Integration chaos

Chris_533976

Just pulled this from Archiseek.

Irish Times
Rail plans on the wrong track

The planning of new rail lines in Dublin as free-standing projects is hindering the prospect of achieving an integrated transport system, writes Frank McDonald, Environment Editor.

Last week, Minister for Transport Martin Cullen declared that the Government's €34.4 billion Transport 21 programme was "not just about individual high-profile projects such as metro, but about the way in which projects are integrated".

However, it is already clear that the "highly efficient, integrated transport network" imagined by the Minister will not be so integrated on the ground in Dublin because people using it would have to walk considerable distances to get from one line to another.

Anyone travelling by public transport from Tallaght to Dublin airport, for example, would have to lug his or her bags from the Luas stop outside Wynn's Hotel to the metro station on Upper O'Connell Street - a minimum distance of 280 metres (308 yards).

Similarly, passengers on the Maynooth suburban railway line seeking to transfer to the Tallaght Luas line will have to walk 350m (385 yards) from the planned rail terminus north of Sheriff Street to the nearest Luas stop serving Docklands.

Neither will the most likely route for Metro North (serving the airport) connect with the Maynooth line.

The distance between the proposed metro station on Botanic Road and a planned Iarnród Éireann station at Prospect will also be 350m.

Mirroring the failure to link up the two existing Luas lines in the city centre (now belatedly being remedied), the fundamental problem is that plans for new rail lines are all being presented as free-standing projects with little reference to integration.

Planning permission for the new rail terminus at Spencer Dock, which will serve Maynooth and the proposed line to Navan, was granted recently by Dublin City Council - subject to its removal in 10 years to facilitate intensive redevelopment of the area.

This decision was based on an assumption that the proposed underground rail link between Spencer Dock and Heuston Station would be finished by then.

Under Transport 21, the projected completion date of this major tunnelling project is 2015.

The tunnel would run via Pearse Station (connecting with Dart), St Stephen's Green (connecting with the Sandyford Luas line and the Airport metro) and the Liberties. At Heuston, it would connect with the Tallaght Luas line and the Kildare Arrow service.

Though it is the single most strategic element of the Transport 21 investment programme, because it would double the capacity of the suburban railway network, the long timescale given for its construction will create more immediate problems for rail users.

According to Platform 11, which campaigns for better rail services, the planned upgrade of the Kildare line to four tracks will create a significant over-capacity problem at Heuston Station until the rail interconnector with Spencer Dock opens in 2015.

Seán Giblin, of the Lucan "Deliver It Right" campaign, demonstrated that if bus and Luas services are not improved, "there will be a peak-hour deficit of nearly 6,000 passengers arriving at Heuston with no onward connection possibility to the city centre". Even after the introduction of longer trams on the Tallaght line and a doubling of the number of buses serving Heuston to 20-plus per hour, "there will still be a deficit of nearly 3,000 passengers with no onward connection possibility to the city centre".

At the Kildare route public inquiry last January, Giblin proposed that Iarnród Éireann should send four peak-hour Arrow commuter trains through the largely disused Phoenix Park tunnel to the proposed Spencer Dock station as an interim solution.

Pat Butler SC, the inspector who conducted the inquiry, recommended this week that the Minister direct Iarnród Éireann to initiate a study of the delivery of ongoing services from Heuston in conjunction with Dublin Bus and the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) within six months.

In its submission to the RPA on route options for Metro North, which would serve Swords as well as the airport, Platform 11 also stressed the need for integration of rail services. In particular, it called for a direct link between metro and the Maynooth line. The group has proposed that the RPA should vary its preferred route for Metro North to link up with the Maynooth line at Drumcondra, where a station already exists, to overcome the problem of a long walk between Botanic Road and Prospect station.

"This should be a no-brainer," according to Fine Gael councillor and Dáil candidate for Dublin West Dr Leo Varadkar. "Failing to link the two rail lines would be an error of gigantic proportions and would be laughed at in any other country in the world."

A spokesman for the RPA said earlier this week that a number of options were now being examined in response to the recent round of public consultations on Metro North, including the location of stations on the route to facilitate easier interchange.

Should get people going :cool:

bryanw

Anyone travelling by public transport from Tallaght to Dublin airport, for example, would have to lug his or her bags from the Luas stop outside Wynn's Hotel to the metro station on Upper O'Connell Street - a minimum distance of 280 metres (308 yards).

I would have expected better from the Irish Times. It seems METRO West is often overlooked.

I don't understand why the Government can't tighten their control on the CIÉ companies (especially IÉ) and the RPA to work better together. They shouldn't have to compete against eachother. It's ridiculous! I'm sure a lot of people feel the same.

MarkoP11

With respect to the Metro North Maynooth line its the RPA's problem since they are building it, the railway line is there it ain't moving, they dodged the issue on the route options presented to the public

If you use the red Luas inwards from Red Cow the interchange problem exists with Metro North. There are no plans or routes on the table (publicly) for Metro West so no one knows. It should be noted that passenger loadings on the Naas Rd section of the Red Luas are very low, the line effectively operates as two with good business at both ends but the centre section is quiet still carries more than the Green Line all the same

The principle problem is actually one of money, proper integration done well is expensive and despite all the singing and dancing there is a finite budget.

There was a turf war of kinds before Transport 21 as both IE and the RPA had rail links to the airport, both agencies/companies have very different remits but at the end of the day its the DoT which tells them what to do

End of the day we are still missing a transport for Dublin body to make it all work. Both sides had some ingenious excuses in the past to avoid integration thats all gone now

bk

In fairness to the RPA, at the public viewings they were saying that their preferred option was actually a mix of both the East route and the central route with a stop at Drumcondra before going up to DCU.

Personally I think it would also be a good idea to have a stop at the corner of Griffith Avenue/Swords road also, before heading up to DCU as it would facilitate a lot of the new apartments being built in that area and existing residents.

The RPA were also saying that they were planning on putting the O'Connell Street stop on the corner of Abbey St to integrate with the Luas.

BendiBus

bk wrote:

In fairness to the RPA, at the public viewings they were saying that their preferred option was actually a mix of both the East route and the central route with a stop at Drumcondra before going up to DCU.

That's what they told me too. But if that's the case why was it not on the list of proposed routes?

Glad to see the article drawing attention to the general subject of integration anyway.

MarkoP11

BendiBus wrote:

That's what they told me too. But if that's the case why was it not on the list of proposed routes?.

Exactly its this lack of openess and transparency that is killing confidence in public transport investment

In short, to alter the route costs €€€, budget finite, need I mention Luas

Bill McH

Frank McDonald wrote:

Anyone travelling by public transport from Tallaght to Dublin airport, for example, would have to lug his or her bags from the Luas stop outside Wynn's Hotel to the metro station on Upper O'Connell Street - a minimum distance of 280 metres (308 yards).

I'm not sure how Frank worked that out. Presumably if the station were built on Upper O'Connell Street there would be an entrance somewhere around the Spire. According to the DTO journey planner that's 224m, less than the distance between DART and LUAS at Connolly Station. Maybe he's adding in the extra metres to get to the platforms?

I still can't quite understand the logic of integrating with the LUAS at Abbey Street and getting rid of the Trinity stop, which some people have advocated on this board. It's just over a kilometre between Abbey Street/O'Connell Street and St. Stephen's Green/Grafton Street. So by integrating with the red line and losing the Trinity stop you save some people a walk of up to 280 metres (if Frank is correct), but then you force others to walk up to 500 metres to get to a station.

Metrobest

I wish Frank McDonald wasn't allowed publish these shameless opinion pieces eroding public confidence in the MetroNorth project. He exploits Platform 11's recent media status elevation by quoting Platform 11 "stressing" the need for integration at Drumcondra.

Would that be the same P11 whose people were on this forum stressing that the infamous Glasnevin Junction was "essential"; if MetroNorth didn't integrate at Glasnevin there would be out-and-war against the RPA. When I told you GJ seemed impractical, all hell broke loose. Subsequently, what I posted has been validated.

So now you want an "integrated" station at Drumcondra. Not a bad idea. But it may not be practical to integrate it in a worthwhile manner. The Maynooth line at Drumcondra runs as an el while MetroNorth runs deep beneath the ground. Drumcondra station is tiny in capacity terms. To fully integrate the two lines, satisfy safety requirements, certain budget-busting things would need to be done:

* CPO-ing neighbouring premises for interchange space and building escalator shafts
* Digging a huge hole in Drumcondra Road or Dorset which will look something like this:



Or this:



And....

* Reroute buses and traffic on a very busy key traffic route into the city for at least three years
* Devise a traffic management plan to deal with all the increased congestion.
* Somehow cajole the CIE dinasour into agreeing with an integration plan for the station.
* Fomulate a media strategy to combat all the anti-metro reports that Frank McDonald and others will write about the "traffic chaos" caused by MetroNorth construction at Drumcondra.

And that's if the thing is actually feasible. I would like to hope it could be.

Whatever decision is taken, one thing is certain. The RPA and Martin Cullen will get it in the ear because it's too easy to take cheap pot shots at them. Far harder do serious analysis.

I can just hear it now in the Sunday Independend... "Martin Cullen, the man reponsible for E VOTING and MONICA LEECH, now brings trauma to families all over North Dublin with his overblown Metro disrupting the city traffic."

On a side issue, I find the constant sniping at Martin Cullen in the Irish media so tiresome. Give the guy a break. Has he really been that bad a transport minister? Who do we want instead? Mary O'Rourke? Olivia Mitchell? Michael Lowry. Take your pic

In a previous discussion, I pulled up articles where Frank McDonald was predicting doom about luas. History has proven him wrong.

Remember his pieces about the money spent on demolition of the ramp at Connolly to terminate luas being "unneccessary" - because the Tallaght passengers didn't really need to be that close to Connolly. Or at least the expense didn't justify it - that was the gist of Frank McDonald's opinion.

Now he's complaining that the very same passengers from the Tallaght line might have to walk from Wynns hotel to an escalator shaft at the Spire to access MetroNorth.

What a contradiction.

He doesn't even mention that MetroWest will interchange with luas.

Shoddy journalism.

Beneath it all, McDonald resents that the Interconnector will take longer to build than MetroNorth, so he vents at the RPA and Martin Cullen. But that's because the interconnector is an even more complex project, and the ten-year timescale was actually Irish Rail's choice, not Martin Cullen's.

Looking at the way MetroNorth is progressing in leaps and bounds and the uncosted interconnector is still Irish Rail's crayon on the map, I can see why they asked for ten years to do it.

Frank McDonald was never in favour of MetroNorth in the first place. So just to prove that he was right all along, he's out to destroy the project.

Just like "McDonald's" new salad range, the Frank McDonald "brand" of anti luas and now anti metro coverage is the same old junkfood. All that's changed is the packaging.

Red Alert

The traders of the city centre are both the long term beneficiary of better public transport and are part of the root cause of the shambles that currently is the LUAS. If this was any other European country they wouldn't have been listened to - especially the crowd on Grafton Street and Dawson Street. Thanks to them we have a non-connecting green line and red line LUAS. They have opposed the logical step of connecting the two, and the worst part is that the government/RPA are listening to them.

bazzer06

I have to say i find these distances calculated for interchange laughable. It's obvious that whoever is calculating them is doing it on a point to point basis - by that i mean from the middle of one platform to the middle of another. Wouldn't MetroNorth have long platforms anyway?

When you consider that escalators and travelators are usually used in integrated stops, this distance is probably the norm - anyone ever changed between lines at Chatelet-Les Halles in Paris? Long walk, even between the two closest lines but its facilitated by the above provisions so its fine.

I do agree with the idea of an integrated transport authority (what has happened to the dto eh??). It is ridiculous that the different transport providers are effectively rivals.

Lastly, what would everyone think of continuing MetroWest across the southside, maybe connecting at Dun Laoghaire with the DART and somewhere in between with Green line Luas? Dun Laoghaire seems to have gotten a bad deal from Transport 21 imo!

craigybagel

Dun Laoghaire already has the dart and the excellent (by DB standards anyway) 46a think there are other parts of the city more deserving of investment from T21.

gjim

To fully integrate the two lines, satisfy safety requirements, certain budget-busting things would need to be done:

blah blah

This is one of the more moronic rants I've read here. We're going to spend 3.5 billion on a staight section of metro and all you can think of is reasons to NOT connect it with the existing heavy rail infrastructure? For the country to realise any sort of gain from spending this sort of money, we need to allow access to it from as many modes as possible. To argue otherwise is pure nuttyness.

Metrobest

No need to be so rude.

Look, I'm just pointing our that building an "integrated" metro station at Drumcondra is not a simple task. I'd appreciate it if you please dealt with that point rather than dissing me because I have a different view to yours.

It's quite common in metro systems the world over that lines cross over and under each other without interchange stations. These are provided only when practical and cost-beneficial. Most cities built their metro systems decades ago. Easier done back then.

"Intergration" at Drumcondra will mean a cut-and-cover station dug either side of the existing railway bridge. Constructing it would reduce roadspace there to one lane for three years; it could possibly close the road altogether. Have you seen a metro station being construted by cut and cover? It ain't pretty. It's disruptive enough when on an extremely wide street like Rokin in Amsterdam, but at Drumcondra station? Where do you expect all that traffic on the city's busiest Northside city road to go? You tell me...

It's unlikely, but if the interchange does go ahead at Drumcondra, project managers would have to deal with all these headaches: you and Frank just sit there in your roles of armchair critics-in-chief demanding that they install a horrendously disruptive station in a clearly unsuitable site without considering the consequences. And for what? The few passengers on the Maynooth line who want to get off at O'Connell Street?

I think that Frank McDonald uses "interchange" to score points against the metro, which is perfectly fine, so long as we are all aware that this bias exists. Unfortunately, the average reader of the Irish Times does not know enough about the nuances of the metro project so Frank McDonald's opinion becomes the fashionable opinion at Dartry dinner parties.

As Bazzer said, the actual distance between Wynns hotel and the Spire, where an escaltor will lead down to metro, is tiny, compared to other underground systems worldwide.

MetroNorth will have platforms to accomodate 90 metre trains; however, entrances can be designed each end. As O'Connell street will be the fourth busiest station on the line (After the airport, Stephen's Green and Trinity), it should feature ample exits - one near the Gresham, one near the Spire, and another near Moore Street/Henry Street would be a nice add-on)

murphaph

Metrobest wrote:

It's quite common in metro systems the world over that lines cross over and under each other without interchange stations. These are provided only when practical and cost-beneficial. Most cities built their metro systems decades ago. Easier done back then.

We have more modern construction techniques so it should be easier now.

Metrobest wrote:

"Intergration" at Drumcondra will mean a cut-and-cover station dug either side of the existing railway bridge. Constructing it would reduce roadspace there to one lane for three years; it could possibly close the road altogether. Have you seen a metro station being construted by cut and cover? It ain't pretty. It's disruptive enough when on an extremely wide street like Rokin in Amsterdam, but at Drumcondra station? Where do you expect all that traffic on the city's busiest Northside city road to go? You tell me...

You can't make an omelette........Seriously, it is a disruptive thing which just has to be dealt with. The Luas was disruptive. It was worth the disruption. They could quite easily keep at least 2 lanes of traffic open. There's a way to build half the station then the other half. The New Yorkers figured it out a hundred years ago.

Metrobest wrote:

It's unlikely, but if the interchange does go ahead at Drumcondra, project managers would have to deal with all these headaches: you and Frank just sit there in your roles of armchair critics-in-chief demanding that they install a horrendously disruptive station in a clearly unsuitable site without considering the consequences. And for what? The few passengers on the Maynooth line who want to get off at O'Connell Street?

Actually the Drumcondra interchange is the likeliest of all (according to various RPA people who many of us have spoken to in person). The RPA believe the site is very suitable (wide, straight street directly beneath an existing elevated station-an integrationist's dream in fact). The only people who seem to be causing any difficulty here are Dublin City Council who haven't got a great name for public transport friendliness. The N1 has been severely disrupted for years on another project just up the road remember, so it's not like there isn't a precedent or that traffic diversions for multiple years haven't been in place already. These are things we must endure to build what we need.

Metrobest wrote:

I think that Frank McDonald uses "interchange" to score points against the metro, which is perfectly fine, so long as we are all aware that this bias exists. Unfortunately, the average reader of the Irish Times does not know enough about the nuances of the metro project so Frank McDonald's opinion becomes the fashionable opinion at Dartry dinner parties.

I think you''re being way to hard on Frank. He's the ONLY national journo so far to openly question the frightening lack of integration as proposed by all the agencies (RPA and IE(Sherrif St Station!)). Would you rather that no journo asked any probing questions about what we're actually getting for the billions we're about to spend on the rail projects in Dublin?

Metrobest wrote:

As Bazzer said, the actual distance between Wynns hotel and the Spire, where an escaltor will lead down to metro, is tiny, compared to other underground systems worldwide.

Yes, but originally we were looking at a metro stop right at the top of O'Connell St. The RPA graphics showed this. That was because even back then they knew a stop at Tara was going to mean no integration with Luas at Abbey. They have now moved beyond Brennan's ststement that Tara will be served and are thinking more laterally, dropping a needless station and improving integration at the same time.

mackerski

Metrobest wrote:

It's quite common in metro systems the world over that lines cross over and under each other without interchange stations.

Excellent - you'll no doubt be able to provide us with some relevant examples in that case.

Dermot

markf909

The few passengers on the Maynooth line who want to get off at O'Connell Street?

Hardly Metrobest, what about the trips north towards the airport that are possible with this interchange?

gjim

Look, I'm just pointing our that building an "integrated" metro station at Drumcondra is not a simple task.

No you were not - you spent most of the message ranting about P11 and Frank McDonald. It comes across as if you're just using this board to continue some sort of personal grudge match you have with P11 even if it requires you to argue for a ludicrous position.

I'd appreciate it if you please dealt with that point rather than dissing me because I have a different view to yours.

I was dealing with your "point". I don't care how difficult it is, it is nuts/moronic to propose spending 3 or 4 billion building a single metro line which doesn't integrate at intersections with other modes particularly existing busy rail lines. I'd rather they spend the money on something else if the line is not going to allow people to make simple connections for onward journeys. Without integration, the effective catchment area for the infrastructure shrinks and the entire economic/financial case for the investment collapses. This is such a basic and simple point.

And I am also interested to hear about these other metro systems which don't bother offering integration. Look at a London tube map, practically EVERY SINGLE intersection between lines offers a means of switching.

SeanW

On the P11 forums many possibilities for an interchange were discussed. There's a bunch of tennis courts at Glasnevin Jct. between the Drumconrda and Midland lines that could be cut-and-covered, there's Cross Guns Bridge (kinda out of the way, but would make a perfect interchange between Metro and the Maynooth and Phoinex Park lines). This is in addition to new talk about Drumcondra.

Suffice to say it is possible, under a wide variety of options, to make a proper Metro system that integrates to the fullest with the various modes of railway that it crosses over/under. The failure to grab these oppprtunities from the outset is indefensible. I don't know how anyone can defend this and expect to be taken seriously. Still waiting for Metrobest's declaration in the "Conflict of Interest" thread.

wwhyte

markf909 wrote:

metrobest wrote:

The few passengers on the Maynooth line who want to get off at O'Connell Street?

Hardly Metrobest, what about the trips north towards the airport that are possible with this interchange?

Also remember that this will be the preferred airport route for people originating along the Dun Laoghaire DART line.

markf909

wwhyte wrote:

Also remember that this will be the preferred airport route for people originating along the Dun Laoghaire DART line.

Good call, this interchange that Metrobest keeps slating will allow one change to Swords/ Airport from anywhere along the Maynooth/ Bray corridor. Metrobest still cleary hasn't grapsed how the interconnector will change the alignment of the Dart services :rolleyes:

Also Metrobest, I too am keen to know these examples of Metros around the world that dont integrate. My experience from using a lot of the systems around the world is contrary to your experience but i'm sure you'll provide us with examples :

It's quite common in metro systems the world over that lines cross over and under each other without interchange stations.

My own 2¢ on this is that a situation similar to Brixton Tube and Rail would suffice if the money is very tight. For those unfamilar, it involves escaltor up, out of tube station then 50m walk to train station then hike up stairs, not ideal but the interchange option is there.

Bill McH

murphaph wrote:

Yes, but originally we were looking at a metro stop right at the top of O'Connell St. The RPA graphics showed this. That was because even back then they knew a stop at Tara was going to mean no integration with Luas at Abbey. They have now moved beyond Brennan's ststement that Tara will be served and are thinking more laterally, dropping a needless station and improving integration at the same time.

Sorry Philip, do you mean "needless station" or "needless interchange" here?

It's hard to see how it would be a "needless station" in the D'Olier Street/College Street/Tara Street area, wherever it actually is. A gap of approx 500 metres between central metro stations would be a pretty normal figure for a modern metro. A gap of over a kilometre between city centre stations would, I think, be considered high. Particularly if you think that the gap between a Mater Hospital station and a station at Drumcondra (if that's where the route goes) would be about 600 metres, even though these stations would be unlikely to enjoy the same patronage.

It's possible that it could be considered a "needless interchange" if we are only bearing in mind the T21 plans. Drumcondra might work just as well for those. However, I hope that we could eventually get around to implementing the metro plans from "Platform for Change" - including the metro towards Tallaght via Kimmage (given that we don't seem to be planning to use the revamped Kildare line for a link to Tallaght:( ). In that respect a connection of some sort with Tara Street could make a lot of sense. At the least, some future connection should be catered for.

I would favour a Trinity stop in the vicinity of D'Olier Street/College Street, with some kind of connection to the Townsend Street end of Tara Street Station, perhaps an underground travelator. That's somewhere between 250 and 300 metres, not including escalators. Not ideal of course, but probably enough to cut perhaps 15 minutes off a journey from the Southside DART to places on the Tallaght metro in the future.

That is, of course, in the hope that the Tallaght metro, at the least, will be built at some stage.

dowlingm

It's quite common in metro systems the world over that lines cross over and under each other without interchange stations.

Not sure where you're talking about here Metrobest. Newcastle wouldn't be one, having gotten their metro from the airport to Central and intercity onwards to Durham. In Toronto suburban rail stations have been moved several hundred metres to intersect with new subways (Oriole GO Station and when Spadina subway is extended Sheppard GO). Perhaps relocating or slightly extending Drumcondra in either direction to hit the alignment could be considered? It doesn't have to hit dead centre, either side will do. As has been pointed out, every passenger not destined for DCC rerouted around it is a win, in this instance Maynooth line pax headed for Dublin airport/Swords/Ballymun/DCU.

I think the Sheriff St station is unfortunately located but the focus should now be on issues like provision of covered walkways etc. in so far as practicable to minimise inconvenience.

John R

Metrobest wrote:

It's quite common in metro systems the world over that lines cross over and under each other without interchange stations. These are provided only when practical and cost-beneficial. Most cities built their metro systems decades ago. Easier done back then.

I too would really like to know where these common interchange-free are, I suspect in your head is the answer.

The point about the works being easier because they were done in the past is bull also, what difference does it make? In comparison to most european cities Dublin has relatively little modern development to get in the way.

The last two tube lines in London were built with direct interchanges central to their operation. The Victoria Line built in the 60s has 16 stations, 15 of them are interchanges with other tube or rail lines. On the Jubilee line extention, built in the late 90s all the stations have an interchange with other tube, rail or DLR lines.

Some of these stations were built under Westminster, Waterloo Rail station, London Bridge and Canary Wharf. The idea that building under a road is too difficult is plainly ridiculous.

Cut and cover is a terribly disruptive method anyway but it can be done with minimum disruption. Just look at the Kings Cross/St Pancras development. Part of the new LU station was built under Euston Road, they built a temporary road over the works to keep the road traffic moving.

markf909

Part of the new LU station was built under Euston Road, they built a temporary road over the works to keep the road traffic moving.

This has also been done in Tokyo in the heart of Shinjuku ( ie insanely busy ) as they are building their 13th underground line.
It has been designed to avoid interchanging with any other line

murphaph

Jaysus yeah, I stayed in a hotel in Shinjuku a while back. That station is total madness. I think it's the busiest railway station in the world. Traffic outside was chronic too.

dowlingm

markf909

that's not what it seems to say here:
http://pacaonly.jp/railway/13th.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Metro_Line_13

markf909

dowlingm wrote:

markf909

that's not what it seems to say here:
http://pacaonly.jp/railway/13th.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Metro_Line_13

I think one of our sarcasm meters has been turned off.
I was joking and I think you are too

dowlingm

missed the smiley...

I'll get me coat.

Navan Junction

Madam, - We welcome Frank McDonald's continued support for the underground DART interconnector (The Irish Times, May 26th). As well as dramatically improving the frequency and capacity on all Greater Dublin area rail lines, this will fully integrate all modes - Dart, Commuter, Intercity, Luas and Metro - into a cohesive network.

However, we would not agree that a "freestanding approach" is being taken to the various investment schemes, "hindering" integration.

The logical conclusion from the argument that integration is not being achieved between Iarnród Éireann and Railway Procurement Authority schemes under Transport 21, due to walking distances of up to 350 metres between modes, is that integration between rail modes barely exists anywhere in the world.

Such interchange distances - and indeed much longer distances in many cases - are extremely common internationally in systems which all observers would readily accept are integrated, such as London Underground, Paris Metro, and their linkages with wider commuter and inter-city rail travel. The high frequency and capacity of these systems ensures that usage is maximisedand that modest transfer distances do not discourage commuters from using public transport.

There is already heavy interchange of customers between Dart and Commuter services at Connolly Station and the Luas Red Line Connolly terminus, where the distance between the Dart/Commuter platforms and the Luas stop is similar to that being presented as some sort of drastic obstacle to integration at Docklands.

The location of our Docklands station, opening next year, will ensure easy interchange with the extended Luas Red Line and also allows services to continue operating while the underground Dart interconnector is constructed. The use of the Phoenix Park tunnel to Docklands for Kildare services would not add any capacity to the system, but would rather result in Kildare commuters taking longer to get to the city centre than they do currently, and prevent planned expansion in the Maynooth line and proposed Dunboyne/Pace line services.

Finally, we are working closely with the RPA to ensure our services integrate closely at all interchange points on the network being funded by Transport 21, including interchanges between the Maynooth commuter line and Metro North and Metro West and between the underground Dart interconnector and the Metro, Luas Red and Luas Green Lines. - Yours, etc,

BARRY KENNY, Manager, Corporate Communications, Iarnród Éireann, Connolly Station, Dublin 1.

popebenny16

Ah jaysus...............


Quote:
There is already heavy interchange of customers between Dart and Commuter services at Connolly Station and the Luas Red Line Connolly terminus, where the distance between the Dart/Commuter platforms and the Luas stop is similar to that being presented as some sort of drastic obstacle to integration at Docklands.



For starters 99% of that journey is within the actual Connolly Station building. So, the reality is that the journey from Connolly station to LUAS is around 10m. Ditto for Heuston to LUAS.

There is a big difference bewteen walking from Sherriff Street Station to a LUAS stop (not even a terminus stop) and what Barry says above. It is akin to the walk from Bua Aras to Connolly Station. Would Barry Kenny say that Connolly Station and Bus Aras are integrated? No.

Next:


Quote:
The location of our Docklands station, opening next year, will ensure easy interchange with the extended Luas Red Line and also allows services to continue operating while the underground Dart interconnector is constructed.


There is no interchange. It is the same as getting off a 40 bus in Parnell Street and walking to the 28 bus stop in Abbey Street. Thats not integrated either. Also, this station will only have a 10 year timespan, which Barry forgets to mention. This means that then interconnector will have to open by 2018 at the latest. As the interconnector isnt due to start untill 2015 I dont think it'll be done in three years, but Im sure the more technical lads can correct me on this.


Quote:
The logical conclusion from the argument that integration is not being achieved between Iarnród Éireann and Railway Procurement Authority schemes under Transport 21, due to walking distances of up to 350 metres between modes, is that The logical conclusion from the argument that integration is not being achieved between Iarnród Éireann and Railway Procurement Authority schemes under Transport 21, due to walking distances of up to 350 metres between modes, is that integration between rail modes barely exists anywhere in the world.



When you have to get off a LUAS at ground level in Stephens Green, walk into an underground station and get onto another form of Transport which starts down the road it isnt intgrated. Using that Logic the fact that you can walk 100 metres or 100 kilometers between stations means they are intgrated, ie, they are all on the surface, or just beneath, of planet Earth. Sadly, Barry is not.

There is no intgration at Botanic Road. There is no intgration proposed at Drumconrda, as the midland line trains bypass the station. This is another fine example of non-integration of services totaly and compleatly within his companies controll.

It is misleading to state "is that integration between rail modes barely exists anywhere in the world" integration on the model defended by Barry barely exists anywhere in the world. Again, there is no integration needed in the examples he is using, as they are all within the same phyical locale. EG using a travelator to go from Teminals 1 to 4 in Heathrow isnt intgrated, its the same system. On that logic Platform 1 and 8 in Heuston are fully integrated.


Quote:
The use of the Phoenix Park tunnel to Docklands for Kildare services would not add any capacity to the system, but would rather result in Kildare commuters taking longer to get to the city centre than they do currently


Oh come ON!!! Not only, as has been pointed out before, is Chav totaly overburnend because some fool never thought the damned thing would be popular, what with it being between the two biggest railway stations and only bus staion in the City and even though someone knew it and hid a third line in Heuston for a laugh, but i love playing the game of next tram in 2 min getting stuck for 4 min, right after 3 min was there for 5. What's happening here, of course is Barry is saying that if you shove your DMU into Platform 1, wait while no-one gets out, then move it around the houses over to the tunnell (cos that's what'll happen) and then to connolly of course it'll take forever. Why not stop it at 10? Perhaps it's not intgrated enough.

This is just so bad, its enraging. I'm sure that Barry will be there at Sherrif Street, dressed as a clown, when it opens, telling those people who have to wealk in the rain to a small LUAS stop that it's intgrated.

But maybe he'll be on holidays that week

dowlingm

A classic BK-ism: we don't do it in Ireland so nobody else does it. Beg to differ Barry. Few people do it when they have a choice to do otherwise. It's far from clear that IE had no choice but to build Sheriff St. - it seems to me that it was just cheaper to.

murphaph

Plenty of heated discussion over on P11 about this letter of untruths. Totally infuriating, especially given Joe Public will believe it all.

Bill McH

I can think of several cases where underground lines do not connect with overground lines under which they pass, if that helps:D

In London, Brixton has already been mentioned. The connection between Shadwell (East London line) and Shadwell (DLR) would be a fairly similar arrangement. Up from the tube, a walk of perhaps 100 metres and then up to the DLR.

In Munich the U3 line (broadly speaking travelling in a south-west to north east direction) passes beneath the S-Bahn line S7/S20/S27 (all travelling due north at this point) at Obersendling with no interchange. An interchange between the U3 and the S7 does happen later on in the journey for both sets of passengers (about 7 stops later on the U3 line and 8/9 stops later on the S7). There is no interchange between the U3 and either the S20 or S27.

Much the same kind of thing happens in Frankfurt, with the S6 line crossing the U6 and U7 lines in the suburbs, with no interchange. These lines do interchange in the city centre (6 stops later on the U lines and 5 stops later on the S line). The same S6 line crosses the U1/2/3 line in the suburbs and there is an interchange, though I'm told it would be like the "Brixton" arrangement where you must leave one station, walk down the road and and into the other station.

So, a few examples, all from the last 30 or so years.

I'd say in all of the above cases, the authorities would have provided a proper interchange if it had been possible. And by an large all of the above are examples of cities where integration would be fairly good.:p

I think Drumcondra would be a good location for an interchange station between the Maynooth line and the metro. There may also be advantages, particularly for the future, in having some kind of a connection between Tara Street station and the metro.

Zebra3

markf909 wrote:

Good call, this interchange that Metrobest keeps slating will allow one change to Swords/ Airport from anywhere along the Maynooth/ Bray corridor. Metrobest still cleary hasn't grapsed how the interconnector will change the alignment of the Dart services :rolleyes:

This will also allow for one change for commuters wanting to access the airport from as far west as Longford.

It's crucial that it's built.

mackerski

Bill McH wrote:

In London, Brixton has already been mentioned. The connection between Shadwell (East London line) and Shadwell (DLR) would be a fairly similar arrangement. Up from the tube, a walk of perhaps 100 metres and then up to the DLR.

The connection at Shadwell is fine. Surface from the tube, walk around the corner and up a flight of stairs. Not ideal with luggage, but it compares favourably with many tube-tube connections. The most annoying part of it is having to touch out and back in again.

Bill McH wrote:

In Munich the U3 line (broadly speaking travelling in a south-west to north east direction) passes beneath the S-Bahn line S7/S20/S27 (all travelling due north at this point) at Obersendling with no interchange. An interchange between the U3 and the S7 does happen later on in the journey for both sets of passengers (about 7 stops later on the U3 line and 8/9 stops later on the S7). There is no interchange between the U3 and either the S20 or S27.

Obersendling has a nominal S-bahn interchange with the crossing lines at Siemenswerke, which is right around the corner, no worse than the Shadwell example. (better, in fact, because you won't need to to any ticket juggling). According to the latest network plan, Siemenswerke is served by all three of the S-Bahn lines that pass it. To me, the reduced nature of this interchange is excusable given the fact that the majority of passengers have a much easier transfer option via a change at Marienplatz. Passengers from Munich West can easily reach any of these destinations with a combination of S-Bahn and bus.

All of the "disputed" interchanges we've seen here, of course, are far better than what's proposed for Botanic Avenue... That's a line-crossing whose location is far more comparable to Neuperlach Süd, Scheidplatz, Feldmoching or Moosach, all of which have full interchanges.

Dermot

Bill McH

mackerski wrote:

The connection at Shadwell is fine. Surface from the tube, walk around the corner and up a flight of stairs. Not ideal with luggage, but it compares favourably with many tube-tube connections. The most annoying part of it is having to touch out and back in again.

I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say that it's fine, but it is okay. Given the comparatively low numbers who use the East London line, it's probably as much as could be expected. It does, I agree, compare favourably with a lot of the tube connections - Bank/Monument being about the worst I can remember. Excusable in that case, I suppose, given the number of lines which run through the station(s). Some changes at Tottenham Court Road, for example, involve quite long walks, even though there's only two lines going through the station.

Obersendling has a nominal S-bahn interchange with the crossing lines at Siemenswerke, which is right around the corner, no worse than the Shadwell example. (better, in fact, because you won't need to to any ticket juggling). According to the latest network plan, Siemenswerke is served by all three of the S-Bahn lines that pass it. To me, the reduced nature of this interchange is excusable given the fact that the majority of passengers have a much easier transfer option via a change at Marienplatz. Passengers from Munich West can easily reach any of these destinations with a combination of S-Bahn and bus.

I'm afraid I was not aware that the Obersendling and Siemenswerke stations were around the corner from each other. I was relying on my street map of Munich, which shows them to be separated by perhaps a few hundred metres. Of course the map does not show all the entrances and exits to these stations, so I suppose that is how they can actually be quite close, as you say.

MarkoP11

Zebra3 wrote:

This will also allow for one change for commuters wanting to access the airport from as far west as Longford.

It's crucial that it's built.

On the opposite side it means a one change from as far south as Greystones, possibly even Gorey if the logical step is taken to operate Longford Dublin Gorey as one service

Its so simple, but its not on the map for the metro route consulation.

dowlingm

Bill McH - there's a difference between 100m (presumably covered walkway?) and 350m down a street I would suggest.

Victor

mackerski wrote:

The connection at Shadwell is fine. Surface from the tube, walk around the corner and up a flight of stairs.

Yeah, but it was slighly scary to realise Shadwell = Tower Hamlets.

Bill McH

dowlingm wrote:

Bill McH - there's a difference between 100m (presumably covered walkway?) and 350m down a street I would suggest.

dowlingm, I hope I've read this correctly, but the Brixton and Shadwell examples do not include a covered walkway, while the Munich one may do (I don't know). The Frankfurt example I gave would be different again because there is no S-Bahn station anywhere in the vicinity of the point where it crosses the U6/7 line. These S and U lines take different routes to get to the centre where they do meet. Mackerski's point above about bus/rail combinations in South-West Munich would hold just as well in North-West Frankfurt.

But of course, I agree totally with the basic point here. Building a metro station on the Smurfit lands, 350 or so metres from the Maynooth line, leaving people with 2 sets of steps/escalators and a hefty outdoor walk would just not be on. Particularly if there are alternatives. The one involving the metro under the Tennis club seemed like a good idea and I hope it gets looked at.

I still would, however, favour a metro route through Drumcondra, with a proper interchange there. I have no idea whether it would be easier to build an interchange there than under the Tennis club (or anywhere else), but a line through there would be almost halfway between the DART line and the Broadstone-Liffey Junction line, which will hopefully see some action before 2015. It might not seem like much, given that the two most likely locations for an interchange are pretty much at either end of the same (Whitworth) road, but I reckon that the Drumcondra option may eventually provide much greater balance on the northside - catchment areas and so forth.

Anyway, Lads, I've spotted another example in London, if anyone's interested...:)

John R

Bill McH wrote:

I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say that it's fine, but it is okay. Given the comparatively low numbers who use the East London line, it's probably as much as could be expected. It does, I agree, compare favourably with a lot of the tube connections - Bank/Monument being about the worst I can remember.

The East London line is due to be closed for 18 months for redevelopment and major extentions, it will no longer be a tube line as such but part of the main rail network.

Shadwell station is also going to be redeveloped, presumably it will make cross-line access better.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-centre/press-releases/press-releases-content.asp?prID=525

http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/3

The big difference with most of these cases is that they are very old railways, the Dublin Metro is being built from scratch and there is no good reason to skimp on important aspects such as interconnection.

dermo88

Actually, there is a very good reason why we should'nt be integrating these lines, and leave plenty of distance between nodes. The logic would shock you if you thought of it long and carefully.

Your the Transport minister, and you meet a few of your bosses buddies at the Galway races, or Cheltenham. Business is going well, and there are a few construction contracts going around. Especially with the whole Transport 21 thing.

But things have to be "transparent", "open", "visible".

Its time to get the smoke and mirrors out and start pretending that things are actually above board, legitimate and honest. But its all legal, very legal.

This ensures that the three pillars of Fianna Fail have strong foundations. 1. Landowners, who have to be compensated, who make dubious objections to obtain compensation. 2. Contractors - we can't give the whole Metro North to Ascon (example).....we have to realise "Oh we left OUT a connecting station at Drumcondra......hmmm......why oh why did'nt we think of that before". So that means, they can give another bit of the contract to CRH, who's boss was also at the beertent, and of course, did'nt our Michael say "Shhhh.....we'll look after you for that tip in the 3.15". 3. The legal profession.

3. So the best way to milk the cow is to split it into a load of silly small little contracts. One contractor does'nt get the jackpot, a whole bunch of them do. And you know they are going to donate lots of wonga to the cummann.....don't ya.

4. Get the occasional NIMBY to make an objection, get your old lawyer buddy from secondary school...."Hows things, do you fancy a job. Things a bit quiet since Larry Goodman was around. Things a bit quiet since Haughey, since the last tribunal which found noone out".......need I go on.

So a few million more there my learned friends, while it gets delayed a bit more.

So, this is why it will take longer than we all expect. This is why we have bad planning. There is no use blaming the unions, or the workers. The real problem is the system. Its not by the people for the people. Its by Fianna Fail for the three pillars.

When the recession happens again, it will be up to an opposition Finance minister to make cutbacks, cancel the projects, and then they will be revived later, at five times the cost, thereby ensuring that the charade, and pretence of honesty and transparency continues.

Welcome to Ireland.

mackerski

Bill McH wrote:

dowlingm, I hope I've read this correctly, but the Brixton and Shadwell examples do not include a covered walkway, while the Munich one may do (I don't know).

It doesn't. In fact, I've had a fresh look at this one with the aid of Google Earth. The distance is a tad longer than I had estimated, though there does appear to be a path along the S-Bahn line that allows a shorter walk than would be possible on-street. It still looks like 450m, though, and not covered. Munich, of course, isn't as wet as Dublin. I stand by what I said about it being an unnecessary connection, and given the many other connections available to replace it, it's probably better this way than an arrangement where every S-Bahn passenger has to wait another 1:30 on the route to work.

Bill McH wrote:

Anyway, Lads, I've spotted another example in London, if anyone's interested...:)

There's the crossing of the H&C Line with the Central near White City.
Central and Picadilly/Metropolitan in Ruislip
Two crossings of Central and Pic in and around Ealing
Bakerloo & Met up Wembley direction

Special mention goes to the two non-connected Edgeware Road stations (Bakerloo is on its Todd) and the Paddington H&C station that's on the other end of the mainline platforms from the rest of the Paddington Tube lines.

Apart from the first of these, all are well out in the sticks, and there are plenty of alternative ways of getting where you're going. None are inside the circle line and none (as far as I can see) could cause people to travel right into the centre to interchange in order to reach an outlying destination.

Dermot

DerekP11

Well done lads on the research and comparisons to other European cities.

I'll make my point in three parts.

1. SPENCER DOCK.
This was a brownfield site owned by CIE. The "temporary" station will have a lifespan of ten years. The Luas extension to the point depot should be built within the next 3 years. All going well, the 350m walk will be in existance for approx. 7 years until the interconnector is built. Barry Kennys assertion that this is acceptable is based on similar examples quoted by others here. However, we must return to the original point. Spencer Dock was a brownfield site owned by CIE. There is absolutely no excuse to justify this "uncovered" and "unintegrated" 350m walk. The decision was taken on the basis of property development first, public transport second. Plain and simple. No argument. What went on in Spencer Dock is an absolute disgrace and is costing us millions in the long run.

2. METRO NORTH.
IE are not working closely with the RPA on an interchange with the Maynooth line. They are working closely on the interchange point at Stephens Green. Both sides have been steaming ahead in very different directions in relation to an interchange between Metro north and the Maynooth line. The RPA now seem to have accepted the importance of this connection, no doubt due to P11s input to the O'Reilly report, as before that it wasn't even mentioned. They prefer Drumcondra on a slight deviation. This requires nothing from IE.

3. PHOENIX PARK TUNNEL
Barry Kenny asserts that routing some Kildare line trains to the Docklands via the tunnell would compromise the planned expansion of Maynooth services and the forthcoming Pace/Dunboyne service. This is a huge red herring. Firstly IE have provided no connection between the PPT and Docklands station. According to Michael Power (Maynooth line manager) this is because the Government failed to allocate €15m for a scissors crossing at Glasnevin junction!?? Docklands station will only have 5 trains per hour serving it at peak. It is designed to take 8 to 10 trains per hour peak. Thats probably why Joe Meagher ex IE CEO told the Oireachtas committee in 2004, that some Kildare line trains would be routed to Docklands via the PPT as "there would be demand for that." His qoute, not mine. In any case the connection could have been made in Spencer Dock itself as both lines from Glasnevin junction (north and south of Croke Park) run into it. However "property development" has prevented this as buildings are to go up where the lines converge. "Brownfield site". Remember??

As regards Barry Kennys comments on the Phoenix Park Tunnell not offering any more capacity...this is off the mark somewhat. The line runs through a densely populated area. Stations could be provided at Blackhorse avenue and Cabra, thereby bringing these areas onto the rail map. A sunday service from Kildare to Pearse could be provided via the Tunnel.(no capacity issues on Sundays and currently no Sunday commuter services on the Kildare line. The only commuter line in the country without one.) As mentioned above some Kildare line services could run to Spencer Dock.

Platform 11 didn't invent the concept of utilising the park tunnell for scheduled passenger services. We only highlighted it and brought it back from the dead. CIE in the 1980s submitted plans to the Government to do the very same thing with stations in places such as Cabra. This project was then cut back to the existing and rather curtailed Kildare commuter service.

Who's interferring in real progress? Who lacks the will to make real change? Who makes the decisions that turn out to be short sighted? Why are plans that make sense suddenly compromised? Why does IE mis-manage part of its Dublin Network? These are some of the questions that everyone interested should ask. Barry Kenny won't give you the answers. He's not allowed to. Remember that his ultimate boss is the "sod turner of the year", Martin Cullen.

Chris_533976

dermo88 wrote:

Actually, there is a very good reason why we should'nt be integrating these lines, and leave plenty of distance between nodes. The logic would shock you if you thought of it long and carefully.

Your the Transport minister, and you meet a few of your bosses buddies at the Galway races, or Cheltenham. Business is going well, and there are a few construction contracts going around. Especially with the whole Transport 21 thing.

(snip)

I hate to agree with the rant but that probobly disturbingly true

Things arent done for the greater good here, they're designed to make money for certain people.

popebenny16

Have to admit going down the dermo way as well. We all know what the problems are and they can be dived into two areas:

The political one as Dermo has pointed out.

Get over that and you get

The institutional one, as Derek has pointed out.

You know what? It's a lovely day out there. Let's get out and enjoy the sun!!!

Metrobest

I stand by my comment that it's quite common for metro lines to cross under and over each other without interchanges being provided. Bill has most helpfully pointed out the London example - and I can think of others in Singapore, Kuala Lumper and Sydney. No doubt there are more. The schematic maps in metro stations don't paint the full picture of where the actual lines are located.

Yes, Frank McDonald is one of the better journalists but he's not always right. I prefer the Sunday Times and Business Post on environment/transport: Frank is prone to factual inaccuracies such as his claim that Tallaght line passengers will have to lug their bags out at Abbey when we all know there will be interchange with MetroWest. I don't like his style of reportage - it's very biased. That said, he's good at thinly-researched comment pieces. He could be good as the new Kevin Myers.

I prefer Tara Street because it's city centre, it connects to Bray-Maynooth DART and it brings Tara Street closer to Dublin's core environment. It's a win-win for DART and metro.

The Tara Street interchange is visionary but the Drumcondra interchange is reactionary. I say reactionary because it's being promoted on the basis of an ideological belief that because two railway lines cross they must "interchange". Its benefits are being overegged, just like Tony Blair's dodgy dossier.

So in summary:

* Interchanges should only be provided where suitable and practical
* Drumcondra may not be a suitable site for an interchange.
* City centre interchanges are preferable to out-of-centre sites
* Tara Street is a better and more suitable site than Drumcondra.

markf909

City centre interchanges are preferable to out-of-centre sites

Ahh excellent Metrobest you have returned.

Now would you care to explain your opinion above?

Tara Street is a better and more suitable site than Drumcondra.

Perhaps flesh out and make a valid point as to why Tara St would be better than Drumcondra. When doing so, please make refernce to the DART post interconnector, that means

Maynooth - Bray. ( with the Maynooth side having by far a larger catchment )
Hazelhatch - Balbriggan.

with the interchange between being at Pearse.

Personally, I would prefer the option of an interchange at Drumcondra, even if it means something like the Brixton example I made.

Mayshine

Hi Metrobeast,

Just to clarrify (and having lived there) - in your Singapore example, there are three underground line (red, green and purple). These lines cross in 3 different places. All these are interconnecting stations (Doby Ghaut, Raffles Place and Harbourfront).

In Raffles Place and also City hall the lines actually run in parallel above and below each other

Singapore MRT Map

They are adding a fourth line (circle line) to be completed end of the year ish). This crosses the other line in 5 places, with 4 of these inconnecting. I'm guessin from looking at the map there is no way of expanding city hall to accomodate it

Singapore Circle line



KL - also been there quite a bit - system is also fully interconnected

here --> KL Map

I haven't been to sydney, but looking at it maps it seems that there is about two instaces on their rail map where there are lines crossing without an interconnect


Say what you may but that in my book that means that when urban transit lines cross it is pretty uncommon not to find an interconnect

Then again with with Dublin, regardless of all the good points and ideas being provided by some of the activist groups, I'm feeling we'll get what we deserve.

Namely a transit system build by bickering partizan sides overseen by a corrupt and useless government, for a majority (present company excepted) of citizens whose only contribution to the project was to moan/agure/not care about it.

What we will get probably might have been considered world class in 1980, but by the time it is build every other forward thinking global city will have a much better vision and implementation of integrated public transport

dermo88

Actually, I live in KL at the moment, and it certainly is not the best example of how to do things. The bus system is chaotic. The LRT system is not integrated yet, and if you are travelling from one line to another, you have to get seperate tickets. There is NO integrated ticketting system with either KL monorail or KTMB (Malaysian Railways) Kommuter system. There is a 250 Meter walk from KL Sentral main station to KL Sentral Monorail. Changing from the Ampang line to the Kelana Jaya line requires a long walk, across a motorway, but its far from integrated. Its planned randomly, and with extreme haste. Its symptomatic of the crazy economic boom this country (Malaysia) went through until 1997, and when it all went "pear shaped", it got delayed, and had to be restarted (See my first entry on oppostion cleaning up the mess).

If thats integration, then I suggest that the Malaysians get their consultants over to Ireland fast, and "assist" Fianna Fail on the best way to milk it.

I'll give an example of this political patronage slush fund nonsense. A major double tracking and electrification project for 180km of track.

1. Supposed to be finished by 2005 and now delayed to 2008
2. The Asian trick of "creative bankruptcy" (watch for this one). Starts off under DRB Hicom, taken over by the Government who then pass it over to UEM Renong Bhd, and then now likely to be finished by 2008.

Now, Malaysians are'nt quite as able to speak as openly as we are in Ireland. But if you replaced Barisan Nasional and UMNO with Fianna Fail, there are startling parralels.

1. Many major projects go over budget and bust.
2. Many of these companies who get the contracts have relations in high places, but noone really knows that. I can't prove it, but observation alone indicates this crap is happening constantly.

We all know the best way to look after your buddies when in Government, and your supporters is to throw money around like confetti at a wedding. Award contracts left, right and centre. Rezone land in the right places. Throw 500 Euro notes like Kerry Packer in Monaco. No fear, no worries, no problems.

Compared to Singapore, KL has screwed up. Of course, in Singapore every single thing is watched. I happen to like both places. Singapore is an expensive, efficient, clean, high class answer to KL. Everything works, snap your fingers, and it happens. Its a joy to watch. There are proper checks and balances in place. But Malaysia.....no. Great country, great people, great food, pity about the Government. KL is reasonably efficient, but it has enough random chaos to make it interesting, fun and cause initiative. You'll know what I mean if you want to use public transport or taxis at 4.30 in the afternoon when the monsoon rains and lightning storms start.

As for Ireland. Don't get me started. At least Malaysia has a decent LRT system, but its far from adequate.

Mayshine

I'll admit, my experience is more Singapore based than Malaysia, so I'll defer to you on that one dermo.