M50

Airblazer

Nice one from the government..use taxpayer's money to pay off toll company..then use taxes raised from motorists to repay it back..double taxation..sweet

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1551282&issue_id=13610

ronbyrne2005

the amount of speculators that have made billions from exploiting the average taxpayer eg property developers ,national toll roads corrib gas field etc really p1sses me off.all these decisions on land rezoning and dodgy contracts were made during the era of corrupt politicians most of whom were Fianna fail but the gobsh1te irish will vote them back in.

reason

So what should we do then?

NTR had a perfectly legal contract to run the tollbridge. There's only a few things that could be done in order to change that. Appeal to the goodness of their hearts, buy them out or perhaps forcibly nationalise them?

ronbyrne2005

threaten to build a competing bridge beside the m50 toll bridge, ntr will be scared of a competing bridge that charges nothing and will sell out rights to current bridge for a lot less than half billion!

Time Magazine

Oh come off it. I wish you were my political opposition!

NTR know well and good that there's absolutely no chance of an additional bridge being built.

First of all it would cost the state hundreds of millions that could be spend on universities, all to save the commuter €2.

Secondly, nobody would ever go into business with the Irish state again. The M50 was a badly-run job. PPP actually ends up costing the people more than public projects; whether or not that's good or not is debateable. But the M50 is definitely one for the bad books. But that suggestion is laughable.

ronbyrne2005

Angry Banana wrote:

Oh come off it. I wish you were my political opposition!

NTR know well and good that there's absolutely no chance of an additional bridge being built.

First of all it would cost the state hundreds of millions that could be spend on universities, all to save the commuter €2.

Secondly, nobody would ever go into business with the Irish state again. The M50 was a badly-run job. PPP actually ends up costing the people more than public projects; whether or not that's good or not is debateable. But the M50 is definitely one for the bad books. But that suggestion is laughable.

why is there no chance of a new bridge? it could be done for a lot less than the 2 billion its projected the gov will have to pay to ntr.
im not saying build a new bridge but in negotiating the pay off the government could argue that if we built a new one that would take all ntr's business then we might get a better deal for the taxpayer.
businesses would go into contracts with government once they were assured of payments for specific projects/targets,the open ended contract of the toll bridge was a disgrace.if theres money to be made companies will bid for tenders.

reason

NTR always get a little demonised by these debates too.

The money they've made certainly hasn't been squandered or frittered away. I'm quite happy with an environment that now includes the like of Irish Broadband, Airtricity and Greenstar / Materials Recovery.

Anyone care to argue that IBB / Airtricity haven't made decent savings available to the "average taxpayer" ?

murphaph

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

...the open ended contract of the toll bridge was a disgrace..

It isn't an open ended contract. The concession period runs out in 14 years time.

Akrasia

a 500 million buy out of the toll Bridge would be €100,000 per day over the remaining 14 years of it's contract. Does the Toll Bridge Make 100,000 profit a day? That's mental if it does, especially considering the prices the Toll Bridge are allowed to charge have to be approved by the government. If the Toll Bridge Doesn't make 100,000 profit a day then why the **** would the government pay them that much in compensation. There is such a stench of corruption here its sickening.

constitutionus

you know what interests me is, whats gonna happen when the government get rid of the toll bridge and start charging people at DIFFERENT STAGES of the motorway
currently my brother uses the M50 to get from clondalkin to tallaght and the animatic i saw said he could be charged going on at the red cow and comming off at tallaght. now i can tell you hes NEVER used the toll bridge so if this type of system comes in he'll NEVER use the M50 again. that means him,and probably a LARGE percentage of others will clog up clondalkin village.

now factor that mentality ALL over the M50, and you'll have hellish congestion in all the small towns it was meant to bypass AND THIS IS BEFORE IKEA OPENS UP:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

you ask me the M50 will be a wastland while the rest of the city is congested and ONLY people who are well off or can write it off as an expense will use it on a daily basis COMPLETLY defeating the whole point of it I.E to relieve congestion

constitutionus

Akrasia wrote:

a 500 million buy out of the toll Bridge would be €100,000 per day over the remaining 14 years of it's contract. Does the Toll Bridge Make 100,000 profit a day? That's mental if it does, especially considering the prices the Toll Bridge are allowed to charge have to be approved by the government. If the Toll Bridge Doesn't make 100,000 profit a day then why the **** would the government pay them that much in compensation. There is such a stench of corruption here its sickening.

one of my brothers use to work with brinks, the tollbridge gets through so much money it has to be removed BY CONVEYOR BELT . its a NICE little earner:D

Suff

constitutionus wrote:

one of my brothers use to work with brinks, the tollbridge gets through so much money it has to be removed BY CONVEYOR BELT . its a NICE little earner:D

I'd say them make more than 100,000 a day.

ohhh...would love to take one day of their toll earnings
the only impact that they would feel is if we avoid it! take the longer route.

J.R.HARTLEY

reason wrote:

So what should we do then?

NTR had a perfectly legal contract to run the tollbridge.

they shouldn't have gotten their contract extension, they already made their money 10 times over and the government went and renewed their contract last year. they were surely thinking about this then, they are guilty of gross incompetence

MrPudding

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

why is there no chance of a new bridge? i

Because the contract the government signed does not allow for any other bridge or route to be built which would divert trafffic from the toll plaza.

MrP

Sparks

Has anyone sat down and worked out how much the tollbridge costs the state per annum - ie., the sum of the tolls taken in and the cost in manhours that are lost every day because of delays on the M50 that the tollbridge causes?

MrPudding

Sparks wrote:

Has anyone sat down and worked out how much the tollbridge costs the state per annum - ie., the sum of the tolls taken in and the cost in manhours that are lost every day because of delays on the M50 that the tollbridge causes?

I am not a fan of the toll bridge but I strongly believe it is not the only cause of delay on the M50. We have all seen queues to get off the M50 at poor interchanges where massive amounts of cars are trying to squeeze onto roads simply not capable of handling the volumes.

For this reason I think it would be hard to put a figure on it. NTR release a statement saying they reckoned the toll bridge only added two minutes to travel time for the *average* M50 user, note the average user not you specifically. Now, before I get accused of being pro toll bridge a couple of points:

1. I know it is in NTR’s interest to say it does not add much to average journey time.
2. Just because it is in their interest to say it does not mean that is isn’t actually true.
3. I do not know enough about traffic management or analysis to say whether or not the report is even close to being true.
4. I would hazard a guess that most people on this board don’t either but will still call it a load of sh1t.

If you could sit back and look at it objectively what they say actually makes some sense. I think there are few people who would say the interchanges are sufficient for the job. To me if you remove the choke point that is the toll plaza it seems obvious that cars will get to the interchanges faster. This is the point, they will get there faster, they will not get through them faster. It is important to note that NTR are not saying the toll bridge only delays people by 2 minutes, they are saying that if the plaza was not there the queues would just be at the interchanges instead of at the plaza with shorter queues at the interchanges. The net gain with the removal of the plaza would be 2 minutes for the average user.

I am not getting into the rights or wrongs of the plaza here. Personally I think it is a disgrace and feel the gov should have built it in the first place. But the fact it that it is there and the company running it were very smart about the contract they signed. That does not make them evil, it just makes them good business people. I also don’t believe removing it will be the magic bullet a lot of people seem to think it will be.

MrP

The Swordsman

I wonder how electronic tolling will work if they do implement it. There is talk that there will be some sort of camera which will photograph your number plate and you will then receive a bill in the post. If you're like me and only use the M50 three or four times a year, are they going to send a bill for a few euro?

It will hardly be worth their while. What if you don't pay? What will they do then?

Anyone know how this works in other countries?

ednwireland

The Swordsman wrote:

I wonder how electronic tolling will work if they do implement it. There is talk that there will be some sort of camera which will photograph your number plate and you will then receive a bill in the post. If you're like me and only use the M50 three or four times a year, are they going to send a bill for a few euro?

It will hardly be worth their while. What if you don't pay? What will they do then?

two words penalty points

the gov was talking about bringing in penalty points for non payement of tolls
talk about using the law of the land to do private companies enforcement

anyway i've managed to avoid dublin for the last 4 years thank god

does anyone think theyd rather have ntr with all its faults running the toll rather than the gov. i'd still be slightly towards ntr myself

Snickers Man

constitutionus wrote:

he'll NEVER use the M50 again. that means him,and probably a LARGE percentage of others will clog up clondalkin village.

now factor that mentality ALL over the M50, and you'll have hellish congestion in all the small towns it was meant to bypass AND THIS IS BEFORE IKEA OPENS UP:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

you ask me the M50 will be a wastland while the rest of the city is congested and ONLY people who are well off or can write it off as an expense will use it on a daily basis COMPLETLY defeating the whole point of it I.E to relieve congestion

Horse poo!!

That situation will exist for a little while until people start to realise: heyfor just a few euros I can speed along an empty motoroway while all these muppets who want to save a couple of euro are stuck in gridlock at traffic lights and behind lollipop men in Clondalkin, and in the process spending as much burning petrol as they would on the toll.

Sounds like a good deal to me.

The M50 was not meant to be a commuter track. Those who want to use it as such should pay for the privelege.

Angry Banana

Angry Banana wrote:

Secondly, nobody would ever go into business with the Irish state again.

That's it exactly.

The government has to honour its contracts end of. If th government simply reneges or tries to retrospectively change the position, then not only will the taxpayer pay for the damn thing but it will also be paying millions more on the legal costs.

murphaph

ednwireland wrote:

the gov was talking about bringing in penalty points for non payement of tolls
talk about using the law of the land to do private companies enforcement

Huh? The law of the land has always been used as an instrument by private individuals and private companies to ensure they are dealt with and deal with others in a proper manner. If I walk into a shop and take an item without paying, should the law of the land not serve me a due punishemnt because I have done wrong by that company? I don't see your problem.

constitutionus

Snickers Man wrote:

Horse poo!!

That situation will exist for a little while until people start to realise: heyfor just a few euros I can speed along an empty motoroway while all these muppets who want to save a couple of euro are stuck in gridlock at traffic lights and behind lollipop men in Clondalkin, and in the process spending as much burning petrol as they would on the toll.

Sounds like a good deal to me.

The M50 was not meant to be a commuter track. Those who want to use it as such should pay for the privelege.

really? so what exactly is happening out at the kinegad bypass most of the truckers are STILL using the old route in protest of the charge, just like bertie suggested:D , and its driving the locals mental.
imagine what'll happen when the port tunnel opens and 2000 trucks end up on a toll paying M50. They'll split off of every off ramp they can to save a buck clogging up those towns.
the one thing you can count on is human nature, it may be irrational but if they think it'll save em money they'll do it.
and even if its only 10% of drivers, most towns are at near gridlock ANYWAY , this will just seal the deal:(

ronbyrne2005

right so,NTR have to be paid off so why cant they just agree to pay them off and open up the tolls NOW instead of in two years time as it seems is now the case.

Akrasia

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

right so,NTR have to be paid off so why cant they just agree to pay them off and open up the tolls NOW instead of in two years time as it seems is now the case.

Paying off vast sums to NTR now to 'ease gridlock' just before we embark on 5 years of major roadworks to widen the road which is gonna cause major gridlock, would be the most idiotic thing the government could possibly do (which means they'll probably do it)
and why are they only widening the road to 3 lanes? as soon as they finish it'll be full again. there should be 4 lanes like in the major arteries of other capital cities

murphaph

Akrasia wrote:

..and why are they only widening the road to 3 lanes? as soon as they finish it'll be full again. there should be 4 lanes like in the major arteries of other capital cities

It'll be 3 lanes + weaving lanes + hard shoulders for the busiest parts. I this case, a weaving lane is a lane that runs continuously from one junction to the next. An example of weaving lanes would be between the N7 (Naas Road) interchange and the Ballymount interchange where the slip lane does not 'end' but just continues to the next junction.

LostinBlanch

Did anyone know that NTR own the road between the Toll Bridge and the Blanchardstown Interchange? 3.2km of ransom. Thank you very much Liam Lawlor, George Redmond, P Flynn.

Snickers Man

constitutionus wrote:

really? so what exactly is happening out at the kinegad bypass most of the truckers are STILL using the old route in protest of the charge, just like bertie suggested:D , and its driving the locals mental.

Stick a few MORE traffic lights on that old route and see what happens. Eventually the traffic will find its own level. If it saves you time and a few millibars of blood pressure, people will eventually pay a reasonable fee for a quicker faster road.

Akrasia

Snickers Man wrote:

Stick a few MORE traffic lights on that old route and see what happens. Eventually the traffic will find its own level. If it saves you time and a few millibars of blood pressure, people will eventually pay a reasonable fee for a quicker faster road.

what about an unreasonable fee? Youre saying that they should make the untolled road so miserable to drive on that people will be forced to pay the tolls

Victor

constitutionus wrote:

imagine what'll happen when the port tunnel opens and 2000 trucks end up on a toll paying M50.

On a road handling nearly 100,000 vehciles a day, 2,000 isn't all that many more, expecially as trucks tend to mostly operate away from peak periods.

Victor

Akrasia wrote:

and why are they only widening the road to 3 lanes? as soon as they finish it'll be full again. there should be 4 lanes like in the major arteries of other capital cities

Why not widen it to 18 lanes while we are at it?

The problem with going beyond the current proposals is you would have to (a) spend a lot more (b) rebuild all the bridges (d) widen it again as traffic increases.

LostinBlanch wrote:

Did anyone know that NTR own the road between the Toll Bridge and the Blanchardstown Interchange?

Yes, I did. Did you not get the memo? Their contract was to build and operate the M50 from the N3 to N4 junctions.