madbeanman wrote: » When people talk about spurs (like this proposal and a seperate one for a spur on the Lucas into Fingal) I always wonder about the length of the line. What is an optimal length for a Metro? How long is too long?
ncounties wrote: » I see on the Metro Link website, the anticipated date for applying for a Railway Order is Q2 2020 - is this still likely?
cgcsb wrote: » Definitely not. Late 2020 if it isn't shelved by then
prunudo wrote: » Why would it be shelved? Are you just being cynical or the possibility a new administration would look for a re-design?
Pete_Cavan wrote: » The idea that the Metro plans changed because one political party didn't like the other political party's plan is nonsense. First of all, these plans weren't developed by the political parties in the first place. Metro North was designed in the context of DU being delivered around the same time, that is no longer the case so Metrolink was designed to provide heavy rail connectivity in the absence of DU. It makes perfect sense and Metrolink is a superior plan.
prunudo wrote: » Was there something about them pushing the cross city Luas ahead meant they built over the proposed ssg station for Metro north, or am I mixing things up.
cgcsb wrote: » The state doesn't have the cash. We've committed a blank check to rural broadband which has a minimum cost of 3bn. The children's hospital saga is a minimum of 2bn it again is a blank check. There are numerous rural road schemes that will be required to buy votes. Then there's the threat of a new government which means redesign. So not a snowball's basically.
marno21 wrote: » Is the National Broadband Plan not a maximum of €2.97bn? The rural road schemes aren't going to be an issue for several years yet because there are very few close to construction. The only road scheme not under construction that could possibly start before 2022 is the N5 Ballaghaderreen-Scramoge scheme which will cost around €130m to construct.
MJohnston wrote: » I'd also be wary of assuming that it would be Metrolink that would get the boot if the government was to shift to FF, the NBP is on much shakier ground politically.
cgcsb wrote: » 2.97bn ok, you hardly think it'll be capped at that? Even if there were funds available for metrolink, I really doubt that there is a political appetite for another mega project given how politically toxic the latest ones are.
loyatemu wrote: » they've already signed the contract for the NBP
marno21 wrote: » I haven't seen the contract but yes, I don't think it'll exceed 3bn. In addition, it's 3bn over 25 years There's no other public transport projects in Dublin that can go ahead now and be used as votewinners. They already exhausted the Luas BXD card the last time. There's no more readymeals
cgcsb wrote: » I think it's naive to assume that a fundamentally flawed project like the nbp will be capped at 3bn. And as for 25 years, companies and governments don't last that long
Marcusm wrote: » The NBP contract has been signed so very difficult to undo.
vladmydad wrote: » The next government will likely be a FF Green coalition. Guaranteed the Greens will make some awful anti infrastructure demands.
Idbatterim wrote: » Is it mad though ? I mean any other continental city and I’d assume they’d be delivering a metro to there... the issue is the chronic lack of funds spent on infrastructure here
Uriel. wrote: » The real issue is spending unusual levels of certain tax receipts on current funding instead of investing in capital project. FAC has already advised on the risks involved here.
