Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] 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 [email protected]

Knocklyon / Orlagh Roundabout Redesign, South Dublin

  • 11-12-2018 3:38pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭


    Anyone living out this way going through this roundabout on a daily basis to access Junction 12 on the M50?

    Its gone crazy since they made it tighter/narrower for the Tallaght - Dundrum cycle lane.

    Tailbacks at off peak times and manic at rush hour.


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,786 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    I can see why they did it, but they should have added bus priority and to me, the main issue is that the new roundabout and the entrances are now ridiculously tight.


  • Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭gaz d


    Yes, I wonder what the minimum width of a road lane is? Its pushing the tolerances I would imagine. All entrances to the Roundabout used to be 2 car widths/lanes and now back to one, with a big grass verge going in place, seems mad.

    There is a petition in for a redesign gathering momentum I read online.


  • Registered Users Posts: 561 ✭✭✭HiGlo


    Yes ,I was just reading on the Knocklyon Network Facebook page that the Orlagh residents association attended a meeting about it. Apparently the petition has over 4,000 signatures. Facebook Post

    It's crazy carry on. They've been working on it for about 8 months or so now! And it's ridiculous! Way too tight and awkward angles. I hope they have to backtrack on it. It's a joke.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    There's so much complaining about this, it's ridiculous.
    All of the entrances used to be two car widths, but the roads were not. So the actual throughput of the roundabout was still only one car at a time. There was no point where you were able to get two cars through the roundabout at a time. Two cars could wait side-by-side, but they couldn't go around at the same time. So the effect on throughput is minimal. The redesign also makes it easier to predict other traffic's movements, which should improve throughput.

    The traffic here has always been bad. The selective memories of people claiming the roundabout has made it worse, baffles me. Traffic coming from Scholarstown towards the M50 was always a sh1tshow, especially when the schools went back.

    SDCC have continually said that they analysed the traffic flow beforehand and have been continuing to analyse it, and people's complaints don't match up with the facts.

    So in the absence of anyone else having hard data to contradict SDCC's, rather than just anecdotes, it has to be assumed that the "problems" here are optics and noise, not reality.

    Last week there were people complaining that a truck got stuck on a kerb. Apparently this is SDCC's fault, not the truck driver who couldn't drive his truck. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,220 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    seamus wrote: »
    There's so much complaining about this, it's ridiculous.
    All of the entrances used to be two car widths, but the roads were not. So the actual throughput of the roundabout was still only one car at a time. There was no point where you were able to get two cars through the roundabout at a time. Two cars could wait side-by-side, but they couldn't go around at the same time. So the effect on throughput is minimal. The redesign also makes it easier to predict other traffic's movements, which should improve throughput.

    The traffic here has always been bad. The selective memories of people claiming the roundabout has made it worse, baffles me. Traffic coming from Scholarstown towards the M50 was always a sh1tshow, especially when the schools went back.

    SDCC have continually said that they analysed the traffic flow beforehand and have been continuing to analyse it, and people's complaints don't match up with the facts.

    So in the absence of anyone else having hard data to contradict SDCC's, rather than just anecdotes, it has to be assumed that the "problems" here are optics and noise, not reality.

    Last week there were people complaining that a truck got stuck on a kerb. Apparently this is SDCC's fault, not the truck driver who couldn't drive his truck. :rolleyes:

    I’ve actually thought this, it looks awkward but I think it moves okay and one car on at a time will I think move things along as your only watching what’s on the roundabout and don’t need to worry about the car beside you.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭steamsey


    It's an absolute disaster. I cycle through it twice a day and drive through it at weekends. They have been at it since about July and the fact that they are till working on such a small area / project is not a positive sign. This must have cost a lot.

    It has and will make traffic in the area worse. There are tailbacks at the weekends, people are clipping the roundabout with their rear wheels, the pedestrian crossings are not marked yet so there are kids wandering across the road between cars. The tarmac section on the left as you go down towards Super Valu is a mess of people, buggies and kids on bikes & scooters and you cannot cycle on it so have to cycle on the road instead. Then when you get to the traffic lights in front of Super Valu, cars queing to go left block the road and if you want to go right, you have to overtake onto the other side of the road.

    An absolute joke. They've made it worse.

    Rant over.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    This is a good example actually of how perception so often taints your view of good -v- bad.
    people are clipping the roundabout with their rear wheels
    You can get busses through the roundabout. If people are clipping it, it's because they're crap drivers.
    the pedestrian crossings are not marked yet so there are kids wandering across the road between cars.
    The pedestrian crossings haven't moved, and are still signalled and marked :confused:
    The tarmac section on the left as you go down towards Super Valu is a mess of people, buggies and kids on bikes & scooters and you cannot cycle on it so have to cycle on the road instead.
    Previously, that section wasn't even there and you had to cycle on the road anyway. Cycle track design is a problem, but certainly the improved road definition is of more assistance to cyclists on the road than previously.
    Then when you get to the traffic lights in front of Super Valu, cars queing to go left block the road and if you want to go right, you have to overtake onto the other side of the road.
    Right. Except that both lanes are now considerably longer than they were before, so more cars get through. Previously if you wanted to go right, you were usually stuck behind 20 cars all turning left and you wouldn't make the lights by the time they went red. As someone who virtually always takes a right at that junction, it's waaay better than it used to be.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,786 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    Part of the problem I think is that because the roundabout is smaller, cars are dallying at the roundabout for a fraction of a second longer as they are less sure where the car currently on the roundabout is going, and whether they have to wait.

    Thats reducing throughput. Their traffic modelling is flawed, delays are definitely worse than they were before this was done.

    (I'm thinking cars only now, not pedestrians or cyclists whose experiences may have improved massively)


  • Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭steamsey


    So suddenly, loads of craps drivers have started using the roundabout? OR seeing as the roundabout has changed, maybe the problem rests there....

    The pedestrian crossing on the first left as you approach the roundabout (the one leading to Super Valu) is not marked on the road. Kids wander across the road in all directions. You've confused yourself there. Signalling was not brought up before you mentioned it.

    The tarmac section was a path and a grass margin with trees. Missed a great opportunity to get the kids cycling to school off the road and onto a cycle path - instead its a wide tarmac path that pedestrians and kids on scooters use. Total missed opportunity.

    he traffic is far worse. The lanes are not considerably longer than they were, maybe they are slightly longer but considerably is not right. As someone who also takes that right turn x2 a day, it's much worse than it was.

    The point is this - the whole thing must have cost hundreds of thousands if not millions and they are still not finished. It has not been worth it and I cannot see how the final touches will suddenly make it worthwhile.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,202 ✭✭✭markpb


    steamsey wrote: »
    The point is this - the whole thing must have cost hundreds of thousands if not millions and they are still not finished. It has not been worth it and I cannot see how the final touches will suddenly make it worthwhile.

    Maybe it will make it worthwhile for the people on road who aren't in car?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,786 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    Possibly for cyclists, when complete, and possibly for pedestrians, of which there are not a huge amount there apart from those going to the bus stops. But it is not worthwhile for people in buses, and that is a missed opportunity with the 175 now running along here. Because of the increased congestion, and the lack of any form of bus priority, their service has deteriorated.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    steamsey wrote: »
    So suddenly, loads of craps drivers have started using the roundabout? OR seeing as the roundabout has changed, maybe the problem rests there....
    If people are clipping the roundabout, they're going too fast. That's the problem. They were crap drivers before, but the layout let them away with it. Now they want to drive through it at the same speed they did before, and they're getting into trouble. That's the driver's fault, 100%.

    One of the main purposes of this redesign is to slow everything down. This is a busy roundabout in a heavily residential area, outside a school. Throughput will actually increase, but the speed of traffic going into and on the roundabout will drop. That's a good thing. That's the point. Too many people are complaining that the roundabout is making them go slower.
    The pedestrian crossing on the first left as you approach the roundabout (the one leading to Super Valu) is not marked on the road. Kids wander across the road in all directions. You've confused yourself there. Signalling was not brought up before you mentioned it.
    Signalling is part of the "marking". You can't miss two bloody big traffic lights. Any road, the lights haven't been moved, and any lack of markings is temporary.
    The tarmac section was a path and a grass margin with trees. Missed a great opportunity to get the kids cycling to school off the road and onto a cycle path - instead its a wide tarmac path that pedestrians and kids on scooters use. Total missed opportunity.
    Kids on bikes will use it too. It also looks like it still needs to be painted. I do agree though that it could have been designed better; grade-separating the cycle lane would have been preferable. This is a persistent issue across the country.
    he traffic is far worse. The lanes are not considerably longer than they were, maybe they are slightly longer but considerably is not right. As someone who also takes that right turn x2 a day, it's much worse than it was.
    We'll have to agree to disagree. Your anecdotal evidence that it's gotten worse is just as valid as my evidence that it's gotten better.
    The point is this - the whole thing must have cost hundreds of thousands if not millions and they are still not finished. It has not been worth it and I cannot see how the final touches will suddenly make it worthwhile.
    How you can say it hasn't been worth it, if it's not finished? Maybe let them finish it first? Gather some data? Roadworks cause congestion; gawkers and tentative drivers. Give it six months and then decide if it's been worth it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭HonalD


    @seamus - Your last point is exactly right. It's not even constructed yet and people are rushing to definite conclusions.

    Another point, did it go through public consultation, was there submissions and what did the report say?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,477 ✭✭✭Kamili


    markpb wrote: »
    Maybe it will make it worthwhile for the people on road who aren't in car?

    What about those in a truck or larger van? How are they meant to get around it? Considering its right off the M50 and near a large supervalu - how are they meant to get their deliveries in?

    What about emergency services - fire trucks and what not? How the hell are they meant to get around it?

    Personally for me this has added about 10 - 15 minutes extra onto my commute to work in the mornings. Its very badly designed and very badly laid out.

    Why did they put those new traffic islands in? they are in my opinion a dangerous obstruction.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,220 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    After reading about how tight the roundabout was here I took notice of it this morning, if you can’t get around it without hitting the roundabout it’s probably best you give back your license.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,301 ✭✭✭McGrath5


    I've noticed an extreme amount of moaning going on over this roundabout, though in fairness that wouldn't be unusual considering nearly everyone objects to everything in Knocklyon.

    The traffic is piss poor in the area, but it always was long before this project commenced and will continue to be for a long time to come since people insist on using their car even if often it is far quicker to walk.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    It's seems to be the done thingnow where roads are narrowed, tighter bends and corners.

    Pedestrian lights placed just off the roundabout so it then gets blocked.

    Ramps everywhere including bus routes which is ridiculously stupid.

    These roundabouts with raised curbing where the bus or larger vehicle has to mount which believe me is extremely uncomfortable and especially for the driver have to pass over numerous times a day.

    I actually can't understand why we can't have a simple design and layout and run with it.

    Some are great but what I see is any news designed ones are shockingly bad.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭HonalD


    It's seems to be the done thingnow where roads are narrowed, tighter bends and corners.

    I actually can't understand why we can't have a simple design and layout and run with it.

    It is simple - it slows down motorized vehicles at the junction. Reducing the hazard for vulnerable road users.

    Take a look at the DMURS document - Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets for information.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,202 ✭✭✭markpb


    Kamili wrote: »
    What about those in a truck or larger van? How are they meant to get around it? Considering its right off the M50 and near a large supervalu - how are they meant to get their deliveries in?

    What about emergency services - fire trucks and what not? How the hell are they meant to get around it?

    Personally for me this has added about 10 - 15 minutes extra onto my commute to work in the mornings. Its very badly designed and very badly laid out.

    Why did they put those new traffic islands in? they are in my opinion a dangerous obstruction.

    I can honestly say I'm not a HGV driver (maybe you are?) so I don't know how they manage but I'd wager the professionals who designed it didn't forget about the existence (or width) of HGVs so they can probably manage, albeit a little more slowly than before.

    That's the whole point of protects like this - to slow drivers down so they're more aware of vulnerable road users. It's not done to penalise drivers, just to make them share the road in a safer way.

    It's too early to judge the actual impact of the new design on your commute, you are being inconvenienced by the roadworks. Give it a few weeks after the work has finished and traffic had adjusted and then see what the impact is.
    Ramps everywhere including bus routes which is ridiculously stupid.

    These roundabouts with raised curbing where the bus or larger vehicle has to mount which believe me is extremely uncomfortable and especially for the driver have to pass over numerous times a day.

    I actually can't understand why we can't have a simple design and layout and run with it.

    You're right that it's daft that bus routes have ramps and narrow roundabouts on them but sadly you are being penalised by the other drivers who also use the road. In my experience, DB drivers are excellent - courteous, safe and aware - but others on the road are not and are both a disincentive and a danger to vulnerable road users so changes like this are inflicted on everyone to make it safer for everyone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 929 ✭✭✭Markx


    markpb wrote: »

    That's the whole point of protects like this - to slow drivers down so they're more aware of vulnerable road users. It's not done to penalise drivers, just to make them share the road in a safer way.

    From the signage at the roundabout I got the impression the point of this particular project was to facilitate the Tallaght to Ballyboden cycling corridor.

    It has never seemed like a particularly dangerous roundabout to me. Does anybody know if there have there been a lot of accidents there? My feeling is that people are extra cautious around there due to the volume of school children.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,301 ✭✭✭McGrath5


    I see an angry mob is been organized via Facebook for a "protest" on Saturday, this will cause the traffic to slow down even further leading to even more congestion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,477 ✭✭✭Kamili


    Markx wrote: »
    From the signage at the roundabout I got the impression the point of this particular project was to facilitate the Tallaght to Ballyboden cycling corridor.

    It has never seemed like a particularly dangerous roundabout to me. Does anybody know if there have there been a lot of accidents there? My feeling is that people are extra cautious around there due to the volume of school children.

    yet the cyclists are being told to use the road, which has by all measures been made worse.

    I wouldn't cycle round that when there is a bus or truck trying to traverse it. The bus has to mount the kerb 4 times to get around it, by god help any cyclist at that stage!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,605 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Kamili wrote: »
    yet the cyclists are being told to use the road

    are they? I was under the impression the crossings are shared areas. As an aside, I cycled through this style of roundabout on Main Road Tallaght and it was an utter dream, it seemed to completely change the attitude of any people driving, I was waiting for the cars to clear, but both stopped to let me cross! I mean, they're legally obliged to do so with zebra crossings, but we all know that's not to be taken for granted...


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,477 ✭✭✭Kamili


    Yep according to the council the cycle lanes are reserved for kids traveling to school.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,861 ✭✭✭Cushie Butterfield


    FUJ24882.JPG


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    They're shared cycle paths, not cycle lanes. So they're not designed for higher-speed commuter traffic and not meant to form part of the main cycling infrastructure.

    It amused me that during the protest, the traffic wasn't bad enough so the protesters had someone stand at every set of pedestrian lights and continually activate them to artificially cause congestion.

    The traffic patterns emerging on this roundabout have made it completely obvious what has happened here.

    All of the congestion is occurring coming from the Ballyboden direction. This is a result of the next phases of Scholarstown Wood and White Pines becoming occupied over the summer and those residents attempting to make their way onto the M50.

    The redesign of the roundabout is merely serendipitous. If the roundabout was the issue, then traffic would be a problem in all directions. It's not, it's only become a problem E-W on the Scholarstown road - i.e. coming from Scholarstown Wood. Traffic coming from Knocklyon and Orlagh still flows as freely as it did before.

    Traffic coming off the M50 has always been bad and hasn't gotten worse as a result of this redesign.

    So poor planning is certainly to blame here - but it's the planning that allowed Scholarstown wood to be built without provision for improvements.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,605 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Kamili wrote: »
    Yep according to the council the cycle lanes are reserved for kids traveling to school.

    I’m 99% sure that has no legal footing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,967 ✭✭✭youcancallmeal


    Part of the problem I think is that because the roundabout is smaller, cars are dallying at the roundabout for a fraction of a second longer as they are less sure where the car currently on the roundabout is going, and whether they have to wait.

    Thats reducing throughput. Their traffic modelling is flawed, delays are definitely worse than they were before this was done.

    (I'm thinking cars only now, not pedestrians or cyclists whose experiences may have improved massively)

    This is one of the main factors I believe. With the smaller tighter layout I find it hard to see the indicator for a car that is already on the roundabout so I end up waiting that little bit longer to be sure if they are exiting or not. With even moderate traffic then it can back up very easily


  • Registered Users Posts: 561 ✭✭✭HiGlo


    seamus wrote: »
    Traffic coming off the M50 has always been bad and hasn't gotten worse as a result of this redesign.

    I think you're probably right in what you're saying, however I don't agree with this bit at all. I come off the M50 southbound every day around 6-7pmish.... There is definite worsening of the traffic heading to Knocklyon. There are evenings where it's bumper to bumper right back up the exit lane on M50. It used to always be that the stopped traffic was in the lane to turn to Ballycullen and the traffic to Knocklyon always flowed easily enough.

    There's a definite change now.
    As you say though, this could equally be to do with the increase in traffic heading toward Scholarstown Wood etc...

    I've also encountered the traffic heading from Ballycullen to Knocklyon on Saturday afternoons and there's definitely more congestion on approach to the roundabout - having said that, it's not causing significant delays, it's just a bit slower to get through.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    seamus wrote: »
    They're shared cycle paths, not cycle lanes. So they're not designed for higher-speed commuter traffic and not meant to form part of the main cycling infrastructure.

    It amused me that during the protest, the traffic wasn't bad enough so the protesters had someone stand at every set of pedestrian lights and continually activate them to artificially cause congestion.

    The traffic patterns emerging on this roundabout have made it completely obvious what has happened here.

    All of the congestion is occurring coming from the Ballyboden direction. This is a result of the next phases of Scholarstown Wood and White Pines becoming occupied over the summer and those residents attempting to make their way onto the M50.

    The redesign of the roundabout is merely serendipitous. If the roundabout was the issue, then traffic would be a problem in all directions. It's not, it's only become a problem E-W on the Scholarstown road - i.e. coming from Scholarstown Wood. Traffic coming from Knocklyon and Orlagh still flows as freely as it did before.

    Traffic coming off the M50 has always been bad and hasn't gotten worse as a result of this redesign.

    So poor planning is certainly to blame here - but it's the planning that allowed Scholarstown wood to be built without provision for improvements.
    The burden of proof aspect doesn't go one way here. Before the design has finished and without some measurements (instead of mere modelling), you might need evidence to conclude that it's "not worsened" either. It's just supposition to claim otherwise. It's not great to democratise the truth but I wouldn't dismiss several anecdotes if they only don't agree with my own presumptions.

    Regarding "something not forming part of the main cycle infrastructure" - something designated as a shared cycle path still makes it the same as every other cycle path in the country with all relevant rules of the road that apply to cycling.


Advertisement