Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Interconnector is Still the Answer

Options
  • 20-03-2005 4:13pm
    #1
    P11 Comms
    Closed Accounts Posts: 173 ✭✭


    THE PROPOSED METRO IS FLAWED
    While Platform11 supports the concept of a Metro system for Dublin, we believe that Iarnrod Eireann's Dublin Rail Plan, which incorporates the Heuston-Spencer Dock "Interconnector" tunnel, and a DART connection to Dublin Airport to be the key infrastructural project for the Greater Dublin Region.

    A Technical Briefing
    The Proposed Dublin Metro is Flawed
    Mark Gleeson, Technical Advisor to Platform11
    March 20, 2005
    http://www.platform11.org/metro_eng_eval.pdf


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    P11 Comms wrote:
    THE PROPOSED METRO IS FLAWED
    While Platform11 supports the concept of a Metro system for Dublin, we believe that Iarnrod Eireann's Dublin Rail Plan, which incorporates the Heuston-Spencer Dock "Interconnector" tunnel, and a DART connection to Dublin Airport to be the key infrastructural project for the Greater Dublin Region.

    A Technical Briefing
    The Proposed Dublin Metro is Flawed
    Mark Gleeson, Technical Advisor to Platform11
    March 20, 2005
    http://www.platform11.org/metro_eng_eval.pdf

    Very interesting, thanks. I don't know much about the nitty gritty of trains and public transport but what you guys are saying seems to make a lot of sense.

    MrP


  • Options
    #3
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    This is propaganda.

    P11 is presenting this as a factual appraisal of the Metro project; yet acknowledges that "much key information...is unavailable...without such information it is impossible to make a fair and accurate evaluation of the project."

    All P11 has done is read a couple of reports - available on the internet. This is hardly a conclusive "investigation". I could pick a thousand holes in it, but I don't have time.

    As far as escalators go, there WILL be escalators from the station ticket/turnstyle area down to platform level, and lifts for the disabled. Costs were saved by removing the escalators to street level. Steps up to street level are the norm in many European metro systems in Spain, France, Sweden and the new Amsterdam metro.


  • Options
    #4
    weehamster
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭weehamster


    OH here we go again. :rolleyes:
    P11 is presenting this as a factual appraisal of the Metro project; yet acknowledges that "much key information...is unavailable...without such information it is impossible to make a fair and accurate evaluation of the project
    The unavailable information is the RPA refusing to release into the public domain information into the exact cost breakdown of the construction of the Airport Metro line.
    Why is this? Why can’t the public who is going to cough up the VERY large amount of cash have this? Only O'Reilly Consultants were allowed to view these figures but were told not to release the figures into the Public domain. Why? All they were allowed to say is that the total cost is €4.86b (2003).
    All P11 has done is read a couple of reports - available on the Internet. This is hardly a conclusive "investigation".
    Why should P11 commission a new report when there has been reports already done? Do you have to cash for a new report, which will tell you what already has been reported?
    The O'Reilly report as well as other reports is available on the Internet under the Freedom of Information act and I am glad they are. Its such a pity that the RPA don’t believe in this.
    I could pick a thousand holes in it, but I don't have time.
    Wow. What a great counter argument. 'I’m right, but I cant be bothered to prove it' :D Keep it up. Please. It’s amusing.
    As far as escalators go, there WILL be escalators from the station ticket/turnstile area down to platform level, and lifts for the disabled. Costs were saved by removing the escalators to street level.
    How do you know this. Have you seen any report stating this.

    Please give up the bashing, just because you have a personal gruge against P11 doesn't mean everybody else has to know this.

    Have a nice evening. :)


  • Options
    #5
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,278 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    weehamster wrote:
    The unavailable information is the RPA refusing to release into the public domain information into the exact cost breakdown of the construction of the Airport Metro line.
    One accusation is there is no breakdown because there is no route selected, it's all hypothetical.


  • Options
    #6
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    I have read the same information you have, so I can't understand where you have found the 'smoking gun' that seems to have brought the cost of the metro to €5bn, if your document is to be accepted as factual.

    You asked me how I know the escalators will run from ticket area to platform level. I would ask you how you know that they won't, unless you are privy to insider information. Are you?

    The facts, as I see them, are this. O'Connor, in his email to O'Reilly, tells him he may mention "reduced specification (escalators etc)". You have, I would suggest wrongly, taken this to mean the removal of all escalators. I'd like you to tell me which report states that "all escalators will be removed" [to cut costs]. Then I will believe it. I have no grudge against Platform 11. I just do not like your strategy of discrediting the RPA/Metro project with information which is not factually accurate.

    I want to be very clear. You are absolutely entitled to criticise the Metro, and your opinions are as valid as anyone else's; however, the "Technical Briefing" you have released is no more than a rehashing of information already in the public domain, but spun heavily to support your ideological anti-metro stance. The problem is, to the casual observer, your authoritative-looking "Briefing" may be all-too-easily taken for fact, when it is clearly an expression of opinion

    Also, there is a "confidentiality notice" at the bottom of Rory O'Connor's email to Myles O'Reilly which would lead me to think that that email should not be in the public domain.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    Metrobest

    Produce your hundred holes or shut the one you have.

    To everyone else

    Sorry for the rudeness but dammit this guy is a troll.


  • Options
    #8
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Metrobest wrote:
    ....spun heavily to support your ideological anti-metro stance...
    Wrong, not for the first time. A scan over the P11 site or message board reveals that P11 are not anti-metro. P11 are pro-quality-good value for money-metro. I'm not going to repeat the specifics (type of connections, etc.) of what constitutes this as this has been discussed at length here and elsewhere. There's a finite amount of money in the pot, metrobest. Fact. Interesting to hear Cullen flapping on the radio about this report today. P11 are players indeed and it's because they talk sense that they are.


  • Options
    #9
    MarkoP11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    All information presented is in the public domain the correspondence between O'Reilly the RPA and the committee is on the Dail website, its not confidential and is an available record under FOI, it makes for interesting reading. And yes I did write to the RPA with a long list of questions all simple one line answers, that was 14/2/2005 no response they at the very least the could have said sorry but no.

    This report is not a rehash, there are 10 references to material dating from 2004 to 1846. We put together all the information we could find, show me where O'Reilly talks about safety, power supply or gauge they don't we do. Show me where O'Reilly quote the DRRTS study they don't. O'Reilly where commissioned to produce a document to reflect the views of the joint committee. We have produced a short document to the point the public don't want to read 100 odd pages of O'Reilly only to find all the good bits are missing.

    Appendix 6 in O'Reilly has bulleted list of cost savings and "remove escalators" is there

    RPA have a number of indicative routes, 3B being the favoured one, its also the cheapest one we think. Figures for extension to Swords aka route 3A have been refused permission to publish, strange considering the Airport St Stephens Green section figures where published. We have Swords passenger figures for 2010 but none for 2016 but we have the Airport figures for 2016 so why hide Swords ?

    The RPA have the numbers but aren't willing to show them to us, that is the whole story of the metro so much information is missing what little we know doesn't instil us with confidence. One aim of this document is to force the RPA to come clean and fill in the blanks.

    P11 is not anti metro we like the metro concept but for the kind of money it looks like costing there are better options, the Dublin Rail Plan, its not an either or we need both we just can't afford both, in fact its pushing it just to pay for one.


  • Options
    #10
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,278 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    MarkoP11 wrote:
    RPA have a number of indicative routes, 3B being the favoured one, its also the cheapest one we think. Figures for extension to Swords aka route 3A have been refused permission to publish, strange considering the Airport St Stephens Green section figures where published.
    Do we know what routes 3A and 3B are taking from the airport to the city?


  • Options
    #11
    MarkoP11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    Victor wrote:
    Do we know what routes 3A and 3B are taking from the airport to the city?

    Route 3B, Airport - Metropark - Ballymun North - Ballymun South - Dublin City University - Botanic Road - Mater - O'Connell Street - Trinity - St Stephen's Green

    Route 3A, is Swords to the Airport and is 3B thereafter I do no further details on the routing of 3A


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    P11 Comms
    Closed Accounts Posts: 173 ✭✭P11 Comms


    Metrobest: "however, the "Technical Briefing" you have released is no more than a rehashing of information already in the public domain, but spun heavily to support your ideological anti-metro stance."

    No, your ideological anti-P11 stance is.

    P11 loves metros. We also love Inter-City, Suburban, Commuter, DART heavy rail and Luas as well. What we don't like are vast sums of money wasted on platitudes to rail transport solutions regardless of if it is reopening the entire Werstern Rail Corridor to run three pointless trains a day from Sligo to Limerick, or handing over almost 5 billion euros to the RPA to construct a low-capacity, poorly intergrated glorified underground 2 coach "metro" when we could finance the completion of the DART and Luas projects for the same amount of money.

    Platform11 mission statement reads:

    "Platform11 was formed in January 2003 to lobby for improved, integrated rail transport solutions for Ireland. Platform11 are objective observers and customers of Ireland's rail transportation network. We want international best practice applied to Mainline, Suburban, Metro and Light Rail transport in Ireland. We are standing on the platforms and on the trains right next to you, and we are your voice in the media and Government."

    It clearly states "metro" in the P11 mission statement and has from the day it was written.

    The only agenda P11 has is a rail network that works for the most people. The only problem with the Interconnector is that construction hasn't started yet.

    www.extendthedart.com

    cheers.


  • Options
    #13
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,278 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    P11 Comms, can you contact me by PM (you don't have PMs enabled). I want to run a few things by you on www.extendthedart.com


  • Options
    #14
    P11 Comms
    Closed Accounts Posts: 173 ✭✭P11 Comms


    Victor, the extendthedart site is run by our sister group the Dart for Lucan Campaign and they do all the editing and webmastering. Their e-mail address is on the site. If you can't find it let me know and I'll PM the webmaster's addy.

    also, how do I activate PMs?


  • Options
    #15
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,278 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    There is an option Enable Private Messaging here:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/profile.php?do=editoptions

    Drop me a line anyway.


  • Options
    #16
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    MarkoP11 wrote:
    All information presented is in the public domain the correspondence between O'Reilly the RPA and the committee is on the Dail website, its not confidential and is an available record under FOI, it makes for interesting reading. And yes I did write to the RPA with a long list of questions all simple one line answers, that was 14/2/2005 no response they at the very least the could have said sorry but no.

    This report is not a rehash, there are 10 references to material dating from 2004 to 1846. We put together all the information we could find, show me where O'Reilly talks about safety, power supply or gauge they don't we do. Show me where O'Reilly quote the DRRTS study they don't. O'Reilly where commissioned to produce a document to reflect the views of the joint committee. We have produced a short document to the point the public don't want to read 100 odd pages of O'Reilly only to find all the good bits are missing.

    Appendix 6 in O'Reilly has bulleted list of cost savings and "remove escalators" is there

    RPA have a number of indicative routes, 3B being the favoured one, its also the cheapest one we think. Figures for extension to Swords aka route 3A have been refused permission to publish, strange considering the Airport St Stephens Green section figures where published. We have Swords passenger figures for 2010 but none for 2016 but we have the Airport figures for 2016 so why hide Swords ?

    The RPA have the numbers but aren't willing to show them to us, that is the whole story of the metro so much information is missing what little we know doesn't instil us with confidence. One aim of this document is to force the RPA to come clean and fill in the blanks.

    P11 is not anti metro we like the metro concept but for the kind of money it looks like costing there are better options, the Dublin Rail Plan, its not an either or we need both we just can't afford both, in fact its pushing it just to pay for one.


    Fair enough. I don't hold any candle for the RPA. I don't think they did a great job on the LUAS. However, I don't think it's reasonable to expect the RPA to release all sorts of information into the public domain. Irish Rail is also being quite cagey about the Dublin Rail Plan and there are plenty of unanswered questions relating to routes/costs etc. You support the Dublin Rail Plan. Again, fair enough. Let's give Irish Rail the benefit of the doubt until we see exactly what the plan is. Let's also, by the same token, give the RPA the benefit of the doubt. You cannot make a coherent judgement on costs/safety implications when you are not privy to detailed information. Platform 11 would be first people to cry foul if a press release was sent out raising questions about costs/routes/safety of the Interconnector project, if that had not been factually accurate.

    That's what I objected to. Your Briefing, authoritative-looking but containing no original research, being sent to the national media in what I view as an attempt to 'kill' the metro project. The €5bn for a metro made a great headline, but was low on substance. P11 have obviously discovered how to grab headlines, but your press release was low on caveats. Nobody can say for sure what any project will cost. Estimates are estimates. The same criteria you used to appraise the Metro could be used for the Dublin Rail Plan, by quoting different passages from the books/websites/presentations. It is self-defeating to suggest there is not enough money to finance the Metro. Money can be found where the will is there - the Travers Report being a case in point.

    Platform 11 are very good at giving criticism. Fair enough. But not everyone agrees with you. I don't. If you are going to go down the road of criticising other projects, it is reasonable to say that you have to back it up with definate facts and be prepared to accept that not everyone will agree with your findings. Irish government ministers don't like being bullied. I don't think that your press campaign on the Metro will have endeared you to Martin Cullen who, at the end of the day, is someone you're going to need on your side if the DRP is ever to get the go-ahead.


  • Options
    #17
    MarkoP11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    Sure you could complain about IE but,

    They have a track record of delivering on time on budget, everything the RPA have done has been late and over budget
    The capacity figures are stunning.
    Intergation is ensured with Luas and the existing rail network.
    We have clear broken down cost estimates from IE. The RPA just issue a figure
    IE play by the safety rules we know that.
    Issues of compatibilty don't exist.
    The specification level IE have used in the past eg DART has been above and beyond what could be reasonably expected
    IE's plans are flexible and can be done in a staged basis

    Cullen hasn't a clue to be honest and deserves all the hammering he gets he has sat in the DoT since Brennan got dumped and done nothing except put decisions off. He would do well to read the report since he hadn't when he got cornered yesterday by a journalist

    The document is a briefing not a research paper we have looked at the information available, we can't afford to call in Ove Arup engineers to perfrom a study for us. Whats the point the RPA would refuse to release the information we know that. The metro has issues that is something upon which we all can agree.

    Those of us in Dublin will note the RPA have made no comment yet, shouldn't they but out screaming this is rubbish ? Or have they realised that we are right in many respects ? They have not made contact with us they have our email address they have our phone numbers they even have our mailing address.


  • Options
    #18
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,767 ✭✭✭SeanW


    I really don't understand Metrobests position. The Interconnector is the central component of the Irish Rail DRP. It opens up The Digital Hub/High St, St. Stephens Green and Spencer Dock massively. It brings a direct link to Dublin Airport along its proposed alignment to Heuston.

    It also decimates the number and severity of line conflicts on the subruban network. Also turnarounds can be handled at the Kildare and Drogheda on that DART line thus cutting the number of reversal movements in the Central Area.

    It is not possible/very difficult to expand the network or prepare it to meet potential demand without the Interconnector. Of course that hardly matters to Metrobest in Holland.

    For Metrobest to claim he's sold on the rest of the DRP like quad-trackings and electrification simply makes no sense - none of this can provide value without the Interconnector - the Interconnector is the centrepiece of the entire strategy - without it the other improvements and assets don't provide their full potential and a large swathe of the Central Area remains without a heavy rail service.
    I should point out, there are certain aspects of the Dublin Rail Plan I support. The €1.3bn tunnel between Heuston and Spencer Dock, however, is the aspect with which I have the most problem. Of the five stations, two (Heuston, Pearse) are already suburban rail stations, so that leaves three unique new stations – at Digital Hub, Stephen’s Green, and Spencer Dock.

    Buying the DRP minus the Interconnector would be a bit like going into McDonalds and asking for a Double Quarter Pounder with no beef. You wouldn't be taken seriously. So Metrobest can hardly clain we should take him seriously either.

    I've got nothing against the Metro - although I'm against taking an Airport-Or-Bust attitude - I think the Metro will be needed but the DRP IN FULL is more important.


  • Options
    #19
    Thomond Pk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 449 ✭✭Thomond Pk


    MarkoP11 wrote:
    And yes I did write to the RPA with a long list of questions all simple one line answers, that was 14/2/2005 no response they at the very least the could have said sorry but no.

    I have written to the RPA on six occaisions (By e-mail) looking for a broad timeframe for the proposed Cherrywood extension, not once have I received a response. I think that Platform 11 are absolutely right to question everything the RPA do and given the escalating costs on the Luas project Platform 11 are right to select the higher end of the price range when estimating cost. I read the technical briefing and I found the use of the possible acceptable as it keeps it all honest, unlike some of the dates various ministers gave us for the Luas start date.


Advertisement