Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Council opposes overhead cables on cross-city Luas line

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member danger here's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,544
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Council opposes overhead cables on cross-city Luas line

    Now I'm all for public transport infrastructure and do appreciate historical buildings but does it not seem a bit nuts that DCC are more interested in city’s “exceptional” and “exquisite” architecture along the Fast Food Mile between Westmoreland Street and Dr Quirkeys.

    Council opposes overhead cables on cross-city Luas line - The Irish Times - Mon, Sep 13, 2010

    The RPA said it investigated a wire-free option that has been used on trams in Bordeaux in France since 2003. The system uses a third rail embedded in the road between the tram tracks which becomes energised as it hits connectors underneath the tram, but switches off when the tram passes.

    However, the RPA said the technology was still new and there were concerns over its robustness, reliability and safety; and it was “substantially” more expensive.



    I've been to truely beautiful cities like Vienna,Prague,Amsterdam,Dresden,Budapest and yet they have not had any aesthetic issues with architecture while having overhead wires,as Dublin didn't with the previous tram system.Is this really cost effective for the taxpayer to be investing in this technology that exists only in one city worldwide,on the basis of what the Dublin Civic Trust and Irish Georgian Society objected to overhead wires?

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member Al.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,620
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Good old RPA. Nothing like having duplicate bureaucracies while pretending they're competing against each other.

    Not that I agree with Luas; it's a waste to build a different mode of rail transport that's incompatible with the general railway network, but it's built now, so the solution is to put it underground within the city centre like other cities have done (imagine the savings by turning the Green Line into a part of the vaunted Metro North; fixing the mistake of the Red Line would take a bit more work). Frankly, there should have been no rail transport on the surface in the inner city, unless you were going to convert bus routes back to trams.

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    There are a number of structural problems with what you propose, which doesn't take away from the merit in your idea.

    They do, however make it very expensive.

    Looking at London's metro as a good comparison, as it is in a river delta, you will note that it was built before the event of pile driven building construction techniques.

    Dublin has significant numbers of buildings constructed using this technique, which would limit the places the Dublin Metro could go.

    The population density also makes it difficult to justify outside the central business district, which means that you have to have exit points to go overground, which are messy.

    There are also organisational problems, as you rightly point out.

    I think this is a fairly comprehensive list of the Government agencies "responsible" for transport in Dublin:

    Dublin Transport Office
    National Transport Agency
    National Roads Authority
    Dublin Bus
    Irish Rail
    Bus Eireann
    Railway Procurement Agency
    Dublin City Council
    Fingal County Council
    South Dublin County Council
    DunLaoighaireRathdown Council
    Department of Transport

    As an interim measure I would propose that the Metro project is abandoned, and the 5 Billion Euro used to encircle the M50 area, with both radial and circular routes. The Bus routes are restructured to feed into the tram system, with Park and Ride at all M50 junctions.

    And I'd also disband all Government "Authorities" in the M50 area, and replace it with one Local Authority.

    With Authority!

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,573
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Callely, while I don;t disagree with the thrust of your post, there has been progress in that regard. The DTO has been disbanded and brought into the new National Transport Agency. And according to AN Bord Snip the RPA and NRA will be merging.

    Also where is the 5 bn Euro you mention?
    We need to radically change every system that has enabled the wholesale destruction of the Irish landscape, rural and urban. There is no time for incremental step by step measures. The systems have failed utterly and the only hope for a real recovery requires the rule book to be torn up completely.

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    17,528
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Default

    there is a problem with the proposed metro north in that about 1/2 the tunnelled sections are not required. There's more than enough room in the central median of the ballymun rd. But of sourse the Ballymun residents association claimed that a surface rail link would cause anti-social behaviour(????)

    RE: the overhead wires, we could bring back the black cast Iron poles like the origional system and it would "blend in" with the "beautiful" supermacs on westmoreland st.

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member Grumpy Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,080
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roll_On View Post
    there is a problem with the proposed metro north in that about 1/2 the tunnelled sections are not required. There's more than enough room in the central median of the ballymun rd. But of sourse the Ballymun residents association claimed that a surface rail link would cause anti-social behaviour(????)

    RE: the overhead wires, we could bring back the black cast Iron poles like the origional system and it would "blend in" with the "beautiful" supermacs on westmoreland st.
    I must say that I'm baffled by this DCC objection to overhead tram wires on College Green and O'Connell Street - there were tram wires and poles for 50 years until Todd Andrews ripped out Dublin's tram system. Have the planners never seen photos of Dublin during Easter Rising and War of Independence?

    And the overhead tram wires in Amsterdam, Budapest and Prague take nothing from the architecture and heritage of those historic cities - which also have world class public transport systems.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member Mushroom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Provence.
    Posts
    15,748
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Has Dublin Council got any real power in this regard or will the RPA simply bypass them and go to ABP, using that fast-track process that the Bungster brought in to speed up the building of un-needed motorways, airport terminals and other expensive infrastructural white elephants?
    Founded in 2003, Politics.ie has one of the most engaged, respected and influential politics and current affairs communities.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alonso View Post
    Callely, while I don;t disagree with the thrust of your post, there has been progress in that regard. The DTO has been disbanded and brought into the new National Transport Agency. And according to AN Bord Snip the RPA and NRA will be merging.

    Also where is the 5 bn Euro you mention?
    In law you are correct, however in practice on the ground the DTO still exists, and the NRA&RPA are still carrying on with business as usual, The NTA consists of consultants and a chair.

    Even so, unless the authority for planning permission is wrestled away from the Councils, there will be no change.

    Remind you of any other Government department? HSE mark II anyone?

    As for the 5 Bn, you have an excellent point - we DON'T have 5bn.

    The 5Bn is the guestimate for the construction of the Metro, as currently proposed.

    Remember this money will most likely be spend with overseas companies, as we don't have the technology locally, it is a poor economic multiplier, even as a loss leading capital project.

    The value for money equation doesn't add up either - if we invested the money in a marginally lower technology tram solution we would be able cover Dublin with cheap clean fast trams, with a fighting chance of covering operating costs.

    This network could be built by local firms, designed by local engineers and make a dramatic impact on the economic landscape, rather than paying a company from overseas to drive a tunnel machine from Stephens Green to Ballymun.

    The Metro will be a constant drain on the exchequer, as the passenger demand forecasts that underlie its economic case were created mid boom, and required Swords to grow to about 150,000 homes in 10 years.

    Nice idea, but there are better uses for the money.

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member Grumpy Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,080
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by I,Callely View Post
    As for the 5 Bn, you have an excellent point - we DON'T have 5bn.

    The 5Bn is the guestimate for the construction of the Metro, as currently proposed.
    The capital cost of Metro North has been estimated at less than €2billion - and that was before construction costs fell an estimated 30% to today's prices.

    The €5bn figure was claimed in Irish Times and has taken hold - it has never been backed up with any evidence.

    The RPA refuses to discuss costs publicly because they are engaged with two PPP bidders to secure the best possible deal for the State.

    Remember this money will most likely be spend with overseas companies, as we don't have the technology locally, it is a poor economic multiplier, even as a loss leading capital project.
    The only major spend overseas will be the purchase of the tunnelling machines and the Metro cars - the rest of the spend will be in Ireland where the work will take place and the construction materials will be sourced. Construction will provide significant returns to the exchequer through income tax, corporation tax and VAT returns every year for five years.

    The value for money equation doesn't add up either - if we invested the money in a marginally lower technology tram solution we would be able cover Dublin with cheap clean fast trams, with a fighting chance of covering operating costs.
    Trams, like buses, don't have the capacity.That was 'discovered' after Luas became operational. every tried to get a Luas at peak time in the rain?

    This network could be built by local firms, designed by local engineers and make a dramatic impact on the economic landscape, rather than paying a company from overseas to drive a tunnel machine from Stephens Green to Ballymun.
    The Metro construction work will be carried out by local staff and engineers. One of the final bidders is a consortium that includes the Irish construction firm John Sisk and Sons.

    [Article] RPA selects two bidders for Metro North project - Rail Users Ireland Forum
    The Metro will be a constant drain on the exchequer, as the passenger demand forecasts that underlie its economic case were created mid boom, and required Swords to grow to about 150,000 homes in 10 years.
    No it will not be a drain on the exchequer. Like Luas and Dart it will show a quick operating profit because people will flock to it as a fast, efficient, reliable way to get around Dublin. It will be paid off over 25-30 years by the generations of taxpayers who will use it - which seems a fair deal to me and much better than pumping billions into a black hole created by a zombie bank. It will be no different than paying a mortgage to buy or construct a house. Sensible option in my opinion.

    Metro North is a version of a plan that was first published in 1975 (Dublin Rail Rapid Transit Study which gave birth to Dart - the other lines in the system were abandoned by FG-Lab govt of 82-87) when Dublin was much smaller and had much less passenger demand. That demand has grown massively in the last two decades - and will continue to grow as the economy recovers.

    And where the hell did you get that 150,000 homes for Swords guff - that would imply a population of around 350,000.

    At the 2006 census, Swords had a population of circa 33,000 - the 8th biggest town in Ireland - and the projections are for it to grow to around 60,000 by 2030.

    Nice idea, but there are better uses for the money.
    Like Anglo Irish Bank?

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    My figures are solid - most of the information is in the public domain, though it does require a bit of reverse calculation to turn the passenger demand figures into population figures, but the Passenger Demand Forecast Handbook covers the maths.

    Do some further research, I won't tell you where, just in case it compromises the objectivity of your opinions. I will simply suggest you look at county development plans as a starting point.

    As for the Anglo jibe, thank you, but I believe my earlier posts suggest where I would invest the money. And it certainly wouldn't be in the pockets of the shareholders of that cesspit of mismanagement.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •