admin
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@Pete wrote:
PVCKing stop quoting these reports about reducing national debt to support your argument, you make it sound like the interconnector is free! The interconnector will cost almost as much but provide much less benefits. And continue to consider the metro route on a stop by stop basis which is not a true reflection of the benefits. .
Provide the case study that backs that point up; that is simply ridiculous…
@Pete wrote:
It is the combination of rail transport to popular locations with no (or very limited in the case of SSG) rail transport (St Stephens Green, Mater Hospital, DCU, Airport), residential communities with relatively high populations but low densities (Phibsborough, Drumcondra, Ballymun, Swords) and links to other public transport systems (Luas Red and Green lines and Maynooth rail) that make the metro viable. Interconnector, on the other hand, brings people on the Dart/Northern Commuter Line and South Western Commuter line a little closer to the city centre..
No it removes the loopline blockage enhancing 4 lines and creating high density development opportunites in Dublin 8; you assess catchments by drawing a 1kms circle from each station; on this basis metro has a very very low population catchment and very small plot size making redvelopment very diifcult.
@Pete wrote:
A Dart spur to the airport does not make sense because it would follow the route of exisiting Dart line with only two new stops, Malahide Road and airport. So in effect this is really only an airport line, because all other stops, bar one, are already served. It is not worth the cost because you would spend a couple of hundred million building a new track from Malahide to the airport, quadtracking the line from Docklands to Malahide and reconfiguring, and in some cases complete redevelopment of stations on the line. All this just for the airport which, as you say yourself;Building a Luas to Drumcondra would cost another couple of million and again is not worth it. That means digging up the roads between St Stephens Green and Drumcondra, some of the busiest in the city, to link an area that is.
The Northern line does not need to be quad tracked; the blockage is South of Connolly.
BXD which is proposed by the same agency will dig all those streets up anyway; this was looked at pre-port tunnel by this government and the externalities were found to be acceptable.
@Pete wrote:
You are also building two separate lines (Luas from St Stephens Green to Drumcondra and Dart from Docklands to airport) to do what the metro can do in one go. The metro would certainly be cheaper per kilometer and offer better value for money. The metro line would also be more profitable by combining passengers from these two routes instead of splitting them and would also incorporate more stops. The four development corridors you speak of would still exist as all existing services would continue to operate, but with a fifth corridor with much more potential. To ensure continued economic prosperity in Dublin we need to move forward and continue to compete with other cities. To stand still is to be left behind. The metro does more for the city than the interconnector and will have guaranteed passengers from the day it opens. The interconnector can be built in 5-10 years time, by which time there might actually be need to increase capacity on the current rail lines.
You are saying that the c20kms Metro is cheaper per kilmoter than enhancing in excess of 100kms of existing track. You obviously either work for the RPA or live on the soon to be culled from the drawing board line as you are so far short of objectivity on this that it is painful.
Bank of Ireland to sell art collection
Saturday, 15 May 2010 07:42
Bank of Ireland is to sell its art collection and put the proceeds towards its community and charitable investment programme.The bank currently owns 2,000 pieces of art, which is one of the largest collections in the country.
The works, which are valued at €5m, will be sold on the open market.
A spokeswoman for AIB has said the future of its art collection was under review.
A spokeswoman for Anglo Irish Bank said any decision on the future of its collection would be made by its board and management in line with the wishes of the Minister for Finance.
Labour Spokeswoman on Arts Mary Upton said all of the banks’ art collection should be made available to the public.
The proceeds should be taken off the next preference dividend and the collection kept intact if the government will allow BoI to off set the tax benefits of the donations to their charitable programmes; if you had to paint 2,000 walls to cover up the picture staining it could cost close to €5m making this almost a revenue neutral exercise. Barings still has its art collection and they were in a much worse state than BoI and this way the bank could buy the collection which has been carefully assembled over time back when their business plan bears fruit; scattering the collection to the four winds into a very poor art market makes no sense except for the auctioneer who gets the fee.
There is no doubt great anger being directed at the banks at present due to their lending policies but tokinistic gestures such as this are just as short sighted as the lending policies that put them into this position in the first place. Sorting out the BoI balance sheet will hinge on their capital raising which will be billions in scale and in that regard €5m less the costs of repainting the affected walls denuded of their art will be a pittance.
@onq wrote:
Does anyone have a handle on what the “limited” actually does for a company of architects?
My understanding is that under normal circumstances it limits the liability of company members to those monies they invested in the company should it go bust.
I understand these people to be shareholders, but what about architects acting as directors and running the company?
I’ve always wondered does the “limited” aspect- prevent companies from recovering debts from directors who have traded dishonestly
- prevent claims for bad design coming against architects
- prevent charges arising from fraudelent certification
Anyone know?
Limited liability only applies if the vehicle gets into financial difficulty and requires court protection from creditors; there is a presumption that directors as soon as they become aware that the business is unsustainable enter voluntary liquidation; otherwise a creditor who feels the business is unsustainable will bring a court petition seeking adiministrators appointed by the court to examine the companies affairs.
What administration does is primarily protect secured creditors and then distribute the proceeds of unsecured creditors; what it does not do is allow negligent directors off the hook; all professionals need to be careful; The principal is laid out in the case Merrett V Babb 2001; easiest ways around it get pi cover that has an extended run off period and document everything to ensure you are not caught out by an opportunistic litigant; if you are found guilty of fraudulent behaviour your assets will simply be confiscated by CAB.
Pete
We have been through all those points before and you have not credibly dealt with the fact that all the predictions were made when the economy was experiencing growth of 8-12% p.a. In light of changed circumstances remove the words stop listing assets that exist independent of the proposed/culled metro north project do not use inapprpropriate words such as projected and capacity and factor in the installation of a Luas line to Drumcoundra and Ballymun as per Mammy O’Rourkes plan.
Where did you get the figure of 20,000 for DCU which in fact has 10,000 students and probably less than 1,000 staff of those a large number would be part time. Write fact not fiction.
Why the interconnector is a great project is that it is four development corridors excluding its City Centre Routing; between higher inner city densities and the four existing routes the Clonee extension and the Luas extensions there is enough serviced land to develop 20,000 homes a year for the next 20 years. The area between Ballymun and Swords does not need a Metro in the same way people don’t want to live near an airport.
‘Urgent’ need to deal with deficits – IMF
Friday, 14 May 2010 16:24
The IMF has warned developed nations they face an “urgent” need to rein in budget deficits or risk stymied growth.“As economies gradually recover, it is now urgent to start putting in place measures to ensure that the increase in deficits and debts resulting from the crisis… does not lead to fiscal sustainability problems,” it warned in a high-profile report.
“If public debt is not lowered to precrisis levels, potential growth in advanced economies could decline by over half a percent annually, a very sizable effect when cumulated over several years.”
AdvertisementThe warning came as Europe continues to be gripped by a debt crisis that has rippled out from Greece across the continent and the globe.
The Greek government is confronting widespread opposition to an austerity program needed to secure an European Union and the IMF bailout totaling €110 billion.
Like everything this project will be demand led and is completely unrelated to any other holding. If the owners can find a cinema anchor then the usual leisure sector suspects will follow; given the profile Munster rugby has given the City it would not be surprising to see some of the major UK restaurant chains buying into the project if the incentives were right. Unlike open retail this sector has performed very well over the past 2 years both on the demand side as people trade down from flash meals and wine bars as well as on the supply side with plenty of private equity available for the right concepts which has ensured that there is a solid pipeline of fresh new concepts.
This project would be a very useful for Limerick as it may attract a lot of punters into the City for another few hours into early evening allowing general retailers to increase the trading hours or trade in neighbouring streets and shopping centre. The difficult part is getting the cinema operator to sign up on terms that make sense in the medium term.
@gunter wrote:
First lesson: You can construct a reasonably accurate picture of the past from seemingly sparse evidence, if your thinking is clear and the evaluation of the evidence is sound.
Second lesson: If the evaluation of the evidence amounts to a workable theory, just stick it up there and let others hurl abuse at it until, either holes get knocked in the theory, or it becomes clear that the theory stands up.
That’s all that we’re trying to do here:- un-pick the layers and fill out the picture.
R & D or research and development is apparently 90% development of existing knowledge and 10% fresh thinking; I’d not argue with Devin on 17th Century architecture but I like your thought process!!!
The reease begs two questions
1. Why has this project made an advanced EIB application whilst the vastly more important interconnector project is not listed on the EIB website under applications?
2. How can the RPA justify spending money on tender exercises when they don’t know if they will receive planning consent or if they do receive consent what conditions will require the tender to be rewritten?
while confidence has been boosted by announcements from Spain and Portugal regarding the implementation of austerity measures,
The World certainly hasn’t ended but the capacity to borrow endlessly has.
Yes household formation sizes are a relevant issue however; there is a cycle in the use of property;
1. Grow up at home – 3 bed semi 16 to the acre suburban town
2. Go to college – specialist student accom or damp pre 63 bed sit
3. Rent flat with mates – City Centre flash location e.g. Smithfield
4. Buy flat with girlfreind – Docklands or Parnell St depending on income
5. Buy house or large apartment with now wife – Anywhere once there is spaceI am not advocating that we do not plan for future growth I am merely pointing out that with 4 Dart Routes that extend out 10-20 miles in 4 very different directions all with green field and brownfield development opportunites as well as 2 Luas lines both extended into green fields that a seventh line is simply not ‘critical’ there is an element of choice and it this point of the economic cycle where goverment is burdened with a lot of unforseen private sector debt that prudence is the key word particularly when you are dealing with multi-billion euro projects that will lose money operationally.
you are spot on; once weekly monthly and annual ticketing on a zonal basis comes in this route will add very little and there will be revenue splits between the various operators. If the loss per passenger carried were small you could cal it a societal economic trade off but the interest bill alone at €100m before a passenger is carried will probably be about €4 euro.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
* growth in population WILL occur (the para on pop forecasts – to help you I even subtracted the component of pop growth which is connected to the economy (migration). I even tried indicate where the growth will come from (aging population, people deferring having children, more single person households – all of these mean more households and are independent of the economy – as a by-the-by there is by all accounts another baby boom underway .
Any such baby boom will not have transport requirements for 20 plus years; the net in migration has turned to net out migration and with the IDA creating only 20,000 jobs per annum it would take 40 years for unemployment to disappear; net out migration is far more likely.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
* the additional households will need to be housed unless prices are to rise unsustainably and to create another property crash in 30 yrs time! The purpose of the graph was to demonstrate that the likely levels are nothing like those of the boom years, but that there would be additional housing, but more likely at a level seen at the start of the boom before housing went crazy. You do have a habit of reacting quite hysterically when the point being made is actually far closer to the one you were making than you realise..
I just see red when anyone talks about Swords having a population of 100,000; if Burke and his cronies hadn’t filled the first mile surrounding the town centre with Urban Sprawl and then maybe if development was made very difficult in the rest of the borough then a significant uplift would be possible. Sadly the sprawl exists and development patterns will be far more dispersed firstly in National terms and secondly within the greater Dublin region. Why interconnector is so superior is that it allows for development to be spread accross four existing rail corridors and the two Luas extensions which both contain a lot of zoned and serviced development land; Developing those areas first will cut the likely Luas operational losses on these two extensions; extensions which were clearly built prematurely in the cases of City West and Cherrywood.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
I then made the point that I thought that planning policy should seek to concentrate future growth along a small number of corridors where infrastructure (not just transport) is being provided. MN corridor has more capacity than most and that is a positive – notwithstanding the financial case for the project – and I have to say the difficulty about someone such as yourself making such specific arguments about the viability of the MN scheme is that none of us have seen the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) and therefore none of us can say for sure – that suggests a slightly more conciliatory tone to any debate rather than an absolutist one. .
I have no desire to be absolutest but I am always concerned when CBA’s are withheld and when a scenario is run that is entirely dependent on very ambitous development targets; when GDP was growing at 6-10% a year and when housing completions were header ever higher I had was not talking about Metro. But the economic picture has utterly changed: look at the three articles below.
LONDON (Dow Jones)–Bank of England Governor Mervyn King warned Wednesday that the banking crisis has turned into a potential sovereign debt crisis and governments must tackle excessive fiscal deficits without delay.
In a press conference, King said he had seen the details of fiscal plans by the new U.K. Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, and that they provided a “very strong and powerful agreement to reduce [the U.K.] deficit.”
They include “a very clear and binding commitment to accelerate the reduction of the deficit in the lifetime of the parliament,” King said, adding: “I think it will diminish some of the downside risks because of the action that will be taken to deal with the deficit.”
Commenting on the lessons of the Greek debt crisis, King said it didn’t make sense to run the risk of an adverse market reaction, and lawmakers need to “get ahead of that.”
Spain to slash wages to cut deficit
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 11:29
Spain has said it will cut state employees’ wages and slash investment spending in a bid to reassure markets that it can get its budget deficit under control and halt the spread of the European debt crisis.‘We need to make a singular, exceptional and extraordinary effort to cut our public deficit and we must do so now that the economy is beginning to recover,’ Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said.
Meanwhile, new figures show that the Spanish economy eased out of recession in the first quarter of 2010 as it recorded growth of just 0.1%.
In the toughest deficit cutting moves by far by the Socialist government, Zapatero said the government planned to save €15 billion in 2010 and 2011 with a series of cuts including a reduction of more than €6 billion in public investment.
Civil service salaries will be cut by 5% in 2010 and frozen in 2011, sparking immediate anger from unions, who have already put the brakes on a government move to raise the retirement age to 67 from 65.
The measures were announced after European Union and International Monetary Fund officials agreed at the weekend on a €750 billion emergency fund for weak euro zone countries that have been hit by a debt crisis.
Economists said that after the weekend EU meeting it became very clear Spain and Portugal, and particularly Spain, would have to go the extra mile in cutting the deficit. They said today’s actions were based on ‘the Irish model’.
The pressures on Zapatero to act rose during the week as US President Barack Obama called him on yesterday and urged him to be ‘resolute’ in efforts to implement economic reforms.
The measures will now reduce the budget deficit to 9.3% of gross domestic product this year, from 11.2% in 2009. It will fall to 6% in 2011 and be reduced to 3% of GDP by 2013, the government said.
Spain sees first quarter growth of 0.1%
Spain eased out of recession with 0.1% growth in the first quarter compared to the preceeding quarter, the government statistics’ office said in a preliminary report today.The figures from the National Statistics Office confirmed a provisional report from the Bank of Spain released last week.
Spain, Europe’s fifth largest economy, entered its recession in the second quarter of 2008 as the global financial meltdown compounded a crisis in the Spanish property market, which had been a major driver for growth in the preceding years.
The economy continued to contract until the fourth quarter of 2009 when it shrank 0.1%. Year on year, the economy shrank 1.3% from the first quarter of 2009, it added.
Spain is the last major world economy to emerge from recession.
The parrelels with Spain are striking a property bust leading to a deep recession. Before people think we can go off balance sheet or wave two fingers to the Commission
EU plans better budget co-ordination
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 11:52
The European Commission has proposed that euro zone countries submit their national budgets to the EU for what it calls ‘peer review’ before they go to national parliaments.The Commission also said it would call on national leaders to agree a permanent crisis resolution mechanism. The proposals come days after EU leaders backed a €750 billion rescue fund for euro zone countries.
The Commission said the recent crises surrounding euro zone debt had exposed the vulnerability of euro zone countries and underlined their interdependence. It said the time had come to draw ‘far-reaching lessons’ about the way economic policies were dealt with.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
I envy your salary – a taxi from Paddington to the City would set you back about £20. Also, I’ve been on the Piccadilly line myself many times in general and specifically to the airport. There are a very significant number of passengers using the Underground, with the heathrow express/taxi combo most used by business travellers on expenses. Buses in the transport world are always considered less likely to achieve modal change (from private to public) that fixed rail connections. Dublin CC could be 15 mins from the airport – think what a competitive advantage that would be for Dublin CC as a city to do business and visit. The bus is entirely reliant on traffic, albeit that the Dublin Port tunnel has improved consistency..
I’ll let you in on a little secret; the heathrow connect service costs only £7.90 and takes 33 mins versus the £6 the tube costs and takes over an hour; the saving is less than minimum wage. A minicab costs about £15 to the city and a black cab about a tenner to the West End. Without getting off point; half an hour which is what the aircoach takes post port tunnel stands up well to any City; few cities have an airport less than 10 miles from their City Centre.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
Well, hopefully at least one of the projects will get the go ahead! Failing that you could fall back on the other comment above which correctly stressed that there is no need for this to be paid from current spending, but rather the cost could be deferred over a longer period of time – we don’t need to repeat the interest on interest argument – I accept it’s a more expensive way of doing it in the long run, it is however less outlay on a year-by-year basis..
It still goes on the National debt and will show up in the national accounts as borrowing; I would favour the interconnector being paid for directly from borrowing and then the debt paid down over 20-30 years on a standard amortisation model.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
There are private operators in Sweden and Germany to name but two. I have no ideological beef with IE – they’re just rubbish at running a train system. I’m not saying you could ever directly privatise them – I was reacting to your arguments against PPP/Private Operators. .
I’ve not come across them as my time in Frankfurt displayed only Stadwerke Frankfurt on the ticketing; if it works it works but my view is clearly contaminated by the UK experience.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
This was my point. There’s no reason for the service not to continue onto Limerick Junction and make the connection. They’ve just not thought about it as a system – room for improvement over time isn’t the issue – they’ve designed it to be useless to the consumer – either to prove their point that they don’t believe in regional services, or because they couldn’t run a piss up in a brewery, let alone a well connected, integrated public transport offering..
;
Neither do I; without the GAA summer loadings to Croke Park; Irish Rail would have lines to Cork, Limerick, Galway, Waterford and Belfast at best. There is no way the demand exists to connect other cities unless the government gave the funding to build a line that was at least as quick as driving; the 2 hours plus from Limerick to Galway was clearly known to Dept of Transport before the project was sanctioned. A symbolic gesture and a waste of taxpayers cash.
@ppjjobrien wrote:
Like I said the 500k figure excludes all migration (a very negative assumption over a 20yr period) and is based purely on demographic trends as explained above. We’ll just have to disagree on the relative merits of western sprawl versus intensification and some greenfield to the North – my central point is that whichever new housing is provided in the future, it should be far more concentrated and much more closely tied into existing and/or planned infrastructure, which improves the sustainability of the communities and also the viability of the schemes, although you’ll always have the chicken and the egg issue.
Sadly it is usually the young that leave because they can’t get graduate jobs; they then meet people from the host country, settle down and stay put. Unless the employment situation turns around dramatically the population will in my view stay static for decades to come; placing a higher tax burden on the population by building vanity projects will deter employment growth and make it more likely that more people have to leave; exacerbating the situation still further.
With the Phoenix Park Tunnel you could theoretically get a line to Blanchardstown without building any new lines; albeit that you would need to refit the tunnel itself and probably need to reconfigure track where the tunnel link joins the Maynooth line to or including a route facing West vs the eastern path that heads towards Liffey Junction and Spencer Dock that the (freight only line) currently takes. It could reach the airport on the routing envisaged for the now abandoned Metro West scoping exercise and reach the Northern line via the routing envisaged by the IE Dublin Rail plan. It would be a great idea long term as it would make say a Belfast to Cork journey much easier but would be very expensive which would be difficult for the current fiscal set up. Great idea to park up and re-examine when finances improve.
The absence of an EIB application for the Interconnector is very worrying.
I respect your position; If I lived beside the route I probably would want it as well even if it did inflate my tax bill; according to the EIB website both the Tuam Motorway and Metro North project are two of three Irish transport projects under assessment. The third is listed below
The PPP contract comprises the design, construction, operation and maintenance of 16.5km of dual carriageway on the Arklow to Rathnew section of the N11 and of the N7 Newlands Cross Junction
There is no mention of the interconnector or any other rail project.
I too pay tax on bad banks and have paid taxes for a war that I didn’t agree with but the economic climate has changed; public expenditure needs to be cut dramatically and I would prefer to think that the focus would be on the projects that are most viable rather than a project that puts an underground through areas with such low population densities.
I have no back up to sugguest this but I would suspect that the Anglo Irish bank situation may change to one where upon expiration of the deposit guarantee scheme that it may be split into a new good bank where performing loans will be transfered and a lot of the existing debt owed by Anglo Irish bank which trades at a significant discount will not move to it but stay in the bad bank which will be declared insolvent; giving the opportunity to walk away from a lot of the junior debt which stretches to billions. At least AIB and BoI are now able to stand on their own 2 feet without further help and should from 2011 by paying corporation tax start to repay the assistance that they have received.
Things are not going to be pretty for the next few years and I do not believe that Metro North is the answer to Dublin’s transport problems on a sufficient scale to warrant the cost. The hope is that like the 1990’s that the payback of low taxes and low inflation and better public services will come for the difficult 1980’s and that this time the lesson will be learnt to cut expenditure early and in sufficient quantity.
You have serious communication issues and for the the record have never stated what you do professionally; that is assuming you have one but I’d doubt its an economist as to claim you knew more than the ex Chair of Goldman Sachs Int and BP who just happens to be Irish, youngest ever Attorney General and EEC Commisioner who liberalised a transport market through the open skies agreement; failure to read anything and then make personal attacks is just typical of you.
Statement 2 parts
Part 1 – Rolling stock tender is smaller than existing rolling stock on Dart lines and Maynooth and Kildare lines much of which will be 25 years old when the interconnector completes and would have been replaced anyway on a like for like basis in the absence of the Interconnector; agreements can involve orders in 2 phases -order certain and order cum break option. Metro North has no rolling stock and to deliver 5 minute frequencies that will require a lot of rolling stock.
Part 2 – 5 stations and a short track; are you saying that this section will be expensive to run and will be unable to leverage all the existing stations on the network?
I have never claimed to be any kind of transport economist or expert; but for the record transport economists are actually called planners the other are general economists who claim to specialise in transport; judging by Sean Barrett and his inability to grasp the bigger picture you could be quite good as one if you listened to people instead of ranting at every possible opoortunity.
Accross the wider the network the majority of stock does exist following additions post 2004; a lot of it will be replaced but would have been replaced anyway. The Maynooth line and Kildare lines were extensively added as commuter routes in the early 1990’s the stock is more or less 20 years old anyway. How do you know the tenders don’t have break options and aren’t based on ademand led approach?
For you to call me a bluffer and a fantasist is rich coming from someone who claimed to know more about economics than the ex-chair of Goldman Sachs Int and BP. You are incapable of fluid thought and I’d imagine you have never negotiated a structured agreement of any kind.
That 700m will comprise rolling stock for the wider network which if you hadn’t noticed is crush loaded. The value of the current rolling stock of the fleet would if ordered today and not valued at depreciated levels be higher. In any event the rolling stock on the Kildare line is aged as is much of the stock on the Maynooth line; given that completion wouldn’t be for 8 years much of the DART fleet will be over 30 years old at that stage.
In terms of running costs they will be minimal as there are only 5 stations and all of these will be busy enough to attract significant poster advertising and retail kiosk opportunites. Not a massive running cost in operational terms.
I further note the approval is approval in principal; bankers are political beasts, they only say no when they have to.
@shytalk wrote:
‘The interconnector will have virtually no running costs as the majority of the rolling stock already exists’
lol more fantasies. There’s a 700million euro tender out for rolling stock for the IC
As has been pointed out several times. the MN capital will come form the EIB at 5%
The architecture of an infrastructure bond is being constructed at this moment. The NTMA
has said it will put approx 10 billion into that. That will also be at 5% interest.usual nonsense from pvcking
European backing for Dublin Metro
Tuesday, 11 May 2010 18:10The European Investment Bank’s Board of Directors has given its approval in principle for a €500m loan for the Dublin Metro PPP project.
‘The Metro North project represents a significant contribution to sustainable urban transport in the greater Dublin area and will be the backbone for a future integrated public transport network in the Irish capital.
‘The European Investment Bank looks forward to working closely with the Irish authorities and the bidders involved in the Dublin Metro project’ said Plutarchos Sakellaris, European Investment Bank Vice President responsible for Ireland.
As they said they would consider funding a €1bn Motorway to Tuam I’m sure they haven’t looked at it in too much detail. I note the total project value is still missing as is the planning consent.
New Irish housing completions may fall below 10,000 in 2011;
By Finfacts Team
Jan 19, 2010 – 2:26:47 PM
Goodbody Stockbrokers chief economist, Dermot O’Leary, says new Irish housing completions may fall below 10,00 in 2011, compared with almost 90,000 in 2006Housing output down another 50% in 2009…
The major contributory factor in the severity of the recession in Ireland is the construction sector in general and specifically the residential sector. Final data today confirmed the extent of the collapse in housing output in Ireland in 2009. There were 26,820 house completions in Ireland, representing a decline of 48% yoy. At the peak in 2006, almost 90,000 units were completed. Over the past three years, we estimate housing alone has knocked 8% off the level of GDP (9% of GNP).
One way of tracking the extent of the housing boom and subsequent bust is to compare the level of completions relative to the population. At the peak in 2006, Ireland was building 21 housing units per 1000 of its population, when the European average was 5.6. In 2009, Irish completions amounted to 5.8 units per 1000, whereas the European average is estimated to be less than 4. Ireland should drop below the European average in 2010 (see chart).
Output has further to fall – Irish house completions will fall sharply again in 2010. Housing commencements fell by 63% in the first ten months of 2009, with housing starts on larger scheme developments down by 83% over the same time period. Tighter credit conditions continue to be an issue for both developers and potential homeowners, but there is also a need to curtail new supply until the vacant housing stock is reduced. We expect 12,000 units completed in 2010 and this could go below 10,000 in 2011.
That graph you posted above is lazy in the extreme and about as relevant as the vast majority of the figures which underpin the Metro; see the true picture above. In any event even when the market was out of control the maximum completion rate across the County of Fingal was about 9,000 units and that included the much larger development area such of Blanchardstown which now stretches from Castleknock to the South Meath Fringe. In addition there was significant development at Malahide, Donabate/Portrane, Rush/Lusk, Skerries and Balbriggan not to mention the estates in Fingal that feed off Leixlip and Ashtown. In the basis that 90,000 houses were built in Ireland in 2006 and of these 6,000 were built in Fingal it is likely that 1,100 houses will be built across the entire county; except that one off houses now make up 25% of completions and you don’t build those in Swords. Taking that on todays figures and you are talking about 733 houses across the entire borough; Swords may get 200 houses a year.
I agree that many will carry on their journey, but Red-line and Luas serve different City Centre catchments (simplistically North and South City). Pearse Station or St Stephen’s Green is a long way to O’Connell St from a transport point of view.
I don’t think I’m understanding your point about taxis – I assume you’re talking about tourists etc from the airport – otherwise taxis are a very expensive way of finishing your journey. The thing is that until there’s a network is in place real interchange is not going to happen so seamlessly and the city starts to become more polycentric in terms of how it works. Cologne is a smaller city than Dublin and is served by tram/underground lines (which are interoperable) and interchange between bus, tram, u-bahn is normal – london, paris, berlin etc all achieve this – we don’t have this culture among our providers which is reinforced by the ticketing system. I strongly suspect that they just don’t get it and need to go!
I live 200m from Paddington where the Heathrow Express terminates; it is my local shop; you see very few people descending the stairs and escalators with cases; the vast bulk of them take the Express into Paddington and then for a modest fare take a taxi to Mayfair or the City or wherever their destination is. Of course you see people who take the Piccadilly line into London and change but few of them have cases and few of them would complain if they had to take a bus for 30 mins into Dublin CC versus the 1 hour and 3 minutes the tube takes to Oxford Circus (considered to be the most central point). If a Dart extension were built that would be real progress as it would hit Connolly 18 mins Spencer Dock for Connolly and the additional 2 stops to Stephens Green would take max 25 mins.
It’s not where I was going with this and your argument seems to work against DART Underground just as much. My point was that even if capital spending were reduced it would still be possible. Capital spending is important to the economy and has a multiplier effect in the short run and and investment return in the long run. The government will continue to invest and its a matter of choice regarding allocations.
It does and the real worry is that when the either or decision gets made and it is either or because the combined inpact on borrowing would add roughly a billion to the EBR for about 5 years; that they approve MN and do not approve the interconnector on the basis of their complete loathing of SIPTU/NBRU and addiction to PPPs.
The PPP model (I’m not a fan) failed spectacularly in relation to London Underground- accepted.
however, TfL sub-contracts bus operations to operators, which are all branded TfL (London Buses – bright red busses), and the bus network has performed extremely well in (with Ken Livingstone’s support). Prob most close to the RPA-Veolia model.
First Group run the aircoach service in Dublin and do a great job; rail is different as the road space is government controlled; allthey need to do are paint bus lanes and it is regulated; other than the UK I have not visited any European country which privatised rail; SNCF provide a great service when they are not on strike and D-Bahn would wipe the floor with Veolia.
Examples to prove a point. It’s true of the timetabling on the recent WRC – Ennis is a bigger example than Gort – if it’s there and your running services, it should be used to serve passengers (and freight if there’s any demand), and to feed other services. That IE should be allowed to deliberately (or through incredulous ineptness) be allowed to run services that seem to deliberately not connect with other services, thus undermining their usefulness, is amazing to me and I can’t see how anyone can defend deliberately running a bad service!
Ennis has a number of services that take about 3 hours mush of it down to the indirect Limerick Junction Route being longer; not ideal but driving the 145 mile journey wouldn’t take much less once you factor in Dublin City traffic. There is room for improvement over time.
Not to labour the point but, MN is about a corridor, not a single connection point. Plus, I’m not sure a spur into that stretch of the northern line that carries other DART services, intercity and commuter services doesn’t just programme in capacity constraints in the future.
Of the 19 stations on the line and excluding the City Centre which is presumbly either the destination or an interchange; then only 4 passenger origin stations seem to have any real potential to give decent passenger numbers (Drumcoundra is served by the Maynooth line) namely DCU and Ballymun which could just as easily be served by a Luas which is going to Parnell Sq anyway; which leaves the Airport and Swords. The airport has been verified as IE as being doable and extending the Malahide service to Swords would actually reduce pressure on the line by meaning that trains cross tracks at Swords and not Malahide. Metro North is not required to acheive all but a link from Ballymun to Swords via the airport. There is no Bus service from Ballymun to the Airport indicating no demand and Dublin Bus would have passenger data for the Airport Swords loadings.
Swords was an example – the figure below shows just how much housing was delivered during the boom:
There will be significant housing demand in the future. CSO forecasts imply something like 750,000 additional people living in the the GDA by 2026 over 2011 (-250,000 if you strip away ALL migration to Ireland from outside). With an average household size of 2.8 (and declining), this implies a housing requirement of something like 175,000 units or just shy of 12,000 per annum. This brings us back to the lower end of the range delivered during the Celtic Tiger years. My fear is that allowing this need to be loosely distributed all over the GDA will just reinforce the unsustainable form which has been delivered with gusto outside of the better work occurring within the Dublin authorities (higher densities within more sustainable communities have been achieved). These need to be supported by infrastructure and made viable by supply side constraint in less sustainable locations. Development levies can then be used to support schemes such as DU or MN.
The advantage of this northern corridor is in its future capacity – and the North is better placed to accept further growth that the south (we’ve hit the mountains!), the west – it’s already and unsustainable messy, shapeless sprawl. Growth northwards has been amazingly subdued and represents a realistic growth corridor which could pull a lot of uses together.
I’ll take it that the demographic forecasts date from the 2006 Census; the same year Anglo Irish Bank’s profits peaked. Population growth will be very modest for the next 10-15 years as the accession state population goes elsewhere with their families. Wild forecasts based on demographics that weren’t sustainable led to a banking bust that will slow the economy down for years. With the IDA’s help growth of 3% will be just about acheivable.
The logical place to develop is along the four interconnector corridors and the Luas extensions. It is a long way to the twelve pins mountains if you go west.
An amount of me suspects that you may well be right and the future may not be rosy for MN. I think a DART spur would be a weak second for the airport and wouldn’t give the City the room for growth it will need in the next 20yrs and beyond.
Frank’s point is that these project will (or could) be paid for over a very long period is valid and you seem to be assuming that other elements of the cost of running the country won’t be cut instead (and/or as well). I still believe both are deliverable if the timeframe is slowed down. I get the impression you just don’t like MN!!! As an aside we were paying about hundreds of million per junction upgrade on the M50 and no one blinked an eye … there’s something very particular about public transport that seems to get people going and no one seems to question whether or not there is a need/demand/justification for (say) the level to which the Atlantic Corridor is being built out – seems to be a mix of Motorway/Dual Carriageway – seems excessive when 2+1 might have done … a parting thought – I need to eat!
I find the €1bn Tuam Motorway just as offensive as Metro North; pouring concrete for the sake of it in both cases.
Frank at €2bn cost these projects will never be paid for they will simply sit on the national debt; €2bn would equate to an interest bill of €100m per year every year for a very long time. Some projects merit that ongoing cost and some don’t. What was discussed above and below is what if the projects were funded year on year and just how much would be added to the exchequer borrowing requirement. Debt to GDP level is very much in focus and clearly each €2bn added will have implications for the rate of interest that one has to pay as each existing bond expires, is redeemed and then has to be replaced by new securities.
In terms of the erroneous figure itresults from my taking a figure based on an outdated US Dollar conversion rate; it does however understate the point I was making; the annual subsidy to one project would equate to a total of 0.29% of overall GDP a sum equal to 10% of the total Government deficit for all capital and current services for five years when fiscal discipline has never been more critical; unlike coming out of the 1980’s we don’t have the low wage rates this time so significantly more needs to be invested in higher education. Given that the route is unproven and that there would be further operational losses to be covered by an additional subvention the project is clearly unaffordable. BXD to Drumcoundra in terms of the link ups over a five year period would be a fraction of the cost and link just as many lines.
