Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

AngryLips · 19-12-2011 12:24pm

I think it's a fair comment to say that public transport in south Dublin would be badly compromised if green line Luas were to go out of action. This, in addition to the N11 QBC and southside Dart service, can quite easily claim to be among the most critical pieces public transport infrastructure in that part of the city.

OssianSmyth · 30-12-2011 1:55am

Spongebob Squarepants features Metro North:

Page%2003%20Spongebob.jpg

http://www.dublinpeople.com/article.php?id=711&l=

L1011 · 30-12-2011 10:29am

OssianSmyth wrote: »

Spongebob Squarepants features Metro North:

http://www.dublinpeople.com/article.php?id=711&l=

If its terminating at Ballymun, its Metro West.

Plowman · 30-12-2011 12:37pm

This post has been deleted.

monument · 16-01-2012 3:18pm

In the "Under Construction" section of the RPA.ie:

Mater D Wall Works
http://www.rpa.ie/en/under_construction/Pages/default.aspx

lods · 16-01-2012 8:43pm

Herald.ie
It would take us 100 years to fund new Metro -- Leo
By Cormac Murphy
Saturday January 14 2012

METRO North would not be completed for 100 years with the money currently available, Leo Varadkar has admitted.

Even if he used all the cash available to him, it would take a century to build the proposed light rail system, the Minister for Transport said.

In a letter to Fingal county councillors, Mr Varadkar said he is "as disappointed as anyone that Metro North has been deferred indefinitely".

However, it is "simply not possible" to fund it at the moment, he added.

About €1.2bn went on transport in 2011 and the figure falls to €0.8bn by 2016.

The vast majority of this will go on 'close out' payments for the motorways already built and maintenance of existing roads and railways. It leaves only about €40m a year for new roads and railways. "Metro North would have cost €3.2-3.7bn. Even spread over 10 years, that would be €400m a year. I have €40m a year. At that rate, getting the Metro to Swords would take 100 years," Mr Varadkar said.

"It just isn't affordable," he added, explaining that even if Metro North was built, fares would have to be €20 each way to cover the operating costs as "we would not be able to subsidise it". The minister raised the possibility of substituting the underground proposal with an above-ground option.

"I hope that someday it will be possible to built Metro North or perhaps an on-street project would be cheaper," he said.

He also said the transport investments made by the private sector have not worked out well.

"(We) have three 'ghost' train stations in Dublin for developments that failed and toll roads with so few cars using them that some companies who took part in the public private partnerships to build the roads are now in serious financial trouble," the minister said.

The Government announced late last year that Metro North, along with Dart Underground, the Thornton Hall prison and the Grangegorman DIT campus project, would be deferred.

comurphy@herald.ie

- Cormac Murphy
http://www.herald.ie/news/it-would-take-us-100-years-to-fund-new-metro-leo-2989050.html?service=Print

What happened to the no brainerv:rolleyes:

Jehuty42 · 16-01-2012 9:04pm

I think Leo raises good points about PPPs there.

He is right too, there is literally no money at the moment to do anything. Putting aside politics, that is the reality of the situation, so anything we discuss on this forum is for now, entirely pie-in-the-sky stuff.

DWCommuter · 16-01-2012 10:36pm

Jehuty42 wrote: »

I think Leo raises good points about PPPs there.

He is right too, there is literally no money at the moment to do anything. Putting aside politics, that is the reality of the situation, so anything we discuss on this forum is for now, entirely pie-in-the-sky stuff.

Of course we can discuss how Leo the lion mentions overground options and how that comes back to my prediction of reinventing the wheel. Herein lies the biggest danger and one must have a very succinct knowledge of public transport planning in Dublin to appreciate it. When we get close to rolling out the ultimate, we inevitably fail and then plan a watered down version. Remember that the Luas was/is a cheap variation of the original DART plan from the 1970s. It may have mutated over the years, but it was originally routed in a similar fashion to the grandiose and very worthwhile aforementioned DART plans.

I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that MN and DU will be reinvented and procrastinated about all over again. Seriously lads, it will happen and I say this based on years of research and not an attempt to provoke or troll.

AngryLips · 17-01-2012 9:57am

Jehuty42 wrote: »

I think Leo raises good points about PPPs there.

He is right too, there is literally no money at the moment to do anything. Putting aside politics, that is the reality of the situation, so anything we discuss on this forum is for now, entirely pie-in-the-sky stuff.

Time to shut down this forum, move along now.

Jehuty42 · 17-01-2012 3:13pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

Of course we can discuss how Leo the lion mentions overground options and how that comes back to my prediction of reinventing the wheel. Herein lies the biggest danger and one must have a very succinct knowledge of public transport planning in Dublin to appreciate it. When we get close to rolling out the ultimate, we inevitably fail and then plan a watered down version. Remember that the Luas was/is a cheap variation of the original DART plan from the 1970s. It may have mutated over the years, but it was originally routed in a similar fashion to the grandiose and very worthwhile aforementioned DART plans.

I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that MN and DU will be reinvented and procrastinated about all over again. Seriously lads, it will happen and I say this based on years of research and not an attempt to provoke or troll.

I agree completely. I wish it wasn't the case, but it is. I certainly don't want to see watered down versions of MN and DU, I hope I made that clear, but it really does seem that with no money to do anything about them now, there is no other choice but to shelve them. You are right though, the risk is that they will get mutated while sitting on that shelf and when money comes around again to build them, we'll end up with crap. Leo's wording there terrifies me. I don't agree with the feelers he seems to be putting out, I merely agree with him that there is not enough money at the moment to do anything.

Jack Noble · 17-01-2012 4:43pm

Anyone think that Leo's sums are a tad off the mark?

Fares of €20 each way to cover operating costs - so annual operating costs of Metro North will be in the region of €700MILLION given the RPA estimates annual usage at 35m journeys?

Never mind the 100 years to pay it off guff.

That's some amount of spin and spoofery by Leo - what in the name of Jaysus possesses him to share every brainfart he has?

He's gonna look an awful eejit someday when that nonsense is thrown back at him - and it will be.

DWC, apologies for doubting you - Irish politicians really don't learn from previous Fubars and appear determined to re-invent the wheel.

OssianSmyth · 17-01-2012 6:42pm

Jehuty42 wrote: »

He is right too, there is literally no money at the moment to do anything.

Government expenditure this year will be approx €70bn as it was last year and will be in 2013. €70bn is not 'literally no money'.

The government has chosen not to spend an annual amount of €200m out of this €70bn because it prefers to spend the money otherwise. Urban transport infrastructure for them is not important enough to make it into the first €70bn of expenditure choices. This is a matter of priorities.

It is not a case of 'There is no money'.

It is also not the case that there is no credit. Irish long debt is trading below 8% and the deficit is funded with 3% money from the Troika.

It is not the case that the European PPP market is dead. 2011 saw about 20bn in euro PPP projects including projects in Italy and Spain. Ireland has the same credit rating as Italy and is rated higher than Portugal.

It is not the case that the annual operational costs of a single Dublin metro line would be €700m. I suspect he arrived at this number by repaying the capital costs from fares over 10 years, which is nonsensical.

AngryLips · 18-01-2012 12:12am

OssianSmyth wrote: »

Government expenditure this year will be approx €70bn as it was last year and will be in 2013. €70bn is not 'literally no money'.

200 million sounds small when compared to the total Government spend of 70bn but in reality it is quite sizable when taken out of a capital spend of 7-10bn. What are you suggesting gets cut to accomodate this?

DWCommuter · 18-01-2012 1:56am

OssianSmyth wrote: »

Government expenditure this year will be approx €70bn as it was last year and will be in 2013. €70bn is not 'literally no money'.

The government has chosen not to spend an annual amount of €200m out of this €70bn because it prefers to spend the money otherwise. Urban transport infrastructure for them is not important enough to make it into the first €70bn of expenditure choices. This is a matter of priorities.

It is not a case of 'There is no money'.

It is also not the case that there is no credit. Irish long debt is trading below 8% and the deficit is funded with 3% money from the Troika.

It is not the case that the European PPP market is dead. 2011 saw about 20bn in euro PPP projects including projects in Italy and Spain. Ireland has the same credit rating as Italy and is rated higher than Portugal.

It is not the case that the annual operational costs of a single Dublin metro line would be €700m. I suspect he arrived at this number by repaying the capital costs from fares over 10 years, which is nonsensical.

I'd be the last to defend any Government, but I believe you have been somewhat disingenuous in your post. It is (in Government and economic terms) a matter of priorities, like you have alluded to. However the rest of your post comes across as a kind of contradiction to what you set out to say.

monument · 18-01-2012 2:18am

It's not just metro north, the government has slashed most capital expenditure (as Wikipedia puts it "expenditures creating future benefits") in favour of not making the hard choices and tackling things like public sector wages (including their own), prices of goods and services, the quangos etc. Propping up the banks and the creation of Nama, has set the governments since on a path leaving the them in a conflict of interest position on rents for retail and residential -- keeping costs even higher.

Even some right-wing economists disagree with this approach -- I'm not saying they agree with metro north, just that they disagree with the overall approach.

In the meanwhile the property charge is to be taken away from the area it is collected in and distributed nationally as the national government sees fit. The councils who have the greatest amount of households should get funding to support infrastructure and services for its population but that does not suit national politicians.

traintimes · 18-01-2012 3:19am

Jack Noble wrote: »

Anyone think that Leo's sums are a tad off the mark?

Fares of €20 each way to cover operating costs - so annual operating costs of Metro North will be in the region of €700MILLION given the RPA estimates annual usage at 35m journeys?

Never mind the 100 years to pay it off guff.

That's some amount of spin and spoofery by Leo - what in the name of Jaysus possesses him to share every brainfart he has?

He's gonna look an awful eejit someday when that nonsense is thrown back at him - and it will be.

DWC, apologies for doubting you - Irish politicians really don't learn from previous Fubars and appear determined to re-invent the wheel.

Look Jack Nobble
face the facts , the Land of Ireland has money for your Beloved Metro Mothball North and Dart Bin collector. The National debt is 200 billion Euros , Europe is on its knees but Jaccque "Clousaeu"Noble still wants his10 billion euros Metro north because "people live there"
Jack you are as delusional as Sean Quinn and The Sooner you go to the Toy Store and get yer self an scaleltric Metro North set the better ,
Brendan Howlin has sorted out the money wasters projects like Dart Binkonnector And Jetro North
Did you have a good cry at the Capital projects press conference on Nov 10last year , when Meyro Madnes Was cancelled was that you snorting inurr hankie!!

Leo v was wrong about 100 years tobuild Metro ,it will be more like 1000 years the way things Are going..

Hotblack Desiato · 18-01-2012 3:30am

What is your source for the national debt being 200 billion euro?

traintimes · 18-01-2012 3:38am

OssianSmyth wrote: »

Jehuty42 wrote: »

He is right too, there is literally no money at the moment to do anything.

Government expenditure this year will be approx €70bn as it was last year and will be in 2013. €70bn is not 'literally no money'.

The government has chosen not to spend an annual amount of €200m out of this €70bn because it prefers to spend the money otherwise. Urban transport infrastructure for them is not important enough to make it into the first €70bn of expenditure choices. This is a matter of priorities.

It is not a case of 'There is no money'.

It is also not the case that there is no credit. Irish long debt is trading below 8% and the deficit is funded with 3% money from the Troika.

It is not the case that the European PPP market is dead. 2011 saw about 20bn in euro PPP projects including projects in Italy and Spain. Ireland has the same credit rating as Italy and is rated higher than Portugal.

It is not the case that the annual operational costs of a single Dublin metro line would be €700m. I suspect he arrived at this number by repaying the capital costs from fares over 10 years, which is nonsensical.

The Country is Broke pally, what Part of Broke Dont you Understand?? You are completly bonkers if you think the country should borrow yet more money to build 10 billion Euro Meyro North
Please Dont insult yer own intelligence with your idea that Ireland is not broke it most certainly is and people like you spouting off about PPP,s been a good deal isfinancial market claptrap PPP's are a legal form of Blacmail thedogs in the street know that,
So stck yet head in the sand Ossian cuz thats were it belongs..

LeinsterDub · 18-01-2012 11:13am

traintimes wrote: »

You are completly bonkers if you think the country should borrow yet more money to build 10 billion Euro Meyro North
.

Even at the height of the boom Metro was never priced at 10 bl euro

Mr Simpson · 18-01-2012 11:21am

traintimes wrote: »

10 billion Euro Meyro North
Please Dont insult yer own intelligence with your idea that Ireland is not broke it most certainly is and people like you spouting off about PPP,s been a good deal isfinancial market claptrap PPP's are a legal form of Blacmail thedogs in the street know that,
So stck yet head in the sand Ossian cuz thats were it belongs..

Is that you Kevin Myers

OssianSmyth · 18-01-2012 11:33am

I don't think Metro North is going to be built now. All I'm pointing out is that cancelling major public transport projects is a choice based on priorities for what is worthwhile in society. Although Varadkar and Kenny both stated that they thought Metro North was a great project, their actions reveal their preference for 350 alternative ways that they prefer to spend the money.

Let's have a quick look at planned gross income and expenditure for 2012:

Gross expenditure planned for 2012

category|€ million
public sector wages |17,981
intermediate consumption |8,911
welfare |26,892
interest |6,683
subsidies |796
capex |2,387
other |4,774
total |68,424

Gross income

production/import taxes |17,981
income/wealth taxes |19,891
capital taxes |318
PRSI |10,343
Property income |2,705
Other |3,819
Total | 54,898

Assumptions:
Metro requires annual payments of 200m amortised over 30yrs:
2012 GDP 159,125m
Metro North costs: 0.3% of annual gross expenditure or 0.4% of annual gross income.

robd · 18-01-2012 12:02pm

OssianSmyth wrote: »

It is not a case of 'There is no money'.

It is also not the case that there is no credit. Irish long debt is trading below 8% and the deficit is funded with 3% money from the Troika.

Ossian,

You've shown a spectacular lack of understanding of basic macro economics in your idea.

The whole basis of a debt backed economy is that GDP growth has to be > than the increase in borrowings.

GDP growth is certainly going to be < 1% in Ireland this year, possibly < 0%. GDP will be approx 204b for 2012 while we'll borrow 14b (68b-54b), or an extra 7%. Technically we shouldn't be borrowing any new money at all. Of course doing that would completely kill our economy hence IMF/Troika rescue deal to try and get us back to GDP growth > debt growth.

Economic theory would prefer they cut current expenditure (welfare and public wages) and kept infrastructure spending. Unfortunately that would take serious political will as the people would vote said government out in spectacular fashion at next election. Hence we are where we are.

The money is not there in any shape or form.

Jayuu · 18-01-2012 1:18pm

It's nothing to do with political will or common sense. It's to do with the prevailing public attitude in a time of recession.

So let's say the Government says they are going to build Metro North at a cost of €200 million per year for the next ten years. In turn to fund that and not increase borrowing they're going to cut €200 million from a variety of sources (public sector wages, education, health, welfare).

Could you imagine the outcry that would come from the chattering classes at such an announcement? The Independent (newspaper) and Independents (Dail idiots) would go to town on this. FF and SF would be screaming bloody murder from every pulpit they could find and Myers et al would spend the the next ten years writing articles and dining out on it. There would be daily protests outside the Dáil by every single group that was affected for what would be labelled as a "white elephant vanity project".

The facts and benefits of the project would be swept aside in a sea of outrage. No government is ever going to deliberately create such a storm.

traintimes · 18-01-2012 1:33pm

The London Crossrail project which involves 22km of tunneling (which is about twice the Metro North tunneling distance of 11km )will cost British Taxpayers 16billion pounds Sterling.So Metro North will cost about 8 billion poundsSterling or close to 10billion euros. The RPA never told the truth about The cost of Metro North for that reason , they knew that their boondoggle of a project was so mad it would make Nero shake in his Toga.The RPA could have built a decent surface Luas System for the Northside but they have failed and failed horribly.The Metro Morth project was driven by people who are inept and dishonest and who could mot give a damn about the cost to the taxpayers.

murphaph · 18-01-2012 2:22pm

traintimes wrote: »

The London Crossrail project which involves 22km of tunneling (which is about twice the Metro North tunneling distance of 11km )will cost British Taxpayers 16billion pounds Sterling.So Metro North will cost about 8 billion poundsSterling or close to 10billion euros. The RPA never told the truth about The cost of Metro North for that reason , they knew that their boondoggle of a project was so mad it would make Nero shake in his Toga.The RPA could have built a decent surface Luas System for the Northside but they have failed and failed horribly.The Metro Morth project was driven by people who are inept and dishonest and who could mot give a damn about the cost to the taxpayers.

What a load of cobblers.

OssianSmyth · 18-01-2012 5:09pm

I didn't suggest that Public Debt be increased to fund the Metro. I do think a PPP is feasible - based on the EIB's latest report on PPP activity in Europe - and I think the annual payments could be met with expenditure cuts elsewhere in the 70bn annual budget.

robd wrote: »

The whole basis of a debt backed economy is that GDP growth has to be > than the increase in borrowings.

I will be very impressed if you can provide a source that supports this statement. Missing variables include future, marginal and existing interest rates, existing debt burden, existing debt/GDP ratio, room for increased taxes/expenditure cuts, stage of economic cycle.

It is not a rule of thumb I am familiar with but macroeconomics is not my area and maybe it is yours.

The IMF debt sustainability framework is here: http://www.imf.org/external/np/pdr/sus/2002/eng/052802.pdf

Annex 1 of the December 2011 IMF report on the Irish economy looks at Irish debt sustainability:
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2011/cr11356.pdf

dowlingm · 18-01-2012 5:10pm

traintimes wrote: »

The London Crossrail project which involves 22km of tunneling (which is about twice the Metro North

Wait wait wait. You're comparing a heavy rail interconnector with a metro? I just lost complete interest in what you're saying. If you don't understand why, you need to do some research into the most expensive component of any underground rail project.

strassenwo!f · 18-01-2012 11:24pm

I'd guess that the O'Connell Bridge stuff would also have been a hard sell.

cgcsb · 19-01-2012 2:38am

traintimes wrote: »

The London Crossrail project which involves 22km of tunneling (which is about twice the Metro North tunneling distance of 11km )will cost British Taxpayers 16billion pounds Sterling.So Metro North will cost about 8 billion poundsSterling or close to 10billion euros. The RPA never told the truth about The cost of Metro North for that reason , they knew that their boondoggle of a project was so mad it would make Nero shake in his Toga.The RPA could have built a decent surface Luas System for the Northside but they have failed and failed horribly.The Metro Morth project was driven by people who are inept and dishonest and who could mot give a damn about the cost to the taxpayers.

cross rail is not metro <<--SNIP-->>. Also the only reason for underground running is a lack of space above ground.

traintimes · 19-01-2012 3:06pm

The TBM machines have to dig those tunnells regardless of what type, color, weight, or electric or steam train goes in afterwards ... The cost is the same .
TheTBM crew aint gonna give you a discount just because you are pleading with them that A Train Called Metro North is not A train called Crossrail

TBMs cost 100,000Euros a day and 9 underground Stations dont come cheap .
So quit yer RPA cheerleading ,they have failed theNorthside of Dublin the Broombridge Line however is A start but that should have been done years Ago

Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Comments