DART+ (DART Expansion)

liamog

Idbatterim wrote: »

right boom continues, what would have stopped it, the every increasing congestion etc?!

I was on the aviation forum earlier, reading about the second dublin airport runway, 4 years before planning was granted! It wasnt simply "oh lets build a metro to the airport and start next week" job. huge amounts of planning and finance had gone into it, **** hits the fan, of course those project were going to go, being a realist living in Ireland.

can you imagine "3,000,000,000" metro works progress in Dublin, while Guardai eat cardboard" "children go to school hungry" take your pick...

Ardnacrusha cost 5.2 Million at a time the state budget was around 25 Million, by that reckoning we should of built a lot more as I'm pretty sure the budget is a lot higher than 15 Billion now.

Grandeeod

liamog wrote: »

You've conveniently left out the time that Leo Varadker was Minister for Transport, a Dublin TD for a constituency that would of seen benefits from DU in particular.

Edit

I actually agree with your point though.

I'm referring to the boom years. Varadker came in on the downward spiral.

Grandeeod

Deedsie wrote: »

I appreciate the time you took to type that out. It's certainly interesting, but also a bit slanted.

So in the last 20 years we have had three non Dublin, two Dublin Metro area and three Dublin based ministers for transport. Rural: Lowry, Rourke & Cullen. Dublin Metro Alan Dukes & Dempsey. Dublin: Séamus Brennan, Leo Varadkar & Pascal Donohue

You say rural TD's don't know the needs of Dublin transport but most of our TD's have lived in Dublin or went to college there prior to entering political life.

Once again I will emphasise that I referred to the boom years. Varadker and Donohue don't count. Dukes was only in the roll temporarily. Brennan was from Galway and served twice as transport minister. Dempsey was reared in Meath long before it was considered a suburb of Dublin. As for all this living in Dublin and going to College thing, it means nothing. They grew up in rural, car dependent Ireland. Nothing slanted about what I have said.

Grandeeod

Deedsie wrote: »

2011 to 2014 was Leo's time in office. Hardly the worst of the recession? I think most of these started in the last few years; Newlands Cross flyover was built during his term in office, city centre resignalling project, Phoenix park tunnel upgrade, national sports campus, M11 Arklow to Rathnew, Luas cross city, M7 Widening (funding granted)... All provided for Dublin Metro area during and after a recession. Nowhere near enough but it's not like there are less developments in Dublin Metro area compared to the rest of the country.

I'm talking about rail projects. MN and DU. I'm not a FG head in case this is driving your response.

I've already alluded to the Park Tunnel project and its background in relation to DU and FG. The City Centre resignalling was nothing to do with FG. It was on the way before FG entered Government. Luas cross city was perhaps down to the FG Government. Considering what was proposed and planned Leo was in the happenney place, once he got into office. Your list doesn't refute the point I have made.

keane2097

Deedsie wrote: »

2011 to 2014 was Leo's time in office. Hardly the worst of the recession? I think most of these started in the last few years; Newlands Cross flyover was built during his term in office, city centre resignalling project, Phoenix park tunnel upgrade, national sports campus, M11 Arklow to Rathnew, Luas cross city, M7 Widening (funding granted)... All provided for Dublin Metro area during and after a recession. Nowhere near enough but it's not like there are less developments in Dublin Metro area compared to the rest of the country.

Funnily enough I have no memory of anyone from my neck of the woods complaining about any of the above.

A good thing so many people who only leave the Pale on Ryanair flights are around to correct us.

Deedsie

Grandeeod wrote: »

Once again I will emphasise that I referred to the boom years. Varadker and Donohue don't count. Dukes was only in the roll temporarily. Brennan was from Galway and served twice as transport minister. Dempsey was reared in Meath long before it was considered a suburb of Dublin. As for all this living in Dublin and going to College thing, it means nothing. They grew up in rural, car dependent Ireland. Nothing slanted about what I have said.

Rural car dependent Ireland? Do you live in Dublin? The city is ruined by car over dependency. Same as all our cities. Both our rural and Dublin TD's have destroyed Cork, Limerick and Galway infrastructure.

Let's be honest, on the lack of Dubliner Transport Ministers... it's a weak argument... Bertie held the reigns pretty tight on the cabinet between 97 & 08. Do you think he would have allowed an anti Dublin bias in investment? Off the top of my head some of the developments in Dublin during the boom: Croke Park, Landsdowne Road, national sports campus, M50, LUAS, M1, Dublin Port Tunnel, Terminal 2, Irish rail infrastructure improvements etc.

Grandeeod

keane2097 wrote: »

Funnily enough I have no memory of anyone from my neck of the woods complaining about any of the above.

A good thing so many people who only leave the Pale on Ryanair flights are around to correct us.

I suggest you leave behind any remarks made about anyone from your neck of the woods complaining and comment on the actual political approach. (with its rural influence) I personally don't want to get involved in a rural people Vs Dublin people argument. It's a political thing at the end of the day.

Deedsie

Grandeeod wrote: »

I'm talking about rail projects. MN and DU. I'm not a FG head in case this is driving your response.

I've already alluded to the Park Tunnel project and its background in relation to DU and FG. The City Centre resignalling was nothing to do with FG. It was on the way before FG entered Government. Luas cross city was perhaps down to the FG Government. Considering what was proposed and planned Leo was in the happenney place, once he got into office. Your list doesn't refute the point I have made.

I have no interest in party allegiances, I'm very neutral with leanings toward green policies. The only things driving my argument and responses is I have lived all over Ireland so trying to balance the rural v urban rhetoric and I have a general interest in Irish Infrastructure.

murphaph

keane2097 wrote: »

[citation needed]

Give it a rest. It's a discussion forum. It's not a court of law. I firmly believe that most rural voters, in a yes/no referendum on MN and or DU would vote against both.

Do you believe the opposite?

Deedsie

Grandeeod wrote: »

I suggest you leave behind any remarks made about anyone from your neck of the woods complaining and comment on the actual political approach. (with its rural influence) I personally don't want to get involved in a rural people Vs Dublin people argument. It's a political thing at the end of the day.

You have repeatedly accused transport ministers originally from rural Ireland of having an anti Dublin bias. "They grew up in rural, car dependent Ireland" as if they wouldn't recognise the DART if it was about to roll over them.

keane2097

Grandeeod wrote: »

I suggest you leave behind any remarks made about anyone from your neck of the woods complaining and comment on the actual political approach. (with its rural influence) I personally don't want to get involved in a rural people Vs Dublin people argument. It's a political thing at the end of the day.

I can see you aren't making that argument. Several other people here and on the politics forum are stating it as fact regularly.

I'm entitled to ask for substantiation of the claims that there's any great opposition to Dublin projects from 'ignorant' rural people, never mind substantiation that such opposition was a factor in DU/MN cancellations.

Deedsie has listed a fairly substantial list of large projects carried out in Dublin over the last 20 years, which I would think indicates that rather than rural opposition halting Dublin infrastructure improvements what we're in fact dealing with is a lack of interest in rail investment. It seems like a hard point of view to understand to me, but there it is.

Deedsie

murphaph wrote: »

Give it a rest. It's a discussion forum. It's not a court of law. I firmly believe that most rural voters, in a yes/no referendum on MN and or DU would vote against both.

Do you believe the opposite?

I definitely believe the opposite, most rural Irish people do occasionally travel to Dublin you know? To work, study, live, hospitals, sporting events, concerts and recreation, visit family and occasionally spend money... OMG. To use the airport, Metro North would be brilliant for people from rural Ireland. It's all of our capital city you know?

keane2097

murphaph wrote: »

Give it a rest. It's a discussion forum. It's not a court of law. I firmly believe that most rural voters, in a yes/no referendum on MN and or DU would vote against both.

Do you believe the opposite?

Yes.

Grandeeod

Deedsie wrote: »

Rural car dependent Ireland? Do you live in Dublin? The city is ruined by car over dependency. Same as all our cities. Both our rural and Dublin TD's have destroyed Cork, Limerick and Galway infrastructure.

Let's be honest, on the lack of Dubliner Transport Ministers... it's a weak argument... Bertie held the reigns pretty tight on the cabinet between 97 & 08. Do you think he would have allowed an anti Dublin bias in investment? Off the top of my head some of the developments in Dublin during the boom: Croke Park, Landsdowne Road, national sports campus, M50, LUAS, M1, Dublin Port Tunnel, Terminal 2, Irish rail infrastructure improvements etc.

Rural car dependent Ireland??? YES!

Can you not see that rural Ireland was car dependent over the years? Can you not see that this casts an influence on those that are reared there? This issue has been around for years, which is why the car is king in Dublin. Public transport didn't exist in Galway etc etc over the years. It only existed to an extent in Dublin. For many years the only "city" bus service existed in Dublin. Even now the watered down version of CIE still offers "city" bus services under the BE banner, which is piecemeal and stuck in a timewarp.

My argument isn't weak and if you wish to study public transport history in Ireland over the last 60 plus years, you may understand. You cannot judge current day public transport systems on the basis of recent activities.

As for Bertie? I was waiting on that one. He didn't give a damn about anything apart from what interested him. Probably why DB is doing pretty well despite the PD push for privatisation of routes.

Deedsie

Grandeeod wrote: »

Rural car dependent Ireland??? YES!

Can you not see that rural Ireland was car dependent over the years? Can you not see that this casts an influence on those that are reared there? This issue has been around for years, which is why the car is king in Dublin. Public transport didn't exist in Galway etc etc over the years. It only existed to an extent in Dublin. For many years the only "city" bus service existed in Dublin. Even now the watered down version of CIE still offers "city" bus services under the BE banner, which is piecemeal and stuck in a timewarp.

My argument isn't weak and if you wish to study public transport history in Ireland over the last 60 plus years, you may understand. You cannot judge current day public transport systems on the basis of recent activities.

As for Bertie? I was waiting on that one. He didn't give a damn about anything apart from what interested him. Probably why DB is doing pretty well despite the PD push for privatisation of routes.

You are jumping all over the place, first you limited the ministers of transport to the boom years ministers (and the damn culchie heads on them) now you are talking about public transport history over the last 60 years.

Hey guess what, public transport has been a shambles in Ireland since the formation of the state and its not Dublin TD's fault and it's not Rural TD's fault...

It has been the responsibility of 32 consecutive Dáils to meet the public transport needs of Ireland. They all failed. They all failed in Limerick, they all failed in Sligo, they all failed in Dublin. Pure raiméis to try and absolve one group from blame as they were elected in Dublin and blame the others as they were so misfortunate to be born in rural Ireland.

liamog

To be fair to Bertie (never thought I'd say those words). I believe Dart Underground and Metro North both came out of his government. I appreciate we are all attempting to lay blame in a game of what-ifferry.

A Fine Gael government is never going to deliver projects such as these as it's not in the private interest. Quite frankly for the good of the city I'd be happy for Denis O'B to get the contracts for DU and MN at least then they might get built, maybe we should be discussing the media interests rather than the politicians as we all know where the real power in this country exists.

murphaph

Deedsie wrote: »

Hey guess what, public transport has been a shambles in Ireland since the formation of the state

Sorry that's plain wrong. In 1922 Dublin had one of the densest tram networks in the world, with zonal fares and all. This was all dismantled by CIE.

Banjoxed

liamog wrote: »

To be fair to Bertie (never thought I'd say those words). I believe Dart Underground and Metro North both came out of his government. I appreciate we are all attempting to lay blame in a game of what-ifferry.

A Fine Gael government is never going to deliver projects such as these as it's not in the private interest. Quite frankly for the good of the city I'd be happy for Denis O'B to get the contracts for DU and MN at least then they might get built, maybe we should be discussing the media interests rather than the politicians as we all know where the real power in this country exists.

All the chat about MN and DU coming from Merrion Street was only ever show pony politics. Luas only happened because FF were shamed into it over the meddling of the Two Marys in cutting out the SSG to O'Connell St link at the behest of other meddlers in the first place. It would be interesting to see why the anti Luas campaigners were given a platform in the first place. It would reveal a lot about how and why infrastructure investment happens here.

murphaph

Deedsie wrote: »

Public transport management has been a shambles by 32 consecutive Dáils is the point I was trying to make. I thought that was fairly clear. DUTC began introducing buses in the mid 20's and the trams were gone by the 50's. Did any government howl in opposition?

No, quite the opposite-we're not in disagreement here. I stated earlier that Dail Eireann has not served Dublin at all well. I believe "Dublin" was always viewed with suspicion as Dublin was the seat of British rule and this legacy persisted. Even nominally Dublin TDs are often not from Dublin at all, though I personally don't give a damn where a person is from, so long as they do the right thing.

I think Dublin voters are their own worst enemy. If even a large minority of Dublin voters voted on Dublin wide issues as opposed to constituency issues (oh yes, Dublin voters can be every bit as parochial as other voters) then we'd see a shift in policy coming out of the Dail. We'd have to, because the logical consequence of ignoring cries for Dublin infrastructure would be the formation of a Dublin centric party.

That would scare the living bejasus out of any TD not affiliated with it, if it gained traction. If FG and FF get it together (as they should, they are ideologically indistinguishable from each other) then it'll be the final nail in the coffin for civil war politics and actual issues and policies might begin to determine how parties are formed in Ireland.

Grandeeod

Deedsie wrote: »

You are jumping all over the place, first you limited the ministers of transport to the boom years ministers (and the damn culchie heads on them) now you are talking about public transport history over the last 60 years.

Hey guess what, public transport has been a shambles in Ireland since the formation of the state and its not Dublin TD's fault and it's not Rural TD's fault...

It has been the responsibility of 32 consecutive Dáils to meet the public transport needs of Ireland. They all failed. They all failed in Limerick, they all failed in Sligo, they all failed in Dublin. Pure raiméis to try and absolve one group from blame as they were elected in Dublin and blame the others as they were so misfortunate to be born in rural Ireland.

I am not jumping all over the place. I clearly stated that I wasn't getting involved in a rural people Vs Dublin argument. I clearly stated that I was talking about the political side. Thats why I listed transport ministers in the boom times, because it was during those times that we had the money to fund big projects. I believe that rural influenced politicians do not care about essential big money rail projects in Dublin.

murphaph

Deedsie wrote: »

I'm sure somehow it's all the fault of the rest of Ireland but I don't see it that way and no one has offered an argument to convince me otherwise.

I've never said that nor do I believe it (I said Dublin voters are probably their own worst enemy).

Infrastructure should be apolitical but it isn't. It can't be, because it costs money that means things that are obviously political (pensions, social welfare etc.) receive less if infrastructure receives more.

Sam Russell

Deedsie wrote: »

Set up a balanced capital spending group, when the program for government is being made up. Agree an amount to be spent on national infrastructure... Inform the aforementioned group for them to invest the spending on the most beneficial projects for the entire country. Politics removed

That is politics.

Sam Russell

Deedsie wrote: »

Granted, the setting up of an independent capital spending group is political. I was focusing more on the after it was set up and was up and running removing the which projects received which funding and when from Dáil politics.

It would still be politics.

Both the HSE and IW are such vehicles and that is political because they do not work. This new group would still be as political as IW.

Idbatterim

received by email a few minutes ago...

"Dear Mr ...

On behalf of the Minister for Transport, Tourism & Sport, Paschal Donohoe T.D., I wish to thank you for your email regarding Metro North and DART Underground. A further reply will issue to you as soon as possible.


Yours sincerely,


Chris Smith
Private Secretary to Minister Paschal Donohoe"

salmocab

Idbatterim wrote: »

received by email a few minutes ago...

"Dear Mr ...

On behalf of the Minister for Transport, Tourism & Sport, Paschal Donohoe T.D., I wish to thank you for your email regarding Metro North and DART Underground. A further reply will issue to you as soon as possible.


Yours sincerely,


Chris Smith
Private Secretary to Minister Paschal Donohoe"

Sure he's extremely unlikely to be the minister for much longer so Id say everything is getting kicked on down the road

strassenwo!f

The last several pages of this thread have, I am sure, been a very interesting discussion of the external factors which may be hindering development of Dublin's public transport.

In relation to the DART Underground and the possibility of this project being built through the Hawkins House site - if the project is ever built, of course - there are a couple of things that immediately spring to mind.

If it were to be built along a direct East-West alignment (ie approximately parallel to the river), allowing a reasonably sensible onward connection to Pearse and Spencer Dock, broadly via Pearse Street, then it would surely also require considerable consumption of space under neighbouring buildings. It would clearly be very difficult for the Hawkins House/Screen cinema footprint itself to accomodate 120 metre platforms, for the DART, along that axis.

If, on the other hand, an alignment could be created which incorporated both the Hawkins House/Screen cinema area and College Street, there would certainly be enough room for a station of that length, with ease.

The issue then would be that such a line would be heading directly to/from Connolly Station, and bending around to connect with Pearse Station and Spencer Dock would be, at least considerably more difficult.

Given the potential volume of passengers which the DART Underground would be able to carry, it also has to be said that either of those routes would not - because of TCD getting in the way - really hit the biggest area of demand for workers, which (as we've seen in the maps discussed earlier on this board) is the area directly between College Green and St. Stephen's Green, and in the long-term that could be a significant drawback.

L1011

The horse died a long time ago - please stop flogging it

A minor twiddle to your completely nonsensed plans and invented figures caused by you hearing that something closed down in a city you're miles away from does not give a free invite to run around in circles with more invented figures.

Just give up

strassenwo!f

L1011 wrote: »

The horse died a long time ago - please stop flogging it

A minor twiddle to your completely nonsensed plans and invented figures caused by you hearing that something closed down in a city you're miles away from does not give a free invite to run around in circles with more invented figures.

Just give up

I have to assume that that pretty incomprehensible rant is intended as a response to the previous post, in which I presented some of my thoughts about possible merits and demerits of the Hawkins House site as a location for an underground station in Dublin.

I have spent time over the years looking at the various transport proposals for Dublin, as they have emerged, and I posted my thoughts about this new possibility. End of.

I think it is fair to ask the poster L1011 to back up his/her allegation - made not just once in such a short post, but twice - that I have ever presented this board with what the poster deems to be 'invented' figures.

L1011

It was dealing with the fact that you are trying to drag your discredited nonsense about a College Green station back up again based on the tiniest of potential changes. Nobody else seems willing to bite anymore but I'm unwilling to let you post it unchallenged lest someone new turn up and think you're credible.

You have no argument. I'm convinced you have a vested interest you won't declare. You don't even live in the country and really don't have a clue. Please stop repeating the same nonsense with different tacks multiple times a year.

Look at your old posts to find the invented figures - you pulled them out of thin air for months and months about employment locations, etc until you were eventually rubbished by facts.

strassenwo!f

L1011, you were invited to back up your suggestion that I have presented 'invented' figures to the board. It seems you're now repeating your allegation, and asking me to understand your reasons for it by looking back at my old posts.

Why not back up your post with specific instances/posts where this discrediting happened, or where I presented these 'invented' figures to the board?

I'm afraid I don't recall any place where this occurred.

I do recall promising the poster Monument that 'we' would get back to analysis of the useful employment maps which he had very kindly posted on the board, but then the ass fell out of the whole project, I was also very busy, etc., and the result is that my analysis of those figures has been stalled. When the project resurfaces, as it surely will, those maps will be very important.