Ridiculous #GE2020 promises

Idbatterim

I asked a FF guy in Maynooth about metro, would it continue as is or back to drawing board.
Seemed shocked by question, then spouted crap they still have railway order of original metro North, didn't think the FG plan was good enough, started talking about DU then.

replying to this as its not allowed in metro thread! WTF! WTF! these people are out looking for votes, and actually do not have a clue! they are offensive morons! the current plans for DM need to go ahead and asap. to hell with anything else, even if some felt they were less than optimal. they want to start the entire, boring, predictable and unbearable saga again? until someone thinks those plans should be shelved. Pathetic!

the rail order for MN is expired and I believe DM is a better plan anyway. Regardless, pity MN didnt go ahead, even if DM was superior, because at least we would have something built, rather than talking about hypotheticals for decades !!! :mad:

Zebra3

Idbatterim wrote: »

replying to this as its not allowed in metro thread! WTF! WTF! these people are out looking for votes, and actually do not have a clue! they are offensive morons! the current plans for DM need to go ahead and asap. to hell with anything else, even if some felt they were less than optimal. they want to start the entire, boring, predictable and unbearable saga again? until someone thinks those plans should be shelved. Pathetic!

the rail order for MN is expired and I believe DM is a better plan anyway. Regardless, pity MN didnt go ahead, even if DM was superior, because at least we would have something built, rather than talking about hypotheticals for decades !!! :mad:

I guess it comes down to what a candidate has prepared for, and this candidate can't understand why somebody is asking about a project outside their constituency.

major interest

Had a quick scan of some of the manifestos and searched for the term "metro". It's mentioned in all of them to some degree. Upgrading the existing green line to metro isn't specifically mentioned in any of them it would appear.

Green Party: Commence construction of Metro North from North of Swords to the South of Ranelagh Luas station and initiate an immediate review of the three options for extending the Metro further South from there. (Does anyone know what these 3 options are incidentally?)

Fianna Fail: Explore the feasibility of Metro South West, ensuring our capital city is efficient is critical to the quality of life its citizens and the economic prosperity of the region. We will strengthen public transport and undertake a feasibility study into constructing Metro South West as a potential key future project. We will allocate €19m for this detailed study.

Fine Gael: Over the next five years, we will revolutionise public transport in the Greater Dublin Area by completing the BusConnects programme and ensuring that MetroLink proceeds through planning and to construction. We will also explore the feasibility of extending MetroLink to other locations including UCD, south-west Dublin; extending the Luas network to Hazelhatch and Booterstown; explore other transport options to reduce dependency on the private car and evaluate the need for underground metro routes within the M50.

Sinn Fein: Progressing the extension of the Luas to Bray, Finglas, Lucan and Poolbeg, the
DART underground, and completing the Dublin Metro by 2027.

Labour: Labour will prioritise infrastructure projects needed for the economic development of cities and large towns outside of Dublin, such as the North Ring Road in Cork, raising Rosslare Europort to Tier 1 status and the Metro to Dublin Airport/Swords/Fingal.

Last Stop

major interest wrote: »

Green Party: Commence construction of Metro North from North of Swords to the South of Ranelagh Luas station and initiate an immediate review of the three options for extending the Metro further South from there. (Does anyone know what these 3 options are incidentally?)

1. UCD
2. Green line upgrade
3. SW

Ironically, the UCD option only came about after Eamon Ryan got the crayons out, proposed the SW option and people explained to him that a Sandyford needed additional capacity. So he went back to the drawing board and put a line from Charlemont to UCD and then onto a Sandyford via the southern bypass alignment reserve plus an additional Luas line from Booterstown to Tallaght.

I would be in favour of the UCD route as a Luas line from Harcourt as it would provide an alternative to the green line while it is being upgraded to metro :pac::pac::pac:

Zebra3

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/what-are-each-parties-transport-election-promises-1.4155507

A quick summary for all.

Thelonious Monk

It has been revealed today that, to make space for cyclists, Paris mayor @Anne_Hidalgo will remove 72% of the French capital's on-street car parking spaces. 60,000 spaces to be eliminated.

Drool. I wish Anne would run for election here.

Qrt

Qrt wrote: »

She was elected as an independent, then switched to FF pretty much straight away. That’s just sneaky considering she probably wouldn’t have won with the FF banner.

Besides, she’s still going on about Orlagh Roundabout! God love the poor people of Knocklyon not having an extra lane.

She was elected as an Independent in 2014.

She joined Fianna Fail in February 2019.

She was re-elected on the first count in June 2019.


Not only did you get it wrong about there being no buses between Ballycullen and Tallaght (3 is more than 0 m8), you can't tell the difference between

1) 2014 and 2019

2) Something happening before an election and after an election.


Impressive.

She's also still going on about the Orlagh roundabout because 1 year on, there are still queues off-peak purely because of this roundabout.

Idbatterim

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It has been revealed today that, to make space for cyclists, Paris mayor @Anne_Hidalgo will remove 72% of the French capital's on-street car parking spaces. 60,000 spaces to be eliminated.

Drool. I wish Anne would run for election here.

we have absolute morons running for election here and nothing will change soon! The public have to demand better, it wont come from those *£$&£$£&£&$£

strassenwo!f

Last Stop wrote: »

1. UCD
2. Green line upgrade
3. SW

Ironically, the UCD option only came about after Eamon Ryan got the crayons out, proposed the SW option and people explained to him that a Sandyford needed additional capacity. So he went back to the drawing board and put a line from Charlemont to UCD and then onto a Sandyford via the southern bypass alignment reserve plus an additional Luas line from Booterstown to Tallaght.

If the Greens think it is a good idea to have a metro line linking the Southwest of the city with the city centre - a view I agree with - what is the possible logic of building this first to Ranelagh (broadly in the Southeast) and then heading in a southwesterly direction?

If the aim is the Southwest, why not just build it from Swords/the Airport to the city centre and then head to the Southwest directly?

It reminds me of the (probably apocryphal) tale of the lost tourist in Ireland asking for directions and being told "Well, I wouldn't start from here." And in the case of these metro plans from the Greens for an extension to the Southwest from Ranelagh, you really wouldn't.

You'd start to the Southwest from the city centre.

Last Stop

strassenwo!f wrote: »

If the Greens think it is a good idea to have a metro line linking the Southwest of the city with the city centre - a view I agree with - what is the possible logic of building this first to Ranelagh (broadly in the Southeast) and then heading in a southwesterly direction?

If the aim is the Southwest, why not just build it from Swords/the Airport to the city centre and then head to the Southwest directly?

It reminds me of the (probably apocryphal) tale of the lost tourist in Ireland asking for directions and being told "Well, I wouldn't start from here." And in the case of these metro plans from the Greens for an extension to the Southwest from Ranelagh, you really wouldn't.

You'd start to the Southwest from the city centre.

Because their leader is on the Dail record in 2004 advocating the extension of metro north to include the green line upgrade.

We’ve been through the SW option before, it isn’t viable. You haven’t provided the figures on station sizes you continued to promise.

Qrt

[Deleted User] wrote: »

She was elected as an Independent in 2014.

She joined Fianna Fail in February 2019.

She was re-elected on the first count in June 2019.


Not only did you get it wrong about there being no buses between Ballycullen and Tallaght (3 is more than 0 m8), you can't tell the difference between

1) 2014 and 2019

2) Something happening before an election and after an election.


Impressive.

She's also still going on about the Orlagh roundabout because 1 year on, there are still queues off-peak purely because of this roundabout.

I’m from the area, when people talk about Ballycullen, then mean the southern fringes built on the mountainside by Lidl and up to the Augustinians. The proposed 16 is an adequate bus to Tallaght. Sure the 175 is a welcome addition but it’s awfully infrequent (especially at weekends, and if the other two buses are the 49 and the 65b, well the 49 is a hell of a walk (and infrequent) and the 65b is so infrequent it’s almost pointless.

But yeah, I got the dates wrong, big whoop. Dunno why you had to get all snarky about it

strassenwo!f

Last Stop wrote: »

Because their leader is on the Dail record in 2004 advocating the extension of metro north to include the green line upgrade.

I'm sure we can get into a discussion of future proposals for the Green Line at some later stage, and perhaps also Mr Ryan's views in 2004 - 16 years back - but the current thread is about party manifestos, and my query is about the Greens' logic of building a metro line between Ranelagh and the Southwest of the city.

I feel it would just be more sensible to build such a line directly between the centre and the Southwest. I can't see why there is a need to faff around with building it to any station in Ranelagh, or any other station in the Southeast of the city.

Last Stop wrote: »

We’ve been through the SW option before, it isn’t viable. You haven’t provided the figures on station sizes you continued to promise.

Of course a southwest option is viable, it just needs some political will, and it would certainly take more time to get to what we currently envisage as 'completion'. To date it doesn't yet seem to have registered with the decision makers that the higher population densities on the southside are in places like Terenure, Rathfarnham, Firhouse and Knocklyon, rather than in Dundrum, Clonskeagh and Sandyford, which are already very nicely served by rail transport.

But I am hopeful that it will eventually register.

And, in relation to this thread, I remain pretty much bamboozled by the Greens' logic behind a metro line to the Southwest via Ranelagh. Puzzled, at least.

Last Stop

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I'm sure we can get into a discussion of future proposals for the Green Line at some later stage, and perhaps also Mr Ryan's views in 2004 - 16 years back - but the current thread is about party manifestos, and my query is about the Greens' logic of building a metro line between Ranelagh and the Southwest of the city.

I feel it would just be more sensible to build such a line directly between the centre and the Southwest. I can't see why there is a need to faff around with building it to any station in Ranelagh, or any other station in the Southeast of the city.

The ship has sailed on metrolink phase 1. Any changes to the alignment between Swords and south of Charlemont (I.e. Ranelagh) would set the project back years.
It would be completely illogical for the Green Party to propose delaying a public transport project so they have tried to have it every way by proposing a SW option from Ranelagh.

Of course a southwest option is viable, it just needs some political will, and it would certainly take more time to get to what we currently envisage as 'completion'. To date it doesn't yet seem to have registered with the decision makers that the higher population densities on the southside are in places like Terenure, Rathfarnham, Firhouse and Knocklyon, rather than in Dundrum, Clonskeagh and Sandyford, which are already very nicely served by rail transport.

But I am hopeful that it will eventually register.

And, in relation to this thread, I remain pretty much bamboozled by the Greens' logic behind a metro line to the Southwest via Ranelagh. Puzzled, at least.

The SW option isn’t viable. Talk of political will is nonsense. The numbers don’t stack up. Your misunderstanding of which areas are served by each line has already been pointed out.
I suggest you tell those who struggle to get on the green line every morning that they are very nicely served by rail. I’m sure you’d get a rude awakening.

The SW option is currently a political point scoring tool. If it was truly viable, then at least 1 part would have committed to building it rather than the token feasibility study.

strassenwo!f

Last Stop wrote: »

The ship has sailed on metrolink phase 1. Any changes to the alignment between Swords and south of Charlemont (I.e. Ranelagh) would set the project back years.

The situation on this part of the metro project is not relevant to this thread.

Last Stop wrote: »

It would be completely illogical for the Green Party to propose delaying a public transport project so they have tried to have it every way by proposing a SW option from Ranelagh.

The Greens want the Swords/Airport metro into town, and then they want the metro to continue to the Southwest. I like that.

Where does Ranelagh, in the Southeast, come into that? The formerly proposed unnecessary replacement of the southside Green line is sensibly not now going to happen, as there's still plenty of scope for increasing the number of trams, so why do they see Ranelagh getting involved in a line to the Southwest of Dublin?

Last Stop wrote: »

The SW option isn’t viable. Talk of political will is nonsense. The numbers don’t stack up. Your misunderstanding of which areas are served by each line has already been pointed out.

No, it hasn't. All of the places we talked about, namely Terenure, Rahfarnham, Firhouse and Knocklyon, have higher population densities than Dundrum or Sandyford, and several other areas along the Green line (I don't have the figures directly to hand).

Last Stop wrote: »

I suggest you tell those who struggle to get on the green line every morning that they are very nicely served by rail. I’m sure you’d get a rude awakening.

I was in Helsinki only two days ago. There's a section there where they are running 32 trams per hour in each direction at peak times, with street crossings. That's yet another city, along with all the other cities which you and I and others have discussed on this board, which are running a tram throughput which is 50%+ over what they're currently running on the Green line.

There are several ways that Dublin could improve the throughput along the part of the green line south of the canal, like building a tram line along Adelaide Road towards Baggot Street Bridge and perhaps beyond, and the metrolink people have very sensibly decided to put off the currently unnecessary replacement, for at least a couple of decades, while they look at (and hopefully) eventually implement other options.

They've made a clear statement that it is not necessary to replace the Green line, south of the canal, for at least a couple of decades.

Last Stop wrote: »

The SW option is currently a political point scoring tool. If it was truly viable, then at least 1 part would have committed to building it rather than the token feasibility study.

It is certainly valid that it is a point-scoring tool. But the areas involved in any putative southwest line generally have higher densities than those along the Green line south of the canal, there are no obvious ways to serve them by LUAS, and journey times would be very significantly reduced along any corridor in that area.

(In contrast, any project which involved replacing the Green LUAS would involve an unnecessary hiatus of probably at least 6 or more months, would not noticeably improve journey times into the city for almost all passengers, and would indeed increase journey times for a very large number of passengers along the line).

Pete_Cavan

strassenwo!f wrote: »

the higher population densities on the southside are in places like Terenure, Rathfarnham, Firhouse and Knocklyon, rather than in Dundrum, Clonskeagh and Sandyford, which are already very nicely served by rail transport.

I'd love to see back up for that claim as it doesn't seem correct to me. Even if it is true, the population increases currently happening along the Green Line will undoubtedly change it. Construction of a new town for several thousand people well underway at Cherrywood, SHD consultation has just started on over 700 apartments in Dundrum plus over 1,000 are intended for the Central Mental Hospital, we could see another thousand plus units in Sandyford. The other areas you mentioned are an ocean of semi-ds with good sized front and back gardens. The Green Line needs upgrading to Metro, there is no doubt about that.

Idbatterim

have people before profit and the lunatic left, proposed ripping up the rail lines and selling the steel and trains etc, so that we can increase welfare spending?

Idbatterim

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I'd love to see back up for that claim as it doesn't seem correct to me. Even if it is true, the population increases currently happening along the Green Line will undoubtedly change it. Construction of a new town for several thousand people well underway at Cherrywood, SHD consultation has just started on over 700 apartments in Dundrum plus over 1,000 are intended for the Central Mental Hospital, we could see another thousand plus units in Sandyford. The other areas you mentioned are an ocean of semi-ds with good sized front and back gardens. The Green Line needs upgrading to Metro, there is no doubt about that.

also the old dundrum town centre redevelopment will add hundreds of apartments, the jesuit site in milltown near the luas, will add hundreds more. There must be plans for 5,000 or so apartments in the south city near the green line currently including cherrywood...

CatInABox

Idbatterim wrote: »

have people before profit and the lunatic left, proposed ripping up the rail lines and selling the steel and trains etc, so that we can increase welfare spending?

No, but they want to cancel Metrolink because it's going to require the CPO of the apartments at Tara St, while they're big proponents of the Western Rail Corridor.

Idbatterim

CatInABox wrote: »

No, but they want to cancel Metrolink because it's going to require the CPO of the apartments at Tara St, while they're big proponents of the Western Rail Corridor.

yeah, thats where my extreme comment was aimed at , that insanity. Was fairly sure I had read that! :rolleyes:

those apartments at tara street, can be replaced by higher density ones later on...

Sam Russell

Idbatterim wrote: »

yeah, thats where my extreme comment was aimed at , that insanity. Was fairly sure I had read that! :rolleyes:

those apartments at tara street, can be replaced by higher density ones later on...

The apartment block can even be built before the Metrolink build starts, as can the swimming pool.

NIMAN

All of them.

Last Stop

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The situation on this part of the metro project is not relevant to this thread.



The Greens want the Swords/Airport metro into town, and then they want the metro to continue to the Southwest. I like that.

Where does Ranelagh, in the Southeast, come into that? The formerly proposed unnecessary replacement of the southside Green line is sensibly not now going to happen, as there's still plenty of scope for increasing the number of trams, so why do they see Ranelagh getting involved in a line to the Southwest of Dublin?



No, it hasn't. All of the places we talked about, namely Terenure, Rahfarnham, Firhouse and Knocklyon, have higher population densities than Dundrum or Sandyford, and several other areas along the Green line (I don't have the figures directly to hand).



I was in Helsinki only two days ago. There's a section there where they are running 32 trams per hour in each direction at peak times, with street crossings. That's yet another city, along with all the other cities which you and I and others have discussed on this board, which are running a tram throughput which is 50%+ over what they're currently running on the Green line.

There are several ways that Dublin could improve the throughput along the part of the green line south of the canal, like building a tram line along Adelaide Road towards Baggot Street Bridge and perhaps beyond, and the metrolink people have very sensibly decided to put off the currently unnecessary replacement, for at least a couple of decades, while they look at (and hopefully) eventually implement other options.

They've made a clear statement that it is not necessary to replace the Green line, south of the canal, for at least a couple of decades.



It is certainly valid that it is a point-scoring tool. But the areas involved in any putative southwest line generally have higher densities than those along the Green line south of the canal, there are no obvious ways to serve them by LUAS, and journey times would be very significantly reduced along any corridor in that area.

(In contrast, any project which involved replacing the Green LUAS would involve an unnecessary hiatus of probably at least 6 or more months, would not noticeably improve journey times into the city for almost all passengers, and would indeed increase journey times for a very large number of passengers along the line).

Absolute nonsense. No figures to back up any of your claims. Filled with anecdotal evidence.

Zebra3

FG third in latest opinion poll and I think fairly safe to say, toxic on transfers.

Won’t be them as main govt party.

Qrt

Zebra3 wrote: »

FG third in latest opinion poll and I think fairly safe to say, toxic on transfers.

Won’t be them as main govt party.

Which poll?

Zebra3

Qrt wrote: »

Which poll?

Sunday Times I think it was.

MrAbyss

Idbatterim wrote: »

have people before profit and the lunatic left, proposed ripping up the rail lines and selling the steel and trains etc, so that we can increase welfare spending?

Their super rich parents buy them BMWs and Mercs as soon as they turn 17. 'Wots public transport deddi!'

Qrt

Qrt wrote: »

I’m from the area, when people talk about Ballycullen, then mean the southern fringes built on the mountainside by Lidl and up to the Augustinians. The proposed 16 is an adequate bus to Tallaght. Sure the 175 is a welcome addition but it’s awfully infrequent (especially at weekends, and if the other two buses are the 49 and the 65b, well the 49 is a hell of a walk (and infrequent) and the 65b is so infrequent it’s almost pointless.

But yeah, I got the dates wrong, big whoop. Dunno why you had to get all snarky about it

The 15 Terminus is Ballycullen. The 175 passes by Ballycullen as does the 65B. The 15B terminus is 100m or so from the edge of Ballycullen.

Ballycullen is south of the Killininny Road, which you would be aware of if "you're from the area".

Are you pathologically incapable of getting facts correct?

It's also not snarky to point out that someone is spoofing on the internet, it's a public service.

You're welcome m8

Qrt

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The 15 Terminus is Ballycullen. The 175 passes by Ballycullen as does the 65B. The 15B terminus is 100m or so from the edge of Ballycullen.

Ballycullen is south of the Killininny Road, which you would be aware of if "you're from the area".

Are you pathologically incapable of getting facts correct?

It's also not snarky to point out that someone is spoofing on the internet, it's a public service.

You're welcome m8

Last time I checked, the 15 nor the 15B doesn’t go anywhere near Tallaght, which was the whole point I made...

The 65b is trash as an urban bus service, and the not-very-frequent 175 is running just over a year. My whole point was a decent bus service from Ballycullen to Tallaght should be running properly before the ridiculous notion of a Luas extension...

Qrt

Qrt wrote: »

Last time I checked, the 15 nor the 15B doesn’t go anywhere near Tallaght, which was the whole point I made...

The 65b is trash as an urban bus service, and the not-very-frequent 175 is running just over a year. My whole point was a decent bus service from Ballycullen to Tallaght should be running properly before the ridiculous notion of a Luas extension...

Both will link you to the 49(15)/75(15+b) within 10 minutes of boarding, since you view a <200m walk to the 49 or a <1km walk to the 75 to be too far to be considered a local bus service.


Ballycullen has excellent transport links to Tallaght. It's also not in the location where you claimed it was, and your waffling about a local politician was completely wrong.

Qrt

Deleted User wrote: »

Both will link you to the 49(15)/75(15+b) within 10 minutes of boarding, since you view a <200m walk to the 49 or a <1km walk to the 75 to be too far to be considered a local bus service.


Ballycullen has excellent transport links to Tallaght. It's also not in the location where you claimed it was, and your waffling about a local politician was completely wrong.

I really don't even know what you're on about at this point, but all I know is that both drafts of the BusConnects redesign have a bus connecting Tallaght and the southern fringes of Ballycullen, so I'm going to go out on a whim and say that they don't think the current bus services are adequate.

I'm done with this s**t now, I'm out.

prunudo

Not so much a promise but Newstalk Breakfast had Noel Rock and Mark Macsharry discussing their respective parties transport policies. Didnt catch either of them mentioning the M20 or DU but Rock kept pointing out that FF would bin or delay Metrolink with needless redesigns and FG were the only party to actually have a plan ready to go.

Cookiemunster

prunudo wrote: »

Not so much a promise but Newstalk Breakfast had Noel Rock and Mark Macsharry discussing their respective parties transport policies. Didnt catch either of them mentioning the M20 or DU but Rock kept pointing out that FF would bin or delay Metrolink with needless redesigns and FG were the only party to actually have a plan ready to go.

FF have a section in their manifesto titled "We will build the M20", so that's fairly safe under them.

There wasn't anything factual from either of them with regard to the metro. It's most definitely not shovel ready as claimed by Rock as there hasn't even been a railway order submitted to ABP.

is_that_so

Cookiemunster wrote: »

FF have a section in their manifesto titled "We will build the M20", so that's fairly safe under them.

There wasn't anything factual from either of them with regard to the metro. It's most definitely not shovel ready as claimed by Rock as there hasn't even been a railway order submitted to ABP.

But there is a plan to submit a plan that is ready! FF's intention to defer or review it is the key point.

Cookiemunster

is_that_so wrote: »

But there is a plan to submit a plan that is ready! FF's intention to defer or review it is the key point.

I'm not saying that FF will or won't interfere or change it, but having a plan to submit a plan, is not a commitment to build it. Or is it a guarantee that ABP won't order changes after the inevitable objections and public hearing. If they do build it it won't be under construction next year and won't be open in 2027.

Pete_Cavan

Cookiemunster wrote: »

I'm not saying that FF will or won't interfere or change it, but having a plan to submit a plan, is not a commitment to build it. Or is it a guarantee that ABP won't order changes after the inevitable objections and public hearing. If they do build it it won't be under construction next year and won't be open in 2027.

If your point is that he prematurely used the term "shovel ready" then you are correct but that is largely irrelevant. The main point in relation to Metrolink is that FG are the only ones nailing their colours to the mast and saying that they want to deliver the project which has been going through the necessary processes for a couple of years now. Everyone else has some caveat designed to attract votes from other areas but will delay if not derail the project. I'd be more than willing to forgive Rock the incorrect use of the term if they do actually get it to construction next year.

Idbatterim

I left the house at 6:45am this morning thinking, Ill beat the traffic! LOL!!! at a crawl from rathcoole city bound on the N7! at 6:45am!!!

zell12

A new hospital!!!!
and no it is not confirmed. It is a plain lie from this FG TD
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=112435258&postcount=373

Idbatterim

From this week’s Galway City Tribune – A 1,150-bed acute hospital and a separate 200-bed elective hospital at Merlin Park – costing in the region of €3 billion and taking up to 15 years to deliver – are included in a new report on health infrastructure needs for Galway.

LOL! I am mid thirties now, Ill be dead and buried by the time this comes to pass, if they have a 15 year time line on it now!!! The geniuses at the NCH built an oval building, must have done wonders for the cost. Suggest they build a pyramid shaped hospital for this scheme! And definitely call in all the experts that waffled for decades about the NCH, we wouldnt be here without them!

Chivito550

Luas to hazelhatch? What's that all about? Hazelhatch needs a DART, not a LUAS.

Sam Russell

Chivito550 wrote: »

Luas to hazelhatch? What's that all about? Hazelhatch needs a DART, not a LUAS.

Well, going by past reports, Michael McDowell does not understand the difference between bus, coach, Luas, metro or Dart.

He though that the airport was adequately served by coaches every half hour, and a metro was just a tram.

Marlay

Had an independent candidate say he would get extra rail carriages 'now, not in two years'. When I asked how, given that they have to be built his response was that if we can bail out the banks overnight, we can get carriages. When I pointed out that you can't build carriages overnight his answer was that they don't need to be built we can lease them. When the issue of a different gauge was explained he maintained the the UK has the same gauge so we could get them from there. He won't be getting my vote.

AlmightyCushion

Marlay wrote: »

Had an independent candidate say he would get extra rail carriages 'now, not in two years'. When I asked how, given that they have to be built his response was that if we can bail out the banks overnight, we can get carriages. When I pointed out that you can't build carriages overnight his answer was that they don't need to be built we can lease them. When the issue of a different gauge was explained he maintained the the UK has the same gauge so we could get them from there. He won't be getting my vote.

The problem is you know this shít so aren't easily led by his bullshít. Plenty of others will vote for him because 'he'll getting those carriages now' not knowing it's complete crap. Imagine if the ASAI applied to political promises. The world would be a different place.

Bebra

Chivito550 wrote: »

Luas to hazelhatch? What's that all about? Hazelhatch needs a DART, not a LUAS.

I'm guessing it's an extension of the Red Line from Saggart. I can't see such a line receiving priority and I'm pretty sure a new Tallaght-Saggart-Hazelhatch-Celbridge-Maynooth bus route is planned under Bus Connects.

prunudo

Chivito550 wrote: »

Luas to hazelhatch? What's that all about? Hazelhatch needs a DART, not a LUAS.

Green party candidate on the Tonight show mentioned canning of feasibility study of a Luas to Blessington. When will they realise that the Luas is a tram and therefore should only be built within short distances from city centres.
Nobody will give up their car to commute on a tram trundling along at 60-70kph (open to correction on max speed).

Idbatterim

prunudo wrote: »

Green party candidate on the Tonight show mentioned canning of feasibility study of a Luas to Blessington. When will they realise that the Luas is a tram and therefore should only be built within short distances from city centres.
Nobody will give up their car to commute on a tram trundling along at 60-70kph (open to correction on max speed).

The Max speed isn’t the biggest issue. It’s stopping every few seconds !

LeinsterDub

prunudo wrote: »

Green party candidate on the Tonight show mentioned canning of feasibility study of a Luas to Blessington. When will they realise that the Luas is a tram and therefore should only be built within short distances from city centres.
Nobody will give up their car to commute on a tram trundling along at 60-70kph (open to correction on max speed).

And yet the Luas is wedged every day. Some people will have to be forced to give up their cars

Idbatterim

The cost of congestion in Dublin is two billion a year , 18 momthsbabd the metro is paid for. Build it ! There cannot be another delay!

CatInABox

A tram line over the Dublin mountains to serve a town with 6000 people. Right.

Sad to see that some Green party candidates still have their priorities up their own hole. They'll still get a high vote from me, but seriously, anyone can look at that plan and know that any feasibility study will laugh them out of it. It already takes 50 minutes on the red line, imagine how long it would take more than doubling the length of the line.

prunudo

LeinsterDub wrote: »

And yet the Luas is wedged every day. Some people will have to be forced to give up their cars

Yeah, once the infrastructure is built we embrace it with both arms here. I just think the notion of suggesting extending Luas to commuter towns is a cheap election promise.
By all means these towns need new public transport options but it needs to be high speed train or express buses.

L1011

Chivito550 wrote: »

Luas to hazelhatch? What's that all about? Hazelhatch needs a DART, not a LUAS.

There is a reason you'd do it (as an extension of the Lucan line once it's built) to actually generate a network - but it's so far down the priority list right now it shouldn't even be coming up