Infrastructure costs

They had the same article on the Indo. I cant recall the figures but they showed Copenhagen as the nearest comparison t the Dublin proposal, ie a surface rail to the city edge and then an underground section. It was a fraction of the cost and that was with more stations. Barcelona was cheaper again and if any of you have been there you’d see what a spectacular system it is.
It also said dat Seamus was flying out to Copenhagen soon to see just how they did it…
Perhaps a lack corrupt landowners and developers had something to do with it….. oooh shame on you!

Niall is right of course, we need someone from elsewhere to head the rpa, someone who isn’t conditioned by the local situation and who will get angry all the time at all the empire-building and money-wasting.

The thing is..isnt the government supposed to tender for mojor projects through the EU journal. Surely that should act as a break to inefficient spending

As the Tribune said, nobody in Government seems to turn a hair at these phenomenal costings especially when compared to similar projects abroad, maybe its the Ivory Towers Syndrome (ITS) again!!!

I see what you mean emf. From todays Irish Times:

The State is likely to spend up to €300 million buying land for the last 10-km stretch of ring road in south Dublin which will complete the M50 motorway, it has emerged, writes Arthur Beesley, Political Reporter

A snip I would have though!

There’s something faintly ridiculous (but probably pre-planned) about the fact that the Southern end of the motorway, which runs through what was always the more expensive real estate in Dublin, is built last, at a time when property prices are at their maximum.
At the same time, there seems to be no such rush to build a rail link (on what should be cheaper land) on the Northside to complement the two Luas lines that serve the southside and a tiny fragment of the north inner city.

Its the North South thing. ‘Twas ever so.
Its like all those lovely stone-cut walls all those Blackrock residents got when they built the Stillorgan dual carriageway. Funny how they never made it up into the wilds of Fingal when the M50 north section was put in place.
And of course you’ll notice the marked difference in the standard of DART stations south of the Liffey.
Although a friend of mine from B’rock has a theory. All those Dun Laoghaire resuidents pay more in tax and therefore expect and demand a higher quality of workmanship. Quite….

How on earth can it cost €1 billion, as reported in todays Irish Times, to build an underground connection between Heuston and Connolly!
What an absolutely ridiculously high sum.

And if Metro costs are spiralling out of control (which they see to be – even before a sod has been turned) why not opt for a LUAS line from Broadstone to Swords. At least LUAS costs seem more realistic.

I am in favour of Metro but I just don’t understand where these crazy costings are coming from.

€1bn for an underground connection from Heuston to Connolly… isn’t there already an underground connection (via Phoenix Park)that isn’t used other than for Rugby games etc?!?

Do we need two or something?

Cost of Tunnelling in Dublin 9 times !! that of Madrid, RPA asked to explain. – Today’s Irish Times.

I think I may be going mad. Why on earth would anybody build an underground link between Heuston and Connolly Station when we’ve spent the past three years building the Luas link between the two.
Surely, the obvious need is for a connection (underground, overground, who cares?)between Luas Line A and Luas Line B.
The preferred option would be tunnel from St Stephen’s Green to Broadstone with an interchange station (Luas to Subway) at somewhere like Church Street.
Then we have the option of building some rail link via Broadstone through Glasneving, past DCU, through Ballymun and on to airport.
There is no necessity at the moment and no justification for any other rail lines in the capital as far as i can see.
The only thing is improvement to existing suburban services.

Heathrow, which now has two separate rail and tube links still only manages a combined rail / tube user share of arriving passengers of barely above 20%!

“To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what percentage of
journeys made to (a) Gatwick, (b) Heathrow, (c) Stansted and (d) Luton airports
were made by (i) train, (ii) bus and (iii) other road vehicles in the latest
year for which figures are available. [80846]

Mr. Jamieson: In 2001, the percentage of journeys made by train to Gatwick was
21.2 per cent. (9 per cent. bus/coach and 69.8 per cent. other road vehicles ).
For Heathrow, the corresponding proportions were 21.5 per cent. train ( ie rail
and tube), 13.1 per cent. bus/coach, and 65.4 per cent. other road vehicles. At
Stansted, the proportions were : 27.3 per cent. train, 7.6 per cent. bus/coach,
and 65.1 per cent. other road vehicles. The proportions recorded at Luton are
26.1 per cent. bus/coach and 73.9 per cent. other road vehicles.”

Suprisingly low figures for such well developed and fairly well integrated rail / tube links.

d_d_dallas, I’ve asked this question befor e and the only answer I can get is that the present underground interconnect (via Phoenix Park) from Heuston to Connelly is too narrow for modern rolling stock

is widening a tunnel any easier than digging a new one? probably not.

Hmmm – not wide enough – am I surprised?

Yeah but surely widening a pre-existing tunnel wouldn’t cost €1bn?!? Well – if you ask anyone other than the CIF…

E-Mail Print Add to Clippings

Brennan bid to unravel cheaper metro mystery

TRANSPORT Minister Seamus Brennan flew to Madrid last night to find out how its new metro is costing six times less than the one planned for Dublin.

He wants to know why the Dublin line is costed at €320m per kilometre and the Spanish capital’s line at only €50m per kilometre.

Also, the costs envisaged for the Dublin project are nearly 12 times dearer than a similar system being developed in Barcelona.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=929679&issue_id=8849

Well at least he is questioning these things rather than blindly accepting them – more that can be said for most of them

True, but it is probably too late to save the money.

Paraic White, chairman of the Railway Procurment Agency (in charge of planning of LUAS & Metro etc) was speaking for a good half hour on Today with Pat Kenny this morning, explaining quite credibly the 4/4.5 billion or so proposed cost of the metro, and the disparity with Barcelona etc.

For a start, the actual cost of it’s construction and land acquisition is 1.7 billion. The remaining 2/3 billion or so is a vast contingency fund, as well as covering other elements. These being insurance, VAT, inflation, the value for money over the 9 years of construction, spiralling property values and a myriad of other costs.

The figures touted for Barcelona exclude land aqusition costs (suffice to say a major element),& the equivilant of their local authority designed it themselves, and then commisioned, thus saving 100s of millions here alone.

He also quite openly said that labour costs and constuction costs are substantilly higher here than in Spain of elsewhere.

Above all, and most importantly, he says this is an absolute, consise, and realistic projected cost of the Metro, including every concievable contingency and potential problem. For once he says, a State body is accuratly predicting the cost of a major project, and is hopeful that as a result it may actually come in under budget.

He was higly credible and practical throughout the interview, no crap, and was incitefully interviewed by Pat. Well worth a listen, audio download available on the RTE website. (first item on programme)

which land acquisition costs? it’s a tunnel.

I was going to say that … but then I thought isn’t it a tunnel from St Stephens Green to Broadstone and then overland to the Airport? Even so, €1.7 billion seems very excessive for land aquistion outside of the city centre.

Also Graham, I would expect Mr White to sound reasonable and credible in interview as it is job to put across a prfessional face to the RPA but that still doesnt make his protestations any more believable. I am sure construction costs are not that much higher than in Spain (Common Market and all that..) and how does he know that this is the final final figure. Rather than talking of contingency funds he should be agreeing a budget and then ensuring that the project comes in on budget.

Sundat Times yesterday had article about our beloved Finance Minister slapping down the Metro no matter the cost (and any other rail projects – i.e. the run down “system” we already have).
Using the tried and tested method of hiding behind Eurostat and their accountancy practices.

C’mon – this is Finanna Fail for god’s sake – if Charlie can find a nice clinic tax break for his buddies to the tune of €63m, and can find time to go to Cheltenham – surely he can scam around anything.
S. Brennan is wasting his time going to Madrid – it’s not like rail construction is the only incredibly overpriced thing in this country.

The aquisition costs are for the substantial overground part from Broadstone to the Airport.

The reality is that labour & materials are much more expensive here, regardless of the open market, and are much higher than Spain, being on the mainland & all that.

It is’nt so much a contingency fund (although that has been built in), but rather a fund for the huge, vast amounts that are required for everything other than physicaly laying tracks and tunneling, absolutely none of which are included in Barcelona’s figures. Also, the lack of any history of tunneling under Dublin city causes many problems, esp around the Liffey.

They are simple facts he laid out, and I don’t doubt anything he said for a second.
Unfortunate of course. I’ll keep an open mind on the subject.

I wasn’t all that impressed with Paraic White as he got caught for a few of Pats questions… however as said above the cost for BOTH construction AND land acq. is 1.7 billion (don’t think that includes VAT but not sure)…… but as he said it will take 8-9 years to design and 3-4 years to build…. hence the costs can be expexted to rise within this period…. so the figure that they presented to the minister was their estimate at what things would escalate to…

Maybe it was a bit naive to publish this figure though, as everybody has jumped on it and made stupid comparisons with other systems etc without knowing what they are comparing.

And its not the RPA’s fault that so much is being paid out for land, but the PR for the whole thing was not done very well. That said as he pointed out in other countries such projects are often under-priced in a bid to win political approval, with Copenhagen costs alot more than originally planned….

“… in Spain people only own the land to a depth of 10 m. Anything deeper is owned by the state. in Ireland there is no limit on the depth to which land is owned…”

This quote appears in Darren Boyles Metro Review in todays Dublin Daily (new newspaper) and seems to be attributed to Seamus Brennan.

Surely this isn’t true?

I know that some people in living over the tunnel have applied to be compensated, but I didn’t know they could claim ownership of the ground. The basis of their claims was (I thought) for disturbance (significant) and devaluation (debatable).

Anyone know more? I know selling off air rights have formed part of the business case for Tara street, and wasn’t the airspace over railway sold to Croke Park? but I never heard of this oposite.

they don’t need to buy land all the way from broadstone to the airport, there is already a cutting isn’t there heading north.

Under the constitution, everything below ground is owned by the state.

IT was Brennan himself who said the thing about the land underground

The current (Phoenix Pk) link between Heuston and Connolly doesn’t have the capacity to be used on a regular basis – I presume thats why its only used for big matches.
It also is aligned in such a way that trains can’t halt at Heuston and then continue on to Connolly. IMO people don’t generally see the benefits that a new (underground) link would bring.

In Brussels they built an underground link between their two main stations (North and South). All tains that go through Brussels now go through both of those stations AND the newer Central station. This means that for people coming into the city from other towns and cities (ie not residents/commuters) they don’t need to get onto the metro/tram system because they simply choose the appropriate mainline station.

In Dublin, all intercity passengers have to get off at Connolly or Heuston regardless if their ultimate destination is the other part of the city. Everyone knows what happens at Heuston – you get off the train, then wait for the (crowded) bus to take you to where you really want to go – THE CITY CENTRE. Why???

LUAS, while it will serve its own purpose well, is not the answer to this – imagine what problems we’ll have at Heuston when loads of intercity passengers try to get on the tram which is already full of commuters!

If instead we had an underground interconnector (and a Central Station between H + C, also underground, as in Brussels) not only could we distribute the intercity passengers among three stations appropriate to their needs, but we could also have through trains (eg Cork-Dub-Belfast, Waterford-Dub-Sligo) allowing people who don’t want to wade through Dublin’s commuters to get a connecting train on the other side of the city, the opportunity to do so!

“In Brussels they built an underground link between their two main stations (North and South). All tains that go through Brussels now go through both of those stations AND the newer Central station. This means that for people coming into the city from other towns and cities (ie not residents/commuters) they don’t need to get onto the metro/tram system because they simply choose the appropriate mainline station”

True, the convential rail rink through Brussels was one of the longest running projects in Belgium, delayed both by the first and second world wars, – rather better excuses than we could produce. Indeed, although the rail link is now there for many years, it was only in the late 1980’s that some of the derelict sites, cleared to allow the works to go ahead were redeveloped.

As for the reason why the railway originally stopped at Kingsbridge, two reasons, Guinness owned the land on the South Bank and there was an inconvenient Army Barracks on the North Bank.

There still was, very likely, little interchange of passengers with other rail routes from Dublin until recently. The big change being the building of the Dart and the development of commuter services on the Belfast route.