Our East Link bridge - still gouging for charges

Victor

L1011 wrote: »

There's a general expectation though, based on international examples, that when a tolling PPP expires that the toll ceases. That also isn't from "political statements".

And I'm waiting for hell to freeze over, so I can ride this bird from college.

Might you have an unrealistic expectation?

The bridges in New York still have tolls - 100 years after they were built.

Cienciano

Muahahaha wrote: »

The toll should be removed simply because that was what the plan was when it was implemented 30 years ago. People accepted it because when it was paid for (which it has been multiple times over) we were led to believe it would be given back to the citizens. Now we have a 180 degree u turn and are expected to continue paying for something that is long since paid for.

It's as simple as that really. It the agreement was for 30 years, the agreement was for 30 years.

markpb wrote: »

If Dublin Corporation at the time had simply built the bridge and tolled it, making no reference to the purpose of the toll or when it might end, would that have changed things then or now?

Of course. It wouldn't be an issue if there was never a time limit. That's the entire point of this thread. Would it have been an issue 30 years ago? Not so sure, was to young to remember.

markpb wrote: »

I think your definition of lying is a little broad. Someone 30 years ago said something, a completly different set of councillors under different circumstances decided to act differently.

All political statements are made based on the current circumstances, nothing more. If you believe they hold a deeper meaning and that they should be followed though regardless, you're very naive.

Also, to repeat my earlier question: if they had just announced that it was to be tolled forever, what difference would that have made over the last 30 years?

It is lying if we were told the toll was for 30 years. Not to hard to get your head around. Imagine making mortgage payments and when you make your last payment on the last day of the 29th year, the bank manager decides you have to keep paying. Sure it was the manager from 30 years ago that agreed the mortgage, not him.
Stuff like this is why people distrust the government and council officials.
BTW, it doesn't effect me, I drove over the bridge hundreds of times and never paid a cent.

odyssey06

I think this should engender distrust of any promise from a politician who won't be the one who ultimately decides whether to honour it. Hard to bring councillors to book after 30 years ago who should never have made those promises. Ideally such decisions should be made via a proposition vote similar to the way US cities would make some of these decisions.

But assuming those promises were made (before my time!) and given the valid points about the level of traffic currently using the bridge, I think the bridge should be toll free outside of rush hours and free on holidays, Saturdays and Sundays.
The bridge is the most convenient route for getting from some parts of the northside to some parts of the southside, and vice versa.

That goes someway to giving something back to Dubliners, without overloading the area, and the bridge will still bring in funds from rush hours users.

L1011

Victor wrote: »

And I'm waiting for hell to freeze over, so I can ride this bird from college.

Might you have an unrealistic expectation?

The bridges in New York still have tolls - 100 years after they were built.

Were they built on time limited PPP contracts?

I think you know the answer to that already. How about using valid comparisons?

garrettod

Hi,

Just a follow up thought... would the majority of people here who are against now having to pay the toll, be agreeable to continuing to pay it in return for the bridge being replaced by a larger bridge offering two motor vehicle lanes each way, along with removing the toll barriers and replacing them with the same method of charging as they use on the M50 for example ?

Personally, I would be happy to continue to pay a toll for a further period of X years, to cover such investment as it benefits the motorists who are using and paying for the service. It helps fix some of the current problems with the bridge, while also aiding the flow of traffic away from the city centre.

Hanley

Has anyone commented yet on how the real problem for the toll bridge is the round about at the Three Arena?

That's the main reason it gets blocked up every day without fail going south to north.

Even at peak rush hours, the north / south direction is never unduly delayed.

Making it a 4 lane bridge / charging / not charging won't solve anything until that bottle neck is fixed.

Muahahaha

markpb wrote: »

I think your definition of lying is a little broad. Someone 30 years ago said something, a completly different set of councillors under different circumstances decided to act differently.

All political statements are made based on the current circumstances, nothing more. If you believe they hold a deeper meaning and that they should be followed though regardless, you're very naive.

Also, to repeat my earlier question: if they had just announced that it was to be tolled forever, what difference would that have made over the last 30 years?

You see that's half the problem in this country right there- if politicians show themselves not to have honesty and integrity why do we even bother ourselves voting? A decision was made to hand the bridge back to the citizens, irrespective of who is in charge 30 years later (and FF/FG most certainly still exist as they did back in 1984) the public should not be treated like a bunch of muppets when the deal comes to an end. This attitude of "sure that's what you say at election time" and treating taxpayers with disdain needs to stop. The attitude of treating the taxpayer as a never ending pot of cash also needs to stop, its no wonder emigrants looking in are saying to themselves nothing has changed in Ireland and prefer to stay where they are at least getting some value for the taxes and levies they pay. Here in Ireland the general public just gets shafted again and again as if we're some bottomless pit of money to be tapped when our public administrators cock up.

And cock up they have, time and time again. Maybe Dublin City Council, instead of moaning that they have no money should take a good hard look at themselves and wonder how they blew close on €100m over the Ringend incinerator fiasco? They claim they need the €4m per year from the East Link while nobody is held accountable for the €100m of taxpayers money wasted down in Ringend. But no, instead the guy responsible, John Tierney, gets rewarded with a €300k salary as CEO of Irish Water and goes on to piss away another €80m of taxpayers money on consultants. And the rest.

Maybe they might think back to the 1980's when they laid destruction to the finest Viking ruins anywhere in Europe so they could knock it down and build their vanity project offices on Wood Quay?. If they had of left that alone as the citizens wanted and protested for Dublin City Council would now own a UNESCO World Heritage site smack bang in the city centre with a million tourists passing through annually at €10 a head. Instead of having a cash cow for generations the eejits rolled in the bulldozers and knocked down 1,000 years of history. And then they have the cheek to tell the taxpayers 'we're broke so we're going to dip your pockets some more'

garrettod wrote: »

Hi,

Just a follow up thought... would the majority of people here who are against now having to pay the toll, be agreeable to continuing to pay it in return for the bridge being replaced by a larger bridge offering two motor vehicle lanes each way, along with removing the toll barriers and replacing them with the same method of charging as they use on the M50 for example ?

Personally, I would be happy to continue to pay a toll for a further period of X years, to cover such investment as it benefits the motorists who are using and paying for the service. It helps fix some of the current problems with the bridge, while also aiding the flow of traffic away from the city centre.

If DCC turned around and said we're going to ring fence the €4m revenue annually and use it only for children's playgrounds, public swimming pools and libraries then I could swallow that no problems. But we all know the money will be pissed up against the wall by county councillors and Council officials going abroad on their nice expense laden 'fact finding missions'.

The more things change, the more they stay the same :mad:

Victor

Hanley wrote: »

Has anyone commented yet on how the real problem for the toll bridge is the round about at the Three Arena?

That's the main reason it gets blocked up every day without fail going south to north.

Even at peak rush hours, the north / south direction is never unduly delayed.

Making it a 4 lane bridge / charging / not charging won't solve anything until that bottle neck is fixed.

The roundabout is expected to be changed to traffic lights this year.

Gumbo

Hanley wrote: »

Has anyone commented yet on how the real problem for the toll bridge is the round about at the Three Arena?

That's the main reason it gets blocked up every day without fail going south to north.

Even at peak rush hours, the north / south direction is never unduly delayed.

Making it a 4 lane bridge / charging / not charging won't solve anything until that bottle neck is fixed.

I believe an upgrade is due. It has to tie in Dublin Ports expansion plans and timelines, that's why it hasn't been done already.

They release the plans for it's about 2 years ago.

Hanley

Victor wrote: »

The roundabout is expected to be changed to traffic lights this year.

Jesus thank god.

Guy:Incognito

garrettod wrote: »

Hi,

Just a follow up thought... would the majority of people here who are against now having to pay the toll, be agreeable to continuing to pay it in return for the bridge being replaced by a larger bridge offering two motor vehicle lanes each way, along with removing the toll barriers and replacing them with the same method of charging as they use on the M50 for example ?

Personally, I would be happy to continue to pay a toll for a further period of X years, to cover such investment as it benefits the motorists who are using and paying for the service. It helps fix some of the current problems with the bridge, while also aiding the flow of traffic away from the city centre.

What would be the point of that if the roads either side still only have 1 lane in each direction?

On one side is an old town , the other a built up docklands.

garrettod

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

What would be the point of that if the roads either side still only have 1 lane in each direction?

On one side is an old town , the other a built up docklands.

Depends on which direction you travel from, coming from the Tunnel for example, it's two lanes, while there is potential to make the approach to the tolls two lanes also.

Victor

Muahahaha wrote: »

The toll should be removed simply because that was what the plan was when it was implemented 30 years ago.

Might this have been wilful self-delusion? Do you have a copy of this plan?

we were led to believe it would be given back to the citizens.

The citizens never owned it. How could it be given back to them?

TheBlock

I use the East Link every day and have done for the past 15 years, to say its a disaster is an understatement.

It'll only get a lot worse when the incinerator in Ringsend opens and they eventually start to develope the IGB site on Sean Moore Road.

It should be barrier free and the round about at Three Arena should be removed urgently. The bus stops at the three arena need to be removed or dipped in or whatever thats a massive delay there.

Any moron pulling in on the road to drop off peopole to concerts in the Arena during heavy traffic should be shot with balls of their own gick!! Gardai just standing there watching them drives me insane!!!

OldGoat

If DCC maintain the toll without the reason of repaying the building debt should we allow them to toll all the other bridges too?

garrettod

OldGoat wrote: »

If DCC maintain the toll without the reason of repaying the building debt should we allow them to toll all the other bridges too?

Absolutely !

No reason why motorists shouldn't be ripped off more and more, hardly like we are not paying more than enough to the State (directly or indirectly) already.

Rip Off Ireland, don't you just love it :rolleyes:

The day of reckoning for our politicans is coming in the next few months and in time, so will the day of reckoning for our councillors.