I thank the Chairman and members for the invitation to appear before the committee.
We were asked to address two issues and both relate to the M50 upgrade. The M50 upgrade scheme is nearing overall completion with works on the motorway lanes now effectively finished, together with a majority of the junctions programmed for upgrade. The remaining locations where extensive upgrading work is ongoing are junction 6, which is the junction with the N3 Navan Road, and junction 5 which is the junction with the N2-Finglas Road. All works on the M50 are due to be completed by the end of this year resulting in an M50 motorway able to satisfactorily cater for the modern traffic demands being placed on it.
One of the principal junctions on the scheme is the M1-M50-N32 junction or junction 3 in Santry. Prior to its upgrade, this was a roundabout type grade separated junction which suffered from severe traffic congestion. As well as catering for all of the movements to and from the N32 on the east side of the junction, the roundabout of this junction also had to accommodate the traffic flows from the southbound M1 wishing to travel onto the M50 and the traffic flows from the M50 wishing to travel south on the M1 towards the city centre or the Dublin Port tunnel.
The environmental impact statement for the M50 upgrade scheme proposed an upgrade to that junction, which included the construction of two new freeflow connector links for the M1 southbound traffic travelling onto the M50 and for the M50 traffic turning southwards onto the M1 towards the Dublin Port tunnel and the city centre. Due to these traffic movements being removed from the roundabout element of the junction, that left the roundabout dealing with only a fraction of the traffic that it previously had to accommodate. The EIS design also provided for a single lane exit from the roundabout to join with the M50 southbound traffic flows, reflecting the reduced traffic levels on the roundabout.
M50 Concession Limited is the company that was ultimately awarded the public private partnership contract for this section of the M50 upgrading. Part of its responsibility was the detailed design and subsequent construction of this junction upgrade, based on the approved An Bord Pleanála layout. This was duly carried out and was substantially completed by February of this year.
Following its full opening to traffic, it was observed that some difficulties were being experienced by traffic using this exit and travelling onto the M50 southbound from the roundabout. This was monitored and assessed and it was decided to remove the single lane exit road markings and, as a trial for observation, to reline the carriageway as a two lane exit that merges into a single lane further down the slip road. This layout was put in place on site in April 2010 and its operation was closely monitored by representatives of M50 Concession Limited and their designers, plus the NRA and Fingal County Council. Under observation, it was considered that the new layout worked better than the original and represented an enhancement to what had originally been put in place. A road safety audit was carried out on the site of this enhanced layout at the beginning of May. The road safety auditor had concerns about the merging of the two lanes into one further along the slip road and recommended reversion to the original single lane exit from the roundabout.
Arising from the fact that most parties did not favour reverting to a single lane exit, M50 Concession Limited developed an alternative design that retains the two lane exit and addresses concerns raised by the earlier audit on the merge to one lane further along the slip road. The design of that arrangement was reviewed and agreed with the road safety auditor. It was implemented on site and opened to traffic on Saturday, 26 June. It provides a two-lane exit from the roundabout with a gentler merge layout into one lane before exiting onto the M50 motorway. The new layout is being monitored by our site team and early indications are that the solution, as constructed, provides a good arrangement. Of course we will continue to observe behaviour there.
A separate matter was raised on works adjoining junction 6 at the N3 Navan Road. It is worth stating that upgrading a major motorway that is urban in nature, passing close to residential areas does pose huge challenges. As part of this challenge we must achieve a balance between the need to carry out the works efficiently and effectively, from the perspective of minimising delay and disruption to road users, and the need to have regard to the difficulties experienced by residents living in proximity to such works.
With regard to the works at the N3 junction, the initial communications between M50 Concession Limited, that is responsible for carrying out the work, and the residents adjoining the motorway in this area, was inadequate. However, the company has since worked closely with the local residents to agree an acceptable outcome.
The issues at this location largely relate to the removal of trees within the motorway boundaries and concerns about the environmental barriers and landscaping that will be put in place as part of the upgrade. The removal of these trees was always an unavoidable and necessary part of the project. They were part of the motorway corridor and had been planted as part of the original M50 scheme some years ago. It would not have been possible to create the space for the additional lanes and the junction upgrading without their removal.
I understand that M50 Concession Limited has had extensive consultations with certain residents and residents' associations adjoining this area. It has committed to install a higher barrier along part of the relevant section adjoining Castleknock Glade than actually required under the EIS. Furthermore, M50 Concession Limited is in ongoing communication with the residents groups to address many of the concerns previously expressed by them. In those areas where established vegetation had to be removed, new planting and landscaping will be provided as part of the project. We are working in the background with M50 Concession Limited, and residents' needs will be sorted out.
That concludes my comments on the two issues presented to us. My colleague, Mr. Creegan, and I will be pleased to take questions from members on any other issues.