Metro North

Re: Metro North

Postby jimg » Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:52 am

marmajam wrote:OK, let's have a look at the figures that PVC finds so sacred.

MN will have a capacity of 20,000 passengers per hour per direction. It will operate for 19hrs a day. That amounts to max capacity of 760,000 per week or approx 370 million passengers per year.

Let's say it carries 200 million a year ( going by LUAS it will be more). In 10 yrs time that will be a fares income of more than 500 million a year.

Ok I was waiting for you to say something interesting or intelligent given the knowing and belligerent tone of your posts but the above proves that you are just a clown. 200 million a year? You are predicting that almost every man, woman and child in Dublin will take a "trip" on metro north once every single working day of the year?

"Going by Luas it will be more"? The two Luas lines together - which have been a phenomenal success - carry about 30 million a year and you basing your predictions on a SINGLE line carrying 7 times the number of passengers as the two Luas lines together?

Even the RPA are only projecting 35 million passenger trips a year last I read. Also last I read the capital costs were projected to be around the 3.7 billion not 2.5 billion which I believe was the figure the RPA bandied about for an O'Connell St. to Airport metro (not Stephen's Green to Swords) with no connection with any other rail line except the red Luas, no station/connection at Drumcondra or other "trimmings" (like disabled access!).

To be honest, I would have just about supported this project until last year even though by my calculations the government subvention was going to cost in the range of 4 and 11 euro per passenger journey for the 35 years. Even assuming the winning consortium can secure finance at 8% and the passenger numbers are 50% higher than what the RPA are suggesting, the subvention per passenger journey works out at about 6 euro. This is massive when you look at Luas never mind IR or Dublin Bus (it will cost the government as much in subvention to carry a single metro north passenger as it currently costs to carry 20 passengers on Dublin Bus). However, my support was based on the idea that at the time we had a 20 year record of completely underestimating our infrastructure needs and that the government coffers were awash with money and if they were going to waste billions that I'd prefer they do it doing something which provides a tangible benefit instead of countless projects and expenditure which deliver nothing at all.

I no longer support metro north. The population of the country is falling for the first time in 2 decades; of the remainder we are looking at 80s levels of unemployment by the end of the year. We need to look for cheap and clever solutions and to be honest I don't actually feel that ferrying people too and from the airport should be the top priority; I fly in and out of it regularly and while I'd much prefer to take a 25 minute metro to Stephen's Green, in the context of air travel the extra 20 minutes spent on a bus is relatively insignificant.

Believe it or not metro is not the only solution for urban mass transport; I've been spending time in Zürich (which has the best public transport system I've experienced) and they had a referendum on building a metro system about 20 years ago and voted against it because the metro proposals simply did not deliver in terms of cost. Instead they greatly increased the tram system and built interconnectors to leverage the existing heavy rail lines. Of course the Swiss have the operational side down to a tee while we sit at the opposite end of the spectrum.

In the current climate, Metro North represents hubristic trophyism. There isn't a chance it will be built. I still support the interconnector but support very little that the RPA is proposing. The red line extension makes sense. But the Lucan Luas and Metro West are simply daft; the convoluted proposed BX is similarly stupid (60% more expensive than a straightforward direct link according to RPA estimates while being slower and more disruptive).
jimg
Member
 
Posts: 480
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 9:07 pm
Location: Zürich

Re: Metro North

Postby missarchi » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:44 am

But the Irish Independent has learned that the capital projects which are safe include all the major inter-urban motorway projects such as the Limerick-Nenagh upgrade, the Galway to Ballinasloe motorway and the Dublin to Waterford motorway. Two public-private partnerships, the Limerick to Cork motorway and the Galway to Tuam motorway, have also been approved in recent months.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/metro-north-runs-late-as-transport-plans-delayed-1663304.html

THE credit crunch and financial meltdown is playing havoc with the Government's plans to deliver billions of euro of Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects.

As banks withdraw from lending, construction projects ranging from the €700m Thornton Hall prison to the Abbey Theatre face immense difficulty in securing private funding. Not one single PPP project was funded last year, following a glut of schemes in 2007.

The implosion of Depfa bank, which was one of the major funders of the Irish PPP sector, forced a number of schemes to seek new financing. Last week, Transport Minister Noel Dempsey announced ambitious plans for new roads worth almost €1.4bn. Three of these will come under the PPP scheme.

Dempsey is adamant that the Metro North project will continue. It is understood that sovereign wealth funds have expressed an interest in financing Irish infrastructure. Several of the funds -- primarily from the Gulf states such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Kuwait, have met with officials from the department of finance.

Dempsey is believed to be keen on taking a future Irish PPP project -- such as Metro West -- on an investor roadshow to the Gulf states to gauge interest.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/dempsey-may-look-to-gulf-to-pay-the-fares-for-metro-1622930.html
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby notjim » Wed Mar 11, 2009 11:03 am

I am appalled by the pro-cyclical economics on display: the down turn is a reason to build, not to stop. MN is, or almost is, a shovel ready project, if it can be financed it should go ahead.

Do you think the famine piers made strict economic sense, or the WPA projects?

Our entire stimulus package, so called, boiled down to 100m for home insulation; crazy. Local governments are canceling sensible urban renewal projects for the sake of funding, somehow the book keeping is easier if you pay people dole instead?

Obviously if the MN involves too much direct government borrowing it can't go ahead, we are having trouble selling bonds, but if it is predominately financed through the PPP mechanism, it should absolutely go ahead, not for public transport reasons, though I think they justify the project, but for economic reasons.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Metro North

Postby jimg » Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:07 pm

It's a bit too late to be appalled by pro-cyclical fiscal policies, notjim. Any chance the country had of allieviating the cyclical downturn fiscally was blown by the government spending policies since 2001. Because government spending expanded at such a rate during this 6 or so years, it will be impossible to even maintain current levels of expenditure never mind continue the exponential trajectory of spending. There are two sides to a Keynesian approach - government contraction during booms and expansion during busts. I find it almost amusing the number of "half" Keynesians that have suddenly appeared in the country; i.e. they never complained about the government spending like crazy during a boom but are now demanding - referencing Keynes - that the government spend like crazy during a bust.

I also think that many people have a very twisted understanding of what Keynes argued for. He would NEVER have advocated borrowing money to pay people to dig holes and fill them in again or to build useless piers in inaccessible places. He argued for an expansion of government spending during a business cycle trough in order to even out the lack of demand in general in the economy. The government spending is still expected to be efficient in terms of stimulating the economy. Paying people to build roads through bogs which will never or rarely be used (or the modern equivalent - building motorways in sparsely populated areas) would obviously be a popular plan with the likes of Tom Parlon and who he represents but it would hardly benefit anyone outside of the people immediately employed.

This isn't theoretical - look at Japan since the 1990s for what happens if you blindly embrace the idea of government stimulus spending for the sake of it. In 10 years they borrowed the equivalent of their entire GDP and spent it on "infrastructure" like the famous bridge which is rarely used. None of this spending did anything to stimulate the economy and it remained in a slump despite this huge amount of spending except now they have a tower of government debt to deal with as well as a falling economy.

Anyway, no matter where you sit along this economic ideological spectrum, the government will effectively have X amount to spend on a stimulus package attempting to counter the bust. It is even more vital than during a boom that this X is spent carefully on projects that delivery as much as possible. It is still important to evaluate the projects in terms of costs and benefits. There is no point in spending the money paying people to dig and fill holes in bogs. Metro North does not measure up for me when you look at the figures; we are looking at a subvention of 6 times that given to Dublin bus for a system which will carry a 5th of the passengers.

Also, I dunno why people feel that there is something financially magical about PPP whereby "free" money is being created. It is government borrowing just as clearly as selling bonds is. There is simply no difference (except in terms of accounting) in terms of government finance between paying a PPP consortium 200 million a year for 20 years and paying a 200 million on bond coupons. Sorry there is one difference; for these sorts of figures the government could raise 2.5 billion by issuing bonds while only 1.6 billion would be raised by PPP.
jimg
Member
 
Posts: 480
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 9:07 pm
Location: Zürich

Re: Metro North

Postby Fergal » Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:22 pm

It is not true that Metro North will require a subsidy 5 times that of Dublin Bus. Metro North will probably require a fairly small operating subsidy. It is the capital cost that is expensive - the key difference is that this is only paid once. When the last payment is in for Metro North, say, in 2040, that is the infrastructure paid for forever, unlike Dublin Bus, which wil require the subsidy for as long as it operates. The subsidy for Dublin Bus will only increase over time, as it rises with inflation, while the capital cost of Metro North is a fixed amount, which will decline year over year. In 30 years, 4.5 billion is likely to be equivalent to about 800 million today.


And another issue is that the subsidy to Dublin bus is tiny - it is half the amount spent yearly on the rural school bus scheme for example, and is the main reason Dublin bus can't run a proper 24 hour service, have reasonable fares, or serve people travelling to destinations that do not start or end in the city centre.
Fergal
Member
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:27 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby notjim » Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:39 pm

What Keynes actually said.

"If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coalmines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of the repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is. It would, indeed, be more sensible to build houses and the like; but if there are political and practical difficulties in the way of this, the above would be better than nothing."
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:31 pm

If it were as simple as following Keynes none of us would work but simple follow an investment strategy with our initial pocket money acting perfectly in five year cycles until we ended up like JP McManus rich!

I do however find his observation of the treasury printing banknotes to bury interesting as that is the one bullet not available to the government; the current issue as opposed to crisis is that International bond markets question Irelands ability to keep creating liquidity by borrowing to plug the government deficit which only results from letting current spending run way out of line during the boom and then the boomier years. What the market is saying the more money the Irish government prints the higher risk premium they will apply to all existing money owed by the government.

How projects like a motorway to Waterford, Western Rail Corridor or Metro can survive in this context is beyond me. But a 2-3 year phase of fiscal responsibility will deliver a sound public purse when things recover in 2012.

Fergal R you are right on crossrail it is 13 miles of new tunnels if the distance from beyond Paddington and the Shenfield branches are included; it is however highly unlikely that the Shenfield branch will happen on time due to the costs escalating due to the fall in sterling and the fact that most tech is made in either the Eurozone or Japan which has levered costs in an upward direction dramatically due to currency movements.

It is also as you point out a more complex project which incidently started last month to tie in the new line with old stations such as Tottenham Court Road. The build costs in Euro terms are now c€21bn due to the depreciation in sterling or over €1.5bn per mile of tunnel.

Where I do fundamentally disagree with you is the passenger generation capacity; Swords is not metro material it has a population of 30,000? How many of them work locally or no longer work?

Ballymun is not highly dense enough, it might have been had they infilled around the towers but a lets give de population a back garden model was chosen.

DCU has how many students? Most of them live in Finglas, Ballygall, Old Ballymun and Whitehall/Sanrty. I'd say it probably has the highest cycely comutting rate of any uni in the country.

Hospitals don't get undergrounds they get light rail or planned bus stops elsewhere; for example Northwick Park Hospital in London that is a university bounded by two tube lines had the metropolitan line stop located to serve the town of Kenton wheras the hospital remians good mile away on foot; they didn't even bother building a proper pedestrian link.

That leaves The Airport which once had 23p.a.x. which is contracting rapidly, O'C St and Stephens Green which is no longer the centre of the office district, lets be honest 100m from the Green and you hit Whitefriar St / Wexford Street. The office district has headed East towards Baggot St / Mount Street / Grand Canal / South Docks and South towards Ballsbridge.

I can only conclude that public money has no place in this project as it doesn't offer enough transport capicty for what it costs to build; it doesn't even connect with the Dart system.

In terms of private money you mention Barclays who have yet to outline the scale of their sub-prime exposure if you believe the shareprice. Maquarie relied heavily on the carry trade of money borrowed in yen at cheap interest rates and then deposited in Aussie banks at much higher rates. The carry trade is dead becuase Japan is in deficit for the first time in decades. Unless they get a significant risk premium why would they invest in a project with major development risks; look at the RPA's first experience with a new type of infrastructure. How far overspent was Luas in the end in percentage terms?

This leaves Noel Dempsey's road show in the Gulf; I like Noel Dempsey and I really hope he pulls this one off as maybe the Gulf states can take a different view on investing i.e. no payback for 30 - 50 years to counteract a declining earnings base as natural resources decline.

Sadly it must be the only deliverable option on the table due to the absence of funding and the government's inability to do unviable schemes financially.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby notjim » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:45 pm

The point is this: MN is a pretty good proposal, Dublin sorely needs better public transport and this proposal does all sorts of useful things. It is not perfect, but we need always be mindful that it is always easy to attack a detailed proposal, we compare the flaws to a counter proposal which lacks details and therefore flaws of its own.

To these benefits must now be added in negative the cost of not building it, a huge potential waste in terms of the lost work hours of the unemployed, the lost use of the otherwise retired work machines, the lost skills to be gains, the huge social cost of unemployment.

This still leaves the cost and here none of us really know what is in the tenders, the advantage of a PPP is that our total debt is still low, what is a problem is not out total borrowing but our ability to sell bonds: in a PPP is an alternative route to raising finance.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Metro North

Postby marmajam » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:44 am

having parsed the arguments here dispassionately it is clear that the anti MN camp falls into 2 categories.

(1) we are now a sort of upmarket Greenland. We should squirrel away any money we have and find a rock to hide under. Until the Chinese come.
(2) freeloading bogmen worried that their handouts will be chopped want everything In Diblin axed just in case.

PVC Queen is likely in the 2nd category as she knows nothing about Dublin. Thinks sending non stopping trains to the airport via nth line, and leaving DARTs at a 30 min frequency is THE answer. ho ho.


MN will go ahead early next year. That is certain.
marmajam
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:18 am

Re: Metro North

Postby reddy » Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:16 am

marmajam wrote:having parsed the arguments here dispassionately it is clear that the anti MN camp falls into 2 categories.

(1) we are now a sort of upmarket Greenland. We should squirrel away any money we have and find a rock to hide under. Until the Chinese come.
(2) freeloading bogmen worried that their handouts will be chopped want everything In Diblin axed just in case.

PVC Queen is likely in the 2nd category as she knows nothing about Dublin. Thinks sending non stopping trains to the airport via nth line, and leaving DARTs at a 30 min frequency is THE answer. ho ho.


MN will go ahead early next year. That is certain.


Tool.

Responding to proper arguments - Metro North definitely has a lot of major benefits and potential but I still think there's a fundamental question about value for money. We could deliver so much more in the form of a massive, citywide integrated transport system for the same price as this.

Luas cost approximately €31million per km. We could quite feasibly build 4-5 times more length of track for the same cost as MN. And lets not talk about there being no room or capability to implement Luas citywide - If we give the city a top to bottom, radical overhaul in terms of traffic management and public transport we could get it to work.

One of the big arguments in favour of Metro North seems to be the fact that its ready to go. That still doesn't make it anything more than a foolish vanity project, dreamt up by the leaders of a nation drunk on the wealth of an unprecedented boom.
reddy
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:03 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Metro North

Postby Peter Fitz » Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:20 am

At this stage it is very unlikely that both metro north & the interconnector will proceed - my concern is and always has been, that we will get the former at the expense of the latter.

There is widespread disagreement about the merits or otherwise of metro north whereas most can agree that the logic behind the interconnector & reconfiguration of the dart network is blindingly obvious. It has been the missing link for decades & will still be after we're finished fumbling around with metro north only to decide that we just can't justify further investment in the rail network. So if its an either or, and realistically it is, build the interconnector.
Peter Fitz
 

Re: Metro North

Postby Fergal » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:22 am

Personally, I don't think that's true. I think that either they both will be built, or neither. The Interconnector is more important, but is also much further away from starting. The government will have to decide first if it's going to fund Metro North. If they don't, I can't imagine that they will cancel one large underground rail project, and then go and fund another one. Especially as economic conditions will probably be even worse when the Interconnector is ready to go.
Fergal
Member
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:27 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby notjim » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:51 am

reddy: I amn't saying the sole argument for MN is that it is ready to go, I am suggesting that it is an additional argument for it, it will use a resource that will otherwise be wasted, lost work hours.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Fri Mar 13, 2009 6:36 am

I agree that a lot of money has been wasted to date on this project but just because money has been spent to date is no excuse to spend a significant sum of money that the exchequer clearly doesn't have. The same arguments could be used for the Western Rail corridor, Carlow-Waterford Motorway or the abandoned decntralisation programme.

This as Peter points out is a choice of how to divvy up the nations scarce resources and the integration of the wider rail network will probably be delayed another 20 years if this gets the green light. This project when looked at in any detail does not stack up and by presenting 5 very similar options at the enquiry the RPA have failed to offer the Bord a proper analysis of the real options which are:

1. Underground
2. Overground
3. Light Rail

This project is a throwback to the arrogant days when there were plans to build a motorway around every field and a luas line to every dublin post office. Times have changed and value for money is now top of the agenda.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby marmajam » Fri Mar 13, 2009 7:34 am

PVC King wrote:I agree that a lot of money has been wasted to date on this project but just because money has been spent to date is no excuse to spend a significant sum of money that the exchequer clearly doesn't have. The same arguments could be used for the Western Rail corridor, Carlow-Waterford Motorway or the abandoned decntralisation programme.

This as Peter points out is a choice of how to divvy up the nations scarce resources and the integration of the wider rail network will probably be delayed another 20 years if this gets the green light. This project when looked at in any detail does not stack up and by presenting 5 very similar options at the enquiry the RPA have failed to offer the Bord a proper analysis of the real options which are:

1. Underground
2. Overground
3. Light Rail

This project is a throwback to the arrogant days when there were plans to build a motorway around every field and a luas line to every dublin post office. Times have changed and value for money is now top of the agenda.


there you have it in a nutshell.
pvc queen doesn't want MN. like most of the heavy rail fetishists.
all the schoolboy howler maths and fancy pie in the sky alternatives are a mere smokescreen.

this is the mindset that built the M50 the wrong size. Ireland has a huge future. if history teaches anything it is that we will develop exponentially over the next 20 years. we need to believe in ourselves and our ability to solve problems and think for the real future.

not run around like a bunch of panicking schoolgirls: 'we're doomed, we're doomed'
marmajam
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:18 am

Re: Metro North

Postby missarchi » Fri Mar 13, 2009 10:52 am

Metro north is not quite there yet nor is the inter connector but I do believe that they are more important than any other road rail plans in the state given the small tweaks and finishing touches that they need... But I fear the finance will always be an unknown and unknownable like other well known contracts that have been agreed...
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby Fergal » Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:29 pm

If anyone is interested in why Metro North is being built, rather than a DART extension, or light rail line, they should read this report, which sets out the reasoning behind it in detail. Transport21 is in Dublin was entirely cherry picked from the plan set out here.

Also interesting is their definitions of DART, Luas, and Metro.

DART: Electrified Heavy Rail
Luas: On street light rail
Metro: Segregated light rail



http://www.dto.ie/platform1.pdf
Fergal
Member
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:27 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby DjangoD » Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:35 pm

Marmajam, while I would be in broad agreement with you on this whole issue, and would hope those in power in this land would actually show a bit of foresight for once, you're really not doing yourself any favours by going on like you have been.

When the pinnacle of your attempts to insult someone amount to calling them female, you're basically coming across as an angry neanderthal.

Tone it down, eh?


marmajam wrote:there you have it in a nutshell.
pvc queen doesn't want MN. like most of the heavy rail fetishists.
all the schoolboy howler maths and fancy pie in the sky alternatives are a mere smokescreen.

this is the mindset that built the M50 the wrong size. Ireland has a huge future. if history teaches anything it is that we will develop exponentially over the next 20 years. we need to believe in ourselves and our ability to solve problems and think for the real future.

not run around like a bunch of panicking schoolgirls: 'we're doomed, we're doomed'
DjangoD
Member
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:34 pm
Location: Dubberlin

Re: Metro North

Postby cgcsb » Fri Mar 13, 2009 6:57 pm

I agree that MN and interconnector are the most important projects in Transport 21. Way more important than the Athenry to Tuam line or the M17 or the luas extension to Bray. Therefore if any of the T21 plans go ahead, both of them should be priorities.
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:09 am

DjangoD

Thanks for your sentiments I suspect that Marmajam has had their prozac removed in the health cuts implemented due to the recession; hence the lack of argument and reliance on rude, crude personal attacks.


Fergal wrote:If anyone is interested in why Metro North is being built, rather than a DART extension, or light rail line, they should read this report, which sets out the reasoning behind it in detail. Transport21 is in Dublin was entirely cherry picked from the plan set out here.

Also interesting is their definitions of DART, Luas, and Metro.

DART: Electrified Heavy Rail
Luas: On street light rail
Metro: Segregated light rail



http://www.dto.ie/platform1.pdf


I agree with your analysis of the split and the approach of the DTO generally on this as being entirely correct in 1999 when the document scoping commenced.

There are however two key flaws in relying on this document.

Firstly at least half the document is concerned with demand side calculations which made a number of assumptions that were valid then but invalid now. The numbers underpinning the document were based on economic growth rates, employment growth and positive demographic shifts the like of which will never be seen again in the city and wider region.

The result of those growth rates both economic and employment was that the boom got boomier before the economy fell off a cliff, employment growth reversed and a new fiscal picture culminating in the April 7 mini - budget sets a revised set of expectations. I am clear that Ireland will recover within 2-3 years but that it will be on a more normal growth path in terms of employment, GDP, population etc - no more arrogant ministerial grand standing on delivering motorways to Waterford, heavy rail to Charlestown or Metro to Drumcoundra.


Secondly you failed to mention that the DTO strategy involved 3 lines firstly Cherrywood, secondly Tallaght and thirdly the Airport. The first and third would be a single line which would dramatically increase convenience and the second would feed large number of passengers and even may have had direct routing options with the airport nullifying the requirement for the disasterous Metro West.

To take an integrated well thought out plan and butcher 2 of the 3 lines required to give the system critical mass does not provide for valid comparison. To then devise a new Metro West that deprived the central part of the system critical mass but served a network of suburban shopping centres en route to the airport makes you wonder did they simply want to brainwash people with the concept 'Airport Good, City Centre Bad'

To still peddle this airport centric solution in the absence of the critical mass required to make the DTO plan viable which would be to the detriment of the wider public transport network in the current fiscal climate illustrates just how self serving and unobjective the RPA are.

Metro North just like the ridiculous Metro West need to be canned; do we have ridership figures for the City west extension?
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby marmajam » Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:47 am

DjangoD wrote:Marmajam, while I would be in broad agreement with you on this whole issue, and would hope those in power in this land would actually show a bit of foresight for once, you're really not doing yourself any favours by going on like you have been.

When the pinnacle of your attempts to insult someone amount to calling them female, you're basically coming across as an angry neanderthal.

Tone it down, eh?


Well Django, you make your point reasonably. But if you were really reasonable you would not be 'posting' on this 'forum'.

It's a fantasy world with about as tenuous a relationship to the real world as a pub football team has to the Barcelonas of this world.

The pretentiousness is embarrassing.
Nobody doing anything really creative would have time for the guff spouted here.
I would have no interest in being popular here.

Just having a bit od fum with my friend pvc queen who is at the more hysterical end of the 'afraid of their own shadow/we're all doomed take on events.
Mind if you think like that it will come upon you.

Fortune favours the brave.
There is a huge future for ireland. With it's geo-political locatiom, it is sparsely populated yet surrounded by wealthy neighbours who are the repository of the greatest engineering and technical expertise on the planet, conducive climate, potential to be the heart of alternative energy in a world of declining fossil fuel resources, there is unlimited scope for development.
To take a small risk on the future by building a future thinking metro that will cost peanuts in repayments in a few years........ this would be wise.

Adios, and thanks for all the fish and chips.
marmajam
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:18 am

Re: Metro North

Postby missarchi » Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:34 pm

missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm


Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:59 am

marmajam wrote:Fortune favours the brave.
There is a huge future for ireland. With it's geo-political locatiom, it is sparsely populated yet surrounded by wealthy neighbours who are the repository of the greatest engineering and technical expertise on the planet, conducive climate, potential to be the heart of alternative energy in a world of declining fossil fuel resources, there is unlimited scope for development.


And a free Aston Martin for everyone in the audience.

When the economy is restructured in a couple of years why not then look at building a proper integrated system?

This proposal is over-priced, under connected and comes at the wrong time.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby cgcsb » Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:57 pm

in all the illustrations i've seen of metro stations, I have yet to see bi-lingual signage.
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Irish Planning Matters