UPROAR (United Portmarnock Residents Opposing Another Runway) has pointed to the road traffic chaos that will result from the proposed new runway at Dublin Airport, and has criticised the wholly inadequate job done by the DAA in assessing the traffic impact of its proposed runway.

In the Sunday Tribune of 20th May last it was reported that the NRA has objected to the IKEA store development near the M50 at Ballymun on the grounds that it would add significantly to traffic congestion. The Tribune notes that: "The National Roads Authority (NRA) has emerged as a leading critic of the project."

The NRA's submission on IKEA, dated 31 March 2006, is indeed harsh on this private sector investment proposal. Referring to the €1 billion planned investment in upgrading the M50, it says: "..the Authority does not want, nor should it be allowed to happen, that the benefits of this massive investment be undermined in any way." Ironically, the NRA refers to Dublin Airport as follows: "This scenario [road congestion due to IKEA] would be unacceptable on this section of motorway, which forms part of the most critical artery for traffic distribution around Dublin and which serves as a vital link to Dublin Airport and Dublin Port, Ireland's largest airport and port respectively."

The NRA further states: "In the case where the upgraded M50 will have a finite limitation on its capacity, and where most of the capacity is already predicted to be utilised, small additional changes have the potential to generate disproportionate effects."

In 2005, The Irish Hardware & Building Materials Association commissioned a report into the impact of the IKEA proposal on traffic. It found that IKEA would generate nearly 11,000 car movements on Sundays, with 7,000 and 8,500 on Fridays and Saturdays, respectively. See: http://www.irishhardware.ie/

The proposed new runway at Dublin Airport is projected by the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) to handle an additional 10 million passengers by 2025, on top of the extra 10 million that will pass through the airport by then anyway. Eighty per cent of passengers passing through Dublin Airport currently use the car (taxi, private car or hired car). The extra staff needed to cope with these extra passengers would also add thousands more car movements a day. The proposed Metro to Swords would reduce the car pressure somewhat. UPROAR estimates that at a minimum, even with the Metro to Swords in place, there will be an extra 35,000 car movements by 2025 due to planned airport expansion, including the new runway. Car traffic generated will cripple the M50 - M1 network. That is at least three times the maximum daily car movements due to IKEA on the same full-capacity road network, which the NRA objected to.

Yet, the NRA did not object to the parallel runway proposed by the Dublin Airport Authority. In a letter to FCC dated 27th March 2006, it was only: "..concerned to ensure that the expansion and development of Dublin Airport takes full cognisance of the current national road network and the impact of its proposals on that network." It objects to 11,000 car movements on peak days, but does not object to 35,000 car movements on an average day, with many more on peak days? Why is there such a difference in treatment between a private sector and a public sector investment proposal?

UPROAR expects that the NRA will redress the balance and make an equally hard-hitting criticism of the runway proposal. They may do so by way of an observation on UPROAR's traffic analysis prepared by Robert Kelly and contained in our appeal to An Bord Pleanála against the decision by Fingal County Council to approve this runway. See: Road Traffic Report at: www.norunway.com/bp/bp.htm. Alternatively, they may wish to make a submission on the Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed runway, when it is published by An Bord Pleanála.

UPROAR 22 May 2006.