Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

Fruits of the Celtic Tiger

  • 15-08-2011 4:35pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 2,332 ✭✭✭ AngryLips


    With the economic boom well and truly over I thought it might be a nice exercise to take a look back for a change instead of looking forward and reflect on some of the achievements of the good times for transport and infrastructure in this country. So I'll start the ball rolling by listing some of what we have to show from that period:
    - Luas
    - Dublin Port Tunnel
    - Dublin Airport T2
    - M50
    - National motorway network
    - New Cork Airport
    - WRC (Limerick-Galway)
    - One of the youngest railway rolling stock in Europe.
    - Limerick Tunnel
    - Restoration of the Shannon-Erne waterway

    Please add to this if anyone notices anything I've missed. Personally, and despite all the controversy, I think T2 has to be my favourite development. Along with all the ancillary works, Dublin Airport finally feels like the gateway to the nation it's meant to be and is both a great first impression and a fantastic reflection of a modern city.


«1

Comments

  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 20,995 Mod ✭✭✭✭ bk


    Unfortunately to me, this is a list of failures in vision, future planning, wasted money and pump parish politics of the Celtic Tiger years:

    - Luas

    * Two Luas lines should have been connected from the start.
    * Already at capacity when they were opened.
    * Extensions to ghost towns.

    - DublinPort Tunnel

    Fair enough, no complaints.

    - DublinAirport T2

    While it is very nice, given that anytime I've gone through it, it is almost completely empty!! I wonder if a cheaper solution could have been found.
    But I'll admit it could be good planning for the future.

    - M50

    Should have been done right from the start.

    - National motorway network

    * Way over engineered for what we currently need.
    * All of the Motorways should be tolled.
    * Took too much emphasis. All the emphasis seemed to be on building the motorway network for political reasons over rail projects in Dublin. Their should have been more balance between road building and rail building.

    - New CorkAirport
    - WRC (Limerick-Galway)

    LOL, you have to be kidding, that white elephant should never have been built.

    - One of the youngest railway rolling stock in Europe.

    You mean wasting money on new carriages and cutting up perfectly serviceable older carriages which had many years of use in them and ironically have a much more comfortable ride then the new trains.

    All the while the new "trains" are no faster then the old trains, genius!!

    - Limerick Tunnel

    Could a cheaper bridge have been built instead to Limerick port?

    - Restoration of the Shannon-Erne waterway


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Zebra3


    "Fruits" wouldn't been the word I'd have picked.

    Not too far off though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 292 ✭✭ teol


    Bremore Port is a missed opportunity. The Dublin docks already has great railway infrastructure (Alexandra Road Tramway) and moving port operations to Bremore would have allowed great development potentials.


  • Registered Users Posts: 852 blackdog2


    The problem with T2 is that it makes T1 look like the sh1thole it is, and it is t1 that the majority of passengers use...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,235 ✭✭✭ D.L.R.


    bk wrote: »
    Unfortunately to me, this is a list of failures in vision, future planning, wasted money and pump parish politics of the Celtic Tiger years:

    - Luas

    * Two Luas lines should have been connected from the start.
    * Already at capacity when they were opened.
    * Extensions to ghost towns.

    - DublinPort Tunnel

    Fair enough, no complaints.

    - DublinAirport T2

    While it is very nice, given that anytime I've gone through it, it is almost completely empty!! I wonder if a cheaper solution could have been found.
    But I'll admit it could be good planning for the future.

    - M50

    Should have been done right from the start.

    - National motorway network

    * Way over engineered for what we currently need.
    * All of the Motorways should be tolled.
    * Took too much emphasis. All the emphasis seemed to be on building the motorway network for political reasons over rail projects in Dublin. Their should have been more balance between road building and rail building.

    - New CorkAirport
    - WRC (Limerick-Galway)

    LOL, you have to be kidding, that white elephant should never have been built.

    - One of the youngest railway rolling stock in Europe.

    You mean wasting money on new carriages and cutting up perfectly serviceable older carriages which had many years of use in them and ironically have a much more comfortable ride then the new trains.

    All the while the new "trains" are no faster then the old trains, genius!!

    - Limerick Tunnel

    Could a cheaper bridge have been built instead to Limerick port?

    - Restoration of the Shannon-Erne waterway

    All of this. Proof positive that FFers and FF softies cannot be trusted with the running of a modern state, in any serious sense.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,047 ✭✭✭ AugustusMinimus


    bk wrote: »

    * All of the Motorways should be tolled.

    On what basis ?

    The whole point of motorways is to try to take traffic off of poorer roads and put it on motorways.

    Toll them and people will simply avoid them. Fermoy might as well not have a bypass at all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,278 ✭✭✭ dowlingm


    There were two viable options and the government bottled both:

    1. Boot the Air Corps out of Baldonnel and send them to Shannon. Throw up an aluminium shed and tell Mick O'Leary to f*** off over there if he thinks a shed is a proper gateway to Ireland. Basically only airlines committed to allowing through connections should have been allowed stay in Dublin Airport. The existing DUB terminal could be refitted over time but the pressure of the low costs would be handled by Dublin South. Shannon would have benefited from the additional traffic plus the additional security from the military presence would have helped with the whole "helping the warmongers - break their stuff" thing.

    2. Tell the PDs to STFU about "inter terminal competition" and build a single new terminal to replace the old Terminal 1 just as Toronto Pearson Terminal 1 replaced the old T1 & T2. The modular design there allows both gates, concourses and car parks to be replaced in a logical fashion up to a design max of 30-35m (airport max 50-55m including expansions to Terminal 3), and it has a people mover to the remote car park which can also be upgraded to a longer, higher capacity one when demand requires.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 61,064 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    blackdog2 wrote: »
    The problem with T2 is that it makes T1 look like the sh1thole it is, and it is t1 that the majority of passengers use...

    They're doing work on T1 to sort it out. Not that I use it very often since T2 opened *polishes Aer Lingus GC card :P* so I dunno how much they've done but I have to on Wednesday (EI Regional flight) so I'll see then.

    Believe they've got a new security area in already, Pier D is tolerable except being bloody miles away; and the airside shopping/food area is grand; so its really just the two old piers and some landside stuff needing doing.

    Pier A does not meet any modern security requirements (incoming and outgoing passengers meeting airside without gate security like Amsterdam has) and from memory B is just a bit run down.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 DWCommuter


    Motorways = needed.

    Luas = unconnected and a fine indicator of how MN is where its at now.

    WRC = waste of time.

    Youngest railway stock in Europe = no big deal.The network is tiny anyway and this is merely a Barry Kenny bull****ophobia pastime. As mentioned already speeds have not increased, only the comfort around your perception.

    Dublin Port Tunnel = Big idea based on massive economic growth, that neglected using the expenditure to alleviate road traffic in the city. UNDERUSED!

    M50 = All that is wrong in Ireland.

    You left out the rail lines to Midleton and Pace. Both should have been back burned along with the WRC to front load funding for actually building DU.

    The Celtic Tiger legacy is riddled with local politics and absolutely no grand plan to implement anything in an effective manner.

    We got stuff, but in the broader picture we got very little.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,738 ✭✭✭✭ corktina


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    "Fruits" wouldn't been the word I'd have picked.

    Not too far off though.

    no fruits is a good word...




    of course some of them are Lemons though


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 624 Aidan1


    - M50

    Should have been done right from the start.

    - National motorway network

    * Way over engineered for what we currently need.

    I love this.

    The M50 was designed and built as a two lane, non grade separated road because the economic and population projections at the time were for a small and contracting economy. In other words, going by the demographic projections in the 1980s, it was future proofed (the toll bridge was widely regarded as a white elephant when it opened; the media were openly wondering when the owners were going to fold.

    On the other hand, much of the Motorway Network was built on a 30 year basis - as in it will meet all likely requirements for 30 years, at minimal additional cost over and above roads of a lesser standard (2+2 etc).

    So, to be clear, you are suggesting that the M50 should have been built to a standard higher than it was, in case economic and population growth was far higher than expected, but that the Motorways should have been built to a lower standard, in case economic and population growth is lower than expected?

    Difficult to keep some people happy, isn't it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,889 ✭✭✭✭ murphaph


    DWCommuter wrote: »
    You left out the rail lines to Midleton and Pace. Both should have been back burned along with the WRC to front load funding for actually building DU.
    I agree with your entire post except the bit about Midleton. Cork City and County have at least tried to get their acts together in some sort of cohesive plan (CASP). They shame the 4 Dublin authorities and shame even more the likes of Waterford/Kilkenny and Limerick/Limerick/Clare.

    Midleton had to wait long enough to get a rail line back and it was a fairly strightforward build. I think it was correct. Cork (along with Dublin) should have seen MUCH more from the Celtic Tiger. Cork should have seen light rail introduced and Dublin should have seen DU and MN built together with an integrated Luas.

    It's all very depressing really. I maintain that it is largely the fault of the Irish people however. They don't vote for politicians promising large scale infrastructure for our important cities. Compare to the current state elections in Berlin where a hot topic is "who is going to sort out the problems with the S Bahn?". There are full size bill boards from political parties addressing the issue. Would never happen in Ireland because it's not a vote winner. The people are largely ignorant of how good quality PUBLIC transport can actually improve their lives.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 DWCommuter


    Aidan1 wrote: »
    I love this.

    The M50 was designed and built as a two lane, non grade separated road because the economic and population projections at the time were for a small and contracting economy. In other words, going by the demographic projections in the 1980s, it was future proofed (the toll bridge was widely regarded as a white elephant when it opened; the media were openly wondering when the owners were going to fold.

    On the other hand, much of the Motorway Network was built on a 30 year basis - as in it will meet all likely requirements for 30 years, at minimal additional cost over and above roads of a lesser standard (2+2 etc).

    So, to be clear, you are suggesting that the M50 should have been built to a standard higher than it was, in case economic and population growth was far higher than expected, but that the Motorways should have been built to a lower standard, in case economic and population growth is lower than expected?

    Difficult to keep some people happy, isn't it.

    With respect Aidan1, the M50 debacle is far from straight forward and no doubt you know that. When first mooted, its route was predominantly countryside. When built, it only spent a very short time as a white elephant as development had already sprung up around the first section. Lights were quickly installed at the Red Cow when it became clear the design couldn't even handle traffic levels at early 90s levels. There were also tailbacks at the toll bridge as early as 1992. While 6 lanes may not have been needed at that stage, it was obvious to users that it was not designed as an urban motorway even though the first section ran through built up areas. I don't believe it was future proofed because it had difficulty before there was any substantial increase in car ownership or employment. In fact this was long before the Celtic Tiger was even a possibility.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 DWCommuter


    murphaph wrote: »
    I agree with your entire post except the bit about Midleton. Cork City and County have at least tried to get their acts together in some sort of cohesive plan (CASP). They shame the 4 Dublin authorities and shame even more the likes of Waterford/Kilkenny and Limerick/Limerick/Clare.

    Midleton had to wait long enough to get a rail line back and it was a fairly strightforward build. I think it was correct. Cork (along with Dublin) should have seen MUCH more from the Celtic Tiger. Cork should have seen light rail introduced and Dublin should have seen DU and MN built together with an integrated Luas.

    It's all very depressing really. I maintain that it is largely the fault of the Irish people however. They don't vote for politicians promising large scale infrastructure for our important cities. Compare to the current state elections in Berlin where a hot topic is "who is going to sort out the problems with the S Bahn?". There are full size bill boards from political parties addressing the issue. Would never happen in Ireland because it's not a vote winner. The people are largely ignorant of how good quality PUBLIC transport can actually improve their lives.

    I agree Cork did their bit and in how things panned out they got what they deserved. However, I'm looking at a bigger picture of priorities and I believe that we needed a clear and coherent plan. Urgent projects first and foremost and above all others. I'd much rather be sitting typing this with DU and MN either built or underway, while we lament the recession putting Pace and Midleton on hold while WOT continue to wave their arms in disgust.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,017 invinciblePRSTV


    DWCommuter wrote: »
    I agree Cork did their bit and in how things panned out they got what they deserved. However, I'm looking at a bigger picture of priorities and I believe that we needed a clear and coherent plan. Urgent projects first and foremost and above all others. I'd much rather be sitting typing this with DU and MN either built or underway, while we lament the recession putting Pace and Midleton on hold while WOT continue to wave their arms in disgust.

    Don't bother saying Midleton should have been scrapped to progress the MN & DU projects when it, beyond pretty much any other road or rail project in the state, was a project based on sound planning and projected to pay for itself in a reasonable period of time.

    You want to shift your gaze to the vanity projects which ate up the lions share of the funding, by that I mean the over bloated Motorways programmes. It's your M9s, M11s, N2s, M4s & your M3s which sucked up the resources away from the MN & DU. If the population hadn't engaged in endemic property speculation then perhaps people would have been less supportive of building a radial Motorway network to service Dublin's massive hinterland and more focused on providing decent rail connections within the Dublin urban area.

    Leave Midleton alone!


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,889 ✭✭✭✭ murphaph


    DWCommuter wrote: »
    I agree Cork did their bit and in how things panned out they got what they deserved. However, I'm looking at a bigger picture of priorities and I believe that we needed a clear and coherent plan. Urgent projects first and foremost and above all others. I'd much rather be sitting typing this with DU and MN either built or underway, while we lament the recession putting Pace and Midleton on hold while WOT continue to wave their arms in disgust.
    I think Cork and Dublin could and should have gotten what they need. The priorities all along were not WRC or Pace etc. rather the winning of as many elections by FF as possible before it all collapsed. To this end they massively expanded the public sector and social welfare payments hugely outstripped increases in inflation. They bought elections with current spending, neglecting capital investment and left us with far too little infrastructure. :(


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,491 Yahew


    Just an incessant whine this thread - The boom didnt give us good infrastructure except where they gave us too damn much - i.e. motorways.

    And a fair bit Dublinocentric. Private capital follows Public capital, after all, so whining about how motorways in the Wesht are serving low volume, low populated regions is to miss the point.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭ opinion guy


    MYOB wrote: »
    They're doing work on T1 to sort it out. Not that I use it very often since T2 opened *polishes Aer Lingus GC card :P* so I dunno how much they've done but I have to on Wednesday (EI Regional flight) so I'll see then.

    Believe they've got a new security area in already, Pier D is tolerable except being bloody miles away; and the airside shopping/food area is grand; so its really just the two old piers and some landside stuff needing doing.

    Pier A does not meet any modern security requirements (incoming and outgoing passengers meeting airside without gate security like Amsterdam has) and from memory B is just a bit run down.


    Personally I prefer T1 - better food options, better shops and its quicker to get thru


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,491 Yahew


    T1 isnt what it was. 6Am used to be a zoo. Now, fairly quiet and the new security system is way better.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 61,064 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    Personally I prefer T1 - better food options, better shops and its quicker to get thru

    I agree on the food and shops but not the time through. Particularly inbound, you can be in the short term parking structure in about 8 minutes after the doors open if you're travelling with hand baggage towards the front of the plane.

    Time to gate is lower to A and B in T1 than E in T2 but the majority of T1 traffic uses D...

    T2's airside food court has some massive voids clearly waiting on someone else to come in. Doubt that's going to happen until there's another all-day airline in it, as its only properly busy for the morning trans-atlantic rush.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,809 ✭✭✭✭ LXFlyer


    MYOB wrote: »
    They're doing work on T1 to sort it out. Not that I use it very often since T2 opened *polishes Aer Lingus GC card :P* so I dunno how much they've done but I have to on Wednesday (EI Regional flight) so I'll see then.

    Believe they've got a new security area in already, Pier D is tolerable except being bloody miles away; and the airside shopping/food area is grand; so its really just the two old piers and some landside stuff needing doing.

    Pier A does not meet any modern security requirements (incoming and outgoing passengers meeting airside without gate security like Amsterdam has) and from memory B is just a bit run down.

    The advent of T2 has made moving through T1 a much more pleasant experience - the days of massive queues have diminished.

    Incidentally the Pier A situation is not as uncommon as you seem to think.

    Both Copenhagen airport and also the new terminal at Barcelona airport allow arriving and departing passengers to mix airside.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭ opinion guy


    lxflyer wrote: »
    The advent of T2 has made moving through T1 a much more pleasant experience - the days of massive queues have diminished.

    Incidentally the Pier A situation is not as uncommon as you seem to think.

    Both Copenhagen airport and also the new terminal at Barcelona airport allow arriving and departing passengers to mix airside.

    Most US airports allow that too


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,235 ✭✭✭ D.L.R.


    Yahew wrote: »
    Just an incessant whine this thread - The boom didnt give us good infrastructure except where they gave us too damn much - i.e. motorways.

    Right, in other words it was unbalanced/unprofessional/hamfisted way to allocate national resources and energies.
    Yahew wrote: »
    And a fair bit Dublinocentric.

    Just like the population of Ireland! :pac:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 624 Aidan1


    When first mooted, its route was predominantly countryside. When built, it only spent a very short time as a white elephant as development had already sprung up around the first section.

    True, and there was a fairly profound lag between the time it was planned (mid 1980s) and the time it was built. When it was planned, it was expected that any economic growth would be weak, but even by 1995 those projections were obsolete - it was 'future proof' in the context of a 1985 basket case economy, not an early Celtic Tiger economy. And on top of that, no account was taken of the propensity of politicians (local and national) to zone land, which in the case of the M50 meant that it quickly became the focus of development in the GDA (the new 'main street').

    As to Midleton, it was a cheap project through a heavily populated area, that was relatively well planned and was subject to a series of strategic land use and transport planning initiatives (including SLAPs(!) for Midleton and Carrigtwohill after the thing was built. It was one of the very good projects built in the period - the only pity was that it was effectively sanctioned in 2001, but it took 4-5 more years for work to actually commence.

    There are other projects out there that are far more worthy of scorn, like the WRC, M3, M9 (kinda) or several 'local' road schemes in the Midlands and Kerry.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,491 Yahew


    D.L.R. wrote: »
    Right, in other words it was unbalanced/unprofessional/hamfisted way to allocate national resources and energies.

    Naw, the motorways are well over-due. I bet if they were of less capacity that would be an occasion for a whine too.
    Just like the population of Ireland! :pac:

    As I said, private capital follows public capital, and labour follows capital.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,332 ✭✭✭ AngryLips


    Yahew wrote: »
    Just an incessant whine this thread.

    I had started this thread thinking it would be a good opportunity to reflect on some of the successes. It seems even when a project produces a positive outcome (M50 for example) we'd rather dwell on the challenges and wrong-turns in between that led to that outcome.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,017 invinciblePRSTV


    Yahew wrote: »
    Naw, the motorways are well over-due. I bet if they were of less capacity that would be an occasion for a whine too.

    The motorway programme was overkill. a small nation doesn't need multiple duplicated blue lines criss-crossing rural Ireland, complete with tiny AADTs, when some smart rational thinking would have built a network more appropriate for the countries needs.
    Yahew wrote: »
    As I said, private capital follows public capital, and labour follows capital.

    In otherwords 'build it and they will come', the motto which underpins pretty much every white elephant project.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 61,064 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Both Copenhagen airport and also the new terminal at Barcelona airport allow arriving and departing passengers to mix airside.

    Do they not have at-gate security though? Not used either of them myself.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭ opinion guy


    Ok whilst I think the celtic tiger left us with some great improvements - road infrstructure being the most obvious, I think ALL of this has been overshadowed by the unplanned, chaotic, dysfunctional, inefficient, decrepit, hamstrung health care system that is hitting our headlines on an almost daily basis.

    There is no excuse for this imho.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,809 ✭✭✭✭ LXFlyer


    MYOB wrote: »
    Do they not have at-gate security though? Not used either of them myself.

    No it's normal security before you enter the airside area - arriving and departing passengers mix freely post security.


Advertisement