Limerick Northern Distributor Road

Middle Man wrote: »

It seems that they're against anything that's modern - yes, we must preserve our heritage and our environment, but we also have to live in the 21st century!

They have also cited the tunnel as an example of now it hasn't alleviated traffic in the city.

I guarantee if you lift the tolls off that tunnel for one week that would disprove that straight away!

marno21 wrote: »

I'd love to see what the result would be

I reckon there would be much more people using the tunnel even if it's more indirect for them, they're just not willing to pay the toll at the minute. The tunnel always feels quieter than the N18 on both sides even wen the bridges are jammed

I've often crawled down the condell road because i don't want to pay the toll in my work van.

Tefral wrote: »

I've often crawled down the condell road because i don't want to pay the toll in my work van.

I thought they ought to have gone with a Ryanair model on that tunnel.

Say 50c. Then the resulting higher use (could be a factor of anywhere between 5 and 10 times the number of cars) would greatly offset the lower toll.
Most importantly, the scheme would actually then realise its objective fully in terms or relieving pressure on the city.

Would you pay 50c to avoid the Condell/Dock road queuing Tefral?:P

mastershake wrote: »

I thought I would bump this thread seeing as the Coonagh Roundabout to the Knockalisheen Rd section is now out to tender for construction.

https://irl.eu-supply.com/ctm/Supplier/PublicTenders/ViewNotice/228129

Reminder of the route below.

https://www.limerick.ie/sites/default/files/media/documents/2017-05/sl-101_scheme_layout_2.pdf

Tenders in a few weeks ago.

This next phase of the road seems perfectly logical, extending right around the city to the M7 not so much.

I assume the longer term plan is to allow for the redevelopment of Moyross to higher density and provide a train station there?

I honestly don't understand the Green's hard-on for rail.
"Halt all roads, cycleways etc, for rail".
It's not the highest priority transport mode, so why put it above all others?
Even then, if they were pumping money into a high density Moyross with a new station, surely you still need a proper distributor road, rather than bringing traffic through a maze of estates.

As everyone else is saying: surely this phase makes sense at least?

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

I honestly don't understand the Green's hard-on for rail.
"Halt all roads, cycleways etc, for rail".
It's not the highest priority transport mode, so why put it above all others?
Even then, if they were pumping money into a high density Moyross with a new station, surely you still need a proper distributor road, rather than bringing traffic through a maze of estates.

As everyone else is saying: surely this phase makes sense at least?

I'd imagine precious few Green party members know what it's like to grow up somewhere like Moyross, and having to deal with the effects of bare-minium transporation infrastructure. (I grew up somewhere similar, but nowhere near as isolated from its city centre)

I'm a reluctant Green voter: I want better environmental policies, but I don't like the GP's persistent habit of making things more expensive for the already struggling while giving handouts to middle-class people (like me, I'll admit) who can well afford to pay more for it. This objection is typical of that: "More roads are bad" is only true if you live in an area with well-developed road infrastructure where people are choosing to drive instead of taking one of the more environmentally-friendly options that are available; it's definitely not true in places decades of underinvestment mean driving is the only option you have, and to add insult to injury, the road network forces you to take longer, more expensive journeys.

Roads and rail are not an either/or. Better roads make buses more attractive (by making journey times reliable), but I sometimes think the GP has too many people in it who'd never want to be seen on a bus...

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

My problem is that I see their preference of train over road like preferring cake over bread. You kinda need both and both need to be planned as part of an overall network.

That's actually a better summary of my objection. They push for cake, because bread isn't good enough for them, while ignoring that most people don't even have the bread.

If ever there was a group that let perfect become the enemy of good...

And, again, I say this as someone who regularly votes for them!

Having walked to/from a lot of the Limerick suburbs (Dooradoyle, Moylish, Kilmurry) a lot of times carrying bags, it always struck me as a tedious journey, through a seemingly endless "nothing" of cul-de-sacs, housing estates and one-off housing. I don't remember why the bus wasn't an option for me, but it was likely an issue of cost and schedule.
Cheaper bus, frequent bus, longer bus hours and bus priority would have been hugely helpful.

Looking at a map gives a good clue why this didn't happen: these 1970s estates are very poorly connected by design, often with only one or two ways in or out, and lots of branching into dead-ends. That mass of cul-de-sacs might be good at removing through traffic, but good public transport requires efficient through-routes. The design pattern they used seems to have originated in the United States, where car ownership is a given.

(I grew up in a similar place, but not as remote and physically isolated as the estates of North-West Limerick)

Gold-plated solutions like train are very welcome, but you can do a lot with bus, cycle and pedestrian. All are above the train in the heirarchy of needs and all require proper roads.

Yes. First keep the pedestrians away from the wheeled transport to encourage walking (at least we did that); next, keep the cyclists away from motorised transport to encourage cycling; then give buses priority over private cars to encourage use of public transport, and only then, if that hasn't fixed the transport problems, should you start looking at light rail. Heavy rail should only be on the radar if an existing light rail system becomes so wildly successful that it can't meet demand.

riddlinrussell wrote: »

Current thinking is moving towards 'bus only' roads in certain places, obviously would want to couple with expansion of bus network/frequency and lower fares.

Bus only roads, unless you completely separate them from the regular road, simply won't work, too many drivers will see it as an alternate unpoliced route