Road-building plans are not in line with fall in traffic levels, say experts

Conor McMorrow, Political Correspondent

Ghost roads: Ireland now has more road per head than Britain

IRELAND HAS 2.5 times more kilometres of motorway per head of population than Britain, according to extensive new research into our 'ghost roads'.

The Sunday Tribune has obtained details of a research document which was compiled for the Chartered Institute of Logistics & Transport Ireland (CILT) which argues that Ireland's road-building plans are based on boom traffic levels that no longer exist.

The country's road network has transformed over the last decade, with the motorway system expanding by 430% between 2001 and 2009. Environmental groups such as the Plan Better group – a joint initiative of An Taisce, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the Irish Environment and Feasta – say that the collapse in traffic volumes on our roads during the recession has left us with a series of 'ghost roads' and some proposed roads will not be needed for 40 to 50 years.

Dr Miles Deas, one of the co-authors of the research for the CILT, has been campaigning against plans for a stretch of motorway from Oilgate in Wexford to Rosslare Harbour and believes that the government should reassess its road-building programmes.

"The harsh realities that now face us, and budgetary restrictions, should have inevitably impacted on the road development aspirations of Transport 21," he argued. As the government's four-year economic plan states that "no project has been cancelled" and "projects can commence as funding becomes available", Deas believes we should overhaul the methods used to appraise and design road schemes for the future.

His report explains: "Analysis of the NRA's [National Roads Authority] last two years' national traffic flow data shows a 7% fall in traffic. This is not surprising. What is disturbing is that future road schemes are being designed on the basis of old forecasted traffic growth of 2-3% year on year. This explains the deserted nature of some of our newly opened roads. Facts that are available paint a different picture."

The CSO Road Freight Transport Survey 2009 showed a 40% fall in road freight carried from the previous year to levels lower than in 1999. The Irish Bulletin of Vehicle and Driver Statistics 2009 showed a 62% fall in new vehicles registered in 2009 compared to 2008. "These are all parameters used to model future traffic growth and they have all drastically changed since traffic was last modelled in Ireland to provide traffic-growth forecasts," said Deas.

According to the Plan Better group, the NRA could face a bill of over €100m of tax-
payers' money to compensate the consortiums that built road projects such as the M3 Clonee to Kells motorway. It opened last year and has been dubbed a 'ghost road' as it is not reaping its expected toll revenue due to the fall-off in traffic volumes.

Deas argued that Ireland should take note of the UK system where the traffic model is run annually and constantly refined to increase accuracy.

"More modest road construction would allow more equitable roll-out of roads. To have expanded the road network with so many four-lane roads during the boom was aspirational; to continue during such an unprecedented recession in the absence of economic and traffic justification is folly."

January 30, 2011

Comments

#1 Patrick B commented, on January 30, 2011 at 7:19 p.m.:

It makes more sense to complete the motorway network now because tender prices are so low. I recently travelled to Westport in Mayo from Dublin and some of that road was frightning. Little if no hard shoulder and crazy people passing at high speed. I don't know how tourists navigate it cause on one occasion I thought I was a goner. Build the rest of the motorways, create much needed employment and save lives.

#2 Sean Lambe commented, on January 30, 2011 at 8:25 p.m.:

"IRELAND HAS 2.5 times more kilometres of motorway per head of population than Britain" ... so what? Britain is much more densely populated than Ireland. Infrastructure should not be built for today´s needs, it should be built for the needs of the next 20-25 years.

#3 Michael Moroney commented, on January 30, 2011 at 10:26 p.m.:

Of course we should continue with road building,it is one of the few job creating areas open to us.We will come out of this recession and will need all the infrastructural improvements which are now in the planning phase.

#4 Miles Deas commented, on February 1, 2011 at 2:09 a.m.:

According to Noel Dempsey the motorway system is complete. We are not talking about leaving these pipeline project roads with a "do-nothing" option. We are talking about the reinstatement of the middle sized road options removed in 2007. At present we jump from standard single lane straight to 4 lane for greenfield road construction. No other European country does this. I want a "do-something else" option. Regarding building for 25 year horizons your right but lets make the horizons realistic. We cannot keep using those 2002 traffic growth parameters they are too far out of date and do not reflect present population and GDP levels nor oil prices. With respect to road construction creating jobs, it does but each job costs more to create than many other alternatives and is short lived. The construction sector should not be artificially inflated again it won't last and we can not afford to sustain it. Motorways are the safest of roads but save the least lives per Euro invested. Almost every other road improvement has a higher benefit to cost ratio when compared to motorways. 50% of our non motorway roads are of the lowest European safety standard. Compare that to Northern Ireland's 5% and Britain's 2%. Fred Barry in the last transport committee meeting said as much. We can not keep building 4 lanes with no traffic or economic justification with the interest on the PPP's need to fund it will be excessive especially when our non-motorway roads are contributing to peoples deaths. The NRA could expand its role to these roads. It is best placed to offer value for money and start developing a nationally consistent road network.

#5 Ollie McG commented, on February 1, 2011 at 3:28 p.m.:

Miles, you make a number of interesting points, however I think you’re misunderstanding the “jump” in the road design standards.
It’s my understanding that Wide Single Carriageways (WSC’s) were removed from the DMRB standards as driver behaviour on the WSC's was less disciplined than on a Standard Single Carriageway (SSC’s), and the fatal accident rate per kilometre of travel was higher on WSC's than on SSC's. The 2+1 and 2+2 carriageway options were introduced in recent years and span the gap between SSC and Dual Carriageways. Although the 2+2 has 2 lanes of traffic in each direction, it had a smaller hard shoulder and median than a Dual Carriageway (i.e. it is 16.5m wide compared to 21.6m for a dual carriageway).
I understand that as 2 + 2 is only marginally more expensive than 2+1, and offers significant additional benefits (improved capacity, better operational safety), that 2+1 is only considered for retro-fit schemes.

Regarding the traffic growth factors, I agree that relying on 2002 traffic figures is not ideal, but if anything the growth factors assumed (prior to 2008 anyway) were a significant underestimation of the growth actually achieved in traffic levels. Looking back over a longer timeframe (20-30 years) I would imagine that a 2-3% growth rate is conservative if anything – particularly as induced traffic is not considered when calculating traffic growth. I believe that these growth factors are to shortly be updated anyway.

I agree that the construction sector shouldn’t be ‘artificially inflated’, but it is a labour intensive industry and unlike rail investment almost everything used in the construction of roads is sourced within the domestic economy.

Finally, regarding you points on safety, it is undeniable that the opening of the inter-urban motorway network has been a key factor in the reduction of road death in Ireland. As you mention however, the safety record of our secondary roads is not good. This is where investment should be focused. There will never be enough traffic levels on these roads to justify motorway construction, however by constructing 2+2 carriageways we would be able to avoid head-on collisions, which usually result in the most severe type of injuries.

#6 Richard commented, on February 2, 2011 at 1:02 a.m.:

Stop building roads; it facilitates environmentally and socially hazardous private car use. The private motor car has no future. It's a failed 20th century experiment. It defeated itself when the first road filled up with traffic. Being stupid humans, we just kept building more roads as if it would solve the problem. But we just made it a trillion times worse - the air pollution, the danger, the missed social interaction, the noise pollution, the resource consumption, the land take, the anxiety, the low sex drive, the killed urban streets, the time wasted, the mass deaths and injuries .........

Name	(Required, published)
Email address	(Required, not published)
URL	(Optional)
Comment
If you enter anything in this field your comment will be treated as spam

Comments

Post a comment

Also in News

Share this article

Search

RSS Feeds