metrolink scheme cost benefit analysisdata.tii.ie/metrolink/cost-benefit-analysis/metro... ·...

MetroLink Scheme

Reference number TP-041 22/03/2018

METROLINK SCHEME – COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS

METROLINK SCHEME METROLINK SCHEME – COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS

IDENTIFICATION TABLE

Client/Project owner National Transport Authority (NTA)

Project MetroLink Scheme

Study MetroLink Scheme – Cost Benefit Analysis

Type of document Final Report

Date 22/03/2018

File name MetroLink Cost Benefit Analysis DRAFT Report - v2.5.docx

Framework NTA TPS Framework

Reference number TP-041

Confidentiality Highly confidential

Number of pages 28

APPROVAL

Version Name Position Date Modifications

1

Author Paul Hussey Principal Consultant

21/03/2018

v1 Draft for client review Checked by Ian Byrne Director 21/03/2018

Approved by Ian Byrne Director 21/03/2018

2

Author Paul Hussey Principal Consultant

22/03/2018

V2 Checked by Ian Byrne Director 22/03/2018

Approved by Ian Byrne Director 22/03/2018

MetroLink Scheme MetroLink Scheme – Cost Benefit Analysis TP-041

Final Report 22/03/2018 /28

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 5

1.1 CONTEXT 5

1.2 PURPOSE OF METROLINK COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS 5

1.3 SCHEME APPRAISAL GUIDANCE 6

1.4 OVERVIEW OF METROLINK 7

2. TRANSPORT MODELLING APPROACH 11

2.1 INTRODUCTION 11

2.2 ERM USE FOR METROLINK TRANSPORT MODELLING AND APPRAISAL 11

2.3 LAND-USE ASSUMPTIONS 11

2.4 SCENARIO DESCRIPTION 11

2.5 TRANSPORT USER BENEFITS APPRAISAL (TUBA) 14

3. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS INPUTS AND ASSUMPTIONS 15

3.1 OVERVIEW 15

3.2 INPUTS GENERATED BY THE ERM 15

3.3 STANDARD ECONOMIC PARAMETERS 16

3.4 METROLINK COST ESTIMATES USED IN THE APPRAISAL 16

4. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS SUMMARY 17

4.1 INTRODUCTION 17

4.2 TRANSPORT USER BENEFITS 17

4.3 COST ESTIMATES 18

4.4 CALCULATION OF BENEFIT TO COST RATIO FOR METROLINK 19

APPENDIX A – TUBA ECONOMIC FILE 20

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. MetroLink Route Alignment 8 Figure 2. Metro and Luas Trains Peak Period Service Provision 13 Figure 3. Metro and Luas Trains Inter-Peak Service Provision 13 Figure 4. TUBA Process Diagram 15

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Interchange Opportunity Key 8 Table 2. MetroLink Stations – Southern Section 9 Table 3. MetroLink Stations – Northern Section (NMN) 10 Table 4. Transport User Benefit Summary – MetroLink 17 Table 5. Present Value of Costs (PVC) 18 Table 6. Benefit to Cost Ratio 19



1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Context

1.1.1 There are a number of key infrastructure measures which form part of the Government’s Project Ireland 20401 - National Planning Framework (NPF) and National Development Plan (NDP) 2018-2027 and the National Transport Authority’s (NTA) Greater Dublin Area (GDA) Transport Strategy2. These key infrastructure measures include MetroLink, DART Expansion3, Luas and Bus Connects4. These schemes, which will support the delivery of an environmentally sustainable low-carbon public transport system, will ensure that public transport will be able to meet the significant growth in passenger demand for public transport services in the Eastern and Midlands Region by 2040.

The NTA commissioned SYSTRA to undertake a high level transport modelling and cost benefit analysis of the proposed MetroLink scheme.

1.2 Purpose of MetroLink Cost Benefit Analysis

1.2.1 The purpose of the MetroLink cost benefit analysis presented in this report is to provide an initial indication of the performance

1 Project Ireland 2040 is the Government’s overarching planning policy initiative for development up to

2040. It was published along with its associated documents the National Planning Framework to 2040 and the National Development Plan 2018-2027 in February 2018. 2 The Transport Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area, 2016-2035 was prepared and published by the

National Transport Authority in 2016

of the scheme in terms of its economic viability which is measured in terms of transport user benefits and Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR). This is based on the current available project details and in advance of the preparation of a comprehensive business case. This appraisal:

Includes a range of indicative cost estimates for MetroLink; Includes benefits calculated from a transport modelling

assessment of MetroLink which use broad assumptions regarding scheme operation and design; and

Does not consider at this stage, other recognised economic impacts arising from major transport schemes such as:

Safety impacts associated with reductions in road collisions;

Health, absenteeism and journey ambience impacts associated with changes in walking and cycling travel; and

Wider Economic Benefits (WEBS).

This report should not be considered a business case for MetroLink. However, it provides a robust and rigorous assessment of the scheme transport user benefits that MetroLink achieves and is compliant with the latest guidance for scheme appraisal in Ireland.

3 The DART Expansion Programme consists of a number of investment projects that will significantly expand

the heavy rail capacity, frequency and connectivity throughout the GDA. 4 Bus Connects is a project, run by the NTA, to overhaul the current bus system in the Dublin Region

(https://www.busconnects.ie/about/)

https://www.busconnects.ie/about/



1.3 Scheme Appraisal Guidance

1.3.1 The cost benefit analysis of MetroLink presented in this report has taken account of relevant guidance from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (DPER) and the Department for Transport, Tourism and Sport (DTTaS).

1.3.2 In particular, this appraisal is informed by the requirements of DPER’s Public Spending Code and the (DTTaS) Common Appraisal Framework (CAF) for Transport Projects and Programmes, which are described below. Public Spending Code

1.3.3 The Public Spending Code (PSC) is designed to ensure that the State gets the best possible value for the resources at its disposal. The requirements in the Code are based on employing good practices at all stages of the expenditure life cycle: In summary, the PSC:

Was produced by Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (DPER) in 2013;

Aims to ensure projects are appraised sufficiently and provide value for money;

Provides a comprehensive set of expenditure appraisal, value for money, requirements and related guidance for both current and capital expenditure; and

Provides thresholds for the detail required in appraising schemes and projects.

1.3.4 The appraisal parameters covering benefit and cost discounting and shadow pricing within the PSC have been applied in the appraisal of MetroLink in this report. Common Appraisal Framework (CAF)

1.3.5 The purpose of CAF is to develop a common framework for the appraisal of transport investments. It is consistent with the PSC and also elaborates on the PSC in respect of the appraisal of transport projects and programmes to assist scheme promoters in constructing robust and comparable business cases for submission to Government.

1.3.6 The parameter values contained within CAF, which are required in the preparation of economic analysis and Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA), have been included for in the appraisal of MetroLink within this report.



1.4 Overview of MetroLink

1.4.1 The MetroLink scheme comprises a new metro service running from Swords via the airport to the city centre (New Metro North (NMN) and an upgrade to the existing Luas Green Line to metro standard. This, therefore, facilitates a metro line running from Swords to Sandyford via the airport and city centre. It is assumed that the metro will connect with the Luas Green line at a tie-in point at Charlemont Luas stop.

1.4.2 The NMN Route Options Assessment has recently been completed by Arup and a draft Emerging Preferred Route (EPR) for the scheme has been identified. The NMN EPR will cover a distance of 18km from Estuary (just north of Swords) to Charlemont on the south side of the city. NMN will have 15 stations and an estimated journey time of just over 27mins.

1.4.3 NMN will have underground stations in Dublin city centre at St. Stephen’s Green East, Tara Street, O’Connell Street, the Mater Hospital and Whitworth before continuing underground (with further stations) via Ballymun Road to the Airport. The EPR will continue mostly over-ground from the Airport through Swords via the R132. The draft EPR route alignment is shown in Figure 1 below.

1.4.4 MetroLink will connect with the existing heavy rail network at Tara Street to maximise public transport integration in the city centre and for wider connectivity with the regional public transport network. MetroLink will also interchange with the

5 Dardistown station will be a future station and will not be in place for the opening year of 2027

existing heavy rail line at Whitworth Road in Glasnevin where seamless connectivity with the Maynooth and Phoenix Park Tunnel (PPT) lines can be provided.

1.4.5 The full list of MetroLink stations is shown in Figure 1 below with further details provided in Table 2. There are 265 MetroLink stations in total:

15 from the proposed NMN route alignment; and 11 existing Luas Green line stations, which will be upgraded

to accommodate metro trains.

1.4.6 The table also provides a description of the type of station (i.e. underground, at grade etc.) and the possible interchange opportunities with other public transport modes available at each station. Table 1 below provides a key for the symbols used by mode.



Table 1. Interchange Opportunity Key

MODE SYMBOL

Bus

Luas

Heavy Rail

Airport

Park and Ride

Figure 1. MetroLink Route Alignment



Table 2. MetroLink Stations – Southern Section

STATION STATION TYPE SCHEME ELEMENT INTERCHANGE OPPORTUNITY

Sandyford At Grade Green Line to metro

Stillorgan At Grade Green Line to metro

Kilmacud At Grade Green Line to metro

Ballally At Grade Green Line to metro

Dundrum At Grade Green Line to metro

Windy Arbour At Grade Green Line to metro

Milltown At Grade Green Line to metro

Cowper At Grade Green Line to metro

Beechwood At Grade Green Line to metro

Ranelagh Elevated Green Line to metro

Charlemont Elevated Luas / Metro Tie-in



Table 3. MetroLink Stations – Northern Section (NMN)


St. Stephen’s Green East

Underground NMN

Tara Street Underground NMN

O’Connell Street

Underground NMN

Mater Hospital Underground NMN

Whitworth Underground NMN

Griffith Park West

Underground NMN

Dublin City University

Underground NMN

Ballymun Village

Underground NMN


Northwood West

Underground NMN

Dardistown (Future Station)

Underground NMN

Dublin Airport Underground NMN

Fosterstown At Grade NMN

Swords Central At Grade NMN

Seatown At Grade NMN

Estuary P&R At Grade NMN



2. TRANSPORT MODELLING APPROACH

2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 This section details the transport modelling approach used to assess the performance of MetroLink, including the modelling inputs and assumptions underpinning the assessment.

2.1.2 The National Transport Authority’s (NTA) East Regional Transport Model (ERM) has been used to assess the performance of the MetroLink scheme.

2.2 ERM Use for MetroLink Transport Modelling and Appraisal

2.2.1 The ERM provides a comprehensive representation of travel patterns within the MetroLink corridor and across the Greater Dublin Area (GDA). The ERM allows for the performance and attractiveness of MetroLink to be analysed and how transport demand is served by the Metro system within a multi-modal network (i.e. including the public transport modes of rail, bus, Luas, Metro as well as that of car, walking and cycling).

2.2.2 The ERM is supported by a suite of transport appraisal tools, developed in line with CAF, that can provide additional information about the performance of the scheme and

6 TUBA is transport economic appraisal software developed by Atkins Limited on behalf of the Department

for Transport in the UK.

specifically for this report, the economic benefits from the Economic Appraisal tool (which incorporates the Transport User Benefit Appraisal (TUBA) software6). These factors make the ERM the most suitable tool for the testing and appraisal of MetroLink.

2.3 Land-Use Assumptions

2.3.1 Transport demand forecasts for the 2027 “Opening Year” scenario were derived by linear interpolation from the 2035 NTA reference year7 and converted into people trips using the NTA’s National Demand Forecasting Model (NDFM), which converts planning data forecasts to trip forecasts.

2.4 Scenario Description Do-Minimum Network

2.4.1 As per the CAF guidance a current ‘business as usual’ scenario must be prepared against which the Do-Something option is compared against. This is referred to as the Do-Minimum scenario.

2.4.2 The ‘Do-Minimum’ network includes forecast transport demand (for the opening year of 2027) and additional transport schemes (public transport, cycling and road) that are already built, under construction or are committed in terms of planning approval and allocation of funds. The list of schemes included in the Do

7 Forecasts of population, employment and education data are defined by the NTA at the Census Small Area

(CSA) level for a standard reference year of 2035, which represents the GDA Transport Strategy horizon year.



Minimum network have been developed in coordination with the NTA and is the same Do Minimum Network used for the NMN Route Options Assessment modelling.

2.4.3 The major schemes included within the Do Minimum network are:

Luas Cross City; Phoenix Park Tunnel; and DART Frequency Increase. Do Something Network

2.4.4 The Do Something network represents the future year with MetroLink scheme included. The scheme is coded on top of the Do Minimum 2027 scenario, to facilitate the assessment of the scheme in isolation. MetroLink and Luas Service Provision and Capacity

2.4.5 The following modelling assumptions are included in the Do Minimum and Do Something scenarios: MetroLink

NMN EPR station locations and journey times between stations;

The tie-in of the NMN EPR at Charlemont Luas stop with the associated through-running of services to Sandyford using the existing Luas Green-Line stations;

Assumed 15 minute journey time on the Sandyford to Charlemont section – reduced from the current approximate 18min journey time;

500 passenger carrying capacity vehicles:

2min headway in AM and PM peak periods 15,000 capacity;

4min headway assumed in inter-peak periods 7,500 capacity;

Seating assumptions as per existing Luas seating to crush capacity ratio 125 seats per vehicle;

5 minute transfer penalty to/from rail and all other public transport sub-modes. This approach was also used in the NMN EPR modelling.

Luas Green Line

55m trams - 96 seating and 380 crush capacity; Services running on Bride’s Glen – Sandyford and

Broombridge – Charlemont sections:

5min headway in AM and PM peak periods; 10min headway in inter-peak periods.

2.4.6 Further details on the MetroLink and Luas service provision assumed in the modelling assessment are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3 below.



Figure 2. Metro and Luas Trains Peak Period Service Provision

Figure 3. Metro and Luas Trains Inter-Peak Service Provision



2.5 Transport User Benefits Appraisal (TUBA)

2.5.1 The Transport User Benefits Appraisal (TUBA) (v1.9.4) program has been used to estimate transport user benefits arising from the scheme. The assessment compares the “Do-Minimum” scenario (i.e. not to progress with the scheme) with a “Do-Something” scenario (i.e. the scheme) and estimates the benefits resulting from the scheme in terms of:

Transport user time impacts; Vehicle operating cost impacts; Transport provider revenue impacts; and Impacts related to emissions (greenhouse gases).

2.5.2 TUBA is the ‘best practice’ software used in transport scheme appraisal across the UK and Ireland and was developed specifically for the purpose of cost benefit analysis and economic appraisal.



3. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS INPUTS AND ASSUMPTIONS

3.1 Overview

3.1.1 This section summarises the key inputs required to undertake the transport user benefits assessment. These key inputs are as follows:

Outputs generated by East Regional Model (ERM) which are used as inputs to TUBA;

Standard economic parameters necessary for appraisal; and

Capital, operational and maintenance cost estimates for MetroLink.

3.1.2 These are outlined in further detail below.

3.2 Inputs generated by the ERM

3.2.1 To calculate the changes in travel costs as a result of the implementation of MetroLink, travel demand and cost skims are extracted from the Do-Minimum and Do-Something ERM model runs. The demand for travel is split into journey purposes (e.g. Commute) which have a common value of time. The travel costs are also split into the appropriate sub-components (e.g. distance, time etc.) which is a requirement of appraisal guidance.

3.2.2 TUBA is run for forecast years (i.e. 2027 – Opening Year and 2057 (+30 year) – Design Year), comparing the change in demand and

costs across the transport network between the case with and without the proposed scheme

3.2.3 Figure 4 provides a graphical representation of the economic appraisal process using TUBA software.

Figure 4. TUBA Process Diagram

3.2.4 For the purposes of this assessment, it is assumed that the transport user benefits for MetroLink will accrue from the opening year (i.e. only the benefits arising after the 2027 opening year are included in the appraisal).



3.3 Standard economic parameters

3.3.1 Standard transport appraisal parameters in Ireland are available from the following documents:

Department of Public Expenditure and Reform ‘Public Spending Code’, 2013;

Department of Transport ‘Guidelines on a Common Appraisal Framework for Transport Projects and Programmes’ (CAF), 2016 – Annex 1: Parameter Values; and

Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) ‘Project Appraisal Guidelines’, 2016 - Unit 6.11 National Parameters Values Sheet.

3.3.2 All general transport appraisal parameters are taken from the above documents. Additional parameters for the appraisal for vehicle purpose splits and vehicle occupancy rates. These are taken from the ERM. Fuel efficiency data is also required, and these are taken from UK WebTAG guidance as no guidance is currently available in Ireland8.

3.3.3 Full details of the parameters used are contained within the TUBA Economic file included in Appendix A.

3.3.4 The other main input assumptions that are used for the appraisal as per PSC and CAF guidance are as follows:

8 SYSTRA have recently completed a review for the NTA, to calculate the TUBA fuel consumption parameter

values for the Irish Petrol and Diesel car fleet. Although this has not been formally approved by the NTA.

A price base year and present value year of 2011; A scheme opening year of 2027; A standard appraisal period of 30 years; A residual value period of a further 30 years; A discount rate of 5% as per PSC; Shadow pricing in line with the PSC, i.e. a shadow price of

public funds of 130% and a shadow price of labour of 80%; and

All outputs are presented in market prices.

3.4 MetroLink Cost Estimates used in the Appraisal

3.4.1 For the purpose of this cost benefit analysis, a high level capital expenditure (CapEx) range has been assumed based on the anticipated CapEx outturn for the MetroLink scheme. The expected CapEx range, based off recent estimates, is between €3-€4 billion.

3.4.2 The cost estimates have been assumed to be in 2018 prices, exclusive of VAT. The profile of expenditure is based on an estimated programme of works to deliver the scheme by 2027. Further details of the cost estimates are provided in section 4.2.1 .



4. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS SUMMARY

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 This section provides an overview of the transport user benefits, the present value of costs and the range of Benefit to Cost Ratios (BCR) arising from the MetroLink cost benefit analysis.

4.2 Transport User Benefits

4.2.1 The Transport User Benefits associated with the MetroLink scheme were calculated using TUBA software. Benefits were examined on a sectoral basis to ensure that only benefits associated with the scheme were included in the overall user benefits calculation.

4.2.2 The results of the assessment of transport user benefits linked to the proposed MetroLink scheme are presented in Table 4.

4.2.3 As can be seen from the table, the MetroLink scheme is forecast to generate approximately €6.8 billion in transport user benefits over a 60 year period.

4.2.4 Public transport travel time savings account for just over €6.8 billion or 78% of the overall benefits.

9 ‘Other Benefits’ includes for non-travel time benefits arising from changes in fare revenues, tolls, fuel and

indirect taxes.

Table 4. Transport User Benefit Summary – MetroLink

JOURNEY PURPOSE

PT TRAVEL TIME

SAVINGS (€M)

ROAD TRAVEL TIME

SAVINGS (€M)

OTHER BENEFITS9

(€M)

TOTAL TRANSPORT

USER BENEFITS

(€M)

Business 912 167 107 1,187

Commuter 1,207 71 120 1,398

Consumer10 3,200 384 610 4,193

TOTAL 5,319 622 836 6,778

10 The ‘Consumer’ journey purpose includes education, shopping, leisure and visitor trips, which are a high

proportion of 24 hour travel demand.



4.3 Cost Estimates

4.3.1 The cost estimates used in the cost benefit analysis comprise capital and operation and maintenance costs.

4.3.2 As mentioned above, the outline cost estimates are high level estimates based on anticipated capital expenditure requirements for the scheme (€3-4 billion in €250m increments). Due to the high level nature of the cost estimates, a range of costs have been tested to provide upper and lower estimates of the potential BCR for MetroLink. The estimates are provided for the purposes of this appraisal only and should not be used or relied upon for any other purposes. The cost estimates are appropriate for this early stage of the MetroLink appraisal.

4.3.3 More detailed cost estimates will be developed for the business case stage of scheme appraisal as the detailed design of the scheme progresses.

4.3.4 In addition, an allowance was made for appropriate annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs over the assessment period. Estimates were developed based on the assumed O&M costs for the New Metro North (NMN) scheme (€30m per year) and high level assumptions on the additional costs for the Luas Green Line upgrade element of MetroLink (50% of NMN O&M costs, €15m). The total annual operating cost estimate for the entire MetroLink scheme is €45m. This estimation does not include fleet renewal costs within the appraisal period.

4.3.5 The O&M cost assumptions are a robust estimate of the likely operating costs for the scheme, based on experience from Luas and other schemes.

4.3.6 Applying the principles of the guidance from DPER in relation to shadow pricing (at 130% for public funds and 80% for labour) and the discount rate of 5%, the total present value of costs (PVC) for the scheme is presented in Table 5 below.

Table 5. Present Value of Costs (PVC)

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE COSTS

PRESENT VALUE OF COST (€M)

3 billion 2,243

3.25 billion 2,385

3.5 billion 2,528

3.75 billion 2,670

4 billion 2,812



4.4 Calculation of Benefit to Cost Ratio for MetroLink

4.4.1 A simple assessment was undertaken to compare the estimated transport user benefits to the set of outline cost estimates for the MetroLink scheme.

4.4.2 Generally, if the forecast benefits for the scheme exceed the estimated costs, then the investment can be considered worthwhile. In general the BCR indicates the likely Value for Money (VfM) category for the scheme i.e.:

>2.0 – High VfM; 1.5-2.0 – Medium VfM; 1.0-1.5 - Low VfM; and <1.0 - Poor VfM;

4.4.3 The results of the assessment of the scheme are presented in Table 6 below.

Table 6. Benefit to Cost Ratio

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE COSTS

BENEFIT TO COST RATIO (BCR)

3 billion 3.02

3.25 billion 2.84

3.5 billion 2.68

3.75 billion 2.54

4 billion 2.41

4.4.4 The estimated transport user benefits of the MetroLink scheme are forecast to exceed the estimated outline scheme costs with a BCR ranging from 2.41 to 3.02. This indicates that investment in MetroLink is worthwhile, based on economic benefits alone and the scheme will provide a High level of VfM.



APPENDIX A – TUBA ECONOMIC FILE TUBA 1.9.4 ECONOMIC PARAMETERS FILE PARAMETERS TUBA_version 1.9.4 the current version of TUBA base_year 2011 defines base year for economic parameters pres_val_year 2011 present value year for discounting GDP_base 100.0 value of RPI in base year av_ind_tax 19.1 % average final indirect tax rate nt_carbdxvalues 5.66 5.66 5.66 base year carbon values in €/tonne (low high central) t_carbdxvalues 5.66 5.66 5.66 MODES *no. description 1 Highway 2 Public Transport VEHICLE_TYPE/SUBMODE *no. mode new_mode P&R type description 1 1 N N per Car 2 1 N N per LGV 3 1 N N fre OGV1 4 1 N N fre OGV2 5 2 N N per Bus 6 2 N N per Light Rail 7 2 N N per Heavy Rail PERSON_TYPE *no. type(D/P) description 1 D Driver 2 P Passenger PURPOSE *no. type(B/C/O) description 1 B Business 2 C Commuting 3 O Other FUEL_TYPE *no. sector name (sector: 1=untraded sector 2=traded sector) 1 1 petrol 2 1 diesel TIME_PERIODS * consistent with assigned periods in Eastern Regional Model v1.0 September 2015 *no. description comments



1 AM 0700-1000 2 LT 1000-1300 Average Peak hr 3 SR 1300-1600 4 PM 1600-1900 BREAKPOINTS *description breakpoint1 breakpoint2 .. Distance 1.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 50.0 100.0 TimeSaving -5.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 5.0 CHARGES *no. sector description 1 pri PT fares (private operators) 2 loc PT fares (LA operated) 3 loc LA tolls 4 pri National tolls 5 pri Private tolls 6 loc LA on-street parking 7 loc LA off-street parking 8 pri Private parking DISCOUNT_RATE * based on DPER Public Spending Code (2013) *% change p.a. *Start_yr End_yr Rate 1 30 5.00 31 90 5.00 VALUE_OF_TIME *cents per hour(Percieved Costs), 2011 values and prices based on CAF Parameters 2016 Tables A6-A8 *Section 4.8 TUBA Manual – COM & OTH in Market prices, BUS in Factor *Vtype/submode Person_type VOT_purpose1 VOT_purpose2 VOT_purpose3 .. 1 1 2902.0 1403.0 1275.0 1 2 2902.0 1403.0 1275.0 2 1 2902.0 1403.0 1275.0 2 2 2902.0 1403.0 1275.0 3 1 2902.0 0.0 0.0 3 2 2902.0 0.0 0.0 4 1 2902.0 0.0 0.0 4 2 2902.0 0.0 0.0 5 1 2902.0 0.0 0.0 5 2 2902.0 1403.0 1275.0 6 1 2902.0 0.0 0.0 6 2 2902.0 1403.0 1275.0 7 1 2902.0 0.0 0.0 7 2 2902.0 1403.0 1275.0 VALUE_OF_TIME_GROWTH



*% change p.a.based on CAF Paramters Table 9 *assume all purposes are same as values only listed for business trips *Start_yr End_yr VOT_Gr_purpose1 VOT_Gr_purpose2 VOT_Gr_purpose3 .. 2012 2014 1.40 1.40 1.40 2015 2019 3.60 3.60 3.60 2020 2024 2.20 2.20 2.20 2025 2095 2.30 2.30 2.30 AV_IND_TAX_CHANGES *% change p.a. from TII PAG Unit 6.11 (2011), Table 13 *Start_yr End_yr Growth 2012 2095 0.00 CHARGE_TAX_RATES *% *charge final intermediate 1 0.0 0.0 2 0.0 0.0 3 0.0 0.0 4 0.0 0.0 5 0.0 0.0 6 0.0 0.0 7 0.0 0.0 8 0.0 0.0 CHARGE_TAX_RATES_CHANGES *% change p.a. *Start_yr End_yr charge final intermediate 2012 2095 1 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 2 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 3 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 4 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 5 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 6 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 7 0.0 0.0 FUEL_COST *Resource values taken from CAF Parameters – Table 11, Factor Costs *Duty values taken from resource x tax on fuel intermediate consumption (TII PAG Unit 6.11 (2011), Table 12) *VAT values taken from TII PAG Unit 6.11 (2011), Table 12 *Carbon dioxide equivalent emissions values taken from UK DfT TAG Data Book Autumn 2015 Final v1.4b – A3.3 (2011 values) converted to g/carbon from kg/CO2 *type resource(c/lit) duty(c/lit) VAT(%) carbon_grammes/unit (unit=litre for fuel types 1 & 2; unit=KWH for electric) 1 63.00 57.62 21.0 2230.00 2 70.00 46.57 21.0 2562.00



FUEL_COST_CHANGES *reflects VAT and Duty changes between 2011 and 2015 *% change p.a. *Start_yr End_yr fuel_type resource duty VAT Carb_Den_change 2012 2012 1 10.70 0.00 2.00 0.00 2012 2012 2 3.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 2013 2013 1 -5.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 2013 2013 2 -5.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 2014 2014 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2014 2014 2 -3.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 2015 2015 1 -30.60 2.00 0.00 0.00 2015 2015 2 -32.60 2.90 0.00 0.00 2016 2095 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2016 2095 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CARBDX_VALUE_CHANGES *relative (%p.a.) or absolute (£p.a.) growth; either absolute or relative may be defined, not both *values taken from CAF Parameters Table 2, converted from absolute values to relative %p.a. *same growth applies to low, central and high carbon values *Start_yr End_yr Rel.(%) - non-traded Abs.- non-traded' (£/tonne/year) Rel.(%) -traded Abs.(£/tonne/year) - traded 2012 2012 2.00 2013 2013 0.00 2014 2014 8.97 2015 2015 2.53 2016 2016 6.79 2017 2017 5.35 2018 2019 0.00 2020 2020 37.17 2021 2021 8.00 2022 2022 7.41 2023 2023 6.90 2024 2024 6.45 2025 2025 6.06 2026 2026 30.00 2027 2027 23.08 2028 2028 18.75 2029 2029 15.79 2030 2030 13.64 2031 2031 12.57 2032 2032 11.17 2033 2033 10.05 2034 2034 9.13 2035 2035 8.37 2036 2036 7.37 2037 2037 6.86 2038 2038 6.42 2039 2039 6.03



2040 2040 5.69 2041 2041 3.08 2042 2042 2.99 2043 2043 2.90 2044 2044 2.82 2045 2045 2.74 2046 2046 2.22 2047 2047 2.17 2048 2048 2.13 2049 2049 2.08 2050 2095 0.00 FLEET * 2011 Split *CSO bulletin on vehicle and driver statistics *veh_type %petrol %diesel 1 70.2 29.8 2 15.0 85.0 3 15.0 85.0 4 0 100.0 5 0 100.0 6 0 100.0 7 0 100.0 FLEET_CHANGES * taken from SYSTRA Rolling Fleet v7 - 2011 values *% p.a. *Start_yr End_yr veh_type %change_petrol 2012 2012 1 -3.430 8.080 2013 2013 1 -3.360 7.072 2014 2014 1 -3.690 7.010 2015 2015 1 -3.700 6.326 2016 2025 1 -1.270 1.967 2026 2095 1 0.000 0.000 FUEL_CONSUMPTION * based on TII PAG Unit 6.3 (2011), Table A6 *veh_type fuel_type a_fuel b_fuel c_fuel d_fuel cut-off_speed(km/h) 1 1 1.1193 0.04400 -0.81383E-04 0.24490E-05 140 1 2 0.4921 0.06218 -0.59098E-03 0.46470E-05 140 2 1 1.9508 0.03453 0.67987E-04 0.37149E-05 140 2 2 1.3969 0.03348 -0.22998E-03 0.76732E-05 140 3 1 1.9508 0.03453 0.67987E-04 0.37149E-05 96 3 2 1.4314 0.25802 -0.39066E-02 0.33623E-04 96 4 2 2.6701 0.55716 -0.79761E-02 0.60035E-04 96 5 2 5.9801 0.24528 -0.30650E-02 0.30615E-04 96 6 2 0.7247 -0.01136 0.716045E-04 0.000000E+00 96 7 2 0.7247 -0.01136 0.716045E-04 0.000000E+00 96



FUEL_EFFICIENCY * based on CAF Paramters, Tables 10 and 13 *% p.a. *Start_yr End_yr veh_type fuel_type change 2012 2025 1 1 2.00 2012 2025 1 2 2.00 2026 2030 1 1 1.00 2026 2030 1 2 1.00 2031 2095 1 1 0.00 2031 2095 1 2 0.00 2012 2095 2 1 0.00 2012 2095 2 2 0.00 2012 2095 3 1 0.00 2012 2095 3 2 0.00 2012 2095 4 2 0.00 2012 2095 5 2 0.00 2012 2095 6 2 0.00 2012 2095 7 2 0.00 NON_FUEL_VOC * based on CAF Parameters, Table 12 (2011) *veh_type fuel_type a_nonfuel_wrk b_nonfuel_wrk a_nonfuel_nw b_nonfuel_nw 1 1 6.265 171.493 5.507 0.000 1 2 6.265 171.493 5.507 0.000 2 2 9.099 70.308 10.327 0.000 3 2 10.020 393.702 0.000 0.000 4 2 19.491 758.888 0.000 0.000 5 2 45.458 1036.494 0.000 0.000 6 2 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7 2 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 NON_FUEL_VOC_CHANGES * based on TII PAG Unit 6.11 (2011), Table 10 *% p.a. *Start_yr End_yr veh_type gnf 2012 2095 1 0.000 2012 2095 2 0.000 2012 2095 3 0.000 2012 2095 4 0.000 2012 2095 5 0.000 NON_FUEL_TAX_RATES * based on TII PAG Unit 6.11 (2011), Table 12 *% *submode final intermediate 1 21.0 0.0 2 21.0 0.0 3 21.0 0.0



NON_FUEL_TAX_RATES_CHANGES *% change p.a. * based on TII PAG Unit 6.3 (2011), Table A14 *Start_yr End_yr Submode final intermediate 2012 2095 1 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 2 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 3 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 4 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 5 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 6 0.0 0.0 2012 2095 7 0.0 0.0 DEFAULT_PURPOSE_SPLIT * Based on NTA ERM global journey purposes, derived from NTA Household survey 2012. * This needs to be updated for each regional model *Vtype/submode purpose Period1 Period2 Period3 Period4 1 1 4.1 7.5 7.5 4.2 1 2 44.4 18.1 18.1 43.3 1 3 51.5 74.4 74.4 52.5 2 1 40.2 40.2 40.2 40.2 2 2 45.1 45.1 45.1 45.1 2 3 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 3 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 4 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 4 2 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 5 1 4.1 10.3 10.3 4.7 5 2 38.8 12.3 12.3 41.9 5 3 57.1 77.4 77.4 53.4 6 1 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 6 2 18.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 6 3 70.8 70.8 70.8 70.8 7 1 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 7 2 18.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 7 3 70.8 70.8 70.8 70.8 DEFAULT_PERSON_FACTORS * Based on NTA ERM global vehicle occupancy rates, derived from NTA Household survey 2012. * This needs to be updated for each regional model *Vtype/submode purpose person_type FactorPer1 FactorPer2 FactorPer3 FactorPer4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 0.18 0.09 0.09 0.18 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.10 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 0.53 0.31 0.31 0.52



2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 2 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 2 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 DEFAULT_PERSON_FACTORS_CHANGE *% change p.a. *Start_yr End_yr Submode Purpose Person_type ChangePer1 ChangePer2 ChangePer3 ChangePer4 ChangePer5 2012 2095 1 1 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2012 2095 1 2 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PREPARATION&SUPERVISION * TUBA standard values * total preparation (by stage) and supervision costs as % of land and construction costs *Mode *Prep:SI Prep:PC Prep:PR Prep:OP Prep: WC Super 1 12.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 2.0 5.0 2 12.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 2.0 5.0

SYSTRA provides advice on transport, to central, regional and local government, agencies, developers, operators and financiers.

A diverse group of results-oriented people, we are part of a strong team of professionals worldwide. Through client business planning, customer research and strategy development we create solutions that work for real people in the real world.

For more information visit www.systra.co.uk

Birmingham – Newhall Street 5th Floor, Lancaster House, Newhall St, Birmingham, B3 1NQ T: +44 (0)121 233 7680 F: +44 (0)121 233 7681 Birmingham – Innovation Court Innovation Court, 121 Edmund Street, Birmingham B3 2HJ T: +44 (0)121 230 6010 Bristol 10 Victoria Street, Bristol, BS1 6BN T: +44 (0)117 922 9040

Dublin 2nd Floor, Riverview House, 21-23 City Quay Dublin 2,Ireland T: +353 (0)1 542 6000 F: +353 (0)1 542 6001

Edinburgh – Thistle Street Prospect House, 5 Thistle Street, Edinburgh EH2 1DF United Kingdom T: +44 (0)131 220 6966 Edinburgh – Manor Place 37 Manor Place, Edinburgh, EH3 7EB Telephone +44 (0)131 225 7900 Fax: +44 (0)131 225 9229

Glasgow – St Vincent St Seventh Floor, 124 St Vincent Street Glasgow G2 5HF United Kingdom T: +44 (0)141 225 4400

Glasgow – West George St 250 West George Street, Glasgow, G2 4QY T: +44 (0)141 221 4030 F: +44 (0)800 066 4367

Leeds 100 Wellington Street, Leeds, LS1 1BA T: +44 (0)113 397 9740 F: +44 (0)113 397 9741 Liverpool Cotton Exchange, Bixteth Street, Liverpool, L3 9LQ T: +44 (0)151 230 1930

London 5 Old Bailey, London EC4M 7BA United Kingdom T: +44 (0)203 714 4400

London Seventh Floor, 15 Old Bailey London EC4M 7EF United Kingdom T: +44 (0)20 7529 6500 F: +44 (0)20 3427 6274

Manchester – 16th Floor, City Tower 16th Floor, City Tower, Piccadilly Plaza Manchester M1 4BT United Kingdom T: +44 (0)161 831 5600

Manchester, 25th Floor, City Tower 25th Floor, City Tower, Piccadilly Plaza Manchester M1 4BT United Kingdom T: +44 (0)161 236 0282 F: +44 (0)161 236 0095

Newcastle PO Box 438, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE3 9BT United Kingdom T: +44 (0)191 2136157 Perth 13 Rose Terrace, Perth PH1 5HA T: +44 (0)1738 621 377 F: +44 (0)1738 632 887

Reading Soane Point, 6-8 Market Place, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 2EG T: +44 (0)118 334 5510

Woking Dukes Court, Duke Street Woking, Surrey GU21 5BH United Kingdom T: +44 (0)1483 728051 F: +44 (0)1483 755207

Other locations: France: Bordeaux, Lille, Lyon, Marseille, Paris Northern Europe: Astana, Copenhagen, Kiev, London, Moscow, Riga, Wroclaw Southern Europe & Mediterranean: Algiers, Baku, Bucharest, Madrid, Rabat, Rome, Sofia, Tunis Middle East: Cairo, Dubai, Riyadh Asia Pacific: Bangkok, Beijing, Brisbane, Delhi, Hanoi, Hong Kong, Manila, Seoul, Shanghai, Singapore, Shenzhen, Taipei Africa: Abidjan, Douala, Johannesburg, Kinshasa, Libreville, Nairobi Latin America: Lima, Mexico, Rio de Janeiro, Santiago, São Paulo North America: Little Falls, Los Angeles, Montreal, New-York, Philadelphia, Washington

metrolink scheme cost benefit analysisdata.tii.ie/metrolink/cost-benefit-analysis/metro... ·...

Documents