[Article] Port tunnel entry to be restricted because of fire hazard

Victor

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2004/0204/2660244793HM1PORTTUNNEL.html

Port tunnel entry to be restricted because of fire hazard

Access to the Dublin Port Tunnel will have to be carefully controlled to avoid a fire disaster because the ventilation system is not adequate to cope with congested traffic, a traffic management report to be published next week reveals. Frank McDonald, Environment Editor, reports

The report, which is to be published by Dublin City Council, will outline a strategy to manage heavy goods vehicles (HGVs).It is also expected to show that the €650 million tunnel will not bring as much relief to the Liffey quays from traffic congestion as was anticipated.

Mr Michael Egan, spokesman for the National Roads Authority, told The Irish Times yesterday that it would have cost an extra €100 million to install a more sophisticated smoke extraction system that would work even in bumper-to-bumper traffic.

"A tunnel that's 4.5 kilometres long is going to be a hostile environment anyway. The last thing you want is people stuck in traffic because a fire in that situation would create panic with the potential for significant loss of life."

It is understood that Dublin City Council's project engineers advised that a smoke extraction system be installed, rather than leaving it to the ventilators to "push" the smoke out. But this was ruled out by the National Roads Authority on cost grounds.

The project was designed before the two most recent fire disasters in the Alpine tunnels of Mont Blanc and St Gotthard, in 2000 and 2001 respectively, which led to a review of international best practice to avoid "worst case scenarios".

"No matter how good the ventilation system is, if a tunnel is chock-a-block with traffic, there's the possibility of a major disaster," said Mr Egan.

"But the port tunnel has cross passages between the two tubes as a means of escape."

Because a smoke extraction system has not been installed, access to the twin-tube tunnel will have to be controlled at each end to ensure free-flowing traffic at all times. This could lead to significant tailbacks at the two portals, off East Wall Road and on the M1 motorway.

However, Mr Egan said the National Roads Authority was "absolutely satisfied" that the project "meets best international practice".

He stressed this meant that "there has to be a high level of certainty at all times that traffic entering the tunnel can get out at speed".

Spending an additional €100 million to further enhance ventilation would not necessarily have produced a better result, he said.

"We do not believe that safety has been compromised in normal traffic movement."

The draft traffic management plan being finalised by the city council will provide for full closure, partial closure and regulated entry at each end in order to keep traffic moving at free flow along the tunnel's four-lane dual-carriageway.

One of the principal aims of the plan is to maximise the use of the tunnel by HGVs, particularly to relieve the Liffey quays.

But even apart from the controversy over its height, there is doubt about what proportion of these heavy goods vehicles will actually use it. "We probably gilded the lily a bit," one insider source conceded yesterday.

"The situation is more complex than it was presented," he said. "It's probably fair to say that we inadvertently oversold the benefits." The draft management strategy attempts to quantify the number of HGVs, with destinations in the inner city, for which the quays would be more convenient than the tunnel, but it still forecasts that a "significant" proportion will use the tunnel.

Meanwhile, tunnel project managers, Kellogg Brown and Root - a subsidiary of Halliburton, the US military's biggest contractor - is under investigation for overcharging by more than $16 million for meals served to US troops in Iraq.

Victor

Aparently the IT have done a back track on the piece.

The peak toll for cars will be index linked from £3 at 1999 prices (currently €5.60). Off-peak will be about a third of that. Trucks will go free.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2004/02/05/story132772.html

Tolls on Dublin Port Tunnel to cost up to €11
05/02/2004 - 8:30:35 am

Motorists will reportedly have to pay up to €11 in tolls to use the €650m Dublin Port Tunnel.

Reports this morning said the tunnel operators will be allowed to impose variable tolls of up to €11 in an effort to prevent traffic build-ups.

The aim of the variable tolls is to discourage motorists from using the tunnel as a short cut.

Reports yesterday said the ventilation system installed in the tunnel would be unable to cope with congested traffic, which could cause a fire hazard.

...........\national\2479520.htm

Cars face variable tunnel tolls of up to €11
From:The Irish Independent
Thursday, 5th February, 2004
Treacy Hogan Environment Correspondent

CAR drivers face the first variable road tolls which can cost up to €11 when the new Dublin Port Tunnel opens.

Tunnel operators will be allowed to impose huge tolls on car users which can change on an hour-by-hour or day-by-day basis.

That is as a deterrent from entering the tunnel and causing traffic buildups.

It will be the first system of variable tolling in the country.

The aim is to have the level of toll so high that motorists won't use the dual-carriageway tunnel as a quick way of getting into the city centre.

If the tunnel operators feel too many car drivers are using the tunnel and congestion is building up the high tolls will be flashed on an extensive network of roadside screens on approach roads.

The expected toll is €5.60 but this can be doubled to more than €11 if necessary to steer cars to existing routes around the city, it was learned.

Heavy trucks with no business in Dublin city centre will all be banned from the streets under draconian new regulations being unveiled next week by the city council.

Those with origins and destinations in the city centre will also be severely restricted, but all other truck movements will be banned.

Victor

http://www.nra.ie/News/PressReleases/d1084.HTML.html

Dublin Port Tunnel Operation

The report which appeared in the Irish Times (Wednesday 4th February 2004) is based on a flawed understanding what Dublin Port Tunnel is for and draws conclusions which are not based on the facts. In simple terms the headline “Access to the port tunnel will be restricted because of fire hazard” puts the cart before the horse.

Dublin Port Tunnel’s primary purpose is to get trucks to and from Dublin Port to the M50 and the M1 motorways. It is not a commuter route to the city centre. It is in the city’s interest that the tunnel takes heavy vehicles, public transport, taxis off the streets of the capital. Private traffic will be discouraged and diverted by a toll - at 2001 prices €5 per car. Traffic congestion will not be allowed to develop in the tunnel.

“If the level of traffic metered is seen to approach congestion level, commuter cars will be restricted and diverted until the level returns to normal. HGV numbers will not be restricted nor are they tolled”, said Tim Brick, Deputy City Engineer.

Ventilation and fire safety measures are being installed to international best practice standards. The tunnel has two tubes, and is in effect an underground dual carriageway of 4.5 km length.

“The ventilation system is designed to best international standards to extract fumes from traffic and disperse them safely”, said Hugh Creegan, National Roads Authority spokesman. “Dublin Port Tunnel will have the most up-to-date safety and rescue procedures to deal with a fire should it occur. People need to be assured that there are first class safety measures in place.”


Tim Brick cited the following points: -

In the event of a fire incident being detected in one of the tunnel tubes, the vehicles in front of the incident will go forward as normal and the ceiling mounted ventilation fans will switch to blow the smoke away from traffic remaining in the tunnel.

To allow people to evacuate the tunnel in an emergency there are pedestrian cross-passages located every 250 metres and every 1100 metres there are vehicles cross-passages between the two tunnel tubes. Both the pedestrian and the vehicular cross-passages also allow emergency personnel to access the scene from the non-incident tube.

Having examined the various ventilation systems available, and the operating traffic management measures applying, both DCC and the NRA were satisfied that the system being installed provides the best level of safety for users of the tunnel. No dispute arose on this matter.

The tunnel will be equipped with a host of safety systems in line with the best provisions around the world. The tunnel will fully monitored by CCTV on a continuous basis, emergency stations and telephones will be located every 250 metres, regular escape cross-passages will be provided, fire detection systems will be installed, pollutant monitors will be installed, emergency public address systems will be provided and a host of other provisions.

A draft EU directive on tunnel safety is expected to be enacted shortly. That directive sets down the safety standards that must be achieved by all major road tunnels in Europe. Under a recent audit it was confirmed that the DPT meets all of the safety provisions set out in that directive and in particular fully satisfies its requirements in regard to fire safety and ventilation systems.

Victor

..........\topstories\2479333.htm

Port tunnel satisfies fire safety rules, say authorities
From:ireland.com
Thursday, 5th February, 2004

Dublin City Council and the National Roads Authority have said that the Dublin Port Tunnel "fully satisfies" the fire safety and ventilation systems required by a draft EU directive on tunnel safety.

They were responding to a report in The Irish Times yesterday, which said access to the port tunnel would have to be restricted to ensure free-flowing traffic at all times in order to guarantee safety in the event of fire.

In a statement, they said a recent audit had confirmed that the €650 million port tunnel "meets all of the safety provisions" in the draft EU directive, which sets down best-practice standards for road tunnels throughout Europe.

"Having examined the various ventilation systems available and the operational traffic-management measures applying, both Dublin City Council and the NRA are satisfied that the system being installed provides the best level of safety for users of the tunnel."

The council's director of traffic, Mr Owen Keegan, said a "completely misleading" impression had been given that a forthcoming management strategy for heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) was required to ensure safe operation of the tunnel.

He stressed that this strategy, due to be published next week, was "completely separate" from the issue of the ventilation system and was designed to maximise use of the tunnel for port access as well as dealing with HGVs that were not port-related.

Mr Keegan said he was satisfied that tankers and other HGVs carrying flammable or hazardous materials could be safely accommodated in the tunnel, though special loads travelling under escort would be subject to certain restrictions.

"There was an implication [in The Irish Times report] that we have compromised safety, but I don't accept that. We believe the tunnel can be operated safely and that imposes an additional onus in terms of traffic management."

A senior officer in the Fire Service said personnel had not yet been given any training on how to respond to an accident in the tunnel. "I'd estimate that 800 would need to be trained up and provided with long-duration breathing apparatus."

Mr Tim Brick, project manager for the port tunnel, said the Fire Brigade had been visiting the construction site on a regular basis and, by the time it was finished in August 2005, an emergency response plan would be put in place. The project team was starting the procurement procedures to select an operator for the tunnel.

"Parallel with that, an operational plan will be drawn up - every tunnel has one - and that will lay down the emergency procedures."

Mr Brick said that, in the event of a fire, the traffic in front of it would get out of the tunnel while fans would blow smoke away from any stationary traffic behind it. The fire would also trigger alarms, overhead detectors and cameras to pinpoint it.

He also noted it had been policy from the time the project was conceived in 1994 to restrict traffic access to the port tunnel, with toll-free priority for HGVs and tolls on cars to deter commuters from using the route at peak times.

Though it would have the capacity to take 70,000 vehicles per day, Mr Brick said allowing that number of cars to use it as a new access route to the city centre would set aside its primary purpose of accommodating around 9,000 HGVs per day.

In their joint statement, the city council and the NRA said it was in Dublin's interest that the tunnel would take as many HGVs off the streets as possible. "Private traffic will be discouraged and diverted by a toll - at 2001 prices, €5 per car."