Metro North Investment???

dunsandin

Does anybody share my view that the states decision today to plough ahead with metro North is just another bung to the developers who invested heavily in landbanks along the proposed route, as opposed to a rational use of scarce rescources? Surely the Dublin-Navan rail corridor would be a better investment? Smells of hard necked cronyism to me.Surprise surprise.

deise go deo

No bertie just wants a new way to get to the Dail:D

Sponge Bob

dunsandin wrote: »

Does anybody share my view that the states decision today to plough ahead with metro North is just another bung to the developers who invested heavily in landbanks along the proposed route, as opposed to a rational use of scarce rescources? Surely the Dublin-Navan rail corridor would be a better investment? .

No
No

and NOO!!!!

dunsandin

So what are you trying to say there then??:D:D It probably is a good investment, surely it wont run over budget, take twice as long and only service a narrow self-interested, Dublin centric clique. And, it probably is common sense, when up to your eyes in squander induced debt, to pee another few billion up the proverbial wall. But, sure it'll keep the developers and construction companies happy, and like the luas, it will create loads of local jobs. Oh no, hang on, most of the best paid luas contracts went to foreign companies who brought in their own workers.

astrofool

It's the second most essential thing that needs to happen after the Dart Interconnector (DI), it will change the way people move around the city.

There are lots of transport initiatives that should go ahead, but when we're short of money, prioritising the DI and MN has to be the priority.

It will also likely make a profit in the long term.

The WRC would have been the bung for developers.

kilburn

Metro north is a joke it should be scrapped, the cash should be pumped into better train and road connections around the country

dunsandin

astrofool wrote: »

It's the second most essential thing that needs to happen after the Dart Interconnector (DI), it will change the way people move around the city.

There are lots of transport initiatives that should go ahead, but when we're short of money, prioritising the DI and MN has to be the priority.

It will also likely make a profit in the long term.

The WRC would have been the bung for developers.

It and Nama....

daithicarr

I was unable to find much information on the metro porject on the transport 21 website, but a few articles mention a price of 4.58 billion at 2004 prices to 6 billion at 2010 prices

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/national-news/dublins-planned-metro-north-line-to-cost-more-than-5bn-1053110.html

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/dublin-metro/

Thats 190 mil to 250 mil per km with given no cost overruns, wikipedia gives a price of 89 million per km for the san fransico metro which is built in a area prone to earhtquakes unlike dublin. I have seen other articles and it seems 60 million to 100 million seems to be the average price for a metro, so why are we looking at at least twice that if not a lot more?

tunney

kilburn wrote: »

Metro north is a joke it should be scrapped, the cash should be pumped into better train and road connections around the country

Given 50% of the tax revenue that the exchequer recevies is generated in Dublin should the investment not be greater there?

cson

I can't believe people are arguing against a project that not only is badly needed but will last for decades. Dublin Airport is possibly the only major European International Airport without a metro or rail link to the city.

Liam Byrne

cson wrote: »

I can't believe people are arguing against a project that not only is badly needed but will last for decades. Dublin Airport is possibly the only major European International Airport without a metro or rail link to the city.

Shannon ?

astrofool

dunsandin wrote: »

It and Nama....

I fail to see the link between the bank bailouts and a piece of infrastructure that can last 100+ years. (unless you're saying we'll still be paying off NAMA in 2110).

daithicarr wrote: »

I was unable to find much information on the metro porject on the transport 21 website, but a few articles mention a price of 4.58 billion at 2004 prices to 6 billion at 2010 prices

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/national-news/dublins-planned-metro-north-line-to-cost-more-than-5bn-1053110.html

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/dublin-metro/

Thats 190 mil to 250 mil per km with given no cost overruns, wikipedia gives a price of 89 million per km for the san fransico metro which is built in a area prone to earhtquakes unlike dublin. I have seen other articles and it seems 60 million to 100 million seems to be the average price for a metro, so why are we looking at at least twice that if not a lot more?

Higher minimum wages in Ireland, higher union rates per worker. Earthquake zones will also be easier to dig in than rock that hasn't moved for millions of years, and the digging is the highest cost.

Also, Dublin city is older than San francisco, with it's layout (non grid) making it harder to find room to build infrastructure.

cson

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Shannon ?

Shannon isn't major I'm afraid Liam.

As an aside; with the construction of the interurbans Shannon could have been a major hub for the West if the DAA hadn't decided to run it into the ground.

daithicarr

how does the minimum wage being higer inpact on this project? no one working on it will be on minimum wage as far as i know, and the technical staff will be on comparative wages would they not?

higher union rates per worker? are they only hiring unionised workers and how does that impact the project? surely they can hire cheaper workers?

and id imagine a earthquake zone would be much harder to build in, the system would have to be able to withstand minor trembles etc and not collapse completely in the case of a major event and thus be more costly?

mikemac

Union staff will be hired.
For any major project having union staff working with non union staff who are paid less then the going rate will cause issues.

You are correct, nobody there will be on minimum wage and most of the workers will have trades and skills so will be paid the proper rate.

A quick look at Construction Industry Federation shows €14.88 per hour for unskilled labouring.
Tradesmen have their own rates

Pete_Cavan

dunsandin wrote: »

Does anybody share my view that the states decision today to plough ahead with metro North is just another bung to the developers who invested heavily in landbanks along the proposed route, as opposed to a rational use of scarce rescources?

Nobody shares that view, well nobody with any sense anyway. You are aware that the majority of the line runs under ground so developers with landbanks are not going to benefit. Even when the line comes above ground it is beyond the airport in north County Dublin where most of the land is for agricultural purposes and so any CPOs will be relatively inexpensive.

dunsandin wrote: »

Surely the Dublin-Navan rail corridor would be a better investment? Smells of hard necked cronyism to me.Surprise surprise.

How would the Dublin-Navan rail corridor be a better investment? Navan has a population of about 40,000 and has just got a brand new road to Dublin built on its doorstep (the most expensive single contract road project ever undertaken in Ireland coming in at approximately €650 million), they do not need a half a billion euro rail line as well. Anyway Park and Ride facilities comprising 1200 spaces will are provided at Pace.

After the Interconnector, Metro North will be the most important piece of infrastructure in Dublin. It provides a link from the airport (which gets around 20million passengers a year) to the city centre with a travel time of less than 30 minutes. It also has stops at important destinations such as the Mater hospital and future site of the new childrens hospital as well as DCU. It also links large communities like Swords (which has a similar population to Navan) and the redeveloped Ballymun to the city centre. MN will allow passengers to interchange with both Luas lines and both Dart lines once the Interconnector is completed so Dublin will finally have an integrated public transport network.

dunsandin wrote: »

So what are you trying to say there then??:D:D It probably is a good investment, surely it wont run over budget, take twice as long and only service a narrow self-interested, Dublin centric clique.

MN serves one of our most important pieces of national infrastructure, Dublin airport, therefore it does not "only service a narrow self-interested, Dublin centric clique". But Dublin does produce more than its fair share of tax revenue which has paid for many white elephant rail lines around the country like the WRC so Dublin deserves a potentially profitable piece of infrastructure like this.

dunsandin wrote: »

And, it probably is common sense, when up to your eyes in squander induced debt, to pee another few billion up the proverbial wall. But, sure it'll keep the developers and construction companies happy, and like the luas, it will create loads of local jobs.

MN is expected to create at least 4,000 direct construction jobs, many of these workers would otherwise be unemployed and thousands more indirect jobs. So this pumps more money into the economy and gets people off the dole reducing social welfare payments. Pace-Navan rail line would employ a lot less people and for a shorter period of time.

dunsandin wrote: »

Oh no, hang on, most of the best paid luas contracts went to foreign companies who brought in their own workers.

If Irish companies were more competitive they would win contracts like this. The Luas is currently the only rail line in the country operating at a profit, perhaps you would prefer to see us losing money on it as well.

daithicarr wrote: »

I was unable to find much information on the metro porject on the transport 21 website, but a few articles mention a price of 4.58 billion at 2004 prices to 6 billion at 2010 prices

Sources estimate that the capital cost of the line will be about €2.8bn. Under the PPP model, this would be the initial cost which is paid for by the winning consortium. The total cost to the government over the life of the PPP contract, which I think is 25 years, would be €5 - 6bn. This is including interest and the winning consortium would also be operating and maintaining the service.

A good article (http://www.businessandfinance.ie/ind...6&n=372&a=1447) says the the cost to the State between now and the day it opens will be about €100. It will then cost about €150m to €170m a year each year for 25 years afterwards. The article also makes a good point about the project employing 5,000 to 6,000 people, most of whom would otherwise be unemployed, reducing social welfare payments as well as generating a lot of tax revenue.

As with most PPP projects I think the real value to the state will be when the current contract expires, by which time most of the costs will (hopefully) be covered by the social and economic benefits arising from the project, and future contracts for operating the service will be profitable for the government, who ever that may be.

RichardAnd

I'd be in favour of the MN though I expect it to be held up by greedy residents wanting a slice of pie. But that's Ireland.

Laminations

I'd imagine the price will be less than that per kilometre in the end but the reason it's higher would be because of higher spec in the project, have you seen the station design? And there is a difference about being against budget overruns and cost versus fundamentally against the metro. I have a hard time taking anyone in the latter category seriously while I myself would be in the former

astrofool

daithicarr wrote: »

how does the minimum wage being higer inpact on this project? no one working on it will be on minimum wage as far as i know, and the technical staff will be on comparative wages would they not?

higher union rates per worker? are they only hiring unionised workers and how does that impact the project? surely they can hire cheaper workers?

and id imagine a earthquake zone would be much harder to build in, the system would have to be able to withstand minor trembles etc and not collapse completely in the case of a major event and thus be more costly?

Higher minimum wage pushes all wages up, we pay the bottom level the most, so all wages are higher as a result.

As said above, all workers will likely be union, with their associated cost per hour, travel time, stand around a hole looking time etc.

The highest cost in building a tunnel is digging it out, not making it secure afterwards. Ireland happens to sit on a lot of rock, making tunnelling very expensive.

dunsandin

This thread shows me why we are where we are. A nation led by deluded wasters who think they deserve the best and damn the cost. I seriously think that some of the responses here are borderline mental. Lets borrow another 40 billion, sure whats the harm. Its a long term investment. Madness. Like paying 32 million for that wasteland to build a new prison on. We are a country that can afford a 96 fiesta, but think we deserve better, so are in hock for our 3 series 10 reg BMW. Nuts. Is there no better target for this sum? Health service anybody????Jenuine job creation??Pete Cavan, you are very full of your own self with your assurance that nobody disagrees with you. You must be a very wise and successful man altogether. Good luck.

oppenheimer1

dunsandin wrote: »

This thread shows me why we are where we are. A nation led by deluded wasters who think they deserve the best and damn the cost. I seriously think that some of the responses here are borderline mental. Lets borrow another 40 billion, sure whats the harm. Its a long term investment. Madness. Like paying 32 million for that wasteland to build a new prison on. We are a country that can afford a 96 fiesta, but think we deserve better, so are in hock for our 3 series 10 reg BMW. Nuts. Is there no better target for this sum? Health service anybody????Jenuine job creation??Pete Cavan, you are very full of your own self with your assurance that nobody disagrees with you. You must be a very wise and successful man altogether. Good luck.

Indeed this thread does show why we are where we are. Metro North should have been built decades ago when european money was flowing in. However the fact that it wasn't doesn't mean it shouldn't be built. The Interconnector and MN are the two single most important transport projects that need to be undertaken. No doubt people will compare the cost of MN to similar size projects like the Jubilee line extension in London Metros in Madrid and Barcelona. This is of course forgetting that the ground in Dublin is very very hard and much more difficult to tunnel in. (For those that would like to learn more about the ground in Dublin read http://igsl.ie/wp-content/uploads/Geotechnique%20DBC.pdf )

There is no problem in borrowing another €40bn for capital projects assuming of course we can meet the interest payments. Borrowing for current spending is far more objectionable, or indeed for investing in the banking sector (that doesn't mean its not important or necessary).

This old chestnut of healthcare is always brought up when discussing government spending. If some people here had their way there wouldn't be a single thing in the country built only hospitals. FFS the government has other priorities too. MN will be of great social and economic benefit to the country as a whole.

As I said before, it should have been built years ago.

astrofool

dunsandin wrote: »

This thread shows me why we are where we are. A nation led by deluded wasters who think they deserve the best and damn the cost. I seriously think that some of the responses here are borderline mental. Lets borrow another 40 billion, sure whats the harm. Its a long term investment. Madness. Like paying 32 million for that wasteland to build a new prison on. We are a country that can afford a 96 fiesta, but think we deserve better, so are in hock for our 3 series 10 reg BMW. Nuts. Is there no better target for this sum? Health service anybody????Jenuine job creation??Pete Cavan, you are very full of your own self with your assurance that nobody disagrees with you. You must be a very wise and successful man altogether. Good luck.

Long term infrastructure projects that will pay for themselves are exactly what we should be spending money on right now.

A) funding is available, and investors will invest
throwing it into the money pit of the hse is probably about the worst value we can get for money at the moment
C) if we ever do want a world class economy, we need to have the infrastructure to support it. MN and DI will create thousands of jobs in construction, but also afterwards rough increased tourism and being able to attract and keep companies to/in ireland.

meditraitor

Is it possible that a lot of the land bank needed for the metro north already belongs to the taxpayer or will be a whole lot cheaper than already envisaged?

Labour and contruction costs should also be a lot cheaper.

Nama

daithicarr

astrofool wrote: »

Higher minimum wage pushes all wages up, we pay the bottom level the most, so all wages are higher as a result.

As said above, all workers will likely be union, with their associated cost per hour, travel time, stand around a hole looking time etc.

I have not seen anything that indicates that because those on minimum wage are paid more than many other countrys all sectors are naturaly paid more? out of curiosity is there anywhere i could see international wage comparisons with irelands?
And how does a slightly higher minimum wage translate in to a much higher construction cost?
Also i thought this was going to be built by private companys on tender, so would that not greatly reduce the amount of union involvement.

Im for this project, id just like to see it done with as little waste as possible and as far as im aware building in sound rock would be much easier than in rock distrubed by seismic activity.

Laminations

dunsandin wrote: »

This thread shows me why we are where we are. A nation led by deluded wasters who think they deserve the best and damn the cost. I seriously think that some of the responses here are borderline mental. Lets borrow another 40 billion, sure whats the harm. Its a long term investment. Madness. Like paying 32 million for that wasteland to build a new prison on. We are a country that can afford a 96 fiesta, but think we deserve better, so are in hock for our 3 series 10 reg BMW. Nuts. Is there no better target for this sum? Health service anybody????Jenuine job creation??Pete Cavan, you are very full of your own self with your assurance that nobody disagrees with you. You must be a very wise and successful man altogether. Good luck.

Ha ha, you call people mental for suggesting that a solid rail infrastructure is a good long term investment and instead you think we should pump more money into health? Like lack of money is the problem there and not mismanagement. The prison is also necessary and the money spent (wasted) on it so far just highlights FFs inability to plan projects.

Comordha

Melbourne airport caters for a population of 4 million people and is probably closer to the city centre than Dublin airport and it has no metro. Frequent mid-sized buses service the route.

beeno67

I am trying to keep an open mind on Metro North. Many of you seem very much in favour of it saying it is a good investment. How is it a good investment? At a cost of 6 Billion as someone said earlier how will the country benefit by more than this. Please no one say it will increase passenger numbers to Dublin Airport. We know it won't do that to any great extent.

Tefral

Just so everyone knows this project WONT run over budget as long as the Design team dont change anything after the Tender has been completed. All new forms of government contracts place the burden of risk soley on the contractor.

I think its a good investment being honest...

Tim Robbins

dunsandin wrote: »

This thread shows me why we are where we are. A nation led by deluded wasters who think they deserve the best and damn the cost. I seriously think that some of the responses here are borderline mental. Lets borrow another 40 billion, sure whats the harm. Its a long term investment. Madness. Like paying 32 million for that wasteland to build a new prison on. We are a country that can afford a 96 fiesta, but think we deserve better, so are in hock for our 3 series 10 reg BMW. Nuts. Is there no better target for this sum? Health service anybody????Jenuine job creation??Pete Cavan, you are very full of your own self with your assurance that nobody disagrees with you. You must be a very wise and successful man altogether. Good luck.

It would be harder to think of a better example of a black hole than our failed health service. We have thrown a huge amount of money at it and still have a very poor service.

Head The Wall

Agreed on that, people are already making their way to dublin airport without this. As are people geting to work etc

Very hard to justify for around 6 Billion, that'd build a lot of schools and probably create even more jobs. Whatever about hospitals we are short of schools in this country

Pete_Cavan

dunsandin wrote: »

This thread shows me why we are where we are. A nation led by deluded wasters who think they deserve the best and damn the cost. I seriously think that some of the responses here are borderline mental. Lets borrow another 40 billion, sure whats the harm. Its a long term investment. Madness. Like paying 32 million for that wasteland to build a new prison on. We are a country that can afford a 96 fiesta, but think we deserve better, so are in hock for our 3 series 10 reg BMW. Nuts. Is there no better target for this sum? Health service anybody????Jenuine job creation??

If you think scrapping MN and pouring more money into the health service is the best way forward for this country then you are the "deluded waster who think they deserve the best and damn the cost", as you put it. We are currently borrowing €20bn a year to keep the country going with a lot of that going on current expenditure. At least borrowing for capital expenditure stimulates economic activity and creates jobs which is genuine job creation. Jenuine job creation - is that what you call borrowing money to pay for unnecessary admin/mgmt in the health service instead of sacking them and saving the country a fortune?

dunsandin wrote: »

Pete Cavan, you are very full of your own self with your assurance that nobody disagrees with you. You must be a very wise and successful man altogether. Good luck.

I did not say that nobody disagrees with me. I said nobody with any sense agrees with you. At least I took a series of quotes from other posters and gave my opinions which I backed up. If you can adequately explain to me how scrapping all capital investment and pumping money into a grossly inefficient health service that, per capita is one of the best funded in the world yet provides a very poor service, is going to return economic prosperity to this country I will gladly agree with you. Until then you can keep your sarcastic comments to yourself because you are losing credibility like the health service in losing money.