Advertisement
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

Dart Underground Online Petition, Sign Now!

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    The Government are about to cancel DART Underground despite having already spent €50 million euro on the project.

    before I sign can you give a precise costing of the scheme and the actual return on investment?
    as opposed to vague waffle about being an essential piece of infrastructure.

    thanks


  • Registered Users Posts: 961 aliveandkicking


    bluesteel wrote: »
    before I sign can you give a precise costing of the scheme and the actual return on investment?
    as opposed to vague waffle about being an essential piece of infrastructure.

    thanks

    http://nationaltransport.ie/downloads/dart_underground_business_case.pdf


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 100 ✭✭✭ Lenton Lane


    bluesteel wrote: »
    before I sign can you give a precise costing of the scheme and the actual return on investment?
    as opposed to vague waffle about being an essential piece of infrastructure.

    thanks

    Why would you sign if you have clearly not listened to or understood the message that even the Minister himself has given about Dart Underground being the most important piece of infrastructure to be constructed in the State? Maybe the car dependent culture in Dublin isn't a cause of concern to you, or perhaps you're thinking its great that them Jackeens aren't getting all them nice things?

    I don't know to be honest but if you have no intention of signing or are generally dismissive of the need to move Dublin away from its dependency on the private car then do us all a favour and move on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭ hardy_buck


    I think someone should post this to reddit.com/r/Ireland

    There was a thread there yesterday about DU and the majority of up-voted comments were in favour of the underground.

    As the later poster said, we need to spell out the benefits, it's not the infrastructure forum posters were appealing to anymore, its the public who have no background in infrastructure and have only had the uninformed drivel of newspaper opinion pieces to go by.
    A concise list of costs, benefits and what experts in their fields have supported it etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 100 ✭✭✭ Lenton Lane


    hardy_buck wrote: »
    I think someone should post this to reddit.com/r/Ireland

    There was a thread there yesterday about DU and the majority of up-voted comments were in favour of the underground.

    As the later poster said, we need to spell out the benefits, it's not the infrastructure forum posters were appealing to anymore, its the public who have no background in infrastructure and have only had the uninformed drivel of newspaper opinion pieces to go by.
    A concise list of costs, benefits and what experts in their fields have supported it etc.

    You're absolutely right - I'm away travelling this weekend but if no one else has done so I'll put a summary of the business case up. I just got annoyed by what came across to me as the somewhat condescending tone of the previous post.

    If people can see the business case and why the DU is so critical and game changing they will be more likely to put pressure on their TDs Senators etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel




    all I'm seeing is [text deleted]
    Major rail schemes are expensive. The costs of implementing the DART Underground programme are
    [text deleted] in current prices, or [text deleted] as a Present Value (PV). The capital costs cover:
     The stations;
     The tunnel; and
     The signalling, power, rolling stock and other equipment needed to run trains.
    In addition there will be the operating, maintenance and renewal costs associated with running the
    services and maintaining the infrastructure. Those equate to a PV of [text deleted] over a 60 year
    appraisal period, in 2009 prices. The costs are summarised in Table S 1. It is intended that the central
    tunnel element of DART Underground is procured through a PPP arrangement.


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    Why would you sign if you have clearly not listened to or understood the message that even the Minister himself has given about Dart Underground being the most important piece of infrastructure to be constructed in the State? Maybe the car dependent culture in Dublin isn't a cause of concern to you, or perhaps you're thinking its great that them Jackeens aren't getting all them nice things?

    I don't know to be honest but if you have no intention of signing or are generally dismissive of the need to move Dublin away from its dependency on the private car then do us all a favour and move on.

    really? that's your response.

    As a tax payer I'd be on the hook for it.

    No wonder Infrastructure in Ireland is pants when this is the waffly, inward looking circle-jerking response of Infrastructure enthusiasts.

    I'd love the Dart underground. I'd also like a pony. Before committing it a huge, technically complex piece of infrastructure I want to know the precise cost - or even a rough cost to within a few hundred million.

    The contrast with the UK and the robust debate over HS2 is stark - there it's about figures, rates of return. here it's grandiose statements about connecting Dublin.

    Can you give a figure of the number of people who will abandon their cars and jump on a train as a result of DU? Can you see why this figure is important?

    Can you give a target that would justify DU? Is everyone who lives in Maynooth, Lucan going to start going to the train and then getting the train into town? No

    Ireland cannot organise Bus Lanes down the bloody Quays, and yet we want to build a underground train system.

    P.s. I live in Dublin - West-ish, along the Liffey. this part of your response is particularly pathetic. "Move on" yourself
    I don't know to be honest but if you have no intention of signing or are generally dismissive of the need to move Dublin away from its dependency on the private car then do us all a favour and move on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 961 aliveandkicking


    bluesteel wrote: »
    all I'm seeing is [text deleted]

    Go to page 4. Read it from top to bottom. Even without the commercially sensitive figures the cost benefit ratio is there for all to see.


  • Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭ hardy_buck


    bluesteel wrote: »
    really? that's your response.

    As a tax payer I'd be on the hook for it.

    No wonder Infrastructure in Ireland is pants when this is the waffly, inward looking circle-jerking response of Infrastructure enthusiasts.

    I'd love the Dart underground. I'd also like a pony. Before committing it a huge, technically complex piece of infrastructure I want to know the precise cost - or even a rough cost to within a few hundred million.

    The contrast with the UK and the robust debate over HS2 is stark - there it's about figures, rates of return. here it's grandiose statements about connecting Dublin.

    Can you give a figure of the number of people who will abandon their cars and jump on a train as a result of DU? Can you see why this figure is important?

    Can you give a target that would justify DU? Is everyone who lives in Maynooth, Lucan going to start going to the train and then getting the train into town? No

    Ireland cannot organise Bus Lanes down the bloody Quays, and yet we want to build a underground train system.

    P.s. I live in Dublin - West-ish, along the Liffey. this part of your response is particularly pathetic. "Move on" yourself


    As a tax payer you will be on the hook for that airport luas which will end up costing more, be under spec'd, less used, and will more than likely block any future investment into transport for north Dublin.
    As a tax payer you're on the hook for over 20Bn in wellfare spending.
    As a tax payer you're on the hook for a huge percentage of the country on medical cards (circa 1,8M I've seen mentioned).

    These figures dwarf the cost of any infrastructure project who's effects on the economy are much, much greater than any of the above mentioned.

    As for your second point, this bullsh1t inferiority complex is half the reason why nothing gets done properly. We have the ability to commit to a sensible project that can change the face the face of irish transport and then we have some people who want to do this decades equivalent of not joining up the luas lines.


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    hardy_buck wrote: »

    As for your second point, this bullsh1t inferiority complex is half the reason why nothing gets done properly. We have the ability to commit to a sensible project that can change the face the face of irish transport and then we have some people who want to do this decades equivalent of not joining up the luas lines.

    Inferiority complex?

    I don't think you know what that means. It's called picking the low hanging fruit. Putting in a Bus Rapid Transit would show the public and the politicians they elect the benefits of proper public transport.

    I wouldn't trust Iarnrod Eireann to run a sweetshop. Sorting out the Bus Lanes on the quays should be simple. if you lads showed the same enthusiasm for sorting it out as you did for spending billions of taxpayer money it would be sorted.

    As for the Luas to the Airport. This weird "Dublin is the only city without an Airport rail link " is keeping up with the Jones - i.e. actual inferiority complex.

    Getting out to the Airport from Dublin CC by bus takes far less time than most Airport metros/rail links I've used and I'e used plenty. Go to most Airports and measure the percentage of passengers that use the rail link and you'll be disappointed.

    Being sceptical of an expensive grandiose project when cheaper alternatives have not been exhausted is not having inferiority complex. it's common sense. Not the kind of voodoo economics that sank this country


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,781 ✭✭✭ Carawaystick


    bluesteel wrote: »

    The contrast with the UK and the robust debate over HS2 is stark - there it's about figures, rates of return.

    Did you miss the benefit/cost ratio of 2.4 rising to 4.0 if the wider economic benefits are included?


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    Did you miss the benefit/cost ratio of 2.4 rising to 4.0 if the wider economic benefits are included?

    I tend not to give much credence when they are picked out of an Iarnrod Eireann consultant's "David Drumm"

    Give me the passenger figures and the switcher figures (on which the benefit figures are presumably predicated). That's not asking too much is it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,884 ✭✭✭✭ murphaph


    Did you miss the benefit/cost ratio of 2.4 rising to 4.0 if the wider economic benefits are included?
    He doesn't care about all those inconvenient details.

    DU alone will have a massive benefit, but DU enables so much more. You don't even need vision to see it as Munich built its DU 40 years ago and the benefits are plain to see. It has become the trunk route through the city that everything connects to.

    By the way, DU is not about a rail link to the airport, though it would greatly facilitate one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    murphaph wrote: »
    He doesn't care about all those inconvenient details.

    DU alone will have a massive benefit, but DU enables so much more. You don't even need vision to see it as Munich built its DU 40 years ago and the benefits are plain to see. It has become the trunk route through the city that everything connects to.

    By the way, DU is not about a rail link to the airport, though it would greatly facilitate one.

    Inconvenient details?
    like [text deleted]. or maybe [text deleted]?
    How about this detail: The number of passengers needed to use it.

    You are trusting a figure derived from [text deleted].

    This report was prepared by IE - not a neutral party.


    By the Way. I know that. I was responding to another point about the airport.


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    murphaph wrote: »
    DU alone will have a massive benefit, but DU enables so much more. You don't even need vision to see it as Munich built its DU 40 years ago and the benefits are plain to see. It has become the trunk route through the city that everything connects to.


    It will have benefits alright. A shame you can't or won't quantity them. Or the cost.


  • Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭ hardy_buck


    bluesteel wrote: »
    Inferiority complex?

    I don't think you know what that means. It's called picking the low hanging fruit. Putting in a Bus Rapid Transit would show the public and the politicians they elect the benefits of proper public transport.

    I wouldn't trust Iarnrod Eireann to run a sweetshop. Sorting out the Bus Lanes on the quays should be simple. if you lads showed the same enthusiasm for sorting it out as you did for spending billions of taxpayer money it would be sorted.

    As for the Luas to the Airport. This weird "Dublin is the only city without an Airport rail link " is keeping up with the Jones - i.e. actual inferiority complex.

    Getting out to the Airport from Dublin CC by bus takes far less time than most Airport metros/rail links I've used and I'e used plenty. Go to most Airports and measure the percentage of passengers that use the rail link and you'll be disappointed.

    Being sceptical of an expensive grandiose project when cheaper alternatives have not been exhausted is not having inferiority complex. it's common sense. Not the kind of voodoo economics that sank this country


    BRT... you think that's a long term solution that will make Dublin the one of the premier cities in Europe? :rolleyes:

    A quote comes to mind:
    "If I asked the people what they wanted, they would have asked for a faster horse" - Henry Ford


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    hardy_buck wrote: »
    BRT... you think that's a long term solution that will make Dublin the one of the premier cities in Europe? :rolleyes:

    A quote comes to mind:
    "If I asked the people what they wanted, they would have asked for a faster horse" - Henry Ford

    Henry Ford? what a stupid retort. Henry Ford was successful providing benefits at a low cost. Maybe you should find a Karl Benz quote

    I know the DU would have benefits but I think it's crazy not to quantify the cost properly. How much is too much for you? 3 billion 5 billion 7 billion. I have the impression you have no bottom line?

    Dublin is a Low density City. You'd get many more BRT lines for less cost in Less time. This would benefit the people of Dublin. Even if it doesn't have the "hey everybody look at my shiny train line" value.

    This just underlines how little interest you have in actual solutions for actual people. Keeping up with the Jones nonsense. Boys and their toys .... :rolleyes: it's like they're trying to compensate for something


  • Registered Users Posts: 929 ✭✭✭ Brian CivilEng


    I'm in work, so not much time to crunch numbers, but can't let this one slide.
    bluesteel wrote: »
    Dublin is a Low density City

    Wikipedia says 4,588/km2 for the Dublin City Council Area, 527,612 living in 114.99 km2. Compared with 4,500/km2 for Munich, (1,407,836 people in 310km2), 4,908/km2 in Amsterdam (1,317,663 in 219.32 km2) and 4,800/km2 in Oslo (628,719 in 130.51 km2). So not really low density, more like medium density. Oslo, Amsterdam and Munich should be the cities we benchmark ourselves against.

    It's not keeping up with the Jones when you see something working well in peer cities and want to replicate it at home. Especially when demographics and existing modal splits point to future capacity issues.

    I don't have time right now to do any more number crunching, maybe tonight. But from what I read before, DART Underground stacks up on appraisal, especially considering that we use 30 years for appraisal in Ireland, not like the 60 years they use in the UK to make their projects look good.


  • Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭ hardy_buck


    bluesteel wrote: »
    Henry Ford? what a stupid retort. Henry Ford was successful providing benefits at a low cost. Maybe you should find a Karl Benz quote

    I know the DU would have benefits but I think it's crazy not to quantify the cost properly. How much is too much for you? 3 billion 5 billion 7 billion. I have the impression you have no bottom line?

    Dublin is a Low density City. You'd get many more BRT lines for less cost in Less time. This would benefit the people of Dublin. Even if it doesn't have the "hey everybody look at my shiny train line" value.

    This just underlines how little interest you have in actual solutions for actual people. Keeping up with the Jones nonsense. Boys and their toys .... :rolleyes: it's like they're trying to compensate for something

    Here you go http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Dart+underound+cost. If you spent even 2 minutes looking into this you will find that its 4 Billion, 2 billion of which will provided by PPP, the remaining 2 Billion could be sourced by low rates we are enjoying at the moment on the bond markets and/or EU funding which we're likely to have access to considering we've been the good boy of europe.

    It's a low density city and yet every second article in the news decries the high cost of property and land in this city, clearly pushing us towards a situation where we need to build up with high density and have decent transport for these developments.

    If you pay in peanuts you get monkeys. This project is more expensive for a reason, it's the best solution, not for the next 5 years, for the next 50 which is something this country should really start doing.
    The phrase is False Economy, I'm afraid I will have to leave it to you to look that one up.

    Regarding your last comment, yes we are all compensating for small manhoods, that is the reason we have been campaigning for this all along :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    hardy_buck wrote: »
    Here you go http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Dart+underound+cost. If you spent even 2 minutes looking into this you will find that its 4 Billion, 2 billion of which will provided by PPP, the remaining 2 Billion could be sourced by low rates we are enjoying at the moment on the bond markets and/or EU funding which we're likely to have access to considering we've been the good boy of europe.



    really - random media articles with vague costings? Are we using De Hedald as a source for billion Euro decisions now? A shame that IE couldn't provide detailed costings before looking of taxpayer money
    4 Billion, 2 billion of which will provided by PPP

    you realise that 2 billion if provided by PPP would have first dibs on the income stream... You make it sound like it's magic money that the taxpayer won't have to payback
    EU funding which we're likely to have access to considering we've been the good boy of europe.

    :rolleyes:

    Likely? Maybe? Possibly? ah sure, build it and they will pay for it.
    Do you mean EU Structural Funds? or Or maybe you mean the European Investment bank (EIB) will invest. i.e. demand a proper return

    Have a look at the EIB's criteria for rail projects. IE's Business Case document would be laughed out of it

    http://www.eib.org/attachments/pj/railpag_en.pdf

    Have you any commercial PPP player lined up for this project? No.
    It's a low density city and yet every second article in the news decries the high cost of property and land in this city, clearly pushing us towards a situation where we need to build up with high density and have decent transport for these developments.
    every second article? Meejia articles are one thing - DCC's latest plans for brownfield sites show no sign of high density housing. Quite the opposite in fact.


    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/high-rise-housing-1.1806912

    seeing as maths isn't your strong point here's the density:
    (“An Bord Pleanála approves fast-track planning for Dublin docklands”, Home News, May 23rd). While 2,600 may sound like a large number of homes, over 55 acres the density works out at only 47 units per acre.

    Not to mention that DU would go right under existing low density areas, which let's face it won't be redeveloped


    If you pay in peanuts you get monkeys. This project is more expensive for a reason, it's the best solution, not for the next 5 years, for the next 50 which is something this country should really start doing.
    The phrase is False Economy, I'm afraid I will have to leave it to you to look that one up.

    how many more trite aphorisms are you going to trot out? You're talking about spending billions and that's the best you can come up with? i guess when you can't quantify a return on investment it's the next best thing :pac:


    Just do us all a favour and quantify likely passenger numbers and cost per passenger - or else admit you don't care about the cost.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 929 ✭✭✭ Brian CivilEng


    bluesteel wrote: »
    Just do us all a favour and quantify likely passenger numbers and cost per passenger - or else admit you don't care about the cost.

    VERRRRYYYYY high level costings here.

    Reasonable cost for entire DART Underground scheme based on international benchmarking: €4billion.

    Number of DART and Dublin suburban users in 2014, approx 26million.

    DART Underground would quadruple the capacity of the DART, will connect areas of Dublin that currently need two changes on pt, shall provide an efficient way of moving around the city, will allow increased frequency. 50 million pax a year sound reasonable?

    In Ireland projects are typically appraised over a 30 year span.

    4 billion / (50million X 30) = €2.65 per pax.

    VERRRY High level I know. Doesn't take operating costs into account but all capital costs are covered (tunnel, track, trains, stations etc.)

    Interestingly, in 2013 Irish Rail carried approx 36 million passengers as a whole, so 26million in Dublin, 10 million on the rest of the network. They made an operating loss as a whole, I can't find DART stripped out but you'd imagine it would be more efficient. So having many more passengers on a smaller area of the network could actually lead to Irish Rail making a profit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    VERRRRYYYYY high level costings here.

    Reasonable cost for entire DART Underground scheme based on international benchmarking: €4billion.

    Number of DART and Dublin suburban users in 2014, approx 26million.

    DART Underground would quadruple the capacity of the DART, will connect areas of Dublin that currently need two changes on pt, shall provide an efficient way of moving around the city, will allow increased frequency. 50 million pax a year sound reasonable?

    In Ireland projects are typically appraised over a 30 year span.

    4 billion / (50million X 30) = €2.65 per pax.

    VERRRY High level I know. Doesn't take operating costs into account but all capital costs are covered (tunnel, track, trains, stations etc.)

    Interestingly, in 2013 Irish Rail carried approx 36 million passengers as a whole, so 26million in Dublin, 10 million on the rest of the network. They made an operating loss as a whole, I can't find DART stripped out but you'd imagine it would be more efficient. So having many more passengers on a smaller area of the network could actually lead to Irish Rail making a profit.

    Hang on, you're calculating your passenger numbers based on the current Dart line? :eek:

    What's the logic behind that?

    Double the capacity? this implies that Dart numbers are constrained by Capacity rather than demand

    Why not look at the Demand? the numbers who travel into Heuston Station or more appropriately those who drive instead of taking commuter trains and then look at those who live along the proposed route?:confused:



    You haven't accounted for the interest on loans in your calculation

    if you take a 5% required return on investment
    it works out at
    4,000,000,000*0.05/50000000 = €4 - that's just for capital costs - with passenger numbers you've plucked out of your David Drumm...


    The EIB - European INvestment Bank has the following criterea
    Moderate Performance
    • The ERR of the project is marginal but acceptable (about 10%).
    • The economic activity conducted by the project or the promoter is in
    accordance with accepted national and EU standards in terms of
    development impact or for mitigating minor potential environmental or social
    harm stemming from the activity.
    • The handling of environmental, social and institutional issues, although
    acceptable, could eventually improve.
    • Development implications could be higher and optimisation of economic
    activity benefits could be achieved.
    Low Performance
    • The ERR of the project is too low (lower than 10%).
    • The project may be in accordance with accepted national standards but is
    below accepted EU standards in terms of potential environmental, social and
    institutional impact stemming from the activity (Low performance may lead to a rejection of a project

    The fact that Irish Rail lose money despite not having to pay for capital investment (worth talking about) should give you pause for thought


  • Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭ hardy_buck


    bluesteel wrote: »
    Hang on, you're calculating your passenger numbers based on the current Dart line? :eek:

    What's the logic behind that?

    Double the capacity? this implies that Dart numbers are constrained by Capacity rather than demand

    Why not look at the Demand? the numbers who travel into Heuston Station or more appropriately those who drive instead of taking commuter trains and then look at those who live along the proposed route?:confused:



    You haven't accounted for the interest on loans in your calculation

    if you take a 5% required return on investment
    it works out at
    4,000,000,000*0.05/50000000 = €4 - that's just for capital costs - with passenger numbers you've plucked out of your David Drumm...


    The EIB - European INvestment Bank has the following criterea





    The fact that Irish Rail lose money despite not having to pay for capital investment (worth talking about) should give you pause for thought

    Alright we get it, you're anti anything rail based. Let's hear your fix seen as you seem to know much more than actual qualified engineers and urban planners.
    Bear in mind that the BRT solution got torn to shreds like the garbage it is in every other thread it turns up in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,181 ✭✭✭ cgcsb


    Why is there an assumption that the capital cost of DART u must be recovered from ticket sales? That's just barking, the DART system only needs to cover it's operating costs, and in practice, subsidize parts of the intercity routes.

    There is no need to recover capital costs on DARTu, the benefits are economic, not financial.


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    hardy_buck wrote: »
    Alright we get it, you're anti anything rail based. Let's hear your fix seen as you seem to know much more than actual qualified engineers and urban planners.
    Bear in mind that the BRT solution got torn to shreds like the garbage it is in every other thread it turns up in.

    Go and jump.

    You know nothing about me; you're attacking me because I not getting aboard the "Ignore the Economics" express.

    If public transport enthusiasts want to be taken as any other than anorak wearing train spotters you should be pressing the government to first pick the low hanging fruit. Bus Lanes etc are simple the most obvious example of this. Every day I see cars blocking the BusLanes and Gardai doing SFA about it. It's pathetic to spend billions on something with single digit economoic returns when a modicum of Bus Lane enforcement would reap economic returns in the 100% range

    BTW I get the Luas practically every weekday. It's great apart from the junkies and skobes


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,169 ✭✭✭ 1huge1


    I've heard Barry Kenny from Irisih Rail comment many times that Dart just about breaks even if that adds anything to the argument.


  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ bluesteel


    cgcsb wrote: »
    Why is there an assumption that the capital cost of DART u must be recovered from ticket sales? That's just barking, the DART system only needs to cover it's operating costs, and in practice, subsidize parts of the intercity routes.

    There is no need to recover capital costs on DARTu, the benefits are economic, not financial.
    Agreed.

    Is there any point at which you would say "let's not do that it would be a white elephant" -

    there needs to be an economic threshold - i.e a solid target for passengers on/cars off the road.

    There's no sign of that in this forum


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,884 ✭✭✭✭ murphaph


    I actually don't agree that public transport needs to reduce car use to be a success. It's primarily about improving people's quality of life, offering an alternative to the crappy commute.


  • Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭ hardy_buck


    bluesteel wrote: »
    Go and jump.

    You know nothing about me; you're attacking me because I not getting aboard the "Ignore the Economics" express.

    If public transport enthusiasts want to be taken as any other than anorak wearing train spotters you should be pressing the government to first pick the low hanging fruit. Bus Lanes etc are simple the most obvious example of this. Every day I see cars blocking the BusLanes and Gardai doing SFA about it. It's pathetic to spend billions on something with single digit economoic returns when a modicum of Bus Lane enforcement would reap economic returns in the 100% range

    BTW I get the Luas practically every weekday. It's great apart from the junkies and skobes

    All these things you ask for have been widely discussed at length in the Dart Underground thread, a bit of quick searching there will answer almost everything you've asked. No need to run down people's throats, and as for telling people to 'go and jump' it's probably not the classiest of statements considering that yesterday was world suicide prevention day...

    Anyhow Let's find some common ground here, do you genuinely believe that the quality of infrastructure and planning in Dublin is adequate? Do you think that there is a need for an integrated transport system like all of the top European cities we are in competition with for FDI?
    It's gonna take more than dishing out a few penalty points for hanging around in the bus lane to keep us competing.

    Obviously economic return is at the core of the infrastructure decisions we make but the government isn't a corporation looking to squeeze every last penny out of investments, if so we wouldn't be spending 15 billion a year on a catastrophically failing health service or 20 billion on a bloated social welfare budget. We need to look at the bigger picture and how public transport can benefit society as a whole.

    Out of interest what are your thoughts on metro north (revised or otherwise)?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement