Built on faulty assumptions, strategy is lacking ambition and firm timelines

Uimhir Thagarta Uathúil: 
NTA-C5-728
Stádas: 
Submitted
Údar: 
John Oh
Líon na ndoiciméad faoi cheangal: 
0
Údar: 
John Oh

Tuairimí

3. Strategy Challenges

The alternative future scenario method of forecasting demand has led to a drastic reduction in the scale and ambition for the GDA Transport Strategy and is built on a number of faulty assumptions:

- 10% and 25% reduction in journeys for education at 2nd and 3rd level respectively.

- A shift to local, convenience shopping for groceries.

The Dept of Education have not announced any plans to shift second level education to a model involving any element of distance learning, nor have they indicated an intention to do so. In fact, the omicron wave has only demonstrated their determination to continue with in-class teaching as this pandemic unfolds.

Kantar figures for 2021 show that there was a dramatic shift away from local convenience retailers in the groceries space as soon as pandemic restrictions were eased. Market share by the large destination retailers such as Dunnes and Tesco have recovered to pre-pandemic levels and this suggests that the shift to local convenience shopping has not materialised on a permanent basis.

Why has this revised strategy not been stress-tested against the old demand model to determine if current plans hold up in a scenario where we see a return to pre-pandemic norms? At the very least, this new demand model should be accompanied by another review of this strategy document sooner than 2028, given that this alternative demand model looks increasingly unlikely to be an accurate picture of future transport demand in Dublin

 

12. Public Transport (Bus, Light & Heavy Rail)

Based on the new alternative future scenario demand model, it seems that Dart+ Tunnel has been deemed not needed during the lifetime of this strategy. I do not understand how this decision was arrived at given that Dart Underground has been an objective of transport planning in Dublin since A Platform for Change back in 2000. Are we now saying that all prior forecasts and assessment are incorrect in identifying a need for a Dart interconnector at this location?

It seems that the NTA rationale for this decision to effectively cancel Dart+ Tunnel during the lifetime of this plan is based solely on the Jacobs Report to assess Dart+ Tunnel Route Options and Feasibility. The Jacobs report acknowledges that it is not business case for Dart+ Tunnel and recommends a route that is near identical to the previously most advanced route for the prior incarnation of Dart+ Tunnel, Dart Underground. Why has the decision to cancel/delay Dart+ Tunnel been based solely on the Jacobs report when an identical alignment has a full business case completed by Irish Rail back in 2010? Shouldn't the 2010 Irish Rail business case be updated as a result and also be used to inform a decision on Dart+ Tunnel? We know that the The Irish Rail business case, based on the Wider Economic Benefits model, found a 4 to 1 return on investment for that recommended route, and there seems to have been no dicussion about how the Jacobs report (which is not a full business case) only found a 1 to 1 ROI.

Faisnéis

Uimhir Thagarta Uathúil: 
NTA-C5-728
Stádas: 
Submitted
Líon na ndoiciméad faoi cheangal: 
0