Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Story on Morning Ireland says Metro North is postponed

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    If the DoF is so afraid of a turf war then surely an independent company could be contracted by the DoT to bulid the entirety of Stephen's Green Station, all levels and leave the tunnel stubs for the RPA and IE to connect their tunnels to. A simpler solution would be for this government to actually govern and MAKE SURE there's no turf war with the threat of sacking the boards of management of both these state agencies if such a turf war breaks out.


  • Options
    #33
    paulm17781
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭paulm17781


    Hamndegger wrote: »
    The odd thing about the Broadstone affray is that property law would likely side with Irish Rail/CIE as it is land held by the company that it took ownership of legally. A land bank of it's type would cost fortunes to engineer were RPA to source one on the private market and CIE knows as such; to hand over same without any compensation or allowance would be theft of a high order.

    Surely it is the state's land irrespective of what label is on it?


  • Options
    #34
    Rawr
    Registered Users Posts: 3,767 ✭✭✭Rawr


    Metrobest wrote: »
    See, if you´d read up on Metro North..

    Trying not to add fuel to the fire here Metrobest, but a little tradition here at boards is '..link or it didn't happen'

    I am enjoying the Tet-a-Tet between yourself and Sponge Bob, but please add references when asking a poster to 'read up' on anything. We all like to be informed too.


  • Options
    #35
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    murphaph wrote: »
    If the DoF is so afraid of a turf war then surely an independent company could be contracted by the DoT to build the entirety of Stephen's Green Station, all levels and leave the tunnel stubs for the RPA and IE to connect their tunnels to.

    Messy, the MN PPP operator could 'blame' a 'third party' for 30 years then if the bloody thing so much as springs a condensation problem after a wet winter :) .
    A simpler solution would be for this government to actually govern and MAKE SURE there's no turf war with the threat of sacking the boards of management of both these state agencies if such a turf war breaks out.

    LOL:D Sack someone in CIE or the RPA for incompetence, sure where would you start ??????

    After the Battle of Broadstone late last year ( and ongoing, the RPA still has not gotten in there and some consultants have had the spat kicked over to them in typical Noel Dempsey style) the Dept of Finance has been singularly unimpressed with the Spirit of Co-Operation between the RPA and CIE ...never mind the DTO who never intervened .

    The Department of Finance is mindful that a turf war over St Stephens Green Station, post contract signing , cannot be kicked off to consultants .

    The Department of Finance is rather shocked at the utter inability of the Dept of Transport and of Noel Dempsey to intervene effectively with these agencies under its remit and to enforce its will or at least broker a ceasefire .

    The Independent correctly called the RPA and CIE a pair of "Rival Street Gangs"

    They would most likely expect this incompetence of Dialup Dempsey ....not least after his shambolic performance with public monies during the ASTI supervision spat some years back , but the fact that no civil servant in there seems to have any authority over the RPA CIE DTO (and I suppose the DTA in time) makes them disinclined to disburse enormous amounts of public money to these people.


  • Options
    #36
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    Rawr wrote: »
    Trying not to add fuel to the fire here Metrobest, but a little tradition here are boards is '..link or it didn't happen'

    I am enjoying the Tet-a-Tet between yourself and Sponge Bob, but please add references when asking a poster to 'read up' on anything. We all like to be informed too.

    I don´t do academic articles on this forum, but here are the references you request.

    Metro North history/background
    http://www.rpa.ie/metro/about_metro/metro_history

    O´Reilly Consultants report (see p.70, 81)

    http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/Committees29thDail/jct/metro-report/Report.doc

    "Soak up" the facts, then make an informed comment. I asked for nothing more, nothing less.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    OTK
    Closed Accounts Posts: 556 ✭✭✭OTK


    Metrobest wrote: »
    See, if you´d read up on Metro North you´d know that ...
    Nobody is arguing in this thread against the viability of MN.


  • Options
    #38
    meditraitor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,207 ✭✭✭meditraitor


    Good informative thread but the basis for the thread comes from this article.
    Mr O'Riordan also said that certain infrastructure projects such as the the Dublin Metro rail project could be postponed, and that spending on the upskilling and training of workers under the National Development Plan should be prioritised
    http://www.rte.ie/business/2008/0626/siptu.html

    Union bull as usual.


  • Options
    #39
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    O Reillys report always struck me as odd in many ways , have you anything better than that Metrobest or is that it .

    In fact have you any linkable facts or assertions given by the RPA and not by 'consultants' . That O Reilly report, even if were not odd, is 5 years old.


  • Options
    #40
    trellheim
    Registered Users Posts: 5,860 ✭✭✭trellheim


    BTW : I think MN is indispensable too, in case I am giving perhaps the wrong attitude here.

    I can see a very slow and painful realization on Joe Public's part

    As Sponge Bob says, unless we have missed something [ and I missed where your deadlines re the Connolly and Pearse completions came from ] the Interconnector needs to go ahead and MN will be afterwards. :(


  • Options
    #41
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    trellheim wrote: »
    As Sponge Bob says, unless we have missed something [ and I missed where your deadlines re the Connolly and Pearse completions came from ] the Interconnector needs to go ahead and MN will be afterwards. :(

    Works on Pearse and Connolly ( and north of Connolly) will be highly disruptive to the DART and to Mainline Rail ( and to the IFSC of course ) . Once the Luas extension is complete there is an alternative way into Docklands for at least some people .

    Finance are very mindful of all that and want the works to occur in a definite and defined window. Currently thats 2012 -2014 as I understand it from my sources.

    If there is a spat a la Broadstone over the Stephens Green Station then there will be knockon effects affecting the Interconnector schedule.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Stark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,905 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    meditraitor wrote: »
    Good informative thread but the basis for the thread comes from this article.


    http://www.rte.ie/business/2008/0626/siptu.html

    Union bull as usual.

    We should take money out of health and education and give them to the "workers". God bless 'em.


  • Options
    #43
    Dublin_Gunner
    Registered Users Posts: 7,692 ✭✭✭Dublin_Gunner


    Just to throw in my 2c, and revive this thread.

    Does anyone else not see the stupidity if building two southern running LUAS lines, when we have no other connection to the airport other than road?? (and air obviously lol)

    Dublin must be the ONLY major city in europe with no rail / metro line to the International Airport - its a joke.

    The very same line could serve half of Dublin north (in and out of city), DCU, the airport, cross at multiple rail lines to switch to services heading to west dublin / kildare / meath.

    IMO, it would have made far more sense to build a northern metro (or LUAS) than build the second one south.

    Even for socio-political reasons - North Dubliners have basically been shafted, and feel that way too.

    I mean, previous major transport initiatives serve both sides of the county - DART & M50 for instance.

    And with Bertie being a north-sider himself, I'm very surprised he didnt put the foot down when planning was going ahead (or is it a case that after the Bertie bowl fiasco he didnt bother giving any input, as the rest of the cabinet are so blind to progress its not even funny - yes, mostly talking about that nob-head Harney)


  • Options
    #44
    IanCurtis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,004 ✭✭✭IanCurtis


    GerardKeating wrote: »
    Story on Morning Ireland in a few minutes says Metro North is postponed...

    WOOHOOO

    I am delighted to hear this!!!

    :D:D:D:D:D:D


  • Options
    #45
    Stark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,905 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Eh why? (Not that the story is accurate).


  • Options
    #46
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,253 ✭✭✭markpb


    Dublin_Gunner wrote: »
    IMO, it would have made far more sense to build a northern metro (or LUAS) than build the second one south. Even for socio-political reasons - North Dubliners have basically been shafted, and feel that way too. I mean, previous major transport initiatives serve both sides of the county - DART & M50 for instance.

    Mass transit needs to link areas of high population density with areas of high employment density. When it comes to underground train lines (which are crazily expensive to build) there should be no other factors taken into account. Is it needed and can we afford it?

    I live on the northside and the metro will pass quite close to me but if the demand (bums on seats) isn't there, it shouldn't be built. Political vote buying and northsiders hurt feelings should never be a factor.


  • Options
    #47
    Dublin_Gunner
    Registered Users Posts: 7,692 ✭✭✭Dublin_Gunner


    But that is only part of it.

    To take your own argument into account (cost and requirement), we can look at the port tunnel.

    For the expense of building it, was it really needed?
    Mass transit needs to link areas of high population density with areas of high employment density

    Pretty much most of North Dublin is highly populated, and if it goes straight up the middle, would link with the City centre, as well as providing alternative routes to DCU & the airport.
    Political vote buying and northsiders hurt feelings should never be a factor.

    When looking to get into government, or staying there, I'd have to disagree.


  • Options
    #48
    donvito99
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    ye kno dat 100 k of luas cud be built for the hole of metro north. think of that :eek:


  • Options
    #49
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    donvito99 wrote: »
    ye kno dat 100 k of luas cud be built for the hole of metro north. think of that :eek:

    on-street trams alone are no solution to chronic gridlock. think about it.

    about 10 years ago they mulled over the idea of putting the original luas lines underground in the city centre area. it was considered too costly and too difficult back then too. on hindsight of course, we could've afforded it and should've done it, and i doubt you'd find anyone saying it was a mistake if we had.

    i guarantee you there will be huge patronage of the metro north, to its fullest capacity. in my opinion it should even be heavy rail, but nevertheless it will transform the northside, the airport, and the city.

    rather than 100km of luas lines interacting with cars and traffic lights all over the city, what we need is a couple of really well thought out lines to join up the city's infrastructure. that's what is currently on the table with metro north and dart 2. these projects must be built, at all costs.


  • Options
    #50
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    donvito99 wrote: »
    100 k of luas cud be built

    What's a "luas cud" and would it normally be rode upon or driven upon ??


  • Options
    #51
    Tefral
    Registered Users Posts: 4,318 ✭✭✭Tefral


    I can categorically tell you right now that neither the Metro nor the interconnector have been held up! I know this for an absolute fact. We (my company) put a bid in for the interconnector last night and also we have been working on the metro job already. Of course i cant disclose anything but believe me transport 21 is not recieving many cutbacks at all


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Bodan
    Registered Users Posts: 448 ✭✭Bodan


    I just looked at the design for the first time and its very impressive. But at €5 billion its too expansive, IMHO.


  • Options
    #53
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Bodan wrote: »
    I just looked at the design for the first time and its very impressive. But at €5 billion its too expansive, IMHO.
    I'm sure the London Underground sounded too expensive in 1863 but if you factor in a useful life of at least 100 years (and as shown by London et al, frequently much longer) it is better value. It must be seen as the first underground line of course. A network must follow I believe.


  • Options
    #54
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,253 ✭✭✭markpb


    Bodan wrote: »
    I just looked at the design for the first time and its very impressive. But at €5 billion its too expansive, IMHO.

    Expensive compared to what? Do you have a cost benefit analysis that shows it's excessively expensive?

    I'm not picking on you but plenty of people in this country will see a five followed by lots of zeros and proclaim that it's "too expensive" without looking at the underlying facts. It will provide a fast, efficient, reliable transport system that covers a big section of the city centre, the north city and Swords. It will network well with several other rail lines. It will provide a solid backbone to develop higher density residential and employment areas. It might even move a lot of people from cars onto public transport.

    After all that, it could still be too expensive. But only if you look at it scientifically, not if you look at a figure and make a decision based on absolutely nothing.


  • Options
    #55
    stiktoir
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24 ✭stiktoir


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Also remember that if a Minimal Interconnector was built as I described above and if this Dublin Airport City Project were to go ahead then the best way to service that with public transport would be with a Heavy Rail spur off the northern section of the Dart first to the Airport City which will not be near MN and then to The Airport itself and then to Swords , underground for max three miles and with the depot over near Baldoyle.

    Park and Ride would not be in Lissenhall but around Balbriggan .

    That's Metro North gone so but the complexities of the St Stephens Green station project mean that the Interconnector has to do their bit of it first .

    Finance have taken it from Transport becuase Dempsey is an incompetent anyway and if he cannot stop the RPA and CIE squabbling over Broadstone , cg The Battle Of Broadstone from January , then imagine the expensive shambolic mess with 2 projects building the one station on the Green .

    Something must be done now about Dublin even if only the Minimal Interconnector .

    Gone? blown up by a logic bomb? :D:D:D


  • Options
    #56
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,967 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    cronin_j wrote: »
    I can categorically tell you right now that neither the Metro nor the interconnector have been held up! I know this for an absolute fact. We (my company) put a bid in for the interconnector last night and also we have been working on the metro job already. Of course i cant disclose anything but believe me transport 21 is not recieving many cutbacks at all
    Thanks Cronin; SpongeBob, get your coat.

    More posts like the above, please.


  • Options
    #57
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    spacetweek wrote: »
    SpongeBob, get your coat.

    Why are you bumping all these threads like that obnoxious plonker sticktoir used to , eh ???

    Two things that have not changed since I posted.

    1. The public fiscal situation has deteriorated even more than it had earlier this year when Finance started looking at T21 cutbacks.

    The governments finances for the next 3 years are starting to look like Lehman Brothers accounts . Holes everywhere .

    2. The Dept of Finance will not tolerate 2 contractors building a station in St Stephens Green at the same time . The potential for cost overruns and for costly litigation is far too great .


  • Options
    #58
    Cool Mo D
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Cool Mo D


    Bit inaccurate there. Firstly, major money won't be due until Metro North is carrying passengers, which will be at least 6 years from now, at the most optimistic prediction. So axing it won't save any Govt. money.
    And the station at Stephen's Green will be entirely built by the Metro crew anyway, and the RPA are in charge. IE and the RPA have bi-weekly meetings to co-ordinate the building of it.


  • Options
    #59
    paulm17781
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭paulm17781


    Cool Mo D wrote: »
    And the station at Stephen's Green will be entirely built by the Metro crew anyway, and the RPA are in charge. IE and the RPA have bi-weekly meetings to co-ordinate the building of it.

    I'm not disagreeing with you. :) Do you have any links / docs that can be posted that say that? I would like to see it written, just as confirmation. :)


  • Options
    #60
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Metro North is an adequate solution. But it needs to be future-proofed. They must make sure that an upgrade to a heavy-rail guage is possible at a later date. Sadly I e-mailed someone on the matter and they said it wouldn't be possible.

    I personally think we should've gone for heavy-rail. YES it does add to the expense. But the burden of the project's expense is carried by the tunnelling costs. The smaller light-rail carriages don't save us an amazing amount in comparison to the overall cost of the project.

    As for Metro West. Haven't heard any news on that lately, but it's looking like an utter disaster before it's even built. It should just be a third luas line judging by the way they're planning to construct it.

    I am confident that Metro North will be delivered 'on time' and 'on budget' in 2020 for 8 billion euro. Metro West will be thrown in the bin before then.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Cool Mo D
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Cool Mo D


    Hmm, I think I read it in an interview with the RPA head in one of the sunday papers - probably the business section of the sunday times. Can't find it now though.


Advertisement