Plan to solve access problem by relocating at Loughshinny had merits

The most radical proposal to solve Dublin Port's perennial access problems was put forward out of the blue in 1990 by the ESB's international consultancy division, ESBI - to relocate the port from Dublin Bay to a site near Loughshinny, in north Co Dublin.

Though never officially entertained, perhaps because it was so radical, it still makes a lot of sense because a new cargo port in this location could be plugged directly into the road and rail network via the planned M1 motor way and the Dublin-Belfast railway line.

Keeping the port in Dublin Bay, according to ESBI, took "no account of the most critical factors limiting the development of port activity - the inaccessibility of the existing terminals and the impact of port-related traffic on city development, city traffic and the general environment".

Following completion of the M50, a relocated cargo port near Loughshinny would be within 15 minutes of the Belfast, Slane and Navan roads, 20 minutes of the Galway road, 30 minutes of the Cork road and 45 minutes of the Wexford road, the ESBI said.

Overall, relocating the port would "substantially reduce freight costs", the consultants maintained. "It would also radically reduce the volume of port-related traffic travelling through Dublin and Dun Laoghaire and do so more effectively than any other solution."

Ten years on, Mr Enda Connellan, Dublin Port's chief executive, is sceptical. "If we all sat down together and said, OK, in the greater interest of the whole population of Dublin the best thing would be to put the port out in Loughshinny, fine. But I don't see that happening."

Though he believed it would not make much sense to "go off to a virgin site and goose that up", not least because of the likely strength of local opposition, Mr Connellan said the ESBI proposal was "certainly something that should be properly costed and considered".

Referring to the port, he said: "I don't give a damn where it is. I don't own this place, I only manage it. Its book value was only £120 million, but if it was to be developed for other uses, it would be worth a billion or more." (Dockland sites have fetched up to £10 million an acre.)

However, he doubted that better facilities could be produced on a site near Loughshinny. Referring to the ESBI's design of a port at this location, costed in 1990 at £160 million, he said it was so tight that the consultants seemed to assume that ships "could do hand-brake turns".

In the past, one of the arguments used to retain the port in Dublin Bay was that the bulk of its trade either originated or had a destination in the metropolitan area. But figures show that Dublin's share of ro-ro imports fell from 83 per cent in 1990 to 54 per cent last year.

Mr Connellan said port-related traffic problems would be alleviated by the Port Tunnel, on which work is expected to start early next year. But he regards its primary purpose as a "city tunnel", the first phase of an Eastern Bypass motorway, rather than a facility to serve the port.

"I don't want any trucks going up and down the quays. But as things stand, 45 per cent of our traffic uses the North Wall and there is no way around that. In the meantime, we're putting 1,000 new cars a week on to the streets of Dublin and that's a far bigger problem than the trucks."

The port's chief executive also suggested that much of the bulk trade through Dublin Port - timber, for example - could be relocated to other, less heavily utilised ports on the east coast, such as Wicklow. "We would consider purchasing a port to handle that," he said.