I apologise for the delay. I propose that Mr. John Henry provides a quick synopsis of his presentation and circulates his documentation, and we will invite him to meet us again. This is an important aspect of the committee's business in that the strategy for the greater Dublin area will have an impact on all our lives.
Transport Strategy: Discussion with Dublin Transportation Office.
Mr. John Henry
I shall dispense with preliminaries. My colleagues are Mr. Willie Soffe, chairman of the Dublin Transportation Office, Mr. Frank McCabe, technical director, and Ms Sara Morris, head of communications and public affairs. I am aware that the committee is short on time so I will give my presentation quickly and we can return to discuss particular issues in more detail.
My agenda comprises the following: what the Dublin Transportation Office is and what we do; why a transportation strategy is being developed at this point in time; legacies from the past which are now becoming significant issues; today's situation and prospects for the future; how we will progress the strategic development; and our promises in terms of what we are going to do.
I realise this committee deals with national issues rather than being Dublin focussed and am aware from the earlier discussions of committee members' interest in the west of Ireland and elsewhere. However, while my presentation will focus on Dublin, its general principles can be applied anywhere. I hope the committee will consider my comments in that context and we would be pleased to return at any time to discuss general principles. I will not dwell on the structure of the office because members can read about that later.
We need a transport strategy because economic, demographic, social and other circumstances change with time and are in a constant state of flux. The Platform for Change strategy, which was produced in 2001, remains the framework for transportation planning in the greater Dublin area but it is now six years old and needs to be updated. We must try to anticipate the serious challenges which lie ahead of us.
In regard to the legacies of the past, cities evolved over time according to the dictates of changing circumstances. People say we made mistakes in the past but today's problems are essentially not mistakes because they developed by design. At the time, that was all we could do but the legacy is the unforeseen consequence of good intentions. Every time we try to improve the quality of life in Ireland, unforeseen consequences will result at some point in the future. Our current planning strategies will leave a legacy for the future, based on our own good intentions.
At the beginning of the last century, Dublin was a nice, compact city with a population of approximately 300,000. Even though one could walk across it in an hour, it had an extensive tram system. Urban density was high compared with the present but, as we are all aware, living conditions were not very good in parts of the city and we had slums. Outlying villages were well-connected to the city with, for an example, a tram line running through Tallaght and on to Blessington. The map circulated to members shows Dublin in 1925, with the reddish brown lines representing the tram network. The built-up area extended little further than the canals. The map indicates the scale of Dublin at the time and makes clear the fabulous tram system we used to have.
In regard to clearing the slums, a garden city movement was established around the same time which took a town planning approach to the idea of having space, front and back gardens, fresh air and clean water. We adopted some of these concepts to be applied in clearing the slum problem. The process of suburbanisation commenced as a result of these efforts to try to improve living conditions and it worked very well for a long time because the inner suburbs, for example, Crumlin, Kimmage and Marino, were sufficiently close to the city to remain well connected. While it may have been a little too far too walk, it was possible to cycle and these suburbs were well connected. For a long time, we did not even notice the problem that was emerging.
We were not a rich country at that time and trams were expensive to maintain. As buses are cheaper and more flexible, being able to move in and out on any road, we chose to stop using trams and by the 1940s and early 1950s they had disappeared to be replaced by buses. Ireland became more prosperous over time and car ownership began to increase. People had great aspirations to own a car and families would show their prosperity by owning one. Engineers had to respond to this change because the roads in the early part of the last century were not wide enough for cars. We had to develop new standards. As the suburbs started to develop beyond the middle suburbs, residents found that they were too far away from the city to be able to get to the city centre other than by bus. As people did not have cars, these places became isolated. We are well aware of the types of problems this caused.
As we all know, the car was a symbol of freedom and status and a sign of prosperity. I ask members to examine the aerial photograph of a typical development area which was taken at random. How would one cycle, walk or get through the black maze of roads shown in the photograph? While a bus may run along the route marked in line, how does one get to the bus stop? We made estates inaccessible to public transport and highly car dependent. How could one get to a bus on this route when the estates are enclosed by walls? We designed these areas solely for cars rather than people. Problems such as traffic congestion, bad driving habits and increased car ownership, sprawl, journey times and distances to work have become serious quality of life issues.
I will briefly address changes in population, specifically between 2002 and 2006. The areas marked in red on the map show the places of greatest growth in population over the short period in question. The blue area is the greater Dublin area, namely, counties Dublin, Meath, Wicklow and Kildare. The red intensifies in areas of maximum population growth. Members will notice how it spreads out from Dublin, rather than being in and around the Dublin city area. It is spreading out fairly uniformly, down into County Wexford and up into County Louth. This map shows where people live, whereas the other map shows where people work. The figures on which these maps are based are from 2002. The peaks in the map show the number of jobs in the city centre, most of which are located inside the canal ring. People living outside the greater Dublin region work in these jobs and must travel to these areas of Dublin to work. This is our growing commuter problem.
This series of slides shows a shocking picture. This one shows the greater Dublin area with just a few old railways and no roads marked on it. This is what could have happened and, as such, it offers a synthetic view. We took today's population and showed how the region would have looked if we had built the region and city in the typical European fashion. It would be wrong to believe, for example, that Dublin and Munich have developed in a similar manner. Members will see the difference between the two cities. Dublin is not a compact city. We know the location of every house and each is plotted on the map as a black dot. There are no roads but members will be able to track them from the location of houses. This is the legacy we must carry into the future. It is a burden which will be difficult to deal with because we cannot demolish these houses and rebuild Dublin in the manner it should have been built. Instead, we must carry this burden into the future.
We can take another perspective. This figure shows a typical 24 hour day for a commuter. One has to sleep, eat and travel. The green segment in the figure represents all the time left for other activities, including spending time with family and friends. This segment is getting smaller every day. What kind of life will we have if it disappears?
Members will notice from the diagram that 50% of our time is spent outside the house. We plan for the home very well and have a billion regulations for it but we do not plan or design well for the times when we leave home.
The most important point I would like to make is that our main failing in the past 100 years has been lack of integration with regard to land use, transport and transport networks. We have independent bus, tram, DART and heavy rail services but they are not integrated. We do not integrate local services by providing access from people's homes to local schools and shops. We cannot even get that right. As shown on earlier slides, there is little integration between workplaces and places of residence. We move people way out of towns, where the jobs remain. I see examples of lack of integration every day relating to urban development and transport services. When we examine plans that come to us, we wonder how they will work because there is no transport plan to make them work. There may be lovely architecture, etc., but no transport plan.
On quality of life and transport projects, when proposing developments do we ever think of the people who will have to live, work and travel to and from them? We seem to design for vehicles and everything else but not people. This is an issue we want to bring to the fore. Some of the challenges facing us are presented by: our growing population, although this may flatten somewhat; employment, which is still increasing; a significant transport deficit; the urban and rural sprawl, with which we will have to deal; increasing journey times and distances, a problem obvious from the crazy early hours at which people rise to travel; and environmental impacts. It is finally dawning on us that climate change is real, that peak oil levels will be reached and that we will no longer be able to dodge the issue.
We are conducting a series of workshops with stakeholders and politicians to try to agree on a vision and objectives which we will then develop and see what we can achieve. We are going through that exercise and I am pleased with progress so far. I will not spend too much time discussing our vision. Essentially, it concerns the type of city region we want, something on which we must agree. The key in terms of transport, which is not an end in itself but a means to an end, is that we must use it cleverly to achieve our objectives and ensure our transport policy ties in with all other Government policies. Our objectives must create a framework for the development of transport measures and infrastructural project proposals. Our thinking is that our vision, objectives and guiding principles will lead to a better quality of life. Committee members may notice that I frequently omit the word "transport". This is because we do not start at that point but further back.
Committee members may look at the slides showing the steps in developing the strategy. We intend to engage in a major public consultation process next year. I would love to be able to return to the committee regularly to obtain its input because it is important that we hear what it wants to tell us, just as we want the committee to listen to us. We intend to produce a strategy and look at policies in other agencies to see if there is anything we can do in terms of transport to support our policies. If we find conflict between our policies, we will point this out.
Transport 21 is the current programme of investment and we will not damage or destroy it. Any commitments made in it will be taken on board but we will have another look at any parts of it to which no commitments have been made and examine whether they can be adjusted or improved. We will not blindly take everything on board but will take a fresh look at everything. Obviously, we will not slow down the implementation programme. We will develop an investment implementation programme to follow Transport 21. We hope to have this finished by 2010 to present to the Government. We also hope the committee will guide us in getting it to the stage where the Government will adopt it. I will circulate the documentation we have brought with us. We would be delighted to come back, whenever the committee wants us to return.
I thank Mr. Henry for his presentation and welcome the delegation. I am delighted to see my old colleague, Mr. Willie Soffe, who has been an outstanding public servant, as a senior manager in Dublin City Council and as Fingal county manager. I recall he played a fundamental role in having the M1 built and in the development of Fingal County Council's new headquarters in Swords. He is a person who wants to get things done, rather than talk about them. We know, from our briefings with Ms Julie O'Neill that we can expect a Dublin transportation authority Bill before Christmas. Will the DTO survive in its present form or will it be the transport authority and get more hands-on people into it? My second point is that we want Transport 21 completed. We are disappointed that the Minister has to come along again and look at issues such as the interconnector. Why do we not have the interconnector? Why was the DART not continued to Blanchardstown? Why are the key radial networks for the Dublin region not in place? Why are we not reaching the Munich and Prague standards? Why are we still ten years away from reaching those standards? We want that work done yesterday. Vision is fine but we want a public transport system that facilitates all the people. Louth should be included. I am a strong supporter of similar services for Galway, Limerck, Cork and so on. Will the Dublin Transportation Office give us a Transport 31 going forward?
It is well to talk about vision and so on but why did young people move out past Ashbourne? The map which extends to County Meath, one of my ancestral counties, is propaganda. That county which has some of the finest land in Ireland played a great role in our history. Why did those people move? They moved because they did not want to live in some box on the fourth or fifth floor in the north of my constituency. They wanted, perhaps, a semi-detatched or a detached house with a decent garden for their two or three kids. They are prepared to do that commute because they could not get decent accommodation in the Dublin region. Is the Dublin Transportation Office ever consulted? There is a prime urban plan Northside, about which we had a big meeting this morning with Dublin City Council officials. Did any of those developers, who want to build immediately 1,500 flats in a region where there could be 6,000 to 8,000 flats, consult the Dublin Transportation Office? The Dublin Transportation Office has included a Luas for that territory in the 2016 plan but it is not included in Transport 21. Our good instinct is that we want things on the ground, we want things done yesterday. We are browned off waiting for them. We reflect the views of our constituents. How can that be made to happen as quickly as possible?
I thank the delegation for an informative presentation. While there are problems we have finance and much more resources. If I travel from the west, Sligo or Galway, to the capital city, there are no park and ride facilities on the western side of the city. I am aware there may be some plans for such facilities in Leixlip but when will they be provided?
There is a huge issue regarding ticketing. One boards a bus or the Luas without being sure of the cost. I look forward to integrated ticketing becoming available as soon as possible.
I was in Paris at the weekend where I saw many cycle routes. Dublin has made some progress in that area. If one could pick up a bicycle and cycle to, say, George's Street that would be convenient. I am not telling the Dublin Transportation Office what to do as it is doing a good job.
I welcome the delegation. I am delighted to see Mr. John Henry and my old colleague, county manager, Mr. Willie Soffe. I concur that we need early implementation of Transport 21. In regard to the park and ride issue, to which I referred at earlier meetings, we are calling in the seven county managers and it might be useful if the DTO was also present. In terms of congestion, the only way it can be prevented is to have a good public transport system and park and ride facilities outside the built up regions. This would enable people to dump their cars and board a bus or train. Equally, we need to progress an outer ring road north of Balbriggan linking with the M1, M2, M3 and M7, as it is urgently required. Members referred to the Dublin transport authority Bill which the Taoiseach confirmed will be brought before the Dáil before Christmas, which is good news for everyone. I hope many people will be involved in that process.
I am surprised the date for adopting this report is 2010, which is three years away. Mr. Soffe and Mr. Henry were always the type of persons who wanted things done yesterday. This is a ridiculous timeframe. We will never get anything done in this fashion. Deliberating for too long creates major problems. Everyone knows what we need to do in terms of delivering public transportation, whether rail or bus transport. We do not need to consult everybody in Dublin city and county, Kildare, Wicklow, Louth and Meath. The people want this done tomorrow. I would suggest to Mr. Henry to get it done within the year or we will never get it done.
I welcome the representatives of the Dublin Transportation Office. I read its annual report a few weeks ago and wish the office well. With regard to consultation within the DTO, it invited the Deputies from all counties in the region apart from County Louth to its recent meeting. I know that at the meeting we were all invited to become involved. A key political point is that a part of Meath is now joined with County Louth for the purposes of the next general election. There has been unbelievable development on the east coast, particularly in County Louth and in particular around Drogheda and Ardee, which must be part and parcel of the DTO's consideration of the transport issue.
One of the problems with the spatial strategy is that it does not include Drogheda as a growth centre. It is half mentioned as being part of the Dublin area but is not mentioned in any other way — I make this point from a local perspective. This issue needs to be tied up.
Deputy Kennedy referred to park and ride facilities for commuters travelling from the north side of Dublin. As I travelled to Dublin at 7 a.m. this morning, there were huge lines of traffic as I passed the airport. Given that we have rail transport, we need park and ride facilities. There was an incentive for the provision of such facilities at railway stations in a budget some years ago but the initiative must come from local government rather than the DTO. With the DTO's wide experience, we should knock heads together more than we have done.
I agree with the point regarding the Dublin outer orbital route, to which the national development plan did not refer. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Transport say they are in favour of the route but they have not provided the funding for it. We must have this route.
I sometimes travel into the city at 6 a.m. to beat the traffic. I find that the traffic backup seems to begin in Gardiner Street after approximately 6.30 a.m., whereas before that part of the city, there is no problem. The phasing of the traffic lights in the area could make a significant time saving for myself and many others. Once one gets through the series of lights, one can travel quickly. While I accept this is a minor technical point, the DTO might consider it with a view to creating a better traffic flow.
The Minister of State, Deputy Ivor Callely, was put in charge of that problem.
Put him in a yellow box and we will all stop.
I apologise for not being in attendance yesterday. I had another commitment before the change of date.
Since I began to study the transport issue in the past two months or so, I have heard nothing but good about the DTO, for which I compliment it. I agree with the comments made about Mr. Soffe. I have not had much contact with him but his reputation is known far and wide. I am pleased to see him as chairman of this group.
The main objective of the committee is to try to advance public transport policy initiatives. While we have many great plans, not least those concerning metro and rail services, one of our objectives is to try to provide for bus transport, in particular. There is a quick fix if we can considerably increase the number of buses and quality bus corridors in our cities, not just in Dublin but also in Cork, Limerick and Galway. In that way we could try to change the culture of being wedded to our cars. With quality bus corridors, we could quickly get people out of their cars. Can Mr. Soffe give us an indication if the DTO has, in association with local authorities, any plans to make progress in implementing this specific aspect of policy?
It is great to see the success the DTO has had, in conjunction with Dublin City Council, South Dublin County Council and other authorities, with existing bus lanes, particularly along the famous 46A route. However, it is remarkable that, although significant financial resources have been made available in recent years by the Department of Transport for park and ride facilities, they have not been taken up by any local authority to date, with the exception of Cork City Council. I went to Cork last Friday to examine the Black Ash facility, a wonderful example of transport infrastructure, and I hope the committee will visit the city to see it. This successful facility has 900 car spaces some 2.5 miles from the city centre. It is remarkable to think that no other local authority has provided such a centre, although one is being developed in Leixlip.
I do not understand why a report compiled four or five years ago stated park and ride facilities would not work in Dublin. I drive from the west side and have no doubt that a major park and ride facility in the Leixlip area, with a quality bus lane all the way to O'Connell Street, would work. I often fly to Dublin on the 6.15 a.m. fight from Galway but, as northside Deputies have said, coming across the M1 flyover there are four lanes of solid traffic as far as the eye can see. Surely it is not beyond the bounds of possibility to have a quick initiative and install a park and ride facility with a high quality bus corridor. It would be economically advantageous to introduce new bus-tram vehicles such as those already in use in various foreign cities.
That is the big issue for the committee in the coming months. We will be inviting local authority managers to come here because there is a lack of joined-up thinking. We will call in the representatives of Dublin Bus also because we want to see action on this matter. We would certainly like to have a close relationship with the DTO in delivering on these objectives. The Minister is most anxious for us to support him in this regard by advancing his key initiative.
Mr. John Henry
Mr. Soffe will deal with questions on the DTA. I will take the others.
Mr. Willie Soffe
I thank the Chairman for his warm welcome and that of his colleagues also. We appreciate such comments.
As regards the future of the DTO, the executive and I, as chairman, support the establishment of the DTA. It is Government policy and has wide support. It is intended that the DTO will be absorbed as part but not all of the DTA. We are working on the preparation of phase 1 of the strategy and when it is completed, there is provision for a pause to review the position of the establishment of the DTA. If the DTA is established, our work will transfer to the DTA for completion. In the unlikely event of the DTA not being established, then we will continue.
Members have expressed worry about the timescales. What is frustrating for all of us is the amount of time consultation takes. To have the widest possible consultation on the new strategy, we are talking about the timescale to which I referred. In the meantime, we have A Platform for Change — An Integrated Transportation Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2000 to 2016, which was published in 2001.
Major projects take a long time. However, the situation is improving. One of the good things about Transport 21 is that it provides a funding package to deliver many of the projects in A Platform for Change. As we all know, all major projects encounter opposition. The project Deputy Thomas Broughan mentioned, the M1, encountered significant opposition but was ultimately delivered. It is something we must deal with. We must listen to people's view and decide on the final shape of a project, making adjustments to take account of the legitimate views expressed.
I agree with Deputy Fergus O'Dowd that Louth, from a transport point of view, should be taken into account in the Dublin region. There is very significant commuting between many parts of County Louth and the Dublin area, though strictly speaking it is not in the greater Dublin area as things stand. It is not in the mid-east, which covers the counties of Kildare, Meath and Wicklow but I take his point.
I will ask my colleague Mr. John Henry to deal with the more technical issues.
Mr. John Henry
Deputy Thomas Broughan asked about the delay in implementing Transport 21. Transport 21 is a funding package to implement the first phase that we set out in our document, A Platform for Change which dates from 2001. We set out in 2001 what needs to be done, but it took several years to put the money package together. We are not an implementing agency but we support every project. We go to the public inquiries and we help projects through in whatever way we can. It is not an easy thing to do. We are not experts in implementation; we are the planners, so I cannot give the correct answer, except in this regard.
Transport 21 will bring us up to the year 2015. Our strategy, when we develop it, will be the follow on from Transport 21 and will probably kick in sometime in 2011 or 2012. The Government wants us to have it ready by 2011. Mr. Willie Soffe referred to the consultation process but that will take time. Under the EU directives, we must carry out a sustainable environmental assessment. That means that from the very beginning we have to start the consultation process and have it interacting with all our work all the way through. The best estimate we can make of the time it will take for the work that must be done is two years. We are a small office employing 28 people and not all staff work on the strategy as the business of the office must be done. Even if we had double the numbers I do not think the work could be done any quicker. We have to go through a process and as the Chairman may be aware, we are conducting a series of workshops. We missed some of the Deputies in the past two weeks because of clashes with other business. However we will rearrange more meetings and try to get a time that suits members. We had a great meeting yesterday and we were delighted with it.
Mr. Soffe mentioned commuting from County Louth. It may be more appropriate to think of dealing with it in terms of Leinster rather than the greater Dublin area. As part of the DTO strategy development, we will have a look at the boundary and see how relevant is the greater Dublin area boundary in terms of what we should do. We will make suggestions to Government if changes are needed.
Members asked if developers consult us. They frequently consult us and commission us to work on their behalf, such as impact assessments. If it is a big project it will come to us anyway generally for observation at the planning application stage. We have a fair enough connection and we deal with the local authorities on these matter. We cannot influence everything to go our way all the time. We have no power, but we advise on how to deal with issues.
I will deal with park and ride as a separate item later, but on the question of integrated ticketing, we have looked at all the cities that have successful integrated ticketing and one thing common to all is that regulations made it happen. None of the cities has it by agreement between those involved. A regulation specified that it must be done. If we want to get integrated ticketing — I am sure CIE may not like to hear me say this — for all modes of transport in Dublin, including the private sector, we need regulations to do that, or otherwise it will not happen. A group of people is trying to push it forward, but it will have great difficulty doing so.
We conducted an audit of cycle routes to see what needs to be done and what needs to be changed. We did not get it all right from the beginning because it was a new business for us. We have 800 km of cycle track in the Dublin area, which is more than Paris has. We will look at it again in the light of the recent audit.
It is not used that well.
Mr. John Henry
We have much to do before we get people back on the bikes.
The census result showed that eight times as many men as women cycle.
Mr. John Henry
We have not done the full analysis yet but it is not surprising. On the question of supplying free bicycles, there was an attempt by Dublin City Council to initiate a free bicycles scheme, but I do not know whether it will happen. There were not enough bicycles. We would need thousands of bicycles to be effective.
The outer ring road was included in A Platform for Change and it is our policy that it should be delivered. In Transport 21 they have to do the next stage of the planning for it, but not the actual building of it. It might be related also to issues such as the relocation of the port to Braemor, and then it begins to make a connection that makes sense. It is not on the immediate horizon but it is still on the agenda.
Irrespective of the Braemor port, the reality is that thousands of cars, a point Deputy Fergus O'Dowd made, from Counties Louth and Meath are traversing the M1 into the city, with many of them taking the M50 to the west to Naas. If the ring road was available they would not come near the M1 from Balbriggan and that would obviously reduce congestion.
Mr. John Henry
The numbers bypassing the city are not significant. Most of the traffic on the M50 is traffic fairly close to the city, hopping on and hopping off at the next junction.
The point I make is that if one analyses the slip road off the M1 up to the airport roundabout that is chock-a-block no matter what time of day, let it be 6 a.m. or 10 a.m. If that traffic was diverted on an outer ring road, it would free up--
Could the committee be given the results of studies that have been done on the travel and traffic patterns on the M50?
Mr. John Henry
Yes, we have fairly up to date information from 2002 and soon we will have the census data, which includes travel information that will be processed over the coming months. We will make available any information the committee wants.
I would be interested in that.
Mr. John Henry
In response to Deputy Kennedy, Transport 21 is the current programme being implemented and A Platform for Change is the current framework for transport planning in the greater Dublin area. We have to review it but it will not be needed until 2011 to take over from the current plans. What is there is going ahead, and what we are doing now will not speed it up. We hope, however--
I accept that there are timeframes and issues of compliance with sustainable assessment. I remember being involved with Fingal County Council and the Dublin Regional Authority when this started. It could be a long time before the report is issued and the Government has committed finance. I am conscious that one of our problems is that ten years on, while we have the finance in place for Transport 21 and to put a metro system in place, it might be 2020 by the time a Government agrees we need the extra buses and trains and a further 20 years before they will be provided.
Mr. John Henry
That is where members can help.
Deputy Broughan stated he would deliver when Minister for Transport.
Not on the past record of his colleagues who voted against everything.
Mr. John Henry
I have stated that this time we want the Government to adopt our strategy. The last time it was accepted but not adopted. This time we want to see it adopted in order that it becomes policy immediately and that funding will then be necessary to deliver it. The committee can help us get this through. We will do the work on analysis and put it before the committee which can argue with us on the content. However, we must get it over the final hurdle and have it accepted by the Government.
The Government accepted A Platform for Change in 2001. However, it was not until 2005 or 2006 before funding became available for Transport 21. This time we have an indication that if we can have the strategy adopted by the Government, it will immediately become the policy for the future. We will publish an implementation programme which will immediately follow Transport 21. We hope it will be bigger than Transport 21 because it needs to be. I ask for the Chairman's assistance in moving us in this direction.
Yes.
Mr. John Henry
With regard to getting caught in congestion on Gardiner Street, we do not get involved with traffic lights but will pass on the message to the city council to see whether it can examine it.
Our major programme for improving QBCs is ongoing but it is a difficult job. We are improving a number of the original QBCs. We detected where the hot spots and pinch points were. We work directly with Dublin Bus in establishing where it believes we can obtain maximum benefit with existing buses.
A problem with new QBCs is that Dublin Bus does not have the buses to put on them. It is a major issue for a local authority if it fought a battle to put in place a QBC but there no buses to run on them. This is tied up with public transport regulation and other matters over which we do not have influence. That is an argument for another day. Where we can, we focus on getting maximum benefit from the money available by picking out--
I assure Mr. Henry the committee will address the issue.
Mr. John Henry
We work directly with local authorities on these matters and have a quality bus network office.
Some time ago we conducted a major study for Dublin with a UK company which had studied park and ride facilities in 35 cities throughout the United Kingdom and worked out the principles connected with them. We did not believe the answers, as the study showed that Dublin had sprawled too much geographically for a bus-based park and ride facility to work effectively. It stated rail-based park and ride facilities would work anywhere. However, drivers do not see an advantage if the park and ride site is so far out that the onward trip by bus is not much more competitive than continuing by car. Despite what the study stated, we appealed for a local authority to introduce such a facility to see how good it would be. South Dublin County Council will introduce one at the Lucan-Leixlip junction and we will help. We went to the public inquiry to dispel objections. We want to see whether the study is right. If it is wrong, we will attempt to deliver park and ride facilities throughout Dublin and get value from them. No one wants to take it up, as everyone sees it as a major lossmaker.
South Dublin County Council took it upon itself to introduce a park and ride facility. It does not really have direct responsibility for public transport, so we give it credit for pursuing the matter. We will try to progress the pilot and will see what happens. If any other local authorities want to do the same, we will be delighted, but somebody has to make an offer.
I have heard many ludicrous comments during my time in the Oireachtas and what Mr. Henry just said in respect of being unable to develop park and ride facilities on quality bus routes because no single local authority is responsible for them, even though South Dublin County Council has developed facilities on its own initiative, is a ludicrous situation. That is the best example of a lack of joined-up thinking I know and it is the reason we have invited the four Dublin local authority managers to meet us in January. We will ask Mr. Henry to return on that occasion and will also invite Bus Éireann. There is no excuse for the matter.
We could also invite representatives from the Departments of Transport and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
Every morning for weeks, I drove my car along the Lucan bypass. The journey takes an hour but it would be quicker and more comfortable to take a bus because a bus lane is in place for most of the route. There are a couple of pinch points but there is no reason these cannot be resolved. A bus lane could also be put on the hard shoulder of the motorway. It is a "no brainer". Articulated buses could be introduced.
Mr. John Henry
I like the articulated buses.
They take 120 passengers each, which is equivalent to 120 cars.
I concur with the Chairman. Why was nothing done to encourage local authorities and CIE to develop park and ride facilities at DART and train stations? One of the busiest stations on the line through my constituency is Raheny, the centre of which is plagued by a tradition of people driving their cars for one and a half miles and leaving them all day outside locals' doors. In the industrial estate at Howth Junction, we allowed all the land to be bought but every time I raised the issue, I was told it was the responsibility of CIE. However, CIE said it was a matter for the local authority to address. Everybody kept passing the football and nobody wanted to run with it. The end result is that we have lost locations. Howth Junction would have been brilliant. Some of the punters that hang around Gardiner Street and get in everybody's way would have been on the train and their cars would not be there.
Mr. John Henry
The Chairman and Deputy Broughan might recall my remark that the biggest failure we have experienced is a lack of integration. We have no powers to direct anyone. All we can do is seek consensus on what should be done. When people disagree, they often end up making a compromise, which is not the right answer either.
Mr. Willie Soffe
Some initiatives have been taken. Deputy Kennedy will be aware that Fingal County Council provided CIE with a free site at Portmarnock station which has been used for park and ride facilities. More such initiatives need to be taken. I accept Deputy Broughan's point regarding Raheny, where I reside. A park and ride facility could certainly be provided there.
One of the reasons people stay in their cars is that they have a place to park them when they arrive in town. They would be much quicker to take the bus and leave their cars in the suburbs if they had nowhere to park. That issue must be addressed.
I will briefly return to an issue raised by Deputy Broughan, namely, the reason people moved so far out of the city. The Deputy is correct that people wanted bigger houses, front and back gardens and a different quality of life. However, we are slowly moving towards a position in which people with smaller families accept higher densities. Quality is an important issue with regard to housing development with higher density and I accept that some of the housing units have been much too small. People are willing to live in higher density housing near good public transport, provided they are satisfied with the quality of the development. There have been some good as well as bad examples.
In Dublin city and the surrounding counties, much of the development has taken place along public transport corridors. This encourages people to use public transport. Where I live, I have a choice of taking a DART or bus and even though I travel in the peak period, the bus is never full. Additional capacity is, therefore, available.
People like a fixed line, which is a feature of the Luas, DART and metro that buses do not have.
Reliability is the issue because one is more likely to reach one's destination on time if one takes the DART.
Mr. Willie Soffe
Certainty about arrival time is a major issue.
I suggest that officials from the Dublin Transportation Office and Departments of Transport and Environment, Heritage and Local Government be invited to attend the forthcoming meeting with the seven local authority managers to ensure the issue of park and ride is not tossed from one Department or agency to another. As I stated at the previous meeting, we need to nail down who will take responsibility for this.
I propose that we first invite delegations from the four Dublin authorities.
I thought we would also invite the three other authorities to the meeting.
No, we do not want the meeting to be all over the place. We have written to the other three authorities but we will first concentrate on the four Dublin local authorities. We will ask officials from the DTO to attend and will hold separate sessions with other authorities, Bus Éireann and so forth.
I thank the delegation for its excellent contribution and apologise again for the delay. In discussions with a number of members it has emerged that the joint committee would like to have a close relationship with the Dublin Transportation Office. We would like to support it and seek its assistance and advice in a number of the initiatives we want to progress. We will try to establish a support mechanism to give the DTO greater say with local authorities in terms of achieving some of the objectives it wishes to realise.
Mr. John Henry
I appreciate that. The joint committee is welcome to ask the office to carry out research work it wants done at any time. We will do this work if resources are available.
The joint committee adjourned at 7 p.m. until Wednesday, 12 December 2007.