Re: Re: transport21
@gunter wrote:
Well I have to say this is all very pleasant, everybody agreeing with each other and all that. The problem is that none of this is happening, or is likely to happen, not unless someone takes this city by the scruff of the neck.
Ruadhán’s point is that the money isn’t there for transport21, so we better find another way. Frank McDonald has been saying similar things for years. These are influential people, and we know the piggy bank is empty, so wishing for transport21 to happen and hoping that it’s the catalyst to better things, just may not be enough.
In times like these, we should be bombarded with ideas, plans, visions, instead of going into cryogenic suspension until somebody somehow gets the building boom going again.
I agree with keeping ideas going; there may be fiscal issues but one thing is clear; China and India will continue to outperform and the cost effects of their catch up process on commodity markets particularly steel and oil means that continuation of current development patterns is a total non-runner as both vehicles and petroleum based products will be significantly more expensive in the medium term.
It is however vital that where investments are made that they stack up in any market; the interconnector and electrification of lines to Maynooth, Balbriggan and Hazelhatch do that.
You state in a previous post that Adamstown is no substitute for the City; I would say that it is no panacea for the city but it and similar type developments are definitely part of the solution. Step back for one second and think of your audience on this site; in the main you are talking to people who think about spatial planning, transport investment and architecture. Great and credit to PC that this forum exists but it is very small part of the population. There are very many people who simply will not take on 20 plus years of debt unless they get a front and back garden (I live in a flat, having traded space for location) the reality is in the new NAMA era there will be a massive pressure to wind down a lot of loans extended on development land that is marginal in spatial terms. Like it or not the real pressure will be to unlock value from assets that produce nothing unless developed; and lets be honest would you commute 10 miles unless you got extra space?
Scenario 1 is that no additional spatial planning occurs and more housing estates are built in the tradional way as NAMA shifts stock having regard to value only and ABP chip away at technical aspects of developments because that is all the developments plans permit them to do.
Scenario 2 NAMA arranges syndicates of land owners as happened with Adamstown and 500 acre holding is developed around train station with apartments, retail centre, school and healthcare facility all within 5 minute walk of station; from there out houses get less dense until a minimum density of 20 units per acre is reached at the fringes. The estate service charge levies charge for bus service which goes within 5 minutes walk of all houses for all units outside the inner apartment/civic/retail core. As the residents have no option other than to pay the charge annually the service sub-consciously becomes free as it is at point of actual use. 10,000 units all plugged in to low oil dependence and bought in the main by people who traditionally bought into spec dev estate named Devin, Hutton or Royceton because they were in Castleknock on Finglas and had a picture of trigger on de front of de brochure.
As you more pertininetly point out the real gains are in densification; a key component of this will be switching land use on existing rail lines from industrial to mixed use. Examples include the area between Inchicore Works and Clondalkin, Dublin Industrial Estate D11, Baldoyle Ind Est D13; East Wall as well the other areas listed above such as Guiness. These low bay aging industrial buildings are vastly inferior to stock that is lying empty in the newer estates and are often in areas where commuter traffic makes distribution a nightmare.
Any solution has to be attractive to get people to make the shift from car based commuting to a rail / tram based alternative. A combination of medium – high density schemes in former industrial areas and medium to low density serviced by free (estate charge) feeder buses in outlying areas adjoining existing rail lines is the way forward. To plan for the next 20 years you probably need another 500,000 residential units at 25,000 p.a. residential units the question is how do you tempt those that previously chose South Meath or North Kildare to swap the car for a more sustainable alternative. Choice of home type and a quality rail service
