M50 madness , Outer Ring needed

Mycroft H

Lol, that'll only cause chaos. Imagine a thick in a BMW belting at 130 on lane three at 8 am in the morning.

HeidiHeidi

Mycroft H wrote: »

Lol, that'll only cause chaos. Imagine a thick in a BMW belting at 130 on lane three at 8 am in the morning.

8am???

Chance'd be a fine thing

kona

Mycroft H wrote: »

Lol, that'll only cause chaos. Imagine a thick in a BMW belting at 130 on lane three at 8 am in the morning.

Jaysus just imagine it. Probably take off at that speed.

magicbastarder

rogue-entity wrote: »

If we're fixing the M50, any chance we could also raise the speed limit to something decent like 130kph.

the figure of 100km/h is not plucked out of the air - it's based on sight lines and lane width, etc.

just a quick back of the envelope calculation - going from the M1 to the M11 junction - the difference in time taken between driving at 130km/h and at 100km/h is six minutes - i.e. just over 20 minutes as compared to just over 26 minutes. given the volume of traffic it carries - apart from the technical reason mentioned above - i can't see them raising the speed limit as it'd increase the chance of collisions.

Consonata

Personally, I think the couple of billion that would be needed for planning + building this new ring road would be better off invested in public transport, and development of transport out into places like Maynooth which have now almost become Dublin suburbs.

n97 mini

Consonata wrote: »

Personally, I think the couple of billion that would be needed for planning + building this new ring road would be better off invested in public transport, and development of transport out into places like Maynooth which have now almost become Dublin suburbs.

Maynooth has a train line which was first supposed to be electrified in 1977. Or was it 67, I can't remember.

In addition to electrifying the already in place rail lines, this whole bollox about Dublin's skyline, with it's sub 8-storey building limit, is a large part of the problem. Upwardly mobile 20-something year olds should be living in high rise apartments down in the Docklands. And I mean proper high rise, 13 to 30 storeys. Leave the 3-bed semis in the suburbs for young families who actually want to live in them.

Commotion Ocean

supermilk1 wrote: »

It's simply not able to cope. Poorly designed, not enough lanes where there's

Poorly designed? I completely agree.

Not enough lanes? I disagree. There are plenty of lanes. People just need to learn to keep left unless overtaking.

We need these on gantry signs in Ireland instead of the usual "slow down, speed kills" cráp.

supermilk1

The fact is that everyone agrees something has to be done, albeit different solutions either to build a road or build a suitable rail network but the sad thing is that it clearly isn't in the sights of the government.
Surely it would be a huge way to generate votes that they so desperately want. If this was the US a politician/governor would be looking to stamp his/her name on a project of this importance and leave a relic behind to remember them by. But for whatever the motive, it wouldn't be put on the long finger until the chaos is beyond return. It would be done at whatever cost as it is needed.
Sadly here we have self preserving lambs.
It's a scary thought to imagine the traffic on that road in 5 years. And for those who are against commuters, there will be a hell of a lot more on the road by then

Consonata

n97 mini wrote: »

Maynooth has a train line which was first supposed to be electrified in 1977. Or was it 67, I can't remember.

In addition to electrifying the already in place rail lines, this whole bollox about Dublin's skyline, with it's sub 8-storey building limit, is a large part of the problem. Upwardly mobile 20-something year olds should be living in high rise apartments down in the Docklands. And I mean proper high rise, 13 to 30 storeys. Leave the 3-bed semis in the suburbs for young families who actually want to live in them.

Completely agree. Also we should be expanding our dart system so we can connect more areas of north and south Dublin. Outside of the City Centre, it is really hard to get around. Adding another ring road is just a patch on the problem, we should be decreasing car usage in cities, not increasing it.

screamer

The M50 is a joke, the N7 is a bigger joke that's what happens when there's "freeflow" traffic. Truth is, the whole country is commuting to Dublin as there are no jobs outside it. Problem being that with every road they build, they then go along and choke it with houses, businesses etc which just adds to congestion issues.
With a lack of decently priced and reliable, far reaching public transport there really is no answer to this. Government make too much revenue out of cars and all that goes into them to care too much or indeed to have any incentive to tackle the problem of choking traffic congestion.
Best we can hope for is that self driving cars become reliable enough to be used for the monotonous every day commuting.

Irish Steve

The reality of the M50 problems is that the Liffey Valley crossing is the only viable road crossing between Heuston Station and Leixlip/Lucan, and neither of those locations have a high volume road capable of taking commute traffic, so the M50 has become the pinch point as a result, as the city has grown, and the large peripheral industrial estates have been developed, the essential infrastructure to link those areas to the residential areas has been badly mis managed, and we're now seeing the result of incompetent, and in some cases corrupt planning decisions over a long period of time.

There are alternatives, one would be to have the double deck options for some of it, with the "upper deck" restricted to long distance traffic, so (for example) there would be no access to the upper deck at Red Cow for traffic leaving before Dundrum or Blanchardstown, and no HGV's on the upper deck.

All HGV traffic should be restricted to the leftmost lane at peak periods, other than the section from Ballymun to the M1 junction.

Much of the problems can be attributed to appallingly bad design, at a number of points, there are intersections on the feeder roads that are just too close to the M50, and cause massive problems at peak times, and the absence of high volume feeder roads inside the M50 ring only makes that problem worse.

Driver behaviour at junctions is also an issue, if we can't have a second level, then a system that forces drivers in the right most 2 lanes to remain on the Motorway for a mile before and after the major junctions would be an alternative, if you want to leave at a junction, then you get into the left well before, and can't get to the right until well after the junction.

Unfortunately, the combination of "the next election" imperative, and the problems of a lack of available capital funding for "luxuries for Dublin" mean that the chances of anything realistic being done any time soon are about as good as the chances of 2 Ft of snow for Christmas.

marno21

The main problem with the M50 is commuting. It works for 18/19 hours of the day, but the volume of car commuters needing to use the M50 at that time - it can't cope. The Outer Orbital won't solve much because the issues with the M50 aren't caused by the negligible amount of long distance traffic from outside Naas/Maynooth, it's all the commuter traffic. For this reason, if any road scheme was to solve the issues in Dublin, it would be the Eastern Bypass as that would provide an alternative north-south route and also an alternative route to the city centre/Docklands areas.

If there was more suitable methods for commuting people would be using them. Fact.

magicbastarder

has a tunnel under dublin bay ever been costed/examined for feasibility?

ThisRegard

Consonata wrote: »

and development of transport out into places like Maynooth which have now almost become Dublin suburbs.

Maynooth has a better rail service into Dublin city than a lot of Dublin itself.

Gmol

Another possible solution is greater flexi time where possible which would lengthen the peak time period and reduce the volume at 8am

Consonata

magicbastarder wrote:

has a tunnel under dublin bay ever been costed/examined for feasibility?

Why would you do that when the port tunnel is already there?

techdiver

Gmol wrote: »

Another possible solution is greater flexi time where possible which would lengthen the peak time period and reduce the volume at 8am

More employers should be encouraged to allow working from home too. Some industries don't require staff in the office every day. I would go as far as to offer tax incentives to allow people to work from home. The number of needless journeys that are taken and time wasted travelling could be used more productively at home.

magicbastarder

Consonata wrote: »

Why would you do that when the port tunnel is already there?

under dublin bay?

magicbastarder

techdiver wrote: »

More employers should be encouraged to allow working from home too. Some industries don't require staff in the office every day. I would go as far as to offer tax incentives to allow people to work from home. The number of needless journeys that are taken and time wasted travelling could be used more productively at home.

i can work from home whenever i want. great for 20 minute power naps on the sofa at lunch.

paddyland

Irish Steve wrote: »

All HGV traffic should be restricted to the leftmost lane at peak periods, other than the section from Ballymun to the M1 junction.

Absolute nonsense. Most trucks are driving better and faster than the hundreds of cars they are surrounded by. You are far less likely to be held up by a truck doing 90 in the middle lane, who moves left when the left lane clears, than you are by a solid line of cars doing a variable speed between 70-80 in the middle lane, who sit there doggedly, and won't move left.

Fill the left lane with trucks, and they all get ganged up behind the one very heavy truck doing 70, or the occasional double deck bus doing 65, and then NOBODY can merge left to take exits without cutting up solidly queued trucks, grossly multiplying the risk of accidents.

It is precisely because trucks overtake each other that those solid lines do not form. A typical case of blaming a handful of trucks, driven by professional drivers, instead of the thousands of cars, driven by mostly idiots and morons.

And before you state the obvious, I am NOT a truck driver, and never have been. I simply hate seeing blinkered rubbish dressed up as insight.

trellheim

It is precisely because trucks overtake each other that those solid lines do not form. A typical case of blaming a handful of trucks, driven by professional drivers, instead of the thousands of cars, driven by mostly idiots and morons.

Correct; HGVs are not the issues here ( except in the longer term whereby goods should move by rail wherever possible ) and pricing of infrastructure for users

Roadhawk

paddyland wrote: »

You are far less likely to be held up by a truck doing 90 in the middle lane, who moves left when the left lane clears, than you are by a solid line of cars doing a variable speed between 70-80 in the middle lane, who sit there doggedly, and won't move left.

A typical case of blaming a handful of trucks, driven by professional drivers, instead of the thousands of cars, driven by mostly idiots and morons.

I would agree here...truck drivers tend to be fairly efficient on motorways and keep up with regular traffic. It is the cars alone that create chaos on the M50. Too many people on phones, doing make up, rubber-necking and just not paying attention. I wouldn't go as far as calling them idiots but people really do need to pay attention.

In my view there should be some sort of official training required for drivers to be able to use a motorway anyway. There is no understanding to allow newly licensed driver to be allowed on a motorway without any training at all.

Back the original post...I really do think there should be an outer ring road circling the M50. It completely makes sense to allow traffic to move freely between north and south without forcing the majority closer to the city centre.

Seth Brundle

The problem here is one of volume. Too many people wanting to travel at the same time.
Adding more roads won't work. Adding a second floor to the M50 won't work. Getting people to move to flexitime or work from home won't work. Congestion charging or tolling along the length of the M50 will offer limited gains.
There is only one viable long term solution and that is to create a meaningful public transportation network. This will need input from both state and private operators with one principal objective only, getting people around the city as efficiently as possible.
Do I see it happening during my lifetime? Not a hope!

magicbastarder

what percentage of traffic which uses the M50 in the morning would come from further out than the likes of maynooth, ashbourne, lusk, etc.?
i.e. what percentage of traffic would actually make use of this new motorway? is such into available?

also, what percentage of drivers would be willing to drive the extra distance such a motorway would involve? it'd be noticeably further to travel for traffic travelling from belfast to cork, i would guess.

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

what percentage of traffic which uses the M50 in the morning would come from further out than the likes of maynooth, ashbourne, lusk, etc.?
i.e. what percentage of traffic would actually make use of this new motorway? is such into available?

also, what percentage of drivers would be willing to drive the extra distance such a motorway would involve? it'd be noticeably further to travel for traffic travelling from belfast to cork, i would guess.

You also have to consider commercial usage of the M50. Many of Dublin's industrial estates are located on the outside of the M50 and are driven toward the M50 for the likes of deliveries etc. If there were an outer ring much of this would be solved.

the.red.baron

kbannon wrote: »

The problem here is one of volume. Too many people wanting to travel at the same time.
Adding more roads won't work. Adding a second floor to the M50 won't work. Getting people to move to flexitime or work from home won't work. Congestion charging or tolling along the length of the M50 will offer limited gains.
There is only one viable long term solution and that is to create a meaningful public transportation network. This will need input from both state and private operators with one principal objective only, getting people around the city as efficiently as possible.
Do I see it happening during my lifetime? Not a hope!

How can you say those things won't work?

Public transport is a red herring, the bus system is fine, yes they could add a few orbital routes, so you aren't forced into town, but the bus system is fine. It's just mired in traffic at rush hour, whats the point of adding more buses just so they can sit in traffic, try it outside rush hour, it's great.

Working from home is a solution and should be encouraged, what kind of job requires someone to come from Athlone every day?


Double decking the m50 would also work, but the cost would be staggering and we'd make some balls of it

As far as being stuck on the m50, get a motorbike. Drive past all the parked car, stuck on the n4 or the quays, cycle, if you can't cycle the whole way, drive, park, cycle

It's plain laziness from people who don't need to drive that's screwing it up for the rest.

Walter2016

A full outer ring would be quite difficult, but an extended M9 going Balbriggan to Ashbourne to Maynooth / Kilcock to join M9 on to Kilkenny and Waterford would not be overly difficult.

It would also connect major industrial / logistical estates that are located in those towns and a spur could be made from greenogue too, thus making it an ideal hgv route.

Costwise, its about a 80km route, the M9 is 120km and cost 1.3bn, so circa 1bn in costs as a guide.

BoatMad

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Ok, so we build this at a cost of probably a billion euro, then as with every road in the history of roads, it becomes congested too, what do we do then? Another ring road outside that?
Sure let's just concrete over the whole country.

given that , even in this technological age , the fact that a driver cant drive two cars simultaneously , so the notion that there is an endless source of traffic to fill every road is just that , a notion and an absurd notion at that

If you separate major domitiry areas from major work centres ( because today , people dont really want to live down the alley at the back of the steel works !!), then you also need to build in serious high capacity transport systems as well

of course once Luas cross city finishes the OP could take the train and LUAS to sandy ford === hurrah

BoatMad

It's plain laziness from people who don't need to drive that's screwing it up for the rest.

utter BS

Seth Brundle

the.red.baron wrote: »

How can you say those things won't work?

Public transport is a red herring, the bus system is fine, yes they could add a few orbital routes, so you aren't forced into town, but the bus system is fine. It's just mired in traffic at rush hour, whats the point of adding more buses just so they can sit in traffic, try it outside rush hour, it's great.

Working from home is a solution and should be encouraged, what kind of job requires someone to come from Athlone every day?


Double decking the m50 would also work, but the cost would be staggering and we'd make some balls of it

As far as being stuck on the m50, get a motorbike. Drive past all the parked car, stuck on the n4 or the quays, cycle, if you can't cycle the whole way, drive, park, cycle

It's plain laziness from people who don't need to drive that's screwing it up for the rest.

1. Double decking the M50 is not financially viable. It would be unlikely to pass easily through the planning stages easily and it could be 20 years before a sodd is dug so to speak. Even if we built a second tier where will the cars go then? Part of the delays on the M50 are caused by the roads linking the M50. Do we upgrade them? What about the roads linking to them? The total cost is rising quite quickly.
2. Working from home is not a realistic option for the majority. For those that do work from home, there can be productivity issues. Nonetheless I can't see the government legislating for it or part funding it.
3. I don't want a motorbike. Neither do most people.
4. If we reduce the volume of vehicles,most of which are single occupant, and encourage the use of a well planned and coherent PT network, there is no reason to believe that people will use it. The car will not be the main mode of transport from a planning perspective.
5. Your last sentence is not worth responding to.


Our previous policies of urban sprawl and high dependence on the car was never sustainable. We now need to face the reality that we did it wrong. Public transport is the only long term option. We have the choice of doing it right or doing it wrong.

magicbastarder

a bit OT, but how much of the budget of building a motorway usually goes on the CPO process for the land?

BoatMad

encourage the use of a well planned and coherent PT network,

we have to build that yet, at present its not looking promising

BoatMad

magicbastarder wrote: »

a bit OT, but how much of the budget of building a motorway usually goes on the CPO process for the land?

depends where the land is

monument

kbannon wrote: »

Our previous policies of urban sprawl and high dependence on the car was never sustainable. We now need to face the reality that we did it wrong. Public transport is the only long term option. We have the choice of doing it right or doing it wrong.

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

The M50 isn't the issue, it's a symptom of bad city planning. Dublin is a very short, sprawling city.

Dublin City and Suburbs has around about the same population density as Amsterdam.

The different in Amsterdam is they have metro lines, more tram lines and cycling for all ages and abilities.

Corca Baiscinn

Driver behaviour at junctions is also an issue, if we can't have a second level, then a system that forces drivers in the right most 2 lanes to remain on the Motorway for a mile before and after the major junctions would be an alternative, if you want to leave at a junction, then you get into the left well before, and can't get to the right until well after the junction.
Irish Steve, that's an interesting idea. so there would be a line of bollards or some such to keep traffic in the left lane? Are you aware of any motorways where this system is used?

magicbastarder

the.red.baron wrote: »

Public transport is a red herring

you've lost me.

Irish Steve

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Driver behaviour at junctions is also an issue, if we can't have a second level, then a system that forces drivers in the right most 2 lanes to remain on the Motorway for a mile before and after the major junctions would be an alternative, if you want to leave at a junction, then you get into the left well before, and can't get to the right until well after the junction.
Irish Steve, that's an interesting idea. so there would be a line of bollards or some such to keep traffic in the left lane? Are you aware of any motorways where this system is used?

`There were, a number of years ago, systems of this nature around some of the major junctions in Orlando. I don't know if they are still there, but they seemed to work well, and prevent the sort of stupidity that seems to be normal on the M50, where people leave it to the last moment to exit, or jump from the entry slip to as far right as they can force their way at often very low speeds, both of which cause significant problems to drivers around them.

In the same vein, if confining HGV's to one lane is so bad, why is that method of traffic flow used so much on the often 2 lane German Autobahn system? I can assure you, there are significant numbers of HGV drivers who get into Lane 2, and stay there for very long distances, regardless of what's happening in Lane 1.

Then of course, there are the people who intend to exit at the next junction, but are not willing to join the queue, so they keep going in Lane 1 until they can't go any further, and then almost stop with a left turn indicator on and effectively force the traffic in Lane 1 to either avoid a collision with them, by moving into Lane 2, or stop, until someone lets the queuing driver into the exit lane.

another scheme that works well in a number of places, especially in the UK on the M25, is the variable speed limit system, which would be relatively easy to implement on the M50, as many of the gantries needed are already in place.

All of these systems though require a fundamental change of attitude from many drivers, who seem to regard things like speed limits, or lane discipline as being not applicable to them, and a significant lack of proper enforcement for many years has done nothing to change those problems.

I have to admit to being very happy that I no longer have to commute across Dublin at peak hours on a regular basis, the volumes on the M25 in the UK are much higher, but the discipline of the users means that it does not suffer from the same level of delay and incident that are becoming a major problem on the M50.

IE 222

If people used motorways correctly there wouldn't as much problems.

Lane 1 is the problem and people not using it correctly. Many seem to think of it as been a continuous slip road or some sort of regional road from one jct to the next. This in turn creates a situation of people either skipping up along the outside and unable to find a way to slip into it at the last min resulting in them slowing down or even stopping in Lanes 2 or 3. Or people trying to enter Lane 1 at an entry slip road.

marno21

The funny thing is from the M1 junction to Sandyford there IS a continious slip road adjacent to Lane 1.

A widespread education campaign, including the use of VMS, and Garda enforcement is needed. Some of the VMS used as toll sign repeaters could be used - there is ample warning about the M50 toll. One or two signs should be enough - if people are that bad at seeing things that they don't notice the signs without needing the VMS they probably shouldn't be driving at all. Although, it would perhaps be pointless using the VMS for education purposes if people don't look at them.

maninasia

Where I live in Asia they added an upper layer to one of the main motorways that serves the capital city's couple of years ago. I was quite skeptical but it very significantly allievated bottlenecks at rush hour.
The top deck has limited entries and exits to control traffic flow and also has dedicated bus and high occupancy lanes. It really works well and maximizes use of resources and is cost efficient.

Yes I have qualms about car use and would have preferred if they had stuck a commuter rail on top instead but adding another road level was MUCH quicker and cheaper than any rail projects and was completed within just a few years.

There's no one single answer, more PT, double the ringroad, electrify the trains, change the planning laws for higher density, encourage telework and other hubs than Dublin. It needs a concerted effort.

Trebor176

Southbound, it can take up to an hour to get from near the M1 to Tallaght or a bit beyond most mornings, according to traffic reports. Northbound, it can be chronic from Ballymount to Lucan or Blanchardstown.

I go from junction 9 (Red Cow) and junction 10 (Ballymount) in the mornings and visa versa in the evenings. Some mornings, as recently as during the week just gone, it can take a half-hour to do this. A journey which takes me less than 10 minutes from home to work in little traffic.

There have been no reasons for these delays, where J9 traffic has joined from the southbound on ramp there to the J10 off ramp. Just volume really! The Ballymount southbound exit is a joke, in my opinion, as it's the only slip road that seems to be bad every morning, apart from the occasional delays around J13 or J14.

Since the economy is continuing to pick up, more jobs are being created, thus leading to more traffic. The M50 cannot cope with the traffic, in my view. But, I can't really see what can be done to sort the problem. A ring road would make sense. But, any 'improvements' will be a very long way off, I'm afraid.

snickerpuss

maninasia wrote: »

There's no one single answer, more PT, double the ringroad, electrify the trains, change the planning laws for higher density, encourage telework and other hubs than Dublin. It needs a concerted effort.

What difference would electrifying the Maynooth line make? Surely they wouldn't be any faster, the gates wouldn't stay down any quicker... so why would this have an effect on traffic?

The J Stands for Jay

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Driver behaviour at junctions is also an issue, if we can't have a second level, then a system that forces drivers in the right most 2 lanes to remain on the Motorway for a mile before and after the major junctions would be an alternative, if you want to leave at a junction, then you get into the left well before, and can't get to the right until well after the junction.
Irish Steve, that's an interesting idea. so there would be a line of bollards or some such to keep traffic in the left lane? Are you aware of any motorways where this system is used?

The Long Island Expressway had something like this, but it was only for high occupancy vehicles - cars with at least two people. You couldnt leave the HOV lane at every junction, but it was clearly signposted in advance.

Side Gate

It's only going to get worse OP. Maybe consider buying a motorbike would cut that journey time in half at least.

Diemos

NiallBoo wrote: »

I think the primary question should be why we don't build appropriate higher density homes that would allow you to live near work instead of commuting from Athlone...but hey.

Because every Irish person deserves there 3 bed house with a garden. We've had these high density thingys in Ballymun and look how that turned out.

*I'm not saying I agree with the above but that's your primary reason.

L1011

snickerpuss wrote: »

What difference would electrifying the Maynooth line make? Surely they wouldn't be any faster, the gates wouldn't stay down any quicker... so why would this have an effect on traffic?

Acceleration is much better on electric trains so there would be speed improvements

magicbastarder

is there any significant cost difference in the rolling stock?
and in running costs.

maninasia

I've heard electric powered trains have better acceleration too. Possibly more reliable maintenance wise also. Lower emissions and quieter. Country where I'm based has electrified almost the entire tracks round the nation so there must be good reasons for it!

NiallBoo

Diemos wrote: »

Because every Irish person deserves there 3 bed house with a garden. We've had these high density thingys in Ballymun and look how that turned out.

*I'm not saying I agree with the above but that's your primary reason.

Yup, I agree that's the thinking behind why we get the kind of development we do.

We've never really built apartments that are suitable for families. Doing so would be considered a "risk" to developers because it's so different that they wouldn't be sure there's a market for it.

Ballymum was always going to fail - poor design, a lack of services provided in the area and generally no attempt at looking at the social aspect. Ballyfermott had the same problems, but nobody blamed the architecture.

I think it's an "if you build it they will come" situation, but I don't expect to see it any time soon.

TheRiverman

I live in rural Ireland twenty minutes drive from the M6 Motorway and everyday I see some bad driving,but by far the scariest place I have ever driven is on the M50.The amount of non compliance with the Rules Of the Road I have seen on the few occasions I have to drive on it each year is horrendous and is a big contributor to the hell that it is each day.