[Article] Tunnel truck traffic will bring M50 to a standstill

Drax

THE M50 will grind to a virtual standstill when the newly opened Port Tunnel forces 2,500 more trucks onto the already gridlocked motorway later this year.

Toll road chiefs last night admitted there are no measures in place to cater for the massive convoy of extra lorries on the country's busiest road.

Political anger also erupted yesterday following claims that the toll company operating Westlink had breached its contract over the level of service it should provide to motorists.

And it was also revealed that taxpayers will have to fork out at least €600m to buy out the toll bridge - €100m more than than initial figures suggested.

Even as the Government moves towards barrier-free tolling and extra lanes on the motorway, the full extent of the mayhem in store for motorists using the M50 was laid bare yesterday.

It emerged that the motorway lanes are handling even more vehicles per day than the notorious M25 around London - dubbed the 'world's biggest car park'.

An amazing communications blunder was highlighted when the boss of the private company which operates the Westlink toll plaza said he had been told of no proposals to deal with the huge volume of extra lorries that would emerge from the Port Tunnel.

National Toll Roads Ltd chairman Jim Barry admitted that truckers would even find it difficult getting onto the motorway in the first place because of gridlocked interchanges.

The State's spending watchdog, Comptroller and Auditor General John Purcell, said the only losers in the contentious M50 toll deal were the users.

antoinolachtnai

Well, to deal with this, why not:

- put on a comprehensive bus service on the M50 and surrounding areas.

- impose a toll (using a sticker system for fast implementation) on the M50 starting middle of this year.

This would reduce the traffic enough to make the whole thing work.

Gurgle

Drax wrote:

THE M50 will grind to a virtual standstill when the newly opened Port Tunnel forces 2,500 more trucks onto the already gridlocked motorway later this year.

What, are they going to build trucks in the port tunnel?
I thought it was a relief route for the trucks that currently use the M1, I didn't realise there was a massive truck factory being built in there. No wonder it took so long and cost so much.

And didn't the M50 grind to a virtual standstill the day they opened the toll bridge and every day since ?

antoinolachtnai

Well, all the trucks going south used to go through the city; now they will go by ring road.

I don't think what you say about the toll bridge. In fact the opposite is the case The M50 didn't really go anywhere until they opened the toll bridge.

It is not a popular thing to say, but the M50 is the victim of its own success.

pontovic

If the M50 is going to be gridlocked, does that mean that the traffic going through the city center will be reduced ? I go to work on the m50 everyday, travelling from Howth all the way to Citywest. I could go through the city center from now on ?

Gurgle

antoinolachtnai wrote:

Well, all the trucks going south used to go through the city; now they will go by ring road.

Isnt the port tunnel for the trucks going south?
I thought it came out somewhere convienent for the east link bridge. That was the whole point in building it.

antoinolachtnai wrote:

I don't think what you say about the toll bridge. In fact the opposite is the case The M50 didn't really go anywhere until they opened the toll bridge.

It is not a popular thing to say, but the M50 is the victim of its own success.

I meant that since the day they opened the M50 and toll bridge, theres been traffic jams at the toll bridge going back for miles.

mollser

antoinolachtnai wrote:

Well, to deal with this, why not:

- put on a comprehensive bus service on the M50 and surrounding areas.

- impose a toll (using a sticker system for fast implementation) on the M50 starting middle of this year.

This would reduce the traffic enough to make the whole thing work.

This line gets on my wick. Because you toll something, it does not mean that people will use it less, without a viable alternative available. There seems to be an underbelly of belief that the M50 is jammed with people who simply don't need to be there, and are just are out for a 'spin'. Therefore a toll would discourage these people. All advocators of tolls churn out this tripe. I would almost be certain that over 95% of people who are stuck on the m50 are there because they need to be, either delivering goods, going to and from work/customers/clients/jobs, or going to the airport, or any number of other reasons.

If ever there was a perfect example of this, its the damn tollbridge, cos no matter how much they raise the toll, most will still go through it cos they have to.

Tolling will not solve anything, it will just act as an additional tax on the motorist. :mad:

antoinolachtnai

Then what about car-sharing? That would reduce traffic levels and would certainly be prompted by a toll on the entire M50. I would almost be certain that 80 percent plus of the private cars on the M50 at the rush hour have two occupants or less.

You are right that for people who live and work along the M50 there is currently little alternative but to use a private car.

Gurgle

antoinolachtnai wrote:

Then what about car-sharing?

Yep, something as simple as allowing a car with 3+ people in it to use bus lanes could do a lot for traffic congestion.

But how could the government make any of their cronies any richer by allowing this?

antoinolachtnai

Gurgle wrote:

Isnt the port tunnel for the trucks going south?
I thought it came out somewhere convienent for the east link bridge. That was the whole point in building it.

By south I mean Limerick, Cork or Tallaght (and the same applies for Galway too).

Almost all imports and exports end up going through Dublin port. At the moment they spread out through Dublin. Now they will all go through the toll bridge

I meant that since the day they opened the M50 and toll bridge, theres been traffic jams at the toll bridge going back for miles.

You are saying that there was a 2 mile queue for the M50 on the day they opened it in 1990. I doubt if that is literally true. I don't know when the congestion became serious, but it was a good bit later than that.

I know you've heard it before and I know you don't agree with me, but if the blockage wasn't at the toll bridge, it'd be at the first exit down the road. There just isn't enough capacity on the off-ramps (and there may never be, because the local road networks can't hold all the traffic).

Transport21 Fan

Railfreight in and out of Dublin Port would be a big help here. The pocket wagons, loco, sindings all ready to go. Just move them on container transfer trains from Dublin Port to a couple of sidings next to the M50

Sadly the "Irish" railfreight lobby think that Foynes is a bigger port than Rotterdam and Singapore combined and that running freight up the Western Rail Corridor is the ultimate expression of rail transport viability on this island.

mackerski

antoinolachtnai wrote:

In fact the opposite is the case The M50 didn't really go anywhere until they opened the toll bridge.

The M50 didn't exist at all until they opened the toll bridge - N3-N4 was the first stretch opened. As to a sticker-toll scheme for the M50, FFS no! The government have mandated so many window-display yokeys (all proving the same thing) that I now only get to see out of about half my windscreen. There's a time to stop the madness.

Dermot

Gurgle

antoinolachtnai wrote:

By south I mean Limerick, Cork or Tallaght (and the same applies for Galway too).

Can't you get from the port via the east-link to the N7?

antoinolachtnai wrote:

You are saying that there was a 2 mile queue for the M50 on the day they opened it in 1990. I doubt if that is literally true. I don't know when the congestion became serious, but it was a good bit later than that.

I didn't realise the toll bridge was there that long. Certainly since they opened the northern part of the M50 from the N3 to the N1/M1 (1995?) the toll bridge has been the major cause of delays on the road.

antoinolachtnai wrote:

I know you've heard it before and I know you don't agree with me, but if the blockage wasn't at the toll bridge, it'd be at the first exit down the road.

Not really, I think it would be split between the rest of the exits after the toll bridge in each direction. Of course no single exit has the same capacity as the toll bridge but the Blanchardstown, Finglas, Ballymun and Airport exits between them would take higher through-put.

D'Peoples Voice

Transport21 Fan wrote:

Railfreight in and out of Dublin Port would be a big help here. The pocket wagons, loco, sindings all ready to go. Just move them on container transfer trains from Dublin Port to a couple of sidings next to the M50

I may be mistaken here, but will a lot of trucks not be removed from the WHOLE Dublin area by this national logistics centre in Portlaoise?
Note the use of the word "rail" in the first paragraph
http://www.tnn.co.uk/EuropeanNews/plonearticle.2005-04-15.9229901173

antoinolachtnai

Gurgle wrote:

Can't you get from the port via the east-link to the N7?

you could, but the whole point of the tunnel and the M50 was to get traffic away from the city. Until the southern port tunnel and its link road is in place, it appears the plan is to discourage trucks from doing this (although I am open to correction).

Not really, I think it would be split between the rest of the exits after the toll bridge in each direction. Of course no single exit has the same capacity as the toll bridge but the Blanchardstown, Finglas, Ballymun and Airport exits between them would take higher through-put.

The way road exits and on-ramps work is a lot more complicated than that. It isn't just a matter of splitting the traffic between a few exits.

Any on-ramp on the motorway will slow things down considerably because of merging traffic. Added to that, there will be a tailback from the exit. Even a small tailback effectively shuts down a lane or two of traffic. If the toll wasn't there to pace the flow of traffic, there would be bigger tailbacks at the exit.

There is simply nowhere for this traffic to go. The roads are all full. The only way to resolve the situation is to manage demand or else build bigger roads into the suburbs. Taking the toll off is like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. It might make things easier for a few minutes, but in the final analysis it will make absolutely no difference.

As I understand it, traffic flows can easily be modelled. I have not heard of a study that modelled the M50 and concluded that removing the toll would make a substantial improvement, but maybe I am wrong.

At the same time I should say that I think NTR is taking the wrong tack on this. I think they would do well to use their super-profits to actually solve the problem, rather than just taking money out.

Gurgle

antoinolachtnai wrote:

you could, but the whole point of the tunnel and the M50 was to get traffic away from the city. Until the southern port tunnel and its link road is in place, it appears the plan is to discourage trucks from doing this (although I am open to correction).

So trucks coming into Dublin port and going south are now to go north through the tunnel to the M50 near the airport, then all the way round the M50 to the N7?

corktina

restrictions on trucks going through the city centre are to be phased in over a period of time, so the trucks heading south of the Liffey wont immediately all be on the M50......at first it will be north(of the Liffey)bound trucks using it...the eastlink option is still there too for trucks heading south east (etc)

antoinolachtnai

I think that's the plan, but I'm not really sure to be honest with you. Obviously, if the M50 is chokka when the boat comes in, this is what is going to happen anyway. Does anyone know what the plan is for sure? [update: thanks for the information corktina]

I would forget about rail as a solution to this problem, for several reasons:

- to do what you are suggesting, the same piece of freight would have to be loaded 4 or 5 times instead of twice or three times, resulting in an increase in cost.

- a lot of the traffic is ro-ro at the moment, for reasons of cost and speed.

- the long, slow rail freight traffic would cripple the commuter and intercity rail system.

- you would slow the flow of freight by half-a-day, and this would ultimately have to be financed by Irish consumers

- you would just move the traffic hotspot from the port to the M50. You would still have more or less the same amount of trucks on the M50 (maybe more) so you wouldn't solve the original problem.

Maskhadov

Isnt it high time we all accepted that the port tunnel/M50 is a failure and what we really should is

RELOCATING DUBLIN PORT OUT OF THE CITY!!!!!

We can use the Port tunnel either as part of an eastern bypass.

Failed to Plan - Plan to Fail

Bluetonic

Maskhadov wrote:

Isnt it high time we all accepted that the port tunnel/M50 is a failure and what we really should is

RELOCATING DUBLIN PORT OUT OF THE CITY!!!!!

[/CENTER]

ha ha ha your not still going on about that one are you, I don't know who's worse you or Tom Morrisey.

antoinolachtnai

Well yes, I agree with that. I think it is safe to say that Dublin Port will be relocated by 2030. But it wouldn't make any difference to the current problem, you'd still end up with even more trucks on the M50.

Maskhadov

Dublin port runs out of capacity in 2008. The government should use that date as a start date to start relocating the port. i.e by putting a cap on all future expanision of the port and designating other locations.

Between now and 2008 the government should draw up a plan as to how to relocate the exisiting port facilities out of Dublin (ballbriggan I belive is top of the list). There is a rail line already servicing most of the nation and it would cut down heavily on trucks on the motorway. All goods could be transported at night for example.

It might take 10+ years to relocated everything out of the port but land could be freeded up in stages and development could begin on that land.

In the mean time the government should press ahed with the Transport 21 plan and build more massive park and ride facilites at all of the major interchanges on the M50. These facilites should be properly serviced by regular buses and eventually Metro/LUAS. Only then would the transport nightmare start to ease.

If you look at the island anyone who wants to travel north south, east west has to go through Dublin. Until the government completes the Atlantic corridor the M50 willl always be a mess.

The outer ring road would help but we really need balanced development and more public transport than a 10 lane M50 highway.

Just look at all the single persons in the cars on the M50. That says a lot about the problem.

corktina

cars are the problem and bus/rail/tram are the solution......

trouble is cars are driven by people who love their cars and dont want to get out of them....they just want everyone else to get out of their way.......and the nub of it is...these people are all voters.....

D'Peoples Voice

corktina wrote:

cars are the problem and bus/rail/tram are the solution......

trouble is cars are driven by people who love their cars and dont want to get out of them....they just want everyone else to get out of their way.......and the nub of it is...these people are all voters.....

I think most of those in cars who have to pay for parking all day, would gladly get the bus or rail/tram in if, and only if, they were reliable, and dare I say it, someway integrated.

With respect to integration, you only have to look at the number of strikes that Bus Eireann have had over the past year or so to realise that you can't rely on state bodies.
Lets not forget Dublin Bus drivers took the afternoon off to join in on a march about Irish ferries workers. To hell with the passengers.
Dart drivers wanted to go on strike because their trains were longer than before. To hell with their passengers.
In my opinion, these workers think they are working for the government, they don't seem to realise they are working for us, the PAYE workers. We pay their wages, the government is merely the middleman. Except we don't have the power to sack them, if they don't perform.

corktina

only those who live near the bus and train services that gho door to door though..........

Victor

antoinolachtnai wrote:

Well yes, I agree with that. I think it is safe to say that Dublin Port will be relocated by 2030.

They could move it to Portlaoise.

corktina

dont start.....we had trouble when someone suggested Athlone......:)

however, at least Port Laoise IS already a Port.....:cool:

Maskhadov

The transport nightmare is perfectly solvable, its just that we dont have the leaders to take the tough decisions.

parsi

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

I think most of those in cars who have to pay for parking all day, would gladly get the bus or rail/tram in if, and only if, they were reliable, and dare I say it, someway integrated.

You'll still need the car for the school run, the creche run, the back from school run, the back from creche run, the go to shop run, the drop kid to party run ...

Transport21 Fan

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

With respect to integration, you only have to look at the number of strikes that Bus Eireann have had over the past year or so to realise that you can't rely on state bodies.
Lets not forget Dublin Bus drivers took the afternoon off to join in on a march about Irish ferries workers. To hell with the passengers.
Dart drivers wanted to go on strike because their trains were longer than before. To hell with their passengers.
In my opinion, these workers think they are working for the government, they don't seem to realise they are working for us, the PAYE workers. We pay their wages, the government is merely the middleman. Except we don't have the power to sack them, if they don't perform.

The problem is that these CIE unions simply have no understanding that they even work in the sector of public transport and have no desire to either.

The NBRU came out of talks with the Minister of Transport last July and with a straight face stated that "the talks were free from any ideology" - (free from irony too it would seem)

murphaph

corktina wrote:

only those who live near the bus and train services that gho door to door though..........

No, people who live near services that are part of a comprehensive network. Door to door is a nonsense. Urban dwelling is the only way to begin to provide comprehensive, integrated public transport. People are already using rudimentary ingtegration like Train from Clonsilla-Pearse, tram to Sandyford, as it can take less time than parking on the M50 all morning. It's not even remotely 'integrated' (15 min walk) but it's still better to many car owners than driving the car.

Capt'n Midnight

Of course it's way too late to suggest they put the trucks on trains and shuttle them out of the city that way. Yeah you'd have to build a new bridge over the Liffey because the Phoenix Park Tunnel would be too small. Then again NTR would not be able to toll it. Then again would there be enough slots on the comutter lines for it to fit ?

corktina

murphaph wrote:

No, people who live near services that are part of a comprehensive network. Door to door is a nonsense. Urban dwelling is the only way to begin to provide comprehensive, integrated public transport. People are already using rudimentary ingtegration like Train from Clonsilla-Pearse, tram to Sandyford, as it can take less time than parking on the M50 all morning. It's not even remotely 'integrated' (15 min walk) but it's still better to many car owners than driving the car.

it isnt a nonsense....my point was that people like their cars and will use them if it is only half way practical to do so......once they have to sit in them to get to a public transport interchange, they will stay in them all the way....therefore public transport only works if it is door to door, and as few people live and work at the two ends of a single bus/train/tram journey, you wont get them out of the cars that easily.....

murphaph

corktina wrote:

it isnt a nonsense....my point was that people like their cars and will use them if it is only half way practical to do so......once they have to sit in them to get to a public transport interchange, they will stay in them all the way....therefore public transport only works if it is door to door, and as few people live and work at the two ends of a single bus/train/tram journey, you wont get them out of the cars that easily.....

So what gets commuters in any city with a decent network requiring multiple changes out of their cars? Your point is a little confused to me however, maybe I'm picking you up wrong but when you say;

corktina wrote:

once they have to sit in [cars] to get to a public transport interchange, they will stay in them all the way*

and then;

corktina wrote:

public transport only works if it is door to door

Do you think the problem is a lack of public transport to one or more interchanges from the origin or is it that you feel people want a zero change public transport journey and won't consider using a network requiring changes to be made?

*I totally disagree with you on this by the way, have you ever seen the cars parked (abandoned!) outside Maynooth, Leixlip, Hazelhatch, Clonsilla, Coolmine etc. railway stations? Same happens on the Luas and DART. Same will happen at Swords on te metro P&R.

corktina

murphaph wrote:

So what gets commuters in any city with a decent network requiring multiple changes out of their cars? Your point is a little confused to me however, maybe I'm picking you up wrong but when you say;

and then;

Do you think the problem is a lack of public transport to one or more interchanges from the origin or is it that you feel people want a zero change public transport journey and won't consider using a network requiring changes to be made?

*I totally disagree with you on this by the way, have you ever seen the cars parked (abandoned!) outside Maynooth, Leixlip, Hazelhatch, Clonsilla, Coolmine etc. railway stations? Same happens on the Luas and DART. Same will happen at Swords on te metro P&R.

yeah you are taking me up wrong....what you want me to do , draw you a diagram? Once they have to sit in them to get to a public transport interchange, they will stay in them ...ie....they are some distance from an interchange and have to sit in to their cars to get there..
.as for the cars parked at the various stations,.I'm not talking about the people ALREADY doing this, i'm talking about the ones who arent.....obvious really isnt it....

murphaph

corktina wrote:

yeah you are taking me up wrong....what you want me to do , draw you a diagram? Once they have to sit in them to get to a public transport interchange, they will stay in them ...ie....they are some distance from an interchange and have to sit in to their cars to get there..
.as for the cars parked at the various stations,.I'm not talking about the people ALREADY doing this, i'm talking about the ones who arent.....obvious really isnt it....

No it's not obvious (or correct) at all. The people who aren't driving to existing interchanges may not do so for numerous reasons. These include but are not limited to-proximity to interchange, availability of parking at interchange, vehicle security while parked, frequency of onward connecting mode (very poor at most suburban rail stations in fact!) and cost of parking. You seem to believe that no matter what improvements are made to public transport (large, high quality P&R sites on the high frequency metro at the M1/M50 for example) will not attract a single user who doesn't already drive to a P&R. That' clearly ridiculous as the provision of the new P&R sites on the Luas system has just recently demonstrated, or do you think these people used to drive to Sandyford and get a bus to town from there? :rolleyes: