The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Mon Jun 08, 2009 9:50 pm

I am not going to respond to Marmajam again as always he waffles on with bland generalities such as linking bonds and solving unemployment without a rats as to how either operates. I will however say 3 things

One; I will not continue to remind of the economic reality there is enough economic analysis the most recent downgrade of soveriegn debt by Standard and Poors today. However if prudent public finances finally arrive this will probably mark the floor of negative sentiment towards what is a truely dreadful fiscal position. Talk of white elephants doesn't assist international perception of a balooning deficit.

Two - the infrastructure bond would be subordinate debt to ordinary NTMA debt and if a bond were likely to default which it isn't but if it were the government would if they were smart pay senior debt and put infrastructure bonds for completed projects to one side so as to protect their ability to raise even more senior debt; subordinate is junk in the medium term if things go wrong. The premium for secondary debt would be at least 150 bp in a good market so taking that senior debt at at about 530 bp that gives a minimum interest rate of 6.80% or €136m a year to fund without repaying the capital that is assuming the RPA actually don't over-run as per usual. I can think of better uses for an annual liability of €136m in the context of the scarcity of money.

Three - the unemployment in the construction industry is in all reality structural; there was an army assembled to deliver 100,000 resi units a year, that demand won't be around for a decade if again ever. People need to emmigrate, Brian Lennihan senior should have been celebrated for that statement in the 1980's and not pilloried. You never know they might even get somewhere where a metro link to the airport stacks up.

If the public finances are brought under control Ireland Inc has a great future, well educated people with an edge for deals only problem is is if you spend scarce spend money on infrastructure and not cutting edge education the whole attraction of paying one of the highest salary bases in the World (deservidly so at present education levels) evaporates. Its all about patience globally things are levelling out.
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby marmajam » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:02 am

You're a naked and not very bright bluffer PVC Queen. Every argument self defeated by the usual schoolboy howler.
I guess the reason you're spouting this psuedo economic guff here is because you'd be laughed out of it in the appropriate forum. You've studied the subject but understood nothing.
At a capital cost of less than 2 billion, income from MN will more than pay the debt. Savings on social security, plus tax and vat revenue from construction and employment, more than pay costs during construction.
Unless we adopt your plan of shipping 100,000 overseas.................
I love the way you slip in fantasy nonsense arguments to hold your whole estate agent economic ideology together.
On the contrary construction of MN will send out positive signals.

Wait now for more gobbledegook jargon - the prance of the 7 hundred veils.
marmajam
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:18 am

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby notjim » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:18 am

Get a room.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby cgcsb » Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:28 pm

In my humble opinion, the 'R word' that I will not say aloud is 90% hype. Continually talking about how dreary things are can only make the situation worse. I must say I dissaprove of PVC's stance of give in to the recession, throw in the towel and let our young talent emigrate. At least building infrastucture projects is doing something positive even if it's not profitable right away, it will provide some economic dividends. Better to build the metro, create employment, cut carbon emmisions, collect income tax revenue from that employment and enjoy the lasting impact of good public transport, rather then spend the money getting private businessmen out of debt
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby alonso » Tue Jun 09, 2009 2:00 pm

PVC King wrote:I
People need to emmigrate .




People only need to emigrate because once again there is nothing here for them. Much of the blame for this can be attributed to the way in which we handled our environment and land over the past 15 years and how we sacrificed sustainable necessary infrastructure such as the interconnector, Metro north, Luas Lines, SChools, Hospitals, Colleges, Water and Wastewater, Broadband, Wind Farms etc etc etc in the name of building houses houses and more houses all over the shagging place. Now we need to redress that GAPING hole in our infrastructure and investing in it now has the double whammy of costing less while saving on welfare plus avoiding the brutal impact emigration can have on a society.

Ireland did not benefit one bit from decades of emigration. The country is a basket case again and only last weekend did we as a nation begin to reject cowboy gangsterism to any great degree. Maybe we should opt for a different approach this time and try to retain our brightest rather than ship them out, primarily permanently, to benefit other societies.
alonso
Senior Member
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:33 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby Devin » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:34 am

It is claimed that the construction of a train line to the airport which would not be on mainline rail is bad practice:

Metro North project questioned

BRIAN KAVANAGH

THE CONSTRUCTION of Dublin’s controversial Metro North rail system will not guarantee maximum accessibility to Dublin airport.

Moreover, it will not ensure the airport’s future as a vital travel hub, a new planning report argues.

A Spatial Vision for Dublin was published yesterday at the Stephen’s Green Hibernian Club, by members of the Dublin City Business Association, which commissioned the report, and author Hendrik van der Kamp.

Although Metro North has been touted by the Government as central to Dublin’s economic development, speculation intensified at the beginning of the year that the project would be shelved due to an estimated cost of some €5 billion.

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny has proposed deferring the project and prioritising smaller, more labour-intensive construction initiatives.

The report uses the example of Schiphol airport in Amsterdam, which it says, like Dublin airport, was for a long time poorly served by public transport, relying almost solely on bus connections to Amsterdam and other cities across the Netherlands.

It found that the deliberate effort to create a working main network railway station in the airport, rather than a mere shuttle rail service to and from the city centre, proved a huge success.

The report also claims that Dublin should not be satisfied with simply connecting the airport with the city centre, as mainline rail access has proven a model of success across Europe.

“It may be of benefit to see Belfast, Dublin and Shannon connected together through a single high-speed railway line, which would link up the three major airports in the country,” Mr van der Kamp. said. “It would provide a . . . fast connection to the west of Ireland, and Galway could be connected to this via the Western Rail Corridor.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0610/1224248536121.html
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby cgcsb » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:39 am

well it's too late in the planning process now. Just build the shaggin thing and get this 10 year saga over with. Isn't construction to begin in September? it cant come fast enough, cos at this stage I'm sick of hearing of people cominig out with aledgedly brilliant alternitive solutions when construction is 3 months away. They had years to voice their opinion and chose not to.
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby fergalr » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:40 am

The IMF will just freeze the thing if they come in to put our expenses in order. Surely there are cheaper options than something costing five billion euro? I mean, you could bail out Anglo-Irish once with that.
fergalr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Howth, Co. Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby cgcsb » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:43 am

havent the costs been reduced to €3bn because of the downturn?
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby marmajam » Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:10 pm

This tripe is from the IT where the tree hugging Frank MacDonald and his betters have been relentlessing briefing against MN.
They keep referring to the cost as 5 Billion. This is like saying that your 300,000 house cost 700,000 since that's what you'll pay over the 30 year mortgage.
However I have been informed that the consortia bids have come in below 2 Billion.
They also tried a scare article last year about traders being up in arms at the cut and cover of O'Connell St (it will be tunnelled).
They are a disgrace.
Look at who commissioned the study.
The DCBA have always been against MN. Shock!...they arrange a report against MN.
Further, they failed to research their facts.
Schipol is in the Randstand which has a population of 10m in an area the size of Munster.
That is the rationale for a mainline link there.
Funnily they are planning a link to the Amsterdam metro as it turns out...........wait for it.............Schipol is not accessible enough.
As I said the IT is a disgrace.

The airport link is only one component of MN.

The mainline option was looked at but decided against as it would have involved big investment for limited benefit. It will have it's day in the longer term.
MN was decided on with it's potential as (a) an important spine and link in creating a very necessary public transport system for Dublin and (b) as a spur to investment and develpment in Nth Co Dublin.

If you follow the IT take on this it is clear they are in the camp of that other odd academic Barret (Professor of transport economics Trinity)
He is against public transport investment and wants the money spent on more roads.

Interestingly, shortly after both LUAS lines were opened he wrote a long article in the IT saying the lesson of LUAS is that no more money should be spent on rail lines. At that point it was anticipated that a subvention would be required for LUAS. LUAS has been such a success the subvention was never needed and runs at an operating profit.
Barret seems to have gone quiet on that issue.
marmajam
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:18 am

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby jdivision » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:17 pm

In my opinion any report that mentions the WRC lacks any credibility
jdivision
Senior Member
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:34 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby Morlan » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:42 pm

cgcsb wrote:havent the costs been reduced to €3bn because of the downturn?


That's why Enda wants to defer it until the prices skyrocket again :rolleyes:
User avatar
Morlan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 831
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:47 pm
Location: Áth Cliath

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby kefu » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:38 pm

And the notion that somehow connecting the major airports by rail, mentioned here as Shannon, Dublin and Belfast is of value. Can somebody explain that?
kefu
Senior Member
 
Posts: 665
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby rumpelstiltskin » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:49 pm

kefu wrote:And the notion that somehow connecting the major airports by rail, mentioned here as Shannon, Dublin and Belfast is of value. Can somebody explain that?


Because when you book a flight from Dublin to Timbuktu for 5 euros on Ryanair, and then realize it'll take you 10 hours and 100 euros to get to Dublin airport, you say to yourself: "Why the fuck isn't there a mainline rail connection to the busiest airport in the country?"

I can definitely see the benefit of linking Dublin airport by rail to Belfast - for Belfast people. Maybe the British government could be prevailed upon to pay for it.
rumpelstiltskin
Member
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby notjim » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:09 pm

Its like everything has turned into boards.ie
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby marmajam » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:30 pm

Kennedy rejects criticisms of Metro North’s access to airport
Posted on 11/06/09 by Michael Kennedy

Michael Kennedy, Dublin North Fianna Fáil TD and campaigner for Metro North, has rejected claims that the transport project will not provide sufficient accessibility to Dublin airport.

Deputy Kennedy said: “According to a recent news article on the planning report by the Dublin City Business Association, the Metro North project ‘will not guarantee maximum accessibility to Dublin airport.’”

“I wholeheartedly disagree with this misleading claim and the insinuation that Metro North won’t deliver an efficient service for people travelling to the airport.”

“The fact of the matter is that when Metro North is completed, it will ensure that passengers will get from the city centre to Dublin Airport in 17 minutes. Can you get more a more accessible service than that?”

“We are the only country in Europe whose capital city does not have a rail link to the airport. The service will revolutionise transportation modes for every citizen in this country.”

Deputy Kennedy has also hit back at suggestions from members of Fine Gael that major projects like Metro North should be put on hold in the face of the current economic climate.
“We learned the hard way in the past that delaying major infrastructural projects can have a strong negative impact on the progress of our economy,” he said.
“To suggest that stalling the Metro project will somehow reverse the current economic situation is both misleading and incorrect and I am pleased that this government has the foresight to be able to make this crucial decision now.”
“The Indecon report commissioned by Fingal County Council indicates that up to 37,000 jobs could be created in the new Metro North economic corridor from Ballymun to Swords. This is a major incentive to bring this plan to fruition.”
“Projects like Metro are vital for our economic progress. The project itself will provide major employment for the building sector while also giving some of the farthest reaches of Dublin and the surrounding counties a quick rail link to the city - and this has its own economics benefits,”

“Like the Luas before it, Metro North will incentivise people to choose the environmentally friendly option and get out of their cars and onto public transport. This project will single-handedly take 20,000 cars off the roads,” added Deputy Kennedy.
marmajam
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:18 am

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:10 pm

jdivision wrote:In my opinion any report that mentions the WRC lacks any credibility


Any reference to the ultimate politically motivated elephant certainly causes concern. The point that is however well made is that rail links that aren't integrated don't do well as they do not provide the requisite connectivity. Frankfurt is a great example of how to do it right it has a mix of direct connections to the CC and intercity express trains that stop there. For example someone from Koln or Stuttgart can get on in their city and go direct Metro North offers nothing to the national rail network.


I can definitely see the benefit of linking Dublin airport by rail to Belfast - for Belfast people. Maybe the British government could be prevailed upon to pay for it.


Airports generate jobs, Belfast is a small regional airport which leaves the population with two choices for most destinations, transfer flight via Heathrow or go overland via Dublin. Anything that adds a population of 500,000 plus people to your catchment is a good thing as it has the potential to increase passenger loadings driving down fares or increasing profitability.

Ireland did not benefit one bit from decades of emigration


Ireland benefitted massively from Emmigration as the financial resources, skills and ideas brought back to Country by returning emmigrants were crucial to the economic turnaround in the 1990's. Living in Boston, London or Hong Kong is problem in what respect?

Projects like Metro are vital for our economic progress. The project itself will provide major employment for the building sector while also giving some of the farthest reaches of Dublin and the surrounding counties a quick rail link to the city


A lot of the jobs on the project will be highly specialist and will be undertaken by people from overseas; in the case of the port tunnel a large proportion of the workers were brought in because there is no tunneling industry. How many people will be directly employed and of that number how many will be unemployed construction workers. €100,000 a job done via the IDA where the average job lasts 10 -20 years or similar amounts in post graduate training targetting specific industries are the only sustainable ways to buy the country out of an unemployment in the medium to long term.

The guy is also getting very carried away with his multiple Counties; I know Fingal is now an independent constituency but that is stretching it way too far. The catchment is far to small for the price tag. It may be the most direct way from Stephens Green to Swords in linear terms but the subsidy required is simply not sustainable; the latest S & P downgrade means perception needs to be tight fiscal control.
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby alonso » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:38 pm

PVC I vvas referring to long term emigration, the hundreds of thousands that are lost forever. It took 40 years to truly recover from the emptying of the island in the 1950's and the turnaround in the 90's had more to do vvith the demography and education of those that remained, as vvell as 1 or 2 major interventions such as FDI and the IFSC that vvere both results of the above factors as vvell as our lovv corporation tax regime.

VVhile i'm no fan of hyperbole and the grandstanding so beloved of our politicians vvhen it comes to "creating" jobs, I still fully believe that the benefits, even in the medium term vvill far outvveigh the costs. Not for one second vvill i ever claim that investment in transport vvill solve unemployment, but it vvill help. Firstly it vvill employ some directly - secondly, as vve savv in the 80's along the DART (in vvorse socio-economic conditions) and the 00's along the Luas, urban rail does attract and create employment. MN vvill make the economic engine of Ireland, Dublin Airport, infintely more accessible to the city centre making it easier both to do business and attract business. The catchment required to support it is there novv, the catchment to require an upgrade vvill be there by 2020.

Hold that thought for a decade and vve'll come back as in fairness, none of us knovv the ansvvers.
alonso
Senior Member
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:33 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:00 pm

If you were talking about Miami or Hong Kong airports I'd go for economic engine as both airports punch way above their weight in terms of passengers to population; they are hub airports where a large proportion of the passengers are connecting. Dublin Airport is far from the economic engine of Ireland it is simply a medium sized European airport offering flights to Europe and a limited number of North American cities; there is not one scheduled daily flight to Asia, West Africa or Latin America.

The economic engines of which there are many are the larger FDI projects such as IBM etc that are dotted all along the M50 and services such as the fund management industry and tax driven advertsing companies such as WPP which are based in the City Centre. Given the choice of office between identical buildings in Mount Street and Dublin Airport where would you want to work?

I agree that Urban Rail decides commercial location decisions but the question is not whether urban rail creates jobs; the real question is which investment in urban rail delivers most upside, clearly that is the interconnector.

I take your point on 1950's emmigration it wasn't pleasant and left a lot of rural communities devistated. I would however contend that unlike the 1950's when the choices were how far you could get away depended on how much you had for the ticket that contemporary emmigration is different. People don't land in Liverpool anymore with a brother or cousins address and an aspiration to peel carrots in a hotel.

The Irish workforce are very well regarded in the major global centres and the types of job secured are typically professional. I have no doubt that the Celtic Tiger would not have been on the same scale unless people returned from senior positions in the US, UK, Germany etc to bring in practical experience.
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby alonso » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:13 pm

all good points PVC, esp on the "standards" of today's emigrants. And yes the Interconnector is the closest thing to a silver bullet for Dublin transport. I think the main thrust of my argument would be the drastic need to prepare for the next upswing in our economic fortunes by borrowing to invest in infratructure while it's at it's cheapest but yeh fuck knows - i'm no big city economist, I just like new trains ;)
alonso
Senior Member
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:33 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby missarchi » Fri Jun 12, 2009 12:26 am

The labour thing is one thing but the IDA have had a decade to train for this?
Where people trained while the port tunnel was going? It was the time...
And send people overseas... Also the ticketing for luas is not controlled by an Irish company i.e the money? The luas is not made in Ireland? Are the tracks made in Ireland?
Was it even designed in Ireland?

2 lines better than one... If they are done correctly...
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Fri Jun 12, 2009 6:33 pm

missarchi wrote: The labour thing is one thing but the IDA have had a decade to train for this?


The IDA have a clear mandate buy jobs that are likely to exist in 20 years time; they have a clear cost matrix that is proportional to the likely tax take from corporations profits and employees salaries. I have no doubt no transport infrastructure project would ever meet their very strict criteria.


missarchi wrote:Where people trained while the port tunnel was going? It was the time...
And send people overseas...
Great stream of consciousness; your point is?

missarchi wrote:Also the ticketing for luas is not controlled by an Irish company i.e the money?
They won it in a tender but no doubt the costs of ticketing are a minute proportion of the major inputs such as route, stations and ongoing costs such as energy, labour etc. Relevance?


missarchi wrote: The luas is not made in Ireland? Are the tracks made in Ireland?
Probably not, again rolling stock is a small proportion of overall cost. Relevance?

missarchi wrote: Was it even designed in Ireland?


Yes and that the same people are designing the Metro adds a very high risk factor to the project costs being in line with budget.

missarchi wrote: 2 lines better than one... If they are done correctly...


And built in the right place; the region needs all projects to be ranked and prioritised in line with revised expectatations. If the proponents of this scheme are so confident what have they got to fear from a review based on sound principles of cost benefit analysis and comparison to International subvention levels including all input costs.

The land catchment a mile either side of any major rail line is going to attract a vastly disproportionate amount of commercial and residential activity. Which makes being careful with major investments all the more important in the context of a smaller investment pot.

Building a line on a different guage to the majority of the rail network and on a different ticketing system that interacts with just one existing branch line of the main rail network for the type of prices being discussed needs urgent review.
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby SeamusOG » Fri Jun 12, 2009 10:40 pm

cgcsb wrote:well it's too late in the planning process now. Just build the shaggin thing and get this 10 year saga over with. Isn't construction to begin in September? it cant come fast enough, cos at this stage I'm sick of hearing of people cominig out with aledgedly brilliant alternitive solutions when construction is 3 months away. They had years to voice their opinion and chose not to.


Or maybe their opinions were ignored?

The people who produced the DRRTS in the '70s came up with a significantly different East-West route between the Kildare line and the Northern line.

A shorter, cheaper route, which - in conjunction with the development of the metro north or the linking of the two LUAS lines - would result in overall efficiencies in passenger movement.

That proposal was clearly ignored. The public consultations about the interconnector only included the longer, more expensive, circuitous options via St. Stephen's Green.

We'vve been discussing the reasons why St. Stephen's Green is to be the location for the interchange for a while and, in my opinion, no coherent analysis of why this is preferable to a more central location has yet been presented.

As discussed earlier in the thread, we've yet to see any figures relating to projected passenger movements in the city which justify building a longer, more expensive route. Hopefully they will be forthcoming.
SeamusOG
Member
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:59 pm

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby PVC King » Sat Jun 13, 2009 12:05 pm

Seamus O'G wrote:That proposal was clearly ignored. The public consultations about the interconnector only included the longer, more expensive, circuitous options via St. Stephen's Green.

We'vve been discussing the reasons why St. Stephen's Green is to be the location for the interchange for a while and, in my opinion, no coherent analysis of why this is preferable to a more central location has yet been presented.


That is a very fair point there is a significant discrepancy between the DRRTS proposal and the interconnector in terms of route length and specific alignment and there are significant cost implications of extending the route.

Dublin as a medium density urban centre in the 1970's was very much concentrated between say the Customs House and the Four Courts East to West and Parnell Square to Stephens Green North to South.

In the 1980's the area between Harcourt Road and Lower Mount Street emerged as the main private sector office area. In the 1990's areas such as IFSC, Grand Canal Quay emerged, in this decade this spread to Hannover Quay and Spencer Dock.

Areas such as Parnell Square stagnated and the former office mecca of College Green turned into outer temple bar i.e. its main function changed to leisure tilted at stag weekends.

What is clear is that Stephens Green is in employment terms probably the most intensively used location in Dublin; Pearse Station serves an area that was in the 1970's decaying but has transformed into a viable educational and office quarter. Spencer Dock is now what Wilton Place was in the 1980's and is surrounded by hundreds of acres of heavily leveraged development land which NAMA is crying out to see properly sefved by public transport. The area around Guiness is not much different.

As logical as your idea is to link Heuston and Tara Street or Connolly directly the chance to develop large scale projects along its route would be problematic due to the fact that so many ideal sites were developed as low quality low rise apartment buildings in the past 15 years. There would also be significant heritage concerns on virtually all the route from Customs House to Christchurch (Hawkins Street Excluded).
PVC King
 

Re: The destruction of St. Stephen's Green

Postby SeamusOG » Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:48 pm

That is a very fair point there is a significant discrepancy between the DRRTS proposal and the interconnector in terms of route length and specific alignment and there are significant cost implications of extending the route.

Indeed.

Yet, as far as I am aware, we’ve not seen any official justification for the change in route alignment, and elevation of costs. When the line was presented for public consultation, the only justification for routing the interconnector through St. Stephen’s Green was that it would enable interchange with the LUAS, despite the fact that a preferred route for the LUAS link-up had already been selected, and this preferred link-up route would have brought other putative interchange locations into play.

Dublin as a medium density urban centre in the 1970's was very much concentrated between say the Customs House and the Four Courts East to West and Parnell Square to Stephens Green North to South.


It’s still the busiest area though, isn’t it, in terms of where people actually are? (And, in volume terms, where they want to get to, and get from)

I mean, what other part of the city is continually busy 24 hours a day, seven days a week?

In the 1980's the area between Harcourt Road and Lower Mount Street emerged as the main private sector office area. In the 1990's areas such as IFSC, Grand Canal Quay emerged, in this decade this spread to Hannover Quay and Spencer Dock.


As a network is developed, ready access to Lower Mount Street should be achievable from Pearse Station and Grand Canal Dock. It already is, for users of the DART line. I wouldn’t see St. Stephen’s Green as a station of choice for people wishing to get to this street or its environs.

Similarly with Harcourt Road: it’s about 800 metres from the proposed interconnector station on St. Stephen’s Green, as the crow flies, and closer to a kilometre on foot along roads. (This is also, approximately, the case for important office areas like Fitzwilliam Place, Adelaide Road, Wilton Place/Terrace, etc).

I don’t think that Dublin should aspire to an end situation where, after significant investment, these important employment locations are so distant from the rail network.

In reality, these areas will eventually need to be properly connected to the network by the metro or LUAS.

It is, in my opinion, short-sighted, to build a longer, more expensive route when the reasons for this choice will be nullified by other infrastructural development which will need to take place if Dublin is to have a decent transport network..

As for the other areas which you mention, The IFSC (at Connolly) and Grand Canal Quay are already served by the existing parts of the proposed network, Spencer Dock will soon be served by the LUAS, which will connect with the DART, while Hannover Quay’s integration into the network may well also happen thanks to LUAS and Mr. Calatrava.:)

Areas such as Parnell Square stagnated and the former office mecca of College Green turned into outer temple bar i.e. its main function changed to leisure tilted at stag weekends.

Parnell Street, it seems to me, has turned a corner, and I do think you are doing College Green a disservice. It isn’t, I agree, the perfect spot at the moment, but even now - in its shabby state – it is much, much more than just a focal point for stag parties, as discussed earlier on this thread (and also on this one,)

According to the RPA’s presentation at the inquiry into the metro, there are a number of locations suitable for a metro/interconnector interchange. While they chose not to divulge the contents of their deliberations into the pros and cons of the various locations, I suspect that College Green would be among this number.

What is clear is that Stephens Green is in employment terms probably the most intensively used location in Dublin; Pearse Station serves an area that was in the 1970's decaying but has transformed into a viable educational and office quarter. Spencer Dock is now what Wilton Place was in the 1980's and is surrounded by hundreds of acres of heavily leveraged development land which NAMA is crying out to see properly sefved by public transport. The area around Guiness is not much different.


I think you are possibly using the term “St. Stephen’s Green” here as a general term for the Green itself, the neighbouring Georgian areas of Dublin, and the more modern developments between the Green and the Canal, as the numbers of people employed in St. Stephen’s Green would not be enormous in density terms, compared to several other areas of Dublin.

If this is the case, please remind yourself of my point about future development of the proposed network.

More importantly, you should also remember that the eventual network will not only be used by people who are employed in one particular place. It will be used by people who travel to and from locations for a whole host of reasons. Overall usage of the system, whether that be directly to a place of employment or for purposes which (by and large) generate employment, needs to be considered.

Pearse Station is already part of the network. As mentioned above, Spencer Dock soon will be with the arrival of the LUAS. And a shorter route probably would not have a different impact on the situation with Guinness.

As logical as your idea is to link Heuston and Tara Street or Connolly directly the chance to develop large scale projects along its route would be problematic due to the fact that so many ideal sites were developed as low quality low rise apartment buildings in the past 15 years. There would also be significant heritage concerns on virtually all the route from Customs House to Christchurch (Hawkins Street Excluded).


Well, in fairness, it is not my idea. As you know, it was produced in the 1970s by others, when I was but a chisler.:p

I really can’t see that development opportunities are going to be, or should be, a factor in the construction of much of this cross-city tunnel. As the city is pretty built up, in any case, within the areas which are being spoken about on this thread – whether along the proposed circuitous route, the shorter route proposed by the DRRTS, or some other route - development opportunities which are geographically closely related to the tunnel project are probably going to be minimal.

I would imagine that there will be development opportunities related to proximity to rail lines which can be put through the tunnel when it is built but I don’t see this as a particularly relevant factor which deserves imminent consideration when discussing the future of St. Stephen's Green.

As for the heritage issue, one would guess that there will be concerns in the Christchurch area. But elsewhere?
SeamusOG
Member
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:59 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland