JP Morgan Boss Slams Dublin Transport Infrastructure

Free-2-Flow

I have been in Munich and Berlin this year, their public transport makes Ireland looks like it's in the stoneage.

BlinkingLights

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

This is actually not true and only makes it worse. Dublin had a world leading tram network back in the day. Then someone though a bus was better and it all disappeared.

It most certainly is true. We had a world-leading tram network for a couple of decades when electric tram technology was new and it occurred under an entirely different set of political and economic circumstances to the 20th century.

We had a world leading telecommunication network in the mid 1980s when digital PSTN technology was new. Then we had a government that seemed to think "ah that's grand. Job done!" as the rest of the world swooped past with massively faster broadband in the days of ADSL in the early 2000s.

The state and many of our commentators do a lot of self-congratulatory nonsense about some of these projects.

You still have people going on about the Shannon Scheme as it if were last week. It was an interesting, historical project. World leading and all as it was in the 1920s, the state did nothing much on that kind of scale until the 1990s!

The reality is that Ireland has absolutely not invested in serious public transport in anything like the kind of sustained way that has occurred in continental Europe and even in many US cities. Similar applies in most of the UK, other than London. So, it's quite a poor benchmark which we always use to conclude that we're doing fine on these things.

Del.Monte

lawred2 wrote: »

still a huge amount of undeveloped land around the IFSC

What's going to happen when Docklands is under water due to global warming or can we get a dispensation for that for being good Europeans?

Even the property porno rag has highlighted this:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/climate-change-will-ireland-s-coastal-cities-and-towns-be-under-water-1.2457216

Free-2-Flow

Del.Monte wrote:

What's going to happen when Docklands is under water due to global warming or can we get a dispensation for that for being good Europeans?

We can build a Dam by then

wordofwarning

n97 mini wrote: »

I'm talking solely about the built environment. If you want to see monuments to bad planning just look in the suburbs. Places like Palmerstown south of the N4. Thousands of houses, one pub in the middle, or around Pennyhill in Lucan..., same story. Dublin 15... Clonsilla, Roselawn, Huntstown, Little pace. As well as the one pub there is usually a Spar or a Lidl. There are no commercial/retail streets.

You can build high-rise and still keep the ground levels free for commercial uses.

How is low density housing ie houses in outer suburban Dublin which is about 10km to the City when urban planning was non-existent comparable to building high density housing served by the new luas line extension close to the City? I find it hard to believe you would think thousands of apartments would be built with maybe a Lidl or a single bar. Look at the Ongar. There is a village there and that was built post 2000.

Just because planners failed on low density housing in the 1960s, does not mean we can't have high density housing in 2017. Look at Charlestown in Finglas. It has a ton of services and it is a new development. Santry was built in the 1960s/1990s and has a ton of services.

Most of the commercial space will not be used. Go to Berlin, Munich, Prague etc and you will see a small strip of shops at a metro station for the apartments. Go to the likes of Fatima, Phisboro, Ballymun etc. Building a ton of commerical space beside a city is useless. It rarely all gets let

Ted Plain

Phoebas wrote: »

Exactly who said "The buses are enough"? An actual person or an invented caricature?

I didn't take the quote as being actual reported speech.

Tell me the names of government ministers and board level CIE people who bus it to work.

zetalambda

Of course companies based in London are going to want to relocate to Paris or Frankfurt over Dublin. Relocating from London to Dublin is akin to relocating from Dublin to Waterford.

LeinsterDub

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

This is actually not true and only makes it worse. Dublin had a world leading tram network back in the day. Then someone though a bus was better and it all disappeared.

In fairness this was in line with the thinking of other western nations at the time especially the US and Britain. And the bus was arguably better.

Yourself isit

n97 mini wrote: »

Dublin already has the highest property taxes in Ireland. Maybe it'd be better to increase property taxes in places like Donegal, among the lowest in Ireland and receiving transfers from Dublin, so that more of Dublin's property taxes could stay in Dublin.

Can't see how increasing property taxes in Donegal helps Dublin.

Dublin does need to get all its property taxes and use that revenue to guarantee loans for public transport.

Yourself isit

zetalambda wrote: »

Of course companies based in London are going to want to relocate to Paris or Frankfurt over Dublin. Relocating from London to Dublin is akin to relocating from Dublin to Waterford.

Frankfurt's population is 700,000. Neither Paris nor Frankfurt are English speaking.

wordofwarning

zetalambda wrote: »

Relocating from London to Dublin is akin to relocating from Dublin to Waterford.

Do you know that nearly a quarter of the world's aircraft are financed out of Dublin? Do you know the ISE is the number 1 exchange for funds in the world and number 2 for debt? Do you know that there are thousands of lawyers and accountants in Dublin dedicated to supporting firms in the IFSC?

Relocating from London to Dublin is not on par with locating from Dublin to Waterford. Outside of Dublin, there are very few skilled accountants and lawyers. There is a reason why even co-ops tend to have their HQ in Dublin. Dublin has very skilled professionals.

When the banks start moving staff to Dublin. The big four can start moving their Irish trained staff working in London, back to Dublin

Marcusm

Free-2-Flow wrote: »

I have been in Munich and Berlin this year, their public transport makes Ireland looks like it's in the stoneage.

They had a broad clearance of buildings in 1943-45 assisted by Britain which, together with an influx of American money post 1946, greatly aided city planning.

markpb

Marcusm wrote: »

They had a broad clearance of buildings in 1943-45 assisted by Britain which, together with an influx of American money post 1946, greatly aided city planning.

What have we got since we joined the EU?

€44 billion.

Where has most of the development in Dublin been in the time?

Green and brown field sites.

Pete Moss

The problem, in my eyes, comes down to the cyclical incompatibility between our government's tenure and the timeline required to strategically implement an effective overhaul of Dublin's transport, commercial and housing infrastructure.

No one wants to stand over a policy now, which will make future political parties look better. A lot of key decisions in government are based on producing short-term term results.

Not only that, but these decisions seem to domino into pre-existing issues. I mean, take the the national children's hospital being developed on the St James's site for example. Another cock up, and that's been in the pipeline for how long now? They've planted a national hospital in the middle of an already overloaded city with limited parking spaces. Effectively inviting more traffic into an already strained road network.

Then there's the poor execution of these plans. Case and point being the on-going Luas works. That project has been a headache for everyone, large and small businesses, tourists, pedestrians, the pre-existing transport network. Of course we can't have our cake and eat it too. For redevelopment, disruption is necessary. But the scale on which the disruption effects public perception can be managed. I'd bet that a majority of Dubliners would be against further disruption to an overhaul of the city's transport network given how poorly this Luas project has been managed.

murphaph

Marcusm wrote: »

They had a broad clearance of buildings in 1943-45 assisted by Britain which, together with an influx of American money post 1946, greatly aided city planning.

In Berlin's case the underground railways had mostly been built by the outbreak of war and largely destroyed by the end of it. In Munich's case the city wasn't terribly affected by bombing but they only started their underground activities in 1972 in time for the Olympics.

Dublin has no excuse when compared with either city. There's no Marshall aid flowing in Germany today but they are still extending both the Berlin and Munich underground systems as we speak.

Infini

Hollister11 wrote: »

10 minute DARTS were due a year ago, and still aren't here due to driver strikes. That's laughable, a company being held back because the workers aren't happy.

Sack them. It's a pretty good job, there will be plenty of takers.

Actually blaming the drivers is an easy cop out I can tell you though its not simply that the drivers dont agree its the damn INFRASTRUCTURE itself thats seriously underinvested in.

The whole 10min Darts was Franks bright idea of putting the cart before the horse. Case point: Look at the havok the adding of Hazelhatch services has caused on delays.

The real issue is the current PHYSICAL infrastructure just isnt enough. Theres 5 level crossings all within a 2 mile stretch of the line between Lansdowne and Merrion that needs to be dealt with and lets not forget the wholly inadequete Northern Line between Connolly and Howth Jct that needs SERIOUS expansion to a 3 or 4 Track line as well.

And dont get me started on Fine Gael's braindead deferral/cancellation of Dart Underground.

Lets be honest we need SERIOUS and realistic upgrades of the infrastructure theres no point in simply looking for the easiest excuse that something didnt happen when its a far more structural problem than just drivers not agreeing even when they actually have VALID concerns and points about the job THEY work and know how it works and not someone in an office thinking how it works and refusing to listen to people.

end of the road

Hollister11 wrote: »

10 minute DARTS were due a year ago, and still aren't here due to driver strikes. That's laughable, a company being held back because the workers aren't happy.

nope. the actual reason is the current infrastructure cannot support a 10 minute dart frequency without huge downgrades to all other services including longer journey times. in reality increasing the capacity to all 8 car trains is a better option for now. the driver issues will be solved but that won't change the reality that if a 10 minute dart is warrented then the infrastructure to support it will have to be built. even if it was a few loops to start with that might be something.

Hollister11 wrote: »

Sack them. It's a pretty good job, there will be plenty of takers.

can't be done, there are no grounds. the plenty of takers couldn't be trained as there would be nobody to train them because you have got rid of the trainers so no service, never mind a 10 minute one.

n97 mini

Yourself isit wrote: »

Can't see how increasing property taxes in Donegal helps Dublin.

Dublin does need to get all its property taxes and use that revenue to guarantee loans for public transport.

20% of property taxes collected in Dublin go to counties like Donegal as Donegal doesn't raise enough to cover its own costs. But Donegal had the lowest property taxes in the country, Dublin has the highest.

If Donegal contributed more to its own costs it wouldn't need a subsidy from Dublin.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

20% of property taxes collected in Dublin go to counties like Donegal as Donegal doesn't raise enough to cover its own costs. But Donegal had the lowest property taxes in the country, Dublin has the highest.

If Donegal contributed more to its own costs it wouldn't need a subsidy from Dublin.

for that to happen more investment to create jobs in Donegal with better wages would have to happen as currently the people of Donegal can't afford the current rates never mind an increased rate of property tax. no different to most of the country of course.

Anongeneric

Marcusm wrote: »

They had a broad clearance of buildings in 1943-45 assisted by Britain which, together with an influx of American money post 1946, greatly aided city planning.

Best description of German planning I've heard in quite a while.

Cookie_Monster

end of the road wrote: »

for that to happen more investment to create jobs in Donegal with better wages would have to happen as currently the people of Donegal can't afford the current rates never mind an increased rate of property tax. no different to most of the country of course.

How "can people not afford current rate" in Donegal? You got any proof of that statement, or just more waffle?

Free-2-Flow

Marcusm wrote:

They had a broad clearance of buildings in 1943-45 assisted by Britain which, together with an influx of American money post 1946, greatly aided city planning.

I disagree, Munich wasn't affected much by WW2 bombings.
The oldest of buildings are still there and the is an underground right below them.

magicbastarder

end of the road wrote: »

currently the people of Donegal can't afford the current rates never mind an increased rate of property tax.

maybe they should stop building houses in donegal so. gweedore actually made me angry, it was a wasteland of idiotic and badly planned houses. we'd been planning on spending a night or two there but decided not to, and went to ardara instead.

Banjoxed

wordofwarning wrote: »

Relocating from London to Dublin is not on par with locating from Dublin to Waterford.

Yup, it sure is, when you are dealing with essentially bus-based public transport, and with a bus first mentality among civil servants and politicians, who have made long-fingering and sniping at rail-based public transport investment for the last forty years an art form.

nc6000

Infini wrote: »

Actually blaming the drivers is an easy cop out I can tell you though its not simply that the drivers dont agree its the damn INFRASTRUCTURE itself thats seriously underinvested in.

The whole 10min Darts was Franks bright idea of putting the cart before the horse. Case point: Look at the havok the adding of Hazelhatch services has caused on delays.

The real issue is the current PHYSICAL infrastructure just isnt enough. Theres 5 level crossings all within a 2 mile stretch of the line between Lansdowne and Merrion that needs to be dealt with and lets not forget the wholly inadequete Northern Line between Connolly and Howth Jct that needs SERIOUS expansion to a 3 or 4 Track line as well.

And dont get me started on Fine Gael's braindead deferral/cancellation of Dart Underground.

Lets be honest we need SERIOUS and realistic upgrades of the infrastructure theres no point in simply looking for the easiest excuse that something didnt happen when its a far more structural problem than just drivers not agreeing even when they actually have VALID concerns and points about the job THEY work and know how it works and not someone in an office thinking how it works and refusing to listen to people.

With the exception of the Luas and a couple of new stations like Clongriffin and Grand Canal Dock has any infrastructure really been improved since the DART was launched back in 1984?

devnull

Something called the Phoenix Park Tunnel being opened to services?

nc6000

devnull wrote: »

Something called the Phoenix Park Tunnel being opened to services?

Has that not made things worse? I'm sure I've read plenty of people on here complaining about the knock-on effect of that re-opening has had on other commuter lines.

Checkmate19

Nobody expected brexit. Housing is a problem as the banks shut up shop when they got burned. It will work itself out over time. It's not a bad thing the banks are handing out money to everyone. However the goverment should be building house's. But its like everything is the country it will take double the time it should and double the money.

Infini

nc6000 wrote: »

With the exception of the Luas and a couple of new stations like Clongriffin and Grand Canal Dock has any infrastructure really been improved since the DART was launched back in 1984?

We still have a ghost station suffering from no entrance on the kildare line: Kishoge or something thats been sitting there for years fully built but unopened because people screwed up and wont finish the road just like with Hansfield till a few years ago.

The physical infrastructure on the Dart line itself hasnt changed at all for the last 3 decades apart from the addition of clongriffin and GCD.

Dart underground was meant to be the first proper infrastuctural change to the dart but Fine Gael thought a glorified tram is the better option which is stupid when Heavy Rail has extra capacity once the investment is made.

LeinsterDub

nc6000 wrote: »

With the exception of the Luas and a couple of new stations like Clongriffin and Grand Canal Dock has any infrastructure really been improved since the DART was launched back in 1984?

It's a sad state of affairs when the electrification of a train line is one of the high water marks for public transport infrastructure

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

Something called the Phoenix Park Tunnel being opened to services?

to be fair, that was one of those "it was there and should always have been open to passenger services and there was no excuse not to do so" projects.
so not an improvement as such but something that always needed doing and should always have been availible to passengers.

fly_agaric

Pete Moss wrote: »

overloaded city

Not getting into the whole "National Children's Car-park" debate, but reason Dublin is somewhat "overloaded" at the moment is a deliberate lack of investment in its infrastructure by many governments.

To use weasel words, some people have this idea that "starving the beast" will drive the people and jobs outward to small towns/rural areas, but it is not going to work. The world is urbanising, and the jobs and investment could go to Cork/Galway if we are lucky but more likely they will end up in a larger city (on Dublin/Belfast's scale) in a different country!

zetalambda

Yourself isit wrote: »

Frankfurt's population is 700,000. Neither Paris nor Frankfurt are English speaking.

730,000 in the city with 2.3 million in the urban area and 5.8 million the the frankfurt rhine metro area. Language isn't an issue if whole departments are moving.

So if we're to compare like with like Dublin city has a population of 495,000 with 1.35 million in the urban area and 1.6 million in the greater Dublin/Leinster area.

Frankfurt feels about 100 times larger than Dublin:

wordofwarning wrote: »

Do you know that nearly a quarter of the world's aircraft are financed out of Dublin? Do you know the ISE is the number 1 exchange for funds in the world and number 2 for debt? Do you know that there are thousands of lawyers and accountants in Dublin dedicated to supporting firms in the IFSC?

Relocating from London to Dublin is not on par with locating from Dublin to Waterford. Outside of Dublin, there are very few skilled accountants and lawyers. There is a reason why even co-ops tend to have their HQ in Dublin. Dublin has very skilled professionals.

When the banks start moving staff to Dublin. The big four can start moving their Irish trained staff working in London, back to Dublin

Yes, I know Ireland is a tax haven and in 2016, not one new company was listed on the ISE. Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and all the other foreign companies that have established their EMEA HQ's here did it for one reason and it wasn't because of our skilled professionals!

trellheim

dont forget also we did actually build a ton of reasonably decent interurban motorways which had a semi-undesired effect of making people move far out, and in GDA are now mainly used as commuter runs - the jobs did not move with them though and neither did the Public transport infra to move them ( and I include the bus and train incumbents in that ) hence M50 and M7/m9 crowding

There is limited industry Cork - Biopharm is well set up down there but serious nexus areas of available and mobile professionals in law and IT and a host of other high skill KWs - its going to be Dublin every time unless you are specialized, and in an area that wants that speciality

The tax haven nature of the IFSC and just the volume of work, dictates Dublin

Now, compare to Birmingham or Manchester in UK - good transport links - plenty of jobs, plenty of large amounts of employers

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

for that to happen more investment to create jobs in Donegal with better wages would have to happen as currently the people of Donegal can't afford the current rates never mind an increased rate of property tax. no different to most of the country of course.

That's a blanket statement and largely untrue. Public sector workers in Donegal get paid the same as public sector workers in Dublin. Staff working for Tesco, Lidl, etc, all get the same wages. Same with ESB, eircom, An Post, etc.

The only difference would be the very high end jobs, which make up a tiny fraction of jobs in Dublin.

Ability to pay is not taken into account with property tax either. Why should a solicitor in Donegal pay less LPT on his rural mansion than a newly qualified teacher in Dublin does on their 1 bed apartment in Sandyford.

Banjoxed

LeinsterDub wrote: »

It's a sad state of affairs when the electrification of a train line is one of the high water marks for public transport infrastructure

And, by Jasus, it sure was grudged at the time. "White Elephant" was bandied about, a lot, by plenty of folks not a million miles away from the Sunday Independent, UCD and TCD. Garret waded in, saying that seeing as most development was four-houses-to-an-acre in the 'burbs, bus was better value and that he wouldn't have authorised DART if he had been Taoiseach in 1979.

If you seek a monument to why Ireland won't get an almighty bonus from Brexit, look no further than that.

BlinkingLights

Yourself isit wrote: »

Frankfurt's population is 700,000. Neither Paris nor Frankfurt are English speaking.

Selective stats there. Frankfurt metropolitan area is 5.8 million. City limits don't define it very well.

I find Dublin tends to include the entire Pale in its calculations when it's trying to big-up itself.

The reality is you can literally see the countryside in central Dublin. That's no bad thing but we need to get past this ridiculous thing of trying to underestimate the size of large metro areas abroad and inflate our own. It does nothing to help realistic debate. It does not realistically take in Kildare, Meath etc etc as is often claimed. Those are not areas you would throw into a metropolitan area calculation. At that rate Cork is over half million as you could claim the entire county on that basis.

You've one metro area of about 1.3 to 1.5 million and another of about 270,000 - 300,000 at a push. The other 3 cities are very small and the rest are small towns with scattered hinterlands.

Dublin is comparable to Oslo, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Raleigh, Providence, Perth (Aus), Ottawa, Glasgow etc.

Cork compares quite closely with say Reykjavik, Bergen, Plymouth and many French smaller cities.

In my opinion the single biggest and most significant difference between irish (and most British) cities and their continental and US counterparts is the total lack of urban autonomous government. When cities' public transport and other infrastructure is a national political football, nothing gets done.

This is why we can't do long term urban planning and why Dublin and Cork have such poor infrastructure. Urban projects need to be run by and have their financing managed by cities themselves.

As soon as you've say a metro project becoming a political issue in a rural area hundreds of km away, it just stops making sense.

Same applies in rural areas, what does a Dublin or Cork city type know about the needs of say someome living in Offaly or Leitrim.

You're getting inappropriate one size fits all approaches from national government and CIE companies (other than Dublin bus).

Public transport should be devolved to city council's / metro authorities and rural transport to county council.

Cities also need executive, accountable mayors and councils.

I'd also advocate, slim, executive mayor setup for smaller towns. Maybe exec mayor and a voluntary council.

lawred2

Yourself isit wrote: »

Frankfurt's population is 700,000. Neither Paris nor Frankfurt are English speaking.

I've lived in Frankfurt. Greater Frankfurt would have a population at least three times that of Greater Dublin.

And it's public transport is enviable.

It's a real city of the world. And the English language is not an obstacle/issue/concern where professional Germans are concerned.

lawred2

BlinkingLights wrote: »

Selective stats there. Frankfurt metropolitan area is 5.8 million. City limits don't define it very well.

I find Dublin tends to include the entire Pale in its calculations when it's trying to big-up itself.

The reality is you can literally see the countryside in central Dublin. That's no bad thing but we need to get past this ridiculous thing of trying to underestimate the size of large metro areas abroad and inflate our own. It does nothing to help realistic debate. It does not realistically take in Kildare, Meath etc etc as is often claimed. Those are not areas you would throw into a metropolitan area calculation. At that rate Cork is over half million as you could claim the entire county on that basis.

You've one metro area of about 1.3 to 1.5 million and another of about 270,000 - 300,000 at a push. The other 3 cities are very small and the rest are small towns with scattered hinterlands.

Dublin is comparable to Oslo, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Raleigh, Providence, Perth (Aus), Ottawa, Glasgow etc.

Cork compares quite closely with say Reykjavik, Bergen, Plymouth and many French smaller cities.

In my opinion the single biggest and most significant difference between irish (and most British) cities and their continental and US counterparts is the total lack of urban autonomous government. When cities' public transport and other infrastructure is a national political football, nothing gets done.

This is why we can't do long term urban planning and why Dublin and Cork have such poor infrastructure. Urban projects need to be run by and have their financing managed by cities themselves.

As soon as you've say a metro project becoming a political issue in a rural area hundreds of km away, it just stops making sense.

Same applies in rural areas, what does a Dublin or Cork city type know about the needs of say someome living in Offaly or Leitrim.

You're getting inappropriate one size fits all approaches from national government and CIE companies (other than Dublin bus).

Public transport should be devolved to city council's / metro authorities and rural transport to county council.

Cities also need executive, accountable mayors and councils.

I'd also advocate, slim, executive mayor setup for smaller towns. Maybe exec mayor and a voluntary council.

Generally I agree, transport matters for Dublin and maybe Cork should be devolved for sure but devolving transport to county councils would be ridiculous. It should well be within the remit of a national agency to manage transport matters outside of Dublin and Cork.

BlinkingLights

I would have no major issues with devolving regional transport in counties to councils / groups of councils in very rural areas (Sligo/Leitrim/Roscommon comes to mind)

The issue is more about organisation of routes and planning of services long term than about funding. You could still fund it centrally, but just plan it locally (with a contribution from local funds too).

I don't necessarily think that our county structure is appropriate to start with. I'd prefer that we moved towards having fewer, larger administrative counties with proper accountability and decent scale and systems and just kept the historical ones for the GAA and old time's sake!

I'd preferred to have seen work done on that than the ludicrous notions of merging say Cork City and County Councils which just creates situation where you've a large urban and a large rural areas being slammed together for no reason other than they share the same name. The needs / interests don't match up at all. However, creating a regional authority for West Cork, Kerry and South Limerick might have made sense but, I'm sure there'd be all hell if you suggested such sacrilege !

At the very least we should be looking at linking up the smaller counties like Leitrim, Roscommon, Sligo, Donegal etc into administrative regions and ensuring they've economies of scale for shared services.

Bigger counties like Cork, Dublin, Tipperary, Waterford etc probably function quite well.

I also don't see the logic of having multiple county councils in Dublin. It should be a single metropolitan authority. In fact, that was the most obvious immediate merger and instead it was broken up...

I would see Ireland as maybe being 10 administrative counties at most. I would scrap about half or more of the 28 administrative counties.
The 5 city council are most definitely needed though and I would reintroduce town councils in a different form for all of the towns over 10,000 with small mayoral setup for small towns (possibly mostly voluntary)

There's no reason why the concept of counties couldn't continue to exist for tourism / GAA / historical value, much like Munster, Leinster, Connacht and Ulster do for historical reasons and for sport.

Being locked into an administrative structure that dates back to counts and baronies and other total irrelevancies seems a bit pointless.

Ireland has a situation where we basically have too many local authorities and they serve little or no purpose as they have no power and are effectively run by an appointed administrator (City/County manager) in vague consultation with the council.

trellheim

they serve little or no purpose as they have no power and are effectively run by an appointed administrator (City/County manager) in vague consultation with the council.

this is not correct; they serve a huge purpose ! the workers on the ground are needed BUT its the only way TDs used to be able to show favouritism so thats why we have tons and tons of councils - I never said it was a nice purpose

daheff

lawred2 wrote: »

Oh no... not this again

And not this again either

bk wrote: »

No, it is a chicken and egg problem. We have piss poor public transport because too much road space is given too cars and not enough space and priority given to buses and trams.

And will reducing car access improve (both financially and acessibility) public transport?

bk wrote: »

Reduce the cars and give more space to the above and public transport greatly improves.

If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?

bk wrote: »

You mean too much money given to social services, public sector employee pay and tax cuts, leaving nothing for infrastructure investment. It is all about priorities.

In some cases yes....but you try telling that to the guard/teacher /civil servant/nurse on 25k a year they are getting paid too much.

Like it or not the country only has so much money and has many competing priorities.

bk wrote: »

Ironically the better the infrastructure you have, the more high paying, high tax jobs you can attract here, which leads to more tax take and thus money money available for all of the above. But then we tend to be too short sighted for that.

In some cases...in others not. Infrastructure is only one factor....otherwise there would be excommunist cities ruling the world. A lot of east european countries have an undergrounds...but still low paid jobs.

lawred2

daheff wrote: »

If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?

Currently - as it stands - do you believe that private cars carry more into the city centre than public transport does? Because that's the central tenet of your point there.

bk

zetalambda wrote: »

Yes, I know Ireland is a tax haven and in 2016, not one new company was listed on the ISE. Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and all the other foreign companies that have established their EMEA HQ's here did it for one reason and it wasn't because of our skilled professionals!

I agree with everything you said about Frankfurt, but I totally disagree with the above.

Each of those companies individually employ thousands of very well educated, well paid and thus high tax paying people. I can assure you that the vast majority of people they employ are NOT involved in the financial side. They are involved in IT, R&D, Sales, Customer Support, etc. I know because I myself work for a multinational and so do most of my friends.

Those companies wouldn't need more then 12 staff if there were just here for taxes.

Google alone employs more then 5,000 people!

Of course low taxes and business friendly government helps. But they are also here for the very well educated and skilled professionals and in some ways attractive place to come for skilled people from other countries.

daheff wrote: »

And will reducing car access improve (both financially and acessibility) public transport?

Yes, of course it will!

Give more space to buses and trams which carry 10 to 20 times as many people per lane per hour then cars. Of course that will improve public transport, just like it has in pretty every European city that has limited car access already.

This isn't new, this is pretty much public transport planning 101 in Europe for the past forty years!

daheff wrote: »

If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?

Errr... You do realise that of people who shop in Dublin City Center, only 19% of them got there by car! The other 81% got there by walking, cycling and public transport.

Ban cars, give more space to trams and buses, make it easier for more people to get too the city center and get around it and I guarantee you Dublin business will be up, up, UP.

jimmycrackcorm

daheff wrote:

And will reducing car access improve (both financially and acessibility) public transport?

Absolutely. Because it's impossible to improve public transport without removing cars. Which is proven by a cursory glance at the streets that the LUAS runs on.

daheff wrote:

If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?

We should suck it and see. But given the vast numbers of people who travel into the city centre via pubic transport already compared to cars, it's a no brainer that it would just become mite popular.

Again the LUAS is an example whereby once the red line began operating, numbers on the equivalent bus routes dropped like a stone because of the improved service.

There's simply no excuse for having cars travel in preference to public transport in a congested environment.

daheff

bk wrote: »

Yes, of course it will!

Give more space to buses and trams which carry 10 to 20 times as many people per lane per hour then cars. Of course that will improve public transport, just like it has in pretty every European city that has limited car access already.

This isn't new, this is pretty much public transport planning 101 in Europe for the past forty years!

.

So you think because there will be more roadspace available by removing cars that public transport will automatically improve? How so? DB/ BE cant just hire drivers at a whim to do this- even if they could afford it. Luas has no possibility of increasing the amount of lines because of the capital costs.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Absolutely. Because it's impossible to improve public transport without removing cars. Which is proven by a cursory glance at the streets that the LUAS runs on.

But what if we actually put all this extra capacity underground?? Then we actually ADD to the commuting capacity instead of just repurposing whats already there. Thats the kind of thing we should be doing...not forcing people onto unsuitable public transport.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

We should suck it and see. But given the vast numbers of people who travel into the city centre via pubic transport already compared to cars, it's a no brainer that it would just become mite popular.

I'm not against the idea of public transport. I'm against the idea that it should only be public transport to the detriment of people for whom public transport does not suit.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Again the LUAS is an example whereby once the red line began operating, numbers on the equivalent bus routes dropped like a stone because of the improved service.

I don't disagree that luas >bus>car, but only on a like for like journey. Compare a commuter coming from Lucan. they can get the bus or the car. They don't have a luas/train option. A lot of buses in the morning are full by the time they get to Lucan. So this user decides to drive. And many more examples like this.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

There's simply no excuse for having cars travel in preference to public transport in a congested environment.

Assuming you have the required frequency and distributed coverage (which we dont, and wont unless we are prepared to pay much higher transport costs).

magicbastarder

daheff wrote: »

So you think because there will be more roadspace available by removing cars that public transport will automatically improve? How so? DB/ BE cant just hire drivers at a whim to do this- even if they could afford it.

well, if it reduces average journey time by 10%, it means 10% more journeys can be made in a given time period. i.e. greater carrying capacity.

bk

daheff wrote: »

So you think because there will be more roadspace available by removing cars that public transport will automatically improve? How so? DB/ BE cant just hire drivers at a whim to do this- even if they could afford it. Luas has no possibility of increasing the amount of lines because of the capital costs.

Of course they can, what are you on about!

It is relatively quick and easy to hire and train up new bus drivers. It takes just a few months, nothing at all in terms of public transport planning.

It is one of the major advantages of buses, how relatively flexible it is. Relatively quick and easy to adjust to demand.

Dublin Bus currently has a recruitment drive on and the NTA has placed an order for 300 new buses for Dublin Bus, the biggest order ever made!

And then they are the big upcoming plans for the three new BRT routes which will add significant capacity.

Never mind all the private operators (Aircoach, Dublin Coach, Citylink, etc.) all of whom have been growing like mad over the last 5 years and ordering large numbers of new coaches.

daheff wrote: »

But what if we actually put all this extra capacity underground?? Then we actually ADD to the commuting capacity instead of just repurposing whats already there. Thats the kind of thing we should be doing...not forcing people onto unsuitable public transport.

While of course we should be building Dart Underground and Metro North. The issue is that they will cost billions and look like they will take decades to build.

Dublin has some of the worst congestion of any city in Europe. We simply can't wait decades for these to be built, we need to fix them now.

And even when they are built, we will still need buses and trams. Look at London, despite the amazing London Underground service, London Bus still carries significantly more people per day then the Underground!

There is simply no room in our cities for cars.

daheff wrote: »

I'm not against the idea of public transport. I'm against the idea that it should only be public transport to the detriment of people for whom public transport does not suit.

What you mean, is you are happy for other people to use public transport while you enjoy the comfort of your car!

Frankly it is a very selfish attitude.

Sure, fine if we had unlimited space. But we don't, the roads are highly congested and we need to prioritise the most efficient form of transport.

What you are suggesting is that you have a greater right to the road space then the 10 to 20 times as many people sitting on the bus or Luas next to you.

What makes you more entitled to that space then all those people?

daheff wrote: »

I don't disagree that luas >bus>car, but only on a like for like journey. Compare a commuter coming from Lucan. they can get the bus or the car. They don't have a luas/train option. A lot of buses in the morning are full by the time they get to Lucan. So this user decides to drive. And many more examples like this.

The reason this happens, is because there simply isn't enough road space for more buses. Remove cars and you have more road space for buses and thus more capacity can be put on routes like this.

The reason they are trying to remove cars from the city center is because the existing bus lanes have actually reached their max capacity at peak hours. They are going to give more space over to buses, so that more new bus capacity can be introduced.

daheff wrote: »

Assuming you have the required frequency and distributed coverage (which we dont, and wont unless we are prepared to pay much higher transport costs).

We pay some of the highest transport costs in the world, recent report found that we are the second highest in the world!

The problem isn't cost, it is simply using the road space more efficiently.

daheff

bk wrote: »

Of course they can, what are you on about!

It is relatively quick and easy to hire and train up new bus drivers. It takes just a few months, nothing at all in terms of public transport planning.

It is one of the major advantages of buses, how relatively flexible it is. Relatively quick and easy to adjust to demand.

Dublin Bus currently has a recruitment drive on and the NTA has placed an order for 300 new buses for Dublin Bus, the biggest order ever made!

How many of those 300 are for additional capacity and how many are to replace buses who's life expectancy has passed (because DB failed/were unable to invest over the past few years)?

bk wrote: »

While of course we should be building Dart Underground and Metro North. The issue is that they will cost billions and look like they will take decades to build.

Dublin has some of the worst congestion of any city in Europe. We simply can't wait decades for these to be built, we need to fix them now.

Sure...but if we keep engaging in short-termism solutions we'll never have a proper infrastructure. Just because this is to take decades doesn't mean we don't do it. There is only so much road capacity and its nearly at breaking point.

bk wrote: »

And even when they are built, we will still need buses and trams. Look at London, despite the amazing London Underground service, London Bus still carries significantly more people per day then the Underground!

There is simply no room in our cities for cars.

I agree there is space for buses, trains and trams as part of the overall solution...but so is there a place for bikes & cars. The way to get people out of cars is to offer a viable alternative...not just a stick approach

bk wrote: »

What you mean, is you are happy for other people to use public transport while you enjoy the comfort of your car!

Frankly it is a very selfish attitude.

Who says I drive? I use public transport.

bk wrote: »

Sure, fine if we had unlimited space. But we don't, the roads are highly congested and we need to prioritise the most efficient form of transport.

No -we need to prioritise adding capacity to the greatest extent possible...not just repurposing what we have. We will run out of road (to excuse the turn of phrase) on that very quickly and still have poor quality transport.

bk wrote: »

What you are suggesting is that you have a greater right to the road space then the 10 to 20 times as many people sitting on the bus or Luas next to you.

What makes you more entitled to that space then all those people?

What makes them more entitled to the space than car drivers who have no other alternative?

bk wrote: »

The reason this happens, is because there simply isn't enough road space for more buses. Remove cars and you have more road space for buses and thus more capacity can be put on routes like this.

The reason they are trying to remove cars from the city center is because the existing bus lanes have actually reached their max capacity at peak hours. They are going to give more space over to buses, so that more new bus capacity can be introduced.

I don't disagree that the bus lanes have reached capacity. Part of the problem is that there are only a couple of routes into /out of the city. Its and old city and has been badly planned over the past 30+ years and we are feeling the impact of that now. More bad planning isnt going to help us long term.

bk wrote: »

We pay some of the highest transport costs in the world, recent report found that we are the second highest in the world!

The problem isn't cost, it is simply using the road space more efficiently.

Really? What report was that- want to share a link? Compare Dublin transport costs to London -the cost in London is way more expensive.Same with Munich, Same with most other capital cities. And then remember commuters in Dublin can claim tax relief on annual tickets. I'm not aware of this being possible in most other countries (although am open to somebody showing its possibility).

Cookie_Monster

daheff wrote: »

Really? What report was that- want to share a link? Compare Dublin transport costs to London -the cost in London is way more expensive.Same with Munich, Same with most other capital cities. And then remember commuters in Dublin can claim tax relief on annual tickets. I'm not aware of this being possible in most other countries (although am open to somebody showing its possibility).

easy find...
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057737182

What makes them more entitled to the space than car drivers who have no other alternative?

It's a far more efficient and environmentally friendly use of space, of course they should have more entitlement. In the list of road space entitlements cars have to come at the bottom for things to change in any meaningful way, both environmentally and congestion-wise.

No -we need to prioritise adding capacity to the greatest extent possible...not just repurposing what we have.

BUt turning lanes full of cars into lanes only full of buses and cyclist massively increase capacity and does so very cheaply, easily and quickly. I'll pull out the old favourite picture as a very simple example.

How many of those 300 are for additional capacity and how many are to replace buses who's life expectancy has passed

DB have a needlessly short life span for their assets so technically none of them need to be replacements...

PS - does anyone know do/will the NTA have the same short lifespan?