Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

M3 & M4 toll up

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Gophur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,921 ✭✭✭Gophur


    markpb wrote: »
    They do of course (I'm from Cavan :)). However, they do not need a motorway unless the traffic levels demand it. You don't build expensive infrastructure just because people want it, you built it if it will be used.

    ......

    That's an antiquated point of view. For once, they built a road in advance of it's use. Look forward, not back, eh?

    The M/N3 now allows for the selling of the NW region and the possible increase in investment in the region, something that suffered for years because of the poor infrastructure.


  • Options
    #33
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,254 ✭✭✭markpb


    Gophur wrote: »
    You're stating a fact, which is true, but superfluous. Who stated such a road had to link two urban areas? The road was to give access to a region, which is has, very successfully.

    _You_ think it's superfluous because you think motorways should be built to appease people, not to carry lots of people.
    The people looking foolish, now, are those who opposed the road and those who said it wasn't needed. For once, some proper planning and foresight was out to good use.

    If the road is so successful, why did the NTA pay the operator over half a million euro to make up for a 3 month loss in 2010? Why did they budget another €5.7m for 2011?
    Gophur wrote: »
    That's an antiquated point of view. For once, they built a road in advance of it's use. Look forward, not back, eh?

    Where should we stop then? I think Belturbet to Ballyconnell needs a motorway, can I have that? I also think that Cavan needs it's own airport (we could use that a selling feature for the county) and it's own TGV link to Dublin Airport and Dublin. They would attract lots of investment surely.


  • Options
    #34
    Gophur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,921 ✭✭✭Gophur


    markpb wrote: »
    _You_ think it's superfluous because you think motorways should be built to appease people, not to carry lots of people.
    .............

    Don't tell me what I "think". Thanks

    markpb wrote: »
    ...........
    If the road is so successful, why has the NTA budgeted €17,000,000 to pay the M3 and M7 consortia this year? People aren't using it.

    ..................

    (I assume you mean the NRA?) As posted previously, that is down to the clowns who "negotiated" the contract. People are using the road.


    markpb wrote: »
    ..............

    Where should we stop then? ........

    Kells, apparently. ('cause it isn't going any further!

    markpb wrote: »
    .................I think Belturbet to Ballyconnell needs a motorway, can I have that? I also think that Cavan needs it's own airport (we could use that a selling feature for the county) and it's own TGV link to Dublin Airport and Dublin. They would attract lots of investment surely.

    The jokes forum is that way
    >


  • Options
    #35
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,254 ✭✭✭markpb


    Gophur wrote: »
    As posted previously, that is down to the clowns who "negotiated" the contract. People are using the road.

    The companies tendering to build it, knew it wouldn't have the volume we wanted it to. They wouldn't operate it if they didn't have that guarantee. What would you have done instead, if no-one wanted to build it without the guarantee?

    Now it turns out that it doesn't have anything like the volume needed. In fact, it was below the minimum only two months after it opened. Who's laughing now? We've committed to paying them for decades because we built a motorway that not enough people are using.


  • Options
    #36
    _Kaiser_
    Registered Users Posts: 28,717 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    markpb wrote: »
    The companies tendering to build it, knew it wouldn't have the volume we wanted it to. They wouldn't operate it if they didn't have that guarantee. What would you have done instead, if no-one wanted to build it without the guarantee?

    Now it turns out that it doesn't have anything like the volume needed. In fact, it was below the minimum only two months after it opened. Who's laughing now? We've committed to paying them for decades because we built a motorway that not enough people are using.

    Not enough people are using it because it costs €5.20 (before the increase) a day to use it - or more if you've to cross the M50 toll - end to end.

    I use it daily. Add in diesel costs and I'm handing over maybe €600 a month. Then add in the extra servicing/wear-and-tear costs that 1000km a week will generate

    As it turns out I'm going to be moving back up shortly anyway (promotion/new job :)) but what I'll save on commuting I'll be paying out in higher rents in Dublin.

    Can't win really :(


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    vetstu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭vetstu


    MYOB wrote: »
    2+1 would have been inadequate and is an inherently unsafe type of road, which is why the NRA no longer builds them

    Also, had we been waiting for the state to publically fund ANY upgrade of the N3, we'd still be waiting.

    Have to agree with this, a 100kmh road with roundabouts every few miles, and junctions coming on at right angles straight into the driving lane, very flawed design from tne start.


  • Options
    #38
    Gophur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,921 ✭✭✭Gophur


    markpb wrote: »
    The companies tendering to build it, knew it wouldn't have the volume we wanted it to. .........

    You are speculating.

    Any private company sitting down to negotiate a contract with the Civil Service knew they could strike a very lucrative deal, by looking at the clowns across the table. We have ended up with a magnificent road, but at a very high cost.

    If you want to blame someone, blame the culture that previous Governments fostered, the culture that signed away our money left right and centre.

    markpb wrote: »
    ............ What would you have done instead, if no-one wanted to build it without the guarantee?.............

    It was nothing to do with me, so your question is hypothetical.

    markpb wrote: »
    .........
    Now it turns out that it doesn't have anything like the volume needed. In fact, it was below the minimum only two months after it opened. Who's laughing now? We've committed to paying them for decades because we built a motorway that not enough people are using.

    The operators are laughing, that's who.

    Intelligent pricing of the road could very much increase the usage and revenue on the road, but, in Ireland, prices only seem to go up.

    It's not as if it's going to be dug up and planted with flowers, anyway. The road is here to stay.


  • Options
    #39
    Gophur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,921 ✭✭✭Gophur


    vetstu wrote: »
    Have to agree with this, a 100kmh road with roundabouts every few miles, and junctions coming on at right angles straight into the driving lane, very flawed design from tne start.

    The Cork Mallow 2+1 is a joke. Traffic builds up on the single carriageways and there's an almighty scramble to overtake when they come upon the dual-carriage section.


  • Options
    #40
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,972 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    vetstu wrote: »
    Have to agree with this, a 100kmh road with roundabouts every few miles, and junctions coming on at right angles straight into the driving lane, very flawed design from tne start.
    My point regarding the 2+1 was that the NRA were only too happy to use them at that time to help relieve traffic pressures. They did not appear to consider them to reduce traffic pressure along the old N3 instead favouring a hugely over budget motorway that goes nowhere (despite what some folk think).


  • Options
    #41
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,972 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Gophur wrote: »
    It was nothing to do with me, so your question is hypothetical.
    ...but mine weren't hypothetical yet you now choose to ignore them!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,835 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    kbannon wrote: »
    My point regarding the 2+1 was that the NRA were only too happy to use them at that time to help relieve traffic pressures. They did not appear to consider them to reduce traffic pressure along the old N3 instead favouring a hugely over budget motorway that goes nowhere (despite what some folk think).

    The NRA were never "only too happy" to use 2+1s. You are aware they never got past pilot stage, right? They would NEVER have committed to 2+1 on a large scale scheme before the pilots ended - which they did, with a decision to never use them for new build N primaries.


  • Options
    #43
    bladespin
    Registered Users Posts: 7,334 ✭✭✭bladespin


    Gophur wrote: »
    Drainage problems? Where?

    Poor response to icing? What do you mean?

    Longer distance? So what? It's an obstacle-free route.

    Travel time is significantly shorter. I don't know what route you're comparing it to, but there's no way on earth anyone who had to travel through Navan and/or Dunshaughlin has had their travel time increased.

    The M3 is one of the great success of the last 20 years. It's a testament to good planning and good construction. It has eased the lives of so many.

    It's just wrong that the users are penalised so much when the likes of the M50 is free for so many every day. (the M50 toll is for the West-link bridge, not the motorway, as such)

    A more reasonable toll for the M3, and in one location only, would have been the fairest solution.

    Drainage is an issue all along the M3 but it's particularly dangerous between the Skryne and Navan exits. There are also very serious issues to be addressed in the build quality with some parts of it, in particular the cast sections which have already had to been refilled.

    AFIK motorways are supposed to be the best kept roads yet they were very slow to respond to icing last November/early December, even the toll booths had visible frost on the road, this shouldn't happen at all IMO, particularly as the weather was as forecast.

    Travel time between Navan and the M50 is the same on the motorway as the old road, you may save 2 minutes on a good day, I've 'clocked' this on multiple occasions, the only time there is a difference is during school times: 8.30ish and 9.30ish. Travel time hasn't increased but it certainly hasn't decreased.

    Personally I see it as a great opportunity wasted, the planning and design are diabolical, around Navan anyway, any time savings are lost with distance folks have to travel to access the damned thing.


  • Options
    #44
    OldmanMondeo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,009 ✭✭✭OldmanMondeo


    Jeez, just saying the tolls went up, not wanting a debate on what roads where and tolled or not...


  • Options
    #45
    MugMugs
    Registered Users Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    M1 is up for bikes..... Was it always 1.80 for cars?

    By the way. I thought the M3 had the best subterranean lake system to counter flooding on our Motorway network?


  • Options
    #46
    bladespin
    Registered Users Posts: 7,334 ✭✭✭bladespin


    MugMugs wrote: »
    By the way. I thought the M3 had the best subterranean lake system to counter flooding on our Motorway network?

    Unfortunately the architects misread it and left out the 'sub' part. :D


  • Options
    #47
    Stinicker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,102 ✭✭✭Stinicker


    I'll be driving through the Shannon Tunnel and the M6 Toll near at Ballinasloe on Thursday, what is the toll on them now, is is €1.90 or €1.80 as I like to have the change ready and go to the automated barrier rather than to the cashier person.


  • Options
    #48
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,835 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Stinicker wrote: »
    I'll be driving through the Shannon Tunnel and the M6 Toll near at Ballinasloe on Thursday, what is the toll on them now, is is €1.90 or €1.80 as I like to have the change ready and go to the automated barrier rather than to the cashier person.

    Car tolls are the same as they were:

    http://www.limericktunnel.com/Toll_Rates.htm

    http://www.n6concession.com/?page_id=27


  • Options
    #49
    Stinicker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,102 ✭✭✭Stinicker


    MYOB wrote: »
    Car tolls are the same as they were:

    http://www.limericktunnel.com/Toll_Rates.htm

    http://www.n6concession.com/?page_id=27

    Thanks for the info, I thought it might be a blanket raise across all toll roads nationwide!


Advertisement