Grade Seperation inside the M50 Dublin area

veryangryman

Palmerstown, Ballyfermot, Inchicore, Longmile, most of Stillorgan Road etc.

Alot of traffic bottlenecks in these places. However, the structure of the NRA for N roads and council for R roads, coupled with the downgrading of most roads inside M50 has made upgrades neigh on impossible.

Surely with the demand there (Over 30,000 vehicles daily go through each zone), it would make some sense to upgrade. Palmerstown especially, given that there is another Dual Carriageway closer to the city. Get the traffic to slow down after Inchicore if they are Quays-bound. Such an upgrade could even cover N7-City traffic as they could get in via M50->R148

cgcsb

Capacity upgrades for commuter roads into the city are a thing of the past. Dublin City Council and the NTA don't want more cars in the City, they want less.

L1011

Palmerston makes the most sense by far as there's then a few KM of grade separated DC after it - and when the N roads still ran to the city centre the NRA had already done your suggestion and sent N7 traffic N4-M50 on signs. The N7 was detrunked after the Red Cow well before the other roads were.

There's probably just about enough land around the Kennelsfort Road junction to do a Newcastle Road on in it and maybe have a collector road to remove the lights at Applegreen (I actually wrote "Shell" there, talking about new road planning must have sent me back to 2005!)


Longmile would have to be seen as the next priority but it'll be incredibly complicated whereas Palmerston would just be expensive.

veryangryman

cgcsb wrote: »

Capacity upgrades for commuter roads into the city are a thing of the past. Dublin City Council and the NTA don't want more cars in the City, they want less.

The cars are coming towards the city regardless of what they do (as we all witness when going that direction). They're not going to dissapear. Even a park and ride somewhere close to Inchicore or Heuston (underground) could be used to keep the quays traffic down. M50 junction is too far out to be considered.

cgcsb

veryangryman wrote: »

The cars are coming towards the city regardless of what they do (as we all witness when going that direction). They're not going to dissapear. Even a park and ride somewhere close to Inchicore or Heuston (underground) could be used to keep the quays traffic down. M50 junction is too far out to be considered.

Why is the M50 too far for a park and ride? There's one out near Dunboyne.

veryangryman

cgcsb wrote: »

Why is the M50 too far for a park and ride? There's one out near Dunboyne.

There are no train or Luas services anywhere near for someone to get off - not yet anyway. Of course yes there are buses, but its a bit awkward around Liffey Valley to do similar to Dunboyne from there.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

Capacity upgrades for commuter roads into the city are a thing of the past. Dublin City Council and the NTA don't want more cars in the City, they want less.

...well who cares what the NTA or DCC want - this country is supposed to be a democracy! In any case, grade separation is the right tool for certain objectives - be it enhancing bus journeys, getting traffic out of the way of major pedestrian movements/areas, enhancing routes for shoppers to access the city centre, motor traffic requiring efficient access to the M50 etc. We seriously need to get real about not having any grade separation in our towns/cities. They have it in other countries, so what makes us any different?

Middle Man

veryangryman wrote: »

The cars are coming towards the city regardless of what they do (as we all witness when going that direction). They're not going to dissapear. Even a park and ride somewhere close to Inchicore or Heuston (underground) could be used to keep the quays traffic down. M50 junction is too far out to be considered.

+1

In addition, what the powers that be need to realize is that they should put their money where their mouths are and invest! The level of rail provision in Dublin is a joke (no Luas on the Northside for example) - also, the NTA should cut the traffic calming and cycling BS and put some of that money into maintaining our existing railways (at least it would be a start) - obviously, the recent cutbacks on public transport are having an impact on reliability - numerous signal faults on the DART line. Obviously, if the rail system become unreliable, that will mean more cars on the road.

As per usual, people driving their cars (and paying through the nose by doing so) are blamed for everything. This country needs a major political overhaul!

Carawaystick

The first step in speeding up public transit between the N4 and the city centre would be to widen the bus lanes on the Chapelizod bypass, so busses and coaches aren't blocked by vehicles and vegetation encroaching into the bus lane.
Followed by making a full bus lane through the left on merge as you leave Dublin city area

Chris_5339762

I don't think this will ever happen for those reasons.

However, I think the one obvious one would be the N4 one... the Chapelizod bypass is the highest capacity route into the city so it is a tempting idea. Or, since you don't want cars going INTO the city, build a two lane bridge with bus lane and dedicate all lanes to OUTBOUND traffic only.

It seems such a shame outbound that those lights are there.

cgcsb

Middle Man wrote: »

...well who cares what the NTA or DCC want - this country is supposed to be a democracy!

<br />
In this case, no we are not a democracy. We can't really have referendums on road design decisions. That is why we have professionals to deal with it. Besides if you were to take a majority poll asking Dubliners if they want more cars, congestion, pollution and danger to pedestrians/cyclists, they would probably vote no. <br />
<br />

Middle Man wrote: »

In any case, grade separation is the right tool for certain objectives - be it enhancing bus journeys, getting traffic out of the way of major pedestrian movements/areas, enhancing routes for shoppers to access the city centre, motor traffic requiring efficient access to the M50 etc. We seriously need to get real about not having any grade separation in our towns/cities. They have it in other countries, so what makes us any different?

<br />
<br />
Most west European states have high capacity road junctions close to their central areas because in the 60s and 70s their states were awash with post war American infrastructure funding and the American model was one of consumption and car dependence. Now much of Europe is scarred as a result. Look at the Roman viaducts that were destroyed by autostrade. Look closer to home even, Lane is a town destroyed by road engineers. Even look at Dublin's Christchurch/Patrick St area, destroyed in an attempt to plough a dual carriageway through.

cgcsb

Carawaystick wrote: »

The first step in speeding up public transit between the N4 and the city centre would be to widen the bus lanes on the Chapelizod bypass, so busses and coaches aren't blocked by vehicles and vegetation encroaching into the bus lane.
Followed by making a full bus lane through the left on merge as you leave Dublin city area

Agreed Dublin Bus and DCC have the nerve to call that thing a 'QBC' buses can't even fit in it.

Middle Man

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

I don't think this will ever happen for those reasons.

However, I think the one obvious one would be the N4 one... the Chapelizod bypass is the highest capacity route into the city so it is a tempting idea. Or, since you don't want cars going INTO the city, build a two lane bridge with bus lane and dedicate all lanes to OUTBOUND traffic only.

It seems such a shame outbound that those lights are there.

...although I did have ideas about prioritising outbound traffic in the city so that the centre would empty faster and fill more slowly - however, that wouldn't work for commuting traffic - for that, we need Luas and heavy rail along with P+R sites. However, outbound bias policy could help normal day traffic as well as lessening pedestrian barriers if grade separation is used - one major stream of traffic would be out of the way at any such reconfigured junction.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

<br />
In this case, no we are not a democracy. We can't really have referendums on road design decisions. That is why we have professionals to deal with it. Besides if you were to take a majority poll asking Dubliners if they want more cars, congestion, pollution and danger to pedestrians/cyclists, they would probably vote no. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Most west European states have high capacity road junctions close to their central areas because in the 60s and 70s their states were awash with post war American infrastructure funding and the American model was one of consumption and car dependence. Now much of Europe is scarred as a result. Look at the Roman viaducts that were destroyed by autostrade. Look closer to home even, Lane is a town destroyed by road engineers. Even look at Dublin's Christchurch/Patrick St area, destroyed in an attempt to plough a dual carriageway through.

It is fair to say that in London, they're reconfiguring traffic junctions to make them more pedestrian friendly, but seem in no hurry to get rid of grade separation. One such junction has been reduced at surface level with greatly enhanced pedestrian facilities, but the underpass remains - as a pedestrian, it makes sense - why hinder my progress on foot by putting a major traffic artery in my way. Just look a Ballymun now that all grade separation is eliminated - is that what you want? The pedestrians don't seem too happy having to fight across multiple lanes of traffic.

cgcsb

Middle Man wrote: »

It is fair to say that in London, they're reconfiguring traffic junctions to make them more pedestrian friendly, but seem in no hurry to get rid of grade separation.

I wouldn't expect that they are in a hurry to undo what has been done. I can't speak for London because I'm unfamiliar. Taking Belfast's westlink as an example. The destruction inflicted upon the communities of West Belfast to accommodate that is done and cannot be undone. There'd be no point in removing road capacity to help protect a community that no longer exists.

Middle Man wrote: »

Just look a Ballymun now that all grade separation is eliminated - is that what you want? The pedestrians don't seem too happy having to fight across multiple lanes of traffic.

Again I'm not talking about undoing anything that's already been done. io find Ballymun is much more pleasant and pedestrian friendly now. I don't know why you would think pedestrians are unhappy with the new layout.

Chris_5339762

Middle Man wrote: »

It is fair to say that in London, they're reconfiguring traffic junctions to make them more pedestrian friendly, but seem in no hurry to get rid of grade separation.

They're in no hurry to get rid of it, granted. But they simply wouldn't build any more grade separation at all. Think Hogarth, that flyover is temporary 30 years after they originally talked about proper grade separation.

veryangryman

cgcsb wrote: »

I don't know why you would think pedestrians are unhappy with the new layout.

Crossing Dual roads as a pedestrian is a pain in the arss. Even the ones with islands - you feel like a tool (not to mention unsafe) waiting in the centre if stuck with a red.

monument

Middle Man wrote: »

It is fair to say that in London, they're reconfiguring traffic junctions to make them more pedestrian friendly, but seem in no hurry to get rid of grade separation. One such junction has been reduced at surface level with greatly enhanced pedestrian facilities, but the underpass remains - as a pedestrian, it makes sense - why hinder my progress on foot by putting a major traffic artery in my way. Just look a Ballymun now that all grade separation is eliminated - is that what you want? The pedestrians don't seem too happy having to fight across multiple lanes of traffic.

Underpasses are being removed in at least one or two Transport for London schemes I've seen lately.

I agree they have their place. But the Ballymun redesign is a massive improvement for that area as the underpasses were far too problamitic. Pedestrians are generally are only crossing two lanes at a time and three in some locations. That's no different to a lot of Dublin or any similar city.

veryangryman

monument wrote: »

Underpasses are being removed in at least one or two Transport for London schemes I've seen lately.

Not sure why? Guess its pretty inner city. In the case of Palmerstown, I cant imagine the anti social problems occurring to the same degree there

monument

veryangryman wrote: »

Crossing Dual roads as a pedestrian is a pain in the arss. Even the ones with islands - you feel like a tool (not to mention unsafe) waiting in the centre if stuck with a red.

Agreed -- using the guidance in the Manual for Urban Roads and Streets re not having staggered crosssings or guardrails would greatly improve things for pedestrians.

veryangryman wrote: »

Not sure why? Guess its pretty inner city. In the case of Palmerstown, I cant imagine the anti social problems occurring to the same degree there

Drawing on latest scheer I seen when as far as saying something like: "dreadful underpass removed"

UK and Ireland have a poor record at designing underpasses -- both the design of the underpass and getting them in the right location etc.

cgcsb

veryangryman wrote: »

Crossing Dual roads as a pedestrian is a pain in the arss. Even the ones with islands - you feel like a tool (not to mention unsafe) waiting in the centre if stuck with a red.

I have never felt like a tool waiting at a pedestrian crossing, nor could I imagine why one would. each to their own.

highdef

veryangryman wrote: »

Crossing Dual roads as a pedestrian is a pain in the arss. Even the ones with islands - you feel like a tool (not to mention unsafe) waiting in the centre if stuck with a red.

Why on earth would you feel like a tool crossing the road the way you are supposed to do so?

veryangryman

highdef wrote: »

Why on earth would you feel like a tool crossing the road the way you are supposed to do so?

When you are stuck on the traffic islands you get the following feelings. Lot of traffic around you, big city, the human complex that "everyone's looking at me", the feeling of being stranded with nowhere to go (till the green). Or to sum it up, feeling like a tool.

But of course, you cannot relate.

cgcsb

highdef wrote: »

Why on earth would you feel like a tool crossing the road the way you are supposed to do so?

Because there's no dingy underpass apparently.

D.L.R.

Don't know of any other major city with no national roads in its centre. Its a bit hair brained to me, and not sure it will benefit the city in the long term not to leave a few major N arteries, that are treated as such.

veryangryman

cgcsb wrote: »

Because there's no dingy underpass apparently.

People (pedestrians, drivers, cyclists etc) all like to be making progress. Red lights impede that.

monument

D.L.R. wrote: »

Don't know of any other major city with no national roads in its centre. Its a bit hair brained to me, and not sure it will benefit the city in the long term not to leave a few major N arteries, that are treated as such.

What cities are you thinking about which still have loads of N roads in the centre?

veryangryman

monument wrote: »

What cities are you thinking about which still have loads of N roads in the centre?

London for 1

https://www.google.ie/maps/place/London,+UK/@51.5286416,-0.1015987,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x47d8a00baf21de75:0x52963a5addd52a99

D.L.R.

monument wrote: »

What cities are you thinking about which still have loads of N roads in the centre?

Most cities.

I'm not sure how Dublin having an orbital motorway suddenly negates the need for national routes into the centre.

Other than to save money on maintenance.

Which is worrying...

cgcsb

D.L.R. wrote: »

Most cities.

I'm not sure how Dublin having an orbital motorway suddenly negates the need for national routes into the centre.

Other than to save money on maintenance.

Which is worrying...

Declassifying n roads to r roads effectively gives the local authority control over the road instead of the nra. The net result is the road space can be changed into enhanced pedestrian and cycling facilities and/or enhanced public transport facilities. Look at the quays which have effectively been turned into a dual carriageway by mid 20th century car fetishism.

The declassification means that the quays can be completely revamped into a pedestrian and cyclist space with plenty of space for through bus services. This would not be possible if it had remained an n road.

BastardFace

veryangryman wrote: »

When you are stuck on the traffic islands you get the following feelings. Lot of traffic around you, big city, the human complex that "everyone's looking at me", the feeling of being stranded with nowhere to go (till the green). Or to sum it up, feeling like a tool.

But of course, you cannot relate.

Sounds more like you have insecurity issues!

Carawaystick

Bordeaux, Milan, Toulouse. no National roads in the city.

cgcsb

veryangryman wrote: »

When you are stuck on the traffic islands you get the following feelings. Lot of traffic around you, big city, the human complex that "everyone's looking at me", the feeling of being stranded with nowhere to go (till the green). Or to sum it up, feeling like a tool.

But of course, you cannot relate.

I'd recommend councelling. The sudden onset of insecurity or self consciousness for no particular reason is something that a small number of people suffer from. Alas road design can't really be considered as a part solution for this. The answer is talking to someone.

veryangryman

cgcsb wrote: »

Declassifying n roads to r roads effectively gives the local authority control over the road instead of the nra. The net result is the road space can be changed into enhanced pedestrian and cycling facilities and/or enhanced public transport facilities. Look at the quays which have effectively been turned into a dual carriageway by mid 20th century car fetishism.

The declassification means that the quays can be completely revamped into a pedestrian and cyclist space with plenty of space for through bus services. This would not be possible if it had remained an n road.

Nope.

N77 has a cycle lane for a long long length. Still an N road. Many other examples (N59 outside Westport another that jumps out to me)

It is little more than a cop out that roads are downgraded. Its a huge middle finger to Motorists and pedestrians alike and ends up costing more in delays than it would do to take the finger out and build the over/under passes.

Middle Man

veryangryman wrote: »

Nope.

N77 has a cycle lane for a long long length. Still an N road. Many other examples (N59 outside Westport another that jumps out to me)

It is little more than a cop out that roads are downgraded. Its a huge middle finger to Motorists and pedestrians alike and ends up costing more in delays than it would do to take the finger out and build the over/under passes.

+1

You said it mate - the problem with the powers that be is laziness - in addition, they couldn't be bothered with the work involved in building a quality transit system or even providing reasonable roads and footpaths in urban areas (how many bloody dishes have I to encounter) - they'd rather cop out, blame us for driving our cars and take the cheap option of trying to force motorists off the road - like come on, cycling is the least popular mode of transport, but I guess it's also the cheapest to invest in and makes the government look as if they are doing something.

Let's get RAIL!!!

cgcsb

veryangryman wrote: »

Nope.

N77 has a cycle lane for a long long length. Still an N road. Many other examples (N59 outside Westport another that jumps out to me)

It is little more than a cop out that roads are downgraded.

Unsure what you mean, national secondary roads having bike lanes doesn't really alter the fact that they are national through roads, where as Dublin's quay side will now transition from being a national road into a public space with some road allocation, i.e. not a national road.

veryangryman wrote: »

Its a huge middle finger to Motorists and pedestrians alike and ends up costing more in delays than it would do to take the finger out and build the over/under passes.

Incorrect. Pedestrians will only experience benefits from reducing road capacity on the quays, motorists are to be discouraged from accessing central areas by car in general.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

Unsure what you mean, national secondary roads having bike lanes doesn't really alter the fact that they are national through roads, where as Dublin's quay side will now transition from being a national road into a public space with some road allocation, i.e. not a national road.



Incorrect. Pedestrians will only experience benefits from reducing road capacity on the quays, motorists are to be discouraged from accessing central areas by car in general.

So speeding cyclists will benefit pedestrians - I'm a long distance pedestrian - I think not!

BTW, Keep off our footpaths!

veryangryman

cgcsb wrote: »

Unsure what you mean, national secondary roads having bike lanes doesn't really alter the fact that they are national through roads, where as Dublin's quay side will now transition from being a national road into a public space with some road allocation, i.e. not a national road.



Incorrect. Pedestrians will only experience benefits from reducing road capacity on the quays, motorists are to be discouraged from accessing central areas by car in general.

Grade seperation should happen further out from the Quays though (Palmerstown my main example). Its a complete no-brainer. The quays are the quays (limited space) so i'll give that much.

I still say though that building underpasses (some of which would double up as Metro/Dart Underground stations) is the way to go.

cgcsb

Middle Man wrote: »

So speeding cyclists will benefit pedestrians - I'm a long distance pedestrian - I think not!

Road space isn't been re-allocated from pedestrians to cyclists, it's being re-allocated from motorists to pedestrians AND cyclists.

cgcsb

veryangryman wrote: »

Grade seperation should happen further out from the Quays though (Palmerstown my main example). Its a complete no-brainer. The quays are the quays (limited space) so i'll give that much.

I still say though that building underpasses (some of which would double up as Metro/Dart Underground stations) is the way to go.

On arterial roads though, you're just creating more capacity for cars heading into the city where there is less and less road capacity and less and less parking. What's the point?

veryangryman

cgcsb wrote: »

On arterial roads though, you're just creating more capacity for cars heading into the city where there is less and less road capacity and less and less parking. What's the point?

Thought i'd mentioned it but... There needs to be access to decent public transport a la park and ride (Luas). Palmerstown does not have such a thing. The area around Heuston does.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

Road space isn't been re-allocated from pedestrians to cyclists, it's being re-allocated from motorists to pedestrians AND cyclists.

Regarding streets of major pedestrian activity, pedestrians should get all the extra space.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

On arterial roads though, you're just creating more capacity for cars heading into the city where there is less and less road capacity and less and less parking. What's the point?

Cars still have their rightful place, albeit not a dominant place. Public transport and pedestrians should be first priority within the M50, but general motor traffic that has business during the day in the city should be reasonably provided for.

cgcsb

veryangryman wrote: »

Thought i'd mentioned it but... There needs to be access to decent public transport a la park and ride (Luas). Palmerstown does not have such a thing. The area around Heuston does.

That's a good point, so surely the optimum solution is more park and rides out of town? which would be cheaper and less disruptive than grade separation of existing junctions

cgcsb

Middle Man wrote: »

Cars still have their rightful place, albeit not a dominant place. Public transport and pedestrians should be first priority within the M50, but general motor traffic that has business during the day in the city should be reasonably provided for.

Of course, but maintaining a situation where a dual carriageway has ploughed it's way through our river front is not a reasonable imposition.

cgcsb

Middle Man wrote: »

Regarding streets of major pedestrian activity, pedestrians should get all the extra space.

Why? surely once cars are out of the way, there's plenty of space to accommodate cycling? a two way track takes up less than 4m afterall.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

Why? surely once cars are out of the way, there's plenty of space to accommodate cycling? a two way track takes up less than 4m afterall.

You won't get rid of all the cars out of the city centre for a start - that will never happen. Secondly, take College Green for example - this is a major pedestrian route with four narrow lanes. It may in this case be possible to ban cars entirely on that street, but at least 7.0m will be required for the Luas. With buses running over the tracks, 8.0m would probably be prudent. The existing road is probably only about 12m wide, and if pedestrian provision is to be seriously improved, then the surplus 4m would be required to widen the footpath on the Bank of Ireland side.

Middle Man

cgcsb wrote: »

Of course, but maintaining a situation where a dual carriageway has ploughed it's way through our river front is not a reasonable imposition.

The carriageways can be narrowed to 7.0m (one bus and one general traffic lane) on each side with the surplus space given to pedestrians. Crossing distances would also be vastly improved with no two way roads or cycle ways (under current plans) to confuse pedestrians.

cgcsb

It seems that you've gone on a bit of a crusade against cycling for some reason. No matter there are plans for a two way cycling track on the north quays in a few years, you'll have to just accept it.

L1011

cgcsb wrote: »

It seems that you've gone on a bit of a crusade against cycling for some reason. No matter there are plans for a two way cycling track on the north quays in a few years, you'll have to just accept it.

Rather dictatorial approach there...

Victor

cgcsb wrote: »

I'd recommend councelling. The sudden onset of insecurity or self consciousness for no particular reason is something that a small number of people suffer from. Alas road design can't really be considered as a part solution for this. The answer is talking to someone.

Constructive posts only please

Moderator