nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

M50 - Eastern Bypass

marno21

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/councillors-oppose-eastern-bypass-to-make-m50-fully-circular-1.2666479

In the news again after it was proposed to protect the route corridor in the recent Dublin transport strategy

Find more posts tagged with

dublin

eastern bypass

m50 motorway

Quick Links

Comments

Carawaystick

Last Stop wrote: »

Again you’re assuming they are in use simply because there is no limit. That’s unlikely to be the case.

The height limit of the ferries set the limit before the tunnel, and was 4.9m iirc
Trucks are paying for a linear space on a ro-ro ferry, so using the full height saves them money.

SeanW

Last Stop wrote: »

Even in this current pandemic it’s hardly a high quantity product. It’s typically a pallet load per store. Even then the majority of the major retailers here have distribution centres here. This means even if super cubes were used, they would likely only be used between the port and the distribution centre. In some cases, these centres are only a few km from the port so the benefits are minimal.

Perhaps.

Again you’re assuming they are in use simply because there is no limit. That’s unlikely to be the case.

Well, there were enough of them in use in little old Ireland to create a controversy, it would be foolish to assume no-one in the UK is using high trucks.

I don’t think it’s as black and white as that. It could be the case that after the schemes you mentioned are built there is no demand for this and the M50 is a lot quieter anyway.

Except that to some on this thread, it really is that black and white. M50 Eastern route Bad. End of story.

You are correct in that the DU, Metro and Luas, if ever built, will solve a lot of problems. Alternatives for people around Leixlip, Lucan, Clonsilla, Blanchardstown etc. such as Metro West and some other Liffey bridges would help as well. But as time passes, those problems may be replaced with new ones.

If the Docklands keeps growing it may in the decades to come have a lot of apartments. You could have tens of thousands, maybe 100,000 or more people living in a very small area with few options for driving out of the city when they need to. A tolled Port Tunnel, the Quays or city streets between the Docklands and the N11. Completing the M50 ring might help in that case, with a rule say "€20 toll for private vehicles at peak (that is, coming into the city before 9AM or leaving it between 4PM and 9PM), free for others".

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

Toilet paper?

Even in this current pandemic it’s hardly a high quantity product. It’s typically a pallet load per store. Even then the majority of the major retailers here have distribution centres here. This means even if super cubes were used, they would likely only be used between the port and the distribution centre. In some cases, these centres are only a few km from the port so the benefits are minimal.

Remember that these things drove legally (presumably) on UK motorways. It seems the only rule over there is "know your height".

Again you’re assuming they are in use simply because there is no limit. That’s unlikely to be the case.

The difference that I am objecting to here, is the difference between "the Eastern Bypass is really low on the priority list, a nice-to-have once more important problems are solved" and the type of attitude Ian Paisely had to power sharing in 1974 ... NEVAAR, NEVAAR, NEVAAR! It is the latter attitude I am calling into question, apologies if I wrongly ascribed it to you.

I don’t think it’s as black and white as that. It could be the case that after the schemes you mentioned are built there is no demand for this and the M50 is a lot quieter anyway.

SeanW

Last Stop wrote: »

Low weight bulk loads is a very specific and I would say niche category. In my mind, the justification for a higher tunnel would be the regular movement of heavy abnormal loads.

Toilet paper?

I find it funny that you keep trying to justify the higher high as somewhat common in the UK (simply because they don’t have a legal limit) and now, you admit that you’re not a logistics expert and don’t have any form of data on they use of these trucks in the UK. It would appear that you are making the assumption that because there is no specific Limit in the UK that logistics companies have higher vehicles and that is unfounded.

Remember that these things drove legally (presumably) on UK motorways. It seems the only rule over there is "know your height".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7g08nwEmyY

I wouldn't say I’m opposed to the Eatern Bypass, I just don’t think it should be high up the agenda. The desire to have a full ring road is another red herring given Dublin’s coastal location. If Dublin was more central (like London, Madrid etc) then of course there would be a strong argument for a full ring but given the fact that you can travel from any direction in Ireland and not have to go inside the M50 to get to any other direction, I think we’re pretty good.

I'm actually somewhat in agreement with this. To my mind, the EB is very low on the priority list. Dart U. a Metro system, more Luas lines are badly needed today and IMHO should all be before the EB in terms of priority, I'd go so far as to say it shouldn't even be on the agenda until Metro, DU, Finglas Luas etc are OPEN.

The difference that I am objecting to here, is the difference between "the Eastern Bypass is really low on the priority list, a nice-to-have once more important problems are solved" and the type of attitude Ian Paisely had to power sharing in 1974 ... NEVAAR, NEVAAR, NEVAAR! It is the latter attitude I am calling into question, apologies if I wrongly ascribed it to you.

We should be looking at prioritising measures that would reduce the commuter element on the M50 allowing it to return to its original function as a bypass.
This would include metro west and new bridges between Lucan and Blanch.

Agreed.

monument wrote: »

You think concerns about carbon emissions in 2030 will only centre on what's powering a car locally? Are you forgetting about concrete, land use, transit-oriented development vs pushing sprawl, getting the grid to zero emissions etc?

Funny, considering the insane social cost that banning ICEs is going to cause, I'd have expected it to solve most of the problems on its own.

Our government is about to embark on the worst anti-democratisation of mobility in all of modern history. Many people in the working classes drive older ICE vehicles, because ICE technology is relatively simple and the vehicles depreciate to practically nothing after ~10 years despite still being reliable transport. If you have €3000 you can buy a 10 year old Toyota, free and clear, and be able to travel wherever and whenever you need. The simpler ICEs of yesteryear were even cheaper.

When internal combustion engines are banned, this will make it impossible for a lot of poor and working people to stay on the road. This is because batteries are insanely expensive and they will most likely always will be. Now I'm sure you can find an advertisement somewhere "hey you can buy this 2011 Nissan Leaf for under €10,000" but the only reason it is so "cheap" is because the battery is banjaxed and needs to be replaced.

The main reason AFAIK why this ban/countdown is on, is because the powers that be don't give a **** about poor people. For the insane social cost the upcoming ICE ban is going to cause, we have a right to expect it to solve the "climate change" problem single-handedly. So as I see it, there are now two possibilities:

Electric vehicles will de-carbonise our society so much that it's worth F@#%ing over poor & working class people. The flip side is that the "climate change" argument for not building roads goes in the trash.
Electric vehicles won't really do that much, therefore the "climate change" argument for not building roads still holds. However, we're basically just saying "F@#% the poor and the workers" for no reason.

I'm actually more inclined to believe the latter, but since the EB will not be even considered before 2030 in any case and won't open for at least a decade more, it's appropriate to ask detractors using the "climate change" argument why that argument holds even though the last NCT certificates for internal combustion engine cars will be issued in 2044/2045. That year will likely be before the EB opens, or if later, not by much.

monument

SeanW wrote: »

The issue of carbon emissions has been raised by others. I'm just highlighting that our gov has put a countdown on the use of Internal Combustion Engines - at least in cars. That's going to work against any argument "but, but, carbon emissions" because the Eastern Bypass won't be considered until at least 2030 nor be open before 2045. ICEs may still be allowed in trucks though, if so, it would be better to have fewer larger trucks than more smaller ones ...

You think concerns about carbon emissions in 2030 will only centre on what's powering a car locally? Are you forgetting about concrete, land use, transit-oriented development vs pushing sprawl, getting the grid to zero emissions etc?

L1011

This is getting split down to not even a case of the source of the mountain being a molehill but a worm cast on sand.

Its basically irrelevant. Get over it.

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

To some extent that depends on the point where the Eastern Bypass would meet the existing M50. And yes, high vehicles should be an option for low weight bulk loads. Although I'm not an expert on UK logistics, I'm sure that they do use high vehicles, like we used to in this country.

At any rate, I'm completely puzzled as to why there is so much resistance to the idea of Dublin having a ring road 50 years from now, it's somewhat bizarre.

Well it’s pretty obvious that it will join the M50 at junction 14 as there’s a reserved alignment between here and Booterstown. Anywhere else and you have a significantly longer tunnel.

Low weight bulk loads is a very specific and I would say niche category. In my mind, the justification for a higher tunnel would be the regular movement of heavy abnormal loads.

Again you’re making an assertion that we never had a height limit before the Port Tunnel. That’s not true. There was a lower limit in place until 2000. So for only 6 years, these super cubes could be used. Between 2006 and 2013 when the height limit was legally passed, logistic companies has more than sufficient time to adapt operations. https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/f1a097-maximum-vehicle-heights-to-change-on-november-1st/?referrer=/press-releases/2013/maximum-vehicle-heights-change-november-1st/.

I find it funny that you keep trying to justify the higher high as somewhat common in the UK (simply because they don’t have a legal limit) and now, you admit that you’re not a logistics expert and don’t have any form of data on they use of these trucks in the UK. It would appear that you are making the assumption that because there is no specific Limit in the UK that logistics companies have higher vehicles and that is unfounded.

I wouldn't say I’m opposed to the Eatern Bypass, I just don’t think it should be high up the agenda. The desire to have a full ring road is another red herring given Dublin’s coastal location. If Dublin was more central (like London, Madrid etc) then of course there would be a strong argument for a full ring but given the fact that you can travel from any direction in Ireland and not have to go inside the M50 to get to any other direction, I think we’re pretty good.

We should be looking at prioritising measures that would reduce the commuter element on the M50 allowing it to return to its original function as a bypass.
This would include metro west and new bridges between Lucan and Blanch.

In terms of the port area, a new tunnel under the Liffey at the port to reduce pressure on the Eastlink. I’d also like to see the removal of level crossings along the DART line and potentially raising the height of some of the low bridges around Beggers Bush which would improve HGV access.

SeanW

To some extent that depends on the point where the Eastern Bypass would meet the existing M50. And yes, high vehicles should be an option for low weight bulk loads. Although I'm not an expert on UK logistics, I'm sure that they do use high vehicles, like we used to in this country.

At any rate, I'm completely puzzled as to why there is so much resistance to the idea of Dublin having a ring road 50 years from now, it's somewhat bizarre.

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

It's a question of flexibility. If a logistics company had a load of low-value, low-weight goods to send to Wicklow, using supercube trucks via a hypothetical Eastern bypass would probably be a good idea. A consignment of computer parts heading to Dundalk? Maybe not so much. And of course you have traffic between the Port and Sligo, Castlebar, Galway (N4) and Cork/Limerick (N7) in which case the distances are similar on the M50, so yes, in those cases, sending supercubes from the Port to those places would make sense too, in a lot of cases.

Admittedly, a lot of this depends on how the EU and the UK work out Brexit, but there may still be efficiencies to be gained in having conditions in our market as similar as possible to UK conditions. That includes things like being able to use a common fleet of freight vehicles in both countries - which we cannot do now.

2 things.

The distances are not similar, going via the eastern bypass to the N4 is going to be much longer than via the port tunnel.

Can you please stop saying that logistics companies can use a common fleet as if that it not possible now. We all know the UK do not ha e restrictions on heights but the majority of trucks are less than 4.65m anyway so it’s a non issue.

SeanW

It's a question of flexibility. If a logistics company had a load of low-value, low-weight goods to send to Wicklow, using supercube trucks via a hypothetical Eastern bypass would probably be a good idea. A consignment of computer parts heading to Dundalk? Maybe not so much. And of course you have traffic between the Port and Sligo, Castlebar, Galway (N4) and Cork/Limerick (N7) in which case the distances are similar on the M50, so yes, in those cases, sending supercubes from the Port to those places would make sense too, in a lot of cases.

Admittedly, a lot of this depends on how the EU and the UK work out Brexit, but there may still be efficiencies to be gained in having conditions in our market as similar as possible to UK conditions. That includes things like being able to use a common fleet of freight vehicles in both countries - which we cannot do now.

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

Umm ... it's not like every single truck is going to be a supercube ... it's just to give logistics other options.

But if a large number of them are (which must be the case if you’re advocating a more expensive, by virtue of being a larger diameter, tunnel to accommodate them) then how can you say

It would almost certainly take a good deal of trucks off the existing M50.

Either these is not enough to justify a larger tunnel (which is my opinion) or there won’t be less trucks on the M50. It simply can’t be both.

Which brings me to my next question. If the main aim of the eastern bypass is to reduce congestion, then surely we should stick to the lower limit??

SeanW

Umm ... it's not like every single truck is going to be a supercube ... it's just to give logistics other options.

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

The issue of carbon emissions has been raised by others. I'm just highlighting that our gov has put a countdown on the use of Internal Combustion Engines - at least in cars. That's going to work against any argument "but, but, carbon emissions" because the Eastern Bypass won't be considered until at least 2030 nor be open before 2045. ICEs may still be allowed in trucks though, if so, it would be better to have fewer larger trucks than more smaller ones ...

So you’ve ignored my point that you’re contradicting your earlier argument that trucks from the SE have a circular route to the port via the M50 by advocating a higher limit on the eastern bypass which would create a circular route for super cubes travelling to efficiently anywhere but the SE??

L1011

Considering the amount of items which come through the UK in containers and do not travel with the truck across the Irish Sea to begin with, I think you are really making a mountain out of a molehill here. That's likely to increase if there's a push to rail freight as a decarbonising measure anyway - you can't put supercube swapbodies on UK loading gauge rail trailers due to their even smaller loading gauge than here!

SeanW

The issue of carbon emissions has been raised by others. I'm just highlighting that our gov has put a countdown on the use of Internal Combustion Engines - at least in cars. That's going to work against any argument "but, but, carbon emissions" because the Eastern Bypass won't be considered until at least 2030 nor be open before 2045. ICEs may still be allowed in trucks though, if so, it would be better to have fewer larger trucks than more smaller ones ...

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

You do realise the government is planning to ban all internal combustion engine cars, right?

What has that got to do with anything we’re discussing??

SeanW

You do realise the government is planning to ban all internal combustion engine cars, right?

donvito99

Baseball72 wrote: »

Not so. Port tunnel height restrictions has added to costs and carbon footprint increase. A significant percentage of cargo (FMCG sector) comes from GB in trailers. Much of it terminates within M50 Corridor so Limerick and Cork tunnels don't come into play. Effectively banning super cubes has added to the volume in trucks on the road, extra costs, higher carbon footprint and all so unnecessary.

What's greater, the extra emissions from having to put on more, smaller HGVs, or...

... the emissions from the additional traffic created by replacing existing infrastructure AND building extra infrastructure - such as the Eastern Bypass - to accommodate larger trucks?

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

The UK places no restrictions so logistics operators in the UK can use whatever kind of truck they want. Ireland is a special case because of the DPT. There is no legal requirement to use the Jack Lynch Tunnel or the Limerick Tunnel (which was only built after the DPT anyway), those tunnels can be avoided if need be, but there is a legal requirement for trucks to use the Port Tunnel.

The port tunnel was opened in 2006, surely logistic companies have adapted by now. Plus, larger trucks can avoid the port tunnel though the permit system.

If you’re suggesting that the eastern bypass should have a higher limit to accommodate these trucks, well then you’re completely contradicting your justification for the eastern bypass which was to avoid trucks coming from the SE having to use the circular M50 route.

Would an eastern bypass tunnel which accommodates “super cubes” therefore not lead to increased congestion on the m50 as these trucks, which based on your reasoning are so popular in the UK, make their way to the rest of the country?

BanditLuke

Eastern bypass will never happen unless they bore under the new houses and apartments built off Mount Anville Road. That in itself would raise the price to a ridiculous level.

SeanW

The UK places no restrictions so logistics operators in the UK can use whatever kind of truck they want. Ireland is a special case because of the DPT. There is no legal requirement to use the Jack Lynch Tunnel or the Limerick Tunnel (which was only built after the DPT anyway), those tunnels can be avoided if need be, but there is a legal requirement for trucks to use the Port Tunnel.

Last Stop

SeanW wrote: »

As Pete's link above shows, the United Kingdom does not have a set height limit for vehicles. As such, prior to the construction of the DPT, a logistics firms' truck fleet could be common to both the UK and Ireland without further qualification. At the time, both the UK and Ireland were members of the European Union but the laws banning supercubes made Ireland a special market with restrictions not in force in the UK.

A logistics company can still have a common fleet... 4.65m? Most trucks are below this anyway.
As mentioned, if the company was making regular journeys to other parts of Ireland such as Cork or Limerick, it would be in their interest to use the lower limit anyway.

Last Stop

Baseball72 wrote: »

Not so. Port tunnel height restrictions has added to costs and carbon footprint increase. A significant percentage of cargo (FMCG sector) comes from GB in trailers. Much of it terminates within M50 Corridor so Limerick and Cork tunnels don't come into play. Effectively banning super cubes has added to the volume in trucks on the road, extra costs, higher carbon footprint and all so unnecessary.

I’m sorry I don’t believe that at all.
Do you have facts to back up the potential use of super cubes??

Plus why would goods terminating within the M50 use the tunnel? That’s what the permit system is there for?

SeanW

As Pete's link above shows, the United Kingdom does not have a set height limit for vehicles. As such, prior to the construction of the DPT, a logistics firms' truck fleet could be common to both the UK and Ireland without further qualification. At the time, both the UK and Ireland were members of the European Union but the laws banning supercubes made Ireland a special market with restrictions not in force in the UK.

Baseball72

Last Stop wrote: »

Why are people still moaning about the height of the port tunnel. Even if taller trucks could use the port tunnel, they wouldn’t be able to use the Limerick tunnel or the Jack Lynch tunnel.

Given the relatively small scale of trade in Ireland compared to other countries in the world, it’s not a big deal anyway.

Not so. Port tunnel height restrictions has added to costs and carbon footprint increase. A significant percentage of cargo (FMCG sector) comes from GB in trailers. Much of it terminates within M50 Corridor so Limerick and Cork tunnels don't come into play. Effectively banning super cubes has added to the volume in trucks on the road, extra costs, higher carbon footprint and all so unnecessary.

Last Stop

Why are people still moaning about the height of the port tunnel. Even if taller trucks could use the port tunnel, they wouldn’t be able to use the Limerick tunnel or the Jack Lynch tunnel.

Given the relatively small scale of trade in Ireland compared to other countries in the world, it’s not a big deal anyway.

Idbatterim

SeanW wrote: »

You can call it horse **** all you want, it does not change the fact that Ireland was using high vehicles before the DPT came on-scene. It's also very likely that as a result of the restrictions it caused, Ireland is now a special market that logistics companies require special trucks to serve unlike the UK.

Your own link shows that the UK does not have a defined height limit.

It is also a fact that "supercube" type trucks used in Ireland before the DPT were/are more efficient because they can carry more cubic/metres of goods per vehicle. It is also a fact that the DPT can never be retrofitted.

In the future, it may be useful to allow supercubes again.
In the future, it may be desirable to allow people to use an Eastern route around the city.
In the future, you may have a very large number of people living in the Docklands with few options for driving out of the city.
It may be desirable to allow buses to have an expressway into the City from the South, the way the DPT serves as a free expressway for buses into the City from the North.

There may be any number of reasons why the Eastern Bypass may well be nice to have in the future. The only thing "stupid" is asserting that under no circumstances would it be useful.

imagine you could run frequent buses via tunnel to docklands and onto the airport...

SeanW

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

So we need a €1bn port access road for the very few times our €0.5bn port access road is out of action?

The think about the DPT being too low is pure horse****. It has a clearance of 4.65m, most of Europe restricts truck height to 4m:

https://www.itf-oecd.org/node/19209

Our higher limit is so farmers can stack bails higher when transporting. The road network here, or any of Europe, wasn't designed for super trucks, we don't need or want them. 99.9% of freight comes in standard sizes. The DPT is more than big enough.

The more people try to justify the Eastern Bypass, the more stupid it sounds.

You can call it horse **** all you want, it does not change the fact that Ireland was using high vehicles before the DPT came on-scene. It's also very likely that as a result of the restrictions it caused, Ireland is now a special market that logistics companies require special trucks to serve unlike the UK.

Your own link shows that the UK does not have a defined height limit.

It is also a fact that "supercube" type trucks used in Ireland before the DPT were/are more efficient because they can carry more cubic/metres of goods per vehicle. It is also a fact that the DPT can never be retrofitted.

In the future, it may be useful to allow supercubes again.
In the future, it may be desirable to allow people to use an Eastern route around the city.
In the future, you may have a very large number of people living in the Docklands with few options for driving out of the city.
It may be desirable to allow buses to have an expressway into the City from the South, the way the DPT serves as a free expressway for buses into the City from the North.

There may be any number of reasons why the Eastern Bypass may well be nice to have in the future. The only thing "stupid" is asserting that under no circumstances would it be useful.

keane2097

Eric Cartman wrote: »

first im hearing of this eastern bypass, fantastic idea. We need to invest heavily in road based infrastructure projects to all ow more access for cars to and through the city, its a nightmare at present.

This seems very genuine.

Idbatterim

how long does it take the morons in DCC to even deliver the bridge that is meant to cross the dodder? they should just make the quays one way, two lanes each direction, when this is done. They are constructing its own mini city in the docklands now, huge amounts of residential to start construction, and what do we have there? single lane everywhere, single lane east link bridge. Its a disgrace!