[Article] Dublin better off spending on Luas & SBahn rather than Metro

probe

Trams and high speed urban rail (SBahn - ie double deck (duplex) trains that could get one from Dublin airport to the city centre type of distances in under 10 mins would be far cheaper to build and provide a better service to the customer - enticing more people to leave their car at home and use public transport.

Irish Times article:

Case for two metro lines 'has not been proven'
FrankMcDonald, Environment Editor

The economic case for building two metro lines in Dublin "has not been proven" and it is "probable" that Dublin's future public transport needs could be met by bus, Luas and suburban rail services, according to one of Ireland's leading transport experts.


In the first independent analysis of the Government's €34.4 billion transport investment programme, Prof Austin Smyth said it is clear that the decision to invest in metro "will involve substantially higher costs than equivalent Luas schemes".


His analysis, prepared for the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, said one of the key questions is why Iarnród Éireann's proposal for a spur off the Dublin-Belfast line was "not appraised as an alternative to metro" in serving Dublin Airport.


The estimated cost for such an airport link would be in the region of €350 to €400 million. Increasing the capacity of the railway line between Clontarf Road and Howth Junction by adding a third track to speed up Belfast trains would cost a further €400 million.


By comparison, Prof Smyth told The Irish Times yesterday, the planned metro line between St Stephen's Green and Dublin airport would cost "billions", as would the proposed orbital metro line in Transport 21 running from Tallaght to Ballymun.


"The cost of the two existing Luas lines more than doubled, so whatever figure they put forward for metro now is likely to be an underestimate," he said. However, no information had been made available on the economic case for the two metro lines.


"Last autumn's announcement of Transport 21 represents a massive expansion in spending on transport by the Government. The key question is - assuming the measures are delivered - will this represent good value for use of taxpayers' money?"


Prof Smyth added: "In most societies when such programmes are unveiled, it is possible to come to some sort of conclusion on the efficacy of the expenditure informed by the supporting documentation that typically goes hand-in-hand with such announcements.


"When Transport 21 was announced, the surprise was that it was accompanied by little on either costs or economic case and financial appraisal of the proposals it contained. This in turn has raised concerns in many quarters about the robustness of the case."


In the light of substantial cost overruns on recent transport projects, he said it was "only reasonable and in line with practice elsewhere" for the economic case for Transport 21 to be presented "with accurate statements of costs and full quantification of benefits".


Given the scale of the investment programme and the fact that politicians liked to be seen opening "big ticket projects", Prof Smyth said Transport 21 needed to be subjected to independent scrutiny, particularly in the run-up to next year's general election.


His analysis of the programme concluded that plans for the expansion of Luas are likely to deliver "substantial economic benefits", but emphasised that Dublin's bus and rail network "should be planned together with a clear strategy for interchange". However, instead of adding an entirely new element (metro) to the mix of public transport services, he suggested that Dublin should develop an integrated suburban rail network similar to Schnellbahn (S-bahn) in German cities like Berlin and Munich.


The "jewel in the crown" of such a network would be the proposed €1.3 billion rail tunnel between Heuston Station and Spencer Dock, with new underground stations in the High Street area, St Stephen's Green and Pearse Station (Westland Row).


As Prof Smyth's analysis noted, this rail interconnector would link the Dart with other commuter rail services, including the Kildare line, the Maynooth line and northern and southern suburban lines. He also concluded that the benefits would include - large journey time savings for transport users, support for major new development, promotion of sustainable transport modes, improved reliability by relieving bottlenecks, and relief of road congestion and reduction in emissions.


However, under the timetable in Transport 21, the crucial rail link would be one of the last elements to be completed - in 2015. This was symptomatic of the "general inconsistency" in the Government's programme, according to Prof Smyth.


"Several cities in Europe have developed fully interconnected suburban rail networks with high-frequency cross-city trains . . . Generally, these depend on a city centre connecting tunnel and the availability of radiating suburban rail lines.


"This opportunity now exists in Dublin where the interconnector project, together with the proven role of Dart, can easily form the basis of a fast, electrified, high-frequency suburban network for the city region . . ."
© The Irish Times

bryanw

It's a bit silly the way they refer to metro as a new type of system. The current proposals are to build a "light metro" - similar to Luas but with longer trains. It will be fully segragated. The DART is essentially a "heavy metro" only its not segragated (or underground).

We are already seeing that Luas is ineffective in coping with the numbers that want to use it.

It's not really a question of cost because without new alignments we are not making any improvements - not everyone can use the current heavy or light rail lines in Dublin. A Dart spur to Dublin Airport will only serve the current areas and the Airport, but Metro North will serve whole new areas.

Whether you build a new Dart alignment or a metro route it still costs a heap of money, most of which is spent bringing it through the city centre, you either have to elevate it or go underground, and thats where the most money is spent.

The Dublin metro is really a compromise between Dart and Luas - it's on a dedicated track, but is a light rail option. It's not really going to be anything "new".

He also mentions Munich and Berlin - but I believe they also have extensive U-Bahn systems as well. No use comparing though - unless we really get our act together.

Slice

A spur to Dublin Airport from the Northern line would require a quadrupling of track on the northern section of the Dart line to facilitate the increase in services - this increase in services would not just come from the addition of direct services to the Airport but would also facilitate an increase in services on Dart, Northern Suburban line and Enterprise, not to mention reducing travel times between Dublin and Belfast. It would also allow Dublin airport to compete for a bigger market share of air passengers from the North given the increased accessibility and this is why the DAA were only lukewarm on the idea of Metro North.

But Government procrastination meant they didn't stick with the original plan of connecting the two Luas lines together with a third spur to Ballymun and pursuing an Airport connection separately this way. What we're left with is two disconnected Luas lines, no Airport connection as of yet and a potentially far costlier way of serving the northside of the City with an Airport connection that does not do Dublin Airport justice as the Island's largest airport. Metro North with a possible connection at Drumcondra to the Maynooth line doesn't really constitute proper intergration with the national rail network that the Airport spur from the Northern line would have afforded.

bryanw

As it stands now, it is much easier to get to the Airport by road. As soon as people travelling from the North hit the republic on the Belfast route they are on motorway all the way to the airport.

It would be a big job to quad-track the northern line, and it serves no new alignment. The "PR-A" are trying to promote the metro as a public transport system, not just an airport express. Why not build the new alignment instead of further conjesting the Northern line. Even go heavy if you want and run Dart on it. It's still possible, nothing has been done yet...

bk

Can I ask, why does that DART always ground to a halt and then crawl through the Clontarf area. At the moment there would be no way to get to the Airport in 10 minutes, it takes at least that to get from Clontarf to Connoly.

Anyway, the Metro is much more then just a train to the Airport, it will also serve lots of new areas like Drumcondra, Ballymun, Swords, etc. Even if you did do the Dart extension, you will still need to build at least one or two LUAS or Metro lines on the North side of the city to serve all the areas not being currently served.

Maskhadov

I HATE double decker trains !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOO

MarkoP11

The business case for Swords Dublin is proven and it will fill the trains, in fact demand is very significant such much as to exceed the capacity of the RPA's 2004 proposals. There is a document which gives a solid thumbs up on the business case the specifics are not released

The case for Metro West is not proven, but Tallaght Blanchardstown is a known hot spot for commuting its all by M50 no bus. It requires study and it is right to ask for such since we need to priotise projects in line with quantifiable benefits

There is business case of sorts for the interconnector based on a 12% rate of return, 70 million extra passengers and non additional subsidy. Medium to long term 4 tracks will be needed on the northern line regardless of the airport. Double decker trains are off the agenda (long dwell times) but the interconnector tunnel should be able to take them in case its needed

Slow speeds through Connolly are down to trains crossing in front of each other and running the signalling beyond design combined with speed control systems, post T21 the interconnector will remove this see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054982111

dowlingm

Maskhadov wrote:

I HATE double decker trains !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOO

Why is that? They're the backbone of suburban in greater Toronto - expanding to 12 car pushpull bilevels from 10 on some lines. Don't use 'em myself as I live in the city and get the subway.

mackerski

Maskhadov wrote:

I HATE double decker trains !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOO

Don't worry - there's nothing in the quoted article that suggests double-decker trains. S-Bahn trains are not inherently double-decked. In fact, until I checked a minute ago, I would have sworn that no S-Bahn network uses double-deckers at all. Turns out they are quite popular on East German S-Bahn networks, though.

Dermot

Red Alert

i travelled on a couple up and down and they're quite pleasant indeed.

i'm concerned however about having a third 'technical island'. The DARTS and Intercity trains share track gauge, some equipment and much know-how. The LUAS is a technological island from mainline/suburban rail, with a different operating voltage, track gauge, and driving principles. Presumably a double-deck LUAS is the way to go, assuming the overhead gantry was of a suitable height.

bryanw

Maskhadov wrote:

I HATE double decker trains !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOO

If the the need was ever there - I don't ever think it could be a case of hating them. It's much more practical to use double deck trains instead of longer ones.

I know some double deck trains aren't that nice, like when I was on one in Paris once, it wasn't the prettiest train - torn fake leather seats and all, and it was practically empty.

Red Alert

i was on one in france too, and its condition was similar to ^^^, but that's not inherent of double deckers in general. It would also mean that the now-required disabled accessibility features which consume seating room could be downstairs, with high-density seating upstairs. If only (from bus experience) people would actually go upstairs.

Vorsprung

I was on the Weasel train (I think it was called that anyway) from Munich to Augsburg (in Bavaria) a few years ago, very comfortable, loads of space for bikes etc., and quick.* Is this what's intended?


*One or more of the above may well have been due to the fact that it was DB

murphaph

bigjimthefirst wrote:

I was on the Weasel train (I think it was called that anyway) from Munich to Augsburg (in Bavaria) a few years ago, very comfortable, loads of space for bikes etc., and quick.* Is this what's intended?


*One or more of the above may well have been due to the fact that it was DB

I've taken that exact trip a couple of times. It's not exactly the same sort of train as DB use push-pull operation on that route. That's a loco at one end and a control console in the carriage at the other which controls the loco as it pushes the coaches. The double deck DART (if it ever is needed and it really shouldn't be IMO) would be an electric multiple unit, just being double deck, not a locomotive hauled train. I'd say those east german S-Bahn double deckers are also push-pull. I know Cologne used t use them until fairly recently. Most double deckers in germany these days are regional trains such as that Munich-Augsburg route, howeber as it only takes about half an hour (IIRC), many peeps commute from the less expensive (housing) Augsburg to Munich.

Slice

The business case for Swords Dublin is proven and it will fill the trains, in fact demand is very significant such much as to exceed the capacity of the RPA's 2004 proposals. There is a document which gives a solid thumbs up on the business case the specifics are not released

I think the point of the article was more that alternatives to Metro North were not properly looked at or weighted against the current proposed connection to the airport. What's certain is that Metro North will be costly, what's probable is that a spur from the Northern line would be less costly but what's not certain is how the two compare which is a ridiculous situation considering the gravity of such a major infrastructure project, but then again it's somewhat characteristic of the Government's approach to planning and infrastructure in general.

bringitdown

bk wrote:

Can I ask, why does that DART always ground to a halt and then crawl through the Clontarf area. At the moment there would be no way to get to the Airport in 10 minutes, it takes at least that to get from Clontarf to Connoly.

Anyway, the Metro is much more then just a train to the Airport, it will also serve lots of new areas like Drumcondra, Ballymun, Swords, etc. Even if you did do the Dart extension, you will still need to build at least one or two LUAS or Metro lines on the North side of the city to serve all the areas not being currently served.

Driver changeover occurs at Clontarf Rd, however as they can't be arsed walking up to the platform proper they stop the Dart short at the small steel platform to allow the new driver on-board. So 2 stops for the price of one.

THAT REALLY GETS ME ANGRY WHEN I AM ON THE DART.