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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Kevin Myers writes anti-Metro column (x4) [SEE MOD WARNING POST #1]

245

Comments

  • #52
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    Kevin Myers can be incisive and enjoyable, but when it comes to transport topics he tends to take the populist and misinformed view for the sake of column inches. However....

    Not everyone who isn't particularly enamoured by Metro North is an anti public transport/Dublin tyrant. What I despise about rail based infrastructural projects is the historical paddywhackery approach that is dictated by political interference and more recently consumed by a Government deathwish to pander to property developers in an attempt to make it look like sensible and sustainable planning. (Which every informed observer should realise is just a ruse.) The latter is why the latest luas extensions will run through fields for many years to come, while the former is why the section of WRC was built.

    Ireland seems trapped in a repetitive cycle of building "bits" of great ideas via much procrastination. Its interesting to note that areas of Dublin where the luas would deliver massive benefits to easing road congestion have been sidelined. Its laughable that the DART was extended to Greystones, when Maynooth would have been the better option. Its scary to think that we may actually build Metro North and then never extend the concept, but instead reinvent the wheel at some future date and procrastinate about it as well. As a nation we devise great ideas and then pick them apart until we are left with a disjointed mess.

    Metro North in itself is not a panacea for solving traffic congestion. It is merely the first step of a metro that should actually be extended. But if one looks at the T21 map, it is easy to see that its not planned to go anywhere else and if we take Metro West out of the equation (which wasn't difficult after the property crash) Metro North is it and thats that. So I can see why it looks like a vanity project.

    This is why I support a complete post celtic tiger/property boom re-evaluation of public transport infrastructure projects. Not because Metro North is bad, but because I fear it will be just another stand alone facility in the aforementioned disjointed mess that we have come to hate. Personally I think the first starting point years ago should have been dealing with the CIE group at Government level, because the creation of the RPA was a state vote of no confidence in CIE and I think the more "quangos" you create then the bigger the problems you have. CIE and the RPA do not work in harmony because the latter was created out of the disgruntled former. Add to this the DTA which is now the NTA and if you are paying attention then the picture should emerge. Its not a pretty one and thats very unfortunate.

    For the record folks, internet forums can be difficult places to articulate opinions like this because we just don't know who we are talking to. The history of transport planning in Dublin is worth immersing oneself in as it tells many tales that we can learn from. So thats my recommendation to younger people here or those who havent exposed themselves to the histrionics of it all and hopefully it helps you understand where the more hardened and opinionated people like myself come from. Because believe it or not, nothing has changed.


  • #53
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Forgot to mention The "Kildare Route Project" ...which is nearly all inside Dublin

    6. KRP by CIE , €350m-€400m spent ( they won't say) and for that we got 4 new stations ( 2 of which existed nearby already ) and a bit of track they don't use and a station they won't open.


  • #54
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    DWCommuter wrote: »
    Kevin Myers can be incisive and enjoyable, but when it comes to transport topics he tends to take the populist and misinformed view for the sake of column inches. However....

    Not everyone who isn't particularly enamoured by Metro North is an anti public transport/Dublin tyrant. What I despise about rail based infrastructural projects is the historical paddywhackery approach that is dictated by political interference and more recently consumed by a Government deathwish to pander to property developers in an attempt to make it look like sensible and sustainable planning. (Which every informed observer should realise is just a ruse.) The latter is why the latest luas extensions will run through fields for many years to come, while the former is why the section of WRC was built.

    Ireland seems trapped in a repetitive cycle of building "bits" of great ideas via much procrastination. Its interesting to note that areas of Dublin where the luas would deliver massive benefits to easing road congestion have been sidelined. Its laughable that the DART was extended to Greystones, when Maynooth would have been the better option. Its scary to think that we may actually build Metro North and then never extend the concept, but instead reinvent the wheel at some future date and procrastinate about it as well. As a nation we devise great ideas and then pick them apart until we are left with a disjointed mess.

    Metro North in itself is not a panacea for solving traffic congestion. It is merely the first step of a metro that should actually be extended. But if one looks at the T21 map, it is easy to see that its not planned to go anywhere else and if we take Metro West out of the equation (which wasn't difficult after the property crash) Metro North is it and thats that. So I can see why it looks like a vanity project.

    This is why I support a complete post celtic tiger/property boom re-evaluation of public transport infrastructure projects. Not because Metro North is bad, but because I fear it will be just another stand alone facility in the aforementioned disjointed mess that we have come to hate. Personally I think the first starting point years ago should have been dealing with the CIE group at Government level, because the creation of the RPA was a state vote of no confidence in CIE and I think the more "quangos" you create then the bigger the problems you have. CIE and the RPA do not work in harmony because the latter was created out of the disgruntled former. Add to this the DTA which is now the NTA and if you are paying attention then the picture should emerge. Its not a pretty one and thats very unfortunate.

    For the record folks, internet forums can be difficult places to articulate opinions like this because we just don't know who we are talking to. The history of transport planning in Dublin is worth immersing oneself in as it tells many tales that we can learn from. So thats my recommendation to younger people here or those who havent exposed themselves to the histrionics of it all and hopefully it helps you understand where the more hardened and opinionated people like myself come from. Because believe it or not, nothing has changed.

    And its because of that endless planning process that I'd like to see Metro North just proceed, imperfect as it may be. The thought of yet more consultation is stomach-churning. We need delivery.

    If 5 or 10 years of waffling about it is not enough to satisfy everyone, then what is? At the end of the day, some people are just idiots who's opinions should be politely ignored. As you say, we could procrastinate about it for another decade, but there has to come a time when you need to break ground. We can't dance around this for another decade before starting. I say what we have on paper is pretty damn good, lets be forthright and build the damn thing.

    If the slower luas turns profit, Metro North/Dart Underground cannot fail to succeed. Not building it would be economic suicide!

    However, we need a new govt first because the current shower have lost the people. With a fresh slate and new govt, I have high hopes these twin projects will break ground in the next few years.


  • #55
    dubhthach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    D.L.R. wrote: »

    If the slower luas turns profit, Metro North/Dart Underground cannot fail to succeed. Not building it would be economic suicide!

    Important reason Luas turns a profit if you ask me is because CIÉ didn't get their paws on it. The same will probably be true of Metro North.


  • #56
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    dubhthach wrote: »
    Important reason Luas turns a profit if you ask me is because CIÉ didn't get their paws on it. The same will probably be true of Metro North.

    I dunno about the whole RPA vs CIE thing, turf wars aren't what Dublin wants. The average punter doesn't give a toss about CIE RPA Dublin Bus or whoever... A bunch of competing systems is actually a pain in the hole from a user perspective. The core goal should be about facilitating the user. Otherwise it is just a string of vanity projects.

    Lest we forget, the RPA are also responsible for the dogs dinners Luas BX and Metro West. You can almost laugh those projects off the page they're so bad in concept and design. Metro North is decent though, credit where its due. But seriously, realising Dublin needs an underground system.. and pointing it at the airport - its hardly rocket science now is it?

    As I see it, Dublin is one city, a standard medium sized european city, it should have one simple system run by one authority. Its not as if it ain't been done elsewhere.


  • #57
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    D.L.R. wrote: »
    However, we need a new govt first because the current shower have lost the people. With a fresh slate and new govt, I have high hopes these twin projects will break ground in the next few years.

    Well you'd better hope it doesn't involve FG because I recall Enda saying MN would be for the snipping whilst endorsing WRC.

    As far as I know Labour and SF support the project.


  • #58
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    It was dig at how every big project in Dublin in the past 15 years has inevitably gone way over budget.

    1. No sooner was the M50 finished in 2005 than it was widened, cost of that €1bn. The last section of the M50 (from Sandyford to Cherrywood) cost over €50m a km when built in 2005 and that sectionhas not been widened...yet. It has blipped on the widening radar.
    2. Luas was around double original budget for red and green lines. They came in at €700m or €800m in the end.
    3. Luas extension to Point Depot cost €100m a MILE, Luas Cherrywood around €40m a km and the Athenry Ennis WRC section cost around €110m THE LOT.
    4. The Port tunnel, €800m I suspect.
    5. The new criminal court building near Heuston will cost us over €15m a year, EVERY SINGLE YEAR between now and around 2035. It cost €120m to build but it looks rather nice :p

    I won't mention Terminal 2 seeing as that was not strictly 'public' expenditure.

    Dublin has a lot of previous when it comes to ludicrous expenditures, no cost control and disgraceful outcomes for the taxpayer.

    Believe it or not it costs more to build in a city than in the middle of a field. Also is your point they are too expensive or always go over budget because you've mixed projects which where over budget and one that where not?


  • #59
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Also is your point they are too expensive or always go over budget because you've mixed projects which where over budget and one that where not?

    Too expensive and over budget, I stand corrected where they were not over budget...but I feel the budgets are somehow more mutable in Dublin than elsewhere.


  • #60
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    Well you'd better hope it doesn't involve FG because I recall Enda saying MN would be for the snipping whilst endorsing WRC.

    As far as I know Labour and SF support the project.

    Yeah but don't FG always do this - they say what they would do if they formed a majority govt, which they won't.

    I reckon a FG/Lab govt would have to support MN, especially if the Lab element is as strong as polling suggests.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    dubhthach wrote: »
    How is it a toy? It will provide mass transit every 3 minutes through a heavy populated area as well as connecting the Airport to city centre in less then 20 minutes. It will also be in use for at least 100years. No doubt if we stuck you in a time machine to the early 80's you would tell us that the Dart would turn out as nothing more then a toy :rolleyes:
    Best post of the thread.


    I don't wish to comment myself, so I'll just echo Furet: The fact that we're still trying to figure out whether we need a metro or not is a national embarrassment. We needed a metro along that alignment in 1990, not 2016.


  • #62
    dowlingm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,337 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    Kevin Myers is not a journalist. He is an opinion writer. A journalist (few enough in Ireland these days) goes out and researches a story for days or weeks. Myers writes about the Seanad one day, Metro North the next, travellers the next and gay rights the next. His production rate is admirable, his use of language to provoke emotional responses capable, his analysis dreadful.
    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    It was dig at how every big project in Dublin in the past 15 years has inevitably gone way over budget.
    3. Luas extension to Point Depot cost €100m a MILE, Luas Cherrywood around €40m a km and the Athenry Ennis WRC section cost around €110m THE LOT.

    Sorry SB but if you don't realise the difference between a coat of paint on a railway line with 5mph speed limits and a few LC automations, and the construction of a new electrified track under which lie huge amounts of electrical, telecom, gas, water and sewer infrastructure, much of which was undoubtedly either missing from or lying away from the available street plan, you are not to be reasoned with.
    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    I won't mention Terminal 2 seeing as that was not strictly 'public' expenditure.
    Last I heard Dublin Airport's corporate ownership was still as much a semi State as RPA or CIE.


  • #63
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    From today's Indo:
    A LOT of people expressed surprise at last week's column about the Metro, which is understandable. We've been bombarded with cataclysmic figures for the past two years, all of which related to financial obligations caused by our past blunders. Many of you were clearly unaware that the Metro represents an entirely voluntary leap into a fresh and cataclysmic debt that could bring disaster to Dublin.

    Now, no one would back a plan to build a huge coal-fired power station that had been conceived before global warming. So why is this technically bankrupt State hoping to build an underground rail link from St Stephen's Green to Dublin Airport which was conceived before the financial meltdown?

    We are borrowing €20bn a year merely to run the State and to pay civil servants' salaries and pensions. And yet we still propose to build the Metro?

    This is not rational behaviour, but akin to the conduct of an alcoholic who has foresworn alcohol totally -- apart, that is, from the open-ended credit-card account with Tesco wines, beers and spirits.

    Tens of thousands of people are repaying mortgages that are vastly greater than their homes are worth. Unemployment is rocketing, as entire swathes of the secondary economy -- restaurants, shops, taxi companies, solicitors -- are collapsing.

    Yet the Government, nonetheless, determinedly proceeds with the most expensive infrastructural project in the history of the capital.

    Official estimates for the Metro declare that it will cost €5bn. Is this figure as much value as government estimates for earlier projects?

    The Dublin Port Tunnel went from an estimated cost of €220m in 2000 to €580m in 2002, then to a final cost of €789m -- some 350pc of the original estimate. The M50 widening increased from €190m to €560m: 300 pc of the estimate. The Luas went up from €290m to €750m.

    So all government predictions are in the realm of how long is a piece of string?

    Therefore, allowing (modestly) that the Metro will probably cost 300pc of the original estimate, the final bill will be about €15bn. But this is not even like squandering money on a greenfield site in north county Dublin. No, the project requires a series of major assaults on the streetscape of Dublin and on the already-bleeding commercial centre around Grafton Street.

    Sit down, while you read what is being proposed: a vast underground station beneath St Stephen's Green. This will require the destruction of the Green, the felling of its trees and its probable closure for two years. During this time, the removal of waste from beneath the Green will require 400 lorry movements a day through the city-centre's narrow streets to some dump in the greater Dublin area. And which lucky rural community will be the beneficiary of these thousands of lorries a week, unloading millions of tons of spoil a year?

    This would have been barking at the height of the boom: but now we are borrowing nearly €60m a day to keep the State going, it is the kind of insane and Gothic fantasy that Hitler might have entertained as the Soviet tanks were rolling towards the fuehrer-bunker.

    For at no point does the Stephen's Green scheme touch reality in terms of the commercial needs of an already crippled city centre, the actual transport requirements of airline passengers or what is financially possible for the Irish State.

    NOW, I don't think that the civil-service mandarins who are backing the Metro scheme (along with the Greens, who are, of course, actually clinically mad) are doing so because they are consciously thinking of their own personal needs. But it's hard not to conclude that a huge collective unconscious is driving this desire to locate the transport hub at the very heart of the civil service. For nobody lives in St Stephen's Green (apart from guests in the Shelbourne Hotel, to which we can probably wave a fond farewell). Otherwise, there's no reason to make it THE underground hub for the Dart and Luas lines.

    A rival hub -- where Dart and Luas and buses and mainline rail all converge -- already exists, although it is where almost no senior civil servant could find it, even on the map -- for it's north of the Liffey, at the Store Street-Amiens Street junction.

    Further official figures will presumably be trotted out to justify the Metro, but most of these are soviet in their meaninglessness.

    For example, the National Roads Authority -- those fine fellows who have just built a thousand miles of motorway without a single petrol pump -- routinely finish their projects ahead of their own schedules. Well, if you asked the NRA planners what time a rugby match will end, they'll invariably say: "Oh, about four hours after kick-off" and then be acclaiming themselves at the "early" whistle. So despite recent and very selective NRA claims, virtually all traffic flow is falling dramatically across the State.

    The statistical projections which made the Metro notionally viable (and only then in the hallucinogenic fantasies of officialdom) are now as meaningful as Chad's military designs on Nebraska.

    "Metro", means "mother" and "-polis" means city: "metropolis" therefore means "mother of the city". But if this insane scheme goes ahead, this underground line will probably be called "Necro".

    kmyers@independent.ie
    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-the-metro-is-an-insane-idea-and-a-disaster-for-dublin-2310177.html


  • #64
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    He shows remarkably little faith in the ability of de Dubs to deliver anything at less than 300% of budget. The 'great hole' of stephens green will only cover 1/4 to 1/3 of the Green...not all of it Kevin and most of the 'trucking' will be underground to the north side :p


  • #65
    noelfirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭noelfirl


    I see he's still going out about Waterloo & City Stephens & Airport.

    I see he's still going on about costs, without considering the recessionary impact on construction prices, or the prospect of employment for a whole lot of people for a good few years.

    I see he's still waffling about south-side political crap.

    All in all the only thing new is the 'tearing up Stephen's Green' line, which is pretty overblown all round, least not thanks to Frank McD and his selective imagery.

    Well he's convinced me :rolleyes:


  • #66
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Does Store Street-Amiens Street have a massive undeveloped area in which to build under that I don't know of ? Also what a lovely shopping and cultural hub it is.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Was he correct regarding St Stephens Green?

    Will it be destroyed?
    & If so how much will be?

    Will the arch on the Grafton Street side survive this?

    thanks


  • #68
    dowlingm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,337 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    I suspect the size of the resulting mailbag from the last one had his editor at the Duckworth School of Journalism crying "More! As much as you can give me!"


  • #69
    Brian CivilEng
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,031 ✭✭✭Brian CivilEng


    Did his invoking of Godwins law mean that the argument is over and he has lost? Seriously, opinions like this are downright dangerous. Does anybody care about their city and country, and want it not only to climb out of the recession but thrive during the next economic cycle? That the Metro and DART Underground should have been built years ago was the mantra during the boom, now they shouldn't be built for years is the opinion he is trying to spread. Especially with fear-mongering about the price.

    It is thanks to articles like this that people really believe that most infrastructure projects have come in over budget, no mention of the changes in specifications from what was first mooted to what was actually built, which of course leads to higher prices. No mention either of the time difference between the first estimates and the final price estimate. Dublin Port tunnel came in on budget. The Luas came in on budget. Saying they didn't is like saying that in 1990 you were considering buying a bicycle for £50, you finally got a car in 2010 that cost €10000, wow that was hugely over budget. The NRA did not over estimate the proposed length of construction, look at the time it took to construct similar schemes 10 years ago then look at the time it takes to construct them now. There is a thing called practise, we got better at building roads,we have a huge amount of road building skill in this country and we are throwing it away because of the recession.

    The Celtic tiger left a great legacy, we have a national motorway system that we can be proud of and will serve us for many years to come, we have a new airport which can cater for huge increases in passengers which will come, and we wont be struggling through crowded terminals. Dublin has two world class stadia, whatever your opinions on the size of Lansdowne Road it is still infinitely better than what was there before. If we had tried to build the current M50 in 1990 we would have been laughed out of it, like there will ever be a need for more than 50,000 vehicles a day using it. Can people not see that recessions end, economies improve and believe it or not there will be more booms! The Metro will not cost €5bn unless something totally unexpected happens during construction (like finding Noah's arc buried under the green). The Metro will be paid for over 30 years, and I would predict at least two more recessions and two more booms in that time. The Metro will be there in 2110 and our grandchildren will thank us for the legacy of infrastructure.


  • #70
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    spank_inferno wrote: »
    Was he correct regarding St Stephens Green?

    Will it be destroyed?
    & If so how much will be?

    Will the arch on the Grafton Street side survive this?

    thanks

    No
    None of the park will be destroyed. A about a third will be inaccessible during the work. However it will returned to the state it was before the work with the exception of a few pieces of infrastructure required by the
    metro. But these will hidden or blended in.
    Yes it will be removed during the works but will be returned


  • #71
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    "Dublin doesn't need a Metro because I have a Jaguar."


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    spank_inferno wrote: »
    Was he correct regarding St Stephens Green?

    Will it be destroyed?
    & If so how much will be?

    Will the arch on the Grafton Street side survive this?

    thanks
    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    No
    None of the park will be destroyed. A about a third will be inaccessible during the work. However it will returned to the state it was before the work with the exception of a few pieces of infrastructure required by the
    metro. But these will hidden or blended in.
    Yes it will be removed during the works but will be returned
    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    The 'great hole' of stephens green will only cover 1/4 to 1/3 of the Green...not all of it Kevin and most of the 'trucking' will be underground to the north side :p

    This topic totally deserves its own thread. See here.


  • #73
    Empire o de Sun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 369 ✭✭Empire o de Sun


    Nothing lasts forever, one day the sun will become a supernova and destroy the green forever. But maybe an Bord Pleanála will request some additional information first from the Sun :rolleyes:


  • #74
    dubhthach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    Empire o de Sun wrote: »
    Nothing lasts forever, one day the sun will become a supernova and destroy the green forever. But maybe an Bord Pleanála will request some additional information first from the Sun :rolleyes:

    Our sun is too small* to become a SuperNova so I'm sure the folks in ABP will not need to waste two years deciding if it should.

    *A star needs to have at least 9-10 times the mass of our Sun to be a candidate for a supernova

    Our Sun is tiny compared to some of starts out there:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Star-sizes.jpg


  • #75
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    dubhthach wrote: »
    Our sun is too small* to become a SuperNova so I'm sure the folks in ABP will not need to waste two years deciding if it should.

    *A star needs to have at least 9-10 times the mass of our Sun to be a candidate for a supernova

    Our Sun is tiny compared to some of starts out there:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Star-sizes.jpg

    I think Empire o de Sun meant Red Giant and was aiming humour ;)


  • #76
    Brian CivilEng
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,031 ✭✭✭Brian CivilEng


    Bloody hell, only in Ireland would we have a sun that is too small for a supernova. This country ;)


  • #77
    Empire o de Sun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 369 ✭✭Empire o de Sun


    Supernova, Red Giant, :rolleyes:

    as long as it's the right shade of red.

    The Green will recover over time. They have digitally or are digitally mapping every rock and stone there.

    Anyway we'll be all in retirement homes, still waiting for an Bord Pleanála to approve. In major infrastructure projects, there should be a better a quicker mechanism put in place for approvals. An B P takes too long. It (the time it takes) is costing taxpayers money.


  • #78
    latenia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,997 ✭✭✭latenia


    Whatever your opinion of Myers, he's correct on this one. Connolly should be designated as 'Central Station' with all national and international passenger links- rail, bus, air, and sea, terminating there.


  • #79
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    latenia wrote: »
    Whatever your opinion of Myers, he's correct on this one. Connolly should be designated as 'Central Station' with all national and international passenger links- rail, bus, air, and sea, terminating there.
    He doesn't mention Connolly at all !


  • #80
    dowlingm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,337 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    latenia wrote: »
    Whatever your opinion of Myers, he's correct on this one. Connolly should be designated as 'Central Station' with all national and international passenger links- rail, bus, air, and sea, terminating there.
    Why not call it "Single Point Of Failure" instead?

    When a crazy dude rocked up to Toronto Union Station with a gun, it shut down commuter rail, intercity rail, one subway line and one streetcar line, all of which fed into the Union complex. Due to the limitations of the available alignments, this dependence is only going to worsen. It needn't be a security incident, it could be a fire, a flood, a loss of electrical power.

    Add to that the likely difficulty of routing metro's turn radii under the Loop Line Bridge and Connolly's foundations and digging into the basement to create a platform.


  • #81
    Aard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Myers:
    We are borrowing €20bn a year merely to run the State and to pay civil servants' salaries and pensions. And yet we still propose to build the Metro?

    I would have thought the rational thing to do would be to reduce the number of civil/public servants and/or their salaries, and invest in infrastructure.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    Aard wrote: »
    Myers:

    I would have thought the rational thing to do would be to reduce the number of civil/public servants and/or their salaries, and invest in infrastructure.

    It would be rational, but the Government don't have the balls to do it. Add to that the continued proping up of Anglo (for no known reason;)) and infrastructure is doomed. But best of luck to those who believe it will happen.


  • #83
    xper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,074 ✭✭✭xper


    Aard wrote: »
    Myers:
    I would have thought the rational thing to do would be to reduce the number of civil/public servants and/or their salaries, and invest in infrastructure
    I can't help but notice that the government has considerably reduced my public sector salary already and all those nice people that were on non-permanent contracts don't come into the office anymore and our services have had to be curtailed as a result.


  • #84
    Aard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Why don't they have the balls to do it, though? Only* 20% of workers are public servants. Are they worried about losing votes? Or is it because unions are so strong? Or is it just nepotism to the max, and they don't want their friends losing jobs?


    *Yes, I know.


  • #85
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    Aard wrote: »
    Why don't they have the balls to do it, though? Only* 20% of workers are public servants. Are they worried about losing votes? Or is it because unions are so strong? Or is it just nepotism to the max, and they don't want their friends losing jobs?


    *Yes, I know.

    That 20% you refer to actually run the country in administrative terms. Piss them off and public services grind to a halt. This takes us back to their unions, which are indeed strong.


  • #86
    Aard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    xper wrote: »
    I can't help but notice that the government has considerably reduced my public sector salary already and all those nice people that were on non-permanent contracts don't come into the office anymore and our services have had to be curtailed as a result.

    My father's too. I understand that people's salaries have been reduced already. Even the public service should be run as a business. When a business is in dire straits, it naturally has to fire people. It streamlines performance.

    We can't save our way out of a recession. (Not that I'm advocating going crazy on the spending.) But like somebody said before, all other countries invest in infrastructure to stimulate the economy. Funnelling the money into the Metro will create jobs, and improve productivity in the long-run. Funnelling it directly into salaries does nothing to solve the problem, and prolongs the agony.

    At the risk of sounding like a commie, think of the greater good!


  • #87
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    Lads, I'm reluctant to interject here, but we are drifting off-topic talking about public sector reform. Reign it in please. :)


  • #88
    Aard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Duly noted. :)


    To get back on topic:
    Judging by the Indo's large readership, and Myers' apparent large following, I would think that the man on the street is somewhat against the Metro. Have there been any polls done to establish whether this is the case?


  • #89
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    "Let me admit now that I don't understand anything about economics."
    - Kevin Myers

    ...or mass transit :)


  • #90
    Empire o de Sun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 369 ✭✭Empire o de Sun


    Do I miss Challenging Times? :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    latenia wrote: »
    Whatever your opinion of Myers, he's correct on this one. Connolly should be designated as 'Central Station' with all national and international passenger links- rail, bus, air, and sea, terminating there.
    Connolly isn't the heart of the city, and it already has the DART. The whole point here is to create other nodes in the city - there'll be three: Drumcondra (DART/Metro), Stephens Green (DART/Metro/Luas), Pearse (DART/DART) plus the ones that handle intercity and tram traffic (Heuston and Connolly).
    D.L.R. wrote: »
    "Let me admit now that I don't understand anything about economics." - Kevin Myers
    Aard wrote: »
    "We are borrowing €20bn a year merely to run the State and to pay civil servants' salaries and pensions. And yet we still propose to build the Metro?" - Kevin Myers
    There's proof of his lack of understanding alright! Doesn't know the diff between current and capital expenditure.
    Aard wrote: »
    Duly noted. :)
    To get back on topic:
    Judging by the Indo's large readership, and Myers' apparent large following, I would think that the man on the street is somewhat against the Metro. Have there been any polls done to establish whether this is the case?
    I am really, really afraid that this might be the case - that people believe him and you get opposition. It's true that there'll be disruption in the city centre and if it's combined with public misinformation it could cause a lot of problems for the project.


  • #92
    BrianD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    Perhaps Myers is ranting on a bit and doesn't address the real nub of the problem but at the end of the day he is tapping into public sentiment on the project. It is a reactionary infrastructure project that seems to be made up and changed as we go along - is it a metro to the airport (it was once), is it serving Swords and happens to pass by the airport yada yada.

    The bottom line is that the Metro North is a bizarre and poorly thought out project and one wonders is it be pushed to keep the RPA quango staff busy and in business.

    Unfortunately, we have a record of building infrastructure that is poorly planned and doesn't seem to be part of a greater scheme. Take the the recent Samuel Beckett bridge - lovely bridge but everybody is left scratching their heads as to why it was built. If there was a long term and strategic goal then perhaps they could have shared it with the public. In any other city the powers that be would be marketing this bridge as the solution to a problem that we should be thankful for. In Dublin it's not even sign posted.

    Until we start planning strategically and selling the benefits to the public, it's no wonder that the public and commentators are going to be derisory about our 'make it up as you go along' infrastructure projects.


  • #93
    Empire o de Sun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 369 ✭✭Empire o de Sun


    BrianD wrote: »
    Unfortunately, we have a record of building infrastructure that is poorly planned and doesn't seem to be part of a greater scheme. Take the the recent Samuel Beckett bridge - lovely bridge but everybody is left scratching their heads as to why it was built. If there was a long term and strategic goal then perhaps they could have shared it with the public. In any other city the powers that be would be marketing this bridge as the solution to a problem that we should be thankful for. In Dublin it's not even sign posted.


    Since when do Dublin City Council signpost anywhere? The only stick up a few route numbers on lamp posts and think that is good enough. Areas/suburbs aren't clearly marked, which leads to allot of "addresses of convenience"


  • #94
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    BrianD wrote: »
    Perhaps Myers is ranting on a bit and doesn't address the real nub of the problem but at the end of the day he is tapping into public sentiment on the project. It is a reactionary infrastructure project that seems to be made up and changed as we go along - is it a metro to the airport (it was once), is it serving Swords and happens to pass by the airport yada yada.

    Its a metro line serving north Dublin via the airport, which interchanges with other modes along the route. It IS simple. Its just yer average uninformed chump on the street who is confused about it, and you shouldn't let that demographic dictate national transport policy!

    Shame on you Myers for dazzling that wrong headed mob mentality with your pretty words, just to feather your own nest. Typical self-obsessed Irishman! No wonder this country was so easy to conquer with the selfish elite interest always coming before the peoples.
    The bottom line is that the Metro North is a bizarre and poorly thought out project and one wonders is it be pushed to keep the RPA quango staff busy and in business.

    Its not bizarre though, its very rational. Perhaps TOO rational for an Ireland that builds surface trams on congested medieval streets and motorways to every Ballyboghole in the country. Its a breath of fresh air is what it is.

    Unfortunately its tainted with the foul stench of this lame duck govt. But don't let that fool you, its a good project.
    Unfortunately, we have a record of building infrastructure that is poorly planned and doesn't seem to be part of a greater scheme. Take the the recent Samuel Beckett bridge - lovely bridge but everybody is left scratching their heads as to why it was built. If there was a long term and strategic goal then perhaps they could have shared it with the public. In any other city the powers that be would be marketing this bridge as the solution to a problem that we should be thankful for. In Dublin it's not even sign posted.

    Until we start planning strategically and selling the benefits to the public, it's no wonder that the public and commentators are going to be derisory about our 'make it up as you go along' infrastructure projects.

    I agree planning in this kip is god awful. Vested interests have gotten in the way of simple solutions.

    Unfortunately, and predictably, our govt just begrudgingly built a couple of low spec tram lines, instead of a proper, integrated mass transit system.

    Meanwhile they emptied the national coffers on property speculation and the neverending junket tour. Such is our fat, indulgent leadership.

    But we have to work with what we now have, which is a disconected suburban rail/tram system. Ultimately, MN/DU is the solution to that. I am not a fan of this govt but I want to see these projects built, whoever forms the next govt. We've already spend millions designing them, and another 5 years of complaining won't improve the basic concept.


  • #95
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    D.L.R. wrote: »
    Its a metro line serving north Dublin via the airport, which interchanges with other modes along the route. It IS simple. Its just yer average uninformed chump on the street who is confused about it, and you shouldn't let that demographic dictate national transport policy!

    Shame on you Myers for dazzling that wrong headed mob mentality with your pretty words, just to feather your own nest. Typical self-obsessed Irishman! No wonder this country was so easy to conquer with the selfish elite interest always coming before the peoples.



    Its not bizarre though, its very rational. Perhaps TOO rational for an Ireland that builds surface trams on congested medieval streets and motorways to every Ballyboghole in the country. Its a breath of fresh air is what it is.

    Unfortunately its tainted with the foul stench of this lame duck govt. But don't let that fool you, its a good project.



    I agree planning in this kip is god awful. Vested interests have gotten in the way of simple solutions.

    Unfortunately, and predictably, our govt just begrudgingly built a couple of low spec tram lines, instead of a proper, integrated mass transit system.

    Meanwhile they emptied the national coffers on property speculation and the neverending junket tour. Such is our fat, indulgent leadership.

    But we have to work with what we now have, which is a disconected suburban rail/tram system. Ultimately, MN/DU is the solution to that. I am not a fan of this govt but I want to see these projects built, whoever forms the next govt. We've already spend millions designing them, and another 5 years of complaining won't improve the basic concept.

    I agree with your sentiments and opinion entirely, but neither MN or DU will happen this side of 2020 and after that expect a possible re-invention of the wheel. Im serious.;)


  • #96
    BrianD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    D.L.R. wrote: »
    Its a metro line serving north Dublin via the airport, which interchanges with other modes along the route. It IS simple. Its just yer average uninformed chump on the street who is confused about it, and you shouldn't let that demographic dictate national transport policy!

    I disagree. In other countries you have project leadership and the public are sold on what exactly it is and what benefits it will deliver even though it will takes years of construction and will be a big inconvenience while it is.

    Here the Metro North has changed guise so many times, the powers that be seem to take a hands off approach (in case they lose votes from the nimby brigade) and only turn up to cut ribbons. Metro North has changed objective so many times that it is no wonder the public are confused. I would argue that Myers (though he's not a fan of the project for other reasons) is echoing this.

    It's similar to the Samuel Beckett bridge but nobody from the council has clearly explained what it's purpose is in the overall city infrastructure other than another bridge across the river. It's no wonder that people are confused to its purpose (why they can't make right turns etc) and think its a some what linked to revenue protection at the east link. had the job been done properly there would be a lot of motorists changing their route to avail of it instead of discovering by accident.

    A big part of public transport and infrastructure is that it needs to be marketed properly and strongly to the public to gain their confidence. This is what your getting and this is why it will make our city better. Instead the public are left scratching their head as to where exactly the Metro North and what it will do for them other than the fear of their house falling into a tunnel.
    The Government and RPA have failed in this respect and it's no wonder that media commentary is negative towards the project.

    Then again, they do this kind of thing well in Germany and I read that there was huge protests in Stuttgart over the construction of a new railway station on the site of an old one. Takes all sorts1


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    BrianD wrote: »
    I disagree. In other countries you have project leadership and the public are sold on what exactly it is and what benefits it will deliver even though it will takes years of construction and will be a big inconvenience while it is.

    Here the Metro North has changed guise so many times, the powers that be seem to take a hands off approach (in case they lose votes from the nimby brigade) and only turn up to cut ribbons. Metro North has changed objective so many times that it is no wonder the public are confused. I would argue that Myers (though he's not a fan of the project for other reasons) is echoing this.

    It's similar to the Samuel Beckett bridge but nobody from the council has clearly explained what it's purpose is in the overall city infrastructure other than another bridge across the river. It's no wonder that people are confused to its purpose (why they can't make right turns etc) and think its a some what linked to revenue protection at the east link. had the job been done properly there would be a lot of motorists changing their route to avail of it instead of discovering by accident.

    A big part of public transport and infrastructure is that it needs to be marketed properly and strongly to the public to gain their confidence. This is what your getting and this is why it will make our city better. Instead the public are left scratching their head as to where exactly the Metro North and what it will do for them other than the fear of their house falling into a tunnel.
    The Government and RPA have failed in this respect and it's no wonder that media commentary is negative towards the project.

    Then again, they do this kind of thing well in Germany and I read that there was huge protests in Stuttgart over the construction of a new railway station on the site of an old one. Takes all sorts1

    Hmm. While I'd agree that the govt are poor at promoting these things properly, I don't quite see how Metro North has "changed guise so many times".

    Its always followed the same basic format City-Airport-Swords. Yes they should have linked it to the green line, but that issue aside, its really is very straightforward.

    I think whats really happening is that vested interests are trying their damndest to smear this project, so that it ultimately falls by the wayside, and they are using every lame ass excuse they can find. These people may or may not have a clue if the Metro is actually a good thing or not. That's beside the point it seems.


  • #98
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    BrianD, I'm really confused as to what it is that you're confused about :)

    It's true that the project changed slightly - in Platform for Change 1999, it was meant to go to Swords via Finglas. This was changed to Ballymun in Transport21 in 2005. But apart from that, it's exactly the same. I've never heard negative commentary about the project from ANYONE (at all!) until the Kevin Myers article - Boards excepted, but this is a discussion forum after all, so I expect that.

    There's no confusion out there about what this is as far as I've gathered. It's appeared in the media countless times. There have been loads of public consultations. People are just wondering when it's going to start really. Even the cost is generally only speculated upon by journalists like Frank McD, etc. though Michael O'Leary got his gab in at one point.


  • #99
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    spacetweek wrote: »
    BrianD, I'm really confused as to what it is that you're confused about :)

    It's true that the project changed slightly - in Platform for Change 1999, it was meant to go to Swords via Finglas. This was changed to Ballymun in Transport21 in 2005. But apart from that, it's exactly the same. I've never heard negative commentary about the project from ANYONE (at all!) until the Kevin Myers article - Boards excepted, but this is a discussion forum after all, so I expect that.

    There's no confusion out there about what this is as far as I've gathered. It's appeared in the media countless times. There have been loads of public consultations. People are just wondering when it's going to start really. Even the cost is generally only speculated upon by journalists like Frank McD, etc. though Michael O'Leary got his gab in at one point.

    Are you serious?

    Metro "north" may have undergone a few changes, but the Metro "project" (which was always essentially a line running north/south/north etc.) has undergone a lot of changes. Its not exactly the same by any means. For example Luas green line was meant to be part of the "metro". The route through the north city was originally via Botanic road. The planned redevelopment of Mountjoy Prison influenced it. The planned redevelopment of the Smurfit site in Glasnevin had a bearing on it. Even the proposed location of a new Childrens hospital beside the Mater inflenced it.

    BrianD is right. The ordinary people of Dublin havent a clue what its about. Just because you know and some boardsies know, its not indicative of public perception and/or opinion. The general population of Dublin havent a feckin iota of whats going on. Talk to them. I did and then went to a meeting with the RPA after a meeting with the original consultants to tell them what people think. Result? Dropped jaws and patronising dismissal. But they did re-route it via Drumcondra rail station.:D

    Real life is a lot different to this forum and we must always accept that rather than dismiss it as an inconvenience.


  • #100
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    DWCommuter wrote: »
    Are you serious?

    Metro "north" may have undergone a few changes, but the Metro "project" (which was always essentially a line running north/south/north etc.) has undergone a lot of changes. Its not exactly the same by any means. For example Luas green line was meant to be part of the "metro". The route through the north city was originally via Botanic road. The planned redevelopment of Mountjoy Prison influenced it. The planned redevelopment of the Smurfit site in Glasnevin had a bearing on it. Even the proposed location of a new Childrens hospital beside the Mater inflenced it.

    Real life is a lot different to this forum and we must always accept that rather than dismiss it as an inconvenience.
    I know about the Botanic Rd/Drumcondra faffing about, but that was just a minor route selection issue. And surely the upgrade of the Luas Green line was always going to be a separate project? I assumed it was.

    I *am* talking about the public's perception, not mine or Boards users'.


  • #101
    dynamick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭dynamick


    The Sunday Business Post ran an editorial last weekend against the metro, probably based on Myers article.

    http://www.sbpost.ie/commentandanalysis/shelve-metro-north-51309.html

    The points are briefly:
    1. It will cost billions but the country is broke
    2. We could run more buses up the tunnel to the airport instead of a metro
    3. The cost benefit ratio is probably very poor
    4. Many other projects have better cost benefit ratios: schools/hospitals

    The counterarguments as you all know are:
    1. We are investing 5.5 billion a year in capital projects even now and have budgeted to do so until 2016. Metro North will take up about 170 million per year for 30 years
    2. More buses in the tunnel is a good answer for purely airport-city transport but the airport will only account for a small fraction of MN's ridership
    3. The cost benefit ratio is unknown because the costs will only be known when the bidders have made their final offers. RPA had predicted a BCR of 1.31 calculated when costs were higher
    4. Simply stating that other projects have better BCRs without looking at the numbers is uninformed guessing.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement