The Pat Kenny Show

mzungu

hotmail.com wrote: »

The author of that just sees transport in terms of the car.

People can avoid all the congestion and avoid adding to it, by using public transport. A clear option for James'.

Those that travel to Dublin have to find a place to park. After that they have to walk around the city with a sick child to get to the Luas or bus stop that brings them to the hospital. It is a lot of hassle.

hotmail.com

If it was an emergency they would be taken by ambulance. Otherwise, yes, people should use public transport so as not to congest the hospital, keeping access open for ambulances.

People are already doing this by the way. I just wish the other car lovers would take the hint and stop driving to hospitals.

People park their car near the train station in the county they are coming and get the train to Heuston and then a short Luas. This is already happening for James' for adults all the time.

mzungu

The idea should always be to improve on what has come before. By and large, people that need to go to hospitals are sick, so driving is the most comfortable way to get there.

Tell me how

Public transport should be encouraged wherever possible. But the reality of the circumstance cannot be ignored. Why is traffic in Dublin currently so troublesome if public transport is a no brainer solution?

If everyone was to switch to public transport, the infrastructure could not handle it. This hospital has to serve the entire country. People travelling from 80% of the country will have to park somewhere, transport to PT with their sick relative and bags etc and continue the journey.

As for using ambulances to get there? On the road yes, but the James site cannot accommodate the coastguard helicopters which is another negative against it.

hotmail.com

mzungu wrote: »

The idea should always be to improve on what has come before. By and large, people that need to go to hospitals are sick, so driving is the most comfortable way to get there.

Not true. Most people travelling to hospitals are not sick. The staff,visitors,People going for check ups, scans,routine appointments.

hotmail.com

hotmail.com wrote: »

Not true. Most people travelling to hospitals are not sick. The staff,visitors,People going for check ups, scans,routine appointments.

I think you're possibly overestimating the amount of reasonably healthy children who will be using the hospital. It isn't intended to be used for broken limbs or routine appointments. Its primary purpose is to treat some of the sickest children in the country, such as cancer patients and those with serious genetic diseases, many of whom will have limited life expectancy.

St James's is perfectly suitable for a routine outpatient paediatric service, but it's several kinds of daft to choose that site for seriously/terminally ill children.

hotmail.com

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think you're possibly overestimating the amount of reasonably healthy children who will be using the hospital. It isn't intended to be used for broken limbs or routine appointments. Its primary purpose is to treat some of the sickest children in the country, such as cancer patients and those with serious genetic diseases, many of whom will have limited life expectancy.

St James's is perfectly suitable for a routine outpatient paediatric service, but it's several kinds of daft to choose that site for seriously/terminally ill children.

The sickest children will be in the hospital, staying over, not going back and forth.

However, the parents and staff will be going back and forth and they are not sick and should use public transport.

hotmail.com

I blame Pat for not Having guests on that actually support the location choice.

Maybe then, we'd hear the points I'm making.

Imagine if there was no Croke Park.. and they decided to build it out in Blanch. It would be madness. No adequate public transport and too far from the city centre.

It's the same logic with the hospital.

If people truly care about sick people, they should support public transport options and access,to ensure that the hospital is cleared for genuine emergencies.

Tell me how

hotmail.com wrote: »

I blame Pat for not Having guests on that actually support the location choice.

Maybe then, we'd hear the points I'm making.

Imagine if there was no Croke Park.. and they decided to build it out in Blanch. It would be madness. No adequate public transport and too far from the city centre.

It's the same logic with the hospital.

If people truly care about sick people, they should support public transport options and access,to ensure that the hospital is cleared for genuine emergencies.

Why is this a problem for a National hospital?

You seem to be caught in the make belief ideal that current public transport infrastructure is best in class.

• Imagine bringing a sick child on the Luas Red Line or travelling yourself with worries and anxiety and being subjected to some of the behaviour which is relatively common on it by all accounts.
• Image sitting on the Luas while a car has blocked the line after breaking a red light while trying to get to the hospital in a hurry.
• Imagine standing at a Dublin bus stop with the info display saying two minutes to next bus and then that changes to 12 minutes without any bus having arrived while you aim to get to the hospital in a hurry.
• Imagine standing at a Dublin bus stop as a bus approaches and then drives straight past as it is already at capacity.

All these scenarios are common enough occurrences on Public Transport to make me think if I had to get to the hospital in either a hurry or while under extreme stress that I would try and drive there.

hotmail.com

Tell me how wrote:

You seem to be caught in the make belief ideal that current public transport infrastructure is best in class. Imagine bringing a sick child on the Luas Red Line or travelling yourself with worries and anxiety and being subjected to some of the behaviour which is relatively common on it by all accounts. Image sitting on the Luas while a car has blocked the line after breaking a red light while trying to get to the hospital in a hurry. Imagine standing at a Dublin bus stop with the info display saying two minutes to next bus and then that changes to 12 minutes without any bus having arrived while you aim to get to the hospital in a hurry. Imagine standing at a Dublin bus stop as a bus approaches and then drives straight past as it is already at capacity. All these scenarios are common enough occurrences on Public Transport to make me think if I had to get to the hospital in either a hurry or while under extreme stress that I would try and drive there.

Again, a sick child would taken to the hospital by an ambulance if it was an emergency. I've already this.

Public transport isn't perfect, but it's far superior to long traffic jams, congestion, pollution, road fatalities etc etc. The future is public transport, not more cars, car parks and roads.

It's just s shame the hospital decided to build such a ridiculously large car park. More car spaces will only encourage the lazy and selfish to drive.

meeeeh

hotmail.com wrote: »

I blame Pat for not Having guests on that actually support the location choice.

Maybe then, we'd hear the points I'm making.

Imagine if there was no Croke Park.. and they decided to build it out in Blanch. It would be madness. No adequate public transport and too far from the city centre.

It's the same logic with the hospital.

If people truly care about sick people, they should support public transport options and access,to ensure that the hospital is cleared for genuine emergencies.

Because people care about sick people they drive them there and not subject them to substandard public transport.

Tell me how

hotmail.com wrote: »

Again, a sick child would taken to the hospital by an ambulance if it was an emergency. I've already this.

Public transport isn't perfect, but it's far superior to long traffic jams, congestion, pollution, road fatalities etc etc. The future is public transport, not more cars, car parks and roads.

It's just s shame the hospital decided to build such a ridiculously large car park. More car spaces will only encourage the lazy and selfish to drive.

In the majority of cases, the soon to be patient does not travel by ambulance. Just because something is not life and death does not mean that it as a casual stroll through the city.

hotmail.com

meeeeh wrote:

Because people care about sick people they drive them there and not subject them to substandard public transport.

As stated, most people who make trips to hospitals aren't sick. Public transport should be used.

hotmail.com

Tell me how wrote:

In the majority of cases, the soon to be patient does not travel by ambulance. Just because something is not life and death does not mean that it as a casual stroll through the city.

Of course Then a car should be used. That's a no brainer. That's why it's important the hospital is kept clear for cases like this.

BarryD2

Why not build it on a green field site in the midlands with proximity to motorways? The Dubs would just have to travel for a change, like the rest of are required to do.

meeeeh

hotmail.com wrote: »

As stated, most people who make trips to hospitals aren't sick. Public transport should be used.

Should, could... i wouldn't, I don't live in Dublin. Driving there would take 1 hour to 1.5 hours. I won't be depending on hourly or less train or bus travel and then on public transport in Dublin.

You can do your travelling in public transport, I hope I won't need to travel there but if I will it will be in the car. I have no intention spending the day on public transport to visit someone for an hour. And you can bet vast majority of people outside Dublin will have exactly the same attitude.

hotmail.com

meeeeh wrote:

You can do your travelling in public transport, I hope I won't need to travel there but if I will it will be in the car. I have no intention spending the day on public transport to visit someone for an hour. And you can bet vast majority of people outside Dublin will have exactly the same attitude.

Lovely attitude! Community driven and thoughtful to other people and the environment.

mzungu

hotmail.com wrote: »

Not true. Most people travelling to hospitals are not sick. The staff,visitors,People going for check ups, scans,routine appointments.

Majority will be patients and their close relatives.

One sure fire way to reduce congestion in the city would be to build the hospital elsewhere. As it stands, we have a rising population, and there is not much room to expand the hospital to cater for this.

No forward planning at all.


A bad idea all around

meeeeh

hotmail.com wrote: »

Lovely attitude! Community driven and thoughtful to other people and the environment.

It is as thoughtful as Irish public transport deserves it.

mzungu

hotmail.com wrote: »

I blame Pat for not Having guests on that actually support the location choice.

Maybe then, we'd hear the points I'm making.

Imagine if there was no Croke Park.. and they decided to build it out in Blanch. It would be madness. No adequate public transport and too far from the city centre.

It's the same logic with the hospital.

If people truly care about sick people, they should support public transport options and access,to ensure that the hospital is cleared for genuine emergencies.

That's not a like-for-like comparison. It would make sense to have Croke Park outside of the city and accessible to people living in rural areas if you had 80,000-90,000 sick children attending games there.

hotmail.com

mzungu wrote:

Majority will be patients and their close relatives.

Majority are the hundreds of staff.

mzungu

hotmail.com wrote: »

Majority are the hundreds of staff.

Who are able bodied and live in the Dublin area so most likely will use public transport to get there.

The only ones that get a raw deal here are the patients.

hotmail.com

mzungu wrote:

The only ones that get a raw deal here are the patients.

It's great for them. They don't have to worry about car parking charges for James.

elperello

meeeeh wrote: »

Should, could... i wouldn't, I don't live in Dublin. Driving there would take 1 hour to 1.5 hours. I won't be depending on hourly or less train or bus travel and then on public transport in Dublin.

You can do your travelling in public transport, I hope I won't need to travel there but if I will it will be in the car. I have no intention spending the day on public transport to visit someone for an hour. And you can bet vast majority of people outside Dublin will have exactly the same attitude.

A good option might be to park at the Red Cow and nip in on the Luas.
A sort of hybrid journey if you like.

meeeeh

elperello wrote: »

A good option might be to park at the Red Cow and nip in on the Luas.
A sort of hybrid journey if you like.

I've done that before when going to Dublin for a weekend. I would also go with the train when going for longer but not if it's just for a visit to hospital. Anyway the fastest way for me is on M4 so realistically I would be driving.

elperello

meeeeh wrote: »

I've done that before when going to Dublin for a weekend. I would also go with the train when going for longer but not if it's just for a visit to hospital. Anyway the fastest way for me is on M4 so realistically I would be driving.

It's not a bad option and the time difference is small enough. Sometimes it would even work out quicker.
Also depending on the hospital parking charges it might be cheaper.

Youdunnit

BarryD2 wrote: »

Why not build it on a green field site in the midlands with proximity to motorways? The Dubs would just have to travel for a change, like the rest of are required to do.

Not an expert on this but the argument goes that the patient has to travel to get the experts

Sods law or something

meeeeh

Realistically main hospitals need to be in urban centres but I do think this one disproportionately took into consideration where staff want to travel to work.

Youdunnit

meeeeh wrote: »

Realistically main hospitals need to be in urban centres but I do think this one disproportionately took into consideration where staff want to travel to work.

Hospitals are actually quite straightforward to build when it's routine work, so they say

I'm familair with some aspects of the build

Planning and Design errors is where you'll pay big later

Tell me how

Youdunnit wrote: »

Hospitals are actually quite straightforward to build when it's routine work, so they say

I'm familair with some aspects of the build

Planning and Design errors is where you'll pay big later

In terms of building infrastructure. Hospitals should be some of the more straightforward. The mechanics of the design are very well known within the industry and there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

Contingency for alterations or expansion could/should be factored in throughout the design phase as some form of future proofing.

Similarly with cabling and supplies for power and IT infrastructure, planning should be possible with a very high degree of confidence that it be can be tailored as demand changes or new technology is brought in.

Access and egress should be possible to consider with mathematical levels of accuracy but it would involve facing up to the reality of the environment and not just claiming things will be ok by refusing to be honest.

But the failure in this project thus far seems to be largely down to scope/ownership/project management and politics.

These are elements which are almost exclusively at the whim of the people involved and that is why this project is so far an example of how not to do it. And unfortunately why it is unlikely to change dramatically or be a once off.