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

DWCommuter

Calina wrote: »

How a service is provided is not as important as it being provided efficiently. With respect to Aircoach, the only one on which I can comment, it's systematically less punctual than the equivalent Dublin Bus service, hence I use the DB 747 service for the city centre out of preference.

That being said, the issue is that private competition as it exists here does not allow integrated ticketing. Part of that is possibly linked to the entry of private operators before someone actually worked out how public transport in Dublin should work.

Competition is not necessary if the system is run correctly. Unfortunately what we currently have is a botched up system that doesn't really work in any meaningful way but which is designed in the best interests of the operators and not of the passengers. I used to live in Swords. Integration between local bus services and the Swords Express would have been useful.

In other words, although we have competition to some extent, it's delusional to suggest that in any meaningful manner it's serving the passenger well.

When we get every transit operator including Luas, Dart, Dublin Bus and all - i mean ALL - of the private operators - using some sort of common ticketing system then we might be in the right place. I don't recall any evidence that the PDs actually cared about how their decisions impacted on the passengers, only on how it impacted on private companies.

Basically you are saying that a plan should come first and then infrastructure should follow? That makes perfect sense and has been pointed out endlessly over the years by me, you and tonnes of others. However the failure of the myriad of agencies to communicate and the failure of the DOT to navigate has lead us here along with many other reasons that have been pointed out.

As for the PD issue, the damage was done long before they got their snouts stuck up Fianna Fails behind. Competition is great. Private operators are great, but it must all be strung together under a cohesive and long term plan. For example. Integrated ticketing should have been done BEFORE the rush to allow private operators into the market, so the adoption of the technology becomes a requirement of being granted a license.

Sponge Bob

Ah but sure that integrated ticketing fiasco was nobodys fault. It will not be rectified by the NTA which hs no responsibility for CIE either.

Metrobest

Calina wrote: »

How a service is provided is not as important as it being provided efficiently. With respect to Aircoach, the only one on which I can comment, it's systematically less punctual than the equivalent Dublin Bus service, hence I use the DB 747 service for the city centre out of preference.

That being said, the issue is that private competition as it exists here does not allow integrated ticketing. Part of that is possibly linked to the entry of private operators before someone actually worked out how public transport in Dublin should work.

Competition is not necessary if the system is run correctly. Unfortunately what we currently have is a botched up system that doesn't really work in any meaningful way but which is designed in the best interests of the operators and not of the passengers. I used to live in Swords. Integration between local bus services and the Swords Express would have been useful.

In other words, although we have competition to some extent, it's delusional to suggest that in any meaningful manner it's serving the passenger well.

When we get every transit operator including Luas, Dart, Dublin Bus and all - i mean ALL - of the private operators - using some sort of common ticketing system then we might be in the right place. I don't recall any evidence that the PDs actually cared about how their decisions impacted on the passengers, only on how it impacted on private companies.

Competition is not the problem - (lack of) regulation is. I think the PDs would argue that sensible deregulation benefits consumers. Arguing for state protection of pet industries is a dinosaur argument.

You criticize the lack of integrated ticketing. Who's to blame? Not the private sector. CIE have done their utmost to prevent integrated ticketing and make the products baffling from a customer point of view.

Ireland is wasting hundreds of millions on CIE at a time when the country is in dire straits financially. The solution is not to keep CIE free of competition. It's to make CIE a leaner, more efficient organization, maintaining an ethos of public service but with the stated goal of operating at zero or minimal cost to the taxpayer. This is achievable through efficiences (eg. get rid of ticket sellers) and through healthy competition.

The subsidy, being wasted through CIE inefficiency, would be better put into building more luas and metro lines in Dublin! The subsidy for CIE would pay the annual PPP cost (spread over 30 years) of about three metro lines, which would ultimately be profitable and fuel economic growth. Pumping money into half-empty trains to Ballina and Rosslare to support redundant functions like ticket offices in rural train stations is a zero sum policy.

Ireland needs to capitalize on what can sustain it going forward and it needs to ruthless about what should be killed off. The government made a great first step in downsizing the civil service - now it's time to extend the hatchet to dinasaurs like CIE.

The luas is crucial to projecting an image of Ireland as a modern, western country. And it plays a role in luring top international talent to the city, as David McWilliams points out here http://www.thepost.ie/commentandanalysis/lets-grab-this-golden-chance-46188.html

dowlingm

In fairness, integrating ticketing is a messy business because many of the systems being integrated have well understood fare classes and discounts which have to be either merged or accomodated. We are currently going through that with the Greater Toronto PRESTO card development which is trying to sync fare-by-distance regional rail with a multi-mode single fare zone in Toronto and various other types in the neighbouring municipality local systems linked by the aforementioned regional rail. Monthly "passes" are replaced by a loyalty scheme which adjusts depending on usage that month. This is useful in months like December or February or when you go on vacation.

The fact is that when you integrate fares you mess with business models and there are suspicions and jockeying for position around the notion that one operators fares will be used to subvent another's whereas in a de-linked system you know how much you're making. While this may come across as obstruction the reality is that if the balance between bus/light rail/heavy rail distance/payment rates is wrongly set it may take some doing to make it right.

This has to be overridden because of the balance of convenience to riders and the ability to gather accurate statistics on usage and mode transfers to make capacity changes and route additions more rational. If necessary, operators could simply have their capacity purchased by the Transport Authority on a seat-km basis with adjustments for actual trips delivered and on-time performance - the number of people on the trip would not be a direct issue for the operator and fare enforcement on a Proof Of Purchase basis would be handled by employees of the Authority.

Zebra3

It may be a messy business, but it's one that should have been sorted out donkeys years ago. :mad:

crocro

Sponge Bob wrote: »

It ended up costing nearly 3 times as much as was initially projected. The Red and Green lines, at €675m for 16.5km , spent €41m a KM ( €66m a mile) on that network which is comparable to what the French spent later in the mid decade.

Some of your numbers are a bit out.

The Red line was 16km when built, the Green line was 9km, so a total of 25km. The amount spent was €775m. The total spent was thus €31m/km.

The docklands extension was twice this price per km. There are probably good reasons for this amongst which:

• Labour cost inflation since the original luas construction.
• Land around the point and spencer dock had to be acquired in the most expensive part of the city at the height of the property boom.
• A €5m architectural feature bridge was constructed, another bridge was widened.
• Service diversion had to be treated very seriously due to the risk of interruption to IFSC critical infrastructure.
• The cost included rolling stock.

The project was built within budget and on time. The estimated costs were independently audited prior to approval by government. Around 20m was raised from developer contributions.

The project will be immediately cost benefit positive but this is likely to be further improved when additions to the luas network are made such as a spur crossing the Beckett bridge or extensions into new residential districts in the docklands or Poolbeg.

Works like this are of course subject to competitive tender so sponge bob enterprises should bid for the next contract if it feels it could do it for less. I noticed that line B1 was being built by Portuguese workers, so it's not a case of the project contractors being limited to Irish firms.

Sponge Bob

crocro wrote: »

Some of your numbers are a bit out.

The Red line was 16km when built, the Green line was 9km, so a total of 25km. The amount spent was €775m. The total spent was thus €31m/km.

Thanks. You may have noted that I did not consider the spend to be remarkable at €40m and your numbers make it less so.

The docklands extension was twice this price per km. There are probably good reasons for this amongst which:

• Labour cost inflation since the original luas construction.
• Land around the point and spencer dock had to be acquired in the most expensive part of the city at the height of the property boom.
• A €5m architectural feature bridge was constructed, another bridge was widened.
• Service diversion had to be treated very seriously due to the risk of interruption to IFSC critical infrastructure.
• The cost included rolling stock.

I am not sure that much if any land was acquired. Can you tell me where these acquisitions were and for how much , thanks!!!!

Service diversion along a 1.5km stretch would have been a few million at most even while being done mainly at the weekend in the case of electricity and telecoms with more latitude for water and sewers.

The project was built within budget and on time. The estimated costs were independently audited prior to approval by government. Around 20m was raised from developer contributions.

Ah yes, it was built inside the estimated cost of €99.5m ( page 10) and on time.

However there was a large scale fuzz factor iin that figure for the netting off of developer contributions against the €99.5m.

The promised €20m contribution from Spencer Dock was converted form a capitalisable €20m to an Easement ...and we do not know how the RPA accounted for an easement rather than a TRANSFER of lands or a CPO if indeed one took place. An Easement is a Wayleave for a specific purpose.

http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/7839-0.pdf ( page 23)

These companies are not consenting to any transfer of their lands to the RPA because they contend that such a transfer would breach its Planning Permission which requires that a reservation be given to the RPA in respect of the LUAS, and they submit that a CPO is unnecessary because of an Easement Agreement entered by them with the RPA.

Is the €90m figure net of developers contributions ( and land) or is it gross ??? We have not been told.

Treasury holdings first 'donated' very large amounts of the land used, 1/3 at least and then 'undonated' these lands. The project runs mainly on the street but _some_ land was also acquired albeit not very much.

The entire project only has a footprint of less than 2 hectares mainly on the street.

Nor do we 'know' what happened with CIE lands.

The project will be immediately cost benefit positive but this is likely to be further improved when additions to the luas network are made such as a spur crossing the Beckett bridge or extensions into new residential districts in the docklands or Poolbeg.

From my memory of the works in upper mayor street nothing whatsoever was done to make it 'easy' to 'T' off the line towards the Beckett Bridge and it would be a tight curve there. No doubt the Spencer Dock lads will be along with a land donation

Works like this are of course subject to competitive tender so sponge bob enterprises should bid for the next contract if it feels it could do it for less.

I hope there isn't another contract after that farce

Ciaranpm

Then they sneak in a fare increase last wednesday without telling anyone!!!

Guy:Incognito

Ciaranpm wrote: »

Then they sneak in a fare increase last wednesday without telling anyone!!!

A blanket one? I just checked the route I've been using for the last 3 months on their fare calculator and it's giving me the same fare I was paying.

dereko1969

is it not just a different fare for the docklands extension? not a price increase as the route wasn't there before.

AlekSmart

Normal Cash Return is €3.30....Abbey Street to Point.

Smart Card makes it €2.90.

Still quite a stiff tarriff ?

Ciaranpm

This happened on budget day very sly sneaked it in under the radar of the Budget Coverage

dereko1969

It's a new additional zone why wouldn't they charge extra for it?

D'Peoples Voice

Actually if we look at the cost of benchmarking per year

An initial assessment suggests that full implementation of the recommendations in the report would give rise to a full year cost of over EUR 1 billion in current terms

source

then EUR 96 million for a project of this nature seems good value:D

Ciaranpm

dereko1969 wrote: »

It's a new additional zone why wouldn't they charge extra for it?

Fares of Gone up thats my issue and how quiet it was delivered almost stealth like. I use the Green line not the Red Why do I have to pay for an extra zone on the Red???????

aliveandkicking

Ciaranpm wrote: »

Fares of Gone up thats my issue and how quiet it was delivered almost stealth like. I use the Green line not the Red Why do I have to pay for an extra zone on the Red???????

Green Line tickets haven't gone up. They are still the same as they were. The only tickets that have gone up are the All Zones tickets on the red line (because theres now an extra zone), the Flexi Tickets for use on both lines and the Combi Tickets valid on both lines and Dublin Bus. If you only use the Green Line then your ticket prices haven't gone up. Red Line line pasengers also don't have to pay anything extra unless they want to travel on the extension from Connolly. They just buy a 4 zone ticket instead of the new 5 zone one.

markpb

Ciaranpm wrote: »

Fares of Gone up thats my issue and how quiet it was delivered almost stealth like. I use the Green line not the Red Why do I have to pay for an extra zone on the Red???????

If you buy monthly or annual tickets, you can select between the red and green line and not pay a premium for extensions to the other line.

I agree it was a little sneaky not to mention the price increase when the line opened, it didn't occur to me that they would rise. I guess we can expect another next year when the green line extension to Cherrywood opens.