M50 to be made even more unbearable

Cookie_Monster

trellheim wrote: »

Come on - this is an M50 thread not the port tunnel.

they are one and the same.

Would tolling the M50 help at say a fiver a trip between any exits ? Would this discourage users ?

no, just force them back onto the roads the m50 was built to relieve in the first place.

trellheim wrote: »

Its unlikely we'll see any extra ring road for another 5-10 years so what's the better answer. Any transport cash is going on BXD Luas so DU and MN is unlikely to be funded this or the next government.

making single occupancy vehicles the least attractive option to commute in is the only long term solution to the problem. The problem with that though is the extreme measures required to implement that. Either publicly unpalatable anti car tolls, charges or fees or spending billions to get the public transport system up to scratch - which takes a long time and has no real funds set aside for now anyway.

BoatMad

trellheim wrote: »

Come on - this is an M50 thread not the port tunnel. Would tolling the M50 help at say a fiver a trip between any exits ? Would this discourage users ?

Its unlikely we'll see any extra ring road for another 5-10 years so what's the better answer. Any transport cash is going on BXD Luas so DU and MN is unlikely to be funded this or the next government.

There is considerable PPP road building going on , so I d dont see funding being especially the issue

Carawaystick

Irish Steve wrote: »

the other feeder roads inside the M50 are a planning disaster, with pinch points and restrictions that make moving significant volumes of traffic almost impossible, the most glaring being Drumcondra.

The works at the Cat&Cage are ongoing so there'll be 2 cycle lanes, 2 bus lanes and 2 traffic lanes there

The swiftway proposal, for all its faults, has a proposal to widen the crossing of the Tolka too.


Other bad decisions are the traffic lights from Turnpike road onto the R110/N7 at Red Cow,
And the Lights at Palmerston on the R148, although this would require substantial engineering to resolve.

Aard

BoatMad wrote: »

There is considerable PPP road building going on , so I d dont see funding being especially the issue

Good luck getting an SEA for the DOOR cheaply/quickly. There's more to it than simply funding.

Also, you haven't answered my previous question: you stated that in Dublin City highrise is "contary to current development planning". Can you point to where in the Development Plan it states that?

BoatMad

Aard wrote: »

Good luck getting an SEA for the DOOR cheaply/quickly. There's more to it than simply funding.

Also, you haven't answered my previous question: you stated that in Dublin City highrise is "contary to current development planning". Can you point to where in the Development Plan it states that?

see http://www.dlrcoco.ie/HighRes/AdoptedBHS_Web_Highres.pdf

section 1.4 summarise Dublin city. in essence 60M or 16 stories is seen as the acceptable limit for residential anmd only in a very restrictive areas ( financial services etc )

the default is

" All areas shall remain low-rise until a Local Area Plan is approved.”

interestingly the highest residential development is in cork

QED I think

monument

Dublin City has some high-densely areas. Recently I looked at the average of the areas along the quays and it's nearly spot on 10,000 per square KM.

You can get high densely without any high-rise.

The main issue with the Dublin City regs isn't at the higher end, but at the lower end. The inner city hight is lower than some buildings built 100 years ago and the definition of a rail hub is too restrictive (500m I think was agreed rather than 1km which was put forward).

Aard

There is very little appetite for development above about 15 storeys, so what tall development there is demand for is being encouraged in highly-accessible parts of the city. I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

Muahahaha

Was just out on the m50 for the first time in a while. I know its been said before but the amount of people just sitting cruising in the middle lane is astounding. I'm wondering if this problem was addressed and solved would it provide much extra capacity for the motorway as a whole ?

mayway

Muahahaha wrote: »

Was just out on the m50 for the first time in a while. I know its been said before but the amount of people just sitting cruising in the middle lane is astounding. I'm wondering if this problem was addressed and solved would it provide much extra capacity for the motorway as a whole ?

The middle lane drivers are the worst type of morons on the road. They should have their licenses whipped off them.

Muahahaha

True they're very annoying- especially so as I'm on a motorbike and getting beyond a middle lane hogger from the driving lane takes me FOUR switches of lane- from 1st to 2nd to 3rd back to middle then the driving lane again. The problem is now so chronic on the m50 that it seems to me if they can solve it then it might produce extra capacity on the motorway itself overall. They should at least go addressing it before they mute any notions of tolling every jucnction because the mototway is supposedely over capacity. Middle lane hoggers slow everyone else down as they cant drive in the most efficient manner due to the need for extra lane changes to get past them. It really should be addressed because it seems it is becoming the norm out on the m50.

_Kaiser_

The whole "middle lane hoggers" and indeed the whole "M50 is at capacity" argument are both not as simple as that.

Firstly, for most of the day the M50 is in fact perfectly usable regardless of what lanes people are in. The issues arrive during peak times (and specifically really between J7 - Lucan/Galway and J9 - Naas and beyond, although Blanch (J6) and Ballymount (J10) aren't great either.. not helped in the latter case by the ridiculous merge from J10/exit for J9 arrangement on the northbound side).

These exits are simply too close together and serve too many primary destinations for normal motorway lane usage to apply - especially during peak times! Have you ever tried to drive in Lane 1 on this stretch at peak? Between people cutting hatching as they merge OR dawdling along in the merging lane until they force their way in or stop dead at the end, combined with trucks lumbering along and boxing people in, and others diving for the exit at the last minute, it's just not practical (or indeed good for the stress levels!) to sit there if you're not merging or exiting... once you get beyond that though (towards Finglas or Sandyford) things calm down and normal usage can apply.. and indeed does most of the time. I also spend time in Cork and their N40 is the same setup as the M50 and just as bad in places... except that you can have idiots on pushbikes using it legally and the chaos that causes (as discussed here previously).


Personally I'm on the M50 at least twice a day and the bigger issues I see are:

- the aforementioned poor design and the chaos it causes.. even the "free flow junctions" are a mess with sharp bends and in the case of the M50N-N7S an immediate ducking and diving session as cars try to join the N7 or leave it for the LUAS P&R/Newlands Cross

- Dawdlers who can't or won't keep up with the flow of traffic and the posted limit when it's perfectly safe and appropriate to do so

- Rubbernecking idiots who bring the whole thing to a crawl/standstill while they gawk at a minor fenderbender

- People who can't drive in the wet without crawling along. Not helped by the very poor drainage and people cheaping out on crap Chinese tyres with no grip

- A driving test that doesn't include motorway driving (unless you live outside Dublin and get experience on a motorway grade dual-carriageway)

- No enforcement of anything beyond "speeding" or tax disc checks by our police force. They'd be better served addressing the tailgating, lane weaving and undertaking, no indicators, people forcing their way into a gap that's not big enough, idiots driving along in the dark/poor conditions with minimal or no lights on etc etc


Putting in more tolls or prosecuting "lane hoggers" won't address any of that. The only long term solutions are:

- More high-rise inside the M50.. and proper Euro-standard high-rise, not the pokey cardboard quality shoe boxes we call apartments today

- Better use of rail/LUAS and public transport generally. Starting with providing a service that fits the need of (potential) customers, not the unions/staff or company

- Decentralisation and investment in infrastructure/BB to encourage this. A longer-term plan to be sure but maybe encouraging/incentivising business to adopt flexible hours, work from home policies (where practical) and a greater emphasis on the tax saver scheme could be a interim measure?

- An outer ring road is indeed a good idea to bypass Dublin entirely but again a long-term plan


Until these things change though, the M50 will continue to cause problems!

omicron

One measure that could help would be to close the Ballymount junction, there is no real need for it with its proximity to J9 and J11 if the minor roads in the area were improved. Most o the slowdown happens from J11 to J7 twice a day so this could help prevent it at relatively low cost.

dubhthach

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

- Better use of rail/LUAS and public transport generally. Starting with providing a service that fits the need of (potential) customers, not the unions/staff or company

Just remember the "Metro West" was suppose to be fully operational by Q4 2014/Q1 2015 before the Recession sank it.

Here's the preferred route map from November 2008.


I'd be curious what sorta impact such a scheme (light-rail/metro orbital) would have on vehicular numbers on the M50 particularly during rush hour.

loyatemu

dubhthach wrote: »

I'd be curious what sorta impact such a scheme (light-rail/metro orbital) would have on vehicular numbers on the M50 particularly during rush hour.

I don't think it would make much impact, similar to demands for bus services along the M50 - where exactly would such services start and end? The range of destinations along the M50 are so disparate, low-density and spread out no public transport system could service them effectively. e.g. - Sandyford is a major employment destination but the people working there live all over the greater Dublin area.

It's a failure of planning and its very difficult to see what measure can be taken retrospectively to improve matters.

The M50 is also a very good example of a road generating more traffic. I live in Greystones and most people in the town would go and do their clothes shopping, visit the cinema etc in Dundrum via the M50. Without the M50 no-one in Greystones would dream of driving to Dundrum, or Liffey Valley, or Blanchardstown, or Ikea.

Ultimately they're going to have to extend tolling along the entire motorway to discourage unnecessary journies, but the shopping centres and other businesses around the ring will fight this tooth and nail...

Tragedy

loyatemu wrote: »

Without the M50 no-one in Greystones would dream of driving to Dundrum, or Liffey Valley, or Blanchardstown, or Ikea.

Without the M50 people from Greystones would be denied access to these places even though they aren't particularly distant.

Roads generate traffic even with good public transport, but it's a stretch to bang that drum when people want more/improved roads because public transport is just non existent.

Victor

Imagen what could be done if €3.5+ billion wasn't spent building the M50?

_Kaiser_

Victor wrote: »

Imagen what could be done if €3.5+ billion wasn't spent building the M50?

Unless your plan included (realistic/practical) solutions for people who were pushed out in the "Good Times" as far as places like Portlaoise/Carlow, Drogheda/Dundalk, Navan, Wicklow etc (and it's happening again with the housing shortage/rental hikes in Dublin) then the M50 was and is definitely needed.

Even that orbital Metro North depicted above isn't much use if you don't drive unless high-frequency shuttle buses were included in the plan. Let's assume that they were.. would we have another Red Line given some of the areas that it was to pass by? I'm not saying that everyone in those areas is an antisocial troublemaker but it is a legitimate concern (as we've seen with occasional disruption/curtailment to DB services for example).

I fundamentally disagree that we must have every variant of public transport going (light rail, heavy rail, underground rail, buses, BRT) at ridiculous expense and disruption "just cause", or because other European cities have it!
Dublin isn't that big, has plenty of existing services, and access to a relatively decent motorway infrastructure. Remember this whole country only has a population of what? 4 million? That's a fraction of some of the cities that Dublin is compared against to justify such expense!

If the bus/rail service that exists was run properly for the benefit of the customers (not just the staff) and they invested in buying up some of those fields on the plan above as P&R locations or better yet, residential developments (the amount of wasted space inside the M50 is ridiculous!) then that'd be a lot more worthwhile than vanity projects like CitySwift 2 for example.

loyatemu

Tragedy wrote: »

Without the M50 people from Greystones would be denied access to these places even though they aren't particularly distant.

I agree - before the M50 getting to anywhere around south or west Dublin (or the Airport) from north Wicklow was a PITA involving either going over the mountains or slogging through traffic in Stillorgan and Dundrum.

But there's no doubt that the opening of the M50 has encouraged more and longer journeys - places like Dun Laoghaire and Bray that were previously shopping destinations have lost a lot of business and the people that used to shop there are now sitting in traffic on the M50.

Public transport can't meaningfully cater for these journeys so the only option is to build more road capacity or manage demand through road pricing.

_Kaiser_

loyatemu wrote: »

But there's no doubt that the opening of the M50 has encouraged more and longer journeys - places like Dun Laoghaire and Bray that were previously shopping destinations have lost a lot of business and the people that used to shop there are now sitting in traffic on the M50.

I wouldn't quite agree.. the M50 has enabled journeys to locations that are better suited for shopping (Blanch SC, Liffey Valley SC) thanks to large dedicated sites with ample parking - rather than still clogging the streets of Dun Laoghaire with that traffic. The areas you mention still seem pretty busy to me whenever I've been there so if they're losing business maybe it's because they're not offering the same value/convenience?

The problems with the M50 are really only between a few junctions (per my post above) but these have a knock-on effect on the whole thing when something does go wrong.

Calina

loyatemu wrote: »

Ultimately they're going to have to extend tolling along the entire motorway to discourage unnecessary journies, but the shopping centres and other businesses around the ring will fight this tooth and nail...

The vast majority of journeys are unnecessary in the grand scheme of things. We may all as well stay in our houses than go out the odd time.

This is a roundabout way to say that there is no safe definition of an unnecessary journey. Just because you might not want to traipse from Swords to Bray doesn't mean that everyone else should stay at home all the time.

Dublin has serious planning issues which feed into transport problems. My view is that the M50 is not the worst sin we have and a lot of the problems with it might well be alleviated by more considerate driving habits. Certainly some of the junctions are perhaps a little too close together but then they feed areas which need access to the M50. The biggest issue I see with Dundrum is not that it's accessible to/from the M50 (because compared to Blanch and Liffey Valley, it isn't, really) but that it has the potential to completely balls up traffic in the area around it and has done.

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

I don't think it would make much impact, similar to demands for bus services along the M50 - where exactly would such services start and end? The range of destinations along the M50 are so disparate, low-density and spread out no public transport system could service them effectively. e.g. - Sandyford is a major employment destination but the people working there live all over the greater Dublin area.

It's a failure of planning and its very difficult to see what measure can be taken retrospectively to improve matters.

The M50 is also a very good example of a road generating more traffic. I live in Greystones and most people in the town would go and do their clothes shopping, visit the cinema etc in Dundrum via the M50. Without the M50 no-one in Greystones would dream of driving to Dundrum, or Liffey Valley, or Blanchardstown, or Ikea.

Ultimately they're going to have to extend tolling along the entire motorway to discourage unnecessary journies, but the shopping centres and other businesses around the ring will fight this tooth and nail...

loyatemu wrote: »

I agree - before the M50 getting to anywhere around south or west Dublin (or the Airport) from north Wicklow was a PITA involving either going over the mountains or slogging through traffic in Stillorgan and Dundrum.

But there's no doubt that the opening of the M50 has encouraged more and longer journeys - places like Dun Laoghaire and Bray that were previously shopping destinations have lost a lot of business and the people that used to shop there are now sitting in traffic on the M50.

Public transport can't meaningfully cater for these journeys so the only option is to build more road capacity or manage demand through road pricing.

You hit the nail on the head there.

It is very difficult for public transport to address orbital journeys as people are all making different individual journeys.

In other words very few people are making the same journey and as such to try and meet everyone's exact journey is impossible. Most journeys would require at least one change if not two, which really makes using public transport much less attractive.

The current orbital bus routes serve major traffic generators as best they can and as such are useful for shorter journeys, but not really for longer ones.

That being said there is a need to develop more routes across the west and south of the city, with more useful services between Blanchardstown industrial areas and the N4, and continuing south to Tallaght and v.v., another route linking Lucan and Tallaght/Citywest, and another route along the southern edge of the city, perhaps starting in Citywest and allowing the 75 to be straightened somewhat.

These were put on hold due to lack of funds.

Tragedy

Victor wrote: »

Imagen what could be done if €3.5+ billion wasn't spent building the M50?

We wouldn't have €3.5billion because as much as you hate it, roads carry the goods that create employment and wealth In ireland.

Imagine what could be done if people weren't so binary and shortsighted?

I can't either, it's too implausible.

Tragedy

lxflyer wrote: »

It is very difficult for public transport to address orbital journeys as people are all making different individual journeys.

No it isn't. A basic bicycle wheel public transport network addresses orbital journies. Spokes radiating out from the centre, concentric rings at set distances orbiting the centre and bisecting the spokes. It isn't hard at all, and I fail to understand why Dublin Bus didn't try to have a say in either the original M50 development, or the redevelopment. Major bus routes cross almost every M50 junction, and a bus station just off each junction linking an m50 orbital route with the likes of the 66, 39, 15, 145a etc.

hmmm

lxflyer wrote: »

In other words very few people are making the same journey and as such to try and meet everyone's exact journey is impossible. Most journeys would require at least one change if not two, which really makes using public transport much less attractive.

I'm not a planner, and won't pretend to understand the complexities, but I've always wondered why some place like (say) the Red Cow or the Long Mile Road weren't turned into a transport hub, rather than having a single hub in the congested city centre. Buses could run from there along the M50 to high traffic areas e.g. Tallaght, Park West, the Airport, Sandyford, East Point, and the LUAS is also available for city centre traffic including the IFSC.

Calina

hmmm wrote: »

I'm not a planner, and won't pretend to understand the complexities, but I've always wondered why some place like (say) the Red Cow or the Long Mile Road weren't turned into a transport hub, rather than having a single hub in the congested city centre. Buses could run from there along the M50 to high traffic areas e.g. Tallaght, Park West, the Airport, Sandyford, East Point, and the LUAS is also available for city centre traffic including the IFSC.

One of the things I don't understand about Dublin is that while "close to bus, Luas and DART" tends to mean "you can walk it in around 20 minutes if you run", but our bus stops aren't a standard distance apart, and some of those distances are around 150m. A ten minute walk between stops is not unusual in Brussels, which is around 700-800m.

When you have the kind of mentality that means there's holy war if you try to remove some bus stops, it gets very hard to implement a decent mix of hobs like, for example, some more integration with Luas at Red Cow for example. The other point is if you look at the locations you identify, the vast majority of them, IFSC and Tallaght aside, are non-residential. This tends to have a detrimental effect on service availability.

Personal view of things here is this: we have an issue in terms of moving people around the city as a whole, but most of the solutions we look at are often not contextual, but bitesized, short term solutions to deal with localised problems. At most times, I'll get across the M50 from where I am which is not far from the M1 to Junction 9 in around 15 minutes. If we want to transfer people like me onto public transport, we need to do a lot more integrated thinking.

LXFlyer

Tragedy wrote: »

No it isn't. A basic bicycle wheel public transport network addresses orbital journies. Spokes radiating out from the centre, concentric rings at set distances orbiting the centre and bisecting the spokes. It isn't hard at all, and I fail to understand why Dublin Bus didn't try to have a say in either the original M50 development, or the redevelopment. Major bus routes cross almost every M50 junction, and a bus station just off each junction linking an m50 orbital route with the likes of the 66, 39, 15, 145a etc.

So do you think people will choose a trip involving two or more buses, and most likely a reasonable walk as well (buses tend to only serve the entrances to most business parks) over a single car trip?

Carawaystick

lxflyer wrote: »

So do you think people will choose a trip involving two or more buses, and most likely a reasonable walk as well (buses tend to only serve the entrances to most business parks) over a single car trip?

Even the Luas ends up being a reasonable walk away. The stop at Kingswood is very close to Belgard, when it could easily have been at the turn away from the M50 to serve Ballymount ind estate (tv3, calmount, fashion city etc.)

veryangryman

Tragedy wrote: »

No it isn't. A basic bicycle wheel public transport network addresses orbital journies. Spokes radiating out from the centre, concentric rings at set distances orbiting the centre and bisecting the spokes. It isn't hard at all, and I fail to understand why Dublin Bus didn't try to have a say in either the original M50 development, or the redevelopment. Major bus routes cross almost every M50 junction, and a bus station just off each junction linking an m50 orbital route with the likes of the 66, 39, 15, 145a etc.

Was about to post this argument. Commuters could forgive 1 change en route if it's seamless enough. Current problem is the changes involve diversion via city centre

lucernarian

veryangryman wrote: »

Was about to post this argument. Commuters could forgive 1 change en route if it's seamless enough. Current problem is the changes involve diversion via city centre

Worth bearing in mind that an M50 orbital route, with the limited amount of housing and residential properties within 10 minutes walk of key interchanges, there would probably be two changes en route. There would be people travelling to some workplace that also happens to be within a convenient walk of the interchange bus stations... But I would like to see actual trip generators being served with an orbital route and there are not many immediately adjacent the M50.

If there was a very frequent, 5 minute or less service, I'd still live with 2 changes though!

Sheldons Brain

Tragedy wrote: »

No it isn't. A basic bicycle wheel public transport network addresses orbital journies. Spokes radiating out from the centre, concentric rings at set distances orbiting the centre and bisecting the spokes. It isn't hard at all, and I fail to understand why Dublin Bus didn't try to have a say in either the original M50 development, or the redevelopment. Major bus routes cross almost every M50 junction, and a bus station just off each junction linking an m50 orbital route with the likes of the 66, 39, 15, 145a etc.

This kind of thing seems like a no brainer, especially at rush hour. The likes of Sandyford is a significant destination, yet there is no 75X.

veryangryman

lucernarian wrote: »

Worth bearing in mind that an M50 orbital route, with the limited amount of housing and residential properties within 10 minutes walk of key interchanges, there would probably be two changes en route. There would be people travelling to some workplace that also happens to be within a convenient walk of the interchange bus stations... But I would like to see actual trip generators being served with an orbital route and there are not many immediately adjacent the M50.

If there was a very frequent, 5 minute or less service, I'd still live with 2 changes though!

There would theoretically be multiple orbits though. So you would take your local orbit to the line that suits, then change. A 10 minute walk is acceptable in a busy city situation (or anywhere really).

Pete_Cavan

Tragedy wrote: »

No it isn't. A basic bicycle wheel public transport network addresses orbital journies. Spokes radiating out from the centre, concentric rings at set distances orbiting the centre and bisecting the spokes.

We already have the bones of such a network in place and it could be developed properly over time. The R112, R113 and R136 could easily be used to create good quality orbital bus routes. They should have a cycle lane, bus lane and general traffic lane in both directions.

The R112 would be difficult and would require acquiring a lot of properties in order to install bus lanes on either side of the road. In the longer term, it could be extended north in future along the northern edge of the Phoenix Park.

The R113 and R136 could easily be upgraded and extended to join with the R121. These orbital routes could also take a lot of short journeys off the M50, freeing up space there, but measures would have to be taken to discourage longer journeys on the orbital routes.

BoatMad

It is very difficult for public transport to address orbital journeys as people are all making different individual journeys.

whats often forgotten, is even if a public transport route existed, its essentially limited to carrying people, not their purchased goods. Try taking Ikea flat packs on a bus, or shopping for a family of 5 etc. The idea that the the car can be replaced by public transport is abject nonsense. bringing a person to his centre city office - fine, but a very limited undertaking

Calina

BoatMad wrote: »

whats often forgotten, is even if a public transport route existed, its essentially limited to carrying people, not their purchased goods. Try taking Ikea flat packs on a bus, or shopping for a family of 5 etc. The idea that the the car can be replaced by public transport is abject nonsense. bringing a person to his centre city office - fine, but a very limited undertaking

A couple of points to note about this.

1) on the odd occasion that you might have large items to carry, IKEA deliver or a taxi might be callable. The question is whether such journeys form a majority of journeys or not.
2) I find it difficult to believe that daily commuter traffic doesn't exceed weekend trips to DIY given the profile of traffic jams.
3) Most of the supermarkets provide a delivery service and again, for one off trips, there are alternatives.

The issue in Dublin is that because public transport has been so poor, people have developed lifestyles which convince them that they need personal transport. The only place I've really needed it is Dublin. Elsewhere, I have found it very easy to adapt to a system where most of my transport is public with only the occasional taxi or delivery van.

BoatMad

Calina wrote: »

A couple of points to note about this.

1) on the odd occasion that you might have large items to carry, IKEA deliver or a taxi might be callable. The question is whether such journeys form a majority of journeys or not.
2) I find it difficult to believe that daily commuter traffic doesn't exceed weekend trips to DIY given the profile of traffic jams.
3) Most of the supermarkets provide a delivery service and again, for one off trips, there are alternatives.

The issue in Dublin is that because public transport has been so poor, people have developed lifestyles which convince them that they need personal transport. The only place I've really needed it is Dublin. Elsewhere, I have found it very easy to adapt to a system where most of my transport is public with only the occasional taxi or delivery van.

Ikea are charging upto 100 euros to deliver in certain cases, and more often 30-40 , In renewing a kitchen , I made 6 journeys to them , getting stuff delivered subjects you to huge additional costs and delays ( next day etc )

Supermarket delivery is often actually inconvenient and is not the norm. ( people actually like to shop )

Public transport is very slow point to point

Taxis are ridiculously expensive

The fact is in Dublin , today ( which is where we are and now), public transport serves a very small niche of users, primarily those travelling into and out of the city centre, a place where in fact little shopping is done these days

One only has to see traffic jams on saturday , to see the amount of consumer traffic as oppose dot commuter traffic

Proponents of public transport seem to assume that people are sheep too be herded in a given fixed direction and that they have all day to do it..

IN my commutes into and around Dublin, I have actually never beaten the point to point times with public transport. when I use the rail system the point to point times are truly ridiculous

Public transport is not a majority solution for modern living, its a niche solution, primary designed in the 19th century to bring people from large housing areas, close to the city centre, into the city centre ( where most activity was). Deliveries to houses , was extremely cheap , as labour was cheap and horses are cheap to run, Houses were close by, and the working classes purchased few goods outside basic sustenance items.

Today, we have an enormous range of goods that we purchase , huge variety in basic and complex sustenance products and therefore the car is a uniquely useful mode of transport. As long as it remains so useful, it will remain the dominant form of such transport and we have to plan accordingly

Aard

Every time somebody leaves thier house -- no, it will not be for commuting to work/education. However at the most saturated times, nearly 100% of journeys will be for commuting. For the vadt majority of these journeys, it's a fairly simple A-to-B that is set in stone. Predictable. Again, the vast majority of these journeys will involve no need to transport anything but the person themselves. You end up with a situation where in a small window during the day, hundreds of thousands of people in Dublin make more-or-less a predictable journey.

Some of these people will have no use for the M50. Some will be very reliant on it. Some will use it because it is more convenient than other routes.

The M50 is a wonderful piece of infrastructure. But we're selling ourselves short with the way that we use it. Right now, the M50 is like a buffet table. Everybody goes up and fills their plates no matter how much they're actually going to eat. At rush-hour the buffet runs out, and the poor late comers get no food while those who arrived early got a full plate no matter how much they actually ate. In other words, the M50 (possibly the most heavily in-demand piece of transport infrastructure in the country) is a free-for-all.

Something needs to be done to balance the demand at rush hour. If we don't make changes, it's simply a drag on the economy. Let's make the M50 work for us in the most efficient way possible, and stop people filling up their plates for fre just because they can! (They can fill up for free off-peak!)

BoatMad

Something needs to be done to balance the demand at rush hour. If we don't make changes, it's simply a drag on the economy. Let's make the M50 work for us in the most efficient way possible, and stop people filling up their plates for fre just because they can! (They can fill up for free off-peak!)

Thats just a thing disguised argument for road pricing , all that does is increase costs for those that have no option, while making others engage in rat runs etc, One can see the effect in France, where high motorways tolls have resulted in light m-way traffic and jammed national routes.

The m50 only really has on remaining engineering issue, the closeness of the junctions from firhouse to cork junctions, close ballymount in particular and firhouse, which could be served by enhanced local feeder roads from taillight junction . This would eliminate the issues around here, the rest runs reasonably well

The m50 is an engineering issue , not a policy one

Calina

BoatMad wrote: »

Ikea are charging upto 100 euros to deliver in certain cases, and more often 30-40 , In renewing a kitchen , I made 6 journeys to them , getting stuff delivered subjects you to huge additional costs and delays ( next day etc )

Supermarket delivery is often actually inconvenient and is not the norm. ( people actually like to shop )

Public transport is very slow point to point

Taxis are ridiculously expensive

The fact is in Dublin , today ( which is where we are and now), public transport serves a very small niche of users, primarily those travelling into and out of the city centre, a place where in fact little shopping is done these days

One only has to see traffic jams on saturday , to see the amount of consumer traffic as oppose dot commuter traffic

Proponents of public transport seem to assume that people are sheep too be herded in a given fixed direction and that they have all day to do it..

IN my commutes into and around Dublin, I have actually never beaten the point to point times with public transport. when I use the rail system the point to point times are truly ridiculous

Public transport is not a majority solution for modern living, its a niche solution, primary designed in the 19th century to bring people from large housing areas, close to the city centre, into the city centre ( where most activity was). Deliveries to houses , was extremely cheap , as labour was cheap and horses are cheap to run, Houses were close by, and the working classes purchased few goods outside basic sustenance items.

Today, we have an enormous range of goods that we purchase , huge variety in basic and complex sustenance products and therefore the car is a uniquely useful mode of transport. As long as it remains so useful, it will remain the dominant form of such transport and we have to plan accordingly

Having read this, I really wonder if you read my post properly. I've pointed out that the car has become dominant because of weaknesses in the public transport system but that those weaknesses can be mitigated against. I'm pretty certain that the TCO of a car exceeds the TCO of going by public transport, getting stuff delivered by taxi or by delivery service. The issue is not the cost, it is the convenience and this could, with will, be rectified.

Out of interest, in what cities with a population greater than 200,000 have you lived in outside Ireland? There are infrastructural issues in Dublin which make public transport an issue but starting off from the point of view that we have complex sustenance products (I assume you mean food here) and therefore public transport hard is not a productive approach to take.

With respect to the M50, I think it does its job as well as possible in the context of how utterly lousy many Irish drivers are.

_Kaiser_

BoatMad wrote: »

Thats just a thing disguised argument for road pricing , all that does is increase costs for those that have no option, while making others engage in rat runs etc, One can see the effect in France, where high motorways tolls have resulted in light m-way traffic and jammed national routes.

The m50 only really has on remaining engineering issue, the closeness of the junctions from firhouse to cork junctions, close ballymount in particular and firhouse, which could be served by enhanced local feeder roads from taillight junction . This would eliminate the issues around here, the rest runs reasonably well

The m50 is an engineering issue , not a policy one

Hard to argue with this TBH..

Running a car isn't cheap.. fuel is going back up again, tax costs a fair bit (especially if you can't afford a post-08 "cheap tax" car), insurance premiums have increased for most this year, toll charges of course.. not to mention the wear and tear costs like tyres and repairs and servicing. Then you have the hassle of finding (and paying) for parking if your employer hasn't got a free car park etc.

But despite this most people travel to work by car because they have no other (reasonable/realistic) choice in the matter - be it because the public option is non-existent, infrequent, unreliable or involves too much wasted time getting from A-B (often because it takes a completely unnecessary detour via C-ity Centre) and they have to be at their destination at a set time, not "whenever the bus/train gets there today"

Add to the mix the current housing crisis in Dublin with a shortage of supply for both buyers and tenants pushing people back into the "commuter counties" again. Unfortunately of course their job doesn't generally move with them, and giving it up probably isn't an option (even short term) so what do these people do when the public options are probably even more restricted? They drive!

Charging these people even more to get to/from work because of poor planning decisions, poor engineering, and of course no foresight beyond the next election (if even that!) by our elected officials is just completely unjustified as long as no suitable/realistic alternatives exist.

SeanW

Aard wrote: »

Something needs to be done to balance the demand at rush hour. If we don't make changes, it's simply a drag on the economy. Let's make the M50 work for us in the most efficient way possible, and stop people filling up their plates for fre just because they can! (They can fill up for free off-peak!)

So the M50 is "free for all?" I will remember that next time I'm crossing the West Link ... or paying my road tax so that I can use any motorway ...

monument

SeanW wrote: »

So the M50 is "free for all?" I will remember that next time I'm crossing the West Link ... or paying my road tax so that I can use any motorway ...

I tried paying for my road tax but http://roadtax.ie does not seem to work?!

monument

BoatMad wrote: »

whats often forgotten, is even if a public transport route existed, its essentially limited to carrying people, not their purchased goods. Try taking Ikea flat packs on a bus, or shopping for a family of 5 etc. The idea that the the car can be replaced by public transport is abject nonsense. bringing a person to his centre city office - fine, but a very limited undertaking

Public transport won't suit everbody or every trip.

But loads of people in Dublin imams around the world manage to get by without car use it without the amount of car use which is prevalent in Ireland.

Most commutes and other trips are relatively short, and irregular trips such as going to Ikea really should not be a major for planning.

A mix of better public transport, better cycling network, more bicycle share, car share etc would serve the city and county better than trying dig their way out of a hole by digging deeper.

Aard

SeanW wrote: »

So the M50 is "free for all?" I will remember that next time I'm crossing the West Link ... or paying my road tax so that I can use any motorway ...

It is a free for all in the sense that certain people have to rely on using the M50, while others have many options available to them and yet still choose the M50. The people who have no other choice need to be prioritised at rush hour.

_Kaiser_

monument wrote: »

I tried paying for my road tax but http://roadtax.ie does not seem to work?!

Ah come on.. we all know what he meant to be fair. The M50 is long since paid for and yet they're still charging people every time.

SeanW

Aard wrote: »

It is a free for all in the sense that certain people have to rely on using the M50, while others have many options available to them and yet still choose the M50. The people who have no other choice need to be prioritised at rush hour.

But how do you do this? The only way I see is congestion charging, e.g. a third tax on usage. ("Motor" Tax, the West link toll, then a demand management fee).

Aard

SeanW wrote: »

But how do you do this? The only way I see is congestion charging, e.g. a third tax on usage. ("Motor" Tax, the West link toll, then a demand management fee).

Ramp metering, improved public transport, planning controls forbidding excessive trip-generators on the M50 (like the Park in Carrickmines).

I would also view tolls as a less favourable solution.

lucernarian

veryangryman wrote: »

There would theoretically be multiple orbits though. So you would take your local orbit to the line that suits, then change. A 10 minute walk is acceptable in a busy city situation (or anywhere really).

I am not sure what an ideal benchmark is to define a catchment area but I thought 10 mins was reasonable. There isn't all that much within 10 minutes of the M50 junctions though and I'm not sure if other possible orbital routes would be relevant to an M50 discussion. I'm more concerned with the likely necessity of 2 bus changes needed for people to use an M50-based bus orbital route and its resulting impact on overall utility.

Aard

Bus routes that *partially* use the M50 could be a runner. Particularly ones to exit at large employment centres like Sandyford, Tallaght, or Blanch.

TheQuietFella

mikhail wrote: »

60 km/h speed limit proposed.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/plan-to-lower-m50-speed-limits-to-cut-congestion-1.2105928

It's all a scam to fine drivers 'who will' exceed the limit.

If they sorted out the drivers who can't or don't understand what driving on a motorway is all about
such as driving in the wrong lane, failing to move to one side when faster traffic is moving up behind but need I go on!

lucernarian

I don't understand the "scam" behind implementing measures that would increase the total capacity of a motorway that every motorist and even non-motorists have contributed plenty of taxes towards. Especially if there's time-based "temporary" limits used.