Smart motorways make sense, says FTA

The implementation of smart motorways in Northern Ireland would make economic, environmental and safety sense, according to the Freight Transport Association (FTA) today. Responding to a study commissioned by the roads authority, TransportNI, which outlines the proposal of the M1 and M2 in and out of Belfast becoming smart motorways, FTA stated that freight operators would see benefits in the introduction, economically, environmentally and would improve safety on the routes.
September 4, 2015 Read time: 2 mins

The implementation of smart motorways in Northern Ireland would make economic, environmental and safety sense, according to the 6983 Freight Transport Association (FTA) today.
 
Responding to a study commissioned by the roads authority, TransportNI, which outlines the proposal of the M1 and M2 in and out of Belfast becoming smart motorways, FTA stated that freight operators would see benefits in the introduction, economically, environmentally and would improve safety on the routes.
 
Smart motorways use the hard shoulder on parts of motorways as a running lane primarily in order to help ease traffic congestion.
 
Seamus Leheny, FTA Policy and Membership Relations manager for Northern Ireland commented: “The major routes around Belfast suffer from recurrent traffic congestion at peak times. Using hard shoulders on the M1 and M2 in and out of Belfast, especially at peak hours – must be given serious consideration. Smart Motorway use increases capacity during rush-hours which would mean improved journey time reliability into Belfast City Centre and the Harbour, and would result in lower emissions and fewer accidents.”
 
The TransportNI study also looked at restricting use of the hard shoulders to buses, multiple occupancy vehicles and freight traffic which would also be feasible and a significant benefit for improving freight movements in the Greater Belfast while also improving public transport.
 
8101 Highways England has implemented similar schemes in Great Britain as far back as 2006, with the M42 scheme after six months reporting an 18 per cent reduction in pollution from vehicle emissions and a four per cent reduction in fuel use, according to the FTA.

Urban Traffic Control

Related Content

  • January 20, 2012
    Adaptive control reduces travel time, cuts congestion
    Situated in San Diego County, California, the growing city of San Marcos has seen its population increase by 53.5 per cent since the turn of the century. Although this dramatic population increase has spurred economic growth bringing new business, homes and opportunities to the city, it has also increased traffic congestion along its central corridor, San Marcos Boulevard. This became the most congested arterial in the city, and, by 2006, the second-most travelled corridor in San Diego County.
    Read More
  • February 2, 2012
    Need for balance on UK speed enforcement funding cuts
    Trevor Ellis, Chairman of the ITS UK Enforcement Interest Group, considers the implications of the UK Government's decision to withdraw funding for road safety camera partnerships
    Read More
  • February 1, 2012
    Positive incentives an alternative to road user charging?
    The Netherlands has been looking at incentivising rush-hour avoidance. The intention is to better understand road users' motivations and find alternatives to congestion charging. Something significant needs to happen if we are to adequately address the traffic congestion and other issues caused by the ever-rising numbers of vehicles on our roads. Congestion or distance-based charging is seen as one way of managing demand and raising revenue for improvements to transport infrastructure. However, charging is
    Read More
  • June 14, 2018
    Road pricing is inevitable – because the ‘user pays’ principle is fair
    We pay for roads through our taxes: the poor pay proportionately more, and effectively subsidise the rich. It would be fairer to accept the ‘user pays’ principle, says Dr John Walker. Road pricing is already used worldwide to combat congestion and pollution, to compensate for falling revenues from fuel duty (‘gas tax’), to provide an alternative (and fairer) means of charging motorists than the 80-year old fuel tax and to improve the efficiency of and expand transport infrastructure. However, it could and s
    Read More

Highlighted Content