priorities to be delivered before 2020; this followed a thorough review of the entire TfL programme and a ranking of projects with Crossrail coming top and other projects granted delivery on a sliding scale thereafter.

Would an early 2009 review of all Transport 21 projects and the announcement of revised delivery dates or a ranking based on importance and a sliding scale of dates for delivery based on the health of the fiscal position.

What would be crazy is if intergration of the two seperate commuter networks as centred on The Heuson routes and Dart/Northern Commuter networked were sacrificed to deliver a scheme that clearly does not stack up on financial grounds unless a Reganesque supply side view is taken. The days of development levies are gone for at least the medium term this needs to be assessed on real economics and take its place in the que.
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby alonso » Sun Nov 16, 2008 9:37 pm

PVC how are you saying it clearly does not stack up. Have you got the exact costs and the land use forecasts for the corridor? Wthout these we're all just throwing out suggestions and conjecture. Both sides have valid arguments but without the figures no-one can state something as fact,
alonso
Senior Member
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:33 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby jdivision » Sun Nov 16, 2008 11:47 pm

PVC King wrote:I have no doubt you are right that more people will use the service than currently use buses. However the catchment for a metro will be c1 mile or 15 minutes walk and with the exception of say Swords, Airport and possibly Drumcoundra I can't see the 10m pax stations required to make this stack up at the projected costs.
.


I disagree, like in London people will get crosstown buses to use it, people will drive from Dundalk to the first stop (wherever it is in the end) as will people from Drogheda and most of Meath. People from Finglas to Coolock and possibly Darndale will get buses to it because of regularity of service and journey time.
jdivision
Senior Member
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:34 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby missarchi » Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:18 am

the fact is Dublin needs a functioning transport system that is immune to traffic and is dependable
one that allows you to live in the south work in the north or live in the south and work in the north west.

the problem I have is that it affects the daily lives of so many people in Ireland...
has the m 50 made things better? why did we build it???
the people of Dublin deserve a proper transport system...
whether that is an Irish gauge or not...
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland