Dublin Airport Metro to have unconnected terminus?

Another Frank MacDonald rant against the metro. Honestly just build the frickin thing already: does Dublin aspire to be a world-class city or not?

The ‘astronomical’ cost of Dublin’s Metro North, as the Taoiseach himself once complained, should force a rethink, argues Frank McDonald , Environment Editor.

This is what Bertie Ahern told the Dáil on June 30th, 2004: “To put a metro into the city on the scale proposed . . . would take up an enormous section of the capital programme for the entire State for an inordinate number of years.”

As he said then, “the difficulty is the cost . . . has been astronomical and . . . is way out of line with what is considered reasonable for the taxpayer to bear . . . My feeling is it will be extremely difficult to undertake the entire project.”

The Taoiseach was referring to estimates by the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) that the likely price-tag for the first phase, linking Dublin airport with the city centre, would be €4.88 billion – a figure that caused consternation in Leinster House.

Three years later, the RPA is motoring ahead with a scheme that will cost even more – at least €5 billion, as revealed by The Irish Times last August. And the cost of repaying this capital investment would equate to €22 for every trip taken on the line from Swords to St Stephen’s Green.

That’s the figure cited by the Oireachtas Library and Research Service in a report on the metro project commissioned by Senator Paschal Donohoe (FG). It assumed that fares would cover the annual operating costs, leaving taxpayers to service a huge capital debt for 30 years.

So what has changed? How is a project branded by the Taoiseach as astronomically expensive in 2004 now proceeding in these more financially-straitened times? The short answer is that we don’t know, because of the blanket of secrecy surrounding Metro North’s funding.

All monetary figures in documents released to The Irish Times last July – nearly two years after they were first sought – were systematically blacked out. It was only by examining one letter closely that it was possible to discern a 2004 estimate of €4.58 billion.

Add the cost of construction inflation since then, as well as an extra station on the east side of Parnell Square plus the cost of putting the line underground in Ballymun, rather than running it along the main street, and it is clear that the estimate would now exceed €5 billion.

Even after allowing for such “value engineering” cost savings as underground stations with bare concrete walls, no escalators between street and concourse levels, and a minimal number of ticket machines – this exceeds the figure which Mr Ahern found “astronomical” in 2004.

It seems hard to credit that his change of tune could be related to the RPA’s 2005 decision to reroute the largely underground metro via Drumcondra, in the heart of his constituency; this made sense anyway because it would provide a connection with the Maynooth commuter line.

The Cabinet originally gave its approval for a much more extensive metro in January 2002. The first phase was to include a line from Dublin airport through the city centre to Bray (supplanting the Sandyford Luas then under construction), as well as a spur to serve Blanchardstown. Rather optimistically, 2007 was set as the completion date for this phase of the metro. On foot of Cabinet approval, the RPA prepared an outline business case in 2002 for what has become known as Metro North and a fuller business case for the 17km (10 miles) line in 2003. A spokesman said a more recent cost-benefit analysis of the scheme was submitted this year.

None of these documents has been published, although one can imagine that the latest one has been scrutinised in detail by the Department of Finance. In the meantime, the RPA has shortlisted a number of “qualified candidates” to build and operate the metro. “It is intended that the Railway Order application process will commence in early 2008. The pre-application consultation process with an An Bord Pleanála has commenced and the public consultation process is ongoing,” the RPA said in a statement on September 13th.

The RPA was much more forthcoming about figures in the past. It gave a full breakdown to the Oireachtas Committee on Transport in 2003 – €1.72 billion for construction, €903 million for risk provision, finance and insurance, €811 million for cost escalation and €458 million for VAT.

In addition – and this is the really interesting bit – the RPA’s then chairman, Padraic White, explained that the public-private partnership (PPP) arrangement would cost the State €676 million, plus a further €313 million in fees for the consultants who would put it together.

So it’s no wonder that major international companies such as Acciona, Alstom, Barclays Private Equity, Bombardier, Bouygues, HSBC Infrastructure Fund Management, Keolis, Macquarie Bank, Mitsui, Siemens and Veolia are all delighted to be put on the RPA’s shortlist.

Under Department of Finance rules, all public capital projects costing €30 million must be subjected to a cost-benefit analysis, which is also supposed to examine alternatives. In the case of Metro North, these would presumably include a Luas line or rail spur to Dublin airport.

Even with “value engineering”, such as the no-frills stations now proposed, the acknowledged cost-benefit ratio is weak at just 1:1.31 – nearly three times lower than the RPA’s equivalent calculation for a city centre link between the Tallaght and Sandyford Luas lines.

The business case for Metro North is also based on extraordinarily optimistic assumptions such as the projection that it would carry 34 million passengers per year – eight million more than the two Luas lines carried in 2006 – with trains running every four minutes.

As the report commissioned by Paschal Donohoe pointed out, the RPA’s assumption that 44 per cent of car users would transfer to metro in the catchment area it served also “seems particularly implausible” in the light of British figures showing much lower levels of “modal shift”.

The metro project would only make economic sense if it was extended southwards from St Stephen’s Green to Sandyford, Cherrywood and Bray. But this would involve digging another tunnel from the Green to Ranelagh, and nobody can (or will) say how much this would cost.

“How can anyone estimate the cost of a metro if a detailed design or even a geo-technical study is not completed?” one experienced transport engineer asked.

And if the cost of the project increases, the slim positive ratio would fall and could even become negative.

What’s certain is that Metro North would be by far the most expensive public project in the history of the State, costing at least six times as much as Luas or the Dublin Port Tunnel. Indeed, a much more extensive Luas network could be built for considerably less money.

The Green Party remains committed to metro, whatever the cost. And now that it’s in Government, its Ministers – John Gormley and Eamon Ryan – will presumably fight to get their way. But it will be up to Brian Cowen and his department to determine whether it goes ahead.

It would require a great deal of political courage to abandon such a “big-ticket” project. However, given the emerging budgetary position and the demise of the Celtic Tiger, it would be the prudent thing to do – and save the money for investment in projects that make sense.

London link: approval for new service

This week the British government finally gave its approval for a £16 billion (€23 billion) underground rail link across London from Paddington to Stratford, with intermediate stations at Bond Street, Tottenham Court Road, Farringdon, Liverpool Street and Whitechapel.

Crossrail, Europe’s biggest civil engineering project, will provide a Parisian-style rapid rail service carrying 200 million passengers a year. It will link all the tube lines running through central London, thereby making it much easier for public transport users to get around.

Dublin also has a “Crossrail” project – the proposed underground rail interconnector between Heuston Station and Spencer Dock. But it is way down the list of priorities in the Government’s Transport 21 programme and may not be built at all if the metro project eats up the money.The Iarnród Éireann project would perform the same role as London’s “Crossrail” by linking existing and planned commuter rail services as well as the Tallaght Luas line (at Heuston), the Sandyford Luas line (at St Stephen’s Green) and Dart (at Pearse Station).

As a result, it would serve many more public transport users than Metro North, or the proposed Metro West, a souped-up Luas line running from Tallaght to Ballymun via Clondalkin and Blanchardstown – an orbital route on which there isn’t even a bus service at present.

According to Iarnród Éireann, the interconnector combined with electrifying commuter rail services to Kildare, Maynooth and Drogheda would result in a four-fold increase in peak rail patronage by 2016, giving superior access to Dublin from nearly all population centres.

The capital cost of this programme was estimated in 2002 at €3.4 billion, of which the interconnector – let’s call it “Crossrail” – would account for €1.3 billion. Five years on, it would cost significantly more – but nothing like as much as Metro North.
© 2007 The Irish Times

@JoePublic wrote:

The Irish Times last August. And the cost of repaying this capital investment would equate to €22 for every trip taken on the line from Swords to St Stephen’s Green.

This number pisses me off. This is an investment over 30 years for a piece of infrastructure that will last for countless decades. The way it’s presented you’t think the Metro was to be closed down in 2040 😡

Personally I’m in agreement with Frank that the Irish Rail Interconnecter will give a better and faster return but the country (not just the city) needs both if it’s to function into the future.

Just build them.

The point on undertaking a feasibility study assessing the alternatives is very well made; all it takes is one landowner being CPO’d to take a judicial review with this not done correctly and the process becomes mired for years.

The point on Crossrail is not well made and I’m surprised that FmD neglected to say that cross rail serves Heathrow direct from Canary Wharf and the City which is a nightmare trek at present not to mention the Adamstown-esque scale regeneration project around Stratford. In terms of comparability Crossrail is the interconnector and metro built into one and will plug into an airport forcast to carry 80m passengers a year on completion as well as introduce parisian metro journey times between compartmentalised core business districts that currently rely on a victorian transport network. The price will be a large rise in Council tax bills which I support because I live 5 mins walk from a proposed station; but if I didn’t?

Its all about priorities and you really need to distance yourself from management consultant speak and break these projects down into price per passenger carried!

It’s very strange to read in the IT one day that Swords is to grow to 100,000 people in the next 20 years, and the next day that it doesn’t merit a rail line. I think Frank is wrong. This has to be built. And the interconnector. I fail to understand his logic whereby he trumpets the urban design benefits of Line BX with absolutely no reference to it’s uselessness in tackling congestion or the huge costs (financial and disruption) yet questions a line which will link up with 2 existing LUAS lines and the Maynooth line, and serve a town that’s bigger than Galway as well as the Airport.

@notjim wrote:

I vote to have Frank McDonald replaced by Graham H.

A bad idea. I’m sure even he would become poisoned by the various issues on which he would have to report. That can’t be allowed to happen.

Given the huge population increases it weould probably make sense to continue the Dart to Drogheda (also mooted) this will also serve the new town of Bettystown/Laytown and also the proposed redevelopment of Gormanstown.

However for this to occur – the track must be made a triple or quad line from Clontarf Road to allow for efficient use of Enterprise/Commuter Services – it may then be possible to open the Dublin-Drogheda-Navan rail line as a proper service.

It is essential also for the interconnector to be built

Another idea would be to extend the Metro out past lissenhall and on to Balbriggan so that passengers on this line (incl NI passengers) could avoid having to go as far as St Stephen’s green (on the interconnector…) in order to connect with the Airport

@archipimp wrote:

im all in favour of the metro north going to swords but with talk of cost sutting measures due to spiralling costs wouldnt it be better to terminate the metro at the airport so the thing gets built and properly, with it then later extended to swords?

A Swords lynch mob is now on it’s way to Bray, complete with pitchforks and burning torches. It may take them a while though as the nearest DART station is in Malahide. 😀

im confused…

have the interconnector people changed this much from june????

well they are getting paid what 300 million!!!! ( the engineers…)

sketch up for a project worth 5 billion get real….
whats missing….

architecture

and

framework plans….

what was the date of this presentation?

@notjim wrote:

as pointed out on the p11 site this interesting ei document is now available, features pictures of the o’connell st metro station and other stuff too:

http://www.iei.ie/uploads/Files/SectorPapers/139/%7BDCF9B68E3F294A02A925475F33D14AD4%7D_LUAS%20AND%20METRO%20PLANS%20FOR%20DUBLIN.PDF

So a first glimpse at what our bare bones concrete walled stations might look like – looks crap.

How much will they actually save by not buying all those paint brushes and tins of paint does anybody know?

Also interesting to see that St. Stephens Green looks untouched, trees and all, in their after photos: hopefully the truth!

@AndrewP wrote:

Jesus those drawings look grim. This is total false economy. It will send a clear signal out to the junkies and winos to move in and within months the costliest piece of infrastructure in the country will be an underground toilet. Would you spend a million euro on a new house, then not paint the walls to save a few quid?

The Bilbao metro has the spec you are referring to and is quite acceptable visually IMO. No doubt though interiors will be blitzed with advertising.