Longmile Road to Become One Lane

murphaph

Jeez Louise. Nobody here has claimed that every journey would be better on the bus. Of course not. People can CHOOSE not to live/work close to each other. They can CHOOSE to buy a car and drive to work. These are choices. Neither of them guarantees you roadspace/time. Public transport must be given priority wherever possible to encourage it's use. Simple as that really. You people who believe the car is your divine right to drive should thank the half 500,000+ a day who make journeys on Bus Atha Cliath/Iarnrod Eireann/etc. Imagine if they all drove a car too. How bad do you think your journies would be then?

darkman2

murphaph wrote:

Jeez Louise. Nobody here has claimed that every journey would be better on the bus. Of course not. People can CHOOSE not to live/work close to each other. They can CHOOSE to buy a car and drive to work. These are choices. Neither of them guarantees you roadspace/time. Public transport must be given priority wherever possible to encourage it's use. Simple as that really. You people who believe the car is your divine right to drive should thank the half 500,000+ a day who make journeys on Bus Atha Cliath/Iarnrod Eireann/etc. Imagine if they all drove a car too. How bad do you think your journies would be then?

Yes and imagine if we had proper roads.;)

murphaph

darkman2 wrote:

Yes and imagine if we had proper roads.;)

Like where? Give me an example of a city in Europe that has no gridlock because of it's excellent road inrastructure.

darkman2

murphaph wrote:

Like where? Give me an example of a city in Europe that has no gridlock because of it's excellent road inrastructure.

Give me an example of any country in Europe that has a proper motorway network other then Germany - none:cool:

murphaph

darkman2 wrote:

Give me an example of any country in Europe that has a proper motorway network other then Germany - none:cool:

You're trolling now. You are unable to answer the question because you know full well the cities in Europe with minor traffic problems are in that situation because they have invested heavily in public transport, not because they invested in roads.

You're diversionary tactics fail anyway, because Germany isn't the only country with a comprehensive motorway network. Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland all have excellent motorways. Even the UK has an excellent network by our standards, but all these countries (including Germany) exhibit gridlock from time to time. Proving, if proof were needed that building roads cannot eliminate traffic jams.

These countries avoid grinding to a halt because they have excellent public transport, not because they have excellent roads. The old centre of Munich for example has relatively freeflowing traffic because only an idiot would opt for the car over their public transport network, yet head north on the A9 motorway (supposedly freeflowing) and you'll meet major traffic jams.

Idleater

darkman2 wrote:

Give me an example of any country in Europe that has a proper motorway network other then Germany - none:cool:

The Netherlands for its size has an extremely good motorway network, Belgium too. I think Letztebourg is catered for too - given its size. Italy, Austria, France are excelent. The latter two of these I know have high tolls for using the motorways... That is the list Ive driven on (and also Germany) and I would like to tell you that none of the above list of countries is without their Gridlock and traffic jams.

The Netherlands for one has an excelent integrated public transport network, yet there are Queues and Queues on the motorways at rush hour. I don't know what this exactly proves other than having "good" roads does nothing to alleviate traffic congestion.

Like Murphaph said, this argument is all about CHOICES. You live by the sword you die by the sword so to speak.

Kaiser2000 - did you consider cycling or a moped/motorbike? I commute 32km in 35-40 mins on the motorbike. Leave at 0815 arrive 0850. M50 all the way..... Bless your cages...

L.

Alun

darkman2 wrote:

Give me an example of any country in Europe that has a proper motorway network other then Germany - none:cool:

Now you're just being silly. There are plenty of European countries with extensive motorway networks, and all of them, yes even including Germany, experience gridlock at peak times too ... believe me, I speak from experience.

The idea that pervades boards.ie that everyone in Germany floats along on uncongested autobahns in 7-series BMW's and E-class Merc's at 200km/h all the day, every day, is just pure bunkum I'm afraid. Try driving home around the Ruhrgebiet at going home time, or undertake a journey to the Alps when the schools are just out for summer, and you'll soon change your mind.

I lived in the Netherlands for 13 years and the trafic jams at peak times were absolutely horrendous. On the radio, they didn't even bother reporting the ones under 10km in length! And that's in a country with an excellent but overfull public transport system.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

darkman2 wrote:

Give me an example of any country in Europe that has a proper motorway network other then Germany - none:cool:

...Norway... Sweden... Denmark.... (You can now drive direct from Sweden to Germnay) ....

The problem is arrogance: I pay tax so Is hould be able to drive whenever I want.

You can. You just can't do it quickly. And if you belive you should be, fine. But it's a point you need to take up with your fellow motorists...

darkman2

murphaph wrote:

You're trolling now. You are unable to answer the question because you know full well the cities in Europe with minor traffic problems are in that situation because they have invested heavily in public transport, not because they invested in roads.

You're diversionary tactics fail anyway, because Germany isn't the only country with a comprehensive motorway network. Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland all have excellent motorways. Even the UK has an excellent network by our standards, but all these countries (including Germany) exhibit gridlock from time to time. Proving, if proof were needed that building roads cannot eliminate traffic jams.

These countries avoid grinding to a halt because they have excellent public transport, not because they have excellent roads. The old centre of Munich for example has relatively freeflowing traffic because only an idiot would opt for the car over their public transport network, yet head north on the A9 motorway (supposedly freeflowing) and you'll meet major traffic jams.

European standards of motorway construction are woeful. Compared to the US for example or the Far East. In countries like Dubai and Saudi Arabia it is far superior. The UK has a half built motorway network with highly questionable juction designs, much like ours and like ours they are simply not big enough. France has an ok motorway network ridden with tolls whilst Switzerland, Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands do not (from my experience) have adequate capacity. Once again they are too small mainly because the green lobby have got a look in. Build metro, light rail etc however also make the roads big enough to take a high level of capacity. We are only a small country and tbh we should not be finding it this difficult to quell traffic congestion if an intelligent approach was taken in the planning and construction of our roads.

paulm17781

Are you insinuating that the likes of California, New York, any US city and any Japanese city does not suffer gridlock?

_Kaiser_

nereid wrote:

Kaiser2000 - did you consider cycling or a moped/motorbike? I commute 32km in 35-40 mins on the motorbike. Leave at 0815 arrive 0850. M50 all the way..... Bless your cages...
L.

Nope, cycling to Blanch from Coolock would be a nightmare with the state of some of the (back)roads between these 2 points, not to mention the way I'd see buses (and yes, cars too) squeezing them off the roads sometimes. Similarly, I wouldn't have wanted a motorbike either.. I just don't trust the things -I'd rather the extra protection and safety of a car.

But ok, here's another example - Blanch to Navan:
- Walk to bus stop @ about 7:30 (7 mins)
- Get 39 to Blanch Village/Navan Road.. 10/15 mins in the morning (+ waiting time of course!)
- Walk from the Village to the BE stop just beyond the Blanchardstown Village roundabout (7 mins)
- Wait on BE Route 109 (because you can never exactly tell when it'll show, you need to be there about 15 min after it leaves Busaras)
- Blanch to Navan (with "diversion" via Clonee and Dunboyne) - 45 mins(ish)
- Walk from Navan bus stop to the office (10 mins)

Total time: 70-90 mins approximately

Via Car:
- leave Blanch @ 8am.. to the office in Navan (via N3) - 35/45 mins maximum.

... my point here is that DB/BE are not viable alternatives I think for a lot more people in this city than those that who say public transport is The Way would have us believe. Again I refer to Fenris's post which sums it up in 2 lines:

Fenris wrote:

Maybe you do not live and work along a direct line into the city centre?
Maybe your work takes you to customers outside the city centre (try getting to city west from Dun L. in less than half a working day)?

If you fall into either of those 2 catagories then a car IS the only viable option. Also note that a lot of employers ask/prefer that you have your own transport (this may or may not be explicitly stated but it is in their minds).

markf909

darkman2 wrote:

European standards of motorway construction are woeful. Compared to the US for example or the Far East.

Now you are really showing your lack of knowledge:D

In New York, try moving on the Brooklyn Queens Express Way at any time during the day, never mind the rush hours. Similar for the 405 in LA, its about 6 lanes wide in both directions and well built. Its the most congested road in the world. Tokyo barely has a motorway penetrating the city, everyone uses the public transit there and the congestion is doesnt even come close to that of LA. These are examples from cities I have personally visited. This notion of "good roads alone" that you claim are the solution is nonsense IMHO. We need top class public transit and decent road infrastructure.

daymobrew

Kaiser2000 wrote:

... my point here is that DB/BE are not viable alternatives I think for a lot more people in this city than those that who say public transport is The Way would have us believe. Again I refer to Fenris's post which sums it up in 2 lines:

Fenris wrote:

Maybe you do not live and work along a direct line into the city centre?
Maybe your work takes you to customers outside the city centre (try getting to city west from Dun L. in less than half a working day)?

If you fall into either of those 2 catagories then a car IS the only viable option.

murphaph agrees that public transport isn't for everyone. Maybe some people who work in the city centre will reply and say why they choose to drive to their office!

Comments about rain are weak. When people who use rain as an excuse to cycle (where you would be exposed for the entire journey, unlike bus/train users who are only exposed while waiting at the stop) it is pointed out that the likelihood of being caught in the rain is very low. I cycle and it's extremely infrequent. There might be showers during the day which might distort one's impression but I am surprised how often I am not caught in the rain during my 80 mins of cycling (40 each way).

Another aspect that no one has mentioned is working from home. I do so at least once a week. My employer is progressive and I have proved that I am honest enough to do my work while out of the office. With my 80 mins of commuting eliminated, I generally end up working that time.
Other employers should realise the benefits of this.

superdog

darkman2 wrote:

European standards of motorway construction are woeful. Compared to the US for example or the Far East. In countries like Dubai and Saudi Arabia it is far superior.

I was in Dubai last week and the congestion is horrendous!
Takes 45mins to an hour to go 5 or 6k.

they're building a metro there now which is due open in 2009 - hurrah!!

Victor

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

darkman2 wrote:

Give me an example of any country in Europe that has a proper motorway network other then Germany - none:cool:

...Norway... Sweden... Denmark....

Of these, only Denmark is well covered by motorways, the other two have relatively limited systems, confined to the main urban and inter-urban routes.

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

(You can now drive direct from Sweden to Germnay) ....

No, you have to go through Denmark.

darkman2 wrote:

Build metro, light rail etc however also make the roads big enough to take a high level of capacity. We are only a small country and tbh we should not be finding it this difficult to quell traffic congestion if an intelligent approach was taken in the planning and construction of our roads.

Traffic expands to occupy available capacity. The intelligent approach is to provide public transport.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Victor wrote:

Of these, only Denmark is well covered by motorways, the other two have relatively limited systems, confined to the main urban and inter-urban routes.
No, you have to go through Denmark.

Traffic expands to occupy available capacity. The intelligent approach is to provide public transport.

I meant via Denmark (as opposed to via Poland and various Baltic States)!!

Sweden seemed to be well covered when I was there. Admittedly, I only saw the southern part of it. And I've never seen as many clean sities and towns and as many bikes as I did in Scandanavia. Perhaps there's a link...?

Victor

You can get maps at www.viamichelin.com

Metrobest

nereid wrote:

The Netherlands for one has an excelent integrated public transport network, yet there are Queues and Queues on the motorways at rush hour. I don't know what this exactly proves other than having "good" roads does nothing to alleviate traffic congestion.

Like Murphaph said, this argument is all about CHOICES. You live by the sword you die by the sword so to speak.
L.

The problem in the Netherlands is population density in the city ring and a significant minority of attitudes similar to Kaiser and Darkman's. Plus the motorways there are not tolled. The drive from Amsterdam to Amersfoort in the rush hour was hell, I remember.

The problem with Dublin's street layout is that it just wasn't designed for the levels of congestion it now handles. To change this, you would have to design the city as an LA-style doughnut. Several road tunnels would criss-cross under the city centre, while the M50 would have to be extended to 12 lanes. The M1, M2, M3, M4, M7, M9 and M11 would all have tunnel portals leading into the city centre and these roads would also have to have extra lanes. Massive underground carparks would have to be built to accomodate all the extra cars.

The cost would be astronomical - "road tax" would have to be quadrupled or more to fund it. No further investment would be made in public transport.

In this scenario, massive numbers of public transport users would switch to cars. Buses would be then used by only the poorest of the poor - immigrants, those on social welfare.

We would become a society controlled by the car.

The A&E crises would worsen as people spend more time in their cars and less time walking. Fat people would waddle into hospital with all sorts of health problems. Pollution would rise sharply: in summer motorists would be advised not to open their windows due to car pollution in the tunnels.

None of this is exaggerated or unlikely to happen in Dublin. It has happened in Sydney. Here, the recent fuel price increases are seen as an assault on motorists' freedoms. This in a country with one of the lowest fuel prices in the world. Sydney is utterly car dependent.

There are motorway tunnels in outer Sydney commuterville that car parks in the rush hour making the M50 look like an Autobahn! One tunnel handles 100,000 vehicles daily and motorists are not allowed to open their windows because of health risks. There are tunnels everywhere, city "streets" with 8 lanes of traffic, minimal green man time at pedestrian junctions. Public transport consists of shambolic jam-packed commuter trains serving outlying low-rise suburbs.

It's a city planned around the "freedom" of the car - and it shows. But such planning can never work in a populated city environment. Unfortuntately the likes of Darkman and Kaiser will continue loading up their tanks with overpriced petrol while the car manufacturers and oil barons sit in their 40th floor offices, dreaming up the next advertising campaign based on the great open road.

murphaph

Not to mention increased road traffic accidents! A nightmare scenario that we can avoid so long as these 'car is king' attitudes disappear.

darkman2

'To change this, you would have to design the city as an LA-style doughnut. Several road tunnels would criss-cross under the city centre, while the M50 would have to be extended to 12 lanes. The M1, M2, M3, M4, M7, M9 and M11 would all have tunnel portals leading into the city centre and these roads would also have to have extra lanes. Massive underground carparks would have to be built to accomodate all the extra cars.'

:eek: What a great idea:D

mackerski

Metrobest wrote:

making the M50 look like an Autobahn!

The M50 is an Autobahn.

Dermot

D'Peoples Voice

My belief to putting a bus lane on any road is,
it's fine if the road is only busy at rush-hour!
I'll explain my reasoning,
if a road is busy constantly between 6am and say 9pm,
then you can say that it's used by freight users and not just commuters,
hence a bus lane at the expense of other users is inappropriate.
On the other hand, if a road is predominantly busy at rush-hour,
and reasonably quiet outside of that,
then it stands to reason that the MAJORITY of users are commuters
who are simply dumping their car in work for about 7 hours a day,
in which case the only time they need their car is for a brief time in the morning and evening.
Providing road space for such people is not an efficient use of resources,
public transport should be given priority over these users,
BECAUSE IT IS NOT ESSENTIAL FOR THEM TO HAVE THEIR CAR AT WORK!
By forcing more of these people to use public transport, you gradually move towards one lane for public transport carrying people to work,
and another lane for those people who need their car at work,
and both being able to co-exist.
While house affordability has played a part in forcing more people to commute, effective public planning should be asking how people in new developments are expected to get to work before planning permission is approved, you only have to look at the new development opposite Centra opening out onto the Wycham Bypass, between dundrum shopping centre and the M50, especially given that there are two roundabouts not too far from the opening, for examples of bad planning.
Finally, bus lanes have to be installed before people will be willing to switch, when they do, demand for buses will increase, and the Dublin Transportation Office should grant the relevant bus company permission to increase the supply of buses on the route to meet demand.
It would be crazy to introduce more buses before there are bus lanes, because "in general" demand will not grow until the bus lanes are in.
Therefore Long Mile road need bus lanes, yes it does,
but the problem really is when the traffic gets to Crumlin village,
so not sure if bus lanes ONLY on the long mile road will attract greater demand for buses.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

darkman2 wrote:

'To change this, you would have to design the city as an LA-style doughnut. Several road tunnels would criss-cross under the city centre, while the M50 would have to be extended to 12 lanes. The M1, M2, M3, M4, M7, M9 and M11 would all have tunnel portals leading into the city centre and these roads would also have to have extra lanes. Massive underground carparks would have to be built to accomodate all the extra cars.'

:eek: What a great idea:D

Well, I do believe you've finally seen sense! This IS progress...!!

_Kaiser_

Metrobest wrote:

It's a city planned around the "freedom" of the car - and it shows. But such planning can never work in a populated city environment. Unfortuntately the likes of Darkman and Kaiser will continue loading up their tanks with overpriced petrol while the car manufacturers and oil barons sit in their 40th floor offices, dreaming up the next advertising campaign based on the great open road.

I actually lived in Holland (Alkmaar and Amsterdam) for 3 years when I was younger (around the mid-80s) and public transport there was/is great!
- integrated ticketing
- frequent and reliable services
- timetables on bus stops for that stop, not the terminus however many miles away.
- routes that don't require you to pass through point C (City Centre) simply to get from A to B.
.. and so on.

But to suggest that Dublin Bus/CIE is even close to this is wisful thinking. :rolleyes: If this changes, and I agree that it is the only way forward, then I'd be more than happy to consider alternatives, but having spent approximately 18 years since we came back using CIE's "services" (the 17A for example, is still as unreliable today as it was when I was gong to school), is it any wonder that there's so many cars on our roads??

Give us a proper solution and then talk, but don't criticize car owners for taking the only realistic option available to them for now/forseeable future.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Kaiser2000 wrote:

Give us a proper solution and then talk, but don't criticize car owners for taking the only realistic option available to them for now/forseeable future.

Mostly, I agree with what you say. But the problem isn't in drivers driving because there's no public transport - it's drivers driving everywhere full stop. People who live beside a Luas/Dart stop and still drive. Even on a sunny day. And then moan because there's too much traffic on the road because someone's decided to prioritise the buses.

A lot of drivers are lazy. I'm told you ge that way when you get a car. There are a lot of them who would still drive everywhere if we had good public transport on the basis that they pay for it.

darkman2

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

Well, I do believe you've finally seen sense! This IS progress...!!

Yes I am, building 12 lane highways in tunnels - brilliant idea. The M50 should be 5 lanes each way also with two weaving lanes between each junction and an elevated highway in the median for traffic to and from the airport.

murphaph

darkman2 wrote:

Yes I am, building 12 lane highways in tunnels - brilliant idea. The M50 should be 5 lanes each way also with two weaving lanes between each junction and an elevated highway in the median for traffic to and from the airport.

How would airport bound traffic reach this elevated roadway without ramps (thereby just making it a part of the rest of the road!), or would it connect directly to your driveway?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

darkman2 wrote:

Yes I am, building 12 lane highways in tunnels - brilliant idea. The M50 should be 5 lanes each way also with two weaving lanes between each junction and an elevated highway in the median for traffic to and from the airport.

**** it... let's just go for Start Trek-style matter trasnporters!