Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Idbatterim

port tunnel entrance to m50 at Sandyford, much of the lands has been reserved for it... Its all well and good many people thinking we don't need it, as many spoofers do. When dublins population is another half a million higher, what kind of infrastructure is appropriate for a 1.5-2 million population, because even what we have now is obviously third world!

one other big argument I would make for going with the original scheme, if the power that's be actually want it built, better to do it now, while the climate i.e. economy is fine for it, waiting another two / three, god knows what could happen, brexit etc, and if construction hasn't started, it will be shelved and used to protect cuts from the world class welfare and public service pay etc :rolleyes:

Idbatterim

I just listened to McCarthy there. I respect his opinion on many things, but he just obviously doesn't have a clue on planning on transport. His point it will cost 2.5 billion, you could do other schemes with that... Yeah and the point is , it is a lot of money, but equally any other project in the state (other than DU) economically is an absolute joke in comparison in terms of what it would do for the city, country and economy...

Coming from an economist, there is also a bit of ignorance, its like we just write a cheque and the 2.5 billion goes off to Germany etc, like we are importing foreign cars :rolleyes: The amount of that figure, that will flow back to government, will be very substantial, then you have all of the other benefits, circular flow of income etc...

take a read and look at the below recent article and video, some of the projected figures mentioned...

http://www.thejournal.ie/metro-north-finally-happening-3379478-May2017/

BonnieSituation

It's a prime example of cost of everything and the value of nothing

Idbatterim

THe Metro North and DART Underground should be merged together. There should be a single line going from Swords to Heuston via the Airport and via Spencer Dock. Would only have to cross the Liffey once, saving hundreds of millions. Would be huge economies of scale and time from doing it as one project and one planning process. Why is this not being considered?

this was posted under the journal article, I think the poster also posts here. How feasible would this be? Obviously one big issue I can see with it, is the joke operation that is Irish rail...

BonnieSituation

Idbatterim wrote: »

this was posted under the journal article, I think the poster also posts here. How feasible would this be? Obviously one big issue I can see with it, is the joke operation that is Irish rail...

I'd be all for that but Jesus that's some project to start now.

I'll take the 2 separate ones please. They may actually be done in my lifetime.

Idbatterim

I'd be all for that but Jesus that's some project to start now.

I'll take the 2 separate ones please. They may actually be done in my lifetime.

If MN does go back to drawing board and DU is, due to costs. I wonder what the actual cost of the proposed would be!

BonnieSituation

Idbatterim wrote: »

If MN does go back to drawing board and DU is, due to costs. I wonder what the actual cost of the proposed would be!

No. No wonderig allowed.

New MN is going to be started in some guise.
There's going to be an announcement come October.

DU is a different story but I'd say come 2018 we will have some further news.

In fact a GE is the biggest obstacle to these projects now. Unless FG win that GE,

Idbatterim

BonnieSituation wrote: »

No. No wonderig allowed.

New MN is going to be started in some guise.
There's going to be an announcement come October.

DU is a different story but I'd say come 2018 we will have some further news.

In fact a GE is the biggest obstacle to these projects now. Unless FG win that GE,

maybe during the public consultation process, Ill propose that incase the **** hits the fan again economically, they could also seek permission for 20m platforms and trams... I mean that would be even cheaper than metro cheap they wont to foist on us now...

BonnieSituation

Idbatterim wrote: »

maybe during the public consultation process, Ill propose that incase the **** hits the fan again economically, they could also seek permission for 20m platforms and trams... I mean that would be even cheaper than metro cheap they wont to foist on us now...

Looking at how NMN is progressing I actually think there's merit to some of the station choices tbh. Well, assuming they're chosen.

LeinsterDub

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Looking at how NMN is progressing I actually think there's merit to some of the station choices tbh. Well, assuming they're chosen.

What can you divulge regarding these choices?

Idbatterim

Looking at how NMN is progressing I actually think there's merit to some of the station choices tbh. Well, assuming they're chosen.

Ill say something else, MN the original scheme was designed FOR ONCE, not on the cheap, not a compromise job. A massive amount of effort and planning went into it, all I can surmise is that if they are changing station locations, its going to be simply for cost reasons and in inferior locations to originally planned...

BonnieSituation

LeinsterDub wrote: »

What can you divulge regarding these choices?

Very little at the minute.

I'm actually trying to work out a way for me to stop talking in tongues re NMN.

I'll work on something later in the week and it may or may not end up somewhere on the internet for consumption

BonnieSituation

Idbatterim wrote: »

Ill say something else, MN the original scheme was designed FOR ONCE, not on the cheap, not a compromise job. A massive amount of effort and planning went into it, all I can surmise is that if they are changing station locations, its going to be simply for cost reasons and in inferior locations to originally planned...

There's one COMPLETELY NEW option for a station and P&R that actually will open up a whole swathe of access to NMN from the NW.

LeinsterDub

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Very little at the minute.

I'm actually trying to work out a way for me to stop talking in tongues re NMN.

I'll work on something later in the week and it may or may not end up somewhere on the internet for consumption

Did anyone say Infrastructure beers ? Free booze for Bonnie

Idbatterim

if they are serious about it, not going with the original scheme is madness. With construction inflation, this inferior scheme will end up costing more.. going through planning and everything again. What an absolute farce the entire thing is...

BonnieSituation

Absolutely. But this inferior scheme will in fact be better than nothing. That's the stage I've gotten to.

Idbatterim

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Absolutely. But this inferior scheme will in fact be better than nothing. That's the stage I've gotten to.

Id like to get to that stage, but I simply cant. If the original scheme say had lots of underground running where it didn't need it etc, I would say ok, you could make an argument for reviewing it. But lets look at the key cost cutting proposals 1. less rolling stock (as if they couldn't have simply ordered less for MN 2. reduced platform length to save 80,000,000 on a 2.5,000,000,000 scheme, I wont even comment on that (could likely be overturned) 3. dropping one station at Upper OCS if I am not mistaken, I think the saving is E100,000,000 on that 4. underground in ballymun after originally it was proposed to have it overground, you can be damn sure there were good reasons that will apply again for residents wanting it underground and the fact the service wont be compromised as much with junctions... so there is what there? perhaps one proposal that MIGHT be worthy of consideration IF planning had lapsed on MN and they were hell bent on the headline figure, but they cant be because they have no issue with hundreds of millions presumably going up in smoke as the construction industry is ramping up again!

As presumably they want to do this critical piece of infrastructure that will be around a long time after we are in the ground, on the cheap! at the very least the underground station boxes should be the original planned 90m...

bk

marno21 wrote: »

This Taoiseach, being 38, will still be in politics in 20 years time. It's a different mentality to the horizon for an older Taoiseach who will be retiring at the next election.

Wow, I hadn't thought of that, one of the most insightful comments I've read in a long time.

MJohnston

But sure if he's 38 now, doesn't that mean he'll retire in 13 years

jd

BonnieSituation wrote:

There's one COMPLETELY NEW option for a station and P&R that actually will open up a whole swathe of access to NMN from the NW.

That sounds like the might move the Northwood stop across the Ballymun road and use the waste land there as P and R!

MJohnston

This article is applicable to a wide range of projects (housing, DU, MN, among many others), but pressure from the media on this is starting to grow and grow:

Housing shortage puts strain on Ireland’s revival

With its economy growing again after almost a decade in the doldrums, Ireland is eager to attract bankers, software engineers and accountants to its shores. But there’s a problem: finding them somewhere to live.

A housing shortage, compounded by ropy infrastructure, limits Ireland’s appeal — just as companies are looking for alternative locations to the U.K. after Brexit.

LuckyLloyd

Good summary of where we are I'd say.

Idbatterim

I can see politically why they didn't proceed with it in 2011! What is beyond a joke is, why they don't proceed with the original scheme now!

BonnieSituation

I know I promised something. Killed with the busy this week.And I will get it out hopefully by tomorrow evening. But current news is that there are 2 emerging routes being preferred as it stands.

murphaph

MJohnston wrote: »

This article is applicable to a wide range of projects (housing, DU, MN, among many others), but pressure from the media on this is starting to grow and grow:

Housing shortage puts strain on Ireland’s revival

I said this was gonna cost us Brexit crumbs (very welcome crumbs!) and it is. Failing to prepare and all that.

Idbatterim

Actually this new City proposal gets even better the more I think about it. Metro north and dart underground. Might get going, what? 20 years after proposed? WHAT SHOULD DUBLin Do WHIle Waiting on this April fool joke, which would be 20-30 years off ambitiously even with the clowns here! The country literally isn't capable of running itself ..

murphaph

I'm not trying to be overly negative but I genuinely believe if we'd invested in Dublin over the past 20 years rather than talking about it, we'd be cleaning up in Brexit business right now.

It's all that's holding us back. English speaking, same timezone as London, same basic legal system as England, flexible staff, business friendly culture, second densest air corridor in the world between Dublin and London. It's just our infrastructure that lets us down. Dublin could have been a golden goose to lay eggs for the whole country, but it isn't to be.

maninasia

It's an example of how not to run your country.
Contrary to a lot of people I feel Ireland already had a lot going for it since 100 years ago and has been doing it's best to keep itself back for large parts of the next hundred.

The cancelling of the infrastructure projects in 2011 was extremely foolhardy . The lack of reasonable planning laws to allow people to live economically and in reasonable radius from work is also a disaster.

Dublin especially has been stuck in a time warp for a capital city that speaks English and has low tax rates and free movement of people in the biggest single market in the world.

markpb

murphaph wrote: »

I'm not trying to be overly negative but I genuinely believe if we'd invested in Dublin over the past 20 years rather than talking about it, we'd be cleaning up in Brexit business right now.

It's all that's holding us back. English speaking, same timezone as London, same basic legal system as England, flexible staff, business friendly culture, second densest air corridor in the world between Dublin and London. It's just our infrastructure that lets us down. Dublin could have been a golden goose to lay eggs for the whole country, but it isn't to be.

FWIW I agree with almost everything you said but several banks have indicated that the regulatory environment in other countries was a reason for choosing them over Ireland. I'm not sure what exactly this means but I believe that there were concerns about the Irish Central Banks ability to cope with the increased demand.

Sam Russell

markpb wrote: »

FWIW I agree with almost everything you said but several banks have indicated that the regulatory environment in other countries was a reason for choosing them over Ireland. I'm not sure what exactly this means but I believe that there were concerns about the Irish Central Banks ability to cope with the increased demand.

Have the Irish Central Bank not just moved into the former HQ of Anglo Irish Bank? Sure should that not build their reputation for strong regulation? Oh, wait ....