Go-Ahead for New Ross Bypass

NedNew

On Tuesday (23rd December) it was announced on local radio (South East Radio) that the New Ross Bypass had received the official 'go-ahead'. Also the local T.D., Sean Connick, was seen congratulating local shoppers and welcoming the news on the streets of the town.

In the Irish Times it was mentioned that due to the recession that the government was rethinking the recent cut-backs in road construction and the 'N25 in Wexford' would be one of the projects that may be kick-started to provide jobs in the area.

I can't find anything official yet though.

Lennoxschips

Is it the massively over-dimensioned and unnecessarily long variant?

That's insane if it's true.

Credit crunch or no credit crunch, the gombeens are alive and well.

Chris_533976

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/HA0004.htm

They say decided but no details available.

Good if this is the case, that place is a terrible bottleneck and should be high on the priority list. I'm a little bit unsure about the scale of this, is it overkill? Possibly, but its the only chance they'll get to build it. 2+2 is fair for this scheme. And no, I dont think this will be motorway, nor should it.

Plus I want to see the bridge when its done This should easily be the most impressive scheme in the whole of the roads program.

Lennoxschips

The N25 has been recently upgraded on the Waterford-New Ross stretch and the Rosslare-New Ross stretch. So that's all ready to go.

All they have to do is build a new bridge just to the south of New Ross to take the traffic out of the town and the scheme is finished. A connector road could be built up to the N30.

A 15 km dual carriageway and dual carriageway bridge is highly unnecessary, a waste of money, and makes the massive stretches of recently upgraded and perfectly good N25 completely obsolete.

But we've come to accept insanity as the norm in Ireland. Even in the middle of a credit crunch.

mike65

Tramore House is like stepping back in time to see a future that hasn't happened

http://www.thrdo.com/n25newrossdates.html

road_high

mike65 wrote: »

Tramore House is like stepping back in time to see a future that hasn't happened

http://www.thrdo.com/n25newrossdates.html

Yea, I love the "road opens winter 2007" one. Pure comedy. And there are lots more projects listed there with similar fantasy dates.
Is Tramore House road design an offshoot of Waterford coco with responsbility for the south east region N roads?

mike65

Its the regional office of the NRA.

Good to see invincibleirish didn't let me down

BluntGuy

Usually I don't agree with all of Lennoxschips' ideas for rationalisation of the road network or cutting back on certain schemes.

But in this case I think he is correct.

By all means, bypass New Ross, but really: spending such a huge amount on a bridge that isn't going to carry half the amount of traffic it's designed for. The Waterford Bypass bridge is necessary, and the AADT does justify its expense. But this... I'm really don't think it does.

Now, by all means, if they're going to build a bridge of that scale, it should be DC, it would be further stupidity if they went and built a bridge as long as that as single carriageway. But spending THAT amount of money, something that could get the half the M20 built, or the SRRs done or Newlands Cross - all projects which are, let's face it, more deserving of funding than this one... is it really the right thing to do?

Surely a standard S2 bypass with perhaps a reasonable 2+2 bridge would be a more sensible proposal. There's no point building a 52,000 AADT bridge for something that will hardly to carry 10,000.

As for the bridge, it looks great, but if we must have a bridge like that, build it somewhere where it's truly necessary.

corktina

Lennoxschips wrote: »

The N25 has been recently upgraded on the Waterford-New Ross stretch and the Rosslare-New Ross stretch. So that's all ready to go.

All they have to do is build a new bridge just to the south of New Ross to take the traffic out of the town and the scheme is finished. A connector road could be built up to the N30.

A 15 km dual carriageway and dual carriageway bridge is highly unnecessary, a waste of money, and makes the massive stretches of recently upgraded and perfectly good N25 completely obsolete.

But we've come to accept insanity as the norm in Ireland. Even in the middle of a credit crunch.

sorry I dont agree...this is a Euroroute and connects Waterford and more importantly Cork and South West Ireland with Europe.Infrastructure of a a certain standard is crucial to the SW and New Ross is an awful bottleneck at times

Chris_533976

Details on this have always been thin on the ground, but from what I gather its something similar to this, near Duisberg in Germany.



Doesnt look so ridiculous when you see it elsewhere. Tho I dont think New Ross has quite this much industry

Amtmann

How much is this expected to cost?

BluntGuy

Furet wrote: »

How much is this expected to cost?

I heard one billion mentioned before...

I thought it was way too much at first, but think about it:

Consider that the Waterford Bypass costed 600 million (half of which you can attribute to the bridge), and has a much shorter bridge (the N.R bypass bridge is over three times longer than the Waterford bypass). If the N.R is built to nearly the same spec as the W.B bridge and is three times its length, the cost will mostly likely increase in nearly the same ratio.

One billion is an unacceptable amount to spend on a single bypass that will only carry around 10,000 vehicles.

One billion would pay for the entire M20! It would pay for the SRR upgrades and Newlands Cross and could probably get most of the money for the N11 scheme in there too...

If the New Ross bypass had a 40,000 AADT, yes, go for the bridge. But I'm sorry a 52,000 AADT capacity bridge that will carry less than 10,000 on many days. Insanity... !!!!

I've also heard a 350 million euro figure mentioned before. Perhaps, in that case, it isn't so questionable. But if it does turn about to be one billion, you can forget about it!

Amtmann

If it costs even one quarter of a billion, I think it's too much, and not really justifiable. An M20 is much more important.

Bards

Lads , you all way off the mark. The whole M9 Motorway from Kilcullen to waterford is not costing €1bn

the waterford city bypass is costing somewhere in the region of €300M (The National Roads Authority estimates that if it were to undertake itself all the design, construction, maintenance, operation and re-investment tasks that are being required of Celtic Roads Group the cost would be in the order of €600m over 30 years)

as of 2005 the New ross Bypass is budget to cost €95M

http://www.wexford.ie/wex/Misc/Notices/Current/Name,887,en.html

FYI the Boyne bridge cost €35M
http://www.roughanodonovan.com/boyne%20bridge.htm

BluntGuy

Bards wrote:

the waterford city bypass is costing somewhere in the region of €300M (€600M inc land land and preliminary design costs was mooted if the state were to construct it)

Incorrect Bards...

NRA Website wrote:

The Authority estimates that if it were to undertake itself all the design, construction, maintenance, operation and re-investment tasks that are being required of Celtic Roads Group the cost would be in the order of €600m (excluding land and preliminary design costs) in 2006 values.

Because of the way the PPP mechanism works, we will end up paying roughly 2 billion euro for the Waterford Bypass over the next 30 years.

95 million for the New Ross bypass seems like a very conservative estimate...

mike65

Well it didn't cost 2 billion to build, only to use.

Lennoxschips

corktina wrote: »

sorry I dont agree...this is a Euroroute and connects Waterford and more importantly Cork and South West Ireland with Europe.Infrastructure of a a certain standard is crucial to the SW and New Ross is an awful bottleneck at times

I'm not saying New Ross isn't a bottleneck that doesn't need to be bypassed, put that straw man away. Just that all it needs is a more suitable bypass to connect up the existing N25 on both sides of New Ross. This is a road which is well up to the job and has been recently upgraded!! Why make it obsolete?!

Just because a road is a "Euroroute" doesn't mean it should be a motorway. A road should be a motorway if the traffic volume justifies it.

BluntGuy

Lennoxschips wrote: »

Just because a road is a "Euroroute" doesn't mean it should be a motorway.

Indeed. There are plenty of euroroutes across Europe which are good quality S2 as well as DC.

This one should be no different, a good quality S2 road with a 2+2 bridge (and not the enormous proposed one either) would suffice methinks.

Sponge Bob

Dudes, the go ahead may be from an Bord Pleanála not from the exchequer .

Bards

Even the DOOR is est to cost €1B. I just don;t know where you came up with 1B for the New Ross Bypass????????

BluntGuy

Bards wrote: »

Even the DOOR is est to cost €1B. I just don;t know where you came up with 1B for the New Ross Bypass????????

I've heard it cited a few times, even on these boards...

When I find the link I'll post it here...

Lennoxschips

What is a 2+2 bridge needed for? That's where the massive and unnecessary costs are being incurred .

A single carriageway bridge is (way) more than sufficient for the traffic intensity.

Perhaps, in 20/30 years, there'll be a need for a dual carriageway bridge. Then you build an identical single-carriage way bridge right next to it, and you have two single carriageway bridges right next to each other. Then you have a dual carriageway crossing.

BluntGuy

Lennoxschips wrote: »

What is a 2+2 bridge needed for? That's where the massive and unnecessary costs are being incurred .

I don't agree with the current bridge proposal, but to only build a single-carriageway bridge would be just as daft and would show a complete lack of foresight.

A relatively small 2+2 (two lanes each way, no hard shoulder) bridge to tie into the rest of the S2 bypass would be good idea because if the time ever came that the rest of the bypass did need to be dualled, it would be a relatively painless tie-in job.

Your idea:

Lennoxschips wrote:

Perhaps, in 20/30 years, there'll be a need for a dual carriageway bridge. Then you build an identical single-carriage way bridge right next to it, and you have two single carriageway bridges right next to each other. Then you have a dual carriageway crossing

... it works as well, but it makes the tie-in job more painful in the future and will incur needless expenses and waste materials. Do the bridge correctly first time around and it's there for a good 50 years or more.

But don't get me wrong, I think the current bridge proposal is ludicrously over-spec and needs to be downsized.

Bards

Lennoxschips wrote: »

What is a 2+2 bridge needed for? That's where the massive and unnecessary costs are being incurred .

A single carriageway bridge is (way) more than sufficient for the traffic intensity.

Perhaps, in 20/30 years, there'll be a need for a dual carriageway bridge. Then you build an identical single-carriage way bridge right next to it, and you have two single carriageway bridges right next to each other. Then you have a dual carriageway crossing.

AADT in 2004 was between 15,000 and 18,000 vehicles per day. there is no up to date data on the NRA site. This is sufficient to require dual carriageway now and would be a disaster to under engineer a solution

https://nraextra.nra.ie/trafficcounterdata/html/N25-13A.htm

Lennoxschips

Firstly, that's measurements at the existing bridge itself, so that includes local New Ross traffic. A bypass would only carry the traffic bypassing New Ross, while local traffic would remain on the existing bridge at New Ross. For example, if the new route was laid out properly, traffic going to New Ross itself from Waterford would get off the bypass before the new bridge and carry on into the town over the old bridge. So the traffic being carried on the new bridge will be less.

However, even if the bridge did have to carry 16,000 vehicles a day (that's in both directions, 8,000 each way), I don't see how that warrants a dual carriageway. What norm and/or regulation do you base that on?

The data you show is broken down into traffic per hour. The maximum per direction shown is 915 movements per hour at peak time (evening rush hour). A single carriageway road can handle up to 1,500 movements per hour per direction. So the peak traffic is well within the design limit of a single carriageway road, let alone off-peak. And that's not even taking into account that a lot of local traffic (Waterford commuters) will continue to use the old bridge...

Bards

Those figures are from 2004, the figures sfrom 2003 & 2002 show about 1,000 less per day per year, so if we assume a growth of 1,000 AADT per year this will give us a figure of 19,000 to 22,000 AADT in today's terms

bearing in mind that the bridge will not commence until 2010 at the earliest and will take three approx years to construct then it is safe to assume that by the time the bridge will be completed the volume for a single carriageway in each direction will be surpassed

Lennoxschips

How is that safe to assume? You are assuming that every single vehicle on the old bridge will be moved onto the new bridge. You are ignoring the fact that local traffic can and will continue to use the old bridge.

Secondly, traffic growth in recent years has been due to large housing projects being built in out of town locations and the encouragement of commuting. The house building boom is over, so that kind of growth is finished. And one would hope that any new houses built in the future will be built closer to the centre of our commercial centres, so that such traffic growth on roads will be avoided. Why should we build a larger bridge to benefit developers? I'm not holding my breath though. A dual carriageway bridge will be built, housing will be built on the other side of the bridge and marketed to Waterford commuters, and we'll all be told how the larger bridge turned out to be necessary in the end.

corktina

make your mind up..is the boom over OR will housing be built to benfit developers?

Lennoxschips

You've missed the point.

The current boom is over.

However, housing will be built again in the future, the question is whether this will be done in a sustainable manner or if new roads will be misused to build out of town developments. Looking at years of Fianna Fail gombeen policy you'd have to say the latter. But should we be building roads now large enough to take into account the corrupted planning of the future...

corktina

lots of people like to live out of town, who are you to say they shouldnt?

murphaph

This crossing is much more important than people seem to believe. It's not just a bypass for New Ross (a town I couldn't give a monkies about tbh) or the South East, it's about providing a decent route from Waterford/Cork/Limerick and possibly Galway as well as the south Midlands to Rosslare.

In my opinion the N24 should be higher priority than parts of the Atlantic Corridor because of the way it slices across to Rosslare.

We all accept I think that a bridge is required at least. People are suggesting that the proposed cable stayed bridge is over-spec and it should be a scaled back 2+2. Knowing little as I do about the proposal or the lay of the land around there, why do people think they are opting for an 'over spec' 2+2 cable stayed bridge instead of a more straightforward design 2+2 bridge? (I totally refute the notion of building any large river crossing as an S2 in this day and age-that would be pure folly)

Is the lay of the land not determining the position and hence the design choice in this case?

If we are ever to recover our position as an exporter we need to make sure our goods can get to port efficiently and I believe the long-term objective for the N24/N25 should be at least 2+2.

BluntGuy

murphaph wrote: »

This crossing is much more important than people seem to believe. It's not just a bypass for New Ross (a town I couldn't give a monkies about tbh) or the South East, it's about providing a decent route from Waterford/Cork/Limerick and possibly Galway as well as the south Midlands to Rosslare.

In my opinion the N24 should be higher priority than parts of the Atlantic Corridor because of the way it slices across to Rosslare.

We all accept I think that a bridge is required at least. People are suggesting that the proposed cable stayed bridge is over-spec and it should be a scaled back 2+2. Knowing little as I do about the proposal or the lay of the land around there, why do people think they are opting for an 'over spec' 2+2 cable stayed bridge instead of a more straightforward design 2+2 bridge? (I totally refute the notion of building any large river crossing as an S2 in this day and age-that would be pure folly)

Is the lay of the land not determining the position and hence the design choice in this case?

If we are ever to recover our position as an exporter we need to make sure our goods can get to port efficiently and I believe the long-term objective for the N24/N25 should be at least 2+2.

That's all fine and good, but the problem with the New Ross proposal is it just costs... too... much.

I've heard figures from 350 million to 1 billion, I've e-mailed the NRA to get an official figure. Hopefully I'll have a response soon.

Either way, there are much more deserving projects than this I'm afraid. 350 million would pay for Newlands Cross and probably at least one of the SRR upgrades. It would finish the missing chunk of N11, it would get the M20 moving. Don't even get me started on the better uses a billion could be put to, should the project happen to cost that much.

Now yes, I accept a bridge is needed, but does it have to be that mega-bridge? Aren't there any other proposals? Yes, if they're going to build a bridge that long it would be lunacy to make it S2. But for some reason, I can't help but feel that the only reason the project is going ahead like this is more for the want of a huge bridge than the need.

Anyway, if there aren't any more reasonable proposals, this project must be put on the long finger for a long time. We can't have such a huge sum of money that should be invested elsewhere being pumped into a 13 km bypass that's going to be seriously under-utilised.

Lennoxschips

I think people are seriously over-estimating the importance of Rosslare.

Lennoxschips

corktina wrote: »

lots of people like to live out of town, who are you to say they shouldnt?

Many people do, but most of the people living in these out of town estates are doing so because they can't afford a place in the city.

If you offered these people to swap their commute for a similar house closer to the city for the same price, they'd bite your hand off.

corktina

in your humble opinion....:rolleyes:

Lennoxschips

All those people complaining about having to put up with long commutes in order to be able to live in an affordable house must be a figment of my imagination.

corktina

they arent a representative selection, the people who are happy to be doing just that dont voice that opinion. I dont think housing is astronomic in that part of the world and I doubt New Ross would be a lot cheaper than Waterford.

invincibleirish

Lennoxschips wrote: »

I think people are seriously over-estimating the importance of Rosslare.

Bang on the money. If we're building infrastructure to help access to our ports lets build the N28, upgrade the M1 to Bremore port, and do something by road or rail to Foynes.

As for the NR Bypass,as Bluntguy said there are other parts of the N25/Atlantic corridor which are in far greater need of attention.

murphaph

invincibleirish wrote: »

Bang on the money. If we're building infrastructure to help access to our ports lets build the N28, upgrade the M1 to Bremore port, and do something by road or rail to Foynes.

As for the NR Bypass,as Bluntguy said there are other parts of the N25/Atlantic corridor which are in far greater need of attention.

There's no real point in developing Foynes. The slowest part of the journey for any lorry going IRL-UK-Europe is(are) of course the ferry crossing(s). For the same reason, Cork/Ringaskiddy would slow down travel on these routes. Foynes/Cork are only really useful for container traffic, if at all. Our main trading partners are in Europe however-getting to and from the UK/Europe as fast as possible should be a priority. Bremore does not exist as a port of any size and of course, Dublin port is already directly connected to the motorway network anyway.

Rosslare has an existing setup well able to handle volume. New Ross needs bypassing anyway.

corktina

murphaph wrote: »

There's no real point in developing Foynes. The slowest part of the journey for any lorry going IRL-UK-Europe is(are) of course the ferry crossing(s). For the same reason, Cork/Ringaskiddy would slow down travel on these routes. Foynes/Cork are only really useful for container traffic, if at all. Our main trading partners are in Europe however-getting to and from the UK/Europe as fast as possible should be a priority. Bremore does not exist as a port of any size and of course, Dublin port is already directly connected to the motorway network anyway.

Rosslare has an existing setup well able to handle volume. New Ross needs bypassing anyway.

bang on the money...ro-ro is the route of choice and Rosslaire is well positioned fro the UK M4 m25 m2 route to the Continent.

NedNew

Since I am familiar with the area and the by-pass proposal I will mention a few points:

To travel from Rosslare to Waterford, all road traffic needs to pass through the port of New Ross, which causes a less than ideal diversion northwards (Waterford is almost directly west of Rosslare).

In comparison. the train line takes a high bridge across the Barrow-Suir merge to the south and allows ships to pass underneath on their way to New Ross.

The new bypass is a mixture of both of above, it is south of New Ross and also the bridge is high to allow ships to pass. The geography closer to the town does not allow for a high bridge.

If the port business was excluded as a factor then it would be a simple matter of a low level bridge slightly south of the existing bridge. No problems.

If you ask me the port is dead, and has been for over 20 years. But no politician the courage or the will to admit this. However there are still ships arriving into the port, delivering grain and some oil products. Then there is a newer port slightly down river (whicl will also be north of the new bypass) which handles more and more of the existing freight.

There is also a rumour that this will be a PPP project with no immediate cost to the Government.

The standard delay entering New Ross from the Waterford direction would be 20-30 minutes, with delays of 45 minutes not uncommon.

The New Ross/Waterford relationship could be considred as something similar to Naas/Dublin - and Naas badly needed its bypass. New Ross is 25km from Waterford and 53km from Rosslare.

invincibleirish

I must have missed this super port we have in Rosslare. Here was me thinking Dublin Port takes the lions share of trade into this country. Hard to find up to date figures for Rosslare but isn't its RO:RO traffic pretty minor compared to Dublin and similar to other Ports?

Surely Rosslare would have boomed in the past 10-15 years if were any bit useful?

Chris_533976

I think with the tolls surrounding Dublin and a completed M9, M11 and possibly N25 that Waterford/New Ross/ Rosslare and even Cork will become bigger/better ports. A decision needs to be made to develop ONE of them rather than let them all compete randomly. That way we'll have one big port instead of lots of silly, substandard ones. But no, common sense will not prevail and every town will want its own port. Before we know it, Athlone will want its own cruise liner terminal.

Lennoxschips

If the port business was excluded as a factor then it would be a simple matter of a low level bridge slightly south of the existing bridge. No problems.

If you ask me the port is dead, and has been for over 20 years.

How often are ships coming into New Ross? If it's not very often (and you say they port is dead) then a low bridge with an opening/closing section could be built...

Of course a bypass is needed, just not on the scale that is being proposed.

Rosslaire is well positioned fro the UK M4 m25 m2 route to the Continent.

Hmm... There's 60 km of single carriageway from Fishguard to the first bit of dual carriageway, and then it's another 30/40 km to the M4.

The British don't think the traffic numbers on the whole Rosslare-Wales route are up to dual carriageway.

Chris_533976

True, but I certinaly wouldnt consider the current Labour Government or the British populace models of forward thinking road building. What we have under construction is embarassing because we need so much of it, what they have under construction is embarassing because theres so little of it.

murphaph

Lennoxschips wrote: »

Hmm... There's 60 km of single carriageway from Fishguard to the first bit of dual carriageway, and then it's another 30/40 km to the M4.

The British don't think the traffic numbers on the whole Rosslare-Wales route are up to dual carriageway.

We are a small trading partner for the UK. They are a large trading partner for us. We are approaching it from two different perspectives! Remember that the A55 in North Wales was only recently completed (in fact it still has a small S2 section!) to dual carriageway standard. For many years succsssive British governments had no intention of upgrading the route to Holyhead either and even today the A5 (main route from Holyhead to London) remains S2 throughout Wales. British thresholds for triggering upgrades of S2 routes to D2 are much higher than ours. Too high IMHO.

L1011

The S2 section of the A55 is a case where they've decided that building a second bridge is too expensive... hence why even on an S2 bypass of New Ross a 2+2 bridge would be essential for future upgrades.

Lennoxschips

huh? they are two completely different roads on completely different routes that serve completely different purposes.

JupiterKid

This "announcement" smacks of nothing more than policitcking and propping up the loal FF TDs (who are probably getting it in the neck from locals for the gross mismanagement of the economy, but that's another story...). I'll believe it when I see the construction plant on site.

There is no way New Ross merits a €1 billion bypass. Build a D2 bridge, link back to the N25 road, and build the more elaborate lengths of the D2 bypass later on, as traffic growth warrants. Right now, only a new bridge is really needed.

L1011

Lennoxschips wrote: »

huh? they are two completely different roads on completely different routes that serve completely different purposes.

Comparison is entirely valid - 30 years ago they'd never have though they'd need a dual carriage way to Holyhead (most traffic went by rail); now they're stuck with a multi-million quid bill if they want to fix the gap in the A55.

On the N25 its not going to be overly more expensive to build a 2+2 bridge than a WS2 bridge. However, stringing a second bridge across in 30 years time would be extremely expensive.

groveman60

When the New Ross bypass bridge is built and opened, someone is sure to have some complaint about it. The look of it, or whatever.
Wouldn't it be typical for them to find that the bridge was a few feet too low for big boats coming up to the port!. 'The tide levels have changed in recent times', might well be the response. 'We can always lower the river-bed under the bridge, anyway'.