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

DWCommuter · 12-09-2010 11:50am

With all this talk of the commercial benefits that MN will bring to the Stephens Green area, I was amused by a report in last Wednesdays Evening Herald stating that Ward Anderson were granted PP for a new cinema to be built on the existing roof of the SG Shopping centre, despite objections from Irish Rail.

Anyone got more detail on this?

Brian CivilEng · 12-09-2010 11:58am

That's an interesting one, I assume Irish rail objected as the Dart Underground tunnel will go under the shopping centre, while Metro North will head down Grafton St. Could cause a bit of hassle underneath.

It'll be interesting to see more details of the actual logistics of tunnelling. Before the building of the quay walls most of the modern city centre was part of the Liffey, the water table is still quite high for the whole length of the interconnector. In fact the Stephen's Green shopping centre is anchored to the bedrock, if not for those anchors after a significant shower of rain it would actually float out of the ground!

LeinsterDub · 12-09-2010 12:25pm

lods wrote: »

Not going to be a lot of sympathy taxis or solicitors:rolleyes:. RPA are to blame for not being more open. Are there any plans for more underground lines other than just metro north?

No other plans . There are plans for metro west and the goal to extend mn south but there are no plans for that . The rpa make this information available for all on the web site they ain't however going call around to you personally and explain it

lods · 12-09-2010 1:43pm

abitofacomedian wrote: »

In fact the Stephen's Green shopping centre is anchored to the bedrock, if not for those anchors after a significant shower of rain it would actually float out of the ground!

like to see that !!!

dubhthach · 12-09-2010 2:46pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

With all this talk of the commercial benefits that MN will bring to the Stephens Green area, I was amused by a report in last Wednesdays Evening Herald stating that Ward Anderson were granted PP for a new cinema to be built on the existing roof of the SG Shopping centre, despite objections from Irish Rail.

Anyone got more detail on this?

There's a small article in business section of Sunday tribune about this today. They have to pay 600k in levies to Dublin city council. 150k of which is reserved for Metro north (though i don't 150k will go far in building it!)

L1011 · 12-09-2010 5:49pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

With all this talk of the commercial benefits that MN will bring to the Stephens Green area, I was amused by a report in last Wednesdays Evening Herald stating that Ward Anderson were granted PP for a new cinema to be built on the existing roof of the SG Shopping centre, despite objections from Irish Rail.

Anyone got more detail on this?

http://www.dublincity.ie/AnitePublicDocs/00315314.pdf

Paparazzo · 12-09-2010 7:32pm

Aard wrote: »

Myers:

I know it's futile, but here's another one. Previously, he has said that there's nothing around Stephen's Green, save parks and Government departments. Now, here, he's talking about the commercial centre around Grafton St, aka the prime commercial centre of the country.

====

Here's another one from that facebook group:

Are they being ironic? I don't get it at all. Do they not realise that having the metro in place makes the city centre more accessible? Restaurants will benefit, shops will benefit. Not sure about the taxis or solicitors. This is an investment in the city that will have a payoff far greater than the cost. What would they prefer the Government did with the money? Prop up failing businesses? Current vs. capital expenditure comes to mind...

Surely the money for Metro north should go straight to help taxi drivers? And what about the poor solicitors? There's not enough work for them, we should divert funds from MN straight into their bank accounts.

L1011 · 12-09-2010 9:07pm

Don't worry, I'm sure the solicitors will find enough to do making themselves a nusiance with bumped up 'vibration' claims for MN/DU.

runway16 · 14-09-2010 11:00am

From where I am standing, it seems that a very well organised campaign is being built against metro north, and it reaks of political ulterior motives.

The arguements being used against MN are not being applied to DART underground for example. No one seems to question DU at all. Funny that.... its also an underground line, will call at Stephens Green, is almost entirely on the southside of the liffey.... You would expect that Myers would have a field day discussing both lines.

But no.. its just MN. Why could that possibly be?

Think about it for a second. Where does MN pass through and serve: Dublin North, thats where. An FF stronghold.

Dart Underground escapes scrutiny, because it passes through areas not exactly known for being FF safe seats.

I submit to everyone that opposition to MN is building as a political tool to get at Fianna Fail, and one which shows complete disregard for the needs and for the People of Dublin.

This futile excercise should be resisted at all costs. I wouldnt vote FF in a heartbeat, but that doesnt matter. Dublin needs MN (and Dart underground, and a proper urban transit system) and those who now find themselves in opposition to it, based on utter bull**** reasoning should be told exactly where to go.

If you have doubts about the project for SANE and PROPERLY THOUGHT OUT REASONS, then that is fine, but to argue against it based on nonsense from the Troll in chief of the Independent is folly.

Lets not **** up the chance to finally give this great city the system it so badly needs.

lods · 14-09-2010 11:29am

runway16 wrote: »

From where I am standing, it seems that a very well organised campaign is being built against metro north, and it reaks of political ulterior motives.

The arguements being used against MN are not being applied to DART underground for example. No one seems to question DU at all. Funny that.... its also an underground line, will call at Stephens Green, is almost entirely on the southside of the liffey.... You would expect that Myers would have a field day discussing both lines.

But no.. its just MN. Why could that possibly be?

Think about it for a second. Where does MN pass through and serve: Dublin North, thats where. An FF stronghold.

Dart Underground escapes scrutiny, because it passes through areas not exactly known for being FF safe seats.

I submit to everyone that opposition to MN is building as a political tool to get at Fianna Fail, and one which shows complete disregard for the needs and for the People of Dublin.

This futile excercise should be resisted at all costs. I wouldnt vote FF in a heartbeat, but that doesnt matter. Dublin needs MN (and Dart underground, and a proper urban transit system) and those who now find themselves in opposition to it, based on utter bull**** reasoning should be told exactly where to go.

If you have doubts about the project for SANE and PROPERLY THOUGHT OUT REASONS, then that is fine, but to argue against it based on nonsense from the Troll in chief of the Independent is folly.

Lets not **** up the chance to finally give this great city the system it so badly needs.

You could be right, a number of Semi state groups are against it, but can't openly express this. Theres a whispering campaign going on. Most business groups are sitting on the fence.

Frank McGee, Dublin Tourisim - One of his biggest concerns is the disruption that will inevitably be caused from the construction of the underground rail system, Metro North, which will result in large areas of the city centre being ripped up and turned into a building site for several years.
http://www.tribune.ie/business/interviews/article/2010/sep/12/the-business-interview-frank-magee-dublin-tourism-/

Dublin Bus are completley against it, from what i here. They feel they can handle any capacity needed are are being forced to cut back on Public transport at a time people are saying we need to invest more in Infrastructure.

I think most people view the Dart Underground as part of Metro Morth (i know its not). Its easier to oppose the large part of the project.

From a politcal point of view its a hard one to decide what parties really want it. I persume FG would prefer it was cancelled by FF rather than them. Having said that voters in the country might view it as a positive thing if it was cancelled, so swings and roundabouts as regards voters.

Aard · 14-09-2010 6:42pm

lods wrote: »

Frank McGee, Dublin Tourisim - One of his biggest concerns is the disruption that will inevitably be caused from the construction of the underground rail system, Metro North, which will result in large areas of the city centre being ripped up and turned into a building site for several years.
http://www.tribune.ie/business/interviews/article/2010/sep/12/the-business-interview-frank-magee-dublin-tourism-/

Surely the people who are against it for tourism/shopping reasons realise that, while there may be a negative effect in the short term, once it's all over there will be far more people within easy reach of the city centre. I've never been to a big city and not seen such works. IMO, it won't deter tourists. How many tourists think, "Well, considering that half of the Green is torn up, I'm just not going to visit Dublin"?

Propellerhead · 14-09-2010 10:22pm

Heaven forbid that any of our fine traders are seeking compo in advance of the project

Propellerhead · 14-09-2010 10:41pm

lods wrote: »

You could be right, a number of Semi state groups are against it, but can't openly express this. Theres a whispering campaign going on. Most business groups are sitting on the fence.

Frank McGee, Dublin Tourisim - One of his biggest concerns is the disruption that will inevitably be caused from the construction of the underground rail system, Metro North, which will result in large areas of the city centre being ripped up and turned into a building site for several years.
http://www.tribune.ie/business/interviews/article/2010/sep/12/the-business-interview-frank-magee-dublin-tourism-/

Dublin Bus are completley against it, from what i here. They feel they can handle any capacity needed are are being forced to cut back on Public transport at a time people are saying we need to invest more in Infrastructure.

I think most people view the Dart Underground as part of Metro Morth (i know its not). Its easier to oppose the large part of the project.

From a politcal point of view its a hard one to decide what parties really want it. I persume FG would prefer it was cancelled by FF rather than them. Having said that voters in the country might view it as a positive thing if it was cancelled, so swings and roundabouts as regards voters.

Every major rail project has suffered from this. The calls of "White Elephant" were made in the early 1980s for DART, in the 1990s for Luas and now this.

If many so-called experts had their way we would have no railways now and continous urban low level sprawl at four houses to the acre. Living hell on the roads and a wholly bus based transport system for those too poor to use a car. Those who advocate the scrapping of Metro North, and the same for those who opposed DART and Luas, should be ashamed of themselves for indulging in attempted sabotage.

DWCommuter · 14-09-2010 11:10pm

runway16 wrote: »

From where I am standing, it seems that a very well organised campaign is being built against metro north, and it reaks of political ulterior motives.

The arguements being used against MN are not being applied to DART underground for example. No one seems to question DU at all. Funny that.... its also an underground line, will call at Stephens Green, is almost entirely on the southside of the liffey.... You would expect that Myers would have a field day discussing both lines.

But no.. its just MN. Why could that possibly be?

Think about it for a second. Where does MN pass through and serve: Dublin North, thats where. An FF stronghold.

Dart Underground escapes scrutiny, because it passes through areas not exactly known for being FF safe seats.

I submit to everyone that opposition to MN is building as a political tool to get at Fianna Fail, and one which shows complete disregard for the needs and for the People of Dublin.

This futile excercise should be resisted at all costs. I wouldnt vote FF in a heartbeat, but that doesnt matter. Dublin needs MN (and Dart underground, and a proper urban transit system) and those who now find themselves in opposition to it, based on utter bull**** reasoning should be told exactly where to go.

If you have doubts about the project for SANE and PROPERLY THOUGHT OUT REASONS, then that is fine, but to argue against it based on nonsense from the Troll in chief of the Independent is folly.

Lets not **** up the chance to finally give this great city the system it so badly needs.

I admire your bravery in bringing this up. Its to be commended.

However I'd speculate one step further on the basis that I think the negative MN stories are actually eminating from Government plants. The ABP delay could also be attributed to Government sources.

I have no evidence, only speculation, based on the inoordinate combination of negativity and delay, while the main proponent of MN (the Government) seem content to work no spin on a project that is apparently Government policy. If Government spin doctors have no positive contribution or interest, then one could be forgiven for thinking that the Government are happy to make "solid commitment" statements, but sabotage it via less obvious routes.

KevR · 15-09-2010 1:41pm

Aard wrote: »

Surely the people who are against it for tourism/shopping reasons realise that, while there may be a negative effect in the short term, once it's all over there will be far more people within easy reach of the city centre. I've never been to a big city and not seen such works. IMO, it won't deter tourists. How many tourists think, "Well, considering that half of the Green is torn up, I'm just not going to visit Dublin"?

It certainly won't deter tourists. To say that it will deter tousists is pure scaremongering. If anything the air travel tax and increased airport landing charges will do a lot more to deter people from visiting Dublin.

You don't hear of people being deterred from visiting London because of Crossrail construction work..

Johnny Utah · 15-09-2010 5:53pm

Facebook wrote: »

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.

There's not a day goes by that you wouldn't see a solicitor collapsed in the street........ maybe when the metro north is built we can finally take him to hospital, but for now he must remain there collapsed on the street as the taxis are too expensive to bring him to A&E!

runway16 · 17-09-2010 2:48pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

I admire your bravery in bringing this up. Its to be commended.

However I'd speculate one step further on the basis that I think the negative MN stories are actually eminating from Government plants. The ABP delay could also be attributed to Government sources.

I have no evidence, only speculation, based on the inoordinate combination of negativity and delay, while the main proponent of MN (the Government) seem content to work no spin on a project that is apparently Government policy. If Government spin doctors have no positive contribution or interest, then one could be forgiven for thinking that the Government are happy to make "solid commitment" statements, but sabotage it via less obvious routes.

A VERY interesting slant on the conspiracy theory there DW, I like your style!

While that is more than possible, I am likely to believe that FF is probably happy to proceed with this project - they would have much to lose in Dublin North if they didnt deliver on this, and lets face it - they are going to need every bloody seat they can get come election time.

I've been in touch with the local FF TD here, and he frequently mails the people of the area on the issue. A lot of development has gone on along the corridor on the premise that MN is coming - and indeed much of that development - such as that at the airport - cannot be sustained without MN.

Dublin airport already has more long term car parking spaces per passenger than any other comparable airport in Europe because of its defecit of public transport. When growth picks back up, it just wont have the space to accomodate the extra needs - especially as it plans to develop the eastlands site into "Dublin Airport City" - which would displace the current long term car parks. The Airport City project itself would be thrown into disarray if Metro doesnt happen. This is just one example of the sort of thing that not going ahead with this puts in jeopardy - of course, you can think of a dozen more!

As for the Dublin tourism chief chiming in claiming the works will scare off tourists - does he realise how much foreign visitors complain about our bad public transport? Busses just dont cut the mustard. They are difficult to use if you are not familiar with a city, becuase they are not mapped as clearly, it is difficult to know which stop to use etc etc.

I make a habit of avoiding cities without good Urban rail systems during my tourist travels - simply because things just are not as accesible.

It beggars belief that some in Dublin think that they know better than all the greatest cities in the world - all of which have great public transport, and crucially, the airport is at the heart of the system. Thats how you get tourists in, and more importantly, how you get them around to experience all your country has to offer. People like using rail - its easy, regular, comfortable, and you know the route and where you need to get off, because of clear signage.

Maybe the Dublin Tourism chief should ask Amsterdam, who are presently building their "Noord-Zuid Lijn" which cuts right through the heart of the city, and given their particular terrain challenges, is taking 10 years to build. Has anyone decided not to go to Amsterdam because of it? I doubt it.

Are Amsterdammers dettered by 10 years of works - absolutely not. They know how vital these things are.

Metrostar · 17-09-2010 9:01pm

runway16 wrote: »

Maybe the Dublin Tourism chief should ask Amsterdam, who are presently building their "Noord-Zuid Lijn" which cuts right through the heart of the city, and given their particular terrain challenges, is taking 10 years to build. Has anyone decided not to go to Amsterdam because of it? I doubt it.

Are Amsterdammers dettered by 10 years of works - absolutely not. They know how vital these things are.

Indeed. Central Station in Amsterdam has been a mess for years now but the tourists keep on coming. I guess they have other reasons to visit...

As a resident of Amterdam I must say life goes on as normal with three metro stations under construction you do not even notice what's happening, the only impact is visual but even that is limited because most of the work takes place underground.

A lot of nonsense has been spouted that St Stephen's Green will be destroyed. That's completely ridiculous. All public spaces have to evolve. If anything, positioning a transit hub under St Stephen's Green is an opportunity to make this park even better. I would support putting a large cafe/skateboarding space above the metro station, and open the park 24 hours to make it a living space. Again, lessons could be learnt here from Amsterdam's Vondelpark.

runway16 · 17-09-2010 11:53pm

I was a long time resident there myself, and still visit frequently.:D

Amsterdam and Dublin have lots in common, and we should learn from Dutch example, because they have got plenty right in terms of their transport system.

They are about to implement an every 10 minute rail service frequency between their major cities. This is stuff we can only dream of....

Imagine Kevin Myers writing in Het Parool or De Telegraaf spouting such rubbish....

Things have really got to change in this country. This is rudimentry, basic stuff in any other country, yet here we are still ****ing talking about it 10 years later and still not a tunnel boring machine in sight..:mad::mad::mad:

Propellerhead · 19-09-2010 3:48pm

Kevin Myers wrote, in 1996:

THANK God for Garret FitzGerald. He has said about Luas what I feared to say; that we have the makings of an urban, calamity that will cost us and our generous German friends millions and might well cause more problems than it solves. Even if his arguments are faulty, he has at least enabled us to discuss a project which has been protected from analysis by its relative "cheapness", by the piety that surrounds anything which purports to be a public utility, by the alleged need to get our hands on the deutschmarks pronto, and finally by the extra cladding of an Irish name, Luas.

Luas, as we all know in this great Irish speaking nation of ours, means speed. To judge from Garret's forecasts, it might well mean Limiting or Urban Arresting System; because the streets of Dublin are too narrow to permit both Luas trains and reasonable traffic flow, and perhaps more compellingly, the very density of buildings in the city centre does not permit many route options for cars or trams.

That is the legacy of the Wide Streets Commission, which chose to insert an extraordinary number of important buildings and squares into a very small area. There is no way of pushing a new road through that heart of the city without killing it. And instead of recognising that reality, and committing ourselves to a transport policy which would, take the expensive but realistic long term option of going underground, we did what we have done, repeatedly in transport policy, we compromised.

Have we not Learned?

Hmm, random objection to any rail based transport system, anyone? If and and when I get the time I intend to write about the whole sorry history of rail transport in Dublin from the closure of the Harcourt Street line onwards. The period from the late 1970s until now has been characterised by emotive and frankly inaccurate scaremongering by many commentators who wouldn't know the right fare to anywhere.

Paparazzo · 19-09-2010 3:53pm

Propellerhead wrote: »

Kevin Myers wrote, in 1996:

Hmm, random objection to any rail based transport system, anyone? If and and when I get the time I intend to write about the whole sorry history of rail transport in Dublin from the closure of the Harcourt Street line onwards. The period from the late 1970s until now has been characterised by emotive and frankly inaccurate scaremongering by many commentators who wouldn't know the right fare to anywhere.

Surprised he didn't say Luas was going to cost €45 billion

dowlingm · 20-09-2010 6:33pm

Wasn't Fitzer's writings about how LUAS was going to be a disaster one reason a BX connector wasn't built on day one? Or am I thinking of someone else?

Metrostar · 20-09-2010 10:38pm

Readers should adopt the following attitude toward Myers's mistruths:

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

dubhthach · 21-09-2010 1:51pm

dowlingm wrote: »

Wasn't Fitzer's writings about how LUAS was going to be a disaster one reason a BX connector wasn't built on day one? Or am I thinking of someone else?

I think his worries were more about the red-line been the wrong route. He had proposed that they should have taken a more direct route to Tallaght by using a Tunnel and going via Terenure/Kimmage area. Not only would it be quicker but it would go through a more densely-populated area.

Cool Mo D · 21-09-2010 4:16pm

dubhthach wrote: »

I think his worries were more about the red-line been the wrong route. He had proposed that they should have taken a more direct route to Tallaght by using a Tunnel and going via Terenure/Kimmage area. Not only would it be quicker but it would go through a more densely-populated area.

Not quite.

Garret objected to sending the red line out the through the industrial estates around the Naas road, which avoided the populated areas in Walkinstown, which would have also provided a more direct route to Tallaght.

What he didn't address is where the road space to fit the Luas through Walkinstown and over the Walkinstown roundabout, compared to having space for the Luas on the median of the Naas road.

I don't remember him ever mentioning a tunnel.

D.L.R. · 21-09-2010 7:12pm

I suppose by suggesting Walkinstown as an optimal route, and not addressing the lack of road space, you can infer that he came to the same conclusion as many others, that a tram really wasn't the ideal solution, and the optimal one would require either an elevated or underground line. This being the Dublin suburbs, elevated is a bit of a non starter. That only leaves one option.

On hindsight, not building an inch of metro in a city that was essentially a cash conveyor belt for 10 years was a grievous mistake. Just imagine the benefit of a metro in Dublin today, and how it would be a workhorse for the recovery. Alas.

Propellerhead · 22-09-2010 12:42am

D.L.R. wrote: »

I suppose by suggesting Walkinstown as an optimal route, and not addressing the lack of road space, you can infer that he came to the same conclusion as many others, that a tram really wasn't the ideal solution, and the optimal one would require either an elevated or underground line. This being the Dublin suburbs, elevated is a bit of a non starter. That only leaves one option.

On hindsight, not building an inch of metro in a city that was essentially a cash conveyor belt for 10 years was a grievous mistake. Just imagine the benefit of a metro in Dublin today, and how it would be a workhorse for the recovery. Alas.

Of course, Garret's intervention could have benefitted the road lobby by accident if Luas/any rail project had been put off for a long time, if Garret had been believed that Luas wouldn't work. Unintentionally of course.

Rail based transport could easily have ceased to exist under Garret's watch as it was highly fashionable at the time to denigrate investment in the railways then.

D.L.R. · 22-09-2010 11:15pm

Propellerhead wrote: »

Of course, Garret's intervention could have benefitted the road lobby by accident if Luas/any rail project had been put off for a long time, if Garret had been believed that Luas wouldn't work. Unintentionally of course.

Rail based transport could easily have ceased to exist under Garret's watch as it was highly fashionable at the time to denigrate investment in the railways then.

Luas is the lowest form of "rail based transport", thats the point of it.

The only decent part of the luas "network" was laid by a certain imperial power in the 19th century. Hardly worth shouting about.

Propellerhead · 22-09-2010 11:47pm

D.L.R. wrote: »

Luas is the lowest form of "rail based transport", thats the point of it.

The only decent part of the luas "network" was laid by a certain imperial power in the 19th century. Hardly worth shouting about.

Jayzuz, here's me thinking for thirty years that a private company called the Dublin and Wicklow Railway built the Harcourt Street to Bray line and not the British Government. All them books must have been wrong.

No wonder Tod Andrews was so keen to have it ripped up :pac:

dubhthach · 23-09-2010 8:32am

Propellerhead wrote: »

Jayzuz, here's me thinking for thirty years that a private company called the Dublin and Wicklow Railway built the Harcourt Street to Bray line and not the British Government. All them books must have been wrong.

No wonder Tod Andrews was so keen to have it ripped up :pac:

Perhaps DLR is confusing the fact that the D&WR had to get an act past in the "Imperial Parliament" before they could start construction?

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

Comments