Dublin 9th most congested city of 200

monument

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Apart from Luas Cross City (which was cheap) and the PPPs for New Ross, Enniscorthy and N7/Newlands (which didn't cost anything and were in the pipeline years ago), the outgoing FG/Lab government have not started any transport projects, haven't funded any, haven't proceeded any major ones to planning. I don't know why they bothered with a minister for transport at all.

• €400m Gorey to Enniscorthy PPP -- contracts signed in 2015 (or late 2014?)
• €550m Gort to Tuam PPP -- contracts signed and EIB funding confirmed in 2014
• €180m N7 Newlands Cross & N11 Arklow Rathnew PPP Scheme -- contracts signed 2013
• €365m Luas Cross City - contracts signed in 2013

Guts of €1.5 billion in those projects alone.

As for the PPPs don't cost anything claim?!? You might want to tell the government to stop paying them yearly.

Chris_5339762

The land was CPOed by the previous government for all of those schemes, so that removed a large chunk of the capital. Also, CPOing cost is precisely the reason why the M20 got canned. The 'upfront' cost of the PPPs, whilst I don't have figures, is much lower than paying for a capital build, even when the yearly payment is taken into account. If the previous government hadn't done most of the work, Enniscorthy, Tuam and New Ross would not be any further now than they were five years ago. I reckon the N7/N11 **may** have gone through.

Luas Cross City was a compromise against Metro North.

Cookie_Monster

Carawaystick wrote: »

Has anyone a link to the methodology used by Tom Tom?

How does it capture congestion by cyclists, train/tram/bus users who won't have a satellite navigation device to be sampled?

or the 99% of car users that don't have / use a GPS often. Even comparing rich 1st world countries to poorer third world would be invalid as the 1st world city will have a much higher % sat nav users (still tiny)

Muahahaha

Carawaystick wrote: »

How does it measure bus, bike or taxi congestion?

Because any "survey" which is hiding it's methodology is just clickbait

I agree with you that it is the type of survey provided by a company to get themselves media attention rather then spending money on advertising.

They say their data is from TomTom GPS users and they measured peak time traffic. From that we can only really include private cars, not buses, trains, etc. But that doesn't mean the survey is completely useless IMO. Presumably their measurement comes from analysing GPS data in 200 cities at peak hours and calculating the average speed of the cars with GPS. From that they conclude that Dublin is 9th slowest out of 200 cities at peak hours.

So while the survey might not capture the very essence of congestion in an overall sense I don't think it should be completely dismissed off the bat either. If Dublin were 50th out of 200 cities for their measurement you might say okay fair enough. But coming behind 190 other cities on their measurements should raise eyebrows. This survey is not 100% scientific for sure but there's no point denying that we have a problem either.

Muahahaha

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

or the 99% of car users that don't have / use a GPS often. Even comparing rich 1st world countries to poorer third world would be invalid as the 1st world city will have a much higher % sat nav users (still tiny)

Fair point but even if one of every 100 motorists have one on (for example) the m50 and are driving at peak times then they have data on their speeds and therefore 'congestion'. Most tourists would be using GPS and would be slightly more than 1% of motorists at a guess. Delivery and courier companies use them a lot too, as do taxis too.

Regards the developing world you'd be surprised. You can buy smartphones there for €20 and GPS companies sell their app at a price the local market can afford. Plus countries like India, China and Brazil aren't exactly flush with proper road signage which means having a GPS is pretty essential if you don't know where you're going. And both India and China are in the middle of a car ownership boom so there are millions of people there who are driving for the first time ever, if they can afford €3k for a brand new car then a smartphone with GPS app is just a small extra.

quadrifoglio verde

On the whole metro north things there any point in going underground?
Most cities have underground in the city centre and above ground outside of that.
We've done the opposite.

Surely it'd make more sense to build another luas line from the phibsboro stop on luas cross city out to the airport. Then extend the cross city out to Blanchardstown.
Have a line then that runs from lucan to ballyfemot and on into walkinstown before linking up with the green line at milltown. This could be continued on to the dart stopping off near ucd

jackofalltrades

cgcsb wrote: »

We should have a pro Dublin party or a Dublin Regional Authority with an elected mayor that can keep it's own lpt revenue instead of redistributing it to the regions.

Dublin really needs a solution like this.
We need to remove non-Dublin input into Dublin's affairs.
A directly elected mayor is urgently needed, with the power to make decisions on large scale infrastructure.
Otherwise we're just going to be left building infrastructure based on a crisis fixing model, which doesn't work out well for public transport.

Sam Russell

@ quadrifoglio verde It would take over an hour to get from the Airport to the city centre using that route. It only takes 20 mins by Aircoach through the port tunnel - why would anyone bother with a Luas?

Carawaystick

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Dublin really needs a solution like this.
We need to remove non-Dublin input into Dublin's affairs.
A directly elected mayor is urgently needed, with the power to make decisions on large scale infrastructure.
Otherwise we're just going to be left building infrastructure based on a crisis fixing model, which doesn't work out well for public transport.

I presume a directly elected mayor wouldn't care about anything in the Kildare part of Leixlip or in Bray say?

I presume they'd have all the expertise to deal with onions and sprouts stinking up the Naul though... :eek:

cgcsb

Carawaystick wrote: »

I presume a directly elected mayor wouldn't care about anything in the Kildare part of Leixlip or in Bray say?

I presume they'd have all the expertise to deal with onions and sprouts stinking up the Naul though... :eek:

Would be a hell of a lot better than FG or FF or the Healy Rays calling all the shots.

Idbatterim

Would be a hell of a lot better than FG or FF or the Healy Rays calling all the shots.

you really have to ask though, why with the poplulation here and the sh*t everything is this tolerated?! Why arent these questions being raised in the Dail? the outrageous house prices in dublin only, crippling traffic and appalling transport network in dublin given its size? far higher crime rates here than outside of Dublin, according to a graph I saw earlier.

If the was an equivalent of "he who cannot be named" for dublin, I would be all over him or her in terms of votes! We have endless elected td's all going after the same BS, IW etc, not one who will fight or shout for Dublin not one who is concerned with public sector recruitment or the value for money in the PS like Creighton...

Banjoxed

Idbatterim wrote: »

you really have to ask though, why with the poplulation here and the sh*t everything is this tolerated?! Why arent these questions being raised in the Dail? the outrageous house prices in dublin only, crippling traffic and appalling transport network in dublin given its size? far higher crime rates here than outside of Dublin, according to a graph I saw earlier.

If the was an equivalent of "he who cannot be named" for dublin, I would be all over him or her in terms of votes! We have endless elected td's all going after the same BS, IW etc, not one who will fight or shout for Dublin not one who is concerned with public sector recruitment or the value for money in the PS like Creighton...

What has to be remembered is that unelected senior public servants call the shots on this, given that many of our pols need a sheet of paper to be able to say anything in the Dáil.

I haven't had a good rant about the bus lovin', train disdaining Colm MacCarthy or his fellow Bord Snip alumnus, TCD's Sean Barrett in a while, but rest assured, it will come!

jackofalltrades

Carawaystick wrote: »

I presume a directly elected mayor wouldn't care about anything in the Kildare part of Leixlip or in Bray say?

Or Leixlip as it's known.
Not getting the point your making here, I'm not proposing any boundaries are re-drawn.

Idbatterim wrote: »

you really have to ask though, why with the poplulation here and the sh*t everything is this tolerated?! Why arent these questions being raised in the Dail? the outrageous house prices in dublin only, crippling traffic and appalling transport network in dublin given its size? far higher crime rates here than outside of Dublin, according to a graph I saw earlier...

I think there's a lack of pride in our capital city.
I remember the time when the county councils were voting for a directly elected mayor and there seemed to be very little public interest in it.
When I talked to other people about it, very few seemed to know anything about it.
Dublin voters need to become more like their rural counterparts and start demanding more.

newacc2015

Idbatterim wrote: »

you really have to ask though, why with the poplulation here and the sh*t everything is this tolerated?! Why arent these questions being raised in the Dail? the outrageous house prices in dublin only, crippling traffic and appalling transport network in dublin given its size? far higher crime rates here than outside of Dublin, according to a graph I saw earlier.

If the was an equivalent of "he who cannot be named" for dublin, I would be all over him or her in terms of votes! We have endless elected td's all going after the same BS, IW etc, not one who will fight or shout for Dublin not one who is concerned with public sector recruitment or the value for money in the PS like Creighton...

Asking for anything for Dublin is political suicide. Dublin cant have nice things without some glorified bog in the west wanting the same. There is plenty of people from outside of Dublin who think Dublin has enough with 2 Luas lines and the DART. That the Government should now give Cork and Galway a Luas next. There will be up roar if Dublin gets another infrastructure project before the Limerick to Cork motorway is built. Although it will only shave 16 mins off the journey. While that €800million that the motorway will would do a far amount of Luas in Dublin and help hundreds of thousands of commuters daily.

Most rural people know Dublin is big. They just dont know how big it is. Eg 40% of the population live in the GDA and will be close to 50% within a few decades. The Government also likes to down play Dublin. As why should Dublin be getting all the jobs, when Donegal needs them? Why arent the IDA forcing American companies to some bog in the midlands? People dont seem to realise these firms will only locate in Dublin. If they choosing between Tel Aviv, Dublin or Singapore for a major office. Carrick-on-Shannon definitely wont be on the list of potential places to open an office.

Look at the social democrat manifestos. They mention Dublin twice in 59 pages.Once is to drive economic growth outside of Dublin and a brief mention on more public transport in Dublin. They have two entire pages on arts versus basically 2 lines on Dublin. Its nice to see where their priorities lie :rolleyes:

monument

newacc2015 wrote: »

Look at the social democrat manifestos. They mention Dublin twice in 59 pages.Once is to drive economic growth outside of Dublin and a brief mention on more public transport in Dublin. They have two entire pages on arts versus basically 2 lines on Dublin. Its nice to see where their priorities lie :rolleyes:

Catherine Murphy was the most vocal political and one of a tiny few who critised the inaction on Dart Underground last year so I was surprised with your claim and had a look at their manifesto.

They have more than a "brief mention on more public transport in Dublin"... Every time they mention "in our cities" that equals Dublin etc and building Dart underground is their second point after "Rebalancing of capital spending". And where do you think a good chunk of that rebalanced funding would go to?

Key word searches confined to one word is bad research -- "cities" is referred to 50 times and most of those mentions includes or mainly mean Dublin.

They are only a new party, but the two pages on arts is partly down to arts-like rambling and extra spacing and headlines when the same points could be said in a page or little more than a page. Compared to transport, there's loads of white space on the arts pages, which transport is to the point and jam packed... Again: looking at pure numbers without looking deeper into the content is flawed research.

Here's their manifestos on transport in full:

TRANSPORT

Comprehensive development of our public transport infrastructure is in Ireland’s vital social and economic interest. However, historical investment in high capacity solutions like rail has been lacking; and big public transport projects are too often victim of short-term political considerations. While a high-quality road network is essential and requires investment to be delivered, this should not be at the expense of better- capacity, cleaner and more efficient forms of public transport which can serve as viable alternatives to car-based travel.

The Social Democrats believe that future population growth, particularly in our urban centres, must be adequately planned for today in terms of transport provision if we are to avoid unsustainable urban sprawl, disconnected communities and ever- increasing car commutes. To do this we need to support a modal shift away from carbon intense, car- based transport towards high- capacity public transport options. We must also drastically reduce emissions in transport if we are to meet emissions reduction targets.

PRIORITIES

• Rebalancing of capital spending in public transport incrementally, ensuring capital spending on roads is at least matched by capital spending on other forms of public transport on a multi-annual basis;
• Encouraging greater use of public transport by reducing public transport fares (see Cost of Living proposals);
• Building the DART Underground at the earliest practicable date.
• Delivering new road infrastructure where there is a critical need, e.g. a high-grade connection between Cork, Limerick and Galway;
• Examining ways to rollout a national smart ticketing system that is integrated,baccessible and e cient, and applies to all forms of public transport.
• We would maintain free travel for those over 66;
• Ensuring focus on suburban and hinterland commuter transport in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and other urban centres; working to provide greater reliability and frequency of services to move people out of cars;
• Continuing the development of light rail and tram services where they are needed, along with the rollout of Bus Rapid Transit in speci c urban centres;
• Enhancing cycling infrastructure in our major cities and towns, and work on developing inter-urban cycleways and scenic greenways. We would implement cycle-friendly traffic management systems in major city and town centres.;
• Increasing incentives and subsidies to purchase Electric Vehicles, including subsidies for the installation of charge points domestically. We would increase the availability of fast-charge points nationwide;
• Reviewing current regulations governing taxi-drivers, with a particular focus on age of vehicle requirements, and improve consultation processes with the industry.

*****

If anything that's too Dublin and urban centric without much or any rural transport mentioned!

They also have a full page on smarter cities.

newacc2015

monument wrote: »

Catherine Murphy was the most vocal political and one of a tiny few who critised the inaction on Dart Underground last year so I was surprised with your claim and had a look at their manifesto.

They have more than a "brief mention on more public transport in Dublin"... Every time they mention "in our cities" that equals Dublin etc and building Dart underground is their second point after "Rebalancing of capital spending". And where do you think a good chunk of that rebalanced funding would go to?

Key word searches confined to one word is bad research -- "cities" is referred to 50 times and most of those mentions includes or mainly mean Dublin.

So Dublin a city that is the size of all our other cities combined. Is of equal importance of cities, that are smaller than some of Dublin's suburbs? It says a lot that they group Dublin in with "our cities" considering the size of it. A city is a buzzword in Ireland and means nothing ie Tralee decided they want to be a city this week, as "its good for tourism". A city of 23k people and 1.2 million arent really comparable IMO.

I dont know where their rebalancing of capital will go, as they havent explicitly mentioned it. By keeping it open and vague, as they are doing, they aren't committing themselves to anything. That appeals to rural voters who are sick of Dublin getting everything. Im a sure a far amount of rural voters assumed that would be more upgrades on glorified rural driveways being aka regional roads.

Look at it this way. Dublin is 40% of the population of Ireland and 45% of the economy. If they cant even devote half a page to a city that is so important to this economy, because throwing it in with "our cities" is sufficient to them. IMO it shows they dont view Dublin that strategically important. If you read an annual company report and it mentioned the key product that was responsible for 45% of sales. But only mentioned it twice as it was lumped in with "our products". But there is several pages on BS corporate social responsibility. Would you think that management cares about the key product?

If you are not explicitly committing to Dublin City or its infrastructure. You arent committing at all. Constantly referring to Dublin with a group glorified towns, as "our cities" is belittling when Dublin is bigger than all the other cities combined.

Carawaystick

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Or Leixlip as it's known.
Not getting the point your making here, I'm not proposing any boundaries are re-drawn.
[\quote]
Some of the 'city' is in other counties, while some of Dublin county is as rural as any other county

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Dublin voters need to become more like their rural counterparts and start demanding more.

But there are very rural parts in Dublin too

jackofalltrades

Carawaystick wrote: »

Some of the 'city' is in other counties, while some of Dublin county is as rural as any other county

Yes but the Mayor would be a Mayor of Dublin, not just an urban mayor.

But there are very rural parts in Dublin too

What I meant by rural voters was voters who elected the likes of the Healy-Rae's or the Lowry's.
Voters outside the Greater Dublin Area.

Carawaystick

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Yes but the Mayor would be a Mayor of Dublin, not just an urban mayor.

So the mayor would deal with Agri issues in the Naul, but do nothing with Bray Leixlip or Celbridge?

[quote="jackofalltrades;98987899"What I meant by rural voters was voters who elected the likes of the Healy-Rae's or the Lowry's.
Voters outside the Greater Dublin Area.[/quote]city slicker voters elected Gay olympics Mitchel and Bertie I won it on the horses in some race I can't remember and I've no bank account Ahern

monument

newacc2015 wrote: »

So Dublin a city that is the size of all our other cities combined. Is of equal importance of cities, that are smaller than some of Dublin's suburbs? It says a lot that they group Dublin in with "our cities" considering the size of it.

Transport and other solutions are often practically the same for Dublin, Cork, Galway, and Limerick... so, what exactly is the big deal about calling them all cities?

newacc2015 wrote: »

A city is a buzzword in Ireland and means nothing ie Tralee decided they want to be a city this week, as "its good for tourism". A city of 23k people and 1.2 million arent really comparable IMO.

This is (a) something the Social Democrats agreed with, or (b) something you're mixing up in your pot of mixed anger soup?

newacc2015 wrote: »

I dont know where their rebalancing of capital will go, as they havent explicitly mentioned it. By keeping it open and vague, as they are doing, they aren't committing themselves to anything. That appeals to rural voters who are sick of Dublin getting everything. Im a sure a far amount of rural voters assumed that would be more upgrades on glorified rural driveways being aka regional roads.

The idea of rebalancing of capital spending is towards spending on public transport and it's fairly clear: "ensuring capital spending on roads is at least matched by capital spending on other forms of public transport on a multi-annual basis".

How exactly are you interrupting rebalancing towards public transport as spending more on regional roads?

newacc2015 wrote: »

Look at it this way. Dublin is 40% of the population of Ireland and 45% of the economy. If they cant even devote half a page to a city that is so important to this economy, because throwing it in with "our cities" is sufficient to them. IMO it shows they dont view Dublin that strategically important. If you read an annual company report and it mentioned the key product that was responsible for 45% of sales. But only mentioned it twice as it was lumped in with "our products". But there is several pages on BS corporate social responsibility. Would you think that management cares about the key product?

Dublin is not 40% of the population of Ireland -- the Greater Dublin Area is not Dublin.

Which is more likely here: (a) all the Dublin TDs departing from party politics and have a free vote on Dublin issues and funding, OR (b) Dublin TDs work with other TDs on issues that mostly affect all cities anyway?

newacc2015 wrote: »

If you are not explicitly committing to Dublin City or its infrastructure. You arent committing at all. Constantly referring to Dublin with a group glorified towns, as "our cities" is belittling when Dublin is bigger than all the other cities combined.

I'm from and have returned to west but remain an advocate for better infrastructure in Dublin, and you're kind of rhetoric is exactly what Dublin does not need.

Dublin gets less than its fair share but there's little political openness about this and there's a lot of mostly unchanged denial... in this kind of setting, what do you think calling other cities glorified towns achieves?

The pro-Dublin camp (and I'm in that) reminds me of the Irish left political parties and groupings -- fighting amongst themselves while others get on with business.

cgcsb

Carawaystick wrote: »

So the mayor would deal with Agri issues in the Naul, but do nothing with Bray Leixlip or Celbridge?

Or we could simply leave agricultural issues to the Dáil. A powerful regional authority doesn't need to controll every portfolio.

The new mayor wouldn't have power over defence, foreign affairs, agriculture, forestry, fisheries etc.

jackofalltrades

Carawaystick wrote: »

So the mayor would deal with Agri issues in the Naul, but do nothing with Bray Leixlip or Celbridge?

The mayor would deal with agricultural issues to the same extent that existing Mayors in applicable county councils currently do.
For the second time I'm not proposing and boundaries being re-drawn.
Do you think the people of Bray want to get rid of their town council?
Those three towns would also benefit from increased infrastructural spending on Dublin.

city slicker voters elected Gay olympics Mitchel and Bertie I won it on the horses in some race I can't remember and I've no bank account Ahern

What's any of the above got to do with the point I was making?

Carawaystick

jackofalltrades wrote: »

The mayor would deal with agricultural issues to the same extent that existing Mayors in applicable county councils currently do.

So you would leave the existing county couincil executive in charge of some matters they are already in charge of? mayors in co councils have almost no power and are a figurehead chair of the council.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

For the second time I'm not proposing and boundaries being re-drawn.
Do you think the people of Bray want to get rid of their town council?
Those three towns would also benefit from increased infrastructural spending on Dublin.

If your plan is to have a city mayor, why not include all the city areas in the mayors power?
You do know the Bray town council was abolished right? and the people of Bray were given no choice in the matter.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

What's any of the above got to do with the point I was making?

People in all parts of the country elect eejit politicians.

jackofalltrades

Carawaystick wrote: »

So you would leave the existing county couincil executive in charge of some matters they are already in charge of?

No, planning to do with argiculture would just continue in the same fashion as it already does, just on a larger scale.

If your plan is to have a city mayor, why not include all the city areas in the mayors power?

It's not a city mayor it's a Dublin mayor.
You have to draw the line somewhere and you're always going to exclude certain areas.
And it's best to us the existing County Council boundaries instead of having to go through the hassle of creating new ones.

You do know the Bray town council was abolished right? and the people of Bray were given no choice in the matter.

Genuinely thought it was still in existence after going through their website.

People in all parts of the country elect eejit politicians.

Which wasn't the point I was making.

bpmurray

One of my in-laws lectures in city planning and he laughed hysterically on his first visit to Dublin many years ago. Nothing much has changed since then! One of the prime rules about transport is that traffic expands to fill available roads, meaning that the only real solution to congestion is to invest in mass transport. This isn't cheap, but it's a requirement for a modern city, and it has many positive knock-on effects - more employment, less pollution, easier commuting and, of course, less congestion meaning that those who do use the roads have a less frustrating time.

Arbiter of Good Taste

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

But how many of those hundreds of thousands sitting in traffic jams every day and suffering a poor quality of life as a result want MN and/or DU built? My experience is that they would prefer to see more investment in roads (M50 outer bypass, M50 Easter bypass, etc.), blissfully unaware that that will only lead to more traffic and more congestion over the long term.

It takes me 20 minutes (max) to drive to work. If I took public "transport" it would take approx. 90 minutes - and that's assuming minimum waiting time between the various different buses I would have to take.

I don't sit in traffic because I like it. There is no reasonable alternative.

I both live and work on the Northside of Dublin it shouldn't be that difficult.

grogi

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

or the 99% of car users that don't have / use a GPS often. Even comparing rich 1st world countries to poorer third world would be invalid as the 1st world city will have a much higher % sat nav users (still tiny)

Years ago TT worked with Vodafone to monitor movement of sims between the cells. That allowed them to identify jams.

hardanro

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

It takes me 20 minutes (max) to drive to work. If I took public "transport" it would take approx. 90 minutes - and that's assuming minimum waiting time between the various different buses I would have to take.

I don't sit in traffic because I like it. There is no reasonable alternative.

I both live and work on the Northside of Dublin it shouldn't be that difficult.

Case study: Finglas to Dublin airport

By car: 30-40 minutes, cost 1.50 (assuming free parking space at destination)
By bus: 35-90 minutes (this large interval is another big nuisance as you cannot plan anything if you rely on dublin bus), cost 3.10-5.40

It's not hard to see which one if the alternative is more advantageous, although, by having 50 peoples in a vehicle it should be much cheaper than having just 1, and by having dedicated bus lanes should be much faster than a car.

thomasj

hardanro wrote:

By car: 30-40 minutes, cost 1.50 (assuming free parking space at destination) By bus: 35-90 minutes (this large interval is another big nuisance as you cannot plan anything if you rely on dublin bus), cost 3.10-5.40

hardanro wrote:

Case study: Finglas to Dublin airport

hardanro wrote:

It's not hard to see which one if the alternative is more advantageous, although, by having 50 peoples in a vehicle it should be much cheaper than having just 1, and by having dedicated bus lanes should be much faster than a car.

Look at Hilton Dublin city vs Hilton Dublin airport

Hilton Dublin city points people to the options they have to get to the airport by public transport, the 16 or the aircoach

Hilton Dublin airport has to provide a free shuttle bus. There is no way of getting to Dublin airport from there by public transport.

ClovenHoof

Sam Russell wrote: »

@ quadrifoglio verde It would take over an hour to get from the Airport to the city centre using that route. It only takes 20 mins by Aircoach through the port tunnel - why would anyone bother with a Luas?

You are falling into the same old trap of thinking that everyone would going to O'Connell Street.

There would be loads of stops in between bringing people to and from the airport. An Luas extension to the airport is not a bad idea.

They would also be on a 'network' going to many parts of the city.