Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] 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 [email protected]

New Children's Hospital at Mater site

2456710

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭ForiegnNational


    Tragedy wrote: »
    They've published statistics on how many patients travel to Crumlin via car, can't remember the figure but it was far, far, FAR higher than travel by public transport.

    From the IrishHealth.com forum:
    FYI - The report on travel is available on the internet - see HSE Publications section and look at the Task Group Report Appendix 7.
    A few points to note
    - The basis of road travel calculations were based on city average speeds of 96 kmph on motorway reduced to 32kpmh on 4th category roads. (On today's Irish Times it is reported that the average speed in the city is now 8mph [u do the maths!]).
    - The report does not weight any of the location with regard to their relative distance and quality of road network from the M50. [Note Crumlin hospital have conducted a survey which shows 81% of a sample of 700 families travelled to the hospital by car.
    - The report does not weight locations either in relation to their ease of access to Heuston and Connolly stations either.
    - The report does not take into consideration either that the time that will be required for road users to transfer from off campus parking to shuttle bus to hospital. [Relevant only to the Mater site].
    - The Trinity report as per appendix offers no conclusion or recommendation although p. 40 of the Task Group report states that the "only potential location where access would be a significant decision making factor was Beaumont Hospital"

    Edit: Actually, I think I will leave this to an expert, Barry O'Donnell, retired Professor of Paediatric Surgery...
    Madam, – A modern children’s hospital needs a large 40-60 bed intensive care unit, a highly efficient day care unit which might turn over patients two or even three times a day and a nearby basic hotel. Oncology and cystic fibrosis need separate units because of infection issues. All Dublin surveys omit the vital factor of a basic hotel, “Holiday Inn” standard, on site. This is an essential part of planning a children’s hospital if bed stay is to be shortened and costs contained. Many of the biggest American children’s hospitals are designed with this in mind. The nearest hotel to the Mater is the Gresham Hotel in O’Connell Street, which is a mile away.

    Many people outside the paediatric field feel that there is strong case for co-location with an adult hospital. It seems logical, but it doesn’t work like that. As has been shown again and again the co-location has no tangible advantages for a large paediatric hospital. Those of us who trained in, worked in and visited standalone units all over the world will testify to that. There is, however, a strong case for crossover collaboration in research. But there is no plan for transferring the Children’s Research Centre at Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, (founded 1965) which has been so highly successful and is now a minor part of the national fabric, to the Mater site. There is certainly no room for it there.

    The Mater site is relatively near Heuston Station, according to a letter-writer who should know better (August 2nd). The station is actually nearer Crumlin and the cross-city journey to the Mater takes perhaps three times or more as long. Public transport is almost irrelevant to children’s hospital access in this second decade of the 21st century. Perhaps 90 per cent patients, especially from outside Dublin, access by car. Published data from the Mater (Irish Times Mater supplement of a few years back) about cycling times from the various mainline stations is about as relevant as rickshaw, sedan chair or gondola times and show a sad lack of insight into the real issues. About 70 per cent of children’s hospital admissions are under four years of age. Tricycle times?.

    As for building on the six-hectare (15-acre) Crumlin site, the Boston Children’s (arguably the worlds number one) was built on the site of the old hospital’s car park, (I was twice visiting professor there) while the hospital continued working. The builders of Our Lady’s, Crumlin say that they could put up a building with all the modern requirements on that site without disturbing the work of the existing hospital. It would cost something over €100 million . . . a saving of €600 million. However, it looks as though the political Faustian pact will prevail. – Yours, etc,

    BARRY O’DONNELL,
    Retired Professor of Paediatric Surgery RCSI,
    Merlyn Road, Ballsbridge,
    Dublin 4.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,553 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    All Dublin surveys omit the vital factor of a basic hotel, “Holiday Inn” standard, on site. This is an essential part of planning a children’s hospital if bed stay is to be shortened and costs contained. Many of the biggest American children’s hospitals are designed with this in mind. The nearest hotel to the Mater is the Gresham Hotel in O’Connell Street, which is a mile away.

    The Maldron Hotel on the corner of Dorset street and Granby Row is two minutes from Eccles Street.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,069 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Tragedy wrote: »
    They've published statistics on how many patients travel to Crumlin via car, can't remember the figure but it was far, far, FAR higher than travel by public transport.

    The big question of the 80/20% is if the 80% includes taxis or other pick up and collect services or not. If there is a notable high percentage of taxi etc journeys within the 80% arriving by car then you have to ask when are these coming from and will adding to these journeys add massively add to the cost compare to adding to private car journeys which would not add much to cost.

    Going with the fact that the car wins in the car / public transport split, you still have to ask questions such as: Are the 20% more are less likely to be less better off? Who are likely to suffer more?

    Given that most people here are claiming public transport is so unusable and unsuitable (at least partly rightly so, I'm sure), adding to public transport journeys is worse than adding to car journeys.

    Tragedy wrote: »
    I just had a quick look, and I can't find anywhere along Metro North until you hit the Old Airport which seems to have the space for a major hospital(Santry Demesne and Botanic Gardens are taken, alas!)
    The second part is untrue. The majority of the population of Ireland is in the south west/south east and Dublin. The majority of the population of Dublin outside the City Council is in the South west and South.

    M7, M11 and the majority of South/West Dublin would be closer to Belgard Road/Greenfields site in Tallaght. M4 is almost equidistant, and M3/M1 are far closer to Blanch.

    I'm talking about a site right beside the M50.

    Closer isn't the only thing that matters, traffic and type of roads also matters. Distances on motorway are meaningless compared to any other roads.

    Go on to google maps, put one destination as Connolly Hospital and just start dragging the second destination around Dublin to get an idea of distances, then do the same with Belgard Road.

    On that (over simple) measure, the Matter wins. It's closer to more places in Dublin than anywhere on one edge of the city or the other.

    Just keep in mind I'm not strongly advocating any one site or the other -- I'm just trying to add a bit of balance to the debate.


  • Registered Users Posts: 34 eminoz


    I’m not for or against the Mater location in terms of the health services to be provided. But I do know the area and I know what heavy traffic looks like. It’s not pretty.

    What I understand is that (most of) the experts looked at maps and gauged its suitability from that, rather than from local knowledge/inspections. Did anyone ask the ambulance drivers, or bus or taxi drivers who know it? Forget about any travel times quoted, and forget measured distances. Crows can fly over, they’re not stuck in, traffic. (do they fly in straight lines anyway?)

    If you think this site is right but don’t know the local traffic conditions, come and have a look. All I’d say is that just one car trying to park on Eccles Street will hold up all traffic each way, incl the bus and not to mention (but I will) pesky ambulances with cardiac patients. And there’s the queue for the existing car park – ditto. Tailbacks turn into traffic jams.

    I’ll save you the trip: just listen to AA Roadwatch (though it’s stopped mentioning some of these as they’re so predictably bad that it’s not News): Dorset Street (Granby Row/Nth Frederick Street/Drumcondra), Church Street/Constitution Hill/Phibsborough Road, North Circular Road/Cabra Road... Berkeley Road. Any ring a bell? If you want to get to the Mater by road, you’ll be on one of these. For a long time. It’s not just the “rush-hour(s)” - there’re blackspots throughout the day and that’s not even mentioning (but again I will) Croke Park days*.

    This is not just about cars and their drivers (though if you have an emergency, you don’t tend to wait for a bus – there’s usually (hopefully) a neighbour to help out?). Time is of the essence, not money. But, if you do need public transport even for emergencies, surely there are just as many living close to, say, Tallaght as to the Mater? You could call this an equal opportunities issue - buses have nearly as many problems in this traffic as cars. The Metro will help – but mostly staff and visitors; it would get you there, but you’d probably need another bus/luas/train to take you to IT. (No wonder they recommend co-location – your child will be ready for the adult hospital by the time you get there. )

    So the reality is that there will be more cars. Lots of cars. With panicking drivers. Stuck in gridlock. Still a mile from hospital and crawling. What would you do? Wait till you get to the new carpark? I think not: abandon vehicle, lift child and run. More traffic problems.

    Can it work? Let’s be positive for once. Just some suggestions that might help:

    1. Getting rid of the car: some entrepreneur can set up a service at a perimeter about a km from the Mater, a bit like a combined valet parking/pub driver scheme: text them while in traffic and they’ll send a driver to take over the car – you’ll still have to run, but the car will be parked (eventually) for you; the driver locates you in hospital and returns key. Maybe they’ll arrive on a scooter, with trailer for child(ren) (or one of those lovely high-tech thingies used for touring the Quays) which you yourself use to get to hospital on pavements. Sounds ok? Plenty of employment potential, which must be a good thing. Requires pre-registration etc (don’t just give your car to nearest pedestrian – but then again, sick child etc, who’ll care about the motor?). (Note to Mater: provide secure scooter parking). (Note to Mater: expect increase in accidents to pedestrians)

    2. Em, of course this is not strictly legal, but desperate times etc... Requires some forward planning, but for your child? Swop/trade your car for a white van (must be surplus left around) (or any van, but must spray white). Paint AMBULANCE on sides (don’t forget “ecnalubma” on bonnet, for authenticity). Get siren. Flashing lights too. (You get it). This is a one use idea, sadly. Will have to abandon vehicle as would look odd in parking bay. (Expect too to be flagged down on street for other emergencies.)

    3. Alternatively, and less elaborate, just get the flashing lights and siren. And hope that the traffic can make some room for you to squeeze past. This has advantage of looking less conspicuous in your driveway, but is not as successful – not as noticeable to other traffic as ambulance.
    4. There is no 4. Yet.

    Don’t expect either to be successful more than once (and, of course, don’t tell anyone else about this idea or it won’t work.
    Required Health and Safety warning: Am obliged to warn that any person thinking of option 2 or 3 must ensure that they have undertaken an advanced driving course, preferably one on “driving emergency vehicles)
    *Unconnected to current topic, but note to self re solving problem of Croke (no)Park(ing). Idea 1 is adaptable for fans travelling to matches. (Will be rich with all these entrepreneurial ideas; mustn't tell anyone.)


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,069 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    eminoz wrote: »
    Crows can fly over, they’re not stuck in, traffic. (do they fly in straight lines anyway?)

    Google Maps allow you to measure distances by roads.
    eminoz wrote: »
    If you think this site is right but don’t know the local traffic conditions, come and have a look. All I’d say is that just one car trying to park on Eccles Street will hold up all traffic each way, incl the bus and not to mention (but I will) pesky ambulances with cardiac patients. And there’s the queue for the existing car park – ditto. Tailbacks turn into traffic jams. [/FONT]

    Ambulances can get by. Improve buses lanes around the Matter / North Circular Road and access for will even be better again.
    eminoz wrote: »
    This is not just about cars and their drivers (though if you have an emergency, you don’t tend to wait for a bus – there’s usually (hopefully) a neighbour to help out?). Time is of the essence, not money.

    Ambulances can get by and even if a Garda stops a private car in an emergency in a bus lane the Garda will most likely give an escort rather than a ticket.
    eminoz wrote: »
    surely there are just as many living close to, say, Tallaght as to the Mater? You could call this an equal opportunities issue - buses have nearly as many problems in this traffic as cars.

    No, far, far more people living near the Matter in all directions than there are near Tallaght at the edge of the city.
    eminoz wrote: »
    The Metro will help – but mostly staff and visitors; it would get you there, but you’d probably need another bus/luas/train to take you to IT. (No wonder they recommend co-location – your child will be ready for the adult hospital by the time you get there. )

    Metro will take 20mins from the Airport to the Green. Whatever about suitability speed is not a problem. You also have bus lanes from the M1 over ground and the Port Tunnel is just over 3km away.

    Staff are also more likely to live closer to the Matter than Tallaght (more so because more areas are closer to the Matter, than anything else). Cycling and walking to work is more viable for staff in a location like like the Matter but in a location like Tallaght there is more likely to be more driving and thus more traffic. Also for staff, as well as visitors, a very large amount of bus routes pass by both sides of the Matter.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭mgmt


    monument wrote: »
    Staff are also more likely to live closer to the Matter than Tallaght (more so because more areas are closer to the Matter, than anything else). Cycling and walking to work is more viable for staff in a location like like the Matter but in a location like Tallaght there is more likely to be more driving and thus more traffic. Also for staff, as well as visitors, a very large amount of bus routes pass by both sides of the Matter.

    Who gives a flying **** about the staff?? Children are being born in the suburbs off the M50, not in the city centre.

    This is a country where we have to pay 400million euro to get rid of 4000 paper pushers. :mad:


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,069 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    mgmt wrote: »
    Who gives a flying **** about the staff?? Children are being born in the suburbs off the M50, not in the city centre.

    First, I did not bring the issue of staff travel up, another poster did. Also a whole load of staff driving to a location off the M50 will likely notably increase traffic in such areas. Also, just to add: Having happy staff with a good quality of life and not crazy commutes is very important in getting excellent care for children.

    Children are been born in the city and the suburbs inside the M50 too. And that will grow now with growing density, more suitable spaces, and people being more unlikely to be able to move out of the city than before. You have to look at the longer term.

    An important question here: Is its easer for [A] private car users around the M50 to get to the Matter site OR for non-car users inside the M50 and those coming from else where on trains to get an M50 site? And I think the answer there is that it's easer for a car user to get to Matter.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,553 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    mgmt wrote: »
    Who gives a flying **** about the staff?? Children are being born in the suburbs off the M50, not in the city centre.

    Without good public transport links to the hospital the vast majority of the staff would have to drive to work. If they have to drive then they have to park at work. The parents of sick children should not have to compete with staff for parking spaces at the hospital. IMO access to public transport should have been on a par with accessibility by car when selecting the site for National Children's Hospital.


  • Registered Users Posts: 888 ✭✭✭Telchak


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    =access to public transport should have been on a par with accessibility by car when selecting the site for National Children's Hospital.

    While the intentions on this are good...
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    If they have to drive then they have to park at work. The parents of sick children should not have to compete with staff for parking spaces at the hospital.

    ...that is a bit silly, as a greenfield site would have necessary room for enough parking for both :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,553 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Telchak wrote: »
    ...that is a bit silly, as a greenfield site would have necessary room for enough parking for both :rolleyes:

    Thats very silly. Providing car parking for over one thousand staff would be very expensive. The budget on the project has been set and if money is spent on providing car parking spaces the opportunity cost is facilities and equipment to help sick children. It makes perfect sence to build the hospital next to a public transport route which would minimise the expense involved in providing car parks for staff, meaning more money can be spent on the hospital itself.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭ForiegnNational


    If there is demand for a Holiday inn style hotel it will be built the free Market doesn't ignore possibility like this but to suggest we build a Hospital in a certain area just because there is a hotel close is madness
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    The Maldron Hotel on the corner of Dorset street and Granby Row is two minutes from Eccles Street.

    I know you both mean well, but again, you lack understanding, which is fair enough as probably neither of you have been in this situation...

    When your child goes in for open heart surgery, it is not a night or two in a hotel. You are looking at a protracted stay of several weeks for the ENTIRE family away from home.

    Whilst your comfort is the least important thing, you still have to maintain a family environment for the other children in a facility that at least mimics a family home. This is why the late late show house and Ronald McDonald house are so intrinsically important. They provide a home-away-from-home where the entire family can stay whilst your child is in hospital.

    A hotel is just not the solution. Any Children's hospital has to cater for the family of the patient when it is a child, not just the patient!

    As I have said before, I have no axe to grind over the Mater, I can just see a half baked plan for exactly what it is... Until a full solution is in place for ANY location, I am going to have reservations.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,553 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    I know you both mean well, but again, you lack understanding, which is fair enough as probably neither of you have been in this situation...

    When your child goes in for open heart surgery, it is not a night or two in a hotel. You are looking at a protracted stay of several weeks for the ENTIRE family away from home.

    Whilst your comfort is the least important thing, you still have to maintain a family environment for the other children in a facility that at least mimics a family home. This is why the late late show house and Ronald McDonald house are so intrinsically important. They provide a home-away-from-home where the entire family can stay whilst your child is in hospital.

    A hotel is just not the solution. Any Children's hospital has to cater for the family of the patient when it is a child, not just the patient!

    As I have said before, I have no axe to grind over the Mater, I can just see a half baked plan for exactly what it is... Until a full solution is in place for ANY location, I am going to have reservations.

    I was replying to the article you posted which said there must be a Holiday Inn style hotel near the National Childrens Hospital, and the article claimed there were no such hotels close to the Mater. I was pointing out that the Maldron hotel is two minutes from the Mater, I was not saying that a hotel does away with the need for facilities for parents. There will be facilites in the new hospital for parents to stay with their children, be it at the Mater or an a greenfield site, this has been covered in the thread already.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭michael999999


    monument wrote: »
    There's still people in Ireland that can't afford cars or can't drive for one reason or another. I don't think those type of comments are fair to parents who try to do their best for their children. Also whatever about city public transport, a good deal of sick people use trains to get to Dublin in the first place -- for them locations like the Matter or Crumlin are ok, but Tallaght adds hugely to their journeys. The same can generally be said for those around Dublin without access to a car at all or even all the time.

    And, with respect, compared to a few hours in a car, I'm not sure if public transport is all that bad. I never had anything that serious at the end of the day, but I remember hating the car but I liked the train. But there's no one solution that suits all.

    In saying all of that, if a ton of car parking isn't planned for the Matter, than that's just wrong. And fully agreed about parking craziness at hospitals -- prices too should be kept low for parents. But it's still worth pointing out that the Matter is only around 4.5km from the M1 or less from the Port Tunnel (toll passes for parents could be arranged with Dublin City Council). That's only about a km less than the distance between Tallaght Hospital and the M50.




    That's not exactly true. A site along the Metro route and close to the M50 around Ballymun would have better access for the majority of the population just on car access alone given its far closer to the M50 than the area around Tallaght.



    Indeed, all round access wise, Blanchardstown seems like a far better idea than Tallaght.
    you cannot bring a child suffering from cancer,c.f. or any other serious illness on public transport because of risk of infection.i understand you may not know this because as you say yourself you have never suffered from anything serious.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    you cannot bring a child suffering from cancer,c.f. or any other serious illness on public transport because of risk of infection.i understand you may not know this because as you say yourself you have never suffered from anything serious.


    But you can bring children with other conditions public transport. Just because its not an option for some doesn't mean it's not an option for everyone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭ForiegnNational


    But you can bring children with other conditions public transport. Just because its not an option for some doesn't mean it's not an option for everyone.

    Doesn't anybody get that this is to be the NATIONAL Hospital for Children. Only 25% of people live in the City of Dublin, and of them, how many are on the immediate transport links to the Mater?

    When children have to go to the likes of Crumlin, Temple Street or Tallagh, they are not just visiting the dentist. They are often going in for serious operations or procedures that mean they are going to be in for days if not weeks.

    You can't just drop them off the the bus/metro/luas and head home. It's fine if you live within 20 minutes of the hospital in Dublin, but for all other parts of the country, you will be moving your entire family to Dublin for a prolonged stay. I don't see people using the Luas/Metro/Bus as a realistic method of taking everything you need for a family with you.

    In addition to the immediate family, visitors are also coming from all over Ireland. Again, the fact that the site will be on the route of a planned (but unfortunately likely to be long fingered) metro line is lovely, but doesn't cater for the majority of people coming via car (80% from Crumlin statistics).


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,553 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Doesn't anybody get that this is to be the NATIONAL Hospital for Children. Only 25% of people live in the City of Dublin, and of them, how many are on the immediate transport links to the Mater?

    When children have to go to the likes of Crumlin, Temple Street or Tallagh, they are not just visiting the dentist. They are often going in for serious operations or procedures that mean they are going to be in for days if not weeks.

    You can't just drop them off the the bus/metro/luas and head home. It's fine if you live within 20 minutes of the hospital in Dublin, but for all other parts of the country, you will be moving your entire family to Dublin for a prolonged stay. I don't see people using the Luas/Metro/Bus as a realistic method of taking everything you need for a family with you.

    In addition to the immediate family, visitors are also coming from all over Ireland. Again, the fact that the site will be on the route of a planned (but unfortunately likely to be long fingered) metro line is lovely, but doesn't cater for the majority of people coming via car (80% from Crumlin statistics).

    Nobody expects sick children to go to hospital on a train so stop banging on about it. There are however many healthy adults who could use public transport to get to the hospital. If the hospital does not have good access to public transport then you have to provide car parking for 1,500 staff. This would be an unnecessary expense when we should be getting cars off the road and encouraging people to use public transport to get to work.

    Also having access to public transport from the hospital has benefits for families staying their because it means they are not just confined to the hospital and would be able to take their other children into town etc. No public transport would also mean every visitor has to drive and park at the hospital.

    There is a limit to the amount of funds available for this project so if several thousand car parking spaces have to be provided then there is less money to spend on facilities within the hospital. The National Childrens Hospital, be it at the Mater or elsewhere, needs good public transport links. End of.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Doesn't anybody get that this is to be the NATIONAL Hospital for Children. Only 25% of people live in the City of Dublin, and of them, how many are on the immediate transport links to the Mater?

    When children have to go to the likes of Crumlin, Temple Street or Tallagh, they are not just visiting the dentist. They are often going in for serious operations or procedures that mean they are going to be in for days if not weeks.

    You can't just drop them off the the bus/metro/luas and head home. It's fine if you live within 20 minutes of the hospital in Dublin, but for all other parts of the country, you will be moving your entire family to Dublin for a prolonged stay. I don't see people using the Luas/Metro/Bus as a realistic method of taking everything you need for a family with you.

    In addition to the immediate family, visitors are also coming from all over Ireland. Again, the fact that the site will be on the route of a planned (but unfortunately likely to be long fingered) metro line is lovely, but doesn't cater for the majority of people coming via car (80% from Crumlin statistics).
    The mater is about the same distance from the m50 as Crumlin. Something which was ignored the first time I posted this.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,069 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Doesn't anybody get that this is to be the NATIONAL Hospital for Children. Only 25% of people live in the City of Dublin, and of them, how many are on the immediate transport links to the Mater?

    Actually, going by the last Census figures, Co Dublin has around 28% of the population and the Greater Dublin Area has 39.2%.

    After the last Census in 2006, the CSO reported that "All other regions lost population share over the 45-year period [up to 2006]." Downturn or no down turn this is suspected to remain the same -- I'd be surprised if the Census next year does not show the Greater Dublin Area peeking above.

    When children have to go to the likes of Crumlin, Temple Street or Tallagh, they are not just visiting the dentist. They are often going in for serious operations or procedures that mean they are going to be in for days if not weeks.

    And many are also just going in for a day.
    You can't just drop them off the the bus/metro/luas and head home. It's fine if you live within 20 minutes of the hospital in Dublin, but for all other parts of the country, you will be moving your entire family to Dublin for a prolonged stay. I don't see people using the Luas/Metro/Bus as a realistic method of taking everything you need for a family with you.

    No, not everybody can just head home -- that's a given no matter where its built. And nobody here is saying public transport suits very sick children -- it's not even suitable for some mildly sick children. Cars are not even suitable for all cases -- there's no one size fits all.

    But parents and other visitors do have to visit, get to other accommodation, get to friends house, get from work to the hospital, get back home, get to train stations, motorways etc.

    Not everybody will have whole families with them and, as I said, many are also just going in for a day or two.

    In addition to the immediate family, visitors are also coming from all over Ireland. Again, the fact that the site will be on the route of a planned (but unfortunately likely to be long fingered) metro line is lovely, but doesn't cater for the majority of people coming via car (80% from Crumlin statistics).

    Again, does the 80% include taxies? I know we took the taxi any time using the train to get to Dublin going to hospital for my sister or my self.

    It'll also be 3km from the nearest motorway, the Port Tunnel, and about 4.5km from the M1 overground. Also from the non-motorway main roads it'll be around 1km from the Finglas Road (the open section of the N2), 2km from the Navan Road (N3), also 2km from the quays (N4).

    From Matter, some of the main trains stations in the country are also near by -- Connolly is 1.5km and Heuston is 3km.

    Traffic isn't that much of an issue and, in an emergency, bus lanes can be used -- even by private cars, no garda will ticket somebody with a sick child in the back of a car in an emergency. Generally traffic will become a big issue on a greenfield site if staff and visitors only have the realistic option of driving.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    I have plenty experience of having family in the mater and kids to temple street. Both getting in there in emergency, and longer stays or even visits. We have regular visits to temple street for an on going condition.

    I'm in Dublin and the location is a nightmare.

    Traffic is a nightmare. Theres no parking. You have to feed meters, if you have to get food out of regular hours theres nothing near it. I know the area pretty well, but even for me its a nightmare due to all the no left/right turns at so many junctions. PITA. Even if you overlook the immediate area itself, you have to pass through a lot of other traffic bottlenecks to get to it. If I used public transport it would make the round trip about 3 times longer than it takes in the car. Makes no sense to me. Not to mention that public transport is probably the least healthiest way to travel, even for healthy people. On a separate issue putting big hospitals together seems like a great way of spreading infections to me. Considering the Mater was one of the worst in my experience.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    BostonB wrote: »
    I have plenty experience of having family in the mater and kids to temple street. Both getting in there in emergency, and longer stays or even visits. We have regular visits to temple street for an on going condition.

    I'm in Dublin and the location is a nightmare.

    Traffic is a nightmare.

    Traffic is a nightmare 24/7? Please I live in the surrounding area and you'll get from the M50 to the cemetery in 5 to 10 minutes with a futher 5 to 10 on to the mater.
    theres no parking. You have to feed meters,
    There will be a massive underground
    if you have to get food out of regular hours theres nothing near it.
    How out of hours? I can think of several pubs and restaurants near by and if push cam to shove a 24 hours tesco
    I know the area pretty well, but even for me its a nightmare due to all the no left/right turns at so many junctions. PITA. Even if you overlook the immediate area itself, you have to pass through a lot of other traffic bottlenecks to get to it.

    Simply untrue. The traffic in that area generally keeps moving and there are several option to get there
    If I used public transport it would make the round trip about 3 times longer than it takes in the car. Makes no sense to me. Not to mention that public transport is probably the least healthiest way to travel, even for healthy people.

    Even currently it all depends where your coming from and with MN it will be massively improved
    On a separate issue putting big hospitals together seems like a great way of spreading infections to me. Considering the Mater was one of the worst in my experience.

    By that logic the best way to stop spreading infections would be to have no hospitals at all .


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    ...
    Simply untrue. The traffic in that area generally keeps moving and there are several option to get there


    Even currently it all depends where your coming from and with MN it will be massively improved

    Must have imagined the 40 mins it took me to move a mile to reach Dorset st the other evening. Had to abandon the car, and walk to the appointment. Afterwards it took another 30 mins just to get to Glasnevin. That area is almost every traffic report.

    Usually people can't choose the time and direction they come from. Kids not being very organised when they get sick or hurt.
    By that logic the best way to stop spreading infections would be to have no hospitals at all .

    The Mater had one of the worst records for MRSA. It also came 31 out of 47 in cleanliness survey, while temple street came 7th. In a MRSA survey Mater came 42 out of 47. Thats pretty much my experience of the place. So excuse me if I'm not in a rush to share that expertise.

    So they'll have a car park. Eye waveringly expensive compared to something outside of town, no doubt too. Great.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    So they'll have a car park. Eye waveringly expensive compared to something outside of town, no doubt too. Great.

    Free for long term patients I do believe and unlike a green field site there will also be several other options be it on street free, on street paid, or multi-storey. In fact with the competition in the area the car park should be reasonable unlike something outside of town where they can charge what they like as they people have no options .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB




  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭ForiegnNational


    monument wrote: »
    going by the last Census figures, Co Dublin has around 28% of the population and the Greater Dublin Area has 39.2%.

    So basically your saying that as circa 30% of people live there, you need to put the new NATIONAL hospital in a site that has no green space, no parking, no family accommodation, is not geographically central to the country, etc, but it's fine as it is in Bertie's constituency, and we all know he will make as fantastic a President as he did a Taoiseach?

    Oh, did you also forget that it provides acute services to Northern Ireland, which has a population of 1,759,000, so actually, given Greater Dublin is 1,661,185 people, from a total of (1,759,000 + 4,470,700), or 27%? So in fact less than 1 in 3...

    I agree however that any site does need public transport links for staff and the 20% of visitors who travel by it. But why MUST it be convenient only to Dubliners?

    Just like the motorways, must all paths always lead to Rome Dublin?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    BostonB wrote: »
    Thus back to my main point . At the mater site you'll have lots more parking options than a green field site in the middle of no where


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    The car park will be expensive to build because the land is so expensive. Once built there'll be no room to expand it, if its not big enough. It will be expensive to park in, to keep commuters out, and competition has no difference to this anywhere else. People have to drive into or across the city center to get to it.

    None of those problems exist on a greenfield site. Considering the countries broke and the HSE is a money pit. There is no good reason to choose the most expensive expensive, and least popular location. The only people who are for this location are the HSE and politicans. The medical experts don't want it, the patients don't want it, and the public don't want to pay for it.

    Its interesting that as part of the funding they reckon they'll get €90m from car parking. anyone want to take bets the cost will rise, as will the take needed from the car parking.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,553 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    BostonB wrote: »
    The car park will be expensive to build because the land is so expensive. Once built there'll be no room to expand it, if its not big enough.

    Actually, the site at the Mater was donated to the state so it is free, regardless of what is paid for a greenfield site it will be the more expensive option.
    BostonB wrote: »
    It will be expensive to park in, to keep commuters out, and competition has no difference to this anywhere else. People have to drive into or across the city center to get to it.

    Parking will be free for long term patients, this has already been covered. A ticket validation system would keep commuters out.
    BostonB wrote: »
    None of those problems exist on a greenfield site.

    Plenty of other problems do exist with a greenfield site (not co-located with another hospital, contributing to the urban sprawl that is holding back the city, lack of public transport, extra costs associated with buying the site.
    BostonB wrote: »
    Considering the countries broke and the HSE is a money pit. There is no good reason to choose the most expensive expensive, and least popular location.

    I would like to see the detailed costings you have that shows the Mater site to be the most expensive location.
    BostonB wrote: »
    Its interesting that as part of the funding they reckon they'll get €90m from car parking. anyone want to take bets the cost will rise, as will the take needed from the car parking.

    Im sure income from car parking would be part of the funding model for the hospital where ever it is located.

    Like I said in the second post on this thread, the last paragraph of the article in the OP says it all; there is no perfect location, there are pros and cons associated with all possible locations, however, the Mater site is the only one with a chance of progressing. If we have to start again and go through site selection, purchasing, planning permission and construction then the hospital will not be built this decade. Just build it on the site we have, giving sick children the facilities they need and in the process saving money compared to the cost of operating three childrens hospitals.

    And the final paragraph of the article makes another good point; if this project is stopped, the HSE will be blaimed for the poor facilities for sick children, not the people who are trying to prevent them from providing good facilities. Once again we will be our own worst enemy but will find someone else to blaim.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Actually, the site at the Mater was donated to the state so it is free, regardless of what is paid for a greenfield site it will be the more expensive option.

    The site is worth 95m approx. That would be better sold off and spent on the mater than giving it away. But of course, by giving it away they attract more funding to themselves, if they tie up with a NCH. Not that they could sell it now, or that its worth that money anymore. Building a multistory has to be more expensive than a big flat car park. Theres hardly any building in the later. Considering the country is broke, why spend more money when you don't have to. And can't afford to.
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Parking will be free for long term patients, this has already been covered. A ticket validation system would keep commuters out.

    It might be free for long term patients but I'm sure the bulk of people using the hospital will not be long term.
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Plenty of other problems do exist with a greenfield site (not co-located with another hospital, contributing to the urban sprawl that is holding back the city, lack of public transport, extra costs associated with buying the site.

    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    I would like to see the detailed costings you have that shows the Mater site to be the most expensive location. ....Actually, the site at the Mater was donated to the state so it is free, regardless of what is paid for a greenfield site it will be the more expensive option.

    The site is worth 95m approx. That would be better sold off and spent on the mater than giving it away. But of course, by giving it away they attract more funding to themselves, if they tie up with a NCH. Not that they could sell it now, or that its worth that money anymore. Building a multistory has to be more expensive than a big flat car park. Theres hardly any building in the later. Considering the country is broke, why spend more money when you don't have to. Look at the design of hospital, its screams expense. Its all curved. You couldn't design it more expensive to build.
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Parking will be free for long term patients, this has already been covered. A ticket validation system would keep commuters out.

    It might be free for long term patients but I'm sure the bulk of people using the hospital will not be long term, and they will pay, because where else will the income from the car park come from? Tourists?
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Plenty of other problems do exist with a greenfield site (not co-located with another hospital, contributing to the urban sprawl that is holding back the city, lack of public transport, extra costs associated with buying the site.

    85% of people will be in car. Yet the priority is public transport? Better again public transport that doesn't exist yet. The logic of collocation is that you have the back up of other specialists. Problem with that is that not all specialists are in the Mater. So it doesn't even achieve that. Better still it plans to squeeze existing services in other hospital into a site much smaller than they currently have, and claims to have plenty of expansion potential. A gallon into a pint pot would be easier.
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Im sure income from car parking would be part of the funding model for the hospital where ever it is located.

    Indeed, but it will be more expensive in a city location.
    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Like I said in the second post on this thread, the last paragraph of the article in the OP says it all; there is no perfect location, there are pros and cons associated with all possible locations, however, the Mater site is the only one with a chance of progressing. If we have to start again and go through site selection, purchasing, planning permission and construction then the hospital will not be built this decade. Just build it on the site we have, giving sick children the facilities they need and in the process saving money compared to the cost of operating three childrens hospitals.

    And the final paragraph of the article makes another good point; if this project is stopped, the HSE will be blaimed for the poor facilities for sick children, not the people who are trying to prevent them from providing good facilities. Once again we will be our own worst enemy but will find someone else to blaim.

    So lets trust the govt and HSE to deliver value for money and good service and save money. Well thats worked will so far hasn't it.

    The process that decided this was flawed beyond belief. But if we question it, we're at fault for the project failing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 776 ✭✭✭dRNk SAnTA


    Honestly! Giving out that the Mater lacks enough near-by hotels and 24 hour food options?

    So where is the m50 green-field site that has more of these than Dublin city centre?

    The hospital has to have top quality public transport links, not everybody has a car!

    All that matters is quality of care for the children, all these other issues are so ridiculously minor in comparison. It would be nice if the quality healthcare was debated as much as car parking spaces!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Actually, the site at the Mater was donated to the state so it is free, regardless of what is paid for a greenfield site it will be the more expensive option.
    That's bollocks. Construction costs+economic cost of disruption to the surrounding area is the main cost in any proposed site. Do you have detailed costings that show building on (any) greenfield site is going to cost more? If you wanted to go that route, Crumlin have had a plan to build the new NCH on their site for years, which would surely cost even less than the Mater.


    Parking will be free for long term patients, this has already been covered. A ticket validation system would keep commuters out.
    Majority of patients aren't long term, I know that from working in a Childrens Hospital for 4 years.


    Plenty of other problems do exist with a greenfield site (not co-located with another hospital, contributing to the urban sprawl that is holding back the city, lack of public transport, extra costs associated with buying the site.
    Why did you parrot the whole co-location thing again? International and Irish experts have already come out in droves to say co-location with an adult hospital will offer no real tangible benefit. Plenty of potential greenfield sites also offer the same(or better!) public transport than Mater, without having to wait for the white elephant that is Metro North.
    And you're forgetting that
    a)CoCo already have land in Tallaght that costs nothing
    b)Connolly has large grounds that don't need to be purchased.

    So basically your whole argument is unfounded rubbish? Yes.


    I would like to see the detailed costings you have that shows the Mater site to be the most expensive location.
    Have you actually looked at the architectural plans? The sheer amount of work in shoehorning a hospital on to a site that small and tying it in with a current hospital is mad. And building a giant underground car park - again, huge costs.
    I can't imagine how any other plausible option could possibly be expensive, I really can't.




    Like I said in the second post on this thread, the last paragraph of the article in the OP says it all; there is no perfect location, there are pros and cons associated with all possible locations, however, the Mater site is the only one with a chance of progressing. If we have to start again and go through site selection, purchasing, planning permission and construction then the hospital will not be built this decade. Just build it on the site we have, giving sick children the facilities they need and in the process saving money compared to the cost of operating three childrens hospitals.
    It isn't going to be giving the sick children the facilities they need. There's a very good chance they'll be giving them even less, without the possibility of ever, EVER expanding.
    What has history taught us with Dublin Hospitals? They always need room to expand.
    And the final paragraph of the article makes another good point; if this project is stopped, the HSE will be blaimed for the poor facilities for sick children, not the people who are trying to prevent them from providing good facilities. Once again we will be our own worst enemy but will find someone else to blaim.
    When I have children in 10 or 20 years, they'll be paying for this absolutely retarded choice we're making now based on vested interests. I don't care if we have to wait 4 extra years, children(and parents) will be paying for the Mater mistake for generations if it goes ahead.

    And the HSE should be blamed, there's plenty of evidence that they fudged reports, cherry picked quotes and statistics to make the Mater the 'best' choice while ignoring any evidence to the contrary.
    It is their fault that people are starting to realise that the Mater isn't the answer to the NCH, and it's their fault if it gets cancelled because they made the wrong decisions and choices.


Advertisement