Metro Link to Airport [Merged Thread]

Borzoi

Originally posted by flav0rflav

Now I don't know alot about tunnelling, but it surely isn't rocket science, and if it is, then they would develop significant up front abilities to estimate and cost projects, using surveying, testing drilling etc. No?

.

You're right tunneling isn't rocket science, it's more arcane than that.

The only way to determine the tunnelling conditions is to dig it out. Surveying, test drills etc only give an indication of the general lie of the land, with details at specific points.

But thanks to mother nature if you have the same conditions at A and B, it does not immediately follow that the same exists at C mideay between. It probably will, but ya cant be certain, and a tunneller won't take that risk.

Victor

Originally posted by Borzoi
But thanks to mother nature if you have the same conditions at A and B, it does not immediately follow that the same exists at C mideay between. It probably will, but ya cant be certain, and a tunneller won't take that risk.

See sketch - the most likely obstructions in deep tunnelling are sections of rock or individual boulders that weren't expected. The longer duration of projects 3-5 years means variables (like wages - which aren't in the contractor's control) are also more difficult to determine (most projects over 18 months have price variation clauses).

While you can ask a contractor to price infaltion upfront, it is often better for government to take the risk.

dmeehan

is the airport metro link going to be underground for 100% of the route, or just the city centre/airport locations?

is there a map anywhere for the new route and station locations?

Victor

Originally posted by dmeehan
is the airport metro link going to be underground for 100% of the route, or just the city centre/airport locations?

Unlikely, while long sections will be underground, it is likely that most options will contain soem overground sections, if nothing else for a depot and the like.

Originally posted by dmeehan
is there a map anywhere for the new route and station locations?

Apparently, Minister Brennan has 3 options on his desk - I'm not sure if they have been released.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/1341019?view=Eircomnet

Build now, pay later plan for new €2.4bn metro line
From:The Irish Independent
Tuesday, 2nd September, 2003
Alison O'Connor Political Correspondent

TAXPAYERS will not have to pay a single cent upfront for the construction of a new €2.4bn metro system in Dublin if Transport Minister Seamus Brennan has his way.

But, under a plan to be brought to Cabinet by Mr Brennan in the next fortnight, they will have to pay €350m a year, for 30 years, to lease the system from private contractors.

Mr Brennan told the Irish Independent yesterday that he wants a citywide metro in the capital within 20 years.

The State will not pay a penny until the first train is running, he promised.

However, from the day the metro is operational the State will lease the system from the contractors at a cost of up to €350m a year, a total cost of €10.5bn.

"The contractors coming in will design it, build it, finance it and, when it comes to running trains, a company will be got to run it. They will keep every penny on fares although there will be a contract with the State on the levels of fares," said Mr Brennan.

The downside, said the minister, is that there would be €350m coming out of our tax bill for 30 years.

"But the upside is not having to go to Charlie McCreevy for €2.4bn, which there is a fat chance of getting," said Mr Brennan.

"The next few generations who use this will be the ones who pay for it out of their income tax and why wouldn't they? Why should today's taxpayers pay for it?" He admitted it will not be easy to get the plan approved by Cabinet saying there are some ministers who are not keen on the idea of a metro. Mr Brennan wants work to begin as soon as possible on a metro line between Dublin Airport and the city centre. However, it will involve the introduction of special legislation, which he hopes to have in the Dail before Christmas. "I am trying to push to the edge of the Constitution and see what we get away with on this," he said. "It would involve hundreds of landowners."

The minister's plans are bound to cause anger, particularly amongst hundreds of landowners who would lose their property rights, and compensation claims, below a certain level underground.

The minister said that in Spain the State may use any land 10 metres below the surface, which is one of the reasons why the Madrid metro was completed successfully. "The Bill will seek to ensure that property that's needed is deemed to be the property of the State," he said. "There is such a long timescale for appeals. Public consultation on Luas took 18 months, why not three or four months for such a project? I want to put all of that into the Bill."

Asked about possible Supreme Court challenges, Mr Brennan said he was talking about land that was 30 metres down below ground level. "It's a long way down."

In Madrid, he said, metro contractors were tunnelling 24 hours a day, as opposed to eight hours of tunnelling for the Dublin Port Tunnel.

The minister met with the Rail Procurement Agency (RPA) yesterday afternoon. to pin down the costs which have been reduced from €4.8bn to €2.4bn for the Dublin Airport line.

The current design, he said, would make the 12km journey from Dublin Airport to the city centre above ground, below ground and on stilts.

It would leave Dublin Airport on ground level, be elevated over the motorway, probably as far as Dublin City University, before going underground again at Broadstone, on to Connolly Station and then St Stephen's Green.

There would probably be stations at Ballymun, Glasnevin, DCU, the Mater Hospital, O'Connell St and on to Connolly Station.

In Phase 2 the minister envisages the metro line being extended to Swords. The Luas line from St Stephen's Green to Sandyford would also then be upgraded to a Metro line.

silverside

why dooesnt he just borrow the money to build it, then contract out the operation of it? 350M X 30 years is a lot!

Is it because
A) Charlie mccreevy doesnt like borrowing
The private sector would do a better job of it
C) LUAS went over budget and over time
D) All of the above?

loyatemu

why dooesnt he just borrow the money to build it

EU rules on debt levels (designed to keep the Euro stable)

maxheadroom

Originally posted by loyatemu
why dooesnt he just borrow the money to build it

EU rules on debt levels (designed to keep the Euro stable)

Then why not set up a semi state company to borrow the money, which would be given a contract to operate the system. They could even be given a contract to run the physical infrastructure and have a seperate company actually run the trains if it was necessary for EU tendering legislation...

dmeehan

Originally posted by maxheadroom
Then why not set up a semi state company to borrow the money, which would be given a contract to operate the system. They could even be given a contract to run the physical infrastructure and have a seperate company actually run the trains if it was necessary for EU tendering legislation...

the "semi state" would have to compete in an open tender process with other private companies

if the govt. owns the company which is doing the borrowing, then this is also included as govt. borrowing (I think??)

the govt. cannot give any money or aid to the "semi state" in any form (including loan garuntees), just ask Ryanair about Strasbourg Airport

RainyDay

Manuel Melis who oversaw the Madrid metro is being installed on the commitee thingy that overses the project...

I don't think the Spanish tunnellers set the 'gold standard' for the rest of the world.

From www.tunnelbuilder.net/frmain.php

---

Spanish Tunnellers Rescued from Guadarrama Tunnel
Thirty-four workers have been rescued after being trapped by fire for five hours on 6th August in the Guadarrama railway tunnel under construction on the high speed link from Madrid to Valladolid, near La Granja de San Ildefonso, 80 km north of Madrid. The workers took refuge in an air pocket until rescuers could reach them. No one was injured but some needed respiratory assistance using oxygen masks. They were trapped 850 m from the tunnel entrance after a muck train ferrying them to the construction site caught fire. The incident took place on one of the southbound tunnels drilled by a 9.5 m-diameter Wirth hard rock TBM. The contractors on this drive include ACS, Vías y Construcciones, FCC, and Ferrovial-Agromán.

It is the second serious incident along the same stretch of line this year. In January, two workers died when two large hoppers filled with gravels collapsed on top of them. Also, early June, a ground collapse occurred in the Mount Valsaín near Segovia.

Victor

Originally posted by loyatemu
EU rules on debt levels (designed to keep the Euro stable)

I don't think capital expenditure counts under these rules. McCreevy is thinking about the government's own accounting system and breaking even (even though they normally have to fudge the figures).

I suspect part of the agenda is to (a) not have any more semi-state companies (b) give private operators a bigger slice of the action.

antoinolachtnai

Capital expenditure does count for the stability pact.

The stability rules are designed to stop governments from undermining the stability of the currency. The rules about funding semi-states are there to stop states from using their financial clout to undermine competition in the marketplace. The Common Market just wouldn't work otherwise.

The net result is that a State has to run its expenditure in much the same way as a household or a business does. This is not all a bad thing.

350 million per year for 30 years is not really a lot for 30 miles of tunnel and track, especially when people are paying 18000 euro/year and more for 30 years for small houses in the city.

No matter what way the state does it, there is going to be borrowing and a pile of interest to pay. This is as good a way of doing it as just absorbing it into general expenditure.

There are plenty of other benefits from doing it this way. The biggest one is that the entity managing the build will have the expertise and experience to know what it is doing (somewhat lacking on the Luas project). It will be able to take on some of the risk of the development, rather than having the government go it alone and not really know what it is doing.

There are definitely disadvantages to the model, but I think it is unfair to slag off these PPP arrangements without really understanding what they are about and how they work.

antoin.

Qadhafi

350 million per year for 30 years is not really a lot for 30 miles of tunnel and track, especially when people are paying 18000 euro/year and more for 30 years for small houses in the city.

That equals €10 billion, thats way to much! hey thats 5 TIMES the cost price.

How are these things so expensive in Ireland?

antoinolachtnai

that's because there's a big bunch of interest. They appear to be proposing what amounts to a glorified fixed-interest hire-purchase agreement with 30 yearly payments. Actually, it's longer than that, because the first payment is only due when the system becomes operational. So the real duration of the loan will be around 35 years.

Mind you, the calculations do seem a bit skewed. I can't understand how they come up with the 10.5 bn figure. This would appear to be based on a 12 percent interest rate, which is a bit pessimistic. At a realistic 6 percent, I would expect the yearly bill to be around 174m.

We could certainly do it cheaper for cash, but we'd be taking on more of the risk. And unless the Japanese strike oil in Fairview Park during the Port Tunnel dig, there is no way we are going to be able to come up with the money up-front.

a.