M50 thread

Sam Russell

paddyman wrote: »

For the suggestions put forward for large capital projects to alleviate the traffic on the M50 such as DU, O Ring, expanded motorway, bypasses, more Luas/Rail Etc - would people mind if the next government as part of their manifesto said "right lads, we need to get this done, we are going to borrow 15 -20 billion and use it for x,y,z projects"?.

Taking on debt for projects such at these and paid back through a multi generational loan could get them started in much shorter time frames. It obviously needs to be paid back with interest but at the same time you get the future economic benefit of them and they will still be used when your kids kids are going to work.

We did this in the 70s and 80s with massive help from the EU. We built motorways that were badly needed. Then, when the EU money ran out, we continued to build motorways, and we are now down to building them where a dual carriage would do at half the cost. Once you get more than 50 km from Dublin, the motorways are empty.

However, the rail infrastructure planned for Dublin in the 70s has yet to be built, and in fact the plans have been watered down to nearly nothing and proposals for bendy buses have been proposed for Swords and Blanch instead. Even these are not going ahead.

The Government should be looking for EU money to sort out the Dublin rail infrastructure.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote: »

We did this in the 70s and 80s with massive help from the EU. We built motorways that were badly needed. Then, when the EU money ran out, we continued to build motorways, and we are now down to building them where a dual carriage would do at half the cost. Once you get more than 50 km from Dublin, the motorways are empty.

However, the rail infrastructure planned for Dublin in the 70s has yet to be built, and in fact the plans have been watered down to nearly nothing and proposals for bendy buses have been proposed for Swords and Blanch instead. Even these are not going ahead.

The Government should be looking for EU money to sort out the Dublin rail infrastructure.

The roads may be quieter away from Dublin but the higher speeds allowed on motorways are a huge benefit and its an investment that will stand the test of time. Far preferable to the short term planning that gave us the mad cow roundabout, a two lane M50 and two un-connected Luas lines.

Sam Russell

First Up wrote: »

The roads may be quieter away from Dublin but the higher speeds allowed on motorways are a huge benefit and its an investment that will stand the test of time. Far preferable to the short term planning that gave us the mad cow roundabout, a two lane M50 and two un-connected Luas lines.

Exactly. Dublin suffered from brown envelopes and local interest groups so the M50 has too many interchanges and is used as a distributor road and not a motorway for bypassing the city. The West Link toll was a huge mistake and caused huge tailbacks until it went barrier free.

A proper dual carriage way built to a proper standard (but less than motorway standard) can take speeds of 120 km/hr. What is important is that it is freeflow, without crossing traffic and a solid median. It does not need to be built like a billiard table, with massive bridges and cuttings to keep it level and the curves slight. Then we build massive roundabouts for every interchange with little local roads so that the occasional car does not collide with the occasional lorry.

Go to France and look at how they build roads with few roundabouts at interchanges - and how they build railways while you are there.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote: »

Exactly. Dublin suffered from brown envelopes and local interest groups so the M50 has too many interchanges and is used as a distributor road and not a motorway for bypassing the city. The West Link toll was a huge mistake and caused huge tailbacks until it went barrier free.

A proper dual carriage way built to a proper standard (but less than motorway standard) can take speeds of 120 km/hr. What is important is that it is freeflow, without crossing traffic and a solid median. It does not need to be built like a billiard table, with massive bridges and cuttings to keep it level and the curves slight. Then we build massive roundabouts for every interchange with little local roads so that the occasional car does not collide with the occasional lorry.

Go to France and look at how they build roads with few roundabouts at interchanges - and how they build railways while you are there.

French road system and signposting is superb. A pleasure to drive there. In the days before sat nav I found hamlets and rural gites without a false step.

We spent best part of a month in rural Aquitaine some years back without a wrong turn. Came back landbridge and got lost on our way out of Dublin Port.

BoatMad

markpb wrote: »

The majority of people entering the city centre are by bus. Should that be the priority?

Well cars are the majority taken over the totality of the day.

BoatMad

Sam Russell wrote: »

We did this in the 70s and 80s with massive help from the EU. We built motorways that were badly needed. Then, when the EU money ran out, we continued to build motorways, and we are now down to building them where a dual carriage would do at half the cost. Once you get more than 50 km from Dublin, the motorways are empty.

However, the rail infrastructure planned for Dublin in the 70s has yet to be built, and in fact the plans have been watered down to nearly nothing and proposals for bendy buses have been proposed for Swords and Blanch instead. Even these are not going ahead.

The Government should be looking for EU money to sort out the Dublin rail infrastructure.

Most of the motorways were built from 1995 onwards with out much EU help, we borrowed it.

Most of the 70s rail concepts are dated and ineffectual , very little of the current rail projects makes economic sense which is why DU has been kicked to touch.

BoatMad

Go to France and look at how they build roads with few roundabouts at interchanges - and how they build railways while you are there.

France ( I have driven in excess of 8000 km there )

1. Very high motorway tolling , resulting in empty m/ways and jam packed national routes. , yup -great idea

2. France decimated its railway system and still is. The TGV is an obvious exception , but high speed trains are very expensive and do suit Europe's longer distances , no comparison with Ireland possible.

3. As for interchanges you haven't been on the periferique , or for poor signage have you tried to navigate from CDG to the A7 ( autoroute DU Soleil) bloody impossible even with sat nav.

Personally I'd say the British road system is the best overall , taken across all areas. France has some terrible road signage on places.

Sam Russell

BoatMad wrote: »

Most of the motorways were built from 1995 onwards with out much EU help, we borrowed it.

Most of the 70s rail concepts are dated and ineffectual , very little of the current rail projects makes economic sense which is why DU has been kicked to touch.

The motorways needed were built in the 70s and 80s with EU money. Those built since are empty and an expensive waste. Would you rather a super motorway (M6) from Athlone to Galway or a decent dual carriageway from Athlone to Galway and a similar one from Cork to Limerick? (No motorway is planned from Cork to Limerick).

Rail only makes sense within the Dublin commuter belt.

If you look at property prices near London, it is all dependant on the commute time to central London and the further out you go, it is the time to drive to the nearest rail link and the time for that link into London. People accept travelling times of an hour or more.

Park and ride is the solution for Dublin, whether it is ride by rail, bus or tram. The spread of Dublin has gone too far and sporadic for any rational public transport only solution.

Rail only makes sense within the Dublin commuter belt.

Which extends out beyond Athlone to the west and probably a similar distance along the other routes. What is needed is an orbital transport service (light rail or bus) that will serve the industrial / commercial estates that have sprung up around the periphery of Dublin. The current tram system is outskirts to city centre based so makes it impossible for most of the M50 commuters to switch to public transport.

BoatMad

Sam Russell wrote: »

The motorways needed were built in the 70s and 80s with EU money. Those built since are empty and an expensive waste. Would you rather a super motorway (M6) from Athlone to Galway or a decent dual carriageway from Athlone to Galway and a similar one from Cork to Limerick? (No motorway is planned from Cork to Limerick).

Rail only makes sense within the Dublin commuter belt.

If you look at property prices near London, it is all dependant on the commute time to central London and the further out you go, it is the time to drive to the nearest rail link and the time for that link into London. People accept travelling times of an hour or more.

Park and ride is the solution for Dublin, whether it is ride by rail, bus or tram. The spread of Dublin has gone too far and sporadic for any rational public transport only solution.

Most of the motorways were built in the post 2000 era , ( were you actually in the country) very few existed in the 70s and 80 ( the nass dualer was about it ) .

ALL of the motorways are essential to the development of Ireland , especially outside dublin , the M20 being the next one desperately needed , ultimately we should have motorways linking waterford , cork limerick and galway too.

facts

M6 completed 2009
M4 completed 2005
M8 completed in stages 2008-2010
M9 - competed in 2010 with early stage completed in 1998

some were funded by the irish exchequer with some EU money as most EU structural funds were not available in 2000+

most were either PPPs , financed by private money

First Up

BoatMad wrote: »

France ( I have driven in excess of 8000 km there )

1. Very high motorway tolling , resulting in empty m/ways and jam packed national routes. , yup -great idea

2. France decimated its railway system and still is. The TGV is an obvious exception , but high speed trains are very expensive and do suit Europe's longer distances , no comparison with Ireland possible.

3. As for interchanges you haven't been on the periferique , or for poor signage have you tried to navigate from CDG to the A7 ( autoroute DU Soleil) bloody impossible even with sat nav.

Personally I'd say the British road system is the best overall , taken across all areas. France has some terrible road signage on places.

The UK is pretty good but I'd say I have driven considerably more than 8,000km in France and I've yet to hit a problem related to signage in/around Paris or anywhere else. A bit of advance planning is always advisable if the route is complex but even without sat nav France is very easy.

Sam Russell

BoatMad wrote: »

Most of the motorways were built in the post 2000 era , ( were you actually in the country) very few existed in the 70s and 80 ( the nass dualer was about it ) .

ALL of the motorways are essential to the development of Ireland , especially outside dublin , the M20 being the next one desperately needed , ultimately we should have motorways linking waterford , cork limerick and galway too.

facts

M6 completed 2009
M4 completed 2005
M8 completed in stages 2008-2010
M9 - competed in 2010 with early stage completed in 1998

some were funded by the irish exchequer with some EU money as most EU structural funds were not available in 2000+

most were either PPPs , financed by private money

Yes I was in the country.

The structural funding covered pre 2000 investments (on the whole) and that funding ended in 2006. Motorway being completed is hardly a measure, since they were finished by doing the least important bits.

The Palmerstown bypass is critical but is not a motorway, and is clogged every morning and evening. The M6 is never ever busy.

Jayuu

I use the M50 from the R139 to Blanch (or sometimes Finglas if the traffic is really bad) every day although recently I had the misfortune of having to drive as far as Sandyford a few weeks back. One thing I noticed on that long awful drive was the once I passed J12 the traffic flow eased considerably. It seems to me that the problems on the southbound in the morning are partly caused by the poor junctions at Ballymount (J10), Tallaght (J11) and Firhouse (J12) which take a huge volume of traffic but are all junctions which lead straight to traffic lights. I'm wondering if something could be done with these junctions to add a free-flow element to them to stop traffic at these junctions piling back onto the mainline.

By the way I know Tallaght already has a freeflow southbound if you're heading into the city.

While I don't drive northbound at peak traffic time in the evening (it's usually 6:30 by the time I'm getting home) I've noticed that it never seems as bad in the evening when all the morning traffic should be returning home. Is this because every junction from the Red Cow onwards is free-flow or almost completely free-flow (bar Ballymun)?

When the M50 was rebuilt, the contractors installed gantries for lane control signals (similar to the ones used on the M25 in London) but they've never been used.
Implementing variable speed limits and using the VMS signs to deter middle lane morons will go a long way to control congestion.

Not a person

Any chance of M50 being widened to three lanes from Sandyford to Bray?

Carawaystick

First Up wrote: »

The UK is pretty good but I'd say I have driven considerably more than 8,000km in France and I've yet to hit a problem related to signage in/around Paris or anywhere else. A bit of advance planning is always advisable if the route is complex but even without sat nav France is very easy.

Id concur with this, except the BP is bananas


The issue with vms signage working in England, is that it is speed camera & penalty point linked. There'd be significant pushback if lots of people got banned here.

L1011

Not a person wrote: »

Any chance of M50 being widened to three lanes from Sandyford to Bray?

Not sure its required - the delays southbound there are due to the M11 being below capacity, and there are plans for it to be widened.

omicron

Carawaystick wrote: »

Id concur with this, except the BP is bananas


The issue with vms signage working in England, is that it is speed camera & penalty point linked. There'd be significant pushback if lots of people got banned here.

Or we could just drive under the limit and not get banned.

Carawaystick

TII aren't allowed operate speed cameras, only police.
There'd be significant issues with having every car on the m50 tracked by Gardaí
Let alone people getting banned for exceeding inappropriately low limits.

BoatMad

anyway I would question the issue on the M50 is speed or speeding

The main issue is the badly designed concentration of junctions from the foothill exit to the cork road exist, where on and off ramps effectively run together , no other stretch has the same issues

my view would be to close ballymount and service this from an improved Tallaght junction , arguably fonthill could be serviced by it as well

there should have only been one junction between ballinteer and cork road at the very most

Bray Head

Here are some recently-proposed solutions to the M50's peak time congestion problems:

-Eastern bypass
-Metro North
-Closing junctions
-Widening the southern section

Some of these are desireable. But they are all extremely expensive and for the first 2 at least a decade away. They will do nothing to solve today's problems any time near today.

It's pity that solutions that are practical and can be implemented in 1-3 years (variable speed limits and congestion charging) get ignored.

L1011

Congestion charging cannot work without alternatives, which we don't have. Its not a practical solution at this point in time.

Bray Head

L1011 wrote: »

Congestion charging cannot work without alternatives, which we don't have. Its not a practical solution at this point in time.

Are you claiming it would:
a) not work in practice, ie, demand pricing would not reduce traffic flows at peak hours? or;
b) it would not be politically acceptable?

L1011

Bray Head wrote: »

Are you claiming it would:
a) not work in practice, ie, demand pricing would not reduce traffic flows at peak hours? or;
b) it would not be politically acceptable?

A, entirely.

There is no public transport capacity in the system at the moment and the vast number of people can't change their working hours. They would just end up paying with zero change to traffic flows.

Anyone who thinks there is capacity for more commuters on Dublins public transport system does not actually use it.

Alkers

L1011 wrote: »

Congestion charging cannot work without alternatives, which we don't have. Its not a practical solution at this point in time.

It can encourage people to commute outside of peak times.
Also generates revenue to spend on public transport alternatives.

L1011

Simona1986 wrote: »

It can encourage people to commute outside of peak times.
Also generates revenue to spend on public transport alternatives.

Most people who have the option of changing their working hours already have, to avoid overcrowded roads and public transport.

There are less obnoxious ways of raising revenue than bringing in a "congestion" charge that won't relieve congestion.

If you want road pricing, call it road pricing - don't try sugar-coat it with lies.

Bray Head

In the short term there would be a lot of losers, I agree. In the long run people change jobs and move houses and the patterns of commuting would adjust. In the same way motorways take a few years to fill up once they are opened.

Road-pricing should be in addition to proper public transport investment, I agree.

But there are some journeys for which public transport will just never work. Stick a pin in a map in rural kildare and another in rural Fingal. No amount of public transport improvements will ever make this kind of journey practical by public transport.

Ireland's dispersed population and pattern of one-off housing is here to stay and the car is the only practical alternative for most people.

BoatMad

Simona1986 wrote: »

It can encourage people to commute outside of peak times.
Also generates revenue to spend on public transport alternatives.

All it is is a tax , mostly unavoidable for the vast majority of commuters. Don't dress it up as anything else.

If there was reasonable, efficient and direct alternative to cars , commuters would use it . In most cases there isn't

L1011

Bray Head wrote: »

In the short term there would be a lot of losers, I agree. In the long run people change jobs and move houses and the patterns of commuting would adjust.

Meaning that its not a "1-3 year" solution like you claimed it was...

The only short term solution is to get more buses on more suitable routes and get train capacity back up to and above its 2007/8 level, coupled with properly resourced (spaces, security) park and ride that is either free of charge, or negligibly charged and allowable under Taxsaver.

Then and only then does it become practical to look at measures to get people to move from cars - as you need something for them to move to

Bray Head

BoatMad wrote: »

All it is is a tax , mostly unavoidable for the vast majority of commuters. Don't dress it up as anything else.

Road tolls are not a tax, they are user charges. There is a subtle but important difference. Tax is confiscation of your income or wealth, not based on use.

By analagy, 99% of people need a passport and have to pay the government for one. It is not a tax however.