I draw attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. I also remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Witnesses have been informed of the joint committee's terms of reference and that the debate is necessarily confined to transport issues. Strictly ten minutes will be allowed for each submission because there are 13 submissions to be taken today. I invite Mr. Tom Hamill, Bellinter, Navan, to make his presentation.
Motorway Scheme: Presentations.
Mr. Tom Hamill
I wish to make it clear at the beginning that my concern relates to the M3 as it passes by and around two sides of the Hill of Tara and through the Tara-Skryne valley. I refer to Daniel O'Connell's opinion of Tara: "Tara has historical recollections that give to it an importance relative to other portions of the land and give it an elevation and point of impression in the public mind that no other part of Ireland can possibly have."
This meeting is about transport and transport matters are what this committee must try to deal with. Our colleagues in the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government dealt with the archaeological side. I would appreciate if Mr. Hamill would confine himself to the transport element.
Mr. Hamill
I do not wish to be argumentative but the environment through which a road which carries means of transport will go seems to me to be——
The Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government received submissions on that matter and we do not want to tread on its remit.
Mr. Hamill
When it was first publicised at the end of 1999, the project was described as a road realignment.
We have the submission on screen in front of us.
Mr. Hamill
It was then upgraded to a road improvement, the road improvement being a dual carriageway, and later it became a tolled motorway. The public was taken totally unawares by this progression of events and this resulted in just over 100 people attending the first public session in the Ardboyne Hotel. When I attended that session at 6 p.m. there were two members of the public present, including myself, which reflects the low key introduction of the project. A number of new routes were shown, including two green routes. We were told later by the county council that the green routes were only inserted to gauge the public reaction to routes so close to the Hill of Tara. They were not viable from day one and should not have been included. It also confused the public to the extent that when asked for opinions their attention dissipated over more routes than were viable.
During the course of the route selection, a 2.3 km section of route was inserted. That represents 15% of the actual blue routes, the total route being 15 km. That was never part of the public consultation process and could be regarded as a dirty trick on the part of the NRA. The route preferences as documented did not seem to add up. I am afraid that while I made reference to that issue at the hearing, I have not been able to get my notes to enable me to discuss it now. All I can say is that there was a category called "strongly opposed" carrying a loading of six points, which was never at any stage made known to the public.
On the issue of noise measurement, the noise measurement carried out at Dalgan Park has to be part of transport because noise and transport go together. I was walking in Dalgan Park on the day noise measurements were being taken. There was quite a strong wind blowing which caused quite a lot of noise. The noise level was recorded in the reports as ambient noise. This was dealt with at some length although obviously not sufficient length at the hearing. The noise expert admitted——
That is an environmental matter again.
Mr. Hamill
Noise from transport.
Noise is an environmental matter. Perhaps there is some other element of it in regard to the road rather than the environmental matters.
Mr. Hamill
The reason noise measurements were taken was to make comparisons with the noise that will eventually be produced by the motorway.
That is an environmental rather than a transport element.
Mr. Hamill
I do not agree. The main problem is that no improvement of the N3 north of Fairyhouse will make any difference to the situation. The distance between the M2 and the M3 at Mulhuddart is only 5.1 km. The distance near Tara between the M3 and the M2 is only 7.1 km. There appears to be a total overkill of motorways in a short surface area of County Meath. We were assured at the hearing that the railway line had been dealt with fully and agreement had been reached with CIE. It turned out in cross-questioning that this was not the case and that no provision had been made for the railway line to cross the road. This issue was rectified, but because of the history of understatement, I am concerned that it might be lost sight of in the future.
On the issue of transparency between the public on the one hand and the NRA and county council on the other, I asked for information under the Freedom of Information Act and was asked for £495, or €628, for the privilege, which I thought was a bit much. I appealed the charge to the county secretary or county manager, I forget which, but was refused. As to public consultation, much was made of the 28 days allowed, but the distance of 18 miles between the principal town of County Meath and the location of the hearing was not mentioned. There were no public representatives present or members of the chamber of commerce or other people in favour of the M3. It is ironic that at this late stage, the people who have had no previous input into this are being heard and are getting a lot of publicity.
Thank you, Mr. Hamill. The committee will now hear from Julitta Clancy of the Meath Archaeological and Historical society.
Ms Julitta Clancy
Thank you, Chairman. I have a few copies of my summary which the committee already has, but it is slightly amended to allow me to speak within the permitted time. I thank you very much for this opportunity. As there will not be enough time to go through our society's entire submission, I will give a brief summary and hope that we can go back to it.
There are seven points that I wish to make regarding the rich heritage of Meath and the tourism industry that draws so much from it: the transport and congestion problems of Meath; the M3 scheme; present areas of congestion; problems with the M3 scheme; our position on the M3 and suggestions towards a resolution of the problem. There is more information in our submission than can be gone into in this brief time.
Meath is a county rich in historical associations and archaeological remains. Some of our greatest archaeological complexes and monuments are in this county. Our growing tourism industry owes much to this unique heritage. Meath is a county with horrendous transport problems, largely owing to its massive population growth. In certain areas of Meath, commuting congestion and the associated traffic pollution are having devastating effects on commuters and their families, on local businesses, on residents of the towns, villages and country roads and on the life of local communities. The M3 is the latest of four motorway solutions designed to relieve these problems and to open up Meath and adjacent counties to investment. This 63 km tolled motorway scheme is being offered as a solution to the commuting, congestion and access problems along the present N3 route from Cavan to Dublin and along the county and regional roads leading to the N3 at various points, particularly from Navan to Dublin and from Trim to Dublin.
The present areas of congestion are wonderfully summarised in the Bellinter residents' submission. Unfortunately, they have not been allowed to present it today, but the committee should have a copy. In the morning, the greatest areas of congestion occur in the stretches from Dunshaughlin to the Clonee bypass dual carriageway; from midway on the Clonee bypass to the M50 junction at Blanchardstown and also at Navan and Kells. In the evening, the greatest areas of congestion are in the stretches from the end of the Clonee bypass dual carriageway to Dunshaughlin and in the stretches approaching Navan, north and south, and Kells. Originally, it was planned to bypass the heavily congested towns and to improve the safety of the N3. As Mr. Hamill has stated, these plans were later developed into proposals for a major upgrading scheme from Clonee to Kells, which in turn were subsumed into the present proposal for a 63 km single-contract tolled motorway due to commence in late 2005 and to be completed in 2010.
There are, as we see it, four problems with this scheme. The core problem for our society and for many people throughout Ireland and abroad is the routing of one section, of 14 km or less, from Dunshaughlin bypass to Navan bypass through the Tara-Skryne archaeological landscape and the proposal for a major interchange at Blundelstown, just 1.2 km from the hill of Tara. We believe that this will damage irreparably this unique and intact archaeological complex which should be preserved. We believe that the decision to route it through this section, despite evidence and advice, in an area already chock-a-block with known monuments was fundamentally flawed. The magnitude of this error has been consistently played down since the decision by An Bord Pleanála. Unfortunately, this route will lead to lengthy delays and increased costs due to the need to resolve adequately or excavate all the new archaeological sites confirmed and yet to be uncovered. A minimum of 38 are now confirmed, representing, we estimate, approximately 46% of the total number of sites found along the entire length of the scheme of 63 km. Many more will be discovered. Further indefinite delays and costs may also be incurred due to the possibility of court actions. The proposed interchange at Blundelstown will not only have a severe visual impact but will lead to large-scale commercial development, further threatening the monument.
Other problems which have been identified by local groups and local councillors include the financing, tolling and contracting aspects of the scheme. This huge scheme, with a single contract for design, construction and maintenance, relies heavily on tolling. Delays to any part of the scheme will have an effect on the entire contract and will result in greatly increased costs to the taxpayer and the commuter. The double tolling proposals will not only involve heavy costs for commuters but will also lead to avoidance, particularly in the section from north of Dunshaughlin to the Clonee dual carriageway, which accounts for one third of the projected traffic, thus continuing the congestion along the N3.
Another issue is the routing of the M3 to link to the heavily congested Blanchardstown M50 interchange. From the beginning, concerns have been expressed about this. Further congestion will develop along the N3 from Fairyhouse, on the N3 dual carriageway from Mulhuddart to Blanchardstown and on the M50 interchange. While there are plans to upgrade the M50 interchange, evidence given recently to the Oireachtas transport committee has demonstrated that even this costly upgrading will not be able to cater for the increased number of cars.
The final potential problem is the possible threat to the reopening of the Dublin to Navan rail line owing to this contract and its nature. The reopening of this rail line was not given adequate priority in the strategic rail review, but in recent years pressure has grown for its phased reopening. Expectations are high that the rail link to Dunboyne will be in place in three years' time. Phased extensions of this link to Navan and then to Kells and Kingscourt could be delayed for many years by this M3 project as it stands. Is it really conceivable that the private investors will countenance the construction of an efficient, high capacity rail line into the centre of Dublin for the duration of this PPP contract? An additional problem relates to the location of the proposed Blackbull toll plaza.
Our position on the M3 is that we are not opposed to it in any way. We are opposed to its routing through the Tara landscape. As a long established society with over 400 members in Meath, we are acutely aware of the pollution and congestion, the high accident rates, the low levels of inward investment and the intolerable conditions for commuters and their families. However, there is a major problem with one part of this scheme. Only the Government and our legislators, when properly apprised of all the facts, can resolve this problem. They must do so in the best interests of our national heritage and the urgent transport, commuting and road safety needs of the people of Meath. Alternatives do exist, and we have put forward a number of suggestions based on a series of discussions with local groups and people who suffer with these problems daily. We believe that Meath needs an integrated and well planned multimodal transport solution incorporating public and private transport options, greater choice for the commuter, maximum benefit to the environment and greater protection of our valuable heritage.
We are not experts in transport issues but we offer this combination of options which includes the motorway, road improvements and public transport. The first proposal we offer, the road option, is the M3 as it stands, but allowing for a ‘two and one' option in the area north of Dunshaughlin to Navan. That would allow the M3 to Dunshaughlin bypass; it would allow the M3 from Navan to north of Kells with a spur road from south of Navan, Kilcarn, to the Navan bypass. The second proposal is the M3 as it stands, but rerouting that section, possibly east of Skyrne. That would probably involve a planning change, but 80% of the road could go ahead.
The third proposal comes from the residents of Bellinter and the Meath Roads Action Group and involves combining the M3 and the nearby M2. This involves running the M3 from Clonee to Dunshaughlin, running a two-in-one from Dunshaughlin to Navan and running the M3 from Navan and on to Kells and Cavan as planned. The proposal also involves extending the M2 Finglas to Ashbourne route north to bypass Slane on the west, linking with the M3 either north or south of the existing Navan to Slane road. The final proposal involves building bypasses and significantly improving the M3, rather than building a motorway. This involves two-in-one sections and improving road safety.
All of these proposals must be combined with a rail line. A phased Dublin to Dunboyne rail line should be prioritised immediately. There should be a phased extension of this line to Navan, Kells and, later, Kingscourt. Park and ride facilities should be provided at key points and bus services should be improved along the M3 and 154 Trim road. Improved services, quality bus corridors, bus stations in Dunshaughlin, Navan and Kells, bus shelters and reduced charges should also be provided. A combination of options A, B and C would allow for bypasses of congested towns, improved access from Dublin to Meath and Cavan and increased options for commuters, residents and people working in Meath. A combination of these options would improve public transport services, make the road network safer, benefit the environment in line with Ireland's commitments under the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, bring about long-term cost benefits and reduce congestion at the M50 interchange. It would also preserve the Tara-Skryne archaeological landscape, significantly boost tourism, remove the need for the interchange at Blundelstown and significantly reduce costs and the possibility of delays arising from archaeological factors.
We are grateful for the interest shown by the committee and ask that it give serious consideration to these proposals and any others that would relieve the commuting, congestion and road safety problems of central Meath, while preserving this unique part of our heritage, which the people of Meath treasure. We remind the committee that only one section of the M3 is in contention. The non-contentious sections of the M3 — over 80% of the road — could be progressed with as planned and on schedule, in conjunction with road safety improvements along the entire M3. These, together with improvements in public transport, would provide major improvements and reliefs, while allowing time for the re-examination of the contentious section of the M3 between Dunshaughlin and Navan.
Thank you very much. I now invite Mr. Magee to contribute.
Mr. Brendan Magee
Thank you, Chairman. I wish to provide some brief background information. The Meath Roads Action Group has been involved with this process since its inception and made a detailed presentation to the oral hearing. This presentation was based on the premise that the wrong route had been chosen for the Dunshaughlin to Navan section of the proposed motorway. We are not opposed to the motorway per se. All the towns along the M3 are essentially dormitory towns for people working in Dublin and an efficient transport system is essential. There is a view that the proposed M3 motorway will not be the most efficient transport system. The major objection is to the plan to run a section of the scheme through the Tara-Skryne valley. The reasons for this objection are obvious. Tara is one of Ireland’s foremost archaeological and heritage sites. Based on our extensive experience of the situation, I present the following alternative proposals.
The first alternative is to reroute the Navan to Dunshaughlin section of the M3. This is the simplest solution to the problem. A viable alternative route was identified by the National Roads Authority, NRA, during the selection process. This is the P route, located east of the Hill of Skryne. All the environmental experts employed by the NRA to assess the route options agreed that this was the most viable option under the various environmental headings. This information is contained in the route selection report. I present a summary of its findings. The report recommends the P route, from an archaeological perspective. The P route has the least impact on built heritage; flora, fauna and habitats; landscape and visual effects; air quality and noise levels. The B route, which was the route chosen, was not selected in any category in the report.
There is a disturbing aspect to this information. One would expect to discover that the route selection report's findings would be reflected in the environmental impact statement. This is not the case. In its presentation to the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government on 1 June 2004, the NRA stated that the chosen route was evaluated as the best choice or equal best under 14 elevating assessment headings. This statement does not stand up when one evaluates the two documents and compares the B and P routes, particularly in the areas of archaeology, ecology, landscape and visual effects.
The second alternative is to reinstate the railway line between Navan and Dublin. It was stated earlier that the proposed motorway might not be the most efficient transport system to deal with the traffic problems. A motorway that bypasses Kells, Navan and Dunshaughlin will create an enormous traffic jam at the Blanchardstown M50 junction. Traffic jams at this junction currently extend to between three and four miles at peak times. These will at least double if the proposed motorway is built. There is a proposal to upgrade this junction at the M50 Blanchardstown intersection. Having seen the plans, I believe this will be very difficult and expensive to construct. It consists of a series of flyovers and tunnels to deal with the canal, the railway and the dwellings adjacent to the junction. The NRA recently admitted that it would cost €140 million to upgrade this junction. It has also admitted that it would not be a full free-flow junction, even after the upgrade. This cannot be considered cost-effective because it will merely move the traffic jam one mile further on to the roundabout at the Halfway House pub. The NRA has admitted that even the proposal to extend the M50 to three lanes would not solve this problem. The problem will be exacerbated when the Dublin Port Tunnel comes on stream.
From many perspectives, the reinstatement of the railway line is the ideal solution to the problem. The advantages are enormous. For example, it will reduce road traffic, with obvious safety implications. It will reduce the amount of traffic entering the city and the consequent atmospheric pollution and will greatly enhance people's quality of life, with shorter and stress-free commuting. Meath is the only major population centre close to Dublin without a commuter rail service. Drogheda, Balbriggan, Wicklow and Kildare have railway lines. The published figure of the cost to build the railway line is €410 million. However, a DART-style commuter system would cost considerably less and could be built under a PPP. It would not be a greater financial burden on the State than the proposed motorway.
The third alternative is to bypass the towns of Dunshaughlin, Navan and Kells. This would need to be combined with the reinstatement of the railway line. Approximately €270 million-€300 million would be more than sufficient to build bypasses around these towns. These bypasses need only be single-carriageway roads, with the possible exception of north of Dunshaughlin. These bypasses would cost considerably less than motorway dual-carriageway roads, would be quicker to build and cause less disruption. This observation was put to the NRA at the beginning of the planning process and, although it is very late in the day, it is gratifying to note that it agrees with it.
Within three months of the NRA's announcement of the preferred route for the motorway, the Ballinter Residents Association put an alternative motorway proposal to it. It is very simple. Instead of building two motorways, the M2 and the M3, which are less than 10 km apart, the NRA should build one between the two. The advantages of this proposal are numerous. For example, it would take all of the through traffic, leaving the existing N2 and N3 to cater for local traffic. A new junction onto the M50 would spread traffic over three junctions instead of two. As well as creating bypasses of Dunshaughlin, Navan and Kells, it would create bypasses for Slane, Collen and Ardee. The creation of a bypass for Slane would solve the dreadful safety problems at Slane Bridge. This would also save the State money, given that it is planning to build a bypass for Slane which would involve the construction of another expensive bridge over the River Boyne. The NRA was asked to carry out a feasibility study of this proposal. However, it simply gave it a cursory examination and produced a document that contained many inaccurate statements.
There is only one viable way to reduce the traffic problems between County Meath and County Dublin, that is, to reduce the number of cars on the roads. The simplest way of achieving this is to reinstate the railway line.
I appreciate the views of the chambers of commerce whose purpose is to promote commercial activity for their members. The motorway will undoubtedly bring much commercial activity in its wake. However, I cannot understand the position adopted by the county councils and politicians who seem prepared to oversee the destruction of the Tara-Skryne valley to facilitate this commercial activity. If this motorway goes through the valley, the damage can never be undone. The two Ministers, Deputies Roche and Cullen, have found themselves with responsibility for 5,000 years——
Mr. Magee is not allowed to refer to anybody who is not in the committee. He knows the terms of reference that were read out at the start. He should not refer to Ministers who are not present.
Mr. Magee
If it is too big a challenge to recommend the postponing of the M3 motorway in order that a more viable alternative can be created, will the committee, please, at least recommend the simple option of moving the motorway out of the Tara-Skryne valley?
We will now move on to the next group of representatives. They are Mr. Michael Egan of the NRA, Mr. Reg McCabe of IBEC and Ms Adrienne Bowen from the Meath Chambers of Commerce. I understand Mr. Egan cannot attend owing to family circumstances and that Mr. Cregan is deputising for him. I understand Mr. Cregan wants to make his presentation by Powerpoint and is aware that he has ten minutes.
Mr. Eugene O'Connor, the acting chief executive of the NRA, is also here. We would like to share time, if possible.
As long as Mr. Cregan and Mr. O'Connor stay within the ten minutes, I have no problem with that.
I understand.
Mr. Eugene O’Connor
I am acting chief executive of the National Roads Authority. I am joined here today by Mr. Hugh Cregan, a project manager in the PPP area of the authority.
I thank the committee for giving us the opportunity of presenting the position of the National Roads Authority on the M3, Clonee to north of Kells, scheme. This is an important scheme from the authority's perspective, both in terms of the provision of a modern road corridor to serve County Meath, County Cavan and the north west and also in terms of relieving major congestion, journey time delays and safety issues on the section of the current entry road.
Through the national development plan, the authority has been given the objective of developing this route to proper modern standards. The legislative procedures for the planning of the road scheme were complemented from the earliest stages by a transparent process with extensive opportunities for public information and input. As part of this, various reports on the evolution of the route, including alternatives examined on the basis of the emerging solution, were produced leading eventually to the publication of the statutory environmental impact statement in respect of the preferred route.
More than four years have been spent on bringing this scheme through the various planning processes necessary for the delivery of the road. More than ten route options were carefully examined in detail for the Dunshaughlin to Navan section before a final route was selected. More than €50 million has been spent on the project to date. The scheme has received approval at local level for the incorporation of the route into the Meath development plan following consultations, public display and submissions. It has also received approval at national level following a comprehensive oral hearing and final determination by An Bord Pleanála. Tenders are being received from four consortia next month to deliver the scheme and construction can commence at the end of this year or, at worst, early next year.
What we would like to do today is to give a short overview of the scheme, show why the selected route is best, why there is no better alternative and then go through a computer visualisation of how the scheme fits into the environment. My colleague, Mr. Cregan, will deal with these matters.
As I am conscious of the time constraints, I will go through the slides very quickly. The first shows the location of the scheme. It runs from the end of the Clonee bypass to the north of Kells. The important point is that overall we are delivering 110 km of public road in County Meath as part of the scheme. This is the main line. There are many other upgrade works associated with it.
This is another more detailed map of the scheme which shows where the Tara section is located between Navan and Dunshaughlin. The existing road is marked green while the new route is shown in red.
The background is as follows. We have gone through a comprehensive process which started in 1999, almost six years ago. We have had exhibitions and consultations with 4,000 people attending. A motor scheme EIS was published. The scheme went through an oral hearing and was approved by An Bord Pleanála in August 2003. There were no challenges to that scheme. Overall, this project has involved a four year planning process.
The need for the project and the project benefits are self-evident. There are major congestion issues along this route. The road cannot cater for the volume of traffic for which it is required and would be required to cater. There are excessive delays for commuters, as well as safety issues. It acts as an economic constraint on the development potential of County Meath and the north west. The benefits are clearly the inverse of this. We would have a modern transportation corridor, major reductions in traffic, major decreases in journey times and also an improvement in accident rates.
I will give some background information on route selection and the alternatives. We went through a rigorous and thorough process over four years. We had expert consultants in all disciplines, including archaeology. There is a variety of factors to consider when choosing a route. Some of the factors that must be considered which are listed include the effect on houses, homes and farms as well as noise and air quality impacts and the other issues set out. It is not a single issue choice when choosing a route for a motorway or any road scheme. In this case there were 18 categories of assessment. Overall, the chosen route was the best balanced solution out of all the options available.
The question has been raised and was raised here today as to why we did not choose an alternative route, that is, the pink route shown on the map to the east of and quite close to Skryne village. The blue route is the selected route. The reason we did not choose the alternative route is set out. It is also set out in the route selection report for the project. There is a significant number of houses within a short distance of the centre line. Some will require demolition and others will be right up against the motorway. There are almost three times the number of properties affected by noise and a severance of the residential community around Skryne village. More farms are affected. Major upgrading of the local roads is required, some needing to be upgraded to dual carriageway standard to provide linkages to the existing N3. Other items are set out in the presentation. It can be concluded that the pink route has significant issues associated with several adverse impacts and will still contain archaeological sites.
The other solution postulated is the building of bypasses and some of the reasons in favour of this solution are set out. The main reason is the strongest reason given. One would effectively have short sections of high-quality motorway linked by short sections of substandard roads, a necklacing of different road types. Safety issues to do with private entrances and road junctions would not be dealt with. It does not provide the overall strategic transportation corridor which we wish to deliver. It can be concluded that this proposal does not resolve the traffic or safety problems, it creates new safety concerns, does not provide the required overall corridor benefits and it would require a new approval process resulting in further delays to the overall project.
The presentation documents show the footprint of the Tara archaeological site. I am conscious the committee does not wish to deal with the environmental issues. The existing route is shown in green and the new route shown in red. The new route is 1.5 miles from the top of the Hill of Tara, approximately half a mile further away than the existing entry road. Other information is also listed in the presentation document.
The NRA has carried out test-trenching all along the route, spaced at 20 m apart, 2 m wide. We have found the 38 sites mentioned previously. However, it is important to note that archaeological sites are discovered on all roads schemes. I will give three examples. The Cashel bypass was opened last October. One hundred archaeological sites were encountered. The M1 which was completed up to Dundalk had 211 archaeological sites. The N4 currently under construction has 68 sites.
Of the 38 sites identified, 14 occur in the valley between the Hill of Tara and the village of Skryne. Details and reports on those sites have been submitted to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the NRA is awaiting directions. The valley between the Hill of Tara and the Hill of Skryne contains many archaeological monuments. This archaeological landscape is intangible and lies hidden beneath the soil. It is not stagnant or rooted in one period. There is a continuity of settlement ranging from the prehistoric, historic and modern periods. It is apalimpsestof settlement.
For the information of the committee I will play a video clip of an aerial view of the road showing how the road fits into its environment. This is a computer model which has been developed using aerial photography and aerial surveying techniques supplemented by ground surveying of hedges, micro detail of hedges and building heights. The picture shows the Hill of Tara on the left, the Hill of Skryne on the right, the existing Navan-Dublin road is as shown. The new proposed motorway is approximately half a kilometre away as shown. The video shows a fly-through view of the area to show the layout of the area, its features and the location of the new road through this environment. The fly-through starts at the back of the Hill of Tara, travelling in a clockwise direction. The picture shows the upstanding monuments of Tara and shows travel in a northerly direction towards Navan. It is worth noting the existing houses and homes along the route. The picture also shows the existing N3. About half a mile further away, the picture passes over the proposed N3 motorway. It is now moving over towards the Skryne area. While the ground, hedge-lines and building locations are all accurate, the micro detail in this area has not been fully modelled as it is a work in progress on this side of the route.
The picture is now passing over the Hill of Skryne and over Skryne GAA pitch and over towards the village of Skryne. The committee will notice the various houses, settlements and farms in the general area. The picture now passes over Skryne church and school before passing over the proposed motorway again at the southern end of the valley this time, going across the existing entry. The committee will note quite an amount of houses and buildings in the general location at this end of the valley. The video clip then continues with the flight path in a clockwise direction which brings the view back around to the back of the Hill of Tara and back to the starting point.
Having shown this aerial view of the area and seen how the road fits into that environment, the NRA wishes to show the impact of the road in terms of its visibility from the Hill of Tara. Taking a viewpoint from the top of the hill, looking over towards Skryne, it is shown in an arc from the north end to the south end of the picture. This is from the viewpoint of standing on the top of the Hill of Tara at normal eye height. The screen shows the alternate views with and without the road. It is very difficult to see it but if one looks at the top of the cursor, one can see the road fading in and out of the background. The road at this point is 1.5 miles away and as can be seen, it is very well screened by the existing hedges along the route and the general topography of the ground. The view will swing back over the same arc and I will point out where the road is fading in and out of the background. The cursor shows the road appearing and disappearing from the viewpoint.
The question of a rail line to Navan has been referred to. Is there provision in the NRA plan to allow for it at a later stage?
We confirm we are providing structures within our plan to accommodate the future railway provision.
On a point of clarification, what has the NRA got to do with the provision of rail services?
It is to ensure its plans will not prevent the provision of a rail service. I thank Mr. Cregan. Mr. Reg McCabe of IBEC will make a presentation. I wish to draw to Mr. McCabe's attention that members of this committee have absolute privilege but this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
Mr. Reg McCabe
On behalf of IBEC, I thank the committee for the invitation to attend this meeting on such an important subject in terms of the national economy and the regional economies which this motorway will serve in the fullness of time. I am joined by Mr. Dick Budden, chief executive of Wellman International in Kells, County Meath. The company made a submission to the committee. I invite Mr. Budden to refer to the impact of the motorway on his business, if that is in order.
Mr. Richard Budden
I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to address the committee. I am the managing director of Wellman International, a business established just over 30 years ago at Mullagh on the border between County Meath and County Cavan. It is one of the largest companies in the region with a turnover of slightly more than €100 million and more than 300 employees. It is estimated that approximately a similar number are employed locally working for ancillary suppliers. We are a manufacturing operator working in a relatively low margin industry and face intense competition from lower cost regions such as Asia. We are engaged in a significant capital programme in Ireland and at our raw material plants on the Continent to raise the output of our plant here by about 10% to maintain our competitiveness and ensure our survival in the face of the competition I have just mentioned.
Raw materials are supplied from our two plants in Holland and France and our customers are similarly widespread, located as they are across Europe. We stock finished goods in warehouses in the United Kingdom and Germany to overcome the difficulties of providing a rapid response to customer needs from our location in Ireland.
We are entirely dependent on the road infrastructure for the movement of raw materials into our plant and finished goods out to our customers. In round numbers, each week 100 container loads travel to our plant along the N3 from Dublin and the same number travel back to Dublin taking finished goods out for our customers. Containers are mainly 40 ft. in length.
This year we will spend in the region of €11.5 million on freight and warehousing, with freight accounting for the largest part of that figure by far. This figure amounts to 12.5% or more of our total costs and is the largest item of cost after buying raw materials and employing people. As it is such a significant element of our costs, we manage it with great care. We have pursued a number of initiatives to seek improved efficiencies and keep these costs down in recent years. Yesterday evening, I compared the cost of transporting goods from our raw material processing site in Holland with equivalent costs ten years ago. Our unit costs today are slightly lower than they were in 1995, which is a measure of the extent to which we have deliberately focused on this area.
This success story is potentially jeopardised by the rapid increases in traffic and congestion on the N3. One of our hauliers has informed us that as recently as four years ago he was able to make three round trips to Dublin each day. This has been reduced by the impact of traffic congestion to only two round trips per day. This amounts to an increase of one third in the main component of the fixed costs of haulage, adding substantially to his costs in moving our goods into and out of our plant.
Moreover, the journey time has become highly variable. The time it takes to cross Kells, our local town, can vary without warning from as little as two minutes to as much as, in the worst case, two hours. Congestion can be equally bad in Navan and Dunshaughlin. This increases considerably the hauliers' difficulty of efficiently managing vehicles and drivers' time and inhibits us from warehousing more of our finished goods at our site, underscoring the impossibility of providing a decent service to customers direct from this part of Ireland.
The rate of increase in congestion is accelerating perceptibly. We anticipate a considerable further deterioration in road conditions in County Meath before the motorway is built, even if the NRA plan is implemented without delay. The financial success of the capital programme to which I referred and the prospect of any further capital expenditure is put at risk by the failure of the road network's capacity to keep pace with increases in traffic density. Any delay to the project will have further, severely negative effects on Wellman International and the prosperity of County Cavan and north County Meath.
I have been greatly impressed by the thoroughness of the consultation process carried out by the National Roads Authority. I urge members of the joint committee to call on the Government to resolve any outstanding issues, dismiss calls for the plans to be reconsidered and proceed with all possible speed to build a new road.
Mr. McCabe
It was important to provide Mr. Budden with an opportunity to comment on the impact of the road. Discussions of the road programme, infrastructure development or infrastructure deficiencies are well worn themes from IBEC's point of view. Mr. Budden's contribution emphasises that this issue relates to economic development and sustaining jobs. From our perspective, it is not merely a motorway or roads programme but the provision of vital economic corridors.
No industrial nation in Europe has built an industrial economy in the absence of an efficient roads network. The difficulty is that we are arriving late to this programme. We have a spatial vision for Europe and our economy which is all about transport integration and using infrastructure facilities to tie together areas of economic activity through transport nodes such as ports and tie them into our export markets to provide efficient supply of goods into the economy.
There is no question that Navan, Kells and the surrounding area are well integrated into the Dublin economy but suffer greatly from congestion. Looking beyond Navan into the north west and Border counties such as Cavan and Donegal, one finds that the integration of more remote regions into the central transport corridors along the east coast is a major political priority. It is an unfortunate geographical reality that all the main transport links out of Ireland are along the east coast. Corridors out to the west and, in particular, the north west are important. From this point of view, we attach major priority to the N3 motorway project.
It is also worth emphasising that counties Donegal and Leitrim and parts of County Sligo lack a rail infrastructure. I have heard Members of the European Parliament talk about their difficulties accessing Dublin Airport from the north west or getting bus and rail connections and so forth. The motorway will revolutionise access from County Donegal into the Dublin conurbation for expressway services. While these kinds of services, for example, the link from Galway direct to Dublin Airport, are developing at a good rate, major congestion problems along the N3 are inhibiting the development of efficient public transport as well as the delivery of goods. I ask members to bear in mind the public transport aspect of this debate as it tends to be overlooked. We have an opportunity to reduce by as much as a half the journey times to Dublin from towns such as Donegal and Killybegs.
While I am conscious of the time and do not wish to wear out our welcome, I wish to address some of the archaeological issues to which we refer in our submission. I apologise if I sound dismissive on this issue, on which IBEC has spoken to the NRA. There is considerable archaeology in this country but the kind of monuments uncovered in the trial excavations along the route of the N3 could be accurately described as everyday archaeology. They are not artefacts of international standing. Notwithstanding the features at Skryne and the Hill of Tara, there would be little archaeological justification for describing these artefacts as national monuments.
We understand from our discussions with the local authority that the so-called archaeological landscape in the Skryne valley has no special designation attached to it. IBEC finds this peculiar because, as the committee will be aware, a whole range of special designations, including world heritage site and area of local scientific or heritage interest, can be applied to preserve or protect landscapes, where appropriate. To our knowledge, none of these has been applied to this landscape. Why would that be the case if this area is of such archaeological merit as our opponents claim?
Mr. McCabe, your time is up.
Mr. McCabe
Can I have one more minute?
Your minute is already over.
Mr. McCabe
I will leave it there.
You have 30 seconds to make your point.
Mr. McCabe
It is extraordinary that archaeology connected with motorway development attracts the almost exclusive attention of the protest movement. I have examples with me today of archaeology uncovered in industrial and housing developments. These are all preserved by record, as the expression has it. I have never heard a whimper of protest from the people who are so active in terms of Tara and, prior to that, Carrickmines. Some of these sites are in Carrickmines. I refer members to a headline in the The Irish Times on 2 November 2004 as evidence of that.
I thank Mr. McCabe and Mr. Budden. I now invite Ms Adrienne Bowen from the Meath Chambers of Commerce to speak.
Ms Adrienne Bowen
Thank you. I have printed copies of what I am about to say. With the Chairman's permission, I will distribute them to members of the committee.
I am the president of Dunshaughlin and District Chamber of Commerce. I am accompanied by Ms Penny McGowan of the Kells Chamber of Commerce and Mr. Eamon Gavigan of the Navan Chamber of Commerce. The three chambers are members of the umbrella group, the Meath Chambers of Commerce and have come together for the purposes of campaigning in favour of the M3 motorway. The written submissions made to the committee were made by Mr. Michael Cassidy of the Navan Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the Meath Chambers of Commerce, but I regret he is unable to be here today.
Thank you for the opportunity of allowing me to speak today. As chambers of commerce, our primary concern is the support and development of our existing business members and the development of commerce in County Meath. There are two points to be made. First, we need a road structure in the county, and, second, we need this road, the M3, as proposed in particular.
As per our written submission, the economy of County Meath and the region beyond the county to the north west is crying out for infrastructure. Members will be aware that no industry of any significance is prepared to invest in an area deficient in infrastructure, such as roads, telecommunications, access to airports and ports, power supply, etc. County Meath has for many years been left undeveloped in these areas. The area is a sleeping giant and, given a proper infrastructure, ripe for extensive development. We are not talking about getting our commuters into the city but bringing business and investment into the area in order that fewer of our citizens will have to travel to the capital and more of them will find work near their homes and provide the quality of life referred to in point 2 of our submission. I also refer members to the matter of many people spending four hours per day in traffic. This is equivalent to 120 working days per year. These are valuable man hours which would be far better invested in productive activity.
Why do we require the motorway as planned and not any other road such as the pink route or any other potential route? The answer is twofold. First, is the requirement of immediacy. A bypass of Dunshaughlin was first mooted as far back as 1973, some 30 years ago. Many people have lived their entire working lives with a proposal for a better infrastructure and not seen it. This motorway came into the planning process in 1999 and, having been put through the process, was approved by An Bord Pleanála in 2003. There is no further time to be lost. It is not feasible to spend any more time debating the issue or considering putting it through any further planning process. All of that has been done. We need this motorway and we need it now. We also support a rail link, but the possibility of such a link is still only the subject of initial reports and cannot possibly be a reality for many years. As a matter of urgency, County Meath and the north-western region cannot wait any longer. Thirty years is quite long enough.
Bear in mind that given the national spatial strategy, the national development plan, the County Meath development plan and the results of the 2002 census, the population of County Meath is one of the fastest growing in the country, yet the county has a rate base of only one tenth that of its neighbour, Fingal County Council, which has a rate base of €70 million. In order to support a growing population and a need for housing, the economy of the county must grow. Again, we submit that it must be facilitated now.
The second reason the motorway must be built as planned is the planning process itself. All the proper procedures have been applied here, the EIS has been done and the planning process has been adhered to. The matter received a 28-day hearing before An Bord Pleanála and was the longest hearing of its kind in the history of the State. There was a period of six weeks for an appeal by any party not satisfied by way of judicial review to the High Court. Not a single person or body made such an application and, as a result, the procedure for the issue of tender notices for the purchase of land, etc., was then triggered. The NRA will provide and has provided the committee with the full detail of its work in that regard.
The statutory bodies set up by the State to provide the road network and structure for the nation and investigate the compliance of such proposals with planning requirements, namely the NRA and An Bord Pleanála, respectively, have done their job. We are now ready to move on. Any attempt to overturn the decision made in this case and re-route the road will be an appalling vote of no confidence in the statutory bodies concerned and will create a most dreadful precedent for future infrastructure development in this country.
With regard to paragraph 4 of our submission, members must keep an open mind when considering the matters before them. Archaeology is not, by any means, the only issue. The 38 finds made in the exploratory phases are not of major significance. Anti-motorway campaigners have not endeavoured to counter this statement. Reference to an ancient domain is merely a theory. There are no facts to ground any such claim. There is already a network of eight roads crisscrossing the so-called Tara-Skryne valley. It is known locally as the Gowra valley. The Tara-Skryne valley is a name which has been given to the area for the purposes of campaigns. The new road will be further away from the Hill of Tara than the existing road, namely 1.5 miles. Tara will not be damaged by this road. It is feasible for modern infrastructure to live side by side with the heritage of the past.
The Meath Chambers of Commerce have commissioned an independent survey in our three towns. This has been completed by Orchard Research in Drogheda and the raw material has yet to be fully collated. However, we can advise that initial results show that out of all those interviewed and able to identify the planned route without assistance, 70% were in favour of the motorway, 14% had no objection and the balance of 16% were opposed. One third of those interviewed thought the planned road would run beside the Hill of Tara. That is what is most distressing for all concerned. When advised of the correct route, 80% were in favour and 20% opposed. This information has yet to be collated. We will make a copy of the survey findings available to the committee shortly. I will leave it with those facts which speak for themselves.
I thank Mr. Cregan, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Budden and Ms Bowen for their submissions. We will now hear from Mr. Oliver Perkins, county engineer, Meath County Council; Mr. Damien McDermot, senior executive engineer, Donegal County Council, and Mr. Jack Keyes, county manager, Cavan County Council.
Mr. Oliver Perkins
I am county engineer and director of services infrastructure in Meath County Council. I have a great deal of experience in the planning and delivery of major projects, including the Portlaoise bypass for which I was project engineer, the Monasterevin bypass, the M1, M4, M2 and, I hope, M3.
Meath County Council has a history of working in close co-operation with the NRA, its agents, the funding authority and the approving authority. We adhered rigidly and meticulously to the national roads project management guidelines in the development of this scheme. Everything was done according to the book, including overall planning, pre-planning, constraint studies, route selection, development of the EIS and so on.
In 1998 when the M3 was identified in the backlog, the NRA and Meath County Council had discussions regarding delivery of the scheme. In June 1999 we were involved in multi-framework contracts and consultants were appointed to consider the delivery of various schemes, among them, the M3. Three consultants were appointed to develop the Clonee-Dunshaughlin, Dunshaughlin-Navan, Navan bypass, Navan-Kells scheme. In December 1999 a preferred route emerged in accordance with national roads project management guidelines.
In July 2000 the NRA announced that the M3 would be included in a list of public private partnership schemes. It was at that stage — perhaps before then — we were leaning towards merging the different schemes into one. This had the enormous advantage of requiring only one EIS. If several schemes had been involved, one would have had to undertake a separate environmental impact study for each — the information in this regard is slightly misleading — and would have had to include roads that would have become redundant when the scheme was planned. It was during that time that my colleagues and I met Iarnród Éireann to discuss the railway line to ensure the motorway would not in any way prevent future planning and development in that regard.
Following discussions, the EIS was published leading to an inquiry into the matter at the Boyne Valley Hotel. Nothing new has emerged since. All the information now available was available at the inquiry and to An Bord Pleanála. The route about which we are speaking is that approved by An Bord Pleanála.
With the Chairman's permission, Mr. Nicholas Wyatt, project manager at the NRA's regional design office in Navan will now make a contribution.
Mr. Nicholas Wyatt
I will take the committee through the submission we signed on behalf of the manager. I will not read it verbatim but pick out what we consider to be the most relevant points.
The proposed M3, Clonee to north Kells, motorway scheme is a much needed one, consistent with local and national policy, including the national spatial strategy, the national development plan, the Meath County Council development plan, the DPO Platform for Change strategy and the strategic planning guidelines for the greater Dublin area.
The scheme is urgently required to alleviate congestion in the towns and villages of Kells, Navan, Dunboyne and Dunshaughlin; to improve the environment for the people living adjacent to the existing N3; to reduce accident rates on the existing road; to promote sustainable national economic growth and improve Ireland's international competitiveness; to improve links between the regions, leading to more balanced regional development and to allow Meath County Council to develop in a planned and sustainable way to achieve the aspirations of local people and the county council.
The public consultation process on the scheme did not begin or end with the oral hearing. A total of 4,000 people took part in the route selection process. There was an entirely separate procedure to vary the county development plan to reflect the scheme published in the EIS on which, again, the public was invited to comment. Members of Meath County Council passed the variation to the county development plan in February 2002 following on from which the environmental impacts of the proposed scheme were comprehensively assessed and published in the EIS in March 2002.
The 28 day oral hearing conducted by An Bord Pleanála afforded a full opportunity to the public and interested parties to debate and examine all issues of concern. The scheme was approved with modifications by An Bord Pleanála in August 2003. No High Court objection to An Bord Pleanála's decision was raised. In approving the scheme An Bord Pleanála stated the proposed road development would be in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and would not have significant effects on the environment. In reaching this conclusion the independent inspector appointed by An Bord Pleanála to conduct the oral hearing weighed up all the arguments about route selection and archaeology and came down firmly on the side of the road authority.
The proposed road passes to the east of the Hill of Tara and between it and the Hill of Skryne. It is a greater distance from the Hill of Tara than the existing N3 as it passes to the east. The design of the motorway has sought to minimise the physical and visual impact on the archaeological landscape around Tara by setting the route low in the valley and to the east rather than the west of the hill.
A significant amount of time was spent at the oral hearing debating the impact of the scheme on Tara. Again, in his report, taking account of the council's evidence and the concerns and arguments put forward by those opposed to the scheme, the inspector reached the following conclusion: "I am satisfied that the route as proposed would not have a significant impact on the archaeological landscape associated with the Hill of Tara as indicated by the area designated as the core zone in the RMP map SK500. I also consider that the route proposed will not significantly impact on the archaeological landscape associated with the Hill of Skryne".
Meath County Council believes this conclusion is testament to the extent and quality of work done on archaeology as part of the planning and development of the road. It is the council's intention that this standard of work will be maintained during all future archaeological investigations along the route. The council and the NRA have given a commitment that sufficient funds and time will be allocated for thorough archaeological investigation and all work will be carried out in accordance with the directions of the Minister in consultation with the heritage section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the National Museum of Ireland.
Ten principal route options for the Dunshaughlin to Navan section of the scheme were identified for assessment. The selection of the preferred route was based on a wide selection matrix which considered various environmental, engineering and economic aspects of each route option. It must be acknowledged that in choosing a route it is impossible to satisfy everyone. Claims have been made by those opposed to the current route that there is a better alternative. In that context, the route, known as the pink route, east of Skryne is cited as being more advantageous, although there have been less vocal claims that the orange route to the west of Tara is preferable. We must pick one route. It is possible to make a case for any one of the routes if one concentrates on its positive aspects but we do not have that luxury. We have to take the advice in its totality and the good and the bad into account. Each of the ten routes has particular advantages. This is certainly true of the pink route. However, it also has its drawbacks which include more severe community and construction impacts, less favourable noise and air quality impacts, a greater effect on agricultural holdings and a more visible crossing of the Boyne valley in comparison with the preferred route.
When all factors were considered, it was concluded that, on balance, the current scheme was the best available route for a road between Dunshaughlin and Navan. This is the option that the National Roads Authority has progressed and for which it has been granted statutory approval. Significant resources have been expended during the development of the N3 scheme. The scheme went through the planning process which took years to complete and on which to date approximately €52 million has been spent. Statutory notices for the land acquisition have been served, committing the local authority to spending approximately €100 million on land included in the motorway scheme. In addition, the public private partnership tendering process is well advanced with four consortia due to submit offers this month. The cost of each of these private consortia submitting tenders is estimated to be several million euros. It is anticipated that construction will commence early in 2006.
Further delays to the scheme will only serve to exacerbate an already intolerable situation for those who live beside and use the existing road. Economic development in the county is being stifled because of the infrastructural deficit which must not be allowed to continue. The development of the M3 motorway has been granted approval in accordance with the statutory process required under law. Meath County Council is anxious to see its implementation without further delay and in consideration of all the above respectfully calls on the Joint Committee on Transport to support the scheme, as approved.
Mr. Perkins
May I be permitted to call Mr. Brendan McGrath for the County Development Board?
No, the allocated ten minutes have expired. I call Mr. Damien McDermot, senior executive engineer, Donegal County Council.
Mr. Damien McDermot
We requested an opportunity to make a brief presentation to illustrate to members the great importance of the construction of the M3 in the provision of the vital infrastructure needed for the development of the Border, midland and western region, specifically the north west. There is an urgent need to have the motorway constructed. The importance of constructing it now should not be underestimated to the growth and development of the entire north west. While Donegal County Council is taking a lead in the submission to the joint committee, it has been involved in consultation with its neighbours in the entire region and, therefore, hopes to represent a general consensus in the region.
I will define the term "the north west" because I will be using it throughout this submission. If members refer to map 1 in my submission, they will see it covers one third of the country, ten counties in all, extending from County Donegal all the way to east Derry, including counties Derry, Tyrone, Monaghan, Cavan, Fermanagh, Mayo, Leitrim, Longford and Sligo — it does not include County Meath — with a population of more than 500,000.
Derry is the fourth largest city in the country which has a major impact upon the welfare and development of County Donegal, its close neighbour. To put it in perspective, Derry city is larger than Galway, Waterford and Limerick, each of which is being provided with motorway infrastructure. That shows the clear deficiency in the current strategy. The north west has suffered from a lack of adequate infrastructure from its main industrial, transport, social and education hub — Dublin. The industrial and transportation elements of Dublin have been mentioned. The social and educational criteria also come into it. It is the social and educational capital of the country which must be reviewed.
The NRA is making good progress on the local infrastructure network in the region. However, this must be linked to an adequate motorway to the capital so as to fully utilise and invigorate subsequent local development and make the most of the finances invested in local systems. Industrial development and consequent growth in the region have fallen behind the rest of the country under the Celtic tiger as a direct result of inaccessibility. The previous speaker spoke of transportation problems in his business. However, if one replicated these in County Donegal and the north west, the cost would double in comparison to what he encountered.
Tourism is the major employer in the north west, yet there is inadequate access to the major entry ports of the country, for example, Dublin Airport, Dublin Port, Dún Laoghaire and Rosslare Harbours.
The development of the M3 is not a parochial issue. While local and other potential national needs such as archaeology are of great importance, any element of national infrastructure such as a motorway is critical to the social and economic development and welfare of all the regions to which it ultimately extends. The Government has addressed this issue of the distribution of wealth and development opportunity in its national spatial strategy. Northern Ireland has also incorporated it in its development plan. However, plans are no good to the people of the north west without action. Most of Ireland's recent prosperity has been in the southern and eastern areas. This plan recognises the need to develop the Border, midland and western region to a similar degree on a national and international scale. Of all the towns identified as hubs and gateways in the north west, none has motorway access to the capital.
Access routes to the north west need urgent improvement. The roads that link the north west are not of the same standard as in the rest of the country. The proposed M3 is a clear starting point for any developments. Let me give an example. For the first 100 kilometres of my journey from County Donegal, it took me two hours to get to the outskirts of Kells; it took me the same time to travel the final 40 kilometres into Dublin. That is indicative of the problems encountered.
The provision of any project may impact on the immediate area of construction but have a balancing potential to be of benefit to people. The major national importance of the proposals to the basic economy and social welfare of thousands of local communities ultimately serviced by the projects needs to be taken into consideration. The project must be undertaken now while economic growth is strong; the north west is already falling behind other areas and any delays in providing the infrastructure now will further disadvantage the area.
We recommend that the M3 proceed as soon as possible. In a good Northern accent, rather than saying no to the scheme, we should be saying now.
I call Mr. Jack Keyes, Cavan County Manager.
Mr. Jack Keyes
I am delighted to be here. I have come from an emergency meeting of Cavan County Council this morning which is discussing the closure of an industry in Virginia, just on the border with County Meath. This foreign owned industry which manufactured paint rollers has been closed on the basis of a marginal disadvantage in cost terms in getting its goods to the market. I had to leave that meeting because I judged this issue to be of the utmost importance for the future of County Cavan.
I have a document which, with the permission of the Chair, may be distributed. I will not read from it verbatim. As there has been no foreign direct investment in County Cavan in 30 years, all of the economic prosperity, such as it is, is based on indigenous industry. The joint committee will be aware of many of the key players such as the Quinn group. I am in very close contact on a regular basis with Kingspan and Quinns and, without fail, the importance of getting goods to the market is emphasised again and again. There is a real danger, if matters do not improve, that we could lose indigenous investment, on which we depend so much.
We have been recommended for decentralisation which we hope will come through. However, access to Dublin is of crucial importance. I met IDA Ireland last week to look at the county — I am a relatively new county manager — and the primary issue raised with me was the question of access. People living in counties such as Sligo, Leitrim, Mayo and Donegal know what I am talking about because they know what it is like to be on the margins, far away from Dublin and how dependent we are on the road artery which is badly needed. Let me draw the attention of members to a letter from Fermanagh District Council which illustrates the cross-Border importance of the route. It states that tourism, along with the development of many business linkages with Cavan and other counties south of the Border, indicates clearly that an acceptable road infrastructure in this area is important. It states that all traffic travelling from Donegal to Dublin passes through Enniskillen and Cavan and with Fermanagh's links with Dublin becoming ever more important, both politically and to secure our economic growth, it is essential that the roads are of an acceptable standard to ensure the travel time is kept to an absolute minimum.
The previous speaker referred to the time it took to get to Dublin this morning. I left a council meeting at 11.30 a.m. because I reckoned it would take three hours to get here. Since I went to Cavan last May the journey time has increased by half an hour. One can get through but one is never very sure. That point has been well illustrated to the committee by other speakers.
There is an issue of balanced regional development to which I must again draw the attention of the committee. People speak a great deal about social inclusion, an area to which we are all committed. Social inclusion in Cavan means balanced regional development. It depends on economic development as the primary source of wealth. In that context, if we are serious about social inclusion, this road is a major issue that we must address.
The members of Cavan County Council and those of town councils, representing their communities, have unanimously supported this roads proposal. I have not heard one voice raised in Cavan against the road. Of a population of 55,000, one might find five, ten or maybe 50 people who would oppose it. The elected members representing the people of Cavan are unanimously behind this proposal. Are we to allow 0.1% of the population make the call on it or are we supporting the democratic structures which have voiced such strong support for this road?
I trust the NRA with which I have had many dealings over the years. I am not an expert in archaeology but I know, from my own limited experience, that the archaeological excavations are extremely thorough. Such excavations are positive, not negative. During an archaeological excavation, artefacts are made available to make the interpretation of the sites more viable to the general community. I worked on the major sewer underneath Christchurch which went down to the River Liffey in Dublin. We went through probably the richest archaeological area in the country and spent one third of the cost of the contract on archaeology. Those artefacts, I am proud to say, have added to the knowledge about Viking Dublin in a significant way. We worked closely and positively with the archaeological community. From an archaeological perspective, I would have no worries. Certainly from a route selection perspective, I totally trust the NRA.
Some 3,000 people leave Cavan every day to go to work. It is becoming a nightmare for them. Cavan's economy does not look to Sligo because of the road infrastructure. It cannot look to Dundalk because that road is dreadful. Our future economic prosperity is intrinsically linked with a fast and efficient link with the capital city. I sincerely urge the committee to endorse this proposal in such a way that it is proceeded with quickly because we need it now.
Thank you, Mr. Keyes.
We now move to the next category, public representatives: Mr. Philip Cantwell; Mr. Brian Fitzgerald; the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith; and Deputy Johnny Brady. I welcome Councillor Fitzgerald, a former Member, back to the House. Councillor Cantwell is not here and the Minister of State, Deputy Brendan Smith, could be a few minutes late. We will start with Councillor Fitzgerald.
Thank you, Chairman. I am glad to be back, even if it is only for a day. The construction of the N3 has been going on for quite a number of years. I have been a member of Meath County Council for 20 years and I have represented the area which has suffered more than most, namely the Dunshaughlin electoral area, every town and village of which is affected by the increased traffic on the N3.
I am very concerned, not so much at the road but at the NRA's insistence that it must be a one contract. In 1999 — the former county engineer made reference to it this afternoon — we signed off on the first section of that road, from Clonee to north Dunshaughlin. That had been approved and it was expected to be completed by 2006. It was way ahead of the N2, which is now under construction. For some reason, which has still never been made clear to us, the NRA changed its decision and decided that it was opting to include the complete road as one contract.
If we are to have the flexibility to ensure this road is constructed as quickly as possible, one of the major areas that needs to be changed is the funding of the road. I have heard none of our colleagues mention today that people coming from Cavan or Kells will have to pay two tolls before they get to Blanchardstown and will have to pay two tolls in the evening on the same road. That is not acceptable. Frankly I do not believe the people who will be affected realise this will happen.
We also talk of having an integrated transport policy. We, in Meath County Council, have for many years preserved the old line from Clonsilla to Dunboyne in the hope that some day Iarnród Éireann and the Government might see the merit in reopening it. That decision is imminent. We understand the proposal will be put to have that reconstructed, with a park and ride facility at the Black Bull Inn, which is the Fairyhouse-Trim Road junction, to alleviate the traffic into Dublin from that particular area on a daily basis. What is being proposed is that there will be a toll plaza less than a mile from the park and ride facility. I am a daily commuter and I know exactly the time it takes to travel 20 miles from the N3 at Clonee. It takes me an hour and three quarters to go the rest of the way. There is no proposal, as I understand it, from the NRA to upgrade that section of the road. In effect, this will mean that people, having paid two tolls irrespective of whether they want to take the train, must still queue to get into the city. That should not be allowed to continue.
As regards the route that has been proposed, I appreciate the serious problems that Meath County Council had in trying to identify a suitable route that would not cause the controversy and problems that have been caused today. With the best will in the world, nobody here can determine what the courts might do. There are people who will take this matter to the courts; they have made this quite clear. If they do and the project is held up for another one, two or three years, will the remainder of the road wait until all of this procedure has been gone through? That has been my argument about this route from day one: we should do it stage by stage.
There is absolutely no problem between Clonee and Ross Cross. The route to the north of Dunshaughlin has been cleared. All of the trees and bushes have been removed in order that if they do start work on the road on time, they will not be held up for environmental reasons. However, if we are to wait until such time as the courts have completed their deliberations on the objections that will inevitably be made, it means the first stage cannot commence. That is wrong. This is something the Minister and the committee will have to take into consideration. If the first stage of the road was built, it would have a huge positive impact on the whole county.
There are approximately 11 miles of open road between Dunshaughlin and Navan. I appreciate there is a major junction at Ross Cross to which one could take the road and at which one could have an intersection which would greatly help. However, if the NRA persists with what it isstating, we will continue to have pile-ups inDunshaughlin, Kilbride, Ratoath, Batterstown, Dunsaney and Dunboyne. Rather than taking the M50, heavy goods vehicles coming from the N2 and the N3 are cutting across to Maynooth and joining the M4 at Intel. In fact, there is a sign directing them onto a regional road. This cannot continue.
If the first section of the road is done, it will alleviate traffic congestion in Dunboyne, Dunshaughlin and surrounding villages. However, if we are to have a toll on that road within a mile of where the park-and-ride facility is planned, it will be counterproductive because daily commuters will not use the M3 and pay tolls each way, that is, four tolls a day. I do not think the people of County Donegal or County Cavan realise this. This is something that has been clouded over because of the controversy about the archaeological argument. I am prepared to see all of this section fully investigated and if it is proven that there are serious problems — that it is not suitable — it should be re-routed. However, I am prepared to wait and see the actual facts in front of me before I do so.
In the event of this happening, we can still re-route the road, without major cost, to join with the bypasses at Navan, Kells and Carnaross. In the morning work could start from Carnaross to south of Navan and from Clonee to north of Dunshaughlin and there would be no controversy. The NRA must be asked why we cannot do this. My understanding is the environmental impact statement was undertaken in stages. Therefore, it should not present any real problem. However, at the end of the day it comes down to one thing — the funding of the road. Until such time as the policy decision is changed, in this day and age we should not create another monster like the M50 with tolls.
Thankfully, the country is doing exceptionally well. It has the money and the interest rate is a lot lower than it has ever been in the past 40 years. For God's sake, do not allow two tolls to be charged on the road. This would make it counterproductive both from a commuter's and an economic point of view. We have suffered greatly because of the road structure in the county. Let us not compound the problem by introducing tolls to fund a road that is badly needed.
I ask the Chairman and the committee to consider seriously this aspect of the project. It is critical that the first stage of the road is built in the interests of the people of County Meath and those who commute from County Cavan and beyond. If it is not done now, we will be held up for three or four years — heaven knows how long — and perhaps at the end of the day it will still have to be re-routed. Do not let the first part be neglected. Let the Navan and Kells bypasses be dealt with now. We can move on but funding is the key element. Do not allow them to toll the road or charge two tolls on it because, as I said, that would be counterproductive.
I thank the Chairman and the committee for giving us the opportunity to make a submission. I am delighted that Councillor Fitzgerald is present and Councillor Brooks is in the Visitors' Gallery. They are two former colleagues of mine on Meath County Council. If I may, I wish to share my time with Mr. Brendan McGrath from Meath County Council and Mr. Bill Sweeney from Kells Town Council.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
The M3, Clonee to north of Kells, motorway scheme is much needed and consistent with both the national development plan and the national spatial strategy. It is a vital piece of infrastructure that will contribute to the ongoing success of the local and regional economy, bringing better balanced regional development, improved safety and access to and from Dublin, the ports and the airport. In addition, the project will transform the quality of life for those living in Dunshaughlin, Navan and Kells. In fact, it will result in reductions of through traffic of 75% in Dunshaughlin, 78% in Navan and 90% in my own town of Kells. It will also benefit everyone living along the M3 by removing through traffic and the associated congestion which affects their daily lives.
The present road is not coping with traffic volumes using the route. The situation will only get worse, given the planned development in County Meath and further afield in counties such as Cavan, Donegal, Leitrim — the Chairman's county, Fermanagh and others in Northern Ireland.
Great care was taken by Meath County Council and the NRA to avoid previously recorded or outstanding monuments when planning the route of the M3 project. Statements by various groups that the selected route was the only one considered by the NRA are incorrect. In fact, a total of ten route options in four broad corridors were examined as part of the route selection study for the Dunshaughlin-Navan section of the scheme which includes the Tara area.
Project planning and assessment of route options were carried out over a period of more than three years. The impact on archaeology, as well as the implications for other aspects of the environment, the effects on people and their homes, the extent to which farms would be severed, together with traffic, engineering and cost considerations were taken into account in evaluating the ten route options in the Tara area.
The archaeological consultants engaged by Meath County Council to advise on route selection concluded that the preferred route which had emerged from the process was the most suitable in terms of archaeology. In fact, the preferred route was assessed as best or joint best under 14 of the 18 assessment criteria used as part of the environmental impact study. The evaluation process accordingly scored this route higher on environmental grounds than on any alternative route.
The public consultation process saw 4,000 people attend public meetings. The preferred route was subsequently submitted to An Bord Pleanála for consideration. Following a 28-day oral hearing during which extensive attention was given to archaeology and potential impacts on Tara, the board approved the project proposal for the M3 from Clonee to north of Kells. In this regard the decision to approve the proposal was based on the board's conclusion that the motorway scheme is necessary to provide adequately for the existing and projected traffic growth and would be in accordance with the proper planning and substantial development of the area. The board also concluded that the scheme would not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.
I understand that the NRA and Meath County Council are currently working on arrangements to advance the project to construction in accordance with the approvals obtained from An Bord Pleanála. Both are committed to resolving archaeological issues in accordance with the best practice in a manner that fully complies with any direction, which might be given by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government under the national monuments legislation.
At present, between 15,000 and 28,000 cars and trucks crawl through Kells every day. County Meath has the fastest growing population of any county outside Dublin. Clearly the present infrastructure can no longer meet the demands now placed on it. Heavy goods vehicles and cars from two national routes go through our local town daily. The primary route, the N3, and the national secondary route, the N52, are very busy routes and this situation is not sustainable.
Mr. Brendan McGrath
I thank Deputy Johnny Brady for agreeing to share his time. I acknowledge Councillor Oliver Brooks, who is here as chair of the Meath County Council strategic infrastructure committee and is also chairman of Meath County Development Board. With the Chairman's permission we will circulate two documents. While I will not refer to them, members of the committee may wish to use them subsequently. The first contains maps prepared on the basis of the 2002 census and the second is a PowerPoint presentation, from which I will take six points.
Meath County Development Board represents a consortium of agencies. It is set up under statute, section 129 of the Local Government Act 2001. It was charged in 2000 with preparing and implementing an integrated social economic and cultural strategy for the county. The strategy has a spatial dimension, which emphasises the importance of the provision of the M3 to the development of Meath. In December 2004, the board was asked by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to undertake a review of the strategy. The review process began in December and the board asked me, in making this submission, to reiterate to the committee the vital importance of having the M3. The board has 31 members, representing four sectors, local government, social partners, local development agencies and State agencies. The board is unanimous in agreeing that this infrastructure must be completed as soon as possible.
The existing N3 bisects the spine of the county. Using a ruler on a map it would hardly be possible to place it more centrally through the middle of the county. The N3 passes through all three principal towns in the county, Navan, Trim and Kells. The spatial development of Meath is covered by a number of documents referred to by previous speakers, including the current national development plan, the national spatial strategy, the recently adopted regional planning guidelines for the greater Dublin area and the Meath county development plan. These refer to three economic corridors, one along the M1 in the east of the county, one on the south Meath fringe, basically following the M4 and, most critical of all, the concept of a Navan-Trim-Kells corridor at the centre of the county acting as a primary development cluster to attract investment into the county and ultimately over time to reduce commuting and to improve the quality of life. All those spatial dimensions are utterly predicated on the M3 happening; it simply cannot happen soon enough.
Meath is grossly underdeveloped from an economic perspective. Jack Keyes and my colleague from Donegal, Damien McDermot, talked about economic development in the north west. Meath currently has 17 IDA projects employing 1,246 people. Some 179 Enterprise Ireland projects employ just over 4,200 people. As in the Virginia example, we have seen downsizing in those industries in the past 12 months. Recently a project considering relocating from Dublin to Navan decided to relocate to the south east of Ireland. When we approached the project promoters and asked why they chose the south east, we were told that the traffic jams in Dunshaughlin and Navan getting to and from the site ultimately forced them to move away from Navan. We are losing economic development projects. To reiterate what I said previously, IDA Ireland has told us that it is all but impossible to promote Meath for foreign direct investment in industrial development because of the hold-ups along the current N3.
The population of Meath increased by 22.1% in the last census. In percentage terms it is Ireland's fastest growing county. In real terms it has seen an increase of 25,000 people. The handout I circulated earlier shows that 36,000 people in Meath travel a minimum of 15 miles to work every day. While some use the M1, the N2 and the M4, the vast majority use the N3. Some 10,000 of those people travel more than 30 miles. Every day 18,500 from Meath spend a minimum of two hours and 5,000 of them spend a minimum of three hours in their cars getting to and from work daily. The impact of not having the M3 on quality of life is phenomenal. Meath is also not well served by child care facilities. We have heard stories of children being put into cars at 6.30 a.m., taken to child care facilities by their parents on the way to work and spending three hours on their way back.
The county development board is as concerned as anybody with heritage and is currently facilitating the development of a heritage plan for the county. The board is highly satisfied with the planning processes that have been employed and it has absolute confidence in the National Roads Authority and Meath County Council to protect the heritage of the county.
I was asked by my board members to say that I came to work in Meath in 1975 and at the time an advertisement referred to Navan as being "only an hour from Dublin". If that advertisement were running today, 30 years on, it would state "Navan, two and a half hours from Dublin".
Mr. Bill Sweeney
I wish to identify a number of issues affecting the town of Kells. As Deputy Johnny Brady has mentioned, the junction of the N52 and the N3 is in the middle of Kells. When two national traffic routes coincide, it causes serious congestion. The second issue is pedestrian safety. The M3 will greatly reduce the accident rates on these routes. When pedestrians are added to the two routes meeting in the middle of the town it becomes a lethal mix. While it is never possible to identify specific incidents a reduction in the traffic volumes in Kells would obviously have a great effect on pedestrian safety.
I wish to bring two issues relating to the development of Kells to the attention of the committee. Kells has traditionally suffered from having a poor industrial base. For the past five years the town council has been working to develop a business park on the edge of the town. The town council made 35 acres of development land available to private developers. The flagship operation is the Smurfit news-press plant. It has made an application to double its capacity with a €100-million extension to the existing plant. It needs a modern road network to allow it to develop its business. Mr. Budden from Wellman International already mentioned the journey times through Kells. That is the reality of Kells for business people.
My final issue relates to heritage about which there has been considerable talk. Kells is a designated heritage town. In the past five years more than €1 million has been invested by Meath County Council, Kells Town Council and the ERDF in establishing a heritage centre to develop that aspect of Kells. The town cannot develop as a heritage town as long as it is the centre of a major national primary route. I ask the committee to fully support the current M3 route as approved.
I hope people are not annoyed with my indulgence in allowing a few additional minutes. We needed to allow time for the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith, to get here following a meeting in the Department. I welcome the Minister of State, who wishes to make a submission to the committee.
I am grateful to the Chairman and the members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport for the opportunity to make a submission in support of the proposal by the National Roads Authority to build the M3, Kells to Clonee motorway. I make this submission as a Member of Dáil Éireann for Cavan-Monaghan. I believe I represent the views of the overwhelming majority of my electorate. The county council and town councils in County Cavan have unanimously supported motions in support of the NRA proposal. The route is of particular importance to my county of Cavan and also to south Donegal and parts of counties Leitrim, Fermanagh and, obviously, Meath, and is identified for development in the national spatial strategy and national development plan.
The issue before the committee is not just of local but national importance. For 30 years, economic development in the Border counties was significantly hindered due to the Troubles on our doorstep in our province of Ulster. The N3 is the existing national route serving the north west. If we are to give momentum to economic development in the region, it is clear that the M3 is essential. We should also bear in mind that this part of our country, namely, the southern Ulster countries, has no railway service. If we are to achieve the economic regeneration the area needs, a basic requirement is a major arterial route of motorway status. The north west of the country needs a modern transport infrastructure linking it to our capital city, Dublin Airport and the ports. The peripherality associated with this region needs to be minimised.
It is clear from discussions with the industrial development agencies that the attraction of inward investment to areas such as County Cavan is hindered by the totally inadequate national route to the capital city. Existing employers continually quote the additional costs on their business arising from traffic delays when product must be transported to the airport or ports and, similarly, when goods are transported from Dublin.
It is stated Government policy that we need to address the imbalance that has arisen in regard to economic development on the east coast vis a vis the rest of the country. Proper access to a region is an imperative and the national routes serving a region must have the capacity to deal with present day traffic volumes. The existing N3 has a design capacity of 11,600 vehicles per day. I understand that this route is presently carrying more than twice this number on some sections and it is projected that in less than 20 years the volume of traffic will rise to 54,000 vehicles per day.
Road safety must be a requirement with all involved in the road construction process. The N3, unfortunately, has an accident rate of one and a half times the national average. The National Roads Authority stated publicly that the new motorways expected to reduce accidents by 80% and that this will be achieved by the elimination of dangerous junctions and private entrances that currently link with the N3.
It has been suggested by some groups that the construction of bypasses at Dunshaughlin, Navan and Kells would alleviate the serious problems on the existing route. This approach would not work because there is an urgent need to eliminate the stretches of road between those towns that already pose serious safety problems for road users. It is ridiculous to state we can tolerate the rest of the route remaining as sub-standard road, trying to carry volumes of traffic way above that road's capacity. Those who travel the route regularly see at first hand the inadequacies of the road and the dangers associated with cross-over movements and heavy volumes of traffic entering and exiting the route.
The National Roads Authority repeatedly stated that, over a period of more than three years, in conjunction with Meath County Council it met with a myriad of interested bodies and thousands of people before presenting a scheme to An Bord Pleanála for approval. The NRA had a comprehensive environmental impact assessment carried out by independent consultants and that report was submitted to An Bord Pleanála which approved the route.
The authority stated clearly and repeatedly that its approach to this project has been painstaking and transparent. It stated that its policy is to balance a combination of the positive impacts of a road scheme on people's daily lives, safety, regional development, economic progress and future prosperity with an inevitable number of negative impacts such as those on people's homes, impact of road closures, cost implications, interference with people's lives across the route, archaeology and environmental aspects. It also stated that in the case of the M3, it has, in the full glare of publicity and through the full rigours of a planning and consultation process, attempted to achieve this tricky balance and provide the best solution. With regard to the Hill of Tara, the NRA stated that the proposed M3 will be at its nearest point 1.5 miles away from Tara, approximately twice as far away as the existing N3 Dublin-Navan road.
I wholeheartedly endorse the submission made by Cavan County Council. I am glad the county manager, Mr. Jack Keyes, and the director of service for roads and infrastructure, Mr. Ger Finn, were able to attend. This project has been at the planning and design stage for far too long. Quite rightly, appropriate and widespread consultations have taken place. The people of the entire region served by this road need to have the construction stage reached as soon as possible. The NRA proposal strikes the proper balance and I reiterate my full support for the project.
Although Councillor Cantwell is late, I will allow him to make a submission. His printed submission will be circulated to members. While members of the committee have absolute privilege, this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
Mr. Philip Cantwell
I am a non-party elected member of Meath County Council and of Trim Town Council. I welcome the opportunity to put before the committee the aspirations of the people I represent in County Meath. Trim is a town 28 miles north-west of Dublin city. Depending on the time of day, it can take as little as 60 minutes to drive from Dublin to Trim but at peak times it can be a painful two and a half hours, with major stress and delay for the first eight miles beginning at the Phoenix Park as, depending on the time, traffic may be bumper to bumper all the way to Dunboyne.
According to the statistics, the population of County Meath has been one of the fastest growing in Ireland and the Trim area, being in the south of the county, has experienced an even higher growth. The population of the Trim area currently stands at 8,000 but there are development plans for approximately another 2,000 houses. Trim is the recognised primary heritage town of County Meath and, accordingly, it is unlikely for the foreseeable future that industry of significant size will come to the town. Therefore, commuting will continue.
Although my figures are questionable as there are problems with access to the computer in Navan, I estimate that 2,000 cars depart Trim for Dublin each morning between 6 a.m. to 8 a.m. From 6.30 a.m. on, a convoy of cars travels bumper to bumper and the procession gets longer as the convoy gets closer to Dublin.
There is no train service serving Trim. The nearest train station to Trim which provides transport to the centre of Dublin is Clonsilla, which is approximately 22 miles from Trim. In such circumstances, few commuters would drive from Trim to Clonsilla, wait for a train and pay the cost of a ticket to Connolly Station. One commuter told me he buys a Bus Éireann weekly ticket which costs €41. He works at the Point Depot and sometimes it would be easy for him to take the train from Connolly Station to Clonsilla and catch up with his daughter. However, his Bus Éireann ticket is not usable on the train. He makes the point that all tickets should be usable on all facilities.
I have a submission from the Dublin Transport Users Group which I will give to the committee afterwards.
Is that regarding rail?
Mr. Cantwell
Yes.
This committee is dealing with the M3.
Mr. Cantwell
Very well. Regarding bus, public service and the need for rural depots, one of the obvious weaknesses in the present arrangement for providing public services from the Trim area is that there is no bus depot or set-down stop in the Navan-Kells-Athboy area. One driver lives in Athboy and his bus is parked there overnight. This is the only reliable service. The remainder of the drivers must drive to Broadstone, collect their bus, travel empty to Trim or Athboy and then to Dublin. On many occasions when the weather is bad, the scheduled bus is either late or does not travel. Consequently, the excess of passengers are left standing at the bus stop.
Regarding the R154 regional road to Dublin, a major upgrade——
We are dealing with the M3, not the R154.
Mr. Cantwell
I mentioned the R154 in my submission.
We are not disputing your submission, but we want to stick with the M3.
Mr. Cantwell
I will stick with the M3. It is my understanding that it is proposed to break the tolls on the M3 into two half tolls, one to be paid between Kells and Navan and the second to be paid north of the Black Bull junction. A worker who lives in Kells and works in Tallaght will be hit for three tolls, one between Navan and Kells, one between Navan and the Black Bull junction and the third on the West Link bridge. What would the take-home pay of such a worker need to be to cover 30 tolls per week or 1,500 tolls per year?
Second, regarding toll booth locations, I understand that the second toll booth between Navan and Dublin will be located at the Black Bull junction and that it is proposed to have a park and ride at what is known as the Sheaf of Wheat. What would be the incentive for a person who pays the second toll approximately two miles from the Sheaf of Wheat to use the park and ride facility where it is to connect with the train service? This is a seriously flawed design. What must be done is to either move the tolls closer to where the train and the park and ride will be. Alternatively what will happen is that once commuters have paid the second toll they will continue to drive all the way to Dublin.
In 1999 the NRA's solution to the growth of traffic was to upgrade the N3 to a two-lane dual carriageway in both directions. According to the figures produced by the NRA a dual carriageway will carry 45,000 vehicles per day and a motorway will carry 56,500. I am told that new roads must provide for traffic growth for 20 years. It is predicted this will reach 50,000 vehicles per day in places. These commuter belt figures are misleading. It is not the daily total vehicle capacities which should be used as a benchmark but the peak flows. In the case of Meath that is from 6 a.m. and 8 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. This is what we need to look at, not the total number of vehicles per day. Many of the traffic counts being produced at the moment for developers show the survey starting at 7 a.m. This is missing the point since most commuters leave Trim and other places at 5.30 a.m. or 6 a.m. Many of the reports being produced are not reliable.
A much more sustainable response would be to have a dual option, that is a carriageway complemented by a rail system to Kells. This would provide an efficient, environmentally friendly service with the benefit of a "plan B" in the event of an oil shortage as happened in the mid-1970s and with the additional benefit of future development of the hinterland throughout Meath, into Cavan and Monaghan. I find it difficult to justify the additional cost of providing a motorway such as the M3 over a dual carriageway for the sake of 11,000 vehicles per day. The tolling of the M3 is unfair to workers and commuters from Meath, Cavan and Monaghan. However, there is also a possibility that the present regional roads will be neglected in order to force commuters to use the M3.
The final issue is access to Dublin Airport, which some of the committee may have experienced. I refer to a situation which happens from time to time and is becoming more frequent. I am talking about accidents happening anywhere on the M50 or on the roads feeding the M50. Given the volume of traffic it only takes a serious accident which involves the emergency services to close the roads and anyone trying to catch a plane will be seriously discommoded. We should provide more signage to the airport for the public on backup routes because we all know the heartbreak of missing a plane.
I thank the Chairman and members of the Oireachtas committee.
I thank everyone who has made submissions to the committee. The committee will consider them and hopes to meet at 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 9 February to deal with this issue in private session. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The joint committee adjourned at 4.05 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 9 February 2005.