Ecomonist gives opinions on Metro

[Mark Hennessy]

Good to see that he isn't rail-bashing and he does have an appreciation of the Interconnector.
Alas, the RPA's metro is going ahead first , so at least if we are building it, lets build it properly.

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

The decision to invest in metro "will involve substantially higher costs than equivalent Luas schemes" - Prof Austin Smyth

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

[TomB]

His analysis, prepared for the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport

Anyone have further information on these guys?

should be planned together with a clear strategy for interchange

he suggested that Dublin should develop an integrated suburban rail network similar to Schnellbahn (S-bahn) in German cities like Berlin and Munich

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,

I love it when experts start quoting P11 policy almost verbatim...

[Mark Gleeson]

So far we got

Prof James Wickham, Frank McDonald and Prof Austin Smyth all saying the same thing, if IE wasn't gagged they would be out as well, everyone in the know knows that politics are running the show not the needs of people

I'd disagree on the business case there is a serious and sustainable case for Swords Dublin, the numbers proved that. What isn't mentioned or understood by Prof Austin Smyth is that the metro is a PPP so the price is fixed at contract and the risk is private sector and no money changes hands till after it opens, this does inflate costs in real terms by 2-2.5 against cash

The case for Ballymun Tallaght now that needs looking at

[comcor]

More from the same guy. Although he seems to have trouble dividing 255 by 90...

Speed the key to future of railways
Frank McDonald


The construction of a full motorway between Dublin and Cork could "cancel out" improvements in rail services on the route unless the average speed of trains is increased to 120kph (75mph), according to Prof Austin Smyth's analysis.

Noting that the two cities are 255km apart and the motorway will cut driving time by almost 40 minutes, his report said: "The fundamental concern is that rail journey time stands at around 2.5 hours and that little reduction in this time is planned."


Assuming an average speed of 90kph, driving time between Dublin and Cork would be reduced to two hours and nine minutes. This would encourage more car trips, some of which would switch from rail, and could reduce train use by about 12 per cent.

Road/rail competition "is critical to Iarnród Éireann's commercial position", but Prof Smyth said this "does not seem to have been considered in Transport 21" - even though encouraging rail use is consistent with environmental sustainability.

"Inter-city rail also has significant potential in helping to meet spatial development needs. Once again, however, under envisaged rail journey times, the extent of its contribution under this heading will be reduced significantly by the large road programme." Because of its implications for rail serving the same corridors, he warned that developing a high-quality road network "will significantly increase car travel and its market share with all of the attendant implications for greenhouse gas emissions".

Although the proposed upgrading of the N8 under the National Development Plan was not subject to cost-benefit appraisal, targets were set for achieving "level of service" and average speeds on the road network - but it was not done for the railways.

This was because Transport 21 did not consider road and rail schemes in an integrated fashion. As a result, "inter-city rail's commercial future could be undermined by road investment, just when Ireland needs a secure rail network to promote sustainability in transport".

His analysis noted that typical rail journey times of two hours 45 minutes on the Dublin-Cork route represents an average speed of 91kph - compared to typical inter-city rail speeds of up to 139kph on mainline services in Britain and 220kph in France.

Despite an increase in frequency to one train per hour in each direction, he said "the real opportunity for rail lies with higher speed [ and] there is a fundamental need for faster journey times on this inter-city route if rail market share is to be increased".

"If average speed on the Dublin-Cork line could be raised to 120kph, which is still below inter-city speeds in Britain, the journey time could be cut to two hours and five minutes. This does not feel like an ambitious target and should not need new trains," he said.

According to his calculations, the combination of higher frequency and faster operation could boost patronage by 25-30 per cent. He also concludes that more people would make use of other long-distance rail services from Dublin if trains ran faster.

Prof Smyth's report, Transporting Ireland, is to be officially launched at a Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport conference on Transport 21 in Dublin on October 18th.

[Derek Wheeler]

The above is more of what P11 have been discussing. Either we're good or being ripped off. Or maybe we just provoke thought.

Mark,

Your "doubt" re Metro West is interesting and spurs me on to discuss things against a bigger backdrop.

The biggest road traffic problem in the country is the M50. Its a road that runs North-South-North. Its at its worst at peak times. Higher volumes of traffic are noticeable making the Journey north in evening peak. Presumably, from my observation, this is because there is more employment potential on the southside of the city. A similar thing happens in the mornings in the city centre. Amiens street in bound is heavy,Pearse street is reletively light. In the evenings, Amiens street inbound is reletively light, while Pearse street is a joke. So there appears to be a definate trend, that hasn't been studied. I note that the DTO are about to carry out a study that will attempt to ascertain the direction of car journies, at peak times, in the Dublin area. It a great idea, but a bit late when you consider that T21 is meant to be the blueprint. (and its more or less a scaled down version of PFC) The DTO results could and I think they will, paint a different picture, if they examine this north-south trend.(I still think they left it a bit late) Dublin City Council have obviously identified it, as they provide many more north-south-north options for public transport in terms of bus lanes, Bus/cycle only turns,etc. Thereby limiting cars to Butt bridge and eastlink as liffey crossing points. (Bring on Macken street)

Back to Metro west. It has potential to alleviate the traffic congestion, caused by the commuting patterns of those moving between various areas in west Dublin. It also appears to provide decent integration with heavy rail and Luas in Tallaght. But, where it falls down, is the complete lack of any kind of demand study that would demonstrate a contribution to relieving traffic congestion in the areas it serves and ultimately along its entire alignment and beyond. Will it help alleviate traffic on the M50? Looking at T21 in the same way, we can apply the same thinking to Metro North. It may well have the population figures and an airport along its route, but that does not mean that it will make any worthwhile contribution to the road traffic problem. Why? Because we still don't actually know where all the cars are coming from or going to. It also applies to all the new proposed Luas lines. In fact we can hold up the existing Luas lines as an example of what Im talking about. The Government and RPA can rightly claim they are successful in terms of usership figures. But what contribution have they made to relieving traffic congestion? Isn't that one of the main reasons for T21? Isn't that what our Government have been trumpeting? "Providing an alternative to the car?" There is actually evidence to suggest that the Luas red line has contributed to traffic congestion in some areas.

The investment in Irish Rail infrastructure can be justified, without question, because it already has a proven demand and is intended to keep pace with demand. With the exception of Midleton and Dunboyne/Pace and apparently Navan and the WRC, the majority of the investment is going into making the existing network more capable of providing a good service to new and existing users in the Dublin area. Thats not visionary or bias, its just common sense. But, the ultimate "link" (in Dublin) is being left until last, thereby negating its chances of actual realization. How serious are our Government about building it? (the interconnector)

The reopenings of Midleton and Dunboyne/Pace are based on planning and the zoning of land. Well at least Midleton was. (CASP) It may make a contribution to alleviating congestion on the N25 approach to Cork. It was well thought out.

Pace is a little more questionable, when one considers that one of the proviso's of granting planning permission for Hansfield, was the provision of a "new" terminal station in the city. Hey presto! Spencer Dock. Navan, had nothing to do with it and is in the same boat as the interconnector.(bottom of the list) Its anyones guess. However, it is fair to say that even if the entire route to Navan was reopened, without detailed analysis of "journies", its justification is open to question.

Overall, new "lines", be they metro, luas or heavy rail have not been studied in line with any real analysis of car journies or actual, demand that will see a shift from the car to rail. Some would say that this renders T21, the greatest waste of money in the history of this state.

This long post can't and doesn't present all the evidence, but it might be a good start to a discussion or study, that may highlight this country's continued poor standard of public transport planning. Ultimately, its being decided by politicians and thats only where the problem begins. Dublin projects may have the population figures to back them up and thats good from a potential user perspective. But until we unlock some kind of idea of where people travel from and too, then I doubt we'll achieve any realistic shift to public transport. As for the WRC, it has neither the population figures or the car journey analysis data. The woe continues.

[philip]

Originally Posted by Derek Wheeler

The above is more of what P11 have been discussing. Either we're good or being ripped off. Or maybe we just provoke thought.

Mark,

Your "doubt" re Metro West is interesting and spurs me on to discuss things against a bigger backdrop.

The biggest road traffic problem in the country is the M50. Its a road that runs North-South-North. Its at its worst at peak times. Higher volumes of traffic are noticeable making the Journey north in evening peak. Presumably, from my observation, this is because there is more employment potential on the southside of the city. A similar thing happens in the mornings in the city centre. Amiens street in bound is heavy,Pearse street is reletively light. In the evenings, Amiens street inbound is reletively light, while Pearse street is a joke. So there appears to be a definate trend, that hasn't been studied. I note that the DTO are about to carry out a study that will attempt to ascertain the direction of car journies, at peak times, in the Dublin area. It a great idea, but a bit late when you consider that T21 is meant to be the blueprint. (and its more or less a scaled down version of PFC) The DTO results could and I think they will, paint a different picture, if they examine this north-south trend.(I still think they left it a bit late) Dublin City Council have obviously identified it, as they provide many more north-south-north options for public transport in terms of bus lanes, Bus/cycle only turns,etc. Thereby limiting cars to Butt bridge and eastlink as liffey crossing points. (Bring on Macken street)

Back to Metro west. It has potential to alleviate the traffic congestion, caused by the commuting patterns of those moving between various areas in west Dublin. It also appears to provide decent integration with heavy rail and Luas in Tallaght. But, where it falls down, is the complete lack of any kind of demand study that would demonstrate a contribution to relieving traffic congestion in the areas it serves and ultimately along its entire alignment and beyond. Will it help alleviate traffic on the M50? Looking at T21 in the same way, we can apply the same thinking to Metro North. It may well have the population figures and an airport along its route, but that does not mean that it will make any worthwhile contribution to the road traffic problem. Why? Because we still don't actually know where all the cars are coming from or going to. It also applies to all the new proposed Luas lines. In fact we can hold up the existing Luas lines as an example of what Im talking about. The Government and RPA can rightly claim they are successful in terms of usership figures. But what contribution have they made to relieving traffic congestion? Isn't that one of the main reasons for T21? Isn't that what our Government have been trumpeting? "Providing an alternative to the car?" There is actually evidence to suggest that the Luas red line has contributed to traffic congestion in some areas.

The investment in Irish Rail infrastructure can be justified, without question, because it already has a proven demand and is intended to keep pace with demand. With the exception of Midleton and Dunboyne/Pace and apparently Navan and the WRC, the majority of the investment is going into making the existing network more capable of providing a good service to new and existing users in the Dublin area. Thats not visionary or bias, its just common sense. But, the ultimate "link" (in Dublin) is being left until last, thereby negating its chances of actual realization. How serious are our Government about building it? (the interconnector)

The reopenings of Midleton and Dunboyne/Pace are based on planning and the zoning of land. Well at least Midleton was. (CASP) It may make a contribution to alleviating congestion on the N25 approach to Cork. It was well thought out.

Pace is a little more questionable, when one considers that one of the proviso's of granting planning permission for Hansfield, was the provision of a "new" terminal station in the city. Hey presto! Spencer Dock. Navan, had nothing to do with it and is in the same boat as the interconnector.(bottom of the list) Its anyones guess. However, it is fair to say that even if the entire route to Navan was reopened, without detailed analysis of "journies", its justification is open to question.

Overall, new "lines", be they metro, luas or heavy rail have not been studied in line with any real analysis of car journies or actual, demand that will see a shift from the car to rail. Some would say that this renders T21, the greatest waste of money in the history of this state.

This long post can't and doesn't present all the evidence, but it might be a good start to a discussion or study, that may highlight this country's continued poor standard of public transport planning. Ultimately, its being decided by politicians and thats only where the problem begins. Dublin projects may have the population figures to back them up and thats good from a potential user perspective. But until we unlock some kind of idea of where people travel from and too, then I doubt we'll achieve any realistic shift to public transport. As for the WRC, it has neither the population figures or the car journey analysis data. The woe continues.

I don't think the main aim of quality PT is to alleviate congestion at all. As long as a quality alternative exists for citizens, then you can let the morons who continue to stubbornly hold on to car commuting go right on ahead and sit in gridlock, or alternatively deploy the stick (the quality PT being the carrot) and introduce congestion charging at that point. Many cities with excellent PT also have cronic congestion and I wouldn't want to drive in them any faster than I like driving in Dublin.

As for the orbital metro, well, being honest it's a Luas right, so we'll have two 'expensive' structures-the Liffey Crossing and the tunel (unlikely)/elevated stretch near Clondalkin. The rest of the alignment is pretty much at grade and is reserved. It also passes through undeveloped land in Abbotstown and this could actually draw funding in from developers. I would go so far as to say it will be one of the easier projects to complete. Luas was delayed in the city centre because of all the utility diversions (old water mains etc. etc.) which by and large, don't exist out here.

[Derek Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Thomas Bibby

Anyone have further information on these guys?

Off course I do. I know everyone in this game.

http://www.cilt.ie

Am I a member? Am I contemplating membership? Would they let me in? Will Mark G try to get there ahead of me? Questions, Questions, so many Questions.

Enjoy the read Thomas.

[Mark Hennessy]

http://www.cilt.ie/article_72.shtml

Might be worth a wander along if the registration isnt too much.

[Mark Gleeson]

Is there a student rate?? off the UCD tomorrow to a workshop which be free owing to student status, its only a half day gig so I think even full price would be reasonable, I'll be living all of 300m away......

[Mark Hennessy]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

Is there a student rate?? off the UCD tomorrow to a workshop which be free owing to student status, its only a half day gig so I think even full price would be reasonable, I'll be living all of 300m away......

I'll give them a shout tomorrow and find out the details, I may go as a member of our Intelligent Transport Research Group for the day . I remember the transport seminar that the Turbine organised a few years cost a small fortune even at the student price.

[Mark Hennessy]

Editorial in todays Irish Times

The right route

Barely a week goes by without Minister for Transport Martin Cullen or his Minister of State Pat "The Cope" Gallagher opening a fresh stretch of motorway or inaugurating a new rail project - all under the banner of Transport 21, the Government's €34.4 billion investment programme. This frenetic activity is only natural because, as noted by the first independent analysis of the 10-year programme published yesterday in The Irish Times, politicians like to be seen opening "big ticket projects".

However, since Transport 21 was first unveiled with a fanfare last November, taxpayers have been kept in the dark about the economic case for every element of it - not least the justification for two metro lines. According to Mr Cullen, the figures will be released "on a project-by-project basis. Once the tender is chosen and the price is the price, then it's a matter of being open".

Prof Austin Smyth, who compiled the analysis, is quite right when he says that in most other countries when such programmes are announced it is possible to form an opinion about the efficacy of the expenditure, based on "accurate statements of costs and full quantification of benefits". No such supporting documentation was presented by the Government; indeed, as Irish Times political correspondent Mark Hennessy wrote at the time: "Never in the history of public transport has so much been promised by so many ministers backed up by so little paperwork". That is why this newspaper has appealed, in the public interest, to Information Commissioner Emily O'Reilly against the Department of Transport's refusal to respond to legitimate queries about various elements of Transport 21, notably the justification for choosing metro as a solution.

As Prof Smyth has said, even the Metro North line on its own will cost "billions", and it is entirely unclear why the Government decided to run with it when Iarnród Éireann had already put forward a much more cost-effective proposal to serve Dublin airport with a rail spur from the Belfast line. Yet without the public being told anything at all about the economic case for Metro North, the Railway Procurement Agency is moving to a final decision on its "preferred option" for the alignment. What other EU member state would proceed in such a fashion with a major public project of this magnitude? The answer is none. The Government's approach smacks of the "command and control" systems that once operated in the Soviet Union and its satellites. It is simply unacceptable that those who will foot the bill are not being told how it has been counted.

© The Irish Times