M50 Congestion

Elmer Blooker

First Up wrote: »

The same reason they don't run on orbital motorways in Europe.

I would dispute that the M50 is a European style 'orbital motorway'.
When planning permission was granted for huge shopping centres and massive car parks at EVERY junction it just became a road for people to go shopping or take their kids to a cineplex.
The road signs may be blue but that's about it.

Andrewf20

I had to commute into the city recently at rush hour. Never again, its absolute madness. 25 minutes to move 2km. I did a u turn and went back and got my bike.

I reckon a lot of people living near the m50 could cycle into the city centre if they had to. It's so much easier once you have somewhere secure to lock the bike. Because it's downhill into the city from most directions, you don't have to even work up a sweat and therefore don't need a shower upon arrival. 25 mins from m50 - city centre at a casual pace on a half decent bike, then 10 mins to change clothes. You would be at you desk in 35- 40 mins.

Coming home is less fun, uphill and often with headwinds if southbound but it's way faster than driving or busing it. And your exercise is done also.

Last Stop

First Up wrote: »

I don't see that being replicated for those using the M50 as an orbital route.

Replicating the M50's role with public transport is just ideological nonsense.

Why wouldn’t that route be busy? You have Blanch - Liffey Valley - The square in Tallaght and the airport along the route.

The M50’s role is a bypass or Dublin. The intention of an orbital route would be to serve the areas along this route. They are 2 different things and not replicating each other.

Last Stop

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Just off the Junctions

Except the majority of junctions on the M50 are free flow meaning buses would have to leave the M50, travel to the next junction to turn around and then rejoin the M50. Journey times would be woeful and completely unreliable

First Up

Last Stop wrote:

Why wouldn’t that route be busy? You have Blanch - Liffey Valley - The square in Tallaght and the airport along the route.

The M50’s role is a bypass or Dublin. The intention of an orbital route would be to serve the areas along this route. They are 2 different things and not replicating each other.

Orbital, Ring Road, Beltway, Peripherique - all variations of the same thing and most big cities have them. They connect roads to other roads, more than to destinations. A few shopping centres along the way doesn't alter their overall purpose.

They are intended to facilitate the movement of cars (and trucks) not as alternative routes for mass transport.

If you don't like cars or trucks, nothing about the M50 is going to please you anyway.

Last Stop

First Up wrote: »

Orbital, Ring Road, Beltway, Peripherique - all variations of the same thing and most big cities have them. They connect roads to other roads, more than to destinations. A few shopping centres along the way doesn't alter their overall purpose.

They are intended to facilitate the movement of cars (and trucks) not as alternative routes for mass transport.

If you don't like cars or trucks, nothing about the M50 is going to please you anyway.

What you have said is mostly true but largely irrelevant to be honest.
The M50 does a job and that is taking traffic out the city centre.

Metro West or a variation of it does something different. It connects all the destinations which are located along the M50 (built there because of its connectivity). That’s not replicating the M50 but providing an alternative to it.

LeinsterDub

Last Stop wrote: »

Except the majority of junctions on the M50 are free flow meaning buses would have to leave the M50, travel to the next junction to turn around and then rejoin the M50. Journey times would be woeful and completely unreliable

Not as woeful as the travel time by car. And we could engineer a solution if we wanted

Last Stop

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I would dispute that the M50 is a European style 'orbital motorway'.
When planning permission was granted for huge shopping centres and massive car parks at EVERY junction it just became a road for people to go shopping or take their kids to a cineplex.
The road signs may be blue but that's about it.

Have to disagree. The M50 functions very well as an orbital motorway in theory.
The problem is the lack of alternatives to it. If you want to get from Blanch to Tallaght you use the M50. Liffey Valley to Blanch... M50 etc etc.

Extending the Outer ring road between the N4 and N3 would provide such an alternative and would mean that the M50 could go back to its original function.

Almost every city with an orbital has shopping centres and retail parks etc beside it. It’s an extremely convenient location.

Last Stop

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Not as woeful as the travel time by car. And we could engineer a solution if we wanted

A far cheaper and more sensible solution would be building the Metro West bridge as a public transport bridge with enough room for 2 bus lanes and tram tracks.
That would mean you could go from the airport to Sandyford pretty much parallel to the M50 using existing roads. The catchments would be far higher too.

It would basically be what is proposed under Busconnects as the W2, W4 and S8 routes although I would run it as 1 route and extend it from Blanch to the airport.

tom1ie

Look, we need the M50 as much as we need orbital pt routes. Notice I said routes.
An inner city loop like the proposed o root in bus connects along with more orbital routes is what is required. This will encourage people to use PT and hence reduce the pressure on the M50.

reubenreuben

I do think the merging lanes at some junctions are too short. That explains a lot why some drivers keep away from left lane. Still, a lot of cars that merge don't indicate and tend to try to push the drivers in the left lane into the middle lane.
It can be a bit 'wild west' on the M50 at times.

And I can't remember the last time I saw a patrol car on it.
And its so busy now. Not fit for purpose anymore

First Up

Last Stop wrote:

Metro West or a variation of it does something different. It connects all the destinations which are located along the M50 (built there because of its connectivity). That’s not replicating the M50 but providing an alternative to it.

The M50 doesn't go to destinations; it connects routes that go to destinations.

A metro is great but its an expensive investment that only makes sense if it serves high volume routes, or is supported by buses to complete the journey.

An orbital motorway is almost the exact opposite of that.

Zebra3

Last Stop wrote: »

What you have said is mostly true but largely irrelevant to be honest.
The M50 does a job and that is taking traffic out the city centre.

Metro West or a variation of it does something different. It connects all the destinations which are located along the M50 (built there because of its connectivity). That’s not replicating the M50 but providing an alternative to it.

The M50 has taken out traffic out of the city which has been replaced by other traffic.

It has also created new traffic.

And higher levels of air pollution.

Last Stop

First Up wrote: »

The M50 doesn't go to destinations; it connects routes that go to destinations.

A metro is great but its an expensive investment that only makes sense if it serves high volume routes, or is supported by buses to complete the journey.

An orbital motorway is almost the exact opposite of that.

Did I say the M50 goes to destinations?
I said there are destinations along the M50 which people currently use the M50 to get to. A metro line would mean they wouldn’t have to use it.

In reality it would be more like a Luas than a metro and this would bring down costs significantly.

And to put this discussion to bed; here is a lovely snippet from the Metro West business case
https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/metro-west-obc-appendix61.pdf#page34

“Based on the interpretation of the DTO strategic model results, Metro West is forecast to primarily remove local based trips from the M50. Reductions in M50 traffic, particularly in the section between the N3 and the M1 intersections, is forecasted. There is also a reduction forecast on some of the radial routes to the M50, i.e., the N4, N3 and N2 routes and on the M1 between the Airport and the City Centre. The results showed that the anticipated global reduction in traffic volumes along the M50 did not emerge. This suggests that the reduction in local trips entering the M50 was offset by an increase in longer distance trips forecast to use the newly available capacity on the M50. This suggests that the introduction of Metro West facilitates the removal of unwanted local based trips from the motorway, allowing it to operate as originally intended, as a by-pass of the city“

First Up

Last Stop wrote:

Did I say the M50 goes to destinations? I said there are destinations along the M50 which people currently use the M50 to get to. A metro line would mean they wouldn’t have to use it.

That depends where they are starting from. A fixed line metro is great if the line happens to go where you want. An orbital motorway offers flexibility; a fixed line rail system does not.

Last Stop wrote:

In reality it would be more like a Luas than a metro and this would bring down costs significantly.

A metro/luas west will of course be welcome and of course it will have some impact. I remain to be convinced it will make for the slightest reduction in the rush hour gridlock caused by accidents (sorry collisions) on the M50.

Last Stop

First Up wrote: »

That depends where they are starting from. A fixed line metro is great if the line happens to go where you want. An orbital motorway offers flexibility; a fixed line rail system does not.

How is the rail line somehow fixed but the motorway isn’t? That’s like saying building the M50 was a mistake because it doesn’t suit my trip from Cork - Limerick. Of course they suit people along the route more but one of the biggest flaws of the current system is the lack of orbital routes and alternatives to the M50. Metro west does that. It’s not going to solve all of the congestion in Dublin but I will reduce it.

A metro/luas west will of course be welcome and of course it will have some impact. I remain to be convinced it will make for the slightest reduction in the rush hour gridlock caused by accidents (sorry collisions) on the M50.

As the quote said, the modelling showed it had minimal effect on the M50 itself but it led to a reduction of traffic on other route including M1 to city centre. That’s welcome and it allows the M50 to go back to what it was designed to do... a bypass.
It will also likely reduce collisions as there will be less people using the M50 for short journeys between junctions

First Up

Last Stop wrote:

How is the rail line somehow fixed but the motorway isn’t? That’s like saying building the M50 was a mistake because it doesn’t suit my trip from Cork - Limerick. Of course they suit people along the route more but one of the biggest flaws of the current system is the lack of orbital routes and alternatives to the M50. Metro west does that. It’s not going to solve all of the congestion in Dublin but I will reduce it.

An orbital motorway helps cars move between routes. A rail line is point to point.

Last Stop wrote:

As the quote said, the modelling showed it had minimal effect on the M50 itself but it led to a reduction of traffic on other route including M1 to city centre. That’s welcome and it allows the M50 to go back to what it was designed to do... a bypass. It will also likely reduce collisions as there will be less people using the M50 for short journeys between junctions

Of course the more alternatives available the wider the dispersal. Your final point assumes that collisions are caused by volume. While there is undoubtedly a mathematical connection between the number of cars and number of collisions, the real cause of collisions is the behaviour of the drivers who cause them.

Last Stop

First Up wrote: »

An orbital motorway helps cars move between routes. A rail line is point to point.

You’re saying the exact same thing.
A motorway is from point to point too. An orbital rail line, linked to other rail lines like Metro West was, helps people move between routes. Yes the interchange between say the N7 and M50 is far more fluid but it’s the equivalent of getting of one train and onto another.

Of course the more alternatives available the wider the dispersal. Your final point assumes that collisions are caused by volume. While there is undoubtedly a mathematical connection between the number of cars and number of collisions, the real cause of collisions is the behaviour of the drivers who cause them.

Again you’re agreeing with me. I’ve already said the volume won’t change but the types of driver and in turn behaviour will.

First Up

Last Stop wrote:

You’re saying the exact same thing. A motorway is from point to point too. An orbital rail line, linked to other rail lines like Metro West was, helps people move between routes. Yes the interchange between say the N7 and M50 is far more fluid but it’s the equivalent of getting of one train and onto another.

Which assumes those other mass transit connections exist. But they don't. Car drivers control where they go. Mass transit users depend on others to take them and they can't take them everywhere.

I am totally supportive of mass transit. I use it when I can and have used it when living in several cities. But there are journeys that are simply unrealistic to expect mass transit to deliver and roads like the M50 are necessary for them.

Last Stop wrote:

Again you’re agreeing with me. I’ve already said the volume won’t change but the types of driver and in turn behaviour will.

It only will change if we ramp up enforcement, as you can see from the apologists here.

tom1ie

First Up wrote: »

An orbital motorway helps cars move between routes. A rail line is point to point.




Of course the more alternatives available the wider the dispersal. Your final point assumes that collisions are caused by volume. While there is undoubtedly a mathematical connection between the number of cars and number of collisions, the real cause of collisions is the behaviour of the drivers who cause them.

And the less drivers who would have caused these accidents, who take PT instead of driving, means the less congestion on the M50.
Hence to reduce congestion on the M50 introduce more PT.
Problem solved.

First Up

tom1ie wrote:

And the less drivers who would have caused these accidents, who take PT instead of driving, means the less congestion on the M50. Hence to reduce congestion on the M50 introduce more PT. Problem solved.

Go back to GO.