Markcheese wrote: » Like it, or loath it the m50 is the main transport hub in the state,
markpb wrote: » M50 carries about 140,000 vehicle trips per day. Dublin Bus carries almost twice day per day (143 million per year).
castletownman wrote: Maybe not quite the correct thread for my following question, but I am driving up to the airport from Gorey for a circa 11AM flight on Thursday, and am not quite sure how heavy the traffic will be on a midweek morning. I thankfully don't have to commute to work, but have been told the M11/M50 tends to be at its worst congestion between 7 amd 8AM? So would I want to be leaving before 7AM, or would my original departure time of 7.30AM be time enough?
First Up wrote: » Morning congestion is worse going southbound so you should be OK. Give yourself a safety margin though.
Idbatterim wrote: I’m thinking of staying around airport in two weeks for early morning flight. Flight is in morning. E67 for hotel near airport a night ... fcuking stress of m50 for morning flights... can’t be arsed with it
Idbatterim wrote: » I’m thinking of staying around airport in two weeks for early morning flight. Flight is in morning. E67 for hotel near airport a night ... fcuking stress of m50 for morning flights... can’t be arsed with it
jesus_thats_gre wrote: » Not sure if I have missed it but has been there been any movement on adding additional toll gates to the M50? IIRC, this was seen as an option to address congestion by encouraging locals using the M50 as a rat run to instead use local roads. I recall thinking that it was quite progressive thinking at the time. Is there any other innovative/smart solutions being looked at for the M50?
tom1ie wrote: » That solves nothing, as you just push cars onto local roads. Removing people from cars and putting them on pt is the only answer. We just need to get good pt in place. :rolleyes:
jesus_thats_gre wrote: » I would suggest it's primary purpose is in allowing commuters to cover relatively distances in a timely manner - the type of timely manner that makes commuter towns a viable place to live.
jesus_thats_gre wrote: » I agree with you on public transport. It is the long term solution of course. I would argue the the M50 has a special designation relative to local roads. The M50 is one of the most crucial pieces of infrastructure in the country, and being a motorway, I would suggest it's primary purpose is in allowing commuters to cover relatively distances in a timely manner - the type of timely manner that makes commuter towns a viable place to live. I am not for a second suggesting that locals in Dublin shouldn't be able to use the M50 but I do think the concept of incentivising people not to use it for short trips - particularly when alternative routes exist, is a worthwhile consideration in the short term. During peak hours anyway.
Dravokivich wrote: » If people are choosing the M50 over alternative routes its becuase the M50 was deemed to be the better option. I doubt people are ignorant of their local alternatives, but very much aware of the other traffic occurring at the same time in those areas. That'll make the alternative unworkable.
marvin80 wrote: » What hotel did you get for €67? Anytime I've booked there at least €100+
whippet wrote: » If the government can somehow bring in incentives for companies to introduce remote working it will take traffic off the roads, free up space for public transport and give an injection to small local economies.
Nijmegen wrote: » It's probably an under explored solution. I remember at the last Census when you looked at non-location specific categories of work (eg non retail, construction, farming etc etc) you pretty much took out 1:4 workers. It's interesting that nobody is really pushing things like working from home or staggering (even as a trial!) school and work hours. Given that public transport reform (or even ordering a few extra carriages for trains) is a few years out that somebody might think of some policy that could be switched on reasonably quickly as it aims to change behavior rather than something physical.
whippet wrote: » I did the whole south bound M50 run for over 15 year every day .. and saw the worst of it from the upgrade, celtic tiger, recession and now the return to the congestion. Our offices are after J10 and about 18 months ago it became so restrictive for most of our staff .. people arriving in to the office 2 hours before work started so they wouldn’t have to sit in traffic etc. Eventually it dawned on us that we can’t complain about the traffic when we are all part of it. So we made a decision that no body needs to come to the offic unless they want to .. everyone has the tool and tech to work from anywhere there is internet. Aside from taking the guts of 20 cars a day off the road everyone is much happier and productivity has increased dramatically - couple this with more family time and saving money on commuting we find staff retention is much easier. When we do need to visit customers in the city we can do this off peak and tend to bundle all out weekly meetings in to one day Another side effect is that we are all spending more money in our local communities. If the government can somehow bring in incentives for companies to introduce remote working it will take traffic off the roads, free up space for public transport and give an injection to small local economies.
LeinsterDub wrote: » That's a massive amount of social change. Surely the easier social change and the change that would provide massive amounts of fringe benefits is to limit the item causing the problem while encouraging those items that help fix it
Nijmegen wrote: » Well, we're not Communist China so I wouldn't propose forcing people to work from home at gunpoint. I'd say you'd be talking about incentivisation rather than forcing it for working from home. As for schools, the state controls the system and should be able to at least trial changes. And if not just for making our commutes easier, these sorts of initiatives have climate benefits, quality of life benefits and so on. If by the items we need to limit you're suggesting cars, I'd note that the NTA has only woken up now and started the multi year process of acquiring more train carriages; whilst people are advised to just move their journey to 6am or 10am to avoid the crush. If you banned a fraction of the cars on the road today, say had a lottery for who can drive what days or at all, public transport wouldn't be able to cope. Other things you don't see from government are, for example, incentivised ride shares or any one of a number of things that could nobble at the problem. There's basically zero innovation in attempt to bridge the gap we have at the moment between capacity and demand.
Nijmegen wrote: » It actually is a little bit nonsensical after the infrastructure the toll was for was built to only have a toll affecting one junction pair.
Macy0161 wrote: » people are going to have to get out of the mindset of door to door, no changes. With an efficient system, changing modes or buses shouldn't be an issue.
LeinsterDub wrote: » You need to remove cars to get it in place. Road space won't just magic it self up.
The Nal wrote: » Not very appealing this morning, getting off a bus and standing in the rain waiting for the next one. It rains a lot here.
For people giving it the whole "oh we don't have the population density" thing, look at the roads across the entire country and surrounding counties this morning. Chaos.
