transport21

Round of applause me arse. The very fact that it’s this month and not years ago means the Government deserve a kick in the head.

On the topic of bringing roads in on time and on budget, you’ll notice now they all are. That’s easy, and is simply the result of getting smart, ie. when announcing the project, add a hefty contingency amount and add 3/6 months to what you think it will take to do it….and hey presto we have a road on time and on budget. It’s cynical spin again from a Government that excels at it.

+1

cgcsb. seriously. No No No No No

No. In a word. No. Worst post ever! Read the DTO Strategy, read T21, Read some of Martin Cullens twaddle in his time. Do all these. Then come back here and radically edit your post by including “integrated ticketing” “DTA” “Navan Rail” “Line BX” “Metro” “Bus services” and “shambles”

@Angry Rebel wrote:

On the topic of bringing roads in on time and on budget, you’ll notice now they all are. That’s easy, and is simply the result of getting smart, ie. when announcing the project, add a hefty contingency amount and add 3/6 months to what you think it will take to do it….and hey presto we have a road on time and on budget. It’s cynical spin again from a Government that excels at it.

True. However i would contend that actual construction has been relatively quick – for any country to construct the bulk of its motorway network in a 6 year time frame has to be seen as a reasonable achievement, in terms of road building.

More appropraitely the Government should be blamed for pissing about and then shelving the critical infrastructure bill when we really needed it, the protracted planning process is the real reason for the delay.

Of course T21 is heavily weighted in favour of roads and with the gov hell bent against borrowing, until they were forced to, it does seem that roads are granted massive funds, and that it is at the expense of rail. A motorway network between dublin & the major centres is a basic necessity imo, however, with a midget national debt of 37bn, we could have transformed both the rail & road networks in tandem.

Why the delay with Navan, why is it that rail projects are phased in to oblivion, just borrow the damn money, get on with building it & build the lot of it.

OK guys, when is the Mary O’Rourke Memorial stretch of the Luas going to be built? Surely this was one of the more blatant examples of a government minister going into a blue funk when confronted with a hotel developer – which would have made the greater impact: the Luas joining up or a hotel? Clearly, in FF terms the hotel!

@Angry Rebel wrote:

Round of applause me arse.

T21.. what exactly have they been doing? They’ve been busy designing a new logo, I see.

“PPP Luas” – Stephen’s Green to Fassaroe, meandering over the M50, left here, right there, over the moor and down the valley… I mean, c’mon, this feckless meandering through PPP developments is going to feck all of us over eventually. The Luas network will be entirely inadequate once its cross-county branches are complete.

How much will it cost us, the tax payers, to straighten this southern line for the inevitable Metro to Bray? This is the M50 all over again, but worse. This is classic Paddy planning. Ten years from now we’ll all be forking out phenomenal amounts of cash to correct ‘our’ mistakes.

The Interconnector should be under construction now. Not after the money runs out from building silly train sets around the three counties.

My heart sinks.

On a lighter note, the new train depot at Portlaoise looks well. :p

Bad news is that unless the m50 phase3 is finished in four days, it’ll be officially behind schedual. The annoncement of a prefered route for the lucan luas line has been put back from March2008 to the end of the year

actually not one of the projects targeted for completion this month are finished yer. There is still 4 days left in this month though

@cgcsb wrote:

actually not one of the projects targeted for completion this month are finished yer. There is still 4 days left in this month though

kilpedder interchange is finished – its just a bridge though.

How did the projects for Transport 21 actually get picked in the first place? What was the criteria and who decided?
Some of them seem strange including the Metro West from Tallaght to Dublin airport.

As far as i know, the transport minister at the time picked the projects as recomended by the RPA and CIE. Only the projects that were absolutely essential were picked. Other less important project were put on the back burner such as the eatern by pass, The outer bypass and the Dublin-Derry motorway

Cgcsb

None of the roads are on time and on budget… It never was in fact.

You see its all a trick from the government. Open your eyes.

I mean the PDF files that the government produce every so often are lovely of late, all the presentations of the glory road plans, T21s, conferences after conferences, the recent review of the government’s record on infastructure was just WOW 😀

Anyway…. back to reality

@cgcsb wrote:

As far as i know, the transport minister at the time picked the projects as recomended by the RPA and CIE. Only the projects that were absolutely essential were picked. Other less important project were put on the back burner such as the eatern by pass, The outer bypass and the Dublin-Derry motorway

Tullamore gets a bypass cus Brian cowen said so. NOWHERE near essential…………. Cork – Limerick motorway is essential, but havent seen any shiny new files on whether are not they are going to do it. Croom bypass gets mentioned alot, it’s a lovely road bypass built nearly 10 years ago, but they forget to tell us, that the rest of the road is for sheep!

The Tullamore bypass is essential as it is part of the n52 route which is the backbone of the Midlands Gateway. The road is currently in poor condition and is being up graded section by section from Nenagh to Dundalk. The N20 Cork-Limerick is definately going ahead It is at the constraints study/preliminary desian stage of developement

What I find confusing is the governments designation of Major inter-urban routes. The N20 is not considered one however the M3 Dublin-Kells (pop. 5000) is one. THe M3 is more of a suburban/commuter road more than an inter city route

MIUs are the Dublin ones only. Is the M3 included? I thought it was DUblin to Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford only

What gets me is that inter-urbans all lead to Dublin….

People do like and need to travel between the urban centres as well. Such Dublin centric planning is ruining this country and making the creaking Dublin infrastructure creak even louder!

yea on http://www.nra.ie/mapping look at the M3 page it says Inter-Urban route: Yes

doesn’t it go to Derry?

@cgcsb wrote:

The Tullamore bypass is essential as it is part of the n52 route which is the backbone of the Midlands Gateway. The road is currently in poor condition and is being up graded section by section from Nenagh to Dundalk. The N20 Cork-Limerick is definately going ahead It is at the constraints study/preliminary desian stage of developement

Of course!! sure every road is essential…

But I think your REALLY missing the big picture here. It goes ahead, cus Brian Cowen said so whether it’s essential or NOT. Tullamore bypass was not in the list of the government priorities last year, Brian cowen has a bigger wand to wave so…. This goes ahead…

Cork Limerick route has been in planning since the start of the decade. This route is one of the busiest routes in the country but as u said its still in planning. and you also stated the tullamore bypass is essential so tullamore get’s a bypass.

Also I could be wrong on this, but last time I passed by Tullamore, there was a bypass route that swings around the town, might not be as glorious as some,but it does the job of getting traffic out of the town.

If Brian Cown becomes Taoiseach, i’ll eat my arms…

P.S N52 smaller trucks, smaller road, smaller towns to go through smaller go to
N20 larger trucks, bigger towns to go through, bigger town go too.

Which should get priority this year BRIAN COWEN SAID THE N52 TULLAMORE, WAHEY!

@notjim wrote:

doesn’t it go to Derry?

No the N2 was designed to go to Derry in the 1969 revised plan but in practice most people use the M1 / A1 to Newry then on to Armagh before joining the N2 routing at Aughnacloy when going to Derry / Letterkenny.

The N3 goes to Donegal and a few commuter towns such as Virginia, Cavan and Enniskillen en route

Was in southern China recently and it stfruck me just how few parrallel roads they had; one motorway was able to serve directional corridors!

It would be possible for the Derry motorway to tie into the M3 when it enteres the republic. Maybe this was what the government meant when they included a motorway from Dublin to Derry in the NDP but not in Transport21

How odd, I thought that Derry was the urban in Inter-urban for this road, remind me, why is this road being built?

Roads, roads, roads and more roads.

There is no other European city like Dublin for such a woeful rail transport service.

We struggle to bring the rail service up to Victorian era standards….and think that’s progress!

in it’s present form, it’s simply a commuter road for Dublin to by pass the current poor quality N3 which is really the only remaining single carrigeway radial route out of Dublin

double post.

@cgcsb wrote:

It would be possible for the Derry motorway to tie into the M3 when it enteres the republic. Maybe this was what the government meant when they included a motorway from Dublin to Derry in the NDP but not in Transport21

Yes, It would make alot of sense, and give te M3 a real purpose to exist! but at the moment the government can’t make their minds up on this.

1. One would say to use the M1 and turn off at newry
2. Another would say use the current N2, (which they are still commiting to upgrade) waste of money!
3. Use the N33 and use the N2 onwards to the A5 ( this S2 lane stretch is currently being upgraded at the mo) Doesn’t fit into the new propasal o D2 to the north does it? oh WHY???.

4. The M3 spur to Eniskillen onto the A5 (makes double sense) as it will serve Donegal and the entire North west of Ireland with direct motorway to Dublin. Secondly a spur would cost less money than upgrading the N2 to the border!

What do you people think? better ideas?

Building motorways for commuting: what a mess!

@onthejob wrote:

Roads, roads, roads and more roads.

There is no other European city like Dublin for such a woeful rail transport service.

We struggle to bring the rail service up to Victorian era standards….and think that’s progress!

Indeed – just back from London where I watched a program on the tube on BBC London – – 1 Billion journeys made last year or approx 3 million people per day – – -program covered history of the tube and noted that circle line was in place by early last century, first tube line constructed in 1863! How can it be that they constructed a system so long ago and we still cannot build even one metro line.
Londoners still complain about the service but my god what would they make of Dublins system(lack of).

Same thing here in old NY, fantastic subway system, with buses and trains intergrated! (new word…) one metrocard can get you practically anywhere (excluding Staten Island) with free transfers between train and bus and vice versa for 2 measly dollars ,24hrs a day, Most new yorkers still complain, i cannot.
It must be said that the system is old and sometimes almost crumbling and im not aware of any recent major new additions, it must have been relatively cheaper early/mid 20th century regarding construction costs etc

I lived in NYc for a while and was constantly amazed by the excellence and stupidity of the system, so handy: having local and express lines on the subway is fantastic, the single stage pricing and the bus transfers are fantastic, the density of most of the network and the 24 hr running, the frequency of the trains, amazing! On the other hand, most journeys after 1am seem to involved going to the wrong station and changing directions, isn’t there a line missing on the east, why is it so hard to get cross town north of say 55th, why did they build an express to the airport and terminate in queens? NYc is generally like that, amazingly creaky and dumb but it somehow works fantastically.

Try Hong Kong you can pay for groceries with your Octupus card!

And get from the airport that is c40-50kms out of town in 25 minutes for €8

Amazing!

The one non-road element of T21 which is flying ahead is also the one with the least impact in terms of attracting passengers. That’s the Western Rail Corridor, a bit of a rural branch line between Athnery to Ennis before it makes it’s way to the metropolis that is Tuam.

The reason for this fast tracking is because the priest that Irish taxpayers are paying to have this built for, can have a special place in heaven and matters more than the entire commuting population of Leinster and Cork

It is no more complicated than the Midelton line or the Navan line. But will be operational years if not decades ahead of these projects.

Our Lady, Seven Apostles, Elvis and a Fried Mars Bar were seen on the side of a wall in Knock you know.

That’s strategic planning alright. Sure, they might come back again!

It’s happening – get over it.

I’d have a few concerns about the WRC myself but the positives far outweigh the negatives. It will transform movement between population centres on the western seaboard. Unfortunately, Cute Panda, with your “funny” comments about priests/our lady/knock etc it would appear that you simply have a chip on your shoulder that something/anything to do with infrastructural development is hapening in the west. The only reason it’s happening prior to many other nescessary schemes around the country is that the level of work required is relatively minimal.

@BTH wrote:

I
I’d have a few concerns about the WRC myself but the positives far outweigh the negatives.

No they don’t, it costs too much and too few people will use it

jdivision: you don’t think settlement patterns will adjust to the route meaning a) it will be well used in the future and b) a better, more clustered pattern of settlement will be the result?

@jdivision wrote:

No they don’t, it costs too much and too few people will use it

We’ll see about that. Given the choice of sitting in an hour and a half long traffic jam from Oranmore or Claregalway into central Galway every morning and out again in the evenings I believe we’ll see a huge number of people choosing to catch the trains instead.

Of course a proper public transport system within Galway City itself will have to be developed for the full benefit of the WRC to be felt – otherwise we’ll just end up with thousands of people arriving in Eyre Square with no way of gettin go their workplaces…

of course running a commuter service from Oranmore doesn’t require the WRC: it is a mystery why this hasn’t happened already.

@notjim wrote:

jdivision: you don’t think settlement patterns will adjust to the route meaning a) it will be well used in the future and b) a better, more clustered pattern of settlement will be the result?

No I don’t, I think it’ll be massive waste of money subsidised by the taxpayer in order for politicians to claim they were responsible for it and should be re-elected. As far as I’m concerned no work should happen on this project until such time as public transport services in Dublin, Cork and indeed Galway itself are improved.

@notjim wrote:

of course running a commuter service from Oranmore doesn’t require the WRC: it is a mystery why this hasn’t happened already.

Agreed.

That the WRC is going ahead does not mean an excuse for delays in delivering the Navan and Midleton lines. All should be open asap imo.

The real benefits of the wrc should be seen in a strategic context – linkage between Waterford, Cork, Limerick, and Galway, with a renewed orbital route from Rosslare port around the country – as opposed to being only Dublin radial based. Whats needed now is for Irish Rail to get back into freight, and devise strategies as to how best maximise this infrastructure.

the real tragedy is that the line in Galway is single track, so intercity trains from Limerick and Dublin as well as Athenry commuter have to use a single track system. Also if the govt. had any sence, there would be a direct Galway Waterford service to accomidate a one change Galway-Cork servive. Otherwise a journey from Galway to Cork would require 2 changes. It would even be possible to make a minor inexpensive track alteration at Limerick Junction to allow direct Cork-Galway service. That would be what really gets the customers out of cars as changing trains can be a hastle

@BTH wrote:

It’s happening – get over it.

I’d have a few concerns about the WRC myself but the positives far outweigh the negatives. It will transform movement between population centres on the western seaboard. Unfortunately, Cute Panda, with your “funny” comments about priests/our lady/knock etc it would appear that you simply have a chip on your shoulder that something/anything to do with infrastructural development is hapening in the west. The only reason it’s happening prior to many other nescessary schemes around the country is that the level of work required is relatively minimal.

It is happening faster than other projects, because, as with Shannon Airport, the political muscle in “the West” is far better organised and better flexed than elsewhere in the country. The Cork – Midleton railway is being done an the previous alignment, similar to the WRC, yet we’ve seen teh Government announce the project ad nauseum for the last 5 years and it still won’t be done until late next year.

The relevant authorities don’t tend to prioritise projects on ease of delivery, they go on what is possible within the budget allocation. The WRC will cost in the region of €600-700m all in when it’s finished so the pressure was applied to get the wheels rolling as it were.

I’d have a few concerns about the WRC myself but the positives far outweigh the negatives.

I don’t see any positives at all. I looks good on the rail map of Ireland but that’s it. Every argument for the WRC could be used to justify the Limerick to Rosslare service if it didn’t already exist. The WRC will be patronised even less that Limerick to Rosslare which also looks reasonable on the rail map but is a complete waste of time. Here’s a novel thought; provide rail where there’s a demand for it and where it is going to succeed; it’s not hard to know where that is – you don’t even have to research international findings – just look at the national experience. Rail works well between or in areas of high population density. The latest once-off housing free-for-all announced by Mayo county council show that there will never be the type of settlement patterns along the line to justify more rail lines there. The Panda is right – the WRC is a bad Irish joke.

http://www.transport21.ie/Maps_And_Videos/Video/Transport_21_Video.html

new transport21 video. the website changed it’s colour scheme to match it’s new logo. seems they are more concerned with the publicity than actually doing the work

@hutton wrote:

The real benefits of the wrc should be seen in a strategic context – linkage between Waterford, Cork, Limerick, and Galway, with a renewed orbital route from Rosslare port around the country – as opposed to being only Dublin radial based. .

You do realise that Irish Rail has said that it would be cheaper for them to pay for people to get a taxi from Limerick to Rosslare than to run the Limerick-Rosslare service. This plan has no basis in reality. It’ll be a white elephant

Really patronising ads that they have at the moment – although I assume that the 10 year-olds featured in the ads are now running transport 21, lets face it they’d probably be better than those involved to date

@cgcsb wrote:

the real tragedy is that the line in Galway is single track, so intercity trains from Limerick and Dublin as well as Athenry commuter have to use a single track system. Also if the govt. had any sence, there would be a direct Galway Waterford service to accomidate a one change Galway-Cork servive. Otherwise a journey from Galway to Cork would require 2 changes. It would even be possible to make a minor inexpensive track alteration at Limerick Junction to allow direct Cork-Galway service. That would be what really gets the customers out of cars as changing trains can be a hastle

I’ve actually studied Limerick junction’s location and it wouldn’t be that hard to put a direct curve from Cork to Limerick at the junction, similar to the Limerick to Dublin curve.

But then again Irish Rail don’t do sense :p

@Angry Rebel wrote:

It is happening faster than other projects, because, as with Shannon Airport, the political muscle in “the West” is far better organised and better flexed than elsewhere in the country.

Dont be ridiculous. If tou remember correctly the lobby to save the Shannon Heathrow slots failed so clearly the political muscle isnt as powerful as you’d like to think. The WRC is being built because it will serve a large population.

The population of Limerick city and the immediate urban area (environs/suburbs) is 90778, the population of Galway city and environs is 72729 (based on the 2006 census carried out by the CSO), the population of Ennis is approaching 32,000 (projected population for 2008). This gives a total of over 195,000.

The Ennis-Limerick rail line is currently carrying 200,000 passengers a year. This will increase exponentially as more towns and especially Galway city are brought onto the network.

This planning of infrastructure to serve large populations and encourage growth and stimulate activity is exactly the kind of forward planning we need. Criticism of its implementation is quite a strange thing to see here to be honest.

And please don’t condescend us by claiming the WRC and indeed Shannon airport are parochial, self centred concerns. The loss of the Heathrow slots at Shannon will have been a major blow to the the competitiveness of the entire Western region, evidenced by the srong opposition to the plan from the CEOs of major international corporations, not just councillors, TDs and priests. The WRC is a strategic project central to providing a viable alternative to investment and population growth along the Eastern seaboard.

You see that is my feeling: we whine and whine about how infrastructure lags need in Dublin and then get all pompous when it is proposed to let infrastructure lead growth in the west.

oh for God’s sake! If the people of the West can’t see the WRC as the electoral bribe it is then God help the region.,To build this useless piece of crap while Dublin and Cork and other cities choke is typical parish pump gombeenism at it’s most rapacious.If you can put a case forward for the WRC over any single rail proposal for Dublin from either T21 or the DTO Strategy from a national perspective (yes National), please do. I’ll reinforce my sides for the response as I’m sure they’ll split – especially those population figures quoted before – talk about lame – compare let’s say the Western rail corridors scattered car-happy catchment to I dunno – Swords with 120,000 people, across the field from a Blanch with 100,000 people,not forgetting of course the wee village of Tallaght growing (up and up) to over 100,000) – North Bray 30,000, Inner Dublin up to 600,000 and beyond. Phase1 of the Navan Rail line from City centre to Pace will probably carry more than this ludicrous nonsense of a line

“The Ennis-Limerick rail line is currently carrying 200,000 passengers a year”

That’s significantly less than 1 train per day.Is this a joke

As for Shannon, there are about 5 airports in the West ffs.Choose one. Develop it.Then leave us alone! Same principle apples hospitals, universities, theatres, and moreover;towns and cities.

Read the Buchanan report while you’re at it

ah yes a pompous bombastic response filled with “we are the worst people on earth”-isms: can I direct you to the p11 board?

Well basically what you’re espousing is a one sided development of infrastructure in the country. I think its about time we began to provide infrastructure which will stimulate growth and development rather than play catch up at providing infrastructure after the fact.

Alonso when you say choose one and then leave us alone. What the hell is that meant to mean? What are you grouchy that your precious tax money is being spent on infrastructure projects in the West? It works both ways. There are more than 4 million people on this island and less than half live in Dublin. This Dublin centric view is suprising especially on an island as small as ours and I’m disappointed to see it on this site where I thought people were in favour of the sensible development of the country and not just Dublin.

I posted those population figures not to be competing with Dublin by the way but purely to prove a point that a rail service is more than viable along this corridor.

You should bear in mind that Shannon free zone is the largest industrial centre outside the IFSC. It is a major economic generator and has a regional and national impact.

I dont agree with the Buchanan report by the way (more condescension). I think the concentration of investment in major centres is of course the most effective way to development but the concentration of investment in one major conurbation running the length of the East coast is completely unsustainable and will just reinforce the problems which Dublin is suffering now.

The WRC is the national equivalent of Luas BX- projects with very suspect rationales that, due to political grandstanding and interference, have captured the public imagination, the necessity for each being seen as an a priori fact when the truth is considerably messier. Yes, they should have existed long before now, but that doesn’t make the case for building them immediately, or at all.

But why am I talking about truth? Local politicians are involved. Truth packed its bags a long time ago.

(notjim- finally we disagree!)

@reddy wrote:

Well basically what you’re espousing is a one sided development of infrastructure in the country. I think its about time we began to provide infrastructure which will stimulate growth and development rather than play catch up at providing infrastructure after the fact.

Where did I espouse that. All I’m espousing is a halt on our money being flushed down the crypto infested drains of the West. Consolidate.You’ve been pushing this same agenda aince the foundation of th4 State.It has failed the West, it has failedCork and it has failed Dublin.I advocate a changing of the record

Alonso when you say choose one and then leave us alone. What the hell is that meant to mean? What are you grouchy that your precious tax money is being spent on infrastructure projects in the West? It works both ways. There are more than 4 million people on this island and less than half live in Dublin. This Dublin centric view is suprising especially on an island as small as ours and I’m disappointed to see it on this site where I thought people were in favour of the sensible development of the country and not just Dublin.

Because between Sligo,Knock, Shannon, Galway, Derry and Cork,the Western and Southern seaboards have managed yet again to dilute all of our taxes into ineffective small scattered facilities that don’t seem to work,while Dublin is over congested waiting for investment that’s a decade overdue.Had Cork been developed to a greater extent rather than dispersing funds this may not have happened

I posted those population figures not to be competing with Dublin by the way but purely to prove a point that a rail service is more than viable along this corridor.

I posted the figures to prove that a rail service was urgent along those corridors.

You should bear in mind that Shannon free zone is the largest industrial centre outside the IFSC. It is a major economic generator and has a regional and national impact.

It’s a fabricated economic zone in a senseless location.Why didn’t they do an IFSC in Limerick City?

I dont agree with the Buchanan report by the way (more condescension). I think the concentration of investment in major centres is of course the most effective way to development but the concentration of investment in one major conurbation running the length of the East coast is completely unsustainable and will just reinforce the problems which Dublin is suffering now.

No One advocated that ever. Not I nor Sir Colin Buchanan.EVer. You’ve managed to state your disagreement with Buchanan yet then espouse the central tenet of the wholebloody document – “I think the concentration of investment in major centres is of course the most effective way to development”.

@notjim wrote:

ah yes a pompous bombastic response filled with “we are the worst people on earth”-isms: can I direct you to the p11 board?

Bombastic perhaps. Pompous? I find the arrogant posturing and grandstanding of “western advocates” who by cutting yet another ribbon and by developing another field con their electorate into believing it’s all good for the region to be far more offensive and pompous. This attitude displayed by yourself and reddy is EXACTLY what’s compromising the development of the Western seaboard. Until settlements in Connacht start realistically aiming for critical mass it will always be like this.

This is far beyond the WRC as I alluded to earlier. What other nation on earth would people elect a Government Party TD to fight against Govt policy, as the Shannonsiders did with O’Dea-Vote Fianna Fail to prevent FF Policy being implemented?

Major Centres! Not one major centre. Thats where I dont agree with what your saying. Major centres can potentially include Dublin, Cork, Limerick-Ennis-Shannon, Galway, Sligo, Waterford, Athlone and many others.
The consolidation of development in the country to the East coast has been espoused recently in the Skehan/Sirr plan https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=6840.

I completely agree about Cork being underdeveloped.

I also completely agree that those areas in Dublin urgently need transport provision. However it should not consistently be at the expense of other parts of the state.

The IFSC was originally planned for Shannon actually and Charlie Haughey placed it in Dublin in a pre election manifesto. The free zone was located at what was the worlds busiest airport at the time and a centre of international connection and trade.

Please tell me where I was offensive or pompous by the way? I apologise.

@alonso wrote:

oh for God’s sake! If the people of the West can’t see the WRC as the electoral bribe it is then God help the region.,To build this useless piece of crap while Dublin and Cork and other cities choke is typical parish pump gombeenism at it’s most rapacious.If you can put a case forward for the WRC over any single rail proposal for Dublin from either T21 or the DTO Strategy from a national perspective (yes National), please do. I’ll reinforce my sides for the response as I’m sure they’ll split – especially those population figures quoted before – talk about lame – compare let’s say the Western rail corridors scattered car-happy catchment to I dunno – Swords with 120,000 people, across the field from a Blanch with 100,000 people,not forgetting of course the wee village of Tallaght growing (up and up) to over 100,000) – North Bray 30,000, Inner Dublin up to 600,000 and beyond. Phase1 of the Navan Rail line from City centre to Pace will probably carry more than this ludicrous nonsense of a line

There are 33,000 people in Swords and 500,000 people in Dublin City according to the 2006 census

@reddy wrote:

Well basically what you’re espousing is a one sided development of infrastructure in the country. I think its about time we began to provide infrastructure which will stimulate growth and development rather than play catch up at providing infrastructure after the fact.

Alonso when you say choose one and then leave us alone. What the hell is that meant to mean? What are you grouchy that your precious tax money is being spent on infrastructure projects in the West? It works both ways. There are more than 4 million people on this island and less than half live in Dublin. This Dublin centric view is suprising especially on an island as small as ours and I’m disappointed to see it on this site where I thought people were in favour of the sensible development of the country and not just Dublin.

I posted those population figures not to be competing with Dublin by the way but purely to prove a point that a rail service is more than viable along this corridor.

You should bear in mind that Shannon free zone is the largest industrial centre outside the IFSC. It is a major economic generator and has a regional and national impact.

I dont agree with the Buchanan report by the way (more condescension). I think the concentration of investment in major centres is of course the most effective way to development but the concentration of investment in one major conurbation running the length of the East coast is completely unsustainable and will just reinforce the problems which Dublin is suffering now.

There are over 6 million people on the Island of Ireland and over 4million in the republic

@reddy wrote:

Please tell me where I was offensive or pompous by the way? I apologise.

gotta go now. Just to say I thought that comment was actually directed at me?

@cgcsb wrote:

There are 33,000 people in Swords and 500,000 people in Dublin City according to the 2006 census

I’m talking about the 2016, 2021 and 2026 Census though.

I dont agree with the Buchanan report by the way (more condescension). I think the concentration of investment in major centres is of course the most effective way to development but the concentration of investment in one major conurbation running the length of the East coast is completely unsustainable and will just reinforce the problems which Dublin is suffering

now.

Just to follow on from Alonso’s point, failure to pursue the Buchanan Reports findings have meant that the “concentration of investment in one major conurbation running the length of the East coast” has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen. Wildly spraying development over the ‘west’ coast, with a range of dubious state supported infrastructure (be they airports or raillines) does nothing to balance regional development. It just results in the failure of any of these regional centres to gain or sustain critical mass, and growth, and population continuing to migrate to Dublin.

Once more and with feeling, scale is critical if firms are to able to take advantage of the increasing returns to scale and external economies of scale associated with urban settlements. We’re a very small country with one urban settlement of any scale (and even then its only a medium size city), entertaining the fantasy that every town of more than 2000 people can hope to compete for businesses is both dangerous and counterproductive. Building critical mass in a small number of larger settlements with their own hinterland is the only way of slowing the relative growth of Dublin vs the rest of the country. In reality, on a national level, the only real question should be whether or not Waterford should be considered as large enough to qualify as such. Otherwise, the message is simple and has been for decades, concentrate on the city regions of Cork, Limerick and Galway as the key nodes for future growth. With proper planning, prioritised infrastructure delivery, and the appropriate industrial development policies, it may even be possible to at least partially balance regional development.

The free zone was located at what was the worlds busiest airport at the time and a centre of international connection and trade.

Sorry – looking for a clarification – Are you suggesting that SNN was the worlds busiest airport in 1986?

No sorry at the time of the establishment of Shannon development and the early ideas about the creation of the free zone.

@alonso wrote:

This attitude displayed by yourself and reddy is EXACTLY what’s compromising the development of the Western seaboard. Until settlements in Connacht start realistically aiming for critical mass it will always be like this.

This is pompous for example! Also I haven’t really displayed an attitude: I just wondered if upgrading the wrc, a realitively inexpensive project might not look forward thinking in the future, I amn’t even sure if that’s true I just wanted to think about it without some rant about gombeens and without being accused of compromising the development of the western seaboard.

@reddy wrote:

And please don’t condescend us by claiming the WRC and indeed Shannon airport are parochial, self centred concerns. The loss of the Heathrow slots at Shannon will have been a major blow to the the competitiveness of the entire Western region, evidenced by the srong opposition to the plan from the CEOs of major international corporations, not just councillors, TDs and priests. .

I laugh at this. Shannon lost its Heathrow slots because it gave Ryanair a sweetheart deal to compete on the London route and then Aer Lingus began to consider its options. It’s the management’s own fault and the ceos etc should have been complaining to them rather than believing that a listed company should serve their interests.

Spot on.

@ctesiphon wrote:

(notjim- finally we disagree!)

I don’t know if we agree or not, I don’t really have an opinion, I don’t have the facts, I just find the whole debate annoying, especially on the anti-wrc side, they may be right but they use the same look-at-the-state of-this-country you-are-an-eejit-by-definition rhetoric that is so irritating in the high rise at any cost people.

Also I haven’t really displayed an attitude: I just wondered if upgrading the wrc, a realitively inexpensive project might not look forward thinking in the future, I amn’t even sure if that’s true I just wanted to think about it without some rant about gombeens and without being accused of compromising the development of the western seaboard.

I agree there is an “attitude” against the WRC but I think it’s because the futility of it is so obvious; regional rail lines in Ireland connecting peripheral cities do not work and no advocates have ever presented any sort of case that the WRC will be anything but a failure and a waste of money. Willfully ignoring very similar existing routes like the Limerick to Rosslare/Waterford route suggests an unwillingness to actually argue or defend the whole idea behind the WRC. Why is Limerick to Rosslare such a failure and why would Galway to Sligo any different? Has Limerick to Rosslare led to any increase in “development” along it’s route or even any significant benefit for Limerick or Rosslare? The answers are obvious and it seems disengenious to suggest that everything will be different with a rail link from Sligo to Galway. We have to get real here; I’m a big fan of rail transport but it only works in certain environments. The Luas carries more passengers in two days than are carried in a whole year on the Ennis to Limerick line and that’s the most “successful” of the regional routes. Under any analysis the money spent on the WRC could find far more beneficial projects for the area but it seems the champions of this scheme believe that any money spent in the West even if completely wasted will help the region when it wont and in fact diverts resources and peoples’ energy away from potentially beneficial enterprises.

Again, it seems to me some principle of subsidiarity should apply, devolving decision making to a local level: obviously some portion of the T21 funds should be spent in the west, to me it seems clear that what eg Galway needs is help for commuters, the traffic is terrible, so run a train back and forward to Oranmore or even Athenry and think what can be done for Barna, Headford and Tuam. However, the local representatives and activists are clear that this, the WRC, is what they want, surely we should respect that?

Perhaps the disastrous record of local decision making in planning makes people despair of subsidiarity, but it seems to me that giving people more responsibility, not less, is the answer.

@jdivision wrote:

I laugh at this. Shannon lost its Heathrow slots because it gave Ryanair a sweetheart deal to compete on the London route and then Aer Lingus began to consider its options. It’s the management’s own fault and the ceos etc should have been complaining to them rather than believing that a listed company should serve their interests.

I completely agree that Shannon has been badly mismanaged and it will only improve now that its been left to sink or swim. They’ll have to raise the bar to survive.

However the real point about the loss of the Heathrow slots was the question over the point of the government maintaining a stake in the airline. If the airline is to run as a listed interest and not serve the national interest then the government should pull out.

Thanks also for some more composed replies to this thread. Think I got a bit defensive!!

I still maintain however that development of infrastructure must not be just in answer to chronic need and where it is occurring in advance of this, hopefully stimulating investment and the attractiveness of the region, then it should be welcomed. Thats all I’m saying.

I still maintain however that development of infrastructure must not be just in answer to chronic need and where it is occurring in advance of this, hopefully stimulating investment and the attractiveness of the region, then it should be welcomed. Thats all I’m saying.[/QUOTE]

I agree totally with this, public transport infrastructure shouldn’t always be built as a reaction to chronic need, advance planning is ok too. By way of an example, I believe my own neck of the woods (Cork city) has reached a stage where I believe light rail / trams should be introduced linking the major suburbs. This doesn’t mean it has reached the stage (in terms of congestion) that Dublin was at 3 years ago when it finally got the Luas – far from. It merely means I believe it has reached the stage in terms of population, movement of people and planned population increase where in most other European countries a proper public transport infrastructure (not just irregular and sparse bus routes) would be put in place.

The WRC may be a different kettle of fish but I’ll stay out of that debate as I know little on the topic. I do think that reddys statement above is very true and a proper criticism of how infrastructure is planned in this country however.

On a related topic, the Greens (before they became chief mourner’s at Bertie’s funeral) claimed as part of the programme for government to have negotiated the procurement of full reports into the viability of light rail in Cork and Galway within the first year (I think) of the government’s life. Has anything been done in this regard?

Two years it seems, but includes Waterford and Limerick!

From http://www.greenparty.ie/government/agreed_programme_for_government

“Conduct feasibility studies to be completed in two years into Luas-style light rail transit systems in Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford.”

Here is how, when completed, this “rapid” rail corridor will function:

8 times a day a train will leave Clairemorris and make its way to Galway via Athenry. Between Clairemorris and Tuam it will cross over the N17 at grade no less than 3 times.

It will then reverse out of Galway and return to Athenry and REVERSE again and make its way to Limerick.

Then it will REVERSE once more and make its way to Lim Junction.

and 8 times a day another train will do the same absurd dance in the reverse direction.

Average running speed 35 MPH.

In no other country would this joke be allowed to happen. Let alone be prioritised ahead of Navan, Midleton, Interconnector, Metro, Luas etc…

How long will Tuam-Galway take?

@notjim wrote:

How long will Tuam-Galway take?

I was told an hour which seemed a bit long to me at first as there are no level crossings between Tuam and Athenry, but apparently a passing loop will be required at Ballygulin to allow trains to pass each other and this will slow it down. It will also have to wait to make connections with Dublin-Galway trains. Main line trains will have priority over WRC at Athenry which means the WRC will also be a stop-start railway.

In other words driving or taking the bus will be faster, cheaper and unlike the sacred WRC they actually serve the main industrial estates in Galway.

Still the 6 or 7 grannies on free travel passes will love it.

@Cute Panda wrote:

Still the 6 or 7 grannies on free travel passes will love it.

You see, a simple question but always the heavy-handed “ironic” rhetoric! What is it about this issue.

Anyway, thanks: that’s pity, an hour is too long for it to work for commuters.

@notjim wrote:

You see, a simple question but always the heavy-handed “ironic” rhetoric! What is it about this issue. .

It’s quite simple jim. Fianna Fail is using the national exchequer to bribe the Western voters by throwing money at a useless dysfunctional rail project with no basis in economic feasibility or social need. All the while the commuters of Dublin, Cork and Galway choke at their roundabouts and crossroads as commuter rail lines are shelved, reshelved and eventually binned for the time being.

If you think the reaction to this is “heavy handed” fair enough. It’s not something people are likely to be less than pissed off with

That’s notjim, not jim!

My point is just that on any thread any poster need only express outrage once!

@notjim wrote:

Anyway, thanks: that’s pity, an hour is too long for it to work for commuters.

Even worse. Irish Rail’s current plan is to have THREE trains a day from Ballina to Limerick via Tuam WHICH IS NOT GOING TO SERVE TO GALWAY DIRECTLY.

It you want to eh “commute” from Tuam to Galway one will have to make a connection at Athenry for a Dublin-Galway train. That’s assuming the three daily southbound trains at Tuam do not arrive at 1, 6 and 9PM which in all likelihood they will.

Not Irish rails fault for this situation, they had this joke forced upon them and the above service is about the only way they can make it work in some shape or form.

So much for business people communting up and down the West coast to Ebay’s World HQ in Swinford as West on Track had people believing.

The 6 grannies on free travel passes will be delighted.

saw this over on platform 11.

good for a laugh.

mirror mirror on the wall which is the best colour of them all

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dublin-bus-feeling-offcolour-yet-again-1353864.html

http://transport21.ie/Monthly_Progress_Reports/2008/June_2008.html

last month’s progress report has nothing new in it 🙁

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/bypass-bliss-for-motorists-1433369.html

New road opening tomorrow means the N6 is more than hal completed. First good news in a while

Oh brilliant! More roads! :rolleyes:

ct it means Moate is bypassed. Even the most ardent hippy eco-mentalist would welcome that!

Moate is already bypassed- by the train! 😀

But seriously- Metro North is threatened, Metro West is threatened, cycling wasn’t included in T21, yada yada, but hot damn! The roads, they just keep a-comin’.

(‘eco-mentalist’- are you Michael O’Leary?)

Its the M6 motorway to Athlone;)

No really, it is.

Only a jackass could claim that we dont need better roads between our urban centres, wider, straighter roads are safer to drive on. Likewise we also need massive investments in commuter rail.

@paul h wrote:

Only a jackass could claim that we dont need better roads between our urban centres.

So true, so true. Can I ask a favour? If you see a jackass who makes that claim, tell us all straight away! We need vigilant posters, people not afraid to go that extra mile for the team- you seem like that man.

:rolleyes:

I was raised near enough to Maam Cross that I have known for years that a donkey stallion is called a jack but only just this minute did I realised that that was the distinction between an ass and and a jackass: a jackass is entire, an ass may not be. paul h, were you using the term jackass carefully, do you feel an ass with no testicles would not make this claim? Is the important distinction between a jackass and a gelded ass, or between a jackass and a jennyass?

Yea notjim i’ll have what your smokin:D
Although i was thinking more along the lines of –
Jackass – “One deficient in judgment and good sense”

New road opened today!
http://www.nra.ie/News/PressReleases/htmltext,15370,en.html
🙂

http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/7048-4.pdf

Every railway project is late

Kildare route 4 tracking isn’t, interconnector can also make its target if they get the finger out.

No doubt though that there is a heavy bias in favour of roads, all of which seem to be on or ahead of schedule.

Any opening date on cashel – culahill ? have to head to baltimore in october, which takes a very long time.

the Kildare project was earmarked for 2006 in the DTO Strategy and was actually in the 1975 Rail Rapid Transit Study which gave us DART! pretty late by my reckoning. Wasn’t the EIS inadequate and had to be redone? I think it stalled for a few years between 02 and 05. An EIS was compltetd in 01 and it was 5 years before the Public Inquiry! However in Fianna fail land where schedules are revised fortnightly I guarantee the Minister of the Day will open it as “on time and on budget”

M50 upgrade. I think the M50 would need its own map guide because looking at some of the plans for the upgrade of the main junctions has me lost, especially the N3 and N7!!!! Cant wait for the M50 to be completed again at least they planned for the future this time!!!!:) few pics of N2, N3, N4, N7 and M1.:confused::confused::confused:

There are new plans for the N3

The junctions look well. I agree that motorways are getting priority over railways. The Cashel to Cullahil M8 is set to open in December and most of the HQDC’s will be redesignated motorway at midnight on September 24th. However it is assumed in most industrialised nations that there is a motorway link between all the cities. In Ireland there isn’t one continuous motorway between any two cities yet. all the luas projects except line F are behind schedual. I believe the Western rail corridor is running ahead of schedual but even when it’s completed, it will be mostly single track and will not directly connect all western cities and it will have to reverse out of every major City station

the govt has prioritised some Transport21 projects and temporarily shelved others in light of the economic trouble.

http://www.transport21.ie/Publications/upload/File/T21_Newsletter_Summer_2009.pdf

What’s going on with the Oyster-card-for-Dublin plan? I hear it will eventually be extended to cover the whole country – sounds excellent to me. According to the Financial Times the single biggest hurdle to the progression of the Irish economy, excluding the recession, has been lack of infrastructure in comparison to countries like Britain and France.

The Metro must go ahead, this smartcard needs to arrive on time and there should be high speed rail links between all the major cities including Belfast – recession or no recession, this will benefit the economy in the long run no end.

at the moment, IÉ is installing smart card readers on DART platforms similar to those at luas stops, hopefully, this is to facillitate integrated ticketing. There also seems to progress in administration of transport in the metropolitain area, e.g. this new website:

http://www.transport4dublin.ie/

Of course the government is shit at everything, but we must acknowledge that the improvement of the roads seems to be a good achievement. Once they complete a motorway from Galway to Limerick to Cork, Ireland will have a road system as good as any in Europe.

To be honest in many areas, particularly transport, Dublin would benefit from having a strong mayoral local government. This has done wonders from London, absolute wonders.

I’d also like to see a city planner as good as this for Dublin: http://journeyplanner.tfl.gov.uk/user/XSLT_TRIP_REQUEST2?language=en

Dublin has the opportunity to learn from everything London is doing right at the moment, without being lumbered with so much of what sadly ruins that city. I really want to see Dublin do that and strike a balance between a city like London and a city like Copenhagen.

Nationwide integrated ticketing, when implemented, is going to be just… brilliant. I mean yeah, excellent, that is just the sort of thing a country like Ireland should be doing. Everyone benefits and it makes all our lives that much smoother.

Irish infrastructure has, I think we all have to admit, turned out pretty damn good, even if it’s still got a ways to go. Dublin airport in my opinion is excellent, far better than the appalling messes of Heathrow and Gatwick. The DART might not be the prettiest light rail system in the world but it does it’s job admirably. The Luas is decent.

The biggest issue is that lack of integrated ticketing, and as a visitor you never really know whether to take the bus or tram and to which stop to get to where you want to go, so that needs to be addressed.

I’m hoping the metro has stop at all the top areas: O’Connell St, St Stephen’s Green, Docklands, College Green etc. That will really do Dublin the world of good for tourists, let me tell you.

It’s a shame to hear that work on Metro North won’t begin until 2011 probably, they really need to get the whole metro done before 2013/2014…

The Oyster Card in London is an example of how any integrated ticketing system should work. It’s brilliant.

Customers using it know they can travel The Tube, Trams, Docklands Light Rail, Buses, Top Trains (ex British Rail), and get discounts on water buses using the Thames.

You simply purchase an Oyster Card for an initial fee of £3 and then top it up with as much as you want.

Journeys using Oyster also work out less than paying cash at a machine or ticket office.

And a fare capping system ensures that you don’t pay more in any one day than the equivalent cost of a one day Travelcard. So after a few journeys in one day the card effectively gives you free travel until 5am the following day.

Dublin is still scratching it’s balls while thinking about something it heard once called smartcards.

oyster card is one thing…
but it doesn’t need to be fancy?
just a normal daily ticket that works on buses trains and luas?

@missarchi wrote:

oyster card is one thing…
but it doesn’t need to be fancy?
just a normal daily ticket that works on buses trains and luas?

Needs to work on the metro too, which is why I think they aren’t in any rush. There’s a plan i place: http://www.transport21.ie/Projects/Integrated_Ticketing/Integrated_Smart_Card_Ticketing_in_the_Greater_Dublin_Area.html

It won’t arrive before all the specifics of the metro’s cost and ticketing system have been worked out.

Its kinda telling that this ticketing system was not used for the Dublin Bike Scheme, I guess because it was never designed to be used as a real public transport alternative.

And I dont see why you can’t pay for single journeys on Dublin Bus with it! The only options are 10 journey travel 90 for occasional users, but this is more expensive (1.80) than the fare I would normally pay for my occasional use (1.60)

Are they going to restructure fares as part of this project? will there be a flat far for all of Dublin as they have in London? Why dont the bloody decide and get on with it!

I’m sure they will restructure the fairs, and who knows perhaps it will work with the velibs – right now we know almost nothing about the “Oyster-card-for-Dublin”, it could do everything and everything we want, we just don’t know. Fingers crossed I suppose.

For the record though, the Oyster isn’t the real innovator, it was the Octopus card in Hong Kong – the Octopus did everything the Oyster and all other smartcards do long before they appeared.

@Yixian wrote:

it could do everything and everything we want, we just don’t know. Fingers crossed I suppose.

It can be however we want it to be, the problem is the people who are responsable for deciding what it does are not making decisions.

Crossing fingers won’t help either, they need to get the fingers out!

You will have a limited say in how it pans out in that next year brings the Dublin devolution reforms, including the new Mayor position that is directly elected by the public and who chairs the Dublin Transport Authority and has executive powers over a lot of the city.

Like London, the Mayor of Dublin will probably have a huge impact on transport. If someone like Joe Higgins ran for mayor and was elected, being a similar mayor of Ken Livingstone you can probably expect fares to drop and for student and pensioner version of the smartcard giving free travel.

Alternatively Dublin could elect a Boris Johnson type Mayor, nobody would have free travel and fares would rise.

That’s true Yixian, there are political decisions to be made here and the unbrella of transport authorities (Dublin Bus, Bus Eireann, DTO, DCC, RPA etc) we have are unable to make these decisions, hence the parial roll-out of the scheme avoiding any real change.

Didnt the government decide to set up a transport authority for Dublin to oversee all of these groups and manage transport21 projects centrally? I believe they hired someone from Trinity college to lead the new authority and in the long run a Dublin Mayor would be chairperson of it.
Again, the policies are there, but the decisions to impliment are put off yet again.
This is political failure from central government.

As far as I know that’s what’s coming into effect next year with the Mayor at the centre of all of it, hopefully bringing consistency to all these projects.

The more power that Mayor has and the bigger the turn out for his/her election, the better, this could really benefit Dublin hugely.

@Yixian wrote:

As far as I know that’s what’s coming into effect next year with the Mayor at the centre of all of it, hopefully bringing consistency to all these projects.

The more power that Mayor has and the bigger the turn out for his/her election, the better, this could really benefit Dublin hugely.

There’s no need for a Mayor when the objectives have already been set for these projects, we just need a single authority to deliever them.

The current (and soon to be replaced in october) program for Government sets 2012 as the year of the first directly elected Mayor for Dublin, but I dont see why we should wait for this as the transport authority structure is the only thing holding up the integration of these projects. Deal with the problem and stop with the distractions.

Setup the Transport Authority, the structure of which has already been decided and transfer power to it! Now, and no more messing around.

@ac1976 wrote:

The current (and soon to be replaced in october) program for Government sets 2012 as the year of the first directly elected Mayor for Dublin

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0512/dublin.html ?

@Yixian wrote:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0512/dublin.html ?

IF the government last out the year you will have a new delivery date for the Dublin Mayoral elections as part of the new program for government.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0513/1224246387781.html

IF the oppositon take over in the meantime it will be more likely 2014 that we have an elected mayor. Anyway an elected mayor is not really connected to transport21 as the projects are all setup by central government.

When it will actually happen is anybody’s guess at this stage, you might even be right about next year yixian!

some of these are really amusing..

Let every taxi driver have a speed camera for night time, to charge those who speed at night. Split the revenue 50-50. Why do I think this was submitted by a taxi driver who’s watched Robert de Niro on his solo mission to clean the filth off the streets once too often?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2009/0812/1224252410564.html

@missarchi wrote:

some of these are really amusing..

Let every taxi driver have a speed camera for night time, to charge those who speed at night. Split the revenue 50-50. Why do I think this was submitted by a taxi driver who’s watched Robert de Niro on his solo mission to clean the filth off the streets once too often?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2009/0812/1224252410564.html

Have a shamrock-shaped Metro station

straight from the pages of archiseek

@sw101 wrote:

Have a shamrock-shaped Metro station

Ah, I have a wave of nostalgia coming on.

Does the estate of M Scott still hold the rights to his design for the Irish Pavillion at the 1939 New York Worlds Fair (with the additional flower bed, in the shape of the map of Ireland)? A round tower shaped ventilation shaft or access lift might be nice too. How about placing it in St Stephens Green?

Afraid the wisdom of the Irish people tends to sometimes undershoot that of their leaders.

This sounds a bit like the platform 11 crowd, but is this really possible? Can it be so simple?
From the Sunday Times:

Think tank: Radical departure for Dublin rail plan
Irish Rail loves to spend big, but there is a cheaper way to connect the capital

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6806595.ece

Doesn’t solve the loopline issue of providing two ways to cross the Liffey within the core of the commercial district; the genius that is the genisis of the interconnector is that it removes Northern Line trains from the common section of the network before Maynooth line trains enter the common section. 3 routes into a single linear route simply doesn’t work; particularly when diesil trains accelerate/decelerate at roughly 1 minute per station more slowly than electric trains. Since the Maynooth route was extended beyond Copnnolly Dart capacity has slumped and to add Kildare trains into the mix; looks like deficit solving by crayon.

Moving Kildare trains from Heuston to Spencer Dock would simply move commuters from being too far West of the City Centre to being too far East of the City Centre. What is required is to get people where they want to go i.e. Christchurch, Stephens Green, Merrion Sq/TCD and Docklands. But more critically the number of trains going between Barrow Street and Newcommen Junctrion (Royal Canal) needs to be reduced dramatically.

I get the impression the author of the article has after years of complaining about CIE’s billboard portfolio, misunderstood both the commercial arrnagement between Shelborne and CIE on Tara St and not done his research on why the interconnector was proposed. It is a supply side argument that both enhances North-South Capacity and opens up a large development corridor from Heuston out to the county border and beyond.

@ac1976 wrote:

This sounds a bit like the platform 11 crowd, but is this really possible? Can it be so simple?
From the Sunday Times:

Think tank: Radical departure for Dublin rail plan
Irish Rail loves to spend big, but there is a cheaper way to connect the capital

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6806595.ece

the platform11 anoraks have an absolute fetish for the 8th wonder of the world the PP tunnel.
this plan is so ridiculous it’s not even wrong. but like our old friend hydra, no matter how many times decapitated, come monday morn it’s back again reincarnated by some gormless journo.

one problem is: why in the name of all that’s bad and unholy would anybody coming from the Kildare direction go on a 25 min magical mystery tour to a docklands timbucktoo station when they can get the Luas from Heuston to OCS taking 10 mins.
IE has surveyed this and 90% plus said they would get out at Heuston and get the Luas.

In reality you could walk to OCS quicker from Heuston than going via the PP tunnell (speed redtricted lines) to Docklands and then finding your way back to the CC.
IE has already scrapped the off peak Clonsilla trains to Docklands because the trains were arriving with no passengers.
Nobody wants to go there.
Neither does anybody other than the one passenger and his dog want to go to Phibsboro from Heuston.
If you knew anything about this part of the city this would be clear to you.
Nor can the PP trains get into Connolly which has no capacity for more services..

This author of this ‘hold on I have the answer to everything’ article could have saved making himself look like a fool if he’d made a phone call to IE for their take on it.

It would serve DCC well if http://www.transport4dublin.ie/ becomes a full on transport guide for the city, journey planner and all. There’s a lot to be said for http://www.tfl.gov.uk/ and plenty of room for improvement.

The ghost line will always remain a ghost line…
Maybe its more to do with communications.

Ladies, to avoid any further confusion by bad reports like the one in the Sunday Times and any future ones that might still pop now and again, I would like to refer you all please to Irish Rails website and to the excellent video presentation explaining it all.

DART Underground

🙂

@weehamster wrote:

Ladies, to avoid any further confusion by bad reports like the one in the Sunday Times and any future ones that might still pop now and again, I would like to refer you all please to Irish Rails website and to the excellent video presentation explaining it all.

DART Underground

🙂

You are pointing for the wrong people here and somehow I would find it hard to believe any journalist in Ireland would not be aware of this site esp. when writing about public transport.

Not to menation the fact that the journalist in question, Ruadhán MacEoin, is no lady!

Is it just me or do both metro north and the dart underground realllly neglect the northside..

@Yixian wrote:

Is it just me or do both metro north and the dart underground realllly neglect the northside..

Metro North hardly neglects the Northside, but do u mean the north Inner City?
If so the soon to be extended Red Luas Line serves this quite well, and hopefully in time Luas will be extended to the inner burbs.

@Yixian wrote:

Is it just me or do both metro north and the dart underground realllly neglect the northside..

Almost all of Metro north is on the northside. Only a small section of “DUnderground” (thankyou I’ll be here all week) is but it is the best route available. moving it Northside would risk duplicating the route of the existing luas red line.

@ac1976 wrote:

Metro North hardly neglects the Northside, but do u mean the north Inner City?
If so the soon to be extended Red Luas Line serves this quite well, and hopefully in time Luas will be extended to the inner burbs.

ah ok fair enough, and yeah I meant the north inner city.

You are pointing for the wrong people here and somehow I would find it hard to believe any journalist in Ireland would not be aware of this site esp. when writing about public transport.

I think no I’m right pointing it out here as you would be very surprised who still thinks the DART underground is a poor idea and there are ‘other’ alternatives. I’ve been around here long enough. Other’s do pop in now and again to have a quick look and its important that they too get the facts drilled into their head.

Not to mention the fact that the journalist in question, Ruadhán MacEoin, is no lady!

err…

@marmajam wrote:

the platform11 anoraks have an absolute fetish for the 8th wonder of the world the PP tunnel.

one problem is: why in the name of all that’s bad and unholy would anybody coming from the Kildare direction go on a 25 min magical mystery tour to a docklands timbucktoo station when they can get the Luas from Heuston to OCS taking 10 mins.
IE has surveyed this and 90% plus said they would get out at Heuston and get the Luas.

In reality you could walk to OCS quicker from Heuston than going via the PP tunnell (speed redtricted lines) to Docklands and then finding your way back to the CC.
IE has already scrapped the off peak Clonsilla trains to Docklands because the trains were arriving with no passengers.
Nobody wants to go there.
Neither does anybody other than the one passenger and his dog want to go to Phibsboro from Heuston.
If you knew anything about this part of the city this would be clear to you.
Nor can the PP trains get into Connolly which has no capacity for more services..

This author of this ‘hold on I have the answer to everything’ article could have saved making himself look like a fool if he’d made a phone call to IE for their take on it.

I agree with you marmajam and PVC King. The author or that article (Ruadhan Mac Eoin – the notorious grandson of James Connolly) is obviously living on cloud cookoo land. If Mac Eoin has a fetish with the Phoinex Park Tunnel then he should seek advice on how he can cure himself of it rather than wasting our time spoofing off the top of his head.

As a matter of interest, could the Phoenix Park tunnel be used in the future as a more limited capacity line to bring people to and from the inner city northside, and to bring people to places like Phoenix Park and Croke Park?

I think the only realistic way the route could be used would be if you had a complete circle line Heuston – Phibsboro – Spencer Dock – Pearse St – Stephen’s Gn – Christchurch – Heuston.
This would be useful as it would attract passengers who wanted to interchange between awkward connections
But the tie in from the IC to the Maynooth line is the issue. Perhaps a spur from the IC turning north short of Inchicore could then come back Eastwards into platform 11 in Heuston and into the PP tunnel.

I don’t see any viable way of using it unless it gets plugged into metro north at drumcronda going south… but it would be better to go grannymorning/cineworld-pennys/connoll st…

even the interconnector missing connolly is strong gesture no matter what all the people say about the so called soil…
How much in fees have been paid by docklands for the interconnector?

Good discussions on here. I’ve only signed up myself and have a blog on some construction issues:

http://constructionconciliation.blogspot.com/

Greetings.

First off, I want to acknowledge this site as one of the best discussion boards in the country, and have been a fan for a number of years.

There are a few points I shall try to address for sake of clarity, as I believe my piece may have been misread by some, and regrettably is being misrepresented.

First off on an aside, I am somewhat amused to see a mugshot of myself pop up here – if it’s any relevance, I am male rather than female – though that discussion provided one or two ex’s with amusement…

Now to get on with the facts.

@PVC King wrote:

3 routes into a single linear route simply doesn’t work… I get the impression the author of the article has after years of complaining about CIE’s billboard portfolio, misunderstood both the commercial arrnagement between Shelborne and CIE on Tara St and not done his research on why the interconnector was proposed. It is a supply side argument that both enhances North-South Capacity and opens up a large development corridor from Heuston out to the county border and beyond.

To clarify]I agree with you marmajam and PVC King. The author or that article (Ruadhan Mac Eoin – the notorious grandson of James Connolly) is obviously living on cloud cookoo land. If Mac Eoin has a fetish with the Phoinex Park Tunnel then he should seek advice on how he can cure himself of it rather than wasting our time spoofing off the top of his head.[/QUOTE]

Linog, regrettably I am not the “the notorious grandson of James Connolly”, nor have I been “spoofing off the top of my head”. As the record will show, while I was Press Secretary for An Taisce, during 2003 I advocated the use of these lines.

It is a position I continue to stand over, not only in terms of infrastructural integration, but to my mind it appears the higher the population density, the less services Irish Rail are providing to Dubliners. Please see the map below.

Please note the above map regrettably does not show the lines going in to Spencer Dock area, which obviously are present already

@weehamster wrote:

Ladies, to avoid any further confusion by bad reports like the one in the Sunday Times and any future ones that might still pop now and again, I would like to refer you all please to Irish Rails website and to the excellent video presentation explaining it all.
DART Underground
🙂

I understand people would like the Interconnector and I too consider it deeply regrettable more money wasn’t spent on railways during the boom rather than unsustainable roads. I am also well aware of that lavish well-produced video.

However given the reality of today’s economic climate, and unaddressed public transport needs, we must make use of existing but idle assets. Ryanair didn’t wait for new airports to be built, and neither should public transport users have to wait for significant improvements that could be delivered by existing lines and stock, if only they are put to better use.

In February 2004 Joe Maher, then CEO of Iarnród Éireann told the Oireachtas Transport Committee: “We certainly intend to use the park tunnel in the short-term to bring trains from the Kildare/Newbridge area into Spencer Dock because there is demand for that.”

This would have made sense, as Croke Park (sandwiched between two railways) was redeveloped as Europe’s 5th largest stadium, yet without a station; and of course populations in Phibsborough, the north inner city, and Cabra are among the highest in the state. However not only did Mr. Maher’s committment not happen, but the new Spencer Dock station was built in such a manner so that the lines entering the area from the Northern/ Belfast and Heuston/ Phoenix Park routes do not actually connect with the station – leaving it accessible only from the Royal Canal Maynooth line. It is hard to see how that folly could be topped, but I do note that Irish Rail are currently seeking to build a €100m spec office block at Tara St – after An Bord Snip recommends closure of about 240km of lines in order to save €55m.

@Yixian wrote:

Is it just me or do both metro north and the dart underground realllly neglect the northside..

Yixian, I believe you have a point here. Once Airport Metro North is removed off the map, Transport 21 leaves a large void north of the Liffey. This is particularly pointless as obviously there is already both population and infrastructure sitting there – yet seemingly there are no plans to use it. In my own personal opinion, I do not believe that Metro North has been well-planned, as evidenced by the withdrawal of RPA until next year from planning hearings. In the past I have written on the topic in Plan Magazine, noting that the tunnels would be predicated on the 4’8″ gauge, rather than 5’3″, and that this combined with stopping it in ag land 3000m short of the east coast line is futile. I do not have much confidence in the project as it was progressed – including O’Connell Street disruptive routing rather than Marlborough Street – nor do I believe is there money now to build it.

Dublin should have got Dart Underground and much more, and hopefully one day it will yet – but it is highly unlikely in today’s economic climate.

It is most lamentable the country has been mismanaged to such a degree over the last number of years. The choices now are painful must be addressed. To not do so is to perpetuate an ostrich-like outlook. Hence do we then adopt a Ryanair approach that could bring most of the people to most of the places most of the time? Or do we wait around for a 1980’s Aer Lingus style approach that will promise all, take forever, cost a fortune we don’t now have – and that’s if it ever gets built?

Sometimes to provoke debate maybe unpopular but necessary; I am glad to have taken this opportunity to reply and I hope it clarifies some matters.

(1) It was wishful thinking by Maher that passengers wanted to go to Docklands.. Reality has disillusioned them. As said before the off peak Maynooth line trains have been axed.
(2)The 100m for Tara St will not be supplied by IE.
(3)Again why go on a DMU olde Dubline cruise to Spencer Dock for an exhibition of train reversing when you can get the Luas to Connolly for Northern trains.
(4)It’s not so expensive or difficult to engineer the reconfiguration of thePP line into Connolly. The problem is there’s no capacity for these services.
This problem cannot be wished away.
(5)Half baked compromises like this are a plague on the Gael of Dublin.

There are other irrational points but I’m fed up with this PP tunnel circular argument.

What comes across is this: One of our pub transport economists spotted the PP tunnel. Then all logic is shoehorned into a convoluted plan to find some way to use it.

@marmajam wrote:

(1) It was wishful thinking by Maher that passengers wanted to go to Docklands.. Reality has disillusioned them. As said before the off peak Maynooth line trains have been axed.
(2)The 100m for Tara St will not be supplied by IE.
(3)Again why go on a DMU olde Dubline cruise to Spencer Dock for an exhibition of train reversing when you can get the Luas to Connolly for Northern trains.
(4)Half baked compromises like this are a plague on the Gael of Dublin.

There are other irrational points but I’m fed up with this PP tunnel circular argument.

What comes across is this: One of our pub transport economists spotted the PP tunnel. Then all logic is shoehorned into a convoluted plan to find some way to use it.

As per usual marmajam, you respond by insult – “pub economist” – simply because you disagree with another’s point of view. MacEoin states he has believed this for a number of years; what gives you the right to assert mischievously he just “spotted” it?

You have also failed to address the points raised.

1) Regarding Maynooth trains to Spencer Dock being axed, perhaps if those trains went on somewhere – such as onto the northern line as suggested, and linked into Red Luas as will happen and was stated in the article – it may well be of use. Instead you ignore the key point about the lines disgracefully being left disconnected, and the pools of population left un-catered for in the North Inner-city, despite the railways being present.

2)Your beloved €100m office block will not be supplied by anyone. Show me the money, and where Shelborne – or anybody else – has given an iron-clad commitment to build it. Until then it is your fantasy in the same way Transport 21 was Martin Cullen’s fantasy.

3 + 4) There’s little point responding to your infantile quips regarding “olde world cruise”, other than noting DMUs and tracks are therein a densely populated area and are not being put to use.
Regarding your “plague on the Gael of Dublin” reference, it would seem appropriate that yourself and Linog with his/ her “notorious grandson of Connolly” reference (whatever that’s about) should get together and form some sort of Fantasy Irish History League. Somewhere else. This site is about architecture and planning – peculiarly based obscure insults at others would therefore seem to be of little relevance.

Hutton is complaining about ‘insults’

Here’s one of Hutton’s exemplary and measured reasonings:

Hutton wrote:
CIE are planning on spending €100m on this office spec development scheme – while acres of office space is empty, and An Bord Snip proposes saving €55m by closing 240km of railways around the country? Fuckwits

Save Irish railways + public transport: Abolish CIE now.

Half your posts seem to involve a lot of foaming at the mouth.

Would you run along sonny and don’t be annoying me.

Mise le meas,

Chuck Higgar-Law

pa GOD (Gaels of Dublin)

@weehamster wrote:

Ladies, to avoid any further confusion by bad reports like the one in the Sunday Times and any future ones that might still pop now and again, I would like to refer you all please to Irish Rails website and to the excellent video presentation explaining it all.

DART Underground

🙂

Is that the Malahide Estuary Bridge that appears at 17 seconds on that video clip?..;)

One point in the Sunday Times which I would agree on is the privatization of the network. Bridges wouldn’t be collapsing if it was run by a private company.

http://constructionconciliation.blogspot.com/

@marmajam wrote:

Hutton is complaining about ‘insults’…
Half your posts seem to involve a lot of foaming at the mouth.

Would you run along sonny and don’t be annoying me.

Well marmajam, as usual you fail to address the points in the last post and try to distract instead.

There is of course a total difference between making passionately put criticisms about a state-funded company that’s out of control, and personal insults. I maybe responsible for the former, yet it seems clear to me you fall into the latter. Perhaps you should get a job with CIE, given your stringent defense of them at every turn, if you haven’t already… Then again maybe they would want someone who doesn’t babble on accusing others of “paranoia” and issuing insults in every second post 🙂

what are you babbling on about ‘points’ for?

don’t try to muddy the issue.

this is a message board.

the insults are the points.

One other thing marmajam, it does nothing for clarity of your argument to go back and add in another point after your post has been subsequently quoted; you posted at 5.22, and added in a new point at 7.54 after your post was quoted.

Anyhow re “(4)It’s not so expensive or difficult to engineer the reconfiguration of thePP line into Connolly. The problem is there’s no capacity for these services. This problem cannot be wished away.”

That’s not what has been suggested – diverting trains into Spencer Dock instead has. Such does not add load onto Connolly’s capacity, but would instead relieve it.

@marmajam wrote:

what are you babbling on about ‘points’ for?

don’t try to muddy the issue.

this is a message board.

the insults are the points.

I think I’ll just leave this one stand. Nothing else needs to be said.

Transport 21 still has no free bikes next to stations…

I have to agree sometimes people get too personal on here.
I have to say I appreciate Ruadhans reply on here, and in terms of transport21 there are definitely issues to be addressed.

How about marrying the Interconnector with Ruadhan’s plan, i.e. interconnector surfacing at Heuston without any turnback facility but instead continuing on through the PPT to server stations in Cabra Phibsborough Croke Park Spencer Dock Pearse Stephens Green Christchurch etc etc
At no poing would any station be more than 10 mins from the City Center, and being a full circle line would offer the maximum integration with other lines/modes of transport.

Even if this is not done now, should that not be the ultimate goal of the interconnector?
To interconnect all of Dublin, and ALL modes of transport, not just the interests of IR?

Is it possible?

Ireland is not ready for a full circle…
It should be about crossing the city fast and key people nodes…
I would buy a shorter route or other short lines but not a full circle it’s a massive waste of resources… even the current docklands/pearse connection seems a bit rich considering there is bugger all there… the only way to take full advantage of the glass bottle and north wall is a circle line maybe in another 50 years…

@missarchi wrote:

Ireland is not ready for a full circle…
It should be about crossing the city fast and key people nodes…
I would buy a shorter route or other short lines but not a full circle it’s a massive waste of resources… even the current docklands/pearse connection seems a bit rich considering there is bugger all there… the only way to take full advantage of the glass bottle and north wall is a circle line maybe in another 50 years…

Fair enough, but what if in 50 years time we want to do this and beacuse it wasn’t planned for, i.e. the tunnel portal not being in Heuston it costs 10’s of billions and we end up with a compromised solution in the process!
Plan now!

My point is whatever plan we have should be easily extendable in the future.
Anyway if you remove the need to tunnel from Heuton to Inchicore it probable wouldn’t cost much extra to turn the Interconnector into a circle.

I obviously can’t speak for the costs or practicalities, but a circle line would seem to be the ideal situation. The rejuvenation of so many areas on the northside of the river could be triggered with metro stations, and rather than the entirely artificial quarters like Spencer Dock and Point Village, artisans and craftsmen and smaller, less mainstream cultural attractions could be rediscovered by the rest of the city simply by providing such easy access from an underground.

Undergrounds do so much more to bring life and status and an audience to places than buses or even trams. In my opinion they are the ultimate form of public transport – bypassing traffic and geography, compressing the entire city into a psychological space small enough so as to feel completely accessible at any given time.

– Also, are we expecting Metro North, West and the Interconnector (or at least North and the Interconnector) to come under a single, unified brand? Eg. Dublin Metro or what have you? It’s not going to be “take the luas to the interconnector then take that to such-and-such and switch to metro north and up to o’connel st station” rather than “take the metro to OCS station” is it? xD

@ac1976 wrote:

Fair enough, but what if in 50 years time we want to do this and beacuse it wasn’t planned for, i.e. the tunnel portal not being in Heuston it costs 10’s of billions and we end up with a compromised solution in the process!
Plan now!

My point is whatever plan we have should be easily extendable in the future.
Anyway if you remove the need to tunnel from Heuton to Inchicore it probable wouldn’t cost much extra to turn the Interconnector into a circle.

One of the many advantages of locating tunnel portal in Inchicore is that it removes the need to four track in the gullet beside the N4 between Heuston and Inchciore.

I disagree with you ac1976: I cannot see how locating the interconnector tunnel portal in Inchicore is going to add any significant costs if in 50 years time a decision is made to turn the interconnector into a full underground circle-line.

Master MacEoin made a reasonable post to defend his plan.
Still that hardly mitigates the reality that the plan is poorly researched.
The plan is based on 2 illusions. The IC is not proposed because IE likes to spend big.
Their aim is to solve the big very obvious and longstanding issue of bringing the Heuston line into the CC.
And in the process lay the basis for a future high qualty public transport system.
MacEoin wants to punish them for proper forward-thinking planning.
And on the basis of his ‘impression’ that their aim is ‘to spend big’
Secondly the Gov is very determined to go ahead with both the IC and MN.
Again MacEoin ‘knows’ better – he thinks they won’t happen.
This in spite of repeated assertions that these projects will go ahead.
But on the basis of having a bit of a think about it MacEoin knows more………
As far as the scheme itself is concerned.
The corridor through the PP tunnel/Phibsboro and into Spencer Dock might be a fairly densely populated area but this does not at all mean a service will be well patronised.
Most of the central Dublin people movement lines are along the arteries into the CC.
As it stands a link through the PP tunnel to Spencer Dock is comparable with the North London Link line as it was 15/20 years ago.
This was a knitting together of various lines that strung across North London from Stratford to the Wimbledon area.
This line runs through very densely populated areas.
But few used it.
However since the completion of the Jubilee line extension and other transport developments it has become like an outer Circle line and it highly patronised. Because it no longer caters simply for the stray traveller who wants to traverse across north London from East to West – it now connects well with other elements of the London transport network.
The PP tunnel will have a role when other elements of public transport are developed. Before that it will be a white elephant.
Master MacEoin would have been wise to consult with IE to hear what their considered view was of his ideas.

By attempting to undermine what is a rational and well thought plan (the IC) and without bothering to consult with those who are perhaps best placed to know the salient issues, and further create the impression, that the IC is a wasteful irresponsible and unnecessarily glamorous luxury the author abuses the power of the media, planting poison in the minds of the sheep who read this guff and adds to the factors that have delivered a woeful public transport system to the capital city of the Gael.
I condemn this crazed proposal and all who sail in her.

Secondly the Gov is very determined to go ahead with both the IC and MN.

The government is struggling with a deficit not seen since Jack Lynch was booted and before that since the late 1930’s. I understand Rhuadhan’s desire for a cheap solution; fiscal recititude under McSharry created the last boom; which in hindsight was spectacular.

The interconnector marries up 4 corridors; 3 of which should be 2 corridors and a 4th that hasn’t developed because it is remote in terms of direct connection. Metro North would by virtue of existing densities be a waste of money; money is scarce just now. Dublin is developed North – South on DART; what it needs is the ability to go west into open country where the genius of Adamstown can be replicated ad infinitum.

Struggling me arse.

Zimbabwe is struggling. North Korea is struggling. CAR is struggling.

Ireland is a rich country.

You do have to buy your way out of recession, cutting infrastructure and public spending is the one guaranteed way to ensure a recession becomes a depression.

Ireland is an educated country with a crippling deficit. Building a €2bn underground line under 1930’s 3-bed semi’s will waste valuable resources

@PVC King wrote:

Dublin is developed North – South on DART; what it needs is the ability to go west into open country where the genius of Adamstown can be replicated ad infinitum.

Wo! stop the bus.

No more satelite towns. Adamstown is no substitute for fixing the city.

The debate should be about how we densify not whether we densify. None of the transport/cost equations will ever work until we force the density up.

The city needs to focus on the dead land-banks that contribute nothing, but drag the density calculations down, like the Guinness compound, the Heuston rail yard, Grangegorman (which is now probably going to stall), the Glass Bottle site (NAMA hopefully), chunks of Sandymount Strand (if I had my way) etc. etc. not keep trying to tweek the transport system of a hopelessly out of control sub-urban sprawl.

Scrapping over which bit of secondhand infrastructure we should re-use, whose back yard not to put the portals in, which drain it’s better to pour the money down, and whether we want Luas on-street or Dart underground is all so depressing when we can’t even agree that Dublin’s density is the fatal flaw.

The dart underground interconnector serves the Guinness Compound and Heuston very well.

The CIE Inchicore Railway Works (80 acres) will have direct access to the dart underground interconnector.

@Linog wrote:

The dart underground interconnector serves the Guinness Compound and Heuston very well.

The CIE Inchicore Railway Works (80 acres) will have direct access to the dart underground interconnector.

That is all true, but the point is:

So we’ll be paying for state-of-the-art infrastructure that services mostly dead land!

Link the provision of Dart underground to well planned, medium density, urban regeneration, using CPO powers if necessary, and we might get somewhere.

You don’t think that Phoenix Park, RKH and the (when finished) Heuston Framework Plan would provide a reason for people to get off at Heuston?

But still:

Link the provision of Dart underground to well planned, medium density, urban regeneration, using CPO powers if necessary, and we might get somewhere.

Definitely agree!

“Metropolitan Dublin” really needs to be extended out to regions like Heuston, and obv the docklands.

I tend to see Dublin as a small city that needs to make that leap to medium sized city, and obviously the biggest hurdle to that is the large derelict and industrial areas littered around the edge of the centre – but this land should be a town planners dream, the opportunities to create wonderful new areas of central Dublin are huge, and I honestly think an underground will be the biggest shot of adrenaline to that process for areas like Heuston.

@Yixian wrote:

I tend to see Dublin as a small city that needs to make that leap to medium sized city, and obviously the biggest hurdle to that is the large derelict and industrial areas littered around the edge of the centre – but this land should be a town planners dream, the opportunities to create wonderful new areas of central Dublin are huge, and I honestly think an underground will be the biggest shot of adrenaline to that process for areas like Heuston.

I have to agree, it’s time for a new kind of development plan for the City.
The days of people flocking to commuter towns are over, the focus is now on living within the city, there’s plenty of room there and the challenge should be accommodate a couple hundred thousand more ppl with the bounds of DCC.
All fitting around transport21 if course.

-Identifying suitable brown field sites could achieve half of this

-Addressing and halting the declining population in may areas within DCC would achieve some more, basically there is an ageing population in many parts of the city; empty nest syndrome. This can be tackled easily by encouraging families into these areas (key worker initiative, affordable housing and family services, safe cycling routes etc)

-Densification of urban villages, this is key to the successful and sustainable development of Dublin as this is where most of the new urbanites will be living. good quality planning guidelines, and a review of Area plans to encourage further densification and integration with transport21 will achieve a lot for the city.

Anyway that’s a bit of my dream, Dublin really does seem to be ready for a leap in development, and the catalyst is definitely transport21 so here’s hoping none of these projects are scrapped.

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.

DCC have gone asleep, there’s nothing coming out of the Civic Offices to suggest that anyone in there has a clue what to do now that the money’s all gone and they can’t afford consultants anymore.

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 say, you fellows’

Is that marmalade or jam?

@gunter wrote:

Is that marmalade or jam?

No its marmajam! ha u guys are so funny

no it’s vegemite, but don’t spread it around

Looks more like mincemeat, just like what all our fine-laid plans are…

@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

@PVC King wrote:

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.

You’ve listed some excellent examples. One of the many merits of the dart underground is the direct link it provides to the Parkwest and Fonthill stations.

@gunter wrote:

The CIE Inchicore Works residents with fight to the death to prevent their middle-class enclave being joined by a medium density public transporation hub that links to the rest of Inchicore and, horrow of horrors, Ballyfermot!.

Nothing to worry about. Lots of the good middle-class residents in the CIE Inchicore Estate are in favour of the urban regeneration of the CIE Inchicore Railway Works. There’s 80 acres in the Railway Works and it’s ripe for medium density development. CIE are scaling down their maintenance operations there. A lot of the site is made up of open space ! There’s many low grade poor quality warehouse structures. The site also contains some Victorian industrial buildings of significant architectural quality which could be redeveloped very tastefully. It’s an urban planners dream – a real high quality urban quarter could be created. The Inchicore Dart Station will be in the geometric centre of the CIE Inchicore Railway Works – very good forward planning.
http://www.irishrail.ie/projects/dart_underground.asp

@Linog wrote:

Nothing to worry about. Lots of the good middle-class residents in the CIE Inchicore Estate are in favour of the urban regeneration of the CIE Inchicore Railway Works. . . . . . It’s an urban planners dream – a real high quality urban quarter could be created. The Inchicore Dart Station will be in the geometric centre of the CIE Inchicore Railway Works – very good forward planning.

This is very good news, Linog . . . . . I would just sleep with the lights on tonight if I was you.

@PVC King wrote:

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 . . . . . . 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 . . .

Again I would say yes! this is progress, compared to your spec. developed sprawl, but no! this is not progress compared to filling in the blank spaces in the city itself.

I’m in awe of your knowledge of economics, but your position on the demand for front and back gardens is way of date. People will buy into good apartment living if the price is right and there’s a decent park near by.

I wish I could share your view on where demand is; Ciaran Cuffe explained his take to my class in college and my experience in London bears his view out. People from 18 -30 flock to apartment living starting first in a house share or bedsit; then to a flash pad during their first serious relationship. Flat 2 is more often than not a bought 2 bed apartment and works for child 1; as soon as child two arrives child 1 is ready to start school; it suddenly dawns on them that there are limited eductional options in the City Centre and they relocate to the suburbs to have kid number 3 or simply educate the first 2 in a school with 50 acres of playing fields.

In the UK they use the commuter rail network in Dublin they move to 2 miles from Drogheda and in a good outcome they park and ride in a bad outcome they drive.

I do agree that demographics have changed completely and that the 19 – 30 phase more often than not is probably closer to 19 – 38 and that a sizeable proportion of the 39 – 45’s will if the right product goes on the market go for a 1,200 sq foot 4 bed flat. But another factor you need to work out is that where children play you can only hear them up to about 4 stories above ground whichj precludes this target market above this height.

I am all for the medium to high density infill you propose; but what I would hate to see is the East region of Dub/Kildare/Meath/Wicklow exclude all unsustainable housing types only to see counties Laois, Westmeath and Carlow continue granting planning permission for housing developments of 300 plus houses at 16 to the acre with no credible link to the rail network.

Realistically there is enough development land between Heuston and Clondalkin Castle alone to provide medium to high density development for the next 20 years. The question is what do you do in the 10 – 20 mile radius where people will be a lot less likely to accept apartment living. The first thing I would recommend is a complete ban on one off houses unless you actually farm land or can prove that you are caring for a parent who needs at least daily part time care.

@Ruadhán MacEoin wrote:

Please note the above map regrettably does not show the lines going in to Spencer Dock area, which obviously are present already

Thats my map, which was created when there was no railway into Docklands. 🙂

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055004323

I created it back in october 2006, well before the CSO did theirs. Docklands didn’t open until March 2007.

@PVC King wrote:

I wish I could share your view on where demand is.

I don’t disagree with your analysis of the demand, or Cuffe’s, but even if we never built another three bed semi with a front and back garden, does Dublin not already have enough of this category of property to satisfy any possible future demand?

Just getting back to more simpler things. We have all made the point that there is a recession on and this major infrastructural projects are getting either pushed back or reassessed. I think that this is a time for a better streamline of current services, a streamline which will not cost as much as a metro or interconnector or a LUAS connector.

In Dublin the majority of people have access and use buses. I was angered by the cutbacks in Dublin Bus, which seemed to go against the idea of increasing passenger numbers and to get people to use cars less. Anyway, excluding that it is high time that all this hassle about integrated ticketing should be stopped and serious effort be put into it.

Also the pricing system for buses in Dublin is cumbersome and complicated. Dublin Bus should install a one price for bus services in the city. I believe Labour have this in their transport program for the last general election. For many people they may know and use one bus line. They will know how much it is to get from one or two places on that line but not if their length of that route changes. Also if one is to use a different bus line to get somewhere else they do not know how much it will cost. With the correct change and coins only rule this causes problems and delays and ultimately frustration. As we mentioned, London has a similar system for people who may not have an Oyster card. We should do the same.

Furthermore a lot of people don’t use buses because they don’t know when they will come. People are not going to wait at a bus stop not knowing when a bus will come. If people knew when a bus was coming regardless if it was on time or not people will have more incentive to use buses. Dublin Bus have been talking about a Real Time system for 9 years but nothing has occurred yet.

So for the moment, while the coffers are low for big infrastructural projects we should be seriously bashing heads in especially Dublin Bus and forcing a one price policy and Real Time information at buses. We should also finally finally FINALLY be forcing a system of integrated ticketing in Dublin.

That’s just my piece anyway.

@gunter wrote:

I don’t disagree with your analysis of the demand, or Cuffe’s, but even if we never built another three bed semi with a front and back garden, does Dublin not already have enough of this category of property to satisfy any possible future demand?

I believe there are, and a lot of them in areas such as Ballyfermot, Inchicore, Crumlin Cabra Glasnevin etc are “empty nests” in excellent locations. A lot of older folk whos children have left the nest wont move to a more suitable home, but luckily enough today’s generation have no problem moving around homes and apartment living will eventually catch on for older age groups as they do in other countries, this frees up the existing 3-bed semi stock of houses.

At some point around Dublin there needs to be a line drawn, inside of which we build a metropolitan center, perhaps the bounds of DCC whould suit this (D1-12 roughly I guess). In here we dont need front and back gardens any more, we dont need housing estates where the streets and pavements outside take up multiple more times space as the houses. You can still build houses here in medium-high density developments.
We do need good quality med-high density housing, cycle lanes, god transport/services, and connectivity to all places with (the current Dublin Bus spiders web is a scourge on the city), and a lot more…
Planners dream is right!

Outside the circle there would be designated med-high density areas such as Dundrum and Coolock.

Ballinasloe to Atlone strech of N6 upgraded to motorway today.

But the Athlone by pass upgrade has been suspended due to objections, wtf is that about?

@gunter wrote:

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 …

Em, I think Ruadhan MacEoin and Frank McDonald are in a slight different league to each other now in fairness 😮

@rob mc wrote:

Ballinasloe to Atlone strech of N6 upgraded to motorway today.

But the Athlone by pass upgrade has been suspended due to objections, wtf is that about?

the dual carriage bypassing Athlone isn’t really suitable for motorway status. It has a narrow hard shoulder and way too many junctions with regional roads. At some stage in the future, it might be decided to build a second bypass to the south of Athlone. On a map the M/N 6 does a significant detour to bypass Athlone where as a southern bypass would result in more of a straight line which means faster travel between Dublin and Galway.

@Devin wrote:

Em, I think Ruadhan MacEoin and Frank McDonald are in a slight different league to each other now in fairness 😮

I was being kind 🙂
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . to Frank

You’d be surprised, Frank and members of An Taisce are like peas in a pod!
(I guess I’m including ex members too Ruadhan)
Actually anyone who has been to one of Frank’s parties will agreee, it’s like being at a bord meeting of An Taisce with the ammount of them there!

All firmly against Metro North & West from the outset and for good reasons too!
Metro west seems to have gone west in every sense of the word and Metro North is kinda likely to follow it.

@ac1976 wrote:

All firmly against Metro North & West from the outset and for good reasons too!
Metro west seems to have gone west in every sense of the word and Metro North is kinda likely to follow it.

When the people driving the public transport enhancement agenda at opinion piece level are against a particular scheme purely on blatent cost grounds you really do feel the writing is on the wall for that project.

@PVC King wrote:

When the people driving the public transport enhancement agenda at opinion piece level are against a particular scheme purely on blatent cost grounds you really do feel the writing is on the wall for that project.

That bunch aint driving anything, they pedal nowhere anyway being environmentalists.
They are just commentators and observers, although mighty influential at that.

The problem they present is that the benefits of Metro are little, and we will end up with infrequent half empty trains as the population density in Dublin is not right for Metro, and they are right, you would probably get 7 or 8 complete new Luas lines for the cost of Metro North alone, not to mention seriving many times more homes that the later with a better service.

A service every 15 – 30 mins is not what people would imagine a Metro to be, but thats what you might get unless u are prepared to run near empty trains, how crappy would that be!

Agreed on capacity there is nothing more frustrating than descending multiple escalators to the platform and seeing the display say 5 minutes; if typical underground loadings were to be delivered based on the population density along the proposed Metro North route then the sign on Metro North platforms outside peak times would probably say 12 minutes on average; if you just missed the Luas specification vehicle that just left for the next station.

Compare that to Interconnector where route options would be Airport, Swords/ Malahide or Howth and the frequency could be every 2 – 6 minutes and by virtue of the service being a through service as opposed to one terminating in the City Centre there would be significant passenger loadings from the West of the City as well.

For the Interconnector to really maximise its potential it is felt that the Metro West alignment should be looked at for the provision of Dart spurs from the Kildare line; what would it cost to develop spurs to say Tallaght and Porterstown to further increase loadings and in the case of the latter provide a second routing for services from West Dublin should service be disrupted in the inteconnector due to say a passenger incident.

@PVC King wrote:

For the Interconnector to really maximise its potential it is felt that the Metro West alignment should be looked at for the provision of Dart spurs from the Kildare line; what would it cost to develop spurs to say Tallaght and Porterstown to further increase loadings and in the case of the latter provide a second routing for services from West Dublin should service be disrupted in the inteconnector due to say a passenger incident.

Agreed, there are just too many people in agreement on here to be honest. That seems like a no-brainer. The Metro west would need to be scrapped as its a different mode of transport to Dart i.e. the track gauge is not the same so they never actually connect.

Building spurs from the new DART line would be much better and make more economic sense, including (as Irish Rail proposed themselves) a spur from the Howth Line to the Airport.
The interconnector really does make this all clear.

Interconnector = extending DART services and you get proper frequent urban transport
Metro = well and irish kind of metro which would not resemble they Metro in any other city as there would be low frequency and under capacity and it would need to be heavily subsidised making its extension impossable.
DART spurs = sharing the new DART experience with more of the city.
Throw in a few more Luas lines (and I dont see a need for one to Lucan as a spur would be so much better) and you have a proper transport plan for Dublin that can grow with the City.

One more point, we tend to throw in park-and-ride around the place, which is not a bad idea, but its kind of stupid not to provide proper bike-and-ride facilities beside them. Cycling being free would have a built-in incentive.
A few safe cycle paths, locked bike storage with cctv etc maybe options for cages/lockers to rent for the day too, and of course a water fountain to replenish yourself before you continue on.

If you took just the money for Metro North and spent it on these kind of things you would get so so much more for the city.
I

One other point to make, the Metro North and some other elements of Transport21 were announced and approved in previous publications of Programmes for Government.
There are currently discussions between the Greens and FF to draw-up a new Programme for Government and you could well see the shelving of some transport21 stuff as a result!

Expect its publication end of next month! So exiciting!
Lets hope the cabinet are also in agreement and shaing our love!

I do hope, and can not but expect to see the Dublin Transport Authority to be a key deliverable from the new program as well as the Interconnector. Lets see about Metro!

@ac1976 wrote:

you’d Be Surprised, Frank And Members Of An Taisce Are Like Peas In A Pod!
(i Guess I’m Including Ex Members Too Ruadhan)
actually Anyone Who Has Been To One Of Frank’s Parties Will Agreee, It’s Like Being At A Bord Meeting Of An Taisce With The Ammount Of Them There!

All Firmly Against Metro North & West From The Outset And For Good Reasons Too!
Metro West Seems To Have Gone West In Every Sense Of The Word And Metro North Is Kinda Likely To Follow It.

ha ha ha

@ac1976 wrote:

One other point to make, the Metro North and some other elements of Transport21 were announced and approved in previous publications of Programmes for Government.
There are currently discussions between the Greens and FF to draw-up a new Programme for Government and you could well see the shelving of some transport21 stuff as a result!

Expect its publication end of next month! So exiciting!
Lets hope the cabinet are also in agreement and shaing our love!

I do hope, and can not but expect to see the Dublin Transport Authority to be a key deliverable from the new program as well as the Interconnector. Lets see about Metro!

I totally agree; a new programme for a new era; building Interconnector and spur lines from the Northern and Western lines seems totally acheivable in the context of fiscal constriants. With the inter-urban road network largely complete and paid for following an unprecendented spend over the past decade, Luas built in 3 out of 4 intended directions from City centre and you get a picture that once the Luas link up and Interconnector are completed with Dart extensions to Airport, Swords, Tallaght etc that Irish Transport is far from the embarassment it was ten years ago. A lot more reasons to be positive than negative and at a price that is affordable.

If Metro West could be scrapped in favor of a DART line, maybe the DART Underground could swing round the northside into a circle line (with station in arbour hill, smithfield, the four courts etc.), meeting that DART line at Parnell Sq. Various underground stations would then have LUAS interchanges, eg. OCS and SSG.

Then you have integrated metropolitan transport for the entire city centre not just as it is now but as it could be in 10, 20 30, 50 years in the future.

And if Metro North is only running every 12 minutes, that effectively removes Parnell Square from the true “Dublin Subway”, you might as well get off at OCS and walk…

And maybe low congestion charges could help subsidise the cost of this public transport.

As somebody mentioned it the other day, wouldn’t it be better for interconnectivity in Dublin if the Interconnector and that Phoenix Park line were combined to make a sort of circle line. Then you would have a number of lines coming off it serving suburbs – i.e. four Dart lines and two Luas lines. The Metro North could be replaced with a Luas extension up to Ballymun or further, and maybe in the future Luas lines up Dame Street out to Lucan and out to UCD could be built.

Oh dear, it’s got to this level now has it.

More like this level

Marmajam if you have nothing to say then don’t post. You no doubt are attempting justify the overpriced and poorly routed metro north project. If you could have built a credible argument it would have been accepted; you have however failed to do so.

It is likely that the Interconnector will be built; there is no harm in discussing potential combinations of new spurs from existing rail lines when the capacity arrives to ramp up services on what will in terms of rerouting options create a new dawn for Irish rail commuting.

As many contributers have stated before; we all want to see a viable network that serves all the key desinations; the key word being viable. The Metro North stated demand of 23m annual passengers at a cost of €2bn does not acheive viability; the costs work out at €87 per annual passenger journey in the crude or occiaional measure or €39,130 per commuter assuming 45 weeks with 5 return journeys in each week.

Contrast this to the Interconnector which trebles capacity and if alternative routes are added demand from the existing 33m p.a.x. to 100m p.a.x. add another €1bn for ancillary extensions to Tallaght, Porterstown. Airport and Swords to create that demand and the figures come back at €45 per occaisional journey and €20,149 per commuter; a figure of €10,000 – €15,000 per residential unit in residential development levies or 5% of gross value are not overly punative once a functional housing market returns. In contrast to hit a 50 – 75% recovery rate Metro North would need €20,000 – €30,000 per residential unit which given the demographic much of the lines passess through i.e. areas close to the Airport, M50, Ikea etc is simply unrealistic.

In terms of running costs the wider network would be a lot cheaper as most of it utilises existing assets and it provides a better pricing model in terms of the airport where a premium service could be spun off in the way that Ferrovial hold the Heathrow Express franchise.

If you could be mature enough to stop posting childrens photo’s I suspect you might have something decent to contribute; the question is do you have the maturity?

@PVC King wrote:

Marmajam if you have nothing to say then don’t post. .

Doesn’t seem to be impeding you from posting 😀

You’re no economist.

btw I don’t take your arguments seriously. Too many invented figures.

So you keep saying with various degrees of rudeness, evasiveness and more laterly images that would have more relevance in a peadophiles toolkit than anything else.

Invented figures you say

23m passengers?
€2bn construction cost?
€10bn annual fiscal deficit

Whatever way you break that down you wouldn’t need to invent any figures to make a rationale argument pointing out the clear flaws in the project that should have stopped it before it began; putting just those three numbers together and anyone removed from the project can clearly see that it is sheer financial lunacy that has the potential for an unacceptable opportunity cost for the rest of the regional and national transport budget

“Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens”

With the stupidity gods themselves battles in vain

A God complex; you’ve done everything else!

Whilst you are on Germany lets look at how the Germans connect their main hub-airport FFM or Frankfurt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Schienennetzplan_Frankfurt_am_Main.png

If the model were followed in Dublin it would equate to an express train from Connolly stopping only at Howth Junction and Portmarnock

If Munich were the model it would involve an interconnector solution being used with a normal commuter train using a common route and diverting to the airport after serving a number of existing stations.

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.urbantransport-technology.com/projects/munich/images/image_1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.urbantransport-technology.com/projects/munich/munich1.html&h=424&w=600&sz=45&tbnid=lML3xFSnIFsW-M:&tbnh=95&tbnw=135&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmunich%2Bs%2Bbahn%2Bmap&hl=en&usg=__0uKDiLxh2OEV5KnexjMnVgXYJgc=&ei=cKqaSqbMNMO7jAek8YyrBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=5&ct=image

As for Berlin the prioritised airport of Berlin Schonefeld is a mix between a DB line RE7 and an extension of S9 which is again an interconnector type of service doing the central spine before serving the airport as a destination

http://selectparks.net/~julian/share/Map_Berlin_S_UBahnNetz.jpg

I can’t see anything that vaguely resembles Metro North here

82 million Germans………….

what do they know?

A Dart Spur is a good idea, it has been touted many times, but in important centralised area’s other than the Interconnector it won’t go under ground.

With A Howth spur to the airport it would be going over land and in the middle of nowhere.

The Metro West Alignment however is a good idea, but that was for a light rail plan.

Is there the space or the want for an elevated and grade seperated heavy rail line that both goes north to the airport in western suburbs and connects with the main line’s and interconnector?

IF a Loop was built using the now questionably scraped Metro West then it would be a large loop that leave’s out the City centre itself, especially the Northside.

The Northside may not be dense in some areas, but it lacks rail and the Luas D1 line connected to the dream like BX is probably not going to surface because of the traffic delays, not cost.

People have been expecting the metro for years. It is in planning. It will most likely go ahead in it’s tiny capacity seperated form. And it will suffer if the metro west is never built.

It’s route, although lower capacity is a direct City Centre to Airport route connecting A train station, historical streets, A college and a large density population area near the airport. It will then AFTER the airport go on to the Swords which is constantly expanding and has NO none road based transport, and further to green field sites with an Ignored possibilty of Connecting with Donabate.

Considering the extreem cost of tunneling under Dublin and it’s lower density the Metro Can’t be heavy rail or like any other subway or metro in any other City. But it is a good route, and i direct one that could promote development.

The airport is what the press always think about when they hear “Metro”. But in truth it’s meant for Swords and the green field site’s beyond.

The Airport isn’t used durign rush hours, it’s used all day long!

Swords and surrounding towns need a corridor into town that doesn’t rely on the bus network and car’s.

Similarly a connection to site’s in town and other part’s of the transport network are needed.

The current plans were good enough during the boom years, they hoped to build more on top of these systems. But now it needs to be fully researched and possibly scraped or re-drawn.

The same arguement against the Metro North destroy’s the idea of Heavy Rail going to the airport and the west and connecting with the interconnector.

Although in line with what other cities do, it isn’t as justified with how little there is that far out in Dublin. It is basicaly a rail line following the Line of the M50 but NOT going the whole way.

There are several idea’s that could be touted about but nothing will change what was planned. For now these are the basic ideas for the way forward and we can’t do much about changing them.

The Dream:

A Heavy Rail Loop:

Spur from northern line to airport.

Connecting with Terminal and Metro North.

Rail then heads west connecting with Luas lines to suburban towns.

It follows Western route and spur’s back into Mainline from West.

On a seperate allignment it connects with the interconnecter which can head both north and south when heading west, creating a Airport based loop.

Heading further south along the west the Heavy rail connects in Tallaght, possibly with a submerged stretch in central area’s that connects to the Red Line/Square/Hospital.

From there is the option to skirt across the southside.

Using the M50 as a base, espeically it’s large cutting’s compared to other parts it will link up with the Southern extensions of the Green Line.

It will then Tunnel Through Shankhill where the old Harcourt line’s alignment was butchered and built over, and link in Triangle both north and south with the Dark Line.

This create’s a larger Loop around the city.

However Connecting with the interconnector here is more difficult, but Grand Canal Dock and Landsdown road are minor possibilties.

The METRO:
The “Metro” should be an Express light-rail that connects the transport hubs running from North to South.

It will bypass the Dart Lines, Heavy Intercity Rail, Commuter lines, and “loop” lines.

It will serve as a central corridor that links the Luas lines and Heavy Rail lines.

LUAS:

Green Line, Current plus southern extentions as far as Bray.

Red Line + Docklands.

Line F: Lucan Luas To College Green.

Theoretical Rathfarnham-Christchurch Luas Connecting with Lucan “line F”

BX Line Connecting Red-Green-Lucan-Rathfarnham Lines.

(Risk of turning into our origional network with “The Pillar” Centric allignment. College Green being a better central point, especial if Metro North’s OCS Bridge exit was closer with an underground concourse)

Line D1 OCS to Grangegorman/Broadstone station.

Finglas Luas connecting with D1 into town etc.

Amiens Street Luas- Sutton etc (One used to exist and the road is large enough) Connect to south side with BX Loop or other crossing.

All other Luas possibilities welcome as a Tram network is far better than relying on Cars and Buses.:rolleyes:

The Reality:

Luas Extensions.

Piss poor useless Metro.

Delayed over expensive Interconnector with 2 Dart line’s being delayed and poorly funded or FAR later than planned.

No further Luas routes due to complaints and poor planing.:mad:

@Denton wrote:

The Reality:

Luas Extensions.

Piss poor useless Metro.

Delayed over expensive Interconnector with 2 Dart line’s being delayed and poorly funded or FAR later than planned.

No further Luas routes due to complaints and poor planing.:mad:

The interconnector can largely bypass the complaints Luas proposals generate.

Seriously the more you look at it the more obvious it is the interconnector is right idea, the more it’s vision is extended the better.

@Yixian wrote:

The interconnector can largely bypass the complaints Luas proposals generate.

Seriously the more you look at it the more obvious it is the interconnector is right idea, the more it’s vision is extended the better.

Extended?

It’s just an increase in the size and capacity of the dart.

It’s worth thousands of passengers a day in key area’s and free’s up the network.

It’s not getting any more than is planned. It never was suggested other wise.

Although i would like to see the origional plans for the Dart.

Ie the other underground route’s with apparently something going to Tallaght.

Back in the 80’s when there was far less people how were they justifying that old plan?

It would be worth a look.

In 2004, the government commited to the Metro North project.
At the time its cost was estimated at 2.4 Billion
Also at the time Irish Rail proposed an overground Dart spur from Howth line to the Airport
The Dart Spur was costed at 400 Million at the time, considerable cheaper than the Metro.

The Government chose Metro, a critical part of their justification at the time was that it sould be part of a wider metro network.

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2004/09/05/story822901313.asp

It’s hard to believe that Metro ever got the go-ahead the cost benefit analysis seems to have been disregarded for some (political) reason.

Anyway, the whole transport 21 plan is based on the DTO “A Platform for Change” strategy and a heavy ammount of political influence.

The good news is that the DTO are reviewing this strategy and its progress and will publish a new strategy in about 6 months time. http://www.dto.ie/web2006/strategy2030.htm
In the meantime the Misister for Transport seems to be desperate to get the Metro North project up-and-running, (I believe they are currently working on the funding for this)

http://www.fiannafail.ie/news/entry/minister-dempsey-meets-vice-president-of-european-investment-bank/

The Metro and Interconnector and the transport21 strategy are all part of the current Program for Government, this is were the transport Minister draws his powers to force it through form. I can’t imagine if there was an election anytime soon that Metro would survive it, and it’s already been butchered as the Metro West has been shelved. Without Metro West the justification used by the government for Metro North is invalid and surely the whole Metro project needs to be reviewed?

Anyway politically it’s easy to see the Dart Undergound / Interconnector is the new star project from transport21!

http://www.youtube.com/user/FatPope

what is the reasoning behind the two extra tracks in the middle?
If they weren’t there I guess the tracks would break…

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/8222435.stm

@ac1976 wrote:

It’s hard to believe that Metro ever got the go-ahead the cost benefit analysis seems to have been disregarded for some (political) reason.

Anyway, the whole transport 21 plan is based on the DTO “A Platform for Change” strategy and a heavy ammount of political influence.

The good news is that the DTO are reviewing this strategy and its progress and will publish a new strategy in about 6 months time. http://www.dto.ie/web2006/strategy2030.htm
In the meantime the Misister for Transport seems to be desperate to get the Metro North project up-and-running, (I believe they are currently working on the funding for this)

http://www.fiannafail.ie/news/entry/minister-dempsey-meets-vice-president-of-european-investment-bank/

The Metro and Interconnector and the transport21 strategy are all part of the current Program for Government, this is were the transport Minister draws his powers to force it through form.

The programme for Goverment was written in mid 2007 roughly 1 month before the sub-prime issue started to dent confidence in all forms of leverage. Also included in the programme for Government was one Western Rail Corridor. At that time it seemed that Ireland was on a never ending rising tide; anything was possible and International financiers were not only lauding Ireland as the model to be aspired to but NTMA could have raised any sum they wanted.

In the intervening period Ireland Inc. has had a torrid time going from hero to zero probably quite unfairly as the same workforce excluding real estate are pretty much still standing and in many sectors inovation continues unabated.

Unfortunately the tide going out has exposed a lot of issues that require restoration of the country’s reputation when it comes to delivering value for money. The public Sector earns almost 50% more than their private sector counterparts whilst enjoying better benefits and much better job security. The ability to buy industrial peace in the good times as fiscal surpluses grew non-stop was a poor choice in retrospect albeit very expedient politically at the time.

The ability to buy a €2bn link to the airport when a €400m option exists would equally be possible; however the fiscal position now cannot sustain such a decision as it is clear if this Metro is built it will be a stand alone Metro line for a couple of decades. It would be much better to redeploy the €1,600m saving with a little additional funding to deliver a number of bolt ons to the existing network such as:

1. A Dart spur for Swords c€200m
2. Luas for Ballymun c€350m
3. Dart spur for Tallaght c€200m
4. Dart upgrade to Maynooth c€200m??
5. Dart upgrade to Pace c€100m??
6. Dart spur to Portstown c€300m??
7. Dart upgrade to Balbriggan c€200??
8. Dart upgrade to Sallins and spur to Naas c€400m??

At the very least Metro North needs to be parked up until the DTO can establish not a generalised needs study as we all know enough of those have been carried out over the past 20 years. What the DTO need to do is conduct a ranking table of what projects can deliver the most passenger numbers per euro spent and clearly demonstrate how various options to Dublin Airport, Ballymun, Swords, Tallaght etc stack up in financial and user freindliness terms from a number of City origin points.

Where did you get your 2bn for MN?
It is incorrect.
The contract will be signed for approx 1.75bn.

Luas to Ballymun makes no sense. There’s no need for it. The buses do a very good job.
The Luas through Ballymun was really for the airport and Swords.

It is not feasible to funnell all the airport/Swords and Nth Fingal rail traffic through the DART/Nth Line corridor to Connolly/Docklands.
It stymies develpment already underway in the airport/Swords locale.

The idea that every 5 years into the planning process we should cancel everything and make a new back of an envelope plan based on the latest Daily Mail economic take of events is not real world stuff.

PVC started off with the argument that MN would cost 5bn with 10% interest repayments.

In fact it will be 1.75bn at approx 5%.

87m a year. More than covered by revenue projected at 100m+ in 2016.

And not even payable until built in 2016.

Inflation after that will render the repayments small beer very quickly. MN will drive economic development in the Nth/NW Fingal area for 150-200 years. There will be more recessions and booms.

The idea that MN is some sort of low capacity tram is also incorrect. It will have 4 times the capacity of Luas – there are many grades of Metro/light-heavy rail syste4ms in operation around the globe. MN is appropriate for Dublin.

Any costs during construction will be more than covered by SS savings, VAT and income tax.
The project is ready to go and will give an important stimulus to the economy.

All the guff about DART lines here there and everywhere – given the Irish planning process…………pure fantasy.

Get real. As the actress said to the property developer.

@marmajam wrote:

Where did you get your 2bn for MN?
It is incorrect.
The contract will be signed for approx 1.75bn..

€2bn is being generous in terms of ability to hit a figure. The idea that almost 50% could be shaved off in a year is laughable; as we all know the RPA won’t release even an estimate based on a 20% variance range; even though construction margins on projects of this scale are less than 10%.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cost-worry-means-no-decision-on-metro-until-2009-1441324.html

@marmajam wrote:

Luas to Ballymun makes no sense. There’s no need for it. The buses do a very good job.
The Luas through Ballymun was really for the airport and Swords..

I disagree the route would serve DCU, Whitehall and Ballymun which is about equivelent to the Luas line to Tallaght; albeit without the huge industrial area in the middle. If it isn’t fit for Luas it surely isn’t fit for Metro.

@marmajam wrote:

It is not feasible to funnell all the airport/Swords and Nth Fingal rail traffic through the DART/Nth Line corridor to Connolly/Docklands.
It stymies develpment already underway in the airport/Swords locale..

It is entirely feasible; otherwise Irish Rail would not have proposed it in their 2004 Dublin Rail Plan; extending the Malahide dart to Swords if done with grade seperation would increase capacity on the Northern line.

@marmajam wrote:

The idea that every 5 years into the planning process we should cancel everything and make a new back of an envelope plan based on the latest Daily Mail economic take of events is not real world stuff..

The events of the past 2 years economically are not 5 year cycle territory they are once in lifetime scale events. Dublin is a fundamentally different equation than it was in 2006.

@marmajam wrote:

PVC started off with the argument that MN would cost 5bn with 10% interest repayments.

In fact it will be 1.75bn at approx 5%.

87m a year. More than covered by revenue projected at 100m+ in 2016.

Let me get this; 23m passengers will pay an average fare of €4.35 per passenger; then the route will run itself with no labour, energy or maintenance costs. At €4.35 per passenger per journey most people will take the bus further denting demand below the stated 23m passengers claimed in a much stronger economic environment. Revenue at €2.80 per fare would total €63m; I’ve also never seen the stated running costs. The project would probably lose €40m a year operationally if the figure of €100m plus bandied out is realised; add that to the costs of subordinate debt at 5.75%p.a. and you get an annualised loss of €155m p.a. or €6.74 per passenger carried.

@marmajam wrote:

Inflation after that will render the repayments small beer very quickly. MN will drive economic development in the Nth/NW Fingal area for 150-200 years. There will be more recessions and booms..

Beyond 20 reversions can’t be valued; if a project was to be analysed over 200 years and operational costs ignored the Western Rail Corridor could be proved viable; oh that is the programme for Government that did that.

@marmajam wrote:

The idea that MN is some sort of low capacity tram is also incorrect. It will have 4 times the capacity of Luas – there are many grades of Metro/light-heavy rail syste4ms in operation around the globe. MN is appropriate for Dublin..

So Luas to Ballymum doesn’t stack up; buit a metro to the airport and Swords does; an annual hole of €155m in the transport budget is wholly inappropriate for Dublin.

@marmajam wrote:

Any costs during construction will be more than covered by SS savings, VAT and income tax.
The project is ready to go and will give an important stimulus to the economy.

All the guff about DART lines here there and everywhere – given the Irish planning process…………pure fantasy.

Get real. As the actress said to the property developer.

The list is unlike this project a list of bolt-ons that can be added as the funds are available and the development plans written and implemented to plan in a co-ordinated way. Look at the way the Germans build their systems it is spine and branch not large scale unviable and stand alone.

@PVC King wrote:

€2bn is being generous in terms of ability to hit a figure. The idea that almost 50% could be shaved off in a year is laughable; as we all know the RPA won’t release even an estimate based on a 20% variance range; even though construction margins on projects of this scale are less than 10%.
.

you like to posture using economic jargon…….

but look at this from a few posts ago from PVC:

1. A Dart spur for Swords c€200m
2. Luas for Ballymun c€350m
3. Dart spur for Tallaght c€200m
4. Dart upgrade to Maynooth c€200m??
5. Dart upgrade to Pace c€100m??
6. Dart spur to Portstown c€300m??
7. Dart upgrade to Balbriggan c€200??
8. Dart upgrade to Sallins and spur to Naas c€400m??

You forgot to factor in that these are todays prices. By the time your new bits get through appraisal/route selection/design/CPOs/EIS – maybe 7 years process – we will be back in seller’s market.The cost will be double.

Another schoolboy howler.

Are all your figures bluffs PVC?

Outside of your numerological bubble, in the real world decisions have to be made.
DCC, Fingal CC, the Dept of Transport, The Taoiseach, are firm on it. The CFI are behind it The Greens have made their support conditional on MN going ahead and the Dept of Finace are comfortable with the tenders.

We have seen non stop schoolboy howlers, bluffing, inventing facts – do you want me to ressurect your previous sad contributions that litter this and the MN thread.

Be embarrassing PVC………..

I suspect that those actually appraised of the real figures – not those garbled in a bluffers pretend economics – might be in a better position than you to judge.

Harsd to see how you can sideline the above and get a new set of plans through in the teeth of opposition from those main players who are happy with the current plan.

@marmajam wrote:

You forgot to factor in that these are todays prices. By the time your new bits get through appraisal/route selection/design/CPOs/EIS – maybe 7 years process – we will be back in seller’s market.The cost will be double.

After ignoring the fact that it costs money to run a metro; you know the stuff they print in Frankfurt, where they have a joined up underground system based on spine and branch. You display further financial illiteracy in not knowing that in costing any project you need to find a price that is based at Net Present Value. All of the projects I listed were submitted as optional extra’s; if the costs rose beyond viablility they would be removed from the agenda.

Critically the spine and branch has the flexibility to select and de-select bolt on’s; unlike the metro which you admit is not viable to Ballymun even as a Luas where a QBC is deemed adequate. Suvention of €6.74 a passenger per year to build a line that passes through areas that can’t justify a Luas in the majority of its existing population catchment.

I await Chairman Boyle’s stance on Nama before declaring unity within the Green Zone

jeez people it’s gettin’ a bit like Politics.ie here…. what happened to polite and courteous debate… sheesh

Nothing is being ignored. Merely pointing out that a litany of schoolboy howlers and invented guessimates betrays an agenda. As an estate agent I guess your aim is any sort short term of recovery from the catastrophe you brought on yourself.
But the job of planners and Gov is look at the bigger picture.
Ireland is strategically placed for exponential growth in the medium term.
We can’t be going around afraid of our own shadows like mice.

Four figures

€2bn construction cost challenge it with a referenced source or accept it as being kind
€115m annual interest bill – cite subordinate debt raised by any Semi-State body this year on a 10 year term at a rate of interest of less than that number 5.75%
23m annual passengers – or less given the predicted construction on the line that now won’t happen
€400m to build a dart spur that serves Dublin Airport

Make an argument and stay away from personality or just don’t post; this line is not worth the money and therefore should just go the way of the Bertie Bowl a great boom era project that had its plug pulled

To a certain extent I would agree that the Metro North probably isn’t feasible in this climate, however I’m not fully up to speed on the funding arrangements on this? Have any posters an idea of the government cost/taxpayer cost on this particular PPP model, how much are the government in for on the whole deal?

With the Rail Procurement Agency in new offices in town and these Metro / LUAS projects their only function and the possible €50 or so million spent to date on the MN its likely therefore to be a runner.

Correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t it a fight out between 2 candidate contractors presently and the tendering is at the Best and Final Offer stage (BAFO stage) and the project (MN) is designed (to a certian degree?)?

On a side issue; something that struck me a few times over the years is why their isn’t just one Government Agency for Rail Transport where ‘joined up thinking’ would be possible.

In this climate there must be justification for amalgamation of Irish Rail (maybe the projects / procurement section for starters) with the RPA with a view to cutting back on the costs of both of these Gov Agencies / Depts?

http://constructionconciliation.blogspot.com/

You’ll have to take my word on it re 1.75bn.

You may need to consider changing your username next Spring 😀

Other than Singapore I don’t believe there is a metro system in the world that pays for itself.
So that makes a bit of a nonsense of your obsession with numbers.

@PVC King wrote:

The ability to buy a €2bn link to the airport when a €400m option exists would equally be possible

I’ll state openly that I believe Metro North is a good idea because it opens lots of new areas of Dublin to rail. I think that’s fundamentally more important that improving existing services because a network isn’t a network if it covers a tiny part of the city. The MN route also integrates lots of the Dart, Suburban and Luas lines helping to improve the network. Upgrades of Dart and lines to the airport achieve neither of this.

However, my main problem with your suggestion is that you keep comparing an (already overcrowded) airport branch serving nothing else with the metro line serving the Green luas line, the south city centre, the Red luas line, the north city centre, the Rotunda, Mater Misericordiae, Drumcondra, the Maynooth and PPT lines, Whitehall, Glasnevin, DCU, Ballymun, (potentially) Metro West, the airport and Swords. Oranges and apples doesn’t even come close!

1. A Dart spur for Swords c€200m
2. Luas for Ballymun c€350m
3. Dart spur for Tallaght c€200m
4. Dart upgrade to Maynooth c€200m??
5. Dart upgrade to Pace c€100m??
6. Dart spur to Portstown c€300m??
7. Dart upgrade to Balbriggan c€200??
8. Dart upgrade to Sallins and spur to Naas c€400m??

Have you got anywhere to back up those figures or are they your own estimates?

@highorlow wrote:

In this climate there must be justification for amalgamation of Irish Rail (maybe the projects / procurement section for starters) with the RPA with a view to cutting back on the costs of both of these Gov Agencies / Depts?

You mean put the RPA back where they came from? 😀

@highorlow wrote:

To a certain extent I would agree that the Metro North probably isn’t feasible in this climate, however I’m not fully up to speed on the funding arrangements on this? Have any posters an idea of the government cost/taxpayer cost on this particular PPP model, how much are the government in for on the whole deal?

With the Rail Procurement Agency in new offices in town and these Metro / LUAS projects their only function and the possible €50 or so million spent to date on the MN its likely therefore to be a runner.

Correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t it a fight out between 2 candidate contractors presently and the tendering is at the Best and Final Offer stage (BAFO stage) and the project (MN) is designed (to a certian degree?)?

On a side issue; something that struck me a few times over the years is why their isn’t just one Government Agency for Rail Transport where ‘joined up thinking’ would be possible.

In this climate there must be justification for amalgamation of Irish Rail (maybe the projects / procurement section for starters) with the RPA with a view to cutting back on the costs of both of these Gov Agencies / Depts?

http://constructionconciliation.blogspot.com/

the informal word from RPA sources is they expect the contract to be signed at approx 1.75 Bn
MN is at the oral hearing stage with ABP and PP is expected early next year.
The contract is a PPP and the consortium will raise the money. Though the gov is presenly looking at facilitating this either through the EIB or Sovereign funds or an Infrastructure bond through the Pensions fund. Or a mix of these 3.
No money is payable until construction is complete (2016) and then payable over 25 years.
Cutting MN therefore will save no money.
On the other hand approx 9,000 people are expected to be employed directly and indirectly during construction so it will be a welcome stimulus to the economy.
As well as laying a crucial spine of an integrated public transport system.

It’s €1.75bn now?!

Good grief, if the government had any sense they’d just wait a few months for the figure to go down to €50 at the rate your estimates are plummeting!

@markpb wrote:

I’ll state openly that I believe Metro North is a good idea because it opens lots of new areas of Dublin to rail. I think that’s fundamentally more important that improving existing services because a network isn’t a network if it covers a tiny part of the city. The MN route also integrates lots of the Dart, Suburban and Luas lines helping to improve the network. Upgrades of Dart and lines to the airport achieve neither of this.

Metro North does not intergrate anything; it intersects with Dart Interconnector (once Interconnector isn’t shelved because of the opportunity cost of Metro) the Maynooth line and two currently seperate Luas lines. It is to all intents and purposes a stand alone network as no routing combinations are delivered unlike Interconnector which like Cross Rail in London joins two seperate rail systems (3 in the case of Cross Rail)

Luas to Ballymun at a cost of c€54m a mile (Luas BX) would produce exacxtly the same level of intersectability but would unlike Metro North actually intergrate the new line with two existing systems; a far superior outcome for the City Section. For the Airport a new Express Dart could be done for €400m and for Swords c€200m would removing Darts reversing in Malahide and extend their route to Swords giving the Pavillions their extension and the town their commuter service; the only losers being the people in Malahide who will no longer have first oportunity on the seats.

@markpb wrote:

However, my main problem with your suggestion is that you keep comparing an (already overcrowded) airport branch serving nothing else with the metro line serving the Green luas line, the south city centre, the Red luas line, the north city centre, the Rotunda, Mater Misericordiae, Drumcondra, the Maynooth and PPT lines, Whitehall, Glasnevin, DCU, Ballymun, (potentially) Metro West, the airport and Swords. Oranges and apples doesn’t even come close!

All of the destinations you have quoted excluding Metro North are claimed by the promoter to have a total annual passenger demand of 23m per annum; given that the financing alone will run to €100m a year the base subsidy per passenger assuming fares cover day to day costs would be €4.35 for every passenger journey. That assumes that the recession doesn’t undermine those predictions.

Metro West will not happen for at least 25 years and to be honest using those alignment for Dart extensions to Tallaght and Porterstown makes a lot more sense.

@markpb wrote:

Have you got anywhere to back up those figures or are they your own estimates?

The basis on all estimates is the Pace extension at a cost of €160m for 7.5kms and €54m per mile on Luas based on the BX extension; both of these are totally up to date comparisons; I used question marks because they are uncosted as Dart.

http://www.meathchronicle.ie/articles/1/33012

DjangoD – love it! http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0902/economy.html

PVC wrote:
“You display further financial illiteracy in not knowing that in costing any project you need to find a price that is based at Net Present Value|”

So I cost something that will be bought in 7 years on the basis of what it costs today?

that wouldn’t be a schoolboy attempt to cover your mistakes PVC?

Might have have been better off trying the reliable “the dog ate me estimates” 😀

MN, which interchanges with the Maynooth line, the Luas Red and Green lines and the DART underground (as well as numerous bus routes) is a stand alone line?

The mangled logic of a contrived argument methinks…………….

The same arguments that were used against the DART and the Luas are stil being used against MN.
Given the historical underestimates of growth it is more likely it will be oversubscribed early in it’s life.
The public have shown they are ready to embrace good quality public transport.

MN is a more rational development in the longer term than squeezing everything from Fingal into the Northern Dart line.

@marmajam wrote:

So I cost something that will be bought in 7 years on the basis of what it costs today?

I think that depends on wether you want to lose your house and a few banks:D
You can pay me the interest on the loan and we can forget about it what do you think?;)j/k

metro north still has hurdles to jump… but we will never know how many hurdles because it’s in commercial confidence… 5% confidence tricks

I know everything.

PVC King, your idea that integrated public transport means that different lines are connected by a track is a complete misunderstanding. Interchange stations for connecting to different lines is good integration. Also, would you refrain from trying to justify the DART airport spur idea. People have already outlined to you the problems with that proposal. I think you should quiet up and accept the fact that you are wrong. Metro north is the best option at this stage.

@Iayo wrote:

Metro north is the best option at this stage.

I don’t think anyone can defend the fact that metro north will terminate in the city centre.

So I cost something that will be bought in 7 years on the basis of what it costs today?

No you establish a discount rate and devalue the known cost on that rate. Keep the personaility out of this. 😡

PVC King, your idea that integrated public transport means that different lines are connected by a track is a complete misunderstanding. Interchange stations for connecting to different lines is good integration. Also, would you refrain from trying to justify the DART airport spur idea. People have already outlined to you the problems with that proposal

Irish Rail in their 2004 Rail Plan made the proposal to do this as part of the Dublin Rail Plan. They are railway professionals with the technical expertese in house to kniow what does and doesn’t work.

Integrated means many things; however interconnected means that routes can be combined; Metro is not a runner as it adds no new routing options and will never be the spine of anything. It is simply too expensive at an annual subvention of at least €4.35 per passenger carried and that is interest cover alone.

excuse my ignorance but does integrated mean that all types of transport are integrated payment wise?

20 years ago Singapore, for example, had buses, rail and metro (the MRT). You bought an MRT card that you used on all forms of transport. When it was empty you put it into the bank link machine and put money on it direct from your account. Taxi drivers were still tossers though – it’s the global taxi-driver obnoxious gene.

I’d look back over this thread to see if this has been discussed before but I can’t be arsed trawling through Missarchi’s thread spoiling and PVC and Marmajam’s bickering impasse – if only they’d just sort it out at home

@PVC King wrote:

No you establish a discount rate and devalue the known cost on that rate. Keep the personaility out of this. 😡

Irish Rail in their 2004 Rail Plan made the proposal to do this as part of the Dublin Rail Plan. They are railway professionals with the technical expertese in house to kniow what does and doesn’t work.

Integrated means many things; however interconnected means that routes can be combined; Metro is not a runner as it adds no new routing options and will never be the spine of anything. It is simply too expensive at an annual subvention of at least €4.35 per passenger carried and that is interest cover alone.

you miss the point.

We are getting MN at a very cheap price right now.

But you want to go back into a controversial uncertain planning process to buy something less- if it gets through planning – at premium prices in many years time.

PVC wrote:

“Irish Rail in their 2004 Rail Plan made the proposal to do this as part of the Dublin Rail Plan. They are railway professionals with the technical expertese in house to kniow what does and doesn’t work.”

In this case no – IE were offering their solution with an eye on extending their operations.

As usual you are spoofing.
.

@marmajam wrote:

you miss the point.

We are getting MN at a very cheap price right now.

But you want to go back into a controversial uncertain planning process to buy something less- if it gets through planning – at premium prices in many years time.

PVC wrote:

“Irish Rail in their 2004 Rail Plan made the proposal to do this as part of the Dublin Rail Plan. They are railway professionals with the technical expertese in house to kniow what does and doesn’t work.”

In this case no – IE were offering their solution with an eye on extending their operations.

As usual you are spoofing.
.

The price of a Dart ticket is €2 – €3 all in; the interest cover cost on metro north is €4.35 per passenger; i.e. plus all operational costs. It is far from cheap and begs the question what in gods name were the rpa doing bandying about figures of €3bn only 12 months ago; or €6./50 per passenger journey. Simply ludicrous.

Irish Rail are a rail company with over 50 years experience; their word is good enough; there are 33m annual commuter passenger journeys they currently deliver. This is as you rightly say a petty turf war and the RPA have delivered a project that forfeits their right to the turf on the basis of this being far to expensive for the number of journeys it has the potential to deliver.

Please remove personality from your polemical rants

where did the RPA mention 3bn?

or any cost?

you’ve been stitched up by Frankie MacDonald.

at 87m interest pa it is a little more than 2.50 Euros per ticket.
Pretty reasonable in 2016.

There is no metro system in the world barring Singapore that breaks even.

Any subvention will be very short lived – MN is for up to 200 years.

The bigger picture has to be addressed.

Poor quality public transport in Dublin is cited by investors as one of the main drawbacks to investing here.

You have to laugh at the idea of the RPA sneaking in some overpriced scheme while nobody is looking.

The project has been analysed to death in the DoT and by the OTC. The RPA can do nothing.

It did not occur to you that if your projected/invented sums meant an average ticket price of 6 Euros plus there might be a flaw in your calculations?

Dear me.

It’s glib to slag off our esteemed betters and ‘experts’ as if everything they propose is stupid but they are certainly no more stupid than braneless message board posters who think they know it all with just a bit of a quick think.

It’s difficult not to get somewhat personal in your case/ I happen to know enough about this project to see that you simply invent facts and data to back up your arguments.

There’s no end to it.

MN has benn CBAed on the CONSERVATIVE estimate of 34 million passengers per year.
Where did you get 23 million from?
It actually has the capacity to carry more than 100 million passengers per year.

Given that the DART and Luas have been much more successful than predicted it wouldn’t be wise to expect something different with a high quality facility like MN.

20 years after construction it will carry 50-60 million passengers per year.

@PVC King wrote:

Irish Rail are a rail company with over 50 years experience; their word is good enough;

So you accept their definition of “on time” do you? You accept that there were “no problems” with the Malahide estuary viaduct? you accept spending €200m+ on the WRC to ferry a few hundred pensioners a day? You accept the decade of inertia at Tara St station? You accept prioritising long distance commuter trains over Metropolitan services? You accept not being allowed to take your bike on a brand new train to Sligo? You accept their intercity fares?

Why the hell do you think the RPA came into existence in the first place?

Whatever about the merits of the substantive issue of this thread, to state “their word is good enough” in relation to Irish Rail will never ever go anywhere near to helping you win any argument

@PVC King wrote:

Metro North does not intergrate anything; it intersects with Dart Interconnector (once Interconnector isn’t shelved because of the opportunity cost of Metro) the Maynooth line and two currently seperate Luas lines.

It integrates the way people in every other city expect it to – you can get from A to B without leaving the rail system. The Dart Interconnector plan also integrates this way by splitting the Dart line in two. Is that unacceptable to you too?

More importantly, it integrates in a way that allows connections but keeps the operation simple. Most modern metros have dedicated tracks and fleet per line to reduce the impact of a single line failure on other paths.

Luas to Ballymun at a cost of c€54m a mile (Luas BX) would produce exacxtly the same level of intersectability but would unlike Metro North actually intergrate the new line with two existing systems; a far superior outcome for the City Section.

Why exactly is it far superior?

@Peter Fitz wrote:

I don’t think anyone can defend the fact that metro north will terminate in the city centre.

I can easily. The other rail tracks (Dart, Suburban and Luas) that it connects with allow plenty of onward travel choices that cover a large part of the city. Yes, it’s a pity that places like Terenure aren’t covered but they will be in time. You can’t expect them to build a single metro line that covers the entire city. It would be unacceptably expensive. This is a good start.

@wearnicehats wrote:

excuse my ignorance but does integrated mean that all types of transport are integrated payment wise?

The RPA are currently tendering several contracts for a new integrated travel card that will, on lauch, work on Dublin Bus, Irish Rail and Luas. Metro will be covered when it opens.

@markpb wrote:

It integrates the way people in every other city expect it to – you can get from A to B without leaving the rail system. The Dart Interconnector plan also integrates this way by splitting the Dart line in two. Is that unacceptable to you too?.

But it does not link anything up that already exists; for €2bn it needs to create significant capacity; when you add up what it connects the alternative methods of providing connections to Ballymun, The Airport and Swords come in at half the price. It is effectively one line and to spend an extra billion building a link between Ballymun and Swords is a complete waste of money that is unjustifiable.

@markpb wrote:

More importantly, it integrates in a way that allows connections but keeps the operation simple. Most modern metros have dedicated tracks and fleet per line to reduce the impact of a single line failure on other paths. .

Can you run Dart or Luas down it? It in no way allows for diverting other existing routes; it doesn’t even reconnect with the Northern Line or connect with any existing Dart Line.

@markpb wrote:

Why exactly is it far superior?.

Because if you are going from any point West of the City to the Airport the alternative involves no change; from any point South on Dart the change would take place at Pearse vs Drumcoundra (no benefit either way. From Luas South going to Ballymun, there be no change at all. Getting on in the City Centre going to Ballymun it would all be street level.
Give anyone a choice of being able to avoid going underground on a route from Stephens Green to Droumcoundra, very few would elect to go underground.

@markpb wrote:

I can easily. The other rail tracks (Dart, Suburban and Luas) that it connects with allow plenty of onward travel choices that cover a large part of the city. Yes, it’s a pity that places like Terenure aren’t covered but they will be in time. You can’t expect them to build a single metro line that covers the entire city. It would be unacceptably expensive. This is a good start..

Places like Terenure will be covered by Luas; like Metro North the population density along the route is too low to justify underground.

@markpb wrote:

The RPA are currently tendering several contracts for a new integrated travel card that will, on lauch, work on Dublin Bus, Irish Rail and Luas. Metro will be covered when it opens.

We discussed intergrated ticket systems in 2004; if it takes 5 years and counting to deliver technology as simple as Octopus / Oyster you really have to wonder how these people were allowed near a multi-billion euro project.

@PVC King wrote:

But it does not link anything up that already exists; for €2bn it needs to create significant capacity; when you add up what it connects the alternative methods of providing connections to Ballymun, The Airport and Swords come in at half the price.
Incorrect

It is effectively one line and to spend an extra billion building a link between Ballymun and Swords is a complete waste of money that is unjustifiable.

Can you run Dart or Luas down it? It in no way allows for diverting other existing routes;

incorrect

it doesn’t even reconnect with the Northern Line or connect with any existing Dart Line.

Because if you are going from any point West of the City to the Airport the alternative involves no change; from any point South on Dart the change would take place at Pearse vs Drumcoundra (no benefit either way. From Luas South going to Ballymun, there be no change at all. Getting on in the City Centre going to Ballymun it would all be street level.
Give anyone a choice of being able to avoid going underground on a route from Stephens Green to Droumcoundra, very few would elect to go underground.

incorrect – people go the fastest route

Places like Terenure will be covered by Luas; like Metro North the population density along the route is too low to justify underground.

incorrect. misses the point of MN

We discussed intergrated ticket systems in 2004; if it takes 5 years and counting to deliver technology as simple as Octopus / Oyster you really have to wonder how these people were allowed near a multi-billion euro project.

Incorrect problems caused by your poster boys IE

making it up as you go along 😀

@marmajam wrote:

where did the RPA mention 3bn?

or any cost?. you’ve been stitched up by Frankie MacDonald.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cost-worry-means-no-decision-on-metro-until-2009-1441324.html

Paul Melia is the source and is a very different type of journalist to FmD. Nobody even the RPA was talking about Metro costing less than €3bn. Even accepting a €2bn cost which is the lowest put into the public domain by any credited source and the economics don’t work. less than 25m passengers and an annual debt service bill of €115m; a subvention exceeding €4.70 per passenger just to cover the interest bill is simply unacceptable.

@marmajam wrote:

at 87m interest pa it is a little more than 2.50 Euros per ticket.
Pretty reasonable in 2016..

The costs will be at least €2bn; the rate of interest will be 5.75% as it will not be senior debt and the number of passengers estimated at 24.4m. That delivers an interest only cost of €4.70 per passenger. Given that Dart loses money operationally it is safe to assume that this service would as well. At least €5 per passenger journey in losses; per commuter you are asking the taxpayer to pay €5 per journey 10 times a week 47 weeks a year or €2,350 per commuter per year.

@marmajam wrote:

There is no metro system in the world barring Singapore that breaks even..

London Underground made money in 2007.

@marmajam wrote:

Any subvention will be very short lived – MN is for up to 200 years..

No project can be assessed on a 200 year timeframe; show one railway study where a 200 year timeframe has been used.

the operational costs however will continue to rise and as the project will lose money operationally year on year; in the interim construction activity will not pick up to anything like the levels
and the population

@marmajam wrote:

The bigger picture has to be addressed.

Poor quality public transport in Dublin is cited by investors as one of the main drawbacks to investing here. You have to laugh at the idea of the RPA sneaking in some overpriced scheme while nobody is looking. The project has been analysed to death in the DoT and by the OTC. The RPA can do nothing. It did not occur to you that if your projected/invented sums meant an average ticket price of 6 Euros plus there might be a flaw in your calculations?.

Interest alone of €4.70 per ticket; average Dart fare of €2.30 would give a break even point above €7 per ticket. I am all for a fair level of subvention maybe €1.50 – €2.50 per ticket in interest cover. Compare this project to the Airport Dart Spur

Cost €400m
Interest €23m
Passengers 8m (20m airport passengers * 40% usage)
Cost per passenger €2.875
Ticket Price to Airport €4.30
Ticket Price to Malahide €2.30

Subvention per ticket €0.875

@marmajam wrote:

Dear me. It’s glib to slag off our esteemed betters and ‘experts’ as if everything they propose is stupid but they are certainly no more stupid than braneless message board posters who think they know it all with just a bit of a quick think.

It’s difficult not to get somewhat personal in your case/ I happen to know enough about this project to see that you simply invent facts and data to back up your arguments.

There’s no end to it.

MN has benn CBAed on the CONSERVATIVE estimate of 34 million passengers per year.
Where did you get 23 million from?
It actually has the capacity to carry more than 100 million passengers per year..

http://www.transport21.ie/Publications/upload/File/FOI/Dublin_Metro_Project_Revised_Proposal_June_2003.pdf

The relevant section is in the last pararagraph in Page 11; the authors are the RPA.

@marmajam wrote:

Given that the DART and Luas have been much more successful than predicted it wouldn’t be wise to expect something different with a high quality facility like MN.

20 years after construction it will carry 50-60 million passengers per year.

Dart cost £115m or €300m in todays values

http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0400/D.0400.199006190187.html

Luas after an initial budget of €288 and cost close to €800m in the end for two lines serving two seperate development corridors.

Where are the 60m passengers going to come from?

Dublin Airport even assumioming growth to 30m p.a.x. will never generate more than 12m rail trips based on International modelling.

Ballymun with a population of 19,517 will deliver possibly 7,806 commuters
Swords with a population of 37,767 over 3,476 Hectares will deliver 15,107 commuters. Between both these settlements you have c10.3m annual passenger journeys; the airport will currently deliver about 8m journeys; which presumes that journeys between other points along the rest of the route will deliver about 6.1m journeys.

The 60m figure you mention assumes an additional 80,000 commuters along the route from a population of 200,000 people.

Where are you going to put 200,000 people along this route?

Metro North at a cost of €2bn serves a City Centre Section as far as Drumcoundra that is all within a 15 minute walk of the network.

A University set amongst a residential density of roughly 16 to the acre, a planned town of 19,517 people, some out of town retail units and warehouses, an airport and an urban sprawl of 37,767 the majority of which is beytond 15 minutes walk from the proposed alignment. A route section that is sandwiched bewtween a motorway and an existing rail line.

In development terms Metro North is vastly inferior to the corridor between Heuston and Adamstown or Blanchardstown and Pace.

ha ha Melia was guessing

he’s anti MN – Tony OReilly is a libertarian nut and against public investment in rail.

of course you can win any argument if you make up ‘facts’

MN is predicated at 34m passengers pa

where is you source for 23 million

where is the source PVC?

you have invented this number to justify your fantasies.

and where is your credited source for 2bn? there is no source for 2 bn.

the interest WILL be 5% either through the EIB or an infrastructure bond or both..

why stop at your invented 5.25 PVC might as well be hung for a sheep and posit 50% interest. 😀

http://www.transport21.ie/Publications/upload/File/FOI/Dublin_Metro_Project_Revised_Proposal_June_2003.pdf

At page 11 last paragraph 24.4m with the enhanced option apparently

[quote=”marmajam
where is the source PVC?[/B”:i9s9cels]

you have invented this number to justify your fantasies.

PVC gave you the source of the 23M passangers above, its a link to an RPA document.

Marma I’m afraid you are the one fanatasizing this MN project does not stand up to any decent cost-benefit analysis, unless of course you live in Swords and it’s costing you noting but you get the benefit of a stand alone metro link to the airport DCU and town. This is silly and MN is preventing a proper integrated transport solution for Dublin, exactly the opposite of why it was originally proposed and its need to be stopped now.

Well well well.

That document is from 2003 and only refers to a proposed line terminating at the airport.

The revised projections for the line now with ABP is actually 34 million

Another bluff bites the dust.

btw Frank haven’t you got a tree to hug somewhere? 😀

Of course a very rapidly expanding Swords will add a huge amount of passengers to MN.

It is clear that the opponents of MN have an agenda. Their sums do not add up so we are regaled with invented figures.

PVC specialises in the obscure reference that when examined usually says the opposite of what he alleges.

God forbid that an estate agent would be economical with the truth…….

That tends to make the case for the converse of what he proposes 😀 😀

your best bet now might be to get onto photshop and forge something from scratch

risky though……………

hmmmm……our MN ‘expert’ PVC has gone a bit quiet after the failure of that bluff.

so, you don’t feel any embarassment about trying to slip through a bogus document PVC?

dear oh dear, and you’ve made a right eejit of your girlfriend ac1976 who trusted you to deliver the goods and backed you up faithfully only to be left knickerless……..

😀 😀

@marmajam wrote:

Of course a very rapidly expanding Swords will add a huge amount of passengers to MN.

It is clear that the opponents of MN have an agenda. Their sums do not add up so we are regaled with invented figures.

The population of Swords is 37,767 of which less than half live within walking distance of a proposed metro stop. Assuming a usage rate of 40% which is high that would deliver 7,553 commuters or 3.39m annual journeys. That is an annual passenger revenue of €7.8m we are talking about a €2bn project with annual financing costs of €115m; €7.8m is 6.78% of the interest bill it is insignificant.

If the Metro demand analysis was for 24.4m passengers without Swords then it is significantly flawed. Taking the 8m airport passengers away it assumes 16.4m passengers between Ballymun and Drumcoundra travelling to the City Centre. That assumes that a population of 91,100 live within a mile of stops at Santry, Ballymun, DCU, Griffith Avenue, Drumcoundra, Mater Hospital.

The Actual population according to the 2006 census is

Mounjoy 7,206
Drumcoundra 8,637
Grace Park 5,925
Whitehall 12,842
Ballymun 19,517

Total 54,127

http://beyond2020.cso.ie/Census/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=75472

If 40% usage patterns bear out and each commuter makes 450 trips per year this section of the route would deliver c9.74m passengers add that to the 3.39m Swords adds and the 8m the airport adds and a figure of 20.13m is the level of demand that you would actually get.

Swords does not justify a metro, the best way to connect the City Centre to the Airport is via the Northern Line as it offers a differential pricing model that would add an additional €16m p.a. in revenue. Luas to Ballymun would no doubt be able to handle the 9.74m passenger journeys that section would generate.

The 24.3m is clearly out of date and predicated on development patterns that never happened and won’t happen anytime in my lifetime. There is simply nowhere to put that quantum of development along the alignment.

oh you are still with us PVC

PVC, can you answer a straight question?

why did you try to back up your argument with a bogus document?

why did you refer to a defunct document that doesn’t apply to MN as designed?

you must have known that document didn’t apply.

did you think nobody would notice that PVC?

interestingly you’ve also ripped the knickers off Frank MacDonald’s campaign in the process.

His case is based on that same document. Which doesn’t refer to MN as designed.

That document is not meant for public perusal. Frankie has been using that as a source for his dreams of Luas down every street in Eire

Doesn’t look too clever now when exposed as irrelevant.

You have lied to be blunt and this document was only the latest. I’m busy today I’ll be back shortly with some of your other bluffs.

The assumption was that it related to Swords as the numbers excluding Swords are just too unrealistic.

Are you saying that a population of 54,127 can deliver 16.4m passenger trips?

Oh I see you are banning non residents of Swords from using the Swords sction.

And for all time no matter what develops there 😀

Swords is projected to have a pop of 100,000 by 2020.

You have failed to answer the question PVC.

Why did you introduce a document that did not refer to MN as designed?

a bit embarassing to admit you were bluffing?

The figures in the Draft Railway Order are calculated based on a Metro Netowrk, i.e. with an interhange with Metro West aswell which is shelved, so the 35M passanger number is the potential passangers on the Metro North setion when ALL of transport21 is implimented, and there are specific references to the Interconnector and Metro West.
Without these the 35M number is not going to be achieved.
This number is also based on a massive 10M increase in passanger numbers at Dublin Airport, which is not likely to happen any more.

Considering that Metro West has been shelved and Luas lines delayed the 35M number is not going to be achieved before 2030. And if Metro North is built it will be difficult to extend it (with Metro West) while the 2bn or so loan is being paid back.

It’s also important to point out that the 35M number is not what they expect when it opens ( even with interconnector and Metro west) and this is the long term maximum capacity which is not going to be achieved.

The whole project was justified at the time as a Metro Network, it just doesn’t make sense on it’s own.

that was a bit embarassing there ac1976 getting left like a lemon by PVC?

ac1976, before we dismantle your confections please answer one question.

where is your source for Metro West being shelved?

can you provide that source?

well construction on Metro West was due to start this year, but the Minister has delayed the publication of the Draft Railway order, with no new date, effectively halting the whole project for now.
That sounds like it’s on the shelf to me.

Also, the Minister went to the EIB to secure funding for the Metro North and Interconnector projects (no mention of any funding for Metro west)
http://www.fiannafail.ie/news/entry/minister-dempsey-meets-vice-president-of-european-investment-bank/
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0724/1224251231691.html

So there are no plans for a Railway Order for now, and no efforts at securing funding.. hmmmmm
It ain’t gonna happen.
There is also a reasonable chance they wont even get funding for Metro North, the position of the Department of Finance speaks for itself:

Responding to suggestions that the Department of Finance does not support Metro North, a spokesman for the department said: “We do not have a principled objection to the metro, but we will have to see how much it costs. We have never said that we are against it, but it depends on how much it costs.”

Marmajam please note, the Government do not even know how much this thing will cost, ease up on PVC
I expect the DOF are referring not just to construction costs there and also how much the loan will end up costing

What we do know, is the rough costs used by the Cabinet at the time the decided on this project as opposed to the Dart spur.

I don’t believe this.

The planning app for metro west is being prepared right now. Check proper sources.

The gov now know EXACTLY what MN will cost. They have the tenders and have short listed 2 consortiums for BAFO.

you are simply making things up.

stay out of it if that’all you’ve got.

If you and PVC keep inventing data I will keep coming back with the correct data.

By what right do you consider you or PVC have the entitlement to make up data to back up your opinion?

any embarassment is the direct consequence of your own silly dishonesty

Both of you represent exactly what is wrong and why we have a country with crap archtecture and 3rd class infrastructure.

Total lack of confidence to build for the real world.

‘ssshhhh don’t try anything decent something terrible might happen’

you have the heart of a mouse.

@marmajam wrote:

I don’t believe this.

The gov now know EXACTLY what MN will cost. They have the tenders and have short listed 2 consortiums for BAFO.
.

This is not true, they may know the construction costs, you have to add to that the cost of preparing Railway Order (not yet complete, delayed) the cost of land purchase, legal costs, the cost of the delay due to ABP and most importantly the cost of the finance, as well as any indemnity agreed in the contract.

They have not yet secured funding, and so they dont know how much this will cost!
It could be 2.5BN with interest paid over 15 years or it cud be something different, we simply don’t know how much will need to be paid back and what the payment schedule will be. They may seek to pay nothing back until construction is complete, adding to the costs significantly. These are no small details.

Metro West is gone West, every dog in the street knows that, how can they start construction on it with no money and no Railway Order? In April the Dept Transport announced EUR20M saving by pulling the funding from the Metro West Railway Order project, so they are not preparing anything at the moment.

PP is the ‘railway order’

there is no more cost on this.

your source for the shelving of metro west is ‘the dogs in the street’……….

I see.

I’m done with you. You’re simply making it up.

@marmajam wrote:

PP is the ‘railway order’

there is no more cost on this.

your source for the shelving of metro west is ‘the dogs in the street’……….

I see.

I’m done with you. You’re simply making it up.

AS I said, the funding was withdrawn from the Metro West Railway Order project.
Read this, there is NO allocation for Planning Metro West this year.
http://www.transport.ie/pressRelease.aspx?Id=82

There is no effort to find funding for the construction of Metro West (due to begin this year) This project is shelved.

http://www.joanburton.ie/?postid=973

The Department of Finance made that comment in relation to the cost of financing the MN project, this funding has not yet been secured so how on earth does anyone know how much it’s going to cost?

Marma you said the Planning for MW is going ahead! HOW when they have had their entire budget cut?
You said the full costs of MN are know, HOW when they have not secured finance? What is the Payment Schedule? how much a year does the tax payer have to pay and for how many years? NOBODY KNOWS YET!

it’s very difficult to know which side of this debate to believe when the level of debate is so shit.

I support Metro North and any attack on it based on the absence of Metro West is unfair as Metro West is still part of the transport strategy and it is still intended to be supplied. The fact that the country is currently crippled does not mean things will never happen. DART opened in 1984 when this country was a basket case.

@marmajam wrote:

Oh I see you are banning non residents of Swords from using the Swords sction.

And for all time no matter what develops there 😀

Swords is projected to have a pop of 100,000 by 2020.

Annual house building in 2008 was 22,500 for the entire state; Swords has a population of 37,767, that leaves a population of 62,233 to be added by 2020. Total House production in the next decade will be 225,000 units are you saying that 13.83% (assuming double occupancy) of housing produced in the country will be in Swords?

@marmajam wrote:

You have failed to answer the question PVC.

Why did you introduce a document that did not refer to MN as designed?

a bit embarassing to admit you were bluffing?

Web searches turned up the document in question; the one you claim at 34m passengers could not be located; if you post the link I will comment on it; although I suspect it is a document the RPA don’t want in the public domain as it is “too commercially sensitive”.

Time for you to answer a question; are you saying that a population of 54,127 can produce 16.4m passenger journeys per year?

@PVC King wrote:

Web searches turned up the document in question; the one you claim at 34m passengers could not be located; if you post the link I will comment on it; although I suspect it is a document the RPA don’t want in the public domain as it is “too commercially sensitive”.

Time for you to answer a question; are you saying that a population of 54,127 can produce 16.4m passenger journeys per year?

http://www.dublinmetronorth.ie/Downloads/EIS/EISNTS/EIS%20Metro%20North%20Non-Technical%20Summary.pdf

This is from the Draft Railway order, end of page 4 as numbered in the document.
It is based on the Metro West carrying 20Million passengers and the Dart Underground being completed. It is also based on passenger numbers increasing from 20M to 30M at Dublin Airport as well as lots of other projections that are no longer valid.

http://www.dublinmetronorth.ie/Downloads/EIS/EISVol1Book1of1/EIS%20Metro%20North%20Volume%201%20Book%201%20of%201%20Part%201%20(Chapters%201%20to%2010).pdf

Page 72 as numbered in the document, gives full details of Passenger demand for reference.

Thanks AC but that simply lays a claim to 35m it provides no guidance as to where the numbers actually come from.

I did however come across the document below:

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%2001042009/MN%20Oral%20Hearing%20Presentation%20Transport%20Model%20Dave%20King%20030409.pdf

There are three key flaws in this document firstly it does not give annual predictions for any location purely hourly capacity.

Secondly population density; the stated population density is 1,300 people per square kilometre on the route; taking 1 kilometre as being a realisitc walking distance the catchment of Metro North would be 34 square Kilometres which would give a catchment of 44,200 people

Thirdly the EIS that you kindly posted a link to lists a total of 2600 car spaces which is you give ridership figures of 1.5 cars per day only produces 3,900 journeys per day or assuming a six day week an annual total of 1.216m per year.

Add 8m airport passengers and you see that the 54,127 figure I gave by including all potential electoral wards as opposed to the sections of those wards that were convenient was a very safe bet.

Real demand based on the RPAs own figures in annual terms would be catchment 7.596m, Airport 8m and park and ride 1.216m or a total of 16.812m

Finally compare Budapest with a population density of 3,500 people per square kilometre and Metro North with a population density some 37% of the Budapest figure but Metro North has an hourly capacity 51.5% higher than a line with three times the catchment.

I am really starting to have my doubts as to how this project ever got off the ground; Luas is deemd adequate with a capacity of 4,650 per hour on the same population density.

Well ac1976, you were asked for any reference for your assertion that metro west had been shelved.

In spite of throwing various irrelevant references around like confetti covering everything from the petty cash receipts of the Bolivian Legion of Mary to the price of medicinal herbs in Mongolia you did not produce any reference whatsoever which supported your claim.

I don’t care what you or your dogs on the street know and neither do I care what link you dig up that could with the benefit of a genius’ imagination and lateral logic be construed as possibly related to transport somewhere in the world, I know for a fact that the planning application for metro west is being prepared right now by the RPA.
Any conclusions you jump to regarding the time frame for this project are merely you and your dogs opinion.
I don’t believe you even half understand the meaning of the references you dish out.
How did you come to the conclusion that when PP is obtained for MN,, an RPO will be needed?
You fail to understand the most basic issues related to these projects. You’d need intense training to get up to the level of a pub commentator.
Your posts are embarassing frankly.

@marmajam wrote:

Well ac1976, you were asked for any reference for your assertion that metro west had been shelved…

You fail to understand the most basic issues related to these projects. You’d need intense training to get up to the level of a pub commentator.
Your posts are embarassing frankly.

Do you have to insult every poster every time that debates with you?

It does little to advance a quality of discourse, and is putting me off this site 🙁

Agreed Hutton but if you look at his posting he only gets abusive when he is trying to evade answering a question.

Such as justifying the population density for the route which cab clearly be seen from the link below as that proves that the demand forecasts for Metro North are a complete work of fiction.

@PVC King wrote:

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%2001042009/MN%20Oral%20Hearing%20Presentation%20Transport%20Model%20Dave%20King%20030409.pdf

There are three key flaws in this document firstly it does not give annual predictions for any location purely hourly capacity.

Secondly population density; the stated population density is 1,300 people per square kilometre on the route; taking 1 kilometre as being a realisitc walking distance the catchment of Metro North would be 34 square Kilometres which would give a catchment of 44,200 people

Thirdly the EIS that you kindly posted a link to lists a total of 2600 car spaces which is you give ridership figures of 1.5 cars per day only produces 3,900 journeys per day or assuming a six day week an annual total of 1.216m per year.

Add 8m airport passengers and you see that the 54,127 figure I gave by including all potential electoral wards as opposed to the sections of those wards that were convenient was a very safe bet.

Real demand based on the RPAs own figures in annual terms would be catchment 7.596m, Airport 8m and park and ride 1.216m or a total of 16.812m

Finally compare Budapest with a population density of 3,500 people per square kilometre and Metro North with a population density some 37% of the Budapest figure but Metro North has an hourly capacity 51.5% higher than a line with three times the catchment.

I am really starting to have my doubts as to how this project ever got off the ground; Luas is deemd adequate with a capacity of 4,650 per hour on the same population density.

Well PVC

Let’s go over a few of your assertions from the MN and related issues.

Yesterday you tried to slip in an obselete report to back up an invented assertion.
A paper from 2003 that did not relate to the design under debate.

It was a bit like a schoolboy answering a Latin question in French hoping the examiner wouldn’t spot the difference.

In the education system you would be expelled in disgrace.

But let’s look a bit further. Because there’s more.

Previously to that you have asserted that:
Metro systems only run on the 3rd rail system.
That people would prefer to travel overground by tram through traffic and traffic lights rather than take a fast underground option.
That the interest on MN would be 7.5% (will be 5%)
That MN did not connect to anything.

That no CBA was done for MN (there’s 2)
That no other system can run on MN (designed to take Luas also)
That MN was only Luas (no it has 4 times capacity of Luas)

There’s more but that’ll do for now..

In fact when all your points are scrutinised they fall apart quicker than a candy floss in a bomb explosion.

You simply make up your facts.

I’ll let you in on a secret. I never read your numbers – I’d have no confidance in anything you come out with. I merely glance at the posts and point out the more glaring non sequitors and absurdities.

Enough bluster – just answer the question relating to a document produced by the RPA; this is the third time this has been put to you.

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%2001042009/MN%20Oral%20Hearing%20Presentation%20Transport%20Model%20Dave%20King%20030409.pdf

There are three key flaws in this document firstly it does not give annual predictions for any location purely hourly capacity.

Secondly population density; the stated population density is 1,300 people per square kilometre on the route; taking 1 kilometre as being a realisitc walking distance the catchment of Metro North would be 34 square Kilometres which would give a catchment of 44,200 people

Thirdly the EIS that you kindly posted a link to lists a total of 2600 car spaces which is you give ridership figures of 1.5 cars per day only produces 3,900 journeys per day or assuming a six day week an annual total of 1.216m per year.

Add 8m airport passengers and you see that the 54,127 figure I gave by including all potential electoral wards as opposed to the sections of those wards that were convenient was a very safe bet.

Real demand based on the RPAs own figures in annual terms would be catchment 7.596m, Airport 8m and park and ride 1.216m or a total of 16.812m

Finally compare Budapest with a population density of 3,500 people per square kilometre and Metro North with a population density some 37% of the Budapest figure but Metro North has an hourly capacity 51.5% higher than a line with three times the catchment.

I am really starting to have my doubts as to how this project ever got off the ground; Luas is deemd adequate with a capacity of 4,650 per hour on the same population density.

Let’s get back to reality.

RPA defends capacity of proposed metro trams
Specifications for Dublin’s Metro North to be released later this month are to concentrate on 90-metre trams as opposed to the higher capacity heavy rail carriages, the Railway Procurement Agency has confirmed. Tim O’Brien reports.

The confirmation comes amid mounting concern over capacity problems on the existing Luas lines as well as fears that Metro North could suffer similar peak-hour capacity problems within a decade of opening.

The Irish Times has learned the RPA was advised by some of the bidders for the Metro North contract that even if it opts for the narrower 2.4 metre tram system, it should build the tunnel wide enough to later convert to 2.8 metre carriages.

The RPA has also been told that comparable capital cities to Dublin, including Prague, Hamburg, Vienna, Berlin, Lisbon, Munich and Madrid all utilise the higher capacity, wider-bodied carriages in their undergrounds.

Munich, which was the subject of a Department of Transport visit in 2005, uses a “low capacity metro” at 2.8 metres wide, and is capable of carrying in excess of 30,000 people per hour in each direction , some 50 per cent more than the 20,000 capacity of the proposed Dublin underground. Dublin’s Dart which can be up to 170 metres long has capacity for 36,000 people per hour per direction. The capacity issue comes as RPA planners face criticism over passengers being left on the platform during the morning rush because trams are full. A Dublin City Business Association spokesman, Tom Coffey, said “to be credible the underground has to have a capacity of about 35,000 people per hour in each direction.

“We can’t have a metro which is going to reach capacity six years after it opens. There is no going back to widen a tunnel after it is built and this infrastructure should be designed to last 100 years, as it did in London and elsewhere,” he maintained.

The issue also comes as a two-day conference on infrastructure heard details of a Dublin Institute of Technology Futures Academy report which predicted population on the island would rise to seven million people by 2020, with about 1.5 million extra people moving into the Dublin Belfast corridor.

A number of commentators including the head of the National Roads Authority Fred Barry said the population increase – similar in size to the existing population of Dublin – would require another large-scale increase in public transport. Mr Barry said the increase would result in demand for much more rail transport as part of “a successor to Transport 21, a Transport 22, if you like”.

However, speaking at the conference the chief executive of the RPA, Frank Allen, said he was “absolutely confident” that the capacity of 20,000 people per hour in each direction was sufficient for Metro North.

He remarked that just “isolated parts” of the London and Paris metros were operating above that capacity and it would be very hard to find other examples in cities in Europe. He said he was “very, very confident” of the capacity of the 90-metre carriages operating at a two minute frequency during peak times.

Mr Allen said the population forecast in the Fingal County Development plan was more pertinent than the all-island forecast. Metro North was, he said, “fully integrated with population projections” and “Fingal is absolutely confident that the capacity is more than is required”.

The Irish Times

We are in reality; the population density does not add up to the demand forecast.

Explain how a population of 44,200 people, 2,600 parking spaces plus an airport with 20m p.a.x will deliver 35m passengers per year.

I am going to keep posting the material below until you answer the question

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%2001042009/MN%20Oral%20Hearing%20Presentation%20Transport%20Model%20Dave%20King%20030409.pdf

There are three key flaws in this document firstly it does not give annual predictions for any location purely hourly capacity.

Secondly population density; the stated population density is 1,300 people per square kilometre on the route; taking 1 kilometre as being a realisitc walking distance the catchment of Metro North would be 34 square Kilometres which would give a catchment of 44,200 people

Thirdly the EIS that you kindly posted a link to lists a total of 2600 car spaces which is you give ridership figures of 1.5 cars per day only produces 3,900 journeys per day or assuming a six day week an annual total of 1.216m per year.

Add 8m airport passengers and you see that the 54,127 figure I gave by including all potential electoral wards as opposed to the sections of those wards that were convenient was a very safe bet.

Real demand based on the RPAs own figures in annual terms would be catchment 7.596m, Airport 8m and park and ride 1.216m or a total of 16.812m

Finally compare Budapest with a population density of 3,500 people per square kilometre and Metro North with a population density some 37% of the Budapest figure but Metro North has an hourly capacity 51.5% higher than a line with three times the catchment.

I am really starting to have my doubts as to how this project ever got off the ground; Luas is deemd adequate with a capacity of 4,650 per hour on the same population density.

keep posting away

I don’t take anything you come up with seriously 😀

Dublin airport projected passengers 2025: 38 million. Thats about 100,000 a day

Not all will use MN but there will be as many many meeters and greeters on top of that

Swords. Pop predicted at 100,000 by 2020

currently about 12,000 people employed directly and indirectly related to Dublin airport.

34 million is about 90,000 a day

With other journeys from Maynooth line, Mater, DCU

MN will attract intense investment all along the route.

easily reach 34 million a year

marmajam, please stop being a dick in your replies. If you disagree with PVC King at least do so with some semblance of maturity. Answering his question would be a good start. I support Metro North but i find it difficult to agree with you.

@marmajam wrote:

Swords. Pop predicted at 100,000 by 2020

The insanity of either wanting or believing that Swords will have a population of 100,000 in eleven years time hasn’t occured to you, marmajam?

We would need bad planning to continue on a massive scale for that to happen.

I don’t know anyone who cares about Dublin who wouldn’t love to have a metro North, South, East and West and Luas lines in all directions, but if we’re going to start undermining the proper planning of the city to fit in with unbalanced infra-structure choices, we’re not just going to be broke forever, we’re going to be living in a city that’s all arteries and no heart.

@gunter wrote:

The insanity of either wanting or believing that Swords will have a population of 100,000 in eleven years time hasn’t occured to you, marmajam?

We would need bad planning to continue on a massive scale for that to happen.

I don’t know anyone who cares about Dublin who wouldn’t love to have a metro North, South, East and West and Luas lines in all directions, but if we’re going to start undermining the proper planning of the city to fit in with unbalanced infra-structure choices, we’re not just going to be broke forever, we’re going to be living in a city that’s all arteries and no heart.

wanting’s got nothing to do with it.

100 years ago India had a population less than 200 million. Now it’s 1 billion.

Should they operate as if it’s at a more reasonable 200 million?

Maybe you think the M50 upgrade should be undone since the 1st version was planned for a more reasonable level of usage.
Personally I’m indifferentto whether there’s 10 million or a mere 500 living in Swords. But you have to plan for what is likely to happen. Utopias are nice but things tend to develop along the lines they already did in the past

@alonso wrote:

marmajam, please stop being a dick in your replies. If you disagree with PVC King at least do so with some semblance of maturity. Answering his question would be a good start. I support Metro North but i find it difficult to agree with you.

I couldn’t care less about your approval.

Your ridiculously naive. PVC is a bluffer and a liar. I won’t apologise for pointing that out.

Grow up Ireland and India share the same colours in their national flag and nothing else.

34m is 93,150 passengers per day on a seven day week. The airport is at 20m and given the great deals Air Lingus are doing from Gatwick it doesn’t seem that it will be growing any time soon. No Airport in World has more than 45% of passengers using rail connections; those that acheive over 30%tend to have multiple rail lines to multiple destinations.

Taking 40% of 20m will give about 8m passengers.

2,600 car spaces will give a maximum of about 1.22m passengers

Allowing 5,000 Dublin Airport workers to MN gives a further 1.125m passengers

The population catchment according to the RPA is 44,200 people; explain how 44,200 people will deliver close to 24m passenger journeys in a Dublin specific context for a project date of 2016.

@marmajam wrote:

I couldn’t care less about your approval.

Your ridiculously naive. PVC is a bluffer and a liar. I won’t apologise for pointing that out.

Well you’ve won me over now. Gobshite

@gunter wrote:

The insanity of either wanting or believing that Swords will have a population of 100,000 in eleven years time hasn’t occured to you, marmajam?

We would need bad planning to continue on a massive scale for that to happen.

I don’t know anyone who cares about Dublin who wouldn’t love to have a metro North, South, East and West and Luas lines in all directions, but if we’re going to start undermining the proper planning of the city to fit in with unbalanced infra-structure choices, we’re not just going to be broke forever, we’re going to be living in a city that’s all arteries and no heart.

I couldn’t agree more and as the country emerges from a tough couple of years it is vital that value for money be delivered in all infrastructural spending. If you could have predicted GDP growth rates of 8% p.a., net in migration of 50,000 p.a. for another decade and if the GDA required 60,000 housing units a year anything could have stacked up.

When you start from a presumption of a requirement of 25,000 residential units a year for the entire metropolitian region then the priority clearly has to be linking up what already exists and enhancing the capacity of existing routes. There are so many obvious projects that stack up in any market such as Interconnector including electrification to Adamstown, the Luas link up, electrifying the Maynooth and Balbriggan rail lines. More QBCs to areas such as Ringsend; a Luas line into North West Dublin, Dart for Tallaght.

Unfortunately funding is going to be less abundant and in that context it is vital that growth be put into areas that are best placed to absorb it such as

North Wall/ East Wall
Ringsend/Barrow Street/Irishtown
Heuston/ St James’ St
Inchicore/Park West/Clondalkin
Tolka Valley
Summerhill/Killarney St
Rathmines/Harolds Cross

I fully agree that prioritising development on one corridor which has a density of 1,300 people per square kilometre at the expense of the rest of the City would be just wrong

I appreciate this conversation appears to have gone around in circles for some time.

Some doubt the figures of future patronage. Others doubt that they remain valid. Others question the cost in absolute terms, others in terms of the cost relative to what else it could buy.

I think there are a couple of points worth considering about the big picture, which often get lost in an effort to do amateur transport planning (that’s not a slight on anyone, it’s one of my favourite hobbies!).

Our track record: To say that Ireland has ever been guilty of over-supplying transport infrastructure would most likely have people drowning in their own laughter. We have typically under-provided – Luas, M50 etc cases in point. Preparing a system with high potential capacity, but on a low short-term spec appears sensible. The second point I would make regarding our track record is just how bad the oft-cited alternatives tend to be in Dublin – the QBC “network” is farcical, with the only success story being the (yawn – we’ve heard this a hundred times already) Stillorgan QBC.

Numbers: None of the discussions seem to take into account that the DTO contains a relatively comprehensive transport model for the Greater Dublin Area. This can better help to inform the likely levels of trip generation that might occur. From the discussion above and the experience with Luas, I would say that the estimates tend to be conservative and this seems to be generated by two primary components. The first is interchange – the level of transfers between Connolly and heuston seem to have vastly outpaced original expectations based on patronage of the God-awful bus link; the second off-peak journeys enabled by a reliable high frequency, dependable service.

A system: the key thing in planning anything big is that you need to plan as part of a system – ideally strategy first, if you can afford it followed by infrastructure. Dublin is on the cusp of developing a system that has taken decades of arguing to get a very weak political establishment to come on board and accept the importance of. It would be a shame were a critical mass of well-intentioned individuals/groups to being us back to square one (endless talking shop), when what is needed (yes, even now, the world has not ended) is delivery. Linking the airport into the city, linking into major growth areas (yes, even if it is for 10 years from now), connecting it to the revised X-shape DART network and the Luas lines takes us from provincial backwater to modern European city. You can build as many QBCs (some of which don’t even have busses running on them) and you will not get the level of modal shift to change how Dublin works.

Funding/Money: there is something quite attractive about using the DART underground and Metro North as part of a Keynsian-style public sector driven stimulus to assist the economy and the base of the trough that we find ourselves in. Both would be funded by PPP (I don’t like this procurement model – I think in the long-run it’s a more expensive way of procuring). however, in the current climate, when the state can’t borrow much it’s difficult to inject stimulus into the economy. This would be “off-the-sheets” because for the construction period it would be private sector money. It would bring jobs, economic stimulus, improve the competitiveness of the economy and of Dublin as a location in which to visit/do business.

I think we need to think big and brave, and I for one (as if that isn’t obvious) believe that this is just one example of where we can start to deliver to find ourselves out of our current quagmire. Negativity will not get us there (this is not to dismiss the many valid points made by many of the contributors of the specifics of the capacity/design).

… Yes, you can (don’t barf, but hopefully you get the idea!)

I hate to post in this thread but I can’t let this go.@PVC King wrote:

the stated population density is 1,300 people per square kilometre on the route; taking 1 kilometre as being a realisitc walking distance the catchment of Metro North would be 34 square Kilometres which would give a catchment of 44,200 people

The stated population density of Dublin of 1300 is a gross figure that takes the entire city population and divides it by the city area. The areas around the stations for MN are of course at much higher density (the electoral districts around Dorset street are 10,000-20,000/sq km). Office workers do not show up on census results yet an individual building can have more than a thousand staff. 6,000 people work in the mater alone. If the catchment areas for the stations were really 1300/sq km it would be mad to build a metro.

The RPA accurately predicted numbers on the Luas A&B lines before opening. Luas is carrying 27m passengers on 25km of track or a million per km. The Luas A&B routes are far less promising than the metro, the capacity is lower and the service is considerably slower than the metro will be. The RPA is predicting that MN will carry nearly twice as many passengers per km of track and I expect it will.

MN: fast frequent grade separated train connecting the city centre, a large hospital, 2 luas lines, 2 dart lines, a university, an airport with more passengers than stansted, a disconnected satellite town with 30,000 people plus it opens several greenfield sites to sustainable development.

Right now we have roughly 60m DART+Luas journeys.
After MN, IC and Luas extensions we should have 170m DART+Luas passengers.

@markpb wrote:

I can easily. The other rail tracks (Dart, Suburban and Luas) that it connects with allow plenty of onward travel choices that cover a large part of the city.

Metro North relies heavily on the interconnector to justify its crazy terminus at Stephen’s Green, made worse by the fact that its construction is being prioritised over, and at the likely expense of the interconnector proceeding at all.

@markpb wrote:

You can’t expect them to build a single metro line that covers the entire city. It would be unacceptably expensive. This is a good start.

I don’t. I do however expect provision to be made for the inevitable extension. Its bad enough that they seek to destroy the integrity of Stephen’s Green, but by their lack of foresight clearly intend to go back and plough it up all over again in ten years time. Though, I suppose given the going over its about to receive, it won’t matter much at that point.

Good debate on here especially between PVC and marmajam.

I’ve sped read through a majority amount of posts back through 5 or 6 pages of this thread and something that one poster highlighted and appears to be missing is the ‘big picture’.

There is a hell of a lot of discussion relating to passenger numbers etc and the focus seems to be on the pop of certain area’s such as swords etc etc.

Now this may have cropped up before somewhere in this thread and if it has i apologies for repetition but have people forgotten about the concept of ‘park and ride’?

One would assume that the RPA have allowed for this in their plans as they have a Park n Ride facility at the red cow and sandyford for the existing LUAS lines.

Shurley commuters in the likes of Ashbourne, Slane and beyond would park up in a provided car park in Swords and hop on the tube into town rather than paying for city center parking fee’s, hassle and petrol?

http://constructionconciliation.blogspot.com/

Fair point there are 2,600 spaces to be provided; assuming each car has 1.5 passengers that is about 3,900 passengers a day which comes to about 1.2m annual passengers. Another point worth considering is that 2,000 of the car spaces or 3,000 passengers are to park within 1 mile of an existing rail line at Donabate; why not just move the carpark close to mile?

Frank

The RPA predicted the numbers on Luas; I’ll take your word on that but two things I would like you to consider are firstly the population density of the Luas Route to Dundrum which is infinitely higher than the density to old Ballymun and secondly how many of the Red line passengers are using Luas to access Heuston Station and how many of them will continue to use it post interconnector?

My interpretation is that the passenger forecasts were done by the RPA; please correct me if I am wrong on this; as whatever way I look at the Metro North proposed catchment and following marmajam’s chuck it in anyway posts I’m pretty sure not a pensioner was missed.

I can’t get the population catchment as far as the Airport above about 54,000 and given the way the census records Swords as sprawling half way to Ballyboghill, and from looking at aeriel photos of so called inner Swords I can’t see a 1kms radius of the proposed alignment having a population above 20,000. But please do enlighten me if I have missed anything; it is however surprising that that no poplulation catchment was given; you would think that it would be the first variable stated.

Capacity is not straight forward; take the Jubilee line which is listed as having a capacity of 37,000 per hour; the two key sections of that route are Canary Wharf to Waterloo and the overlapping section of London Bridge to Baker Street; the route doesn’t really transport people in an origin to destination type of way for most users; it is more used for moving people from the rail terminus from the outer commuter segments of the network to their end destination.

Given that MN only connects the Maynooth line to Luas Red Line and the Interconnector and that demand at peak times for this connection looks to be less than 100 per peak hour surely a Luas connection from Ballymun in would suffice; with Swords and the Airport served from the Northern Line.

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%2001042009/MN%20Oral%20Hearing%20Presentation%20Transport%20Model%20Dave%20King%20030409.pdf

@highorlow wrote:

Good debate on here especially between PVC and marmajam.

I agree however it’s disappointing to see people making personal attacks on people especially when they are directing these personal attacks on people who are contributing constructively to debate.
Making the discussion personal in nature adds nothing to the debate and is not constructive.

@PVC King wrote:

The RPA predicted the numbers on Luas; I’ll take your word on that

They estimated about 20m passengers and approximate operational break-even the year before opening (2003).
http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=4379&lang=ENG&loc=1346

but two things I would like you to consider are firstly the population density of the Luas Route to Dundrum which is infinitely higher than the density to old Ballymun

The population density along the route is not relevant – an apartment building next to the line will generate no trips if it is nowhere near a station. What matters is the actual and potential residential/worker/student density in walking distance around the stations and the popularity of the station location as a trip destination (for shopping or entertainment or whatever).

how many of the Red line passengers are using Luas to access Heuston Station and how many of them will continue to use it post interconnector?

I’m not sure how this question is relevant to MN ridership. The red line follows a different route from the IC. They intersect at Heuston and Docklands.IC will certainly take passengers from the red line for journeys between heuston and docklands, however both lines will feed passengers to each other. I expect overall ridership on the red line to increase post IC.

My interpretation is that the passenger forecasts were done by the RPA; please correct me if I am wrong on this;

I think they did their own forecasts based on the DTO demand prediction model. They would have had to get their estimates independently audited by one of the transport consultancies like Faber Maunsell.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

They estimated about 20m passengers and approximate operational break-even the year before opening (2003).
http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=4379&lang=ENG&loc=1346.

Never questioned your word; I would however say that D6 had a higher density in 2003 than D9 has now.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

The population density along the route is not relevant – an apartment building next to the line will generate no trips if it is nowhere near a station. What matters is the actual and potential residential/worker/student density in walking distance around the stations and the popularity of the station location as a trip destination (for shopping or entertainment or whatever).I’m not sure how this question is relevant to MN ridership. The red line follows a different route from the IC. They intersect at Heuston and Docklands.IC will certainly take passengers from the red line for journeys between heuston and docklands, however both lines will feed passengers to each other. I expect overall ridership on the red line to increase post IC..

My question was not what happens in 2016 post IC; it was do a passenger count on existing Luas Red coming down Stephens Lane and do another one crossing Kings Bridge; what is the percentage difference and how many crossing Kings Bridge will do so when they are offered IC.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

I think they did their own forecasts based on the DTO demand prediction model. They would have had to get their estimates independently audited by one of the transport consultancies like Faber Maunsell.

Frank

Even if you buy the proposition that 46% of the maximum passenger load will board MN before Swords at peak the 35m doesn’t stack up.

Maximum hourly volume is about 6,100 which occurs at DCU; by the time the segregated Luas reaches DCU roughly 800 people have alighted on presumably a Monday to Friday basis. The stated capacity of MN is 35m which assumes 95,890 passengers per day; assuming the system works from 630 am to 1230am the system would carry an average of 5,327 people per day for an 18 hour period.

I would present an alternative scenario

Monday to Friday (hourly figures)

630am – 730am 1,500 people inbound 1,000 people outbound
730am – 930am 6,900 people inbound 1,000 people outbound
930am – 430pm 1,500 people each direction
430pm – 630pm 5,000 outbound 1,250 inbound
630pm – 1230am 2,000 outbound 1,000 people inbound

19.06m

Weekends

630am 1230pm 2,000 per hour each direction

3.74m

Total 22.8m p.a.x

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence/MN%20RO%20Oral%20Hearing%20Evidence%2001042009/MN%20Oral%20Hearing%20Presentation%20Transport%20Model%20Dave%20King%20030409.pdf

Please comment on the credibility of the passenger load added at each station from Bellinstown to Drumcounrda; with particular reference to the latter and the lack of interchange passengers

This is one heck of an interesting debate. All sides of the argument have very interesting arguments. I am personally supportive of MN. I may not have facts and details and you may discard my post for reasons such as that. However I think the average person, including myself and especially residents in Dublin have seen the successes of the LUAS and DART. They may not have the facts and details but they are very grateful for the service. These projects may have cost a lot but it is more than just about predicted passenger numbers. It’s about a reorientation of transport to a more sustainable means. MN and LUAS and DART are more than just a service, they are an incentive to get people not just in the catchment area but others to consider change. I hope I am making sense. Simply put, arguments about numbers etc are very relevant but it is not just about numbers but it’s afect on society now and in the future.

@PVC King wrote:

Given that MN only connects the Maynooth line to Luas Red Line and the Interconnector and that demand at peak times for this connection looks to be less than 100 per peak hour surely a Luas connection from Ballymun in would suffice; with Swords and the Airport served from the Northern Line.

Do you not see any advantage in building a fully segregated metro system that can run trams as often as needed, as long as needed and without any interference from bad driving, congestion, pedestrian conflict, parades or emergency services requiring access to nearby buildings?

What you’re suggesting is adding even more trains to an already over-crowded northern line operated by a very poor company. You’re also suggesting running even more on-street trams which will have more in common with the congested and slow red line than the green line which benefits from an existing right of way.

The system you propose is also limited in it’s expansion possibilities so even if densities improves to the levels you require, the trams can’t be lengthened nor the frequencies increased because of the impact on other street traffic.

Finally, I’m not sure how Irish Rail planned on bringing a heavy rail line above ground into the airport without massive conflicts with the M1, R132 and the airport’s ground transportation system. The station would either be nowhere near the terminal buildings (ala CDG1) or a tunnel would have to be dug to get it underneath the buildings which would have huge cost. Perhaps the whole line from east of the M1 to the terminal would have to be tunnelled and since most of the cost of tunnelling is the entry points, it would be hugely expensive for the distance covered.

@markpb wrote:

Do you not see any advantage in building a fully segregated metro system that can run trams as often as needed, as long as needed and without any interference from bad driving, congestion, pedestrian conflict, parades or emergency services requiring access to nearby buildings? .

Agreed Metro North is better than Luas in engineering terms; you could however say that instead of buying new trains for use on the Dublin to Cork rail line that they should have built a new TGV spec line. Everything comes back to annual subvention cost per passenger and if the Luas Section serves Stephens Green to Ballymun it would be an investment that was just about proportionate in terms of balancing ridership and cost.

@markpb wrote:

What you’re suggesting is adding even more trains to an already over-crowded northern line operated by a very poor company. You’re also suggesting running even more on-street trams which will have more in common with the congested and slow red line than the green line which benefits from an existing right of way. .

I disagree that Irish Rail are a poor company they have in recent years when investments were made in renovating dilapidated track on a large scale for the first time since the 1920’s delivered a more reliable service in line with a more reliable network. I would point to Frankfurt where the on street tram network is extensive and heavily used; trams are inappropriate for journeys of over 10kms but used as part of an intergrated system they play a very useful role.

@markpb wrote:

The system you propose is also limited in it’s expansion possibilities so even if densities improves to the levels you require, the trams can’t be lengthened nor the frequencies increased because of the impact on other street traffic..

The trams will only serve small sections of population such as Ballymun to the existing Red and Green lines. Tallaght would get a Dart connection and at existing frequencies of 3-4 minutes at peak Luas is working well below its operating capacity if continental comparison is used. The only capacity constraint Luas has always been what the Dublin Chamber of Commerce imposes on it; Dawson Street was clearly a step too far.

@markpb wrote:

Finally, I’m not sure how Irish Rail planned on bringing a heavy rail line above ground into the airport without massive conflicts with the M1, R132 and the airport’s ground transportation system. The station would either be nowhere near the terminal buildings (ala CDG1) or a tunnel would have to be dug to get it underneath the buildings which would have huge cost. Perhaps the whole line from east of the M1 to the terminal would have to be tunnelled and since most of the cost of tunnelling is the entry points, it would be hugely expensive for the distance covered.

The cost of €400m by Irish Rail clearly factors in the engineering challenges of reaching Dublin Airport; the cost of the Pace extension is €160m for a 7.5kms extension; the distance from Dublin Airport to the existing Northern line is about 6.5kms in a line that passes south of the carpark complex between Swords Road and the M1; add a kilometre for curves and you have the same length of line as Pace but a budget that is 2.5 times the scale. Taking the distances considered acceptable at Heathrow to make terminals 1 and 3 from Heathrow Central and a walk from the end of Terminal 2 to Terminal 1 are extremely modest. In terms of the buildings all you have down there are the redundant Air-Cargo terminals built in 1987 which are hopelessly dated and Air Lingus don’t even do Cargo anymore since they morphed into a low cost carrier.

What does however concern me is the effect of teh Green party ammendment to the Nama legislation levying an 80% tax on land rezonings. Most of the route of MN north of Swords is Zoned Green Belt and policy GS2 in the development plan seeks to prevent the merging of Swords, Malahide, Donabate together.

http://www.fingalcoco.ie/devplan/yourfingal/Stage4/written_statement/Part%202-Strategic%20Framework.pdf

The problem is that the MN passenger forecasts are predicated on 46% of passenger numbers joining the service before Swords; if developers have to hand 80% of their profits over in tax to have the land rezoned from Greenbelt then nothing will be built.

@PVC King wrote:

Taking the distances considered acceptable at Heathrow to make terminals 1 and 3 from Heathrow Central and a walk from the end of Terminal 2 to Terminal 1 are extremely modest. In terms of the buildings all you have down there are the redundant Air-Cargo terminals built in 1987 which are hopelessly dated and Air Lingus don’t even do Cargo anymore since they morphed into a low cost carrier.

Redundant? Out-dated? How so? From working in the airport I saw first hand how busy all those cargo buildings get! (and Aer Lingus still deal with cargo). The Aer Lingus cargo building also processes cargo for other airlines. (They used to do all the UPS cargo for the company I used to work for). Also how exactly is a warehouse “hoplessly out-dated”? :confused: They aren’t exactly aesthetically pleasing, but they are perfectly functional.

There is also a ‘ghost’ underground train station beneath the 1950’s passenger terminal building (T1). It’s never been used for anything bar storage. But is quite extensive and has twin bore tunnels extending out under the building in the direction of the M1. I’m not exactly sure how far they go though!

Dec you are correct Aer Lingus continue to behave like a flag carrier and throw good money after bad on cargo activities despite the positive changes they are making elsewhere in their passenger operations which will in tim get their P & L account back on track.

I had a good look at air cargo at Dublin Airport a few years back and the talk at Aer Lingus at the time was that it was something that they would be out of by 2008 due to their market share collapsing to levels that made turning planes around quickly a bigger objective.

In 2005 they carried 21,100 Tonnes or 525 truck loads annually on their entire network.

http://www.aerlingus.com/Corporate/Current_Report/AL_AnnualReport2005.pdf

At page 9

By 2008 thay had collapsed to 11,825 Tonnes or 296 truck loads.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0827/aerlingus.pdf

(At page 4)

At the rate of decline between 2005 – 2008; the total cargo carried will be 6,659 tonnes by 2011 which is split across 4 airports with Shannon probably having the largest share once they keep a transatlantic service. Changes in supply chain mean that most consumers of Air Freight now have a global intergrated supply chain management contract with a major supplier such as DHL, UPS or FedEx; Air-Freight really only works on long haul between hub airports with the cargo trucked from say Cork to Paris and flown from there to say Caracas. If air freight is perceived as important surely developing the Harristown fringe with seperate run-way access for the major players such as FedEx and DHL who have their own planes would be the way forward

Looking at Dublin Airport post T2 is it fair to assume that the flag carriers will be using T2 in the main and the low cost carriers the existing facilities? Terminal 2 looks very good and no doubt will be central to the next 20-30 years at Dublin Airport