2015-2035 Transport Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

and that the only project of note being implemented in Dublin today was not on the DTO's crayon plan.

Which one is that?

strassenwo!f

The LUAS BXD line, the link-up.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The LUAS BXD line, the link-up.

I think I explained everything very clearly in my OP. I suggest you read it again. BXD is merely a route that was originally part of a broader Metro network and I did clearly state that PFC is regularly pillaged by the RPA to suit whatever mood the Government are in.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

In fairness, Grandeeod, the PFC plan amounted, even then, when the country was starting to wallow in money, to government-sponsored crayonism on a grand scale.

The DTO produced it without any call for submissions from the public as to what might be needed, what might be good, how best to do this or that. They knew best.

It was basically a group of people assembled by the Department of Transport from various sources, including its own people, and it was given free rein to come up with a plan. This they did, ignoring the many people who had returned from overseas with good experience in many aspects of public transport development.

What's missing from it? If it was nearing completion, would the city be functioning better?

strassenwo!f

Grandeeod wrote: »

I think I explained everything very clearly in my OP. I suggest you read it again. BXD is merely a route that was originally part of a broader Metro network and I did clearly state that PFC is regularly pillaged by the RPA to suit whatever mood the Government are in.

Grandeeod. I have of course read everything you wrote thoroughly. But the map which the dto produced is here:

http://people.reed.edu/~reyn/DublinPlanMetro&LUAStram.G.jpg

Now that shows an underground metro line going St. Stephen's Green to a station at Nassau Street, then to a station at Tara Street and on to a further station at the Rotunda.

Is that basically the same as the LUAS line which is currently being built?

strassenwo!f

Grandeeod wrote: »

What's missing from it? If it was nearing completion, would the city be functioning better?

I'm pretty sure the city would be functioning better.

I don't think it could have ever been built in the timeframe proposed, or anything near it, while most of the skilled construction workers were involved in more lucrative private sector construction jobs. And even if they hadn't been, the scale of construction required, in the face of local residents' objections, unforeseen issues like TCD (on the metro route between Tara Street and Nassau Street, for example) would have made it almost impossible to complete that amount of work in the timeframe proposed.

If it had been built, yes the city would be working better. But I don't think that a sufficient amount of expertise and money could realistically have been invested in those projects, in that relatively short time, even if they had had everybody's political will behind it.

strassenwo!f

If Dublin is to go the underground route, or put significant revenue into overground lines, it has to recognise that it's not going to catch up with competitor cities overnight. This was one of the things which stood out for me when the PFC plan was produced.

When the DTO came out with PFC, it seemed like Dublin was producing a 'transport map' which would bring the city up to the level of competitor cities like Munich or Prague. Unfortunately, those cities have been developing their public transport systems for many years. They now have a 'transport reality'.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Grandeeod. I have of course read everything you wrote thoroughly. But the map which the dto produced is here:

http://people.reed.edu/~reyn/DublinPlanMetro&LUAStram.G.jpg

Now that shows an underground metro line going St. Stephen's Green to a station at Nassau Street, then to a station at Tara Street and on to a further station at the Rotunda.

Is that basically the same as the LUAS line which is currently being built?

You are being pedantic. The route between SSG and Rotunda taken by the proposed metro under PFC was only slightly different. After Rotunda it was heading for the Broadstone alignment and on to the Liffey Junction area, just like BXD. One look at the BXD project and the PFC map clearly demonstrates the point I am making; The RPA pillage the original proposals to implement cheaper and less efficient alternatives.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

In fairness, Grandeeod, the PFC plan amounted, even then, when the country was starting to wallow in money, to government-sponsored crayonism on a grand scale.

The DTO produced it without any call for submissions from the public as to what might be needed, what might be good, how best to do this or that. They knew best.

They were paid to know best and as a critic of Dublin transport, I believe it was a very well thought out plan. We havent produced anything better since. In fact we have been watering it down again and again. This latest study is also designed to water it down and stall real implementation.

In relation to submissions, asking the public to contribute to the PFC plan before its publication would be like asking the illiterate to contribute to the planning of libraries. The correct time for submissions happens when it comes to the implementation of each project/route within the plan. As it happens currently. But personally, I think there is too much public consulation on rail/light rail/metro in Ireland. As it is, it gives every wannabe transport planner a podium to stand on. The only relevence should be the impact of contruction etc. Its bad enough that the GOV interfer, without Joe Bloggs from wherever wanting a say on which way a luas goes.

But of course that suits a society that likes to fudge real development in rail transport.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the city would be functioning better.

I don't think it could have ever been built in the timeframe proposed, or anything near it, while most of the skilled construction workers were involved in more lucrative private sector construction jobs. And even if they hadn't been, the scale of construction required, in the face of local residents' objections, unforeseen issues like TCD (on the metro route between Tara Street and Nassau Street, for example) would have made it almost impossible to complete that amount of work in the timeframe proposed.

If it had been built, yes the city would be working better. But I don't think that a sufficient amount of expertise and money could realistically have been invested in those projects, in that relatively short time, even if they had had everybody's political will behind it.

No doubt the city would be functioning better. We agree on that much.

As for the timeframe proposed, without GOV interference in the planning of routes and types of transport (see the bonkers Green line debacle as an example), it could have been done. The skyline of Dublin changed within a short period of time. Villages around Ireland went from sleepy backwaters to having large housing estates. Funny how a state can transform a landscape via property development. Add to that the Motorway network, completed only 4 years behind schedule and delayed in the main by farmers. I accept objections would have been raised, but thats what the critical infrastructure bill was for.

The money was there. PPPs were being signed off for road projects in a flash. The state was awash with money that it wasted on tax cuts to maintain the vote. We pushed the road bill down the road so to speak. People took the benefits of these cuts to increase their personal standard of living, while complaining about traffic congestion, as they sat in brand new cars. This happened. Then we have the historical proof that successive Irish Governments go to war over rail based transport projects. Believe it or not the civil war continues to this day and its being fought within any rail based form of current or planned development.

If we actually had political will, we'd succeed.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

If Dublin is to go the underground route, or put significant revenue into overground lines, it has to recognise that it's not going to catch up with competitor cities overnight. This was one of the things which stood out for me when the PFC plan was produced.

When the DTO came out with PFC, it seemed like Dublin was producing a 'transport map' which would bring the city up to the level of competitor cities like Munich or Prague. Unfortunately, those cities have been developing their public transport systems for many years. They now have a 'transport reality'.

You seem to have this preoccupation with Dublin "catching up". Dublin needs to plan for its own needs and there is no harm in using international best practise to do that. As far back as 1975, the realisation that Dublin needed some form of underground through the city was recognised. Yes 1975! 25 odd years before PFC was published. We are now reaching 40 years since this realisation and what have we got? Very little. PFC was trying to take advantage of a pro rail attitude and a growing economy. If we couldn't do it then, we will never do it. Never.