Transport Package

PandaMania · 23-10-2005 07:37PM #1

It is proabably the worst kept secret going, but Bertie is about to announce the details of the 10 Year Transport Plan. I got some info from a VERY reliable source (always wanted to say this) who has been bang on in the past and I have no doubt to doubt them now. It all sounds a bit too good to be true, but I think we can be cautiously optimistic.

Anyways here it is.

IN:

Interconnector (Spencer Dock station to be fast tracked)
Swords Metro (via Broadstone)
Cherrywood and Point Luas
Eastern ByPass
New Station at Oranmore
Ennis to Atheny
100 New Buses for BAC (depending on deregulation agreements)
10M sections for Red Line Trams
A new rural bus investment programme

OUT:

DART Airport Link
Luas to Ballymun
WRC north of Athenry.

So something for everybody really. I guess Metrobest and P11 can join hands now and sing "We are the World". Santa Bertie is making us all happy it would seem.

Maskhadov · 23-10-2005 07:41PM

pretty good as damien duff would say. when does your mate think an announcement will be made ?

PandaMania · 23-10-2005 07:43PM

Oh sorry, annouoncement planned for early Novmeber. Big media gig being planned.

cyclopath2001 · 23-10-2005 08:44PM

PandaMania wrote:

So something for everybody really.

But nothing for cyclists stuck with Dublin's botched 'strategic cycle network'.

murphaph · 23-10-2005 08:46PM

Eastern bypass eh. I can think of better things to spend a couple of billion euro on right now.

Zaph0d · 23-10-2005 09:22PM

Has anyone got a transcript of Bertie's speech today? I heard some of it on the radio and he said something like:
"The new transport 10 year plan contains projects budgeted at €25bn and will be announced in the coming weeks."

Obviously this has been announced many times before but this was the first time I heard €25bn mentioned, and it was Bertie speaking at the Árd Fheis which makes it more official.

The question is: which projects will be prioritised? 10 years is a long time and something's sure to slide. All the above projects look good apart from the Eastern ByPass which will compete with public transport and encourage higher car volumes on the suburban routes feeding the m50 ring. I guess one reason to build the eastern bypass is to get southbound trucks out of the port without going north to the airport first - but that makes you wonder whether two twin-bore motorway tunnels were really cheaper than moving the port out of the centre city.

What about connecting the Luas lines and converting Line A to metro?

strassenwolf · 23-10-2005 10:07PM

PandaMania wrote:

Oh sorry, annouoncement planned for early Novmeber. Big media gig being planned.

So the announcement of the plan in early November. Does your mole have any word about the approximate date, to the nearest year, for the media gigs associated with the actual sod-turning on the metro or interconnector?

Stimpyone · 23-10-2005 10:39PM

Feck all for the North East of Dublin in the the way of public transport, figures. New Metro to the Airport, Dart hugging the coast nothing in-between except an inept bus service that insists on visiting every back breaking speed bump infested estate on the way to and from town.

I suppose we have the further development of Clare Hall, City Junction/Northern Cross, Balgriffen and Donameade to look forward to which will bring ever increasing traffic onto the Malahide road and the N32 which is already a frickin nightmare.:mad:

This entire area has been given the go ahead for development and has increased in size expediently in the last 10 years with feck all inprovement in public transport ( oh hold on ... we got a bus shelter on Blunden drive now ).

gjim · 24-10-2005 12:26AM

If that's true then I'll be disappointed. I really do not see what the eastern bypass will do for the country. Let the trucks travel outside of rush hour and they can use the expanded M50 to get to any route out of Dublin quickly. Spending a couple of billion running a motorway under Sandymount Strand looks like a massive mis-allocation of resources given the gaps in the inter-city motorway network.

No DART link to the airport and no Luas extension north would be bad news. The Luas network needs to expand to get value from the existing investment and Dublin airport needs integration with the heavy rail network.

I have to say that the metro bit of your information makes me a bit sceptical about your source. A metro line using Broadstone would be completely out of the blue given that all the metro proposals I've heard of have involved the line running east of Broadstone. Where would it go? Just stop in Broadstone?

weehamster · 24-10-2005 12:53AM

Well if your sources are correct and Broadstone will be used then the metro appears to be the DTO metro which P11 were in favour of and not the white elephant of the RPA metro which metrobest was plugging so famously ever since he joined boards.ie.

DTO metro includes Finglas and was designed to split into 2 directions near the M50/N2 Jtn, 1st heading to Swords via Airport and the 2nd heading to Blachardstown, Liffey Vally, Castleknock, Tallaght, then heading to Kimmage, Harolds X and completing the loop at Stephens Grn. The 1st Route would be done first (under this plan) and the 2nd sometime is the distant future. However I'll wait till the announcement B4 jumping with joy. Fingers crossed the Gov hasn’t fooked this up by letting the RPA get their way.

Its is sad the Drumdrum to Ballymun Luas line is but on the back burner as this was the better option for central North Dublin corridor than the RPA metro which is a 'Jim Will Fix It' alternative to the DTO metro. This Luas line was suppose to split into to at Whitehall heading to Howth Jtn. Again this will be done in the distant future.

As for the Interconnector, well really no surprises there. This wasn’t an option as it had to be built despite what Metrobest or Olivia 'I don’t even know the basic facts of the project' Mitchell think.

The Luas extension, again no surprises. The Point extension was supposed to start construction this year and the Cherrywood extension was co funded by local developers to keep the cost down. However the Green line now can’t be upgraded to a metro line in the distant future, which the DTO wanted. You can’t have a metro going through the streets. Your source forgot to mention the Luas Red and Green line link up too.

As for the 10m add-ons for the trams and the lengthening of the current platforms to 50m, well that was simply a fook up by the RPA. This was pointed out to them well before the Red line was finished, but they choose to ignore it. I would count this as not an extension but as finishing off the original construction, making the total cost hitting €750m to €800m.

Also, as already pointed out by Stimpyone, the Airport DART is desperately needed to handle the extra 20,000 new home currently being build by various developers in North Dublin. Some can use the new Grange Station, but it can’t handle them all. The Malahide Rd is going to be permanently gridlocked in the foreseeable future.

However I’m annoyed about the Eastern Bypass. Still no one has explained why we need it. Dont forget the M50 will be a 3 line motorway with improved Jtns at the M1, N2, N3, N4, N7. The Dublin port tunnel will be in full swing too. Also don’t forget the DART extension to Drogheda, Dunboyne, Maynooth and Kildare, which should mean that commuter traffic levels should drop, freeing up the M50. That is a few billion waited which can go to the Luas, DART and Metro lines mentioned above as well as the Lucan to Spencer Dock Luas Line and a possible Luas system for Cork (yes they have bad gridlock too).

As for the rest, well they were a no brainer really.

I'll wait in hope. Thats all we can do.:rolleyes:

Maskhadov · 24-10-2005 08:37AM

i agree with everyone is saying about the eastern bypass. it all seems a bit of a waste to me. Personally I would favour the PD proposal to relocate dublin port out of dublin and develop the whole site for offices apartments and stuff like that.

What about the outer bypass that is going to take traffic off the M50.

BrianD · 24-10-2005 09:27AM

Weehamster wrote:

However the Green line now can’t be upgraded to a metro line in the distant future, which the DTO wanted.

In fairness, this was never on the agenda and the tram to metro line conversion is a urban myth that has been circulating around since the project began.

Weehamster wrote:

As for the 10m add-ons for the trams and the lengthening of the current platforms to 50m, well that was simply a fook up by the RPA.

The trams on the Red line are all 30m. The new sections bring them up to the same capacity as the Green line trams (40m). The platforms are already 40m on the red line so no rebuilding required.

Will the airport via Broadstone line be integrated into the interconnector? If this is the case then it is a DART to the airport. Lets hope that there is also a budget for marketing public transport. The entire upgraded transport system in Dublin (rail, bus and tram) needs to be put under the DART brand and sold hard to consumers.

As for the Eastern Bypass this is a project that needs to be killed off asap.

loyatemu · 24-10-2005 11:15AM

BrianD wrote:

In fairness, this was never on the agenda and the tram to metro line conversion is a urban myth that has been circulating around since the project began.

not an urban myth - the green line was built to slightly different spec in order to allow upgrade to metro at a later date. obviously this was never actually going to happen but the two tracks on the green line were built slightly further apart to accomodate it.

bk · 24-10-2005 11:26AM

BrianD wrote:

In fairness, this was never on the agenda and the tram to metro line conversion is a urban myth that has been circulating around since the project began.

No, it isnt a myth, it was actually part of the DTO plan for 2000 - 2016, yuo can see it here:
<PDF Warning!!> http://www.dto.ie/platform1.pdf <PDF Warning!!>

BrianD wrote:

Will the airport via Broadstone line be integrated into the interconnector? If this is the case then it is a DART to the airport. Lets hope that there is also a budget for marketing public transport. The entire upgraded transport system in Dublin (rail, bus and tram) needs to be put under the DART brand and sold hard to consumers.

Yes, I was wondering what would the difference between a Metro and a Dart be?
Wouldn't they be both rail and use electricity?

I mean I was in Boston a few weeks ago and their T system is simply fabulous. The T Trains seem to be the same as Darts, train's with overhead electricity and run overground in the suburbs, yet they run underground in the city like the Metro and seem plenty fast.

Could someone please explain the pro's and con's of having a separate System or integrated Dart systems (Speed, frequency, etc.) I'm genuinely interested. Thanks.

PandaMania · 24-10-2005 11:36AM

The metro is being routed through Broadstone not terminating there. The Eastern ByPass is to be a commuter motorway (yes, I know shocking, but this Ireland what you expect) with the eventual aim to build huge carparks underground in the city centre. (similar to the ones in Paris around La Defense)

I have heard nothing about the Luas link up and the Green Line is not being converted to metro AFAIK.

There is no details on timelines, engineering and prioirty, but as I heard about the Eastern ByPass quiet a bit, a lot actually, which worries me. This underground car park system was how I got wind about the total package. Apparently the Government and bankers and money men in the Docklands are all utterly smitten with the idea.

We'll have to wait until the final announcment, but the fact that no public transport representative group was invited to Clontarf Castle by Ivor Calley last week to discuss the plan, while the likes of Cement Roadstone was a guest of honour is a big red flag.

Victor · 24-10-2005 11:42AM

bk wrote:

Yes, I was wondering what would the difference between a Metro and a Dart be?

Very little. In theory the Metro would have no level crossings and use smaller more frequent trains.

MarkoP11 · 24-10-2005 12:34PM

If you look at a map the route the RPA proposed went almost due north from O'Connell Street it gets damn close to Broadstone. The talk in recent weeks was for a compromised solution which involved a tunnel starting somewhere between Glasnevin Junction and Liffey Junction this connected to the existing rail network (there are 4 tracks from Glasnevin into Connolly and Spencer Dock) it would be fully segregated from all other services, however it would be built to Iarnrod Eireann spec not mickey mouse RPA spec, Broadstone is not an ideal location Glasnevin Junction offers much much better integration with rail, of course the 1975 draft alignment by CIE was under Glasnevin Junction

What is interesting is an order not to touch either of the Maynooth line approaches to the Airport till post 10 year plan announcement, those being the N2 metro just north of Liffey Junction and the Iarnrod Eireann Pelletstown route

In a strange show of sense the proposed metro was/is to use 1500V DC overhead as its power supply system which is the same as the DART (and all planned expansion) uses

However the geniuses in the RPA decided to use the European 1435mm track gauge instead of the Irish 1602mm standard (which is enshrined in Irish Law) as to make both systems completely incompatible with each other. The conspiracy theorists put this down to the RPA wanting to ensure Iarnrod Eireann could never connect their network up.

One thing to note is no route is definitive until after a public inquiry and the minister signs off.

The eastern bypass is a crazy piece of infrastructure its nuts, remember the southern portal is in Booterstown and that the northern portal is well the Port Tunnel so the M50 M1 junction is going to get worse not better

And yes it stinks the CRH are in on this but this is Ireland business interests first joe public is last

BrianD · 24-10-2005 01:59PM

loyatemu wrote:

not an urban myth - the green line was built to slightly different spec in order to allow upgrade to metro at a later date. obviously this was never actually going to happen but the two tracks on the green line were built slightly further apart to accomodate it.

This is true and incorporated into the design but once the project was commenced there was very little practical chance of the line being upgraded but the "myth" of a potential future upgrade still persists.

In regard to the gauge, I thought that this was used as all light rail systems use this and as this was always going to be a segrated system it made no odds and sound economic sense to use the euro guage.

Yes, I was wondering what would the difference between a Metro and a Dart be?

None whatsoever as Victor points out. Some metros are "purer" than others and that's about it. Depends when they were built or how they evolve. Most people think of a metro in terms of a very modern underground line with no other traffic on it. In most cities there is usually a compromise on some or all metro lines.

I too was in Boston recently where all transport comes under the 'T' brand. Their 'metro' consists of trams, traditional metro trains and the new silver line which is a very odd one. The service is operated by hydrid electric-diesel buses that run on what looks like a metro line (without tracks) and then when it comes above ground the diesel engine fires up and the bus heads down the expressway to the airport. Bus Rapid Transit its called.

http://www.allaboutsilverline.com
Not everybody likes the idea though - http://www.badtransit.com/TheT/SilverLine/tour_update_4.htm

bk · 24-10-2005 05:15PM

BrianD wrote:

I too was in Boston recently where all transport comes under the 'T' brand. Their 'metro' consists of trams, traditional metro trains and the new silver line which is a very odd one. The service is operated by hydrid electric-diesel buses that run on what looks like a metro line (without tracks) and then when it comes above ground the diesel engine fires up and the bus heads down the expressway to the airport. Bus Rapid Transit its called.

Yes, I was on that and I thought it was pretty cool. It is funny that people still find something to complain about in a city with one of the best public transport systems I've ever experienced. Interestingly Boston has roughly the same population as Dublin.

As for using different trains for Metro and DART, if they can do the same thing (in terms of speed etc.) then isn't it silly buying different trains, wouldn't you get greater economy of scale when buying trains if you bought the same for both lines and wouldn't it also make it easier to manage changes in demand by moving trains between the two systems. Also in future the same could be more closely integrated, it seems silly and wasteful to have four different train types: LUAS, Metro, Dart, Arror/Intercity, when at least two of them are so close. To my inexperienced eye it seems like an unnecessary patchwork of different systems hubbled together.

Victor · 24-10-2005 06:03PM

bk wrote:

To my inexperienced eye it seems like an unnecessary patchwork of different systems hubbled together.

some people prefer to be a big fish in a small pond than share a larger pond with larger fish.

spacetweek · 26-10-2005 11:29PM

PandaMania wrote:

Interconnector (Spencer Dock station to be fast tracked)
Swords Metro (via Broadstone)
Cherrywood and Point Luas
Eastern ByPass
New Station at Oranmore
Ennis to Atheny
100 New Buses for BAC (depending on deregulation agreements)
10M sections for Red Line Trams
A new rural bus investment programme

OUT:

DART Airport Link
Luas to Ballymun
WRC north of Athenry.

Good overall, but some big disappointments.

No Luas to Ballymun? Considering the redev of Ballyer is one of the Gov's flagships projects, and considering that failure to develop proper public transport to the area was one of the reasons for its decline in the first place, this seems unbelievable. The Northside it seems will still remain a blackspot for transport.

Oh and what happened to the Citywest Luas?

No DART to airport. This is particularly disappointing. With this we could have had (a) a link to the airport, (b) integration of the Swords metro and future LUAS lines in the area with heavy rail and (c) public transport for the busy Northern Fringe N32 area. Also it could have been open much faster than the Metro line.

I really think they could have left the Eastern Bypass for another 10 years. After spending so much on the PT it should be put to work doing its job. Sure its inconvenient for traffic heading south from the docks but so what. We're gonna end up having spent around 1.5 billion on roads just to serve the docklands, essentially, since the toll will be so high that it won't really be a viable commuter route for anyone except politicians and Michael O'Leary.

Thank God there's no mention of the Outer Orbital though. That's definitely one for 2020 at the earliest.

Zaph0d · 26-10-2005 11:41PM

Is the Navan line ruled out?

Maskhadov · 27-10-2005 08:22AM

It looks like whats posted on this thread is pretty accurate

Cullen to present 10-year transport plan
Tim O'Brien

The Government's long-awaited 10-year strategic transport plan, which will include extending the Luas system, reopening the western railway corridor in phases and a major rail package for the greater Dublin area, is to be brought to Cabinet for approval next Tuesday.

Minister for Transport Martin Cullen and transport officials yesterday briefed some Cabinet Ministers, sources said.

Minister for Finance Brian Cowen cleared the plan and it has the support in principle of Taoiseach Bertie Ahern.

The plan also includes the State's commitment of almost €10 billion to finish the inter-urban motorway programme in the next five years, while rail and public transport elements are likely to bring the total cost closer to €20 billion.

The transport plan is expected to be a major plank in the Government's manifesto for the next general election, due in 2007.

The Taoiseach, at an inspection trip to Dublin Port Tunnel recently, said the 10-year plan would run from 2007.

It envisages linking up the Luas lines in the centre of Dublin with extensions to Swords, the docklands and Cherrywood.

Further extensions to Citywest and Harold's Cross are understood to be less secure.

The Dublin airport metro is also included as are Iarnród Éireann's plans for a station at Spencer Dock, a rail interconnector linking Connolly and Heuston stations via Pearse Street, and the reopening of the Navan railway line as far as Dunboyne, Co Meath.

Further extensions of this route towards the end of the 10- year plan have not been completely ruled out.

Funding for the quadrupling of the Kildare route lines as far as Hazlehatch is also included.

In Cork the plan includes finance for the expansion of commuter services on the Mallow line and the reopening of commuter services on the Midleton line.

In the west the plan provides for the reopening of commuter services between Ennis and Galway, with a phased addition to Claremorris, Co Mayo, and possibly at a later date from Claremorris to Sligo.

In terms of the National Roads Programme, the 10-year strategic transport plan provides for the completion of the inter-urban motorway programme as well as improvements to inter-regional roads, particularly the western road corridor.

Some provision for the outer orbital motorway route around Dublin is included, although this will be built, probably as a public private partnership, in phases and would not be completed in 10 years.

It runs from Drogheda, through Navan, Trim and Kilcock to Naas but not as far as the east coast because of the position of the Wicklow mountains.

While Mr Cullen has repeatedly said there was no rift with the Department of Finance over the plan, finance officials have spent the last year "testing" the projected figures.
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2005/1027/535664160HM10TRANSPORT.html

Aim2Please · 27-10-2005 01:02PM

Pity that the Shannon airport - Limerick rail link is not mentioned. Even though a report earlier this year said that it would be economically viable. A great opportunity missed....

JackieChan · 27-10-2005 03:43PM

Is the Navan line ruled out?
Not at all, there is a 4-5 mile spur off the Maynooth line in the pipeline. All Navan people will have to do is drive the 25 miles to the station.
Oops, I forgot to mention that they'll have to pay a toll on the M3 and parking fee on top of the petrol to get to the station and monthly/annual ticket to Dublin!!!Sounds great

Maskhadov · 27-10-2005 03:47PM

Plus you forgot Jackie to pay for the cark parking

Rip off Ireland is alive and well. Pity we didnt have a government with balls and extend the railway line all the way to Navan in one go.

strassenwolf · 28-10-2005 04:26PM

Today's Independent wrote:

Metro gets green light but signals are mixed

THE proposed metro system to link Swords with Dublin city centre is a "prescription for disaster" if it is not managed properly.

A Dail committee member issued the stark warning yesterday before it was given the green light.

Citing the shambolic experience with the building of the Dublin Port Tunnel, now expected to cost close to €1 billion due to delays and cost overruns, Fine Gael Transport spokewoman Olivia Mitchell said that it was absolutely essential that the project be carefully managed from day one.

"This has the potential to be a total disaster," she told colleagues on the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport as the Railway Procurement Agency presented its report on the proposed metro.

"We must learn the lessons from the failure of the Port Tunnel. Whether it it is done through a Public Private Partnership agreement or not, there is a huge need for the ratcheting up of project management expertise right from the beginning," she said.

Issues such as correctly projecting passenger demand were crucial to prevent the project from becoming another white elephant, she said.

"It's shockingly important that project management expertise is brought in on day one," she added. Frank Allen, chief executive of the RPA, outlined its response to transport consultant Myles O'Reilly's report on the proposed system.

The 18km metro line linking Swords and Dublin airport with the Luas line at St Stephen's Green is proposed to be a key part of a 10-year public transportation infrastructure plan which the Government is expected to announce next week.

The RPA gave its blessing to much of the consultant's report, stating that a new metro system was needed and viable. "Our view is that it is prudent to test the project under conservative assumptions and if the scheme still makes economic and financial sense, then there is a robust case for proceeding," Mr Allen told the committee.

Under questioning from committee members who unanimously endorsed the need for an underground railway system, he said the project should be funded as part of a public-private partnership agreement, with operating costs paid for by the private sector and construction funded by the State.

He was adamant, however, that the project should only proceed after full public consultation with particular emphasis on the proposed route, which takes in Ballymun, Drumcondra and Whitehall before joining the Luas terminus at St Stephen's Green. The Swords-city centre route, however, would be just the first phase of the project, which would eventually be expanded to include other lines that would also link up with tramlines and railways, Mr Allen said.

"It wouldn't make sense unless it would lead on to further lines," he added.

The initial metro line would have a capacity to serve more than 20,000 passengers per hour; twice the current capacity of the Dart system, he said.

The trains would eventually be 90m long but shorter carriages would be installed initially.

The project has been estimated to cost €3.5bn.

Allison Bray

Does this actually mean anything - this committee giving the project the green light? I mean, if we're going to fork out 3.5 billion on it, I'd have thought it would have to be thrashed out in the House, even before a public inquiry.

Another thing. I had read some reports that section(s) of it will be overground. So 200 million per km seems pretty expensive per kilometre if it's not all going to be in a tunnel.

3.5 billion! Olivia Mitchell is right that the costs have to be rigorously controlled, otherwise we'll never trust ourselves to build anything again after the LUAS/port tunnel overruns

Victor · 28-10-2005 05:09PM

strassenwolf wrote:

Another thing. I had read some reports that section(s) of it will be overground. So 200 million per km seems pretty expensive per kilometre if it's not all going to be in a tunnel.

On the surface, you can be paying €1,000-4,000/m2 for land plus demolition and disturbance costs. Then add engineering costs.

Underground you might be paying €50/m2. Then add engineering costs.

Swings. Roundabouts.

strassenwolf · 28-10-2005 06:27PM

Victor wrote:

On the surface, you can be paying €1,000-4,000/m2 for land plus demolition and disturbance costs. Then add engineering costs.

Underground you might be paying €50/m2. Then add engineering costs.

Swings. Roundabouts.

Fair enough. (:o)

But just for the sake of argument, and since we don't know the actual route yet, would that mean that the costs of an open cut arrangement along the airport road would be less again? I mean, it might be theoretically feasible to do this from Drumcondra-Whitehall-Santry-Airport along the road, might it not? No land purchase required, though I grant you there'd be plenty of disruption to traffic. (Of course, you don't get to DCU or Ballymun that way and these are areas which would have a lot of demand).

Metrobest · 28-10-2005 11:16PM

Interesting this RPA press release - well worth reading for the metro doubters and RPA bashers

http://www.rpa.ie/?id=13

And the bits I found interesting...

On Glasnevin Junction:

"RPA supports the Committee’s view that the Metro should be linked to all national heavy rail lines. In relation to the Maynooth line, RPA notes the Committee’s suggestion that this connection should be at Glasnevin Junction. While this location has merit, it should be noted that it is land-locked by Prospect Cemetery, Broombridge Industrial Estate and the Royal Canal limiting passenger numbers in that area. It would also require the closure of Bus Átha Cliath and Bus Éireann bus depots at Broadstone, which could risk of delaying the project."

On the €1.2bn cost estimate quoted in the O'Reilly Consultants report:

"It is important to note that RPA has made allowances in its cost estimates for inflation and for on-going operation, maintenance and refurbishment costs.

RPA notes the Committee’s concerns regarding the possibility of a reduced service and customer quality resulting from cost reductions. The RPA Revised Proposal submitted in June 2003 was prepared in response to a request for a more affordable metro project. In presenting the revised proposal, RPA acknowledged that some of the changes could have implications for customer service. The main cost savings in RPA’s revised proposal arise from three areas:

• shorter alignment with two fewer stations
• reduced station specifications
• 24 hour tunnelling

As noted in the Consultant’s report, metro systems vary considerably in terms of specification, with corresponding variation in cost. To the extent that it becomes an objective that Dublin Metro should be delivered at the lower range of cost estimates, this will be reflected in the design."

On Cost/Benefit analysis:

"Our view is that it is prudent to test the project under conservative assumptions and if the scheme still makes economic and financial sense, then there is a robust case for proceeding. This approach is also prudent in preparing for a PPP procurement process, where bidders and investors themselves take a conservative approach in assessing costs and benefits.

The Consultant argues that RPA could have taken a more optimistic view on issues such as GNP growth, greater road traffic demand management, more extensive alterations to the bus network and other transport policy assumptions. All of these are outside the control of RPA and therefore it would not be appropriate to structure a project dependent on such changes. The assumptions in the cost benefit analysis were made in consultation with the relevant agencies and authorities (ESRI, CIE, Dublin Transportation Office etc.) and the methodology itself is based on the 1994, ‘CBA Parameter Values and Application Rules for Transport Infrastructure Projects’, by DKM Economic Consultants. Deviation from this, such as suggested by the Consultant, would not have complied with relevant Department of Finance guidelines."

Metrobest · 28-10-2005 11:21PM

On route alignment:

"We have completed a detailed alignment study which considered the merits and constraints of all feasible alignments. As well as the important matter of public transport integration highlighted by the Committee, other factors considered include construction cost and risk, projected patronage, environmental impact, impact on traffic, public transport services and business during construction, and property acquisition requirements."

On Swords:

"RPA welcomes the Committee’s support for the inclusion of Swords in the first phase of the Metro. Swords is a rapidly developing, population and employment centre and thus is a major potential patronage generator. The RPA Metro proposal and extension to Swords enjoys the very strong support of Fingal County Council, whose county town is Swords."

On Finance:

"RPA is concerned that the Consultant’s report does not address the complex issues associated with procuring and funding the Metro. The conclusion that a private sector franchise is the most effective way of delivering the Metro is not supported by any analysis in the report and indeed there is no example internationally that this is the case. Separate market consultation exercises carried out both by the then Department of Public Enterprise and later by RPA reached the conclusion that no experienced private company would be willing to assume the planning risk of a Metro. It is also clear that there is very little interest from competent bidders in assuming full demand risk in the context of an evolving regulatory and transportation environment. It is our view that a private sector franchise would only be feasible if the State guaranteed to underwrite the franchisee’s losses, which we would not recommend."

Transport Package

Comments