Re: Re: Metro North

@PVC King wrote:

20,000 jobs per year = 200,000 sq m of offices and 15,000 homes.

Spatial clusters each to accomodate 35,000 sq m

1. Spencer Dock – Interconnector
2. Heuston Station – Interconnector
3. Park West / Inchicore – Interconnector
4. Dublin Airport – Spur from Northern Line
5. Cherrywood – Luas line
6. Blanchardstown – Maynooth line

Residential districts each to deliver 3,000 homes

1. North Docklands – Interconnector
2. Adamstown – Interconnector
3. Leixlip – Interconnector
4. Pace – Interconnector
5. North Fringe – Interconnector

If the £1,550m saving were spent on attracting the jobs in the form of incentives and post grad education and not a €2bn underground luas line the plan would be a lot more viable.

Once you take to fantasy and invented costings it tends to mean you’re backing a loser.

You say that by building a spur from the Malahide DART as an extension of the Interconnector, with enhanced signalling for higher frequency of services, the purpose of Metro North will be achieved with savings of 1,550 million Euros.
(Meaning the spur plus signalling costs 450m)

That is wildly incorrect.

At this time the final contract for MN is now expected to be in the region of 1.75 billion.

You have forgotten that you proposed a Luas to Ballymun as an alternative ‘high quality’ transport system.
Such a proposed line would have to go to the airport. It alone would cost in the region of 500 million.

But.
This line would
(a) restrict further a congested road corridor along it’s route.
(b)have neither the capacity to bear current passenger numbers or allow for future growth.

So, so far you have saved 1.75 billion minus (450 + 500 million)

equals 800 million

Not 1,550 million.

And what will your plan achieve?

A white elephant between Dublin CC and the airport via Santry/Ballymun that allows no growth and congests the area further.

When the earlier London tube lines were built – particularly the Metropolitan/District lines…..large sections of them were built through GREEN fields.

Not along the sort of high density corridors that you assert only justify a metro line. That came later because the lines were there to justify it.

The same holds true for many European cities like Berlin, Frankfurt, Helsinki etc

It’s the foresight and confidence in the future that means planning in this way is the correct and wise thing.

Now we have already seen your earlier assertions that:

IE will have to rebuild bridges on the Kildare line ( incorrect, already done),

that all ‘tube’ lines only use a 3rd rail (wrong – many major cities use overhead power lines),

that the RPA had designed the project with no outside expertise (wrong – Turner and Townsend world leaders were consultants).

it was only a Luas line (wrong it has 4 times the capacity of Luas),

it would’nt connect with any other system (wrong it connects with DART, Luas Red etc),

that the CBAs were predicated on ‘celtic tiger growth (wrong they were calculated on historic growth)……..

they’re just the gaffes I can remember off the top of me head PVC..

When a commentator gets so many simple facts wrong and further invents others to back up his perverse logic

who would be confident in his conclusions?

I don’t know what sort of work you do but I hope it’s nothing responsible.

You are exceptionally incompetent.