M50 upgrade information on the www

Andrew Duffy

http://www.dlrcoco.ie/Roads/nontechsumm_m50eis.pdf

There's some interesting text, and more interesting renderings. I still can't figure out the proposed N3-M50 interchange - it looks terrifying.

bringitdown

Jeeebus, I was horrified to read that this would take 5 years but then set eyes on them interchanges, it WILL take 5 years for people to figure the blighters out let alone build the fuppers.

I didn't think 'free flowing interchanges' was in the govenment lexicon.... here hoping. No doubt they will have a great big public enquiry and they will find that they can build it quicker and for less by using bigger roundabouts and more traffic lights...!

robbie1876

According to that document, there will only be one free flowing interchange, the N4 interchange. All the rest of them will have some traffic lights and will be 'partially free flowing'. I'm stunned at this, have they learned nothing at all from putting traffic lights at motorway junctions?

bringitdown

Well 2 would be the N4 and the M1 (DUH!)

The rest are partial, but with the free flow catered for major routes, i.e. M50->N3 and N3->M-50 would be free-flow, M50->Blanch local traffic would be traffic lights + roundabouts... similarly for other routes, which is probably alright... altho it is difficult to follow that drawing!

The obvious one that should be completely free flowing is the BUSIEST FUPPING INTERCHANGE IN THE COUNTRY ... the red cow, and the only reason this is partial is (if I follow that impression correctly) due to the Luas... surely it is prudent to put the luas on stilts / overpass the interchange and remove it from the equation... and unlike Georgian Dublin putting the Luas on stilts would hardly detract from the surroundings.

robbie1876

No, the M1 will be partial freeflowing. The existing roundabout and traffic lights there will be kept, basically all they are doing is adding 2 overpasses, one coming off the M1 southbound to bring you on to the M50, the other bringing you from the end of the M50 onto the M1 southbound. Traffic on the N32 coming to this roundabout will still have to queue for the traffic lights. As someone that takes that route often, this annoys me, as sometimes the queue can tail back most of the way towards the Clare Hall shopping centre.

I don't mean to sound like I'm moaning and looking for faults in the plan, it justs strikes me as cheap that they don't fully upgrade approaches to any junction where there are known traffic problems. There are no approaches to the Red Cow roundabout, for example, that don't suffer from major tailbacks for most of the day, and yet they are still leaving some traffic lights on the junction knowing this.

Traffic

I think its time to stop talking about the LUAS on "stilts" idea!

Dont no where the minister came up with that one, prob in the pub with his mates drinking!

murphaph

bringitdown wrote:

The rest are partial, but with the free flow catered for major routes, i.e. M50->N3 and N3->M-50 would be free-flow

I can see that alright, but I can't see how N3 outbound traffic makes it's way without hitting a rake of lights. The have clearly catered for N3 inbound, am I missing something?

I'm pretty sure N3 inbound/outbound traffic is the majority flow, not N3-M50 or vice versa.

Andrew Duffy

I had a closer look at the pictures, and the N7 interchange looks slightly different to the previous proposal (attached). The difference is a slight realignment of the loop providing the West-North movement, and a change in the handlign of the side road beside the hotel. There is also proper access to the Luas parking lot.
I'd expect the traffic problems on the N32 to be reduced once traffic moving East-South is removed from the roundabout. Also, the port tunnel will reduce traffic on the Malahide Road - after all the N32 was intended to be an access road between the Malahide Road and the M1; it was poorly-planned development that led to its becoming a major artery.
The Ballymount interchange is interesting - a lot of work was done to this interchange to convert it from a signal controlled junction to a pair of roundabouts, and now it's being changed back, albeit with a better bridge.
Finally, anyone else notice the ganty signs dotted all over the drawings? About bloody time for a few of those.

murphaph

Traffic wrote:

I think its time to stop talking about the LUAS on "stilts" idea!

Why? Elevating the Luas line at this critical road junction is basic science in my book. I'll never understand why Brennan was mocked for one of the few good ideas he had. You see elevated metro/LRT all around the world, and it's funny here because he said "stilts" :rolleyes:

Traffic

Its funny because he actually thought the idea would work and that he suggested the idea with less than a year to go to the proposed opening of the line! This would of set the project back years with a whole new planning process etc to be undertaken
The gradient would also be too steep for LUAS to run along, the red cow station etc would have to be moved. Madness!!
The minister would of been told that the Luas would move through the existing sequence of lights in place at the red cow and therefore would not affect traffic

murphaph

Traffic wrote:

Its funny because he actually thought the idea would work

It would and will work as I guarantee you someday it will be done, Red Cow Mk. III (or is that IV, seein as the original one had toll booths)

Traffic wrote:

The gradient would also be too steep for LUAS to run along, the red cow station etc would have to be moved. Madness!!

Wrong, just take a look at the Peter Place ramp on the green line, and those trams are heavier with the same horse power.

Traffic wrote:

The minister would of been told that the Luas would move through the existing sequence of lights in place at the red cow and therefore would not affect traffic

With the current setup this may be true but not with this proposed scheme. It would be plain madness not to grade separate the Luas during the works.

bringitdown

It was madness the bloody thing wasn't elevated in the first place, granted it doesn't affect traffic but it DOES affect the LUAS times +5 minutes sitting to cross that fupping monster.

It WILL need to be elevated or subwayed at Red Cow at some stage no matter how you look at it so why not get it done sooner rather than later.

Traffic

And then for a time there will be three stand alone luas lines in the city!

Why redesign the existing luas line when with modifications to the NRAs plans both PT users and vehicle users win

PS. It would be better if we could all look at the final drawings and not an impression for the junction as it could be slightly different to whats on the above link

Kaner

The sick thing about the LUAS M50 crossing is that the proper place for the M50 bridge was at the southern end of the LUAS site. There they could have built a bridge accross the M50 that would not have interfered with the slip roads. I only hope the bozo who approved building the bridge where it is was fired.

They could build that bridge now without too much trouble and without the need for stilts. In fact they could run the LUAS tracks between some factories after it crosses the motorway and join the N7 half a mile east of the interchange if they wanted to.

One thing that is good to see in then plans is that there will be four traffic lanes between interchanges from the M1 to the Scholarstown interchange. That should help absorb traffic hopping on and off the motorway.

SeaSide

Theres goto be something wrong with the N3 junction or is it the perspective they've used. Look at the angle of the turn just after the N3 passes under the canal and railway. Would it no have been better to swing the whole thing to the right of the current junction and go for a proper cloverleaf.

unkel

Surprised to see only N4 / M50 will be complete freeflow, had expected N3 and N7 as well

Kaner wrote:

One thing that is good to see in then plans is that there will be four traffic lanes between interchanges from the M1 to the Scholarstown interchange. That should help absorb traffic hopping on and off the motorway.

Yes that was (good) news to me too. It will make a big difference

Now let's teach people to drive in the correct lane :rolleyes:

jlang

Full cloverleafs (-leaves?) take up a huge area so I don't think there's space. The N3 junction has interesting constraints due to the nearby signal-controlled roundabouts at Blanchardstown Village and Auburn Ave as well as having the Canal and the railway line going through the centre of the interchange area.

Of course, I really want to see one of these, but maybe not in my back yard. (Click for link) ...

thejollyrodger

yeah thats what the country needs. One of those bad boys. No traffic lights, no hold ups and proper future proof for the next 50 years. There will still be traffic lights with the new junction :S

jd

thejollyrodger wrote:

and proper future proof for the next 50 years.

!! 50 years ago was 1954.!! too optimistic there..

Victor

Actually at the M1/M50/M32 adding slip lanes to the new bridges to/from the M32 would reduce it to one set of traffic lights. Have drawing will post later.

SeaSide

"The existing M50 is a result of three decades of planning" Did any one else spot this one liner.

Hows about at the N3 junction you build a bridge connecting both bits of the N3 so all traffic going straight is freeflow with slip roads for all traffic turning left and the existing roundabout for traffic turning right

Andrew Duffy

Three-level stacked roundabouts like that are all over the UK and they're sh1te. Have a look at all the interchange designs here - they all discriminate against traffic entering the city and favour traffic going onto the M50, or off it to go away from the city. That's in line with the transport objectives of the development plan.

Victor

Is it me or does the Blanchardstown junction MAKE MY BRANE HURT!