A 5 Billion Metro subway to Swords!

mikemac

murphaph wrote: »

Dublin public transport went from one of the best systems in Europe to one of the worst, thanks largely to a rural mindset which viewed Dublin with massive suspicion,

Todd Andrews was from Dublin and went to UCD, I think we'll let the Dubs claim him as one of their own

cavedave

southsiderosie
how is this any different from a taxi system, other than the fact that you could perhaps enjoy the ride in peace?

Because you do not have to pay a taxi driver and can use electric cars it can be cheaper. Enough cheaper that you will not need your own car. Also because people are not crashing into each other as much (particularly heavy good vehicles which will be automated early) you can have much smaller cars and fit more of them into the same space.

southsiderosie

cavedave wrote: »

Because you do not have to pay a taxi driver and can use electric cars it can be cheaper. Enough cheaper that you will not need your own car. Also because people are not crashing into each other as much (particularly heavy good vehicles which will be automated early) you can have much smaller cars and fit more of them into the same space.

OK, but you are still stuck in traffic, which is part of the problem with going to the airport (or Dublin city center) in general. 200,000 people getting in electric cars to go to work sounds like a traffic nightmare. Something like that would almost make more sense for rural areas.

markpb

cavedave wrote: »

Because you do not have to pay a taxi driver and can use electric cars it can be cheaper. Enough cheaper that you will not need your own car. Also because people are not crashing into each other as much (particularly heavy good vehicles which will be automated early) you can have much smaller cars and fit more of them into the same space.

Once again you're mixing up public transport (which is available to everyone without the need to own a car or bike) with mass transport (whose sole aim is to carry as many people as possible in a small amount of space). Taxis and Dublin Bikes are public transport but they're absolutely not mass transport.

The majority of the space taken up in a car is not the driver, it's the safety features, the engine and the boot. Replacing the driver (who will still have to sit somewhere) with a computer will not reduce the size of a car and will definitely not reduce the size of a truck (most of their space is taken up by cargo areas). Even if you could reduce the size of a car, it won't ever come close to the density afforded to trains. And that's ignoring the fact that cars will bring you exactly where you want go go so they can rarely be shared, unlike a train. And even if you could reduce the size of a car enough to compete, you still won't be able to compete with the speed and reliability of an underground system.

RDM_83 again

markpb wrote: »

The new RTIS system currently allows inspectors to see each and every bus in the city and ensure it leaves on time.

But has actually been enforced?(moved away from Dublin last year). There are/were I saw routes with a frequency of Busses that would equal or possibly surpass the luas however due to the drivers synchronising break times it worked out as 3 busses every half an hour rather than 1 every ten minute (I'm thinking of the morning route from Ranelagh into town).
My point is Dublin doesn't have a bad transport system because it doesn't have a metro, it has a bad system because of a lack control and integration of the existing networks.

Also nobody answered my point about the fact that Dublin actually has a low population density for a city, and underground is the choice for very high density populations.

murphaph wrote: »

and site of the future national childrens hospital, DCU etc. is of national importance. It will even benefit people in Gamway travelling to those places!

Do you think spending 3-8 Billion will help the chances of a childrens hospital at a time when a billion is coming out of the non-staff costs of the health service?.

ps I do think Dublin has an appalling transport network I don't think a subway is the answer however

cavedave

southsiderosie

OK, but you are still stuck in traffic, which is part of the problem with going to the airport (or Dublin city center) in general. 200,000 people getting in electric cars to go to work sounds like a traffic nightmare. Something like that would almost make more sense for rural areas.

You are stuck in traffic because people are terrible at traffic. They block yellow boxes they take 5 seconds to go. The break red lights so the sequencing has to have a huge lag etc. Without these problems and with two cars able to fit in the current space used by one the traffic would be much less.

Put it this way. A bus lane from Dublin city center to the airport with autonomous 20 person minibuses every few minutes. These are much safer than current buses. You do not have to pay wages other than servicing. Being electric they do not need much servicing. Do you still need to spend several billion on a metro?

jd

cavedave wrote: »

Because you do not have to pay a taxi driver and can use electric cars it can be cheaper. Enough cheaper that you will not need your own car. Also because people are not crashing into each other as much (particularly heavy good vehicles which will be automated early) you can have much smaller cars and fit more of them into the same space.

I'd see it more in terms of people substituting this service for car ownership - NOT as a replacement for a mass-transit system

markpb

RDM_83 again wrote: »

But has actually been enforced?(moved away from Dublin last year).

Yes. Several drivers have been reprimanded over breach of duties discovered by the RTIS.

murphaph

feelingstressed wrote: »

Todd Andrews was from Dublin and went to UCD, I think we'll let the Dubs claim him as one of their own

LOL!

If Todd Andrews hadn't chopped the cart track railways which were suffering massive financial losses, the ENTIRE core intercity network would not exist today! The man saved Irish railways.

His biggest error was probably closing the DS&ER (Luas Green Line) but even that was tight. The destruction of the popular tram network however was not his doing.

murphaph

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Do you think spending 3-8 Billion will help the chances of a childrens hospital at a time when a billion is coming out of the non-staff costs of the health service?.

It is a PPP. The up front costs will be small. If the HSE could return a fraction of the benefit per Euro of this project, we'd be laughing. As for the hospital not being built for want of spending on transport, should we not have improved the regional motorways because of the children?

RDM_83 again wrote: »

ps I do think Dublin has an appalling transport network I don't think a subway is the answer however

Strange that, nearly every developed capital city in Europe thinks it is the answer, hence they built them!

I RELIABLY get hom from work in 28 mins, despite living on the opposite side of Berlin to where I work. This would never be possible by relying solely on modes that interface with road traffic.

Osgoodisgood

PanchoVilla wrote: »

I think every county/region should be responsible for collecting and spending it's own VAT like they do in the U.S., then maybe we'd have a more even distribution of funding.

I'm with you on this idea.
Sligo will fund its infratructure exclusively through the collection of local VAT. Dublin will do the same.

mikemac

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I'm with you on this idea.
Sligo will fund its infratructure exclusively through the collection of local VAT. Dublin will do the same.

I agree too.
And as the Bank HQ's are in Dublin, we'll leave Dublin to take care of the NAMA debt, they won't mind

cavedave

markpb

The majority of the space taken up in a car is not the driver, it's the safety features, the engine and the boot. Replacing the driver (who will still have to sit somewhere) with a computer will not reduce the size of a car and will definitely not reduce the size of a truck (most of their space is taken up by cargo areas).

The less accidents you have the less safety gear you need. If car crashes were 100 times less common you might not bother with the bulky heavy safety gear we currently use. Truck drivers need to sleep at night. computers do not. Much truck traffic would move to nighttime when traffic is less once trucks are automated.

And even if you could reduce the size of a car enough to compete, you still won't be able to compete with the speed and reliability of an underground system.

An underground system has one point of failure the track. Roads have multiple redundancies. And no one can go on strike.

southsiderosie

cavedave wrote: »

You are stuck in traffic because people are terrible at traffic. They block yellow boxes they take 5 seconds to go. The break red lights so the sequencing has to have a huge lag etc. Without these problems and with two cars able to fit in the current space used by one the traffic would be much less.

Put it this way. A bus lane from Dublin city center to the airport with autonomous 20 person minibuses every few minutes. These are much safer than current buses. You do not have to pay wages other than servicing. Being electric they do not need much servicing. Do you still need to spend several billion on a metro?

Dublin HAS bus lanes in other parts of the city and they are still slow as hell during rush hour. And god help you if there is an accident or bad weather.

When there is a dedicated mass transit system, users know exactly how long it will take them to get from point A to point B give or take 5 minutes. It gets more cars off of the road, so when people do need to drive (say delivery trucks and the like) there is less traffic. It also tends to help cluster residential and commercial development; people like to work and live near mass transit stations.

RDM_83 again

murphaph wrote: »

Strange that, nearly every developed capital city in Europe thinks it is the answer, hence they built them!

Strange that your avoiding my question about population density?
http://www.iro.ie/dublin_region.html

I think berlin is a lot higher than that! The reason I am using that as a source is that this is not a metro going from Lower Rathmines to Dorset street but out to Swords which is clearly part of "Greater DUblin"

southsiderosie

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Strange that your avoiding my question about population density?
http://www.iro.ie/dublin_region.html

I think berlin is a lot higher than that! The reason I am using that as a source is that this is not a metro going from Lower Rathmines to Dorset street but out to Swords which is clearly part of "Greater DUblin"

Greater Bilbao (Biscay) has a lower population density than Greater Dublin, compares quite favorably in terms of its population and STILL has an extensive rail and bus network. And their metro line is relatively new: it only opened in the 1990s and is still expanding.

Where there is a will, there is a way.

del_c

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Strange that your avoiding my question about population density?
http://www.iro.ie/dublin_region.html

I think berlin is a lot higher than that! The reason I am using that as a source is that this is not a metro going from Lower Rathmines to Dorset street but out to Swords which is clearly part of "Greater DUblin"

Actually Berlin is not that densely populated; it has huge amounts of green space and parks within the city centre.
Just checked the numbers:
Dublin
- Density 4,398/km2 (11,390.8/sq mi)

Berlin
- Density 3,857.8/km2 (9,991.6/sq mi)

And, add to this the fact that these schemes tend to dictate the shape of the city over time as people like to live along the lines.

If we accept that low density is a problem for dublin's transport infrastructure, then building this line, will over time result in a situation that higher density accomodation will result along these lines...even as far "out" as Swords...which is only a couple of miles from the city centre anyway. So, we are building something now, which we believe will satisfy a future need and strategically shape the city; not very Irish, but quite sensible.

Would it not be possible to place a surcharge within 2 kms of each station for future planning applications / house sales to reap more of this money back over time? I heard of something like this been done before, though I don't remember where.....There must be some way of getting back some of the increased value of land / accommodation along the route?

astrofool

The EU is part funding it.

It will end up paying for itself (and then feed back into our coffers).

It will provide jobs to thousands of out of work construction workers.

It's a PPP where private groups stump up some of the cost of building it.

It will finally introduce a train service to our woefully unconnected airport.

It will take cars off the road, and reduce the amount of pollution caused by transport.


What exactly is the reason not to build it?

And this is without going into the halo effect of businesses being attracted here due to a good public transport network.

I would also note that the ghost estates (http://ghostestates.com/main.php?g2_view=map.ShowMap) in Dublin will likely fill up over the next couple of years as they get finished up, and that the proposed route of metro north has basically no ghost estates near it (1 in Santry).

Osgoodisgood

astrofool wrote: »

The EU is part funding it.

It will end up paying for itself (and then feed back into our coffers).

It will provide jobs to thousands of out of work construction workers.

It's a PPP where private groups stump up some of the cost of building it.

It will finally introduce a train service to our woefully unconnected airport.


What exactly is the reason not to build it?

I think it's because some fella in Sligo hasn't passed his driving test.:pac:

RDM_83 again

By that logic those areas along the Dart line should have a significantly higher density, I do think that Dublin transport needs to be overhauled but to me this seems like another ribbon of access to the city centre as the Luas are, where what I believe is needed is a complete overhaul of the city bus network so that whichever area you are located there is an adequate and intergrated service i.e not every nearly every route running through the city centre.
The Labour document bellow indicates my line of thinking
www.labour.ie/download/pdf/getting_dublin_moving_nov06.pdf
or ideas such as Blue Line
http://www.blueline.ie/

RDM_83 again

Also any european comparison should include comparisons in terms of electrification of the rail infrastructure which has been a standard accross europe
here's a nice map of it

murphaph

RDM_83 again wrote: »

By that logic those areas along the Dart line should have a significantly higher density

Not easy to improve density in the sea, ie, half the DART's catchement area. The DART is also NOT a metro level service. It is nowhere near as frequent as say, a typical S Bahn in Germany (closest comparison).

Anyway, the coastal railway DID increase population growth along its corridor. Just look at a map of Dublin with hosuing hugging the south east coastline and on up to Howth: This was mostly built AFTER the railway.

The northern reaches of the proposed metro north would be the cheapest bits as they aill not be built underground. The Luas (especially the grren line) has seen a lot of densification directly adjacent to its corridor. Look at the Red Line Terminus HERE!

southsiderosie

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Also any european comparison should include comparisons in terms of electrification of the rail infrastructure which has been a standard accross europe
here's a nice map of it

Can you post the key for this map? It's hard to understand what we are supposed to be looking at.

Rabble Rabble

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

Where have we heard similar assertions before? :pac: So we've already secured the loan for half of it? And we can't afford proper healthcare? Education? Care of the Elderly? What kind of logic is at work here at all

We certainly will not be able to support any of this if we dont maintain infrastructure. This is a particularly Irish discussion. I cant think of any democracy where the building of critical infrastructure is met with such ill-informed hostility.

Rabble Rabble

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I'm with you on this idea.
Sligo will fund its infratructure exclusively through the collection of local VAT. Dublin will do the same.

were sligo to do that, and follow the US model, it would use it's local rates to cover it's own streets. And would hardly build, or need, a subway. Sligo may not even have a bus service - I dont know I have been, I know that Clonmel, where I have relatives - doesnt, nor does it need one - but it has a local private bus service. But that would be a minor expense and the local town councils look after the same roads anyway.

Following the American ( and German/ Federal) model, counties would run regional R-roads but the NRA would run the N and M roads, and the federal government would pay for the intercity trains. So, Sligo would have good access anyway, County Sligo's roads might decline in usability, or cost more, but there is a strong case that many boreens in Ireland need never have been taken in charge by the councils. If they are a road for private dwellings, and there are other routes, they can go private.

So sligo will see little or no increase in tax. Dubliners will have to fund Dublin Bus, the Parks, the Metro, and the DART and whatever subsidy the Luas gets. Dubliners will see their taxes rise, not the citizens of SLigo.

But this is off topic to the major debate- this subway is needed, and desirable.

markpb

Rabble Rabble wrote: »

So sligo will see little or no increase in tax. Dubliners will have to fund Dublin Bus, the Parks, the Metro, and the DART and whatever subsidy the Luas gets. Dubliners will see their taxes rise, not the citizens of SLigo.

But this already happens. People and businesses in Dublin contribute tax to the state, the state pays for the operation of those services and there's still money left to contribute to less well off counties.

Amtmann

A more informed version of this thread can be read here.

murphaph

markpb wrote: »

But this already happens. People and businesses in Dublin contribute tax to the state, the state pays for the operation of those services and there's still money left to contribute to less well off counties.

Exactly. If every county was responsible for tax collection and disbursement, Dublin would already have a metro SYSTEM. Dublin (and much of Leinster and Cork) are self sufficient and cross subsidise other parts of the country. It is clear from this thread that many people STILL do not undertstand that!

RDM_83 again

Sorry that picture was meant to illustrate the areas that do not have electrified rail systems and the fact that Ireland is not comparable to Germany rather the Scottish highlands, Sardinia and Albania.

Rabble Rabble

murphaph wrote: »

Exactly. If every county was responsible for tax collection and disbursement, Dublin would already have a metro SYSTEM. Dublin (and much of Leinster and Cork) are self sufficient and cross subsidise other parts of the country. It is clear from this thread that many people STILL do not undertstand that!

No you dont understand federal systems. The "subsidy" is non-existant per-capita ( it works the other way). In a federal system the national taxes would continue to pay for health, defence, education, national infrastructure and so on. Since these are re-distributive, not just from the rich to the poor, but from the richer parts to the poorer parts. There would be no reduction from the Dubliner's tax take, except for that tiny amount given to Counties for infrastructural development.

Dubliners would pay more tax. That is the way of a federal system.