Kevin Humphreys (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I will follow up on Mr. Creegan's answers on College Gate. I still hope College Gate is under consideration for a slight realignment relating to property around there. I know one of the sites creates a difficulty with the main sewer line but if that can be resolved, can the station be moved while maintaining integrated transport? I suggest that a proper costing be carried out on the sewer line during the further public consultation, with a view to opening up alternative options. The normal compulsory purchase order, CPO, mechanism will not work for College Gate. It is a community that has been in the city for several years and there is a mixture of tenants and owner occupiers. In the case of the latter, the current CPO system will not allow them to stay within their own community if it is carried out. I ask for that to be examined.

College Gate is very different from anywhere else because of its location. People who purchased their two-bedroom home in College Gate during the recession got it at a what people would call a good price nice now. If they want to stay within their community, there will be a huge gap between what is a compulsory purchase price and a compensation price than what they can purchase in the immediate area. That reality must be taken into consideration. These people cannot be banished from their communities in which they have lived for decades. Similarly for tenants, I do not believe the proposed one-year system will work.

In terms of bus corridors, Deputy Eamon Ryan has outlined that we do not want the streetscape change. To be fair, Mr. Creegan has worked with me when I made proposals and suggestions in an effort to resolve some of these issues, and I accept that not all of the issues can be resolved. Let me outline one of my concerns. In an effort to make constructive suggestions about how this matter can be resolved, as the witnesses are probably aware, the real-time data for buses are open data, so they are freely and easily accessible. There seems to be a difference of up to 40% between the times stated in the consultation documents and the open real-time data sources that we have accessed. I ask the witnesses to check their data sources. We have 28 or 29 days of data. There are large differences in the times that have been put forward and what is actually shown in the real-time data. We now need local consultation, thus allowing people to bring forward constructive solutions and I am a big supporter of public transport.

As far back as when the metro system was proposed, I always said that no decision would be a worse decision for local communities. We have hit a worse solution for the Charlemont Street line. By building a bus park under Ranelagh, the NTA has sent a clear indication that it will extend the Luas green line. I would like a better technical term than "perhaps" 20 years. I am sure we have real modelling that will tell us within what timeframe it is proposed to extend. I have not encountered the technical terms of "perhaps" before. Anybody living along the line now who wishes to rightsize or downsize will experience a financial depreciation on their properties and probably will not be able to move to suitable accommodation because it will be an automatic discount. This scenario has happened numerous times in terms of plans and certainly within Dublin city. I refer, for example, to the Merrion Gates flyover that was proposed by the NTA. One will see from a property search in the area that it is next to impossible to sell a property there if one wants to move one because potential buyers will see that there is a road reservation in the front garden yet there is no negotiation on a future compulsory purchase. Similar things have happened in other locations, such as the sterilisation of a tract of land in terms of the eastern bypass. Therefore, the NTA must give a little bit more certainty rather than the word "perhaps" so people can understand the future plans and proper timescales. I certainly believe that there are two options, which have been clearly outlined by Deputy Eamon Ryan. One option is to connect UCD or take the line further westward and connect Harold's Cross, Kimmage and up as far as the Rathfarnham bus corridor, which takes over 70,000 passengers and shows there is a demand. I also believe that we should start to plan public transport for this city on a 100-year basis and not on a very short-term basis.

I respect what has happened in Swords. I mean a decision has already been taken about height and density on the expectation that the metro system will go to Swords. As for furnishing data on the viability of taking the MetroLink westward, one could consider, while working with local authorities, that changing the density and height at the locations along the metro line could make the line much more financially sustainable. I believe public transport must be subsidised because cities and communities make other positive gains.

Lastly, the NTA must take on board the fact that this city is made up of villages and, therefore, we must ensure they are not destroyed by the proposals. I urge the NTA that the streetscape is not changed so much that the villages are no longer viable. I lived through the development of the Luas line on Harcourt Street so I know that many of the businesses on Harcourt Street never re-opened after they closed during the construction period. Therefore, the construction proposals must be accompanied by supports for small businesses to ensure that they can exist during construction. We must work imaginatively with the local authorities and take into consideration the loss of business during the construction of BusConnects. At present small businesses and small shops are only hanging in there so one cannot say this project is going to be great, more people will go to the village thus generating more business if one cannot stay open during the construction period. If a small business or shop closes then, more than likely, it will never re-open.