Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Wasteful Dublin Transport Spending (Tram Project cost €96m a mile)

Options
  • 10-12-2009 6:52pm
    #1
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭


    Compare and contrast these jobs to see what utterly crap value for money trams in Dublin are:(

    In all three cases there were no significant land acquisition costs.

    1. The Western Rail Corridor South

    Length 35miles
    Land Acquisition Costs €3m
    Total Cost c.€110-112m
    Cost per Mile €3.1-3.4m including a couple of old railcars.

    2. Luas extension to the Point.

    Length 1 Mile
    Land Acquisition Costs €0m
    Total Cost €90m
    Cost per Mile = €90m

    3. Cork Midleton

    Length 9 Miles
    Land Acquisition Costs €3m
    Total Cost €75m
    Cost per Mile = €8m ( includes some bridges and park and rides)


«134

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    MUST ... NOT ... FEED ... TROLL ...


  • Options
    #3
    Cool Mo D
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Cool Mo D


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Compare and contrast these jobs to see what utterly crap value for money trams in Dublin are:(

    In all three cases there were no significant land acquisition costs.

    1. The Western Rail Corridor South

    Length 35miles
    Land Acquisition Costs €3m
    Total Cost c.€110-112m
    Cost per Mile €3.1-3.4m including a couple of old railcars.

    2. Luas extension to the Point.

    Length 1 Mile
    Land Acquisition Costs €0m
    Total Cost €90m
    Cost per Mile = €90m

    3. Cork Midleton

    Length 9 Miles
    Land Acquisition Costs €3m
    Total Cost €75m
    Cost per Mile = €8m ( includes some bridges and park and rides)

    But both the Cork and Western Rail corridors were already built! They were being REopened, and no new permanent way was required. I don't see how you can say the cost of the Luas was excessive in those cases.


  • Options
    #4
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    LIKE WITH LIKE Spongey baby.


  • Options
    #5
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Actually I am wrong. Did I say €90m a MILE ???

    It is actually 1.5km which is 0.93 miles . The cost was therefore

    €96m a Mile, FFS :(

    and it is not even a railway like the other two , it is a bloody tram with a couple of rails bedded in concrete on a street.
     Permanent way my arse :(

    Nor am I certain that the cost of demolishing that ramp at Connolly is included in the €90m figure which palaver could have put it over the €100m...all for 0.93 miles of track.

    Maybe now ye know why I have my beady eye on the Interconnector :(


  • Options
    #6
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users Posts: 24,469 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    what'll the usage or return be though. The Luas probably has 1000 times the daily usage either of those other two do.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    StephenM_smc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭StephenM_smc


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    what'll the usage or return be though. The Luas probably has 1000 times the daily usage either of those other two do.

    Likewise the LUAS has more of a chance of making a return on its investment over time.


  • Options
    #8
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    a rural line..an urban line and a commuter line....


    I dont see much point in a comparison


  • Options
    #9
    crocro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 301 ✭✭crocro


    One of these projects had a positive cost/benefit ratio in its business case. The other two were election sweeteners.


  • Options
    #10
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    In Madrid they built Metrosur at the same time we built the original Luases.

    Metrosur is mostly or all underground and is 40km long , it cost €1.55bn

    40km is 25 miles. So that was €62m a Mile for full underground.

    Metrosur also comes with things called stations...like the one below. 26 of them ( maybe not all this size but some are) unlike the Luas Extension which has street level bumps ...extended bus shelters in effect.

    In a nutshell.

    The Spanish can build full underground railways with ****ing underground enormous stations for 2/3 the cost per mile of a tram in Dublin with NO stations

    Getafe_Central_interior.JPG

    More enormous stations here

    http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/mad/linea12.htm


  • Options
    #11
    noelfirl
    Registered Users Posts: 625 ✭✭✭noelfirl


    ***yawn***

    Excess negativity really bugs me.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    €96m a MILE for a tramway bugs me ....lots.


  • Options
    #13
    DWCommuter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,032 ✭✭✭DWCommuter


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    €96m a MILE for a tramway bugs me ....lots.

    And 350,000 for a semi D in longford bugged me. But its all history now. Those kind of prices are well gone. Unfortunately we are so broke as a nation after all the excess and greed that we cannot even afford the inevitable lower construction costs.


  • Options
    #14
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Ehhhh but the shower who spent €96m a mile on a tramway are trying to build an underground next :(

    Double or quits ??


  • Options
    #15
    HonalD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭HonalD


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Ehhhh but the shower who spent €96m a mile on a tramway are trying to build an underground next :(

    Double or quits ??

    Now that is a good point.....I cannot agree that the LUAS extension was a bad idea at the time.....but now, can we really really afford a Metro? To anyway? And I said a number of years ago when told yes - Now I think we all know who is really going to pay for it - yes you got it me and you! The mugs, I mean the public!


  • Options
    #16
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    HonalD wrote: »
    Now that is a good point.....I cannot agree that the LUAS extension was a bad idea at the time.....but now, can we really really afford a Metro? To anyway? And I said a number of years ago when told yes - Now I think we all know who is really going to pay for it - yes you got it me and you! The mugs, I mean the public!

    I'll gladly pay for a Metro!


  • Options
    #17
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,743 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    I have to agree with Bob here (to an extent) - I think the Docklands Luas is a good idea, but the cost, and length of time (not to mention disruption) involved are outrageous. I've said this before here, but it bears repeating - it is only a mile long!


  • Options
    #18
    I.S.T.
    Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    I don't know why they needed a tram system anyway, they could have saved a fortune by building a dedicated bus lane along the current luas route. Vanity reasons I suppose, some nice pretty pictures of the Luas in their propaganda leaflets for the next election looks a lot better than buses.


  • Options
    #19
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,457 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    The metro and dart interconnector will pay for themselves, raising finance for them will be relatively easy and painless given the expected return.

    The Luas extension will also likely pay for itself over the coming years.

    Can the same be said about trains out west? Will the usage level ever be viable for a non government entity take over and run as a business?

    I really think we missed a beat in not building some high speed lines over to the west, CIE have a lot to answer for.


  • Options
    #20
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Compare and contrast these jobs to see what utterly crap value for money trams in Dublin are:(

    Not alone are you comparing re-opening a line with the construction of a new line but you're comparing the construction cost alone which is a little pointless. That's why we do cost benefit analysis.

    I don't have the figures here but I probably wouldn't be wrong if I said that the red line extension will require no operating subvention and probably carry more people each year than WRC.
    IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »
    I don't know why they needed a tram system anyway, they could have saved a fortune by building a dedicated bus lane along the current luas route. Vanity reasons I suppose, some nice pretty pictures of the Luas in their propaganda leaflets for the next election looks a lot better than buses.

    There's more than enough proof to show that people are more likely to switch from car to train than car to bus, no matter how well-run the bus service is. That's why cities build tram lines even though they cost so much. It might sound like pandering to peoples tastes but if public transport is going to be successful in Dublin, building a good tram and train network is the way forward.

    Besides which, there are already bus lanes in Dublin (and a bus route along the current red line extension) but anyone who uses them can tell you that people drive in them or park in them, they are closed whenever there are roadworks or they are congested because of poorly designed junctions. One of the advantages of tram lines in the city is that drivers are less ignorant and selfish on tram lines than bus lanes (although that doesn't stop me being delayed almost every evening because of some twat blocking the bottom of the Harcourt/Charlemont ramp).


  • Options
    #21
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Whether things will pay for themselves are not does not negate the need to ensure that the money being spent on them is effectively spent.

    IE, if something costs 30,000 do we really need to spend 90,000 on it, that sort of thing. So if the Luas could have been built for less than 96million euro a mile, then prudent planning suggests that we should see about ensuring that it doesn't cost 96million euro a mile in the future, that sort of thing...this, I suspect, is what Sponge Bob is aiming at.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    I.S.T.
    Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    markpb wrote: »
    There's more than enough proof to show that people are more likely to switch from car to train than car to bus, no matter how well-run the bus service is. That's why cities build tram lines even though they cost so much. It might sound like pandering to peoples tastes but if public transport is going to be successful in Dublin, building a good tram and train network is the way forward.

    Besides which, there are already bus lanes in Dublin (and a bus route along the current red line extension) but anyone who uses them can tell you that people drive in them or park in them, they are closed whenever there are roadworks or they are congested because of poorly designed junctions. One of the advantages of tram lines in the city is that drivers are less ignorant and selfish on tram lines than bus lanes (although that doesn't stop me being delayed almost every evening because of some twat blocking the bottom of the Harcourt/Charlemont ramp).
    I am not talking about painting a bus lane on the road and sharing space with other traffic (as with Stillorgan bus lane). I am talking about using the same route as the Luas but with a roadway with buses on it. You can easily stop cars from using the busway, make it inaccessable for them. You can have cameras watching the lane with a high fine for any car that drives in it.


  • Options
    #23
    KevR
    Registered Users Posts: 3,110 ✭✭✭KevR


    M50 is another example of wasteful transport spending.

    How much less would it have cost overall if they built it properly the first time around (with the extra lanes and free-flow junctions)? The upgrade is costing €1 Billion and that's with no extra land acquisition costs. Not to mention it will now permanently have a 100kmh speed limit instead of 120kmh. Also, the disruption during the upgrade is really annoying.

    And then there's the whole issue of letting a private company have the toll plaza and then buying it back off them.


  • Options
    #24
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    it is not even a railway like the other two , it is a bloody tram with a couple of rails bedded in concrete on a street.

    did you miss the twangy things overhead, and the transformers required to produce 750VDC? You won't find that in Ardrahan.

    As pointed out by others, these numbers are useless without taking passengers into account. How long will it take the Ennis-Athenry section to have net boardings equal to the number of people shifted from a single Lily Allen concert?


  • Options
    #25
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Ehhhh but the shower who spent €96m a mile on a tramway are trying to build an underground next
    News to me that RPA are building interconnector


  • Options
    #26
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    dowlingm wrote: »
    As pointed out by others, these numbers are useless without taking passengers into account. How long will it take the Ennis-Athenry section to have net boardings equal to the number of people shifted from a single Lily Allen concert?

    I really don't care. €96m a mile for a bloody tram is simply outrageous.

    The only comparable cost I can find is the Rennes Metro which was built a few years ago , is 5.8 miles long and cost €530m

    This French extravagance therefore cost €91m a Mile which compares favourably to the Luas extension until you realise that the French put most of it underground and built 13 undergrounds stations too with the rest of it elevated. No street sections at all.

    €96m for something with no stations...in effect.....is absolutely outrageous. The French system is on an appropriate scale for somewher e the size of Dublin by and large.

    Rennes+098.jpg

    And yes, Norman Foster designed the overground bits :)


  • Options
    #27
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    dowlingm wrote: »
    News to me that RPA are building interconnector

    Metro North is all overground is it ??


  • Options
    #28
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    Fair enough, I misread there on the metro/interconnector.

    The numbers on the French example are interesting but as has been pointed out previously this extension was a special case with the Connolly ramp fiasco and the utilities issues, not to mention the bridge which probably didn't come cheap. Bring in figures from other LRTs by all means but don't compare it to a non-electric regional rail line.


  • Options
    #29
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,744 ✭✭✭SeanW


    And the point that's been made by dowlingm and others is that your comparison only makes "sense" because you excluded A) the fact that the Midleton and WRC were reopenings of existing railways with preserved rights of way, and
    B) The WRC will probably not carry that many passengers while both Midleton and the Luas extension will carry enough passengers that it will make a net return from a socio-economic viewpoint, and possibly a profit in the case of Midleton.

    If you look at it from your perspective, we should build railways out the back of Mayo, Dingle, New Ross and god knows where else as guided by an issue of Johnsons Railway Gazette from the 1800s, and forget about building Metros and the Interconnector in Dublin or new Luas lines anywhere, because they "cost too much."

    The only use your post serves is to suggest that we should look to bring the construction costs of urban projects down to something resembling European norms.


  • Options
    #30
    Metrobest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Metrobest


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    In Madrid they built Metrosur at the same time we built the original Luases.

    Metrosur is mostly or all underground and is 40km long , it cost €1.55bn

    40km is 25 miles. So that was €62m a Mile for full underground.

    Metrosur also comes with things called stations...like the one below. 26 of them ( maybe not all this size but some are) unlike the Luas Extension which has street level bumps ...extended bus shelters in effect.

    In a nutshell.

    The Spanish can build full underground railways with ****ing underground enormous stations for 2/3 the cost per mile of a tram in Dublin with NO stations.

    More enormous stations here

    I'm not sure MetroSur is 40km, but it's a completely spurious comparison. MetroSur is not in central Madrid - it's way out in the southern suburbs (so cheaper to build) and it's a circular line (so no need for two termini). Labor costs in Spain are probably 50% lower than Ireland's if not more - and labor is a huge part of any capital project. MetroSur would be more comparable with our MetroWest - if that ever gets built!

    The planning system in Spain is completely different - projects don't have lengthy expensive oral hearings like in Dublin. The politicians just decide to greenlight a project and it gets built. It's been like that both before and after General Franco. Incidentally Madrid has the most kilometers of metro of any city in the world, but only half the average load factor of the Barcelona metro. They build metro to serve the sprawl of a badly-planned edge city? Sound familiar.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    SeanW wrote: »
    If you look at it from your perspective, we should build railways out the back of Mayo, Dingle, New Ross and god knows where else as guided by an issue of Johnsons Railway Gazette from the 1800s, and forget about building Metros and the Interconnector in Dublin or new Luas lines anywhere, because they "cost too much."

    Where did I ever advocate that?? LINKS or STFU time SeanW :(

    It is not me fault that the Dubs..the RPA is a Dublin quango only..... are incapable of managing the procurement of infrastructure in a cost efficient manner. I never even mentioned the Beckett Bridge at €60m although the actual bridge cost less than half that including delivery from Holland

    The 35 mile long Athenry - Ennis restoration cost only slightly more than sub one mile of Dublin tramway did.

    The Kildare four track project cost €50m a mile with land acquisition costs, new track bed , lot of big bridges and 4 or 5 hefty stations included.

    You may note that I did not compare the mickey mouse tram project with that other project as it does not compare despite costing nearly TWICE as much.


Advertisement