Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie 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 hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

M50 Congestion

Options
13567…22

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,314 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    my pet 'what they should have done with the M50' idea, is that they should have put bike lanes along the top of the embankments.
    dealing with junctions would have been fun, but being able to cycle from finglas to parkwest, for example, without much interaction with traffic would have been attractive to people. though the noise might be a little offputting.


  • Options
    #63
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,148 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    sharper wrote: »
    Create better alternatives. Bus Connects planned to greatly increase orbital connections but a lot of people with a large front garden and two cars parked in it suddenly became very worried about trees.

    You know this is nonsense, it's right down there with dismissing people's concerns as simply NIMBYism.


  • Options
    #64
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,314 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    well, in this case it'd be NIMFYism, i guess...


  • Options
    #65
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    is_that_so wrote: »
    It might have helped a bit but as always the answers are more complicated. Planning or lack thereof has turned Dublin into a huge sprawl with a fairly low overall population, which public transport will always struggle to cover.

    That's a myth. Dublin does not have a low population density. The city centre is higher than other, similarly sized European cities. The urban Dublin area has a reasonable population density. The lack of public transport is entirely down to politics and our preference to spend money on roads instead of public transport.

    Dublin urban region: 4,588 people per square kilometer
    Amsterdam: 4,908 people per square kilometer
    Helsinki: 3,034.62 per square kilometer
    Colgne: 2,700 per square kilometer
    http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/


  • Options
    #66
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    markpb wrote:
    That's a myth. Dublin does not have a low population density. The city centre is higher than other, similarly sized European cities.

    The cars clogging up the M50 are not driven by people living in the city centre.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    First Up wrote: »
    The cars clogging up the M50 are not driven by people living in the city centre.

    Those populations are for the Dublin region, not the city centre.


  • Options
    #68
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    markpb wrote:
    Those populations are for the Dublin region, not the city centre.


    You mentioned city centre.


  • Options
    #69
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    markpb wrote: »
    That's a myth. Dublin does not have a low population density. The city centre is higher than other, similarly sized European cities. The urban Dublin area has a reasonable population density. The lack of public transport is entirely down to politics and our preference to spend money on roads instead of public transport.

    Dublin urban region: 4,588 people per square kilometer
    Amsterdam: 4,908 people per square kilometer
    Helsinki: 3,034.62 per square kilometer
    Colgne: 2,700 per square kilometer
    http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/
    Who's talking about the city centre? That link does say in the city proper. Most people in Dublin don't live there or anywhere near it. Any that do are unlikely to be clogging up the M50. Those stats don't include the people who can't afford to live in inner urban Dublin and commute from a lot further afield.

    Take even a few random areas in the Dublin region. Balbriggan and Swords with about 60K between them do not have acceptable public services. Even in somewhere like Lucan it depends where you live. That's not a "roads" problem that's crap to no planning. Then when you push out a little further to Drogheda in the north, Leixlip, Celbridge and Kildare in the west and Arklow down south the problem magnifies enormously simply because too many people are going in the same direction.


  • Options
    #70
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Who's talking about the city centre? That link does say in the city proper. Most people in Dublin don't live there or anywhere near it. Any that do are unlikely to be clogging up the M50. Those stats don't include the people who can't afford to live in inner urban Dublin and commute from a lot further afield.

    Take even a few random areas in the Dublin region. Balbriggan and Swords with about 60K between them do not have acceptable public services. Even in somewhere like Lucan it depends where you live. That's not a "roads" problem that's crap to no planning. Then when you push out a little further to Drogheda in the north, Leixlip, Celbridge and Kildare in the west and Arklow down south the problem magnifies enormously simply because too many people are going in the same direction.

    Literally all the places you mentioned have rail lines (or, in the case of Swords, one being planned). With the billion that was needlessly spent on the M50 widening and the money now being needlessly spent on the N7 widening, that money could have been spent on improving those rail links and giving people options. Instead, we laid more tarmac and hoped that the inevitable wouldn't happen. There will always be people who can't avail of public transport. For those people, roads are ideal. Unfortunately, we attempt the impossible and keep trying to solve everyone's problem with roads.


  • Options
    #71
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    markpb wrote: »
    Literally all the places you mentioned have rail lines (or, in the case of Swords, one being planned). With the billion that was needlessly spent on the M50 widening and the money now being needlessly spent on the N7 widening, that money could have been spent on improving those rail links and giving people options. Instead, we laid more tarmac and hoped that the inevitable wouldn't happen. There will always be people who can't avail of public transport. For those people, roads are ideal. Unfortunately, we attempt the impossible and keep trying to solve everyone's problem with roads.
    M7 widening is essential and should have been spent initially. Taking money away from the M50 would really not have solved the transport issues as a whole lot of that was the sheer impossibility of traversing Dublin in any form of public transport. As for rail it's very expensive to use, costly to maintain and this is where that density question emerges. Frequency of service is the biggest problem for many of those places not on the DART, along with excessive travelling times from the outer suburbs.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    is_that_so wrote: »
    M7 widening is essential and should have been spent initially. Taking money away from the M50 would really not have solved the transport issues as a whole lot of that was the sheer impossibility of traversing Dublin in any form of public transport. As for rail it's very expensive to use, costly to maintain and this is where that density question emerges. Frequency of service is the biggest problem for many of those places not on the DART, along with excessive travelling times from the outer suburbs.

    That's a great list of excuses. So,what's your plan, another billion or two widening the M50 again? Blame the bad drivers and pretend that's a problem that can be fixed?


  • Options
    #73
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    markpb wrote:
    That's a great list of excuses. So,what's your plan, another billion or two widening the M50 again? Blame the bad drivers and pretend that's a problem that can be fixed?


    It would be helpful to reduce peak time dependence on (or preference for) the M50 and there may be ways to do that without spending billions.

    It would also be helpful if people knew how to drive on it properly and a bit of education and enforcement wouldn't cost billions either.


  • Options
    #74
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    markpb wrote: »
    That's a great list of excuses. So,what's your plan, another billion or two widening the M50 again? Blame the bad drivers and pretend that's a problem that can be fixed?

    The m50 can't and shouldn't be widened again. It's a just that it's the only real way of getting around Dublin. We shouldn't be surprised if it struggles at times.


  • Options
    #75
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    The m50 can't and shouldn't be widened again. It's a just that it's the only real way of getting around Dublin. We shouldn't be surprised if it struggles at times.

    The second part needs some context. The M50 at peak carries 149k vehicles. That's about 1.5 times what the Luas carries and only a fraction of what Dublin Bus carry each day. It's far from the only way to get around.


  • Options
    #76
    antodeco
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 13,425 ✭✭✭✭antodeco


    They should just build another motorway on top of the M50 (like the golden gate bridge), except it only goes to every 3rd exit or something


  • Options
    #77
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    antodeco wrote: »
    They should just build another motorway on top of the M50 (like the golden gate bridge), except it only goes to every 3rd exit or something

    another road joining the n11 and n7 and one joining the m1 and n7 seperate to the m50 would help infinitely, particularly on fridays.


  • Options
    #78
    blackwhite
    Registered Users Posts: 8,475 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Variable speed limits, coupled with enforcement, would go a long way to improving flow at peak times.

    Approx. once per month I travel the M7 from the M9 merge to the Ball at Naas on a Monday around 7.30am.

    The journey tended to take less time when the 60 limit was being enforced than it did with a 120kph limit and no roadworks!

    Much less chance of "concertina" tailbacks occuring when speeds are lower.

    Dymanic speed limit management would certainly help the M50


  • Options
    #79
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,428 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    A decent public transport system,including a m50 orbital bus / Brt, with hard shoulder running where possible, and protected stops under each bridge, and bus /train interchange, park and rides as close as possible to the motorway bridge, and encourage large employers and industrial estates to provide shuttles to interchanges...

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #80
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Markcheese wrote:
    A decent public transport system,including a m50 orbital bus / Brt, with hard shoulder running where possible, and protected stops under each bridge, and bus /train interchange, park and rides as close as possible to the motorway bridge, and encourage large employers and industrial estates to provide shuttles to interchanges...

    That would all help and there's already a number of shuttle services in operation Microsoft have their own and another does a shuttle from the DART to Sandyford.

    I'd happy to see investment going into such infrastructure and incentives/subsidies for bus operators. But the infrastructure has to provide door to door solutions.

    The M50 is a vital part of our transport network. We can't allow it choke to death.


  • Options
    #81
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,428 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    First Up wrote: »
    That would all help and there's already a number of shuttle services in operation Microsoft have their own and another does a shuttle from the DART to Sandyford.

    I'd happy to see investment going into such infrastructure and incentives/subsidies for bus operators. But the infrastructure has to provide door to door solutions.
    The M50 is a vital part of our transport network. We can't allow it choke to death.

    The M50 is vital, its become the hub for everything in the country... And its stuffed...
    And always will be...
    The more capacity that's added to the M50 the more it'll fill up with commuters
    And unfortunately that's not just a Dublin commuter problem it's a national economy problem... (think seat of government, main city, Dublin Port and dublin Airport.. All of which because of our spoke and hub road network are our national ports...
    So rather than trying to spend mega billions on either a double decker M50, or an outer ring road, which will give us a second problem road in a few years, maybe an m50 public transport option, either a metro west (cos we're doing great with metro North) or an really good(but not cheap either) Brt on the M 50.

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,740 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Just because the car is the best mode for certain individuals given their particular circumstances, that doesn't change the fact that public transport is a far more efficient way of moving large number of people. Every time this fact is stated on here, we have people falling over themselves to tell us why they need their car despite it having no relevance to anything. We need more public transport, even if it is not usable for some people they will still benefit from it through less other drivers.
    Both things can be true simultaneously.

    People may need to drive for legitimate reasons to get where they are going, and it's also true that public transport can be used for journeys that are suitable to mass transit. For example, people trying to get from suburbs into a city centre, or around an inner city.

    It's a question of the right tool for the right job. Cities need more public transport, ASAP, but regional travel requires roads.


  • Options
    #83
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    If there's any tolling of other areas of the M50, it needs to be accompanied by traffic slowdown measures on alternative routes - or our suburbs are going to be choked with traffic avoiding the M50.

    For me, this all comes back to density inside the M50 - we're building lots of housing outside the M50, particularly in West Dublin, and a lot of these people are going to drive. There's only so much we can afford to as regards public transport. We need to stop the sprawl and build up in the city centre proper.


  • Options
    #84
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    I'm revisiting this as I've had to use the M50 on a number of evenings recently - heading northbound for a few exits from Sandyford/Dundrum towards the N4 and N3.

    Every journey has taken well over an hour and while heavy volumee will slow things, in every instance the delay was caused by an accident blocking one (and sometimes two) lanes.

    Statistically, motorways are supposed to be the safest part of the road network. Two or three lanes in the same direction, well marked exits and slip roads on and off. Yet we have accidents every day and the cause can only be bad driving.

    This is choking the city to death; will we ever see proper education and enforcement? As it stands, proper motorway behaviour seems to be beyond the capability of many Irish drivers.


  • Options
    #85
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,314 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    First Up wrote: »
    This is choking the city to death; will we ever see proper education and enforcement? As it stands, proper motorway behaviour seems to be beyond the capability of many Irish drivers.
    the primary issue is the M50 is way overloaded.


  • Options
    #86
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    magicbastarder wrote:
    the primary issue is the M50 is way overloaded.


    The volume slows it down but it doesn't cause accidents. Bad driving does.


  • Options
    #87
    sharper
    Registered Users Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭sharper


    First Up wrote: »
    The volume slows it down but it doesn't cause accidents. Bad driving does.

    Accidents definitely don't help and there are absolutely too many of them which also take too long to clear up.

    If you follow any of the main twitter accounts that report on current traffic over the last couple of years it's become much much more common for them to report extremely heavy and slow traffic with no incidents e.g.

    https://twitter.com/aaroadwatch/status/1174737010139049984


  • Options
    #88
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    We can't do much about the heavy traffic, at least in the short term. We can improve driver behaviour. I used the M50 northbound in the evening 4 times in the last two weeks, one journey took about 45-50 minutes due to volume. The other three journeys took 75-90 minutes due to accidents.


  • Options
    #89
    veryangryman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,531 ✭✭✭veryangryman


    First Up wrote: »
    We can't do much about the heavy traffic, at least in the short term. We can improve driver behaviour. I used the M50 northbound in the evening 4 times in the last two weeks, one journey took about 45-50 minutes due to volume. The other three journeys took 75-90 minutes due to accidents.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COsttGQ6IJU


  • Options
    #90
    ifElseThen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 348 ✭✭ifElseThen


    Any red cow incidents, it all bottlenecks through Junction 10 alongside the Luas. This is a 1 lane road so ideally they could turn that into 2 lanes.
    Bottlenecks at the turn-in to the Kingswood estate. Couple of houses there at that junction though, look like they couldn't afford to lose any back garden.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    I know about the bottlenecks, congestion etc. But if the numpties causing the accidents every bloody day knew how to use (and pay attention on) a motorway, we would all get around quicker and without spending any money.

    I think it merits a massive publicity and enforcement campaign but the RSA seem half-hearted about it and the gardai aren't interested.


Advertisement