Upgrade of the M7 from 2 to 3 lanes between Naas and the M9 junction

G_R

http://www.nra.ie/RoadSchemeActivity/KildareCountyCouncil/N7NaasNewbridgeBypassUpgrade/SchemeName,15698,en.html

hi,

i just saw on the NRA website that there is plans to widen the M7 from from 2 to 3 lanes between Naas (where it becomes/stops being the N7) and when the M9 starts. Needed in my opinion that can be a bottle neck when traffic is high.

It says that it is currently doing a Constrains Study, any idea what that actually means and anyone know what the progress is??

thanks

d

Victor

dannym08 wrote: »

It says that it is currently doing a Constrains Study, any idea what that actually means and anyone know what the progress is??

Its essentially the start of the process.

They are working out what options can / can't be done, e.g. there might be buildings in the way or narrow bridges.

On a greenfield project a constraints study would be down to work out where the road can't go because of bogs, rivers / lakes, urban development, zones of archaeologicla importance and so on.

mysterious

The Naas ball flyover should of being knocked when they refitted it:rolleyes:

Not going to get into this petty rediculing of the NRA.:rolleyes:
But when they repaired the bridge they should of replaced the colums for widening. I just don't understand the short sighteness I'm so sick of it at this stage:mad:

The 3 other existing road bridges on the Naas bypass have to go. The rest of the bridges should be fine up till the M9. As from the Naas bypass to the M9 off ramp is wide median motorway.

This should of been done when the Naas road was dug up. But pfffft.

G_R

Victor wrote: »

Its essentially the start of the process.

thanks victor

mysterious wrote: »

The Naas ball flyover should of being knocked when they refitted it:rolleyes:

Not going to get into this petty rediculing of the NRA.:rolleyes:
But when they repaired the bridge they should of replaced the colums for widening. I just don't understand the short sighteness I'm so sick of it at this stage:mad:

The 3 other existing road bridges on the Naas bypass have to go. The rest of the bridges should be fine up till the M9. As from the Naas bypass to the M9 off ramp is wide median motorway.

This should of been done when the Naas road was dug up. But pfffft.

totally agree, they really arent the most visionary people on the planet it has to be said!

mysterious

Will the third Naas bypass access be incoporated into this scheme, at the Milennium business park? If so, if not, will the new upgrade still allow this gap to be renumbered as part of the rest of the M7

Or will the NRA, go dumb beanie and build this upgrade, build this interchange after, then remove all the numberings and yank the new numbering so this new interchange is incoporated.

I know this is all juggle juggle, but the NRA are a bit lost.

The other thing that really get's on my tits.
is the down arrows, on two lane motorways. YOU DON'T NEED TWO DOWN ARROWS LANE BY LANE SEGMENTS on two lane motoway along with left arrow facing up. It's absaloutely retarded.

It really is, they don't have awful signage like this in other countries. Ugh it's horrible. The examples are actually on the Naas bypass. They only need down facing arrows if the motorway is more than 2 lanes. So traffic gets in lane. When it is two lanes YOU DON'T NEED IT for christ sakes.

L1011

The third exit is a separate scheme which I think is progressing as-is. Its required for the Kildare County Council controlled Sallins Bypass to go ahead anyway.

Think it might be Kildare CC/private money building it (like M4 J2A/6). Nearly sure the planning application went up recently...

mysterious

mysterious wrote: »

Will the third Naas bypass access be incoporated into this scheme, at the Milennium business park? If so, if not, will the new upgrade still allow this gap to be renumbered as part of the rest of the M7

Or will the NRA, go dumb beanie and build this upgrade, build this interchange after, then remove all the numberings and yank the new numbering so this new interchange is incoporated.

I know this is all juggle juggle, but the NRA are a bit lost.

The other thing that really get's on my tits.
is the down arrows, on two lane motorways. YOU DON'T NEED TWO DOWN ARROWS LANE BY LANE SEGMENTS on two lane motoway along with left arrow facing up. It's absaloutely retarded.

It really is, they don't have awful signage like this in other countries. Ugh it's horrible. The examples are actually on the Naas bypass. They only need down facing arrows if the motorway is more than 2 lanes. So traffic gets in lane. When it is two lanes YOU DON'T NEED IT for christ sakes.

I didn't realise it turned into a rant:D

DWCommuter

mysterious wrote: »

The Naas ball flyover should of being knocked when they refitted it:rolleyes:

Not going to get into this petty rediculing of the NRA.:rolleyes:
But when they repaired the bridge they should of replaced the colums for widening. I just don't understand the short sighteness I'm so sick of it at this stage:mad:

The 3 other existing road bridges on the Naas bypass have to go. The rest of the bridges should be fine up till the M9. As from the Naas bypass to the M9 off ramp is wide median motorway.

This should of been done when the Naas road was dug up. But pfffft.

I'd go with that. A classic example of a patch work solution based on an administration that never kept up with reality. Now that the money has run out, it'll be 10 years before we revisit these "obvious" requirements.

dowlingm

Is this the motorway section which crosses the Waterford railway line and which they only made a single track width bridge for?

ardmacha

The obvious cure is to stick a toll thereabouts to fund a widening, a la M50. Commuters coming on the M4, M3 or M1 face a toll, but not those from Carlow or Portlaoise.

G_R

ardmacha wrote: »

The obvious cure is to stick a toll thereabouts to fund a widening, a la M50. Commuters coming on the M4, M3 or M1 face a toll, but not those from Carlow or Portlaoise.

maybe so but anyone travelling from cork for example will hav to pass through 2 toll bridges (not including M50). I think they've been charged enough.

mysterious

ardmacha wrote: »

The obvious cure is to stick a toll thereabouts to fund a widening, a la M50. Commuters coming on the M4, M3 or M1 face a toll, but not those from Carlow or Portlaoise.

That wont happen seriously ffs:rolleyes:
The alternate roads is via through Naas and Newbridge and Kilcullen, that is not a viable alternate road for tolls.

Seriously think before you type stuff like the above.

ardmacha

maybe so but anyone travelling from cork for example will have to pass through 2 toll bridges (not including M50)

This toll would mean 3 on the Cork route for 240km of motorway, or 1 every 80km. Tell the people in Kells that is unfair, as they face two tolls over 60Km reaching Dublin.

The alternate roads is via through Naas and Newbridge and Kilcullen, that is not a viable alternate road for tolls.

What is unviable about them. These were the National roads until 20 years ago. There is traffic in the towns, but there is traffic in Navan, Drogheda, Fermoy and other other towns bypassed by toll roads.

Stupido

the extra lane will be on the central reservation. Can't see the need for taking down existing bridges. 3 lanes makes sence, but should go all the way to Portlaoise to the M7/M8 split

invincibleirish

ardmacha wrote: »

The obvious cure is to stick a toll thereabouts to fund a widening, a la M50. Commuters coming on the M4, M3 or M1 face a toll, but not those from Carlow or Portlaoise.

If we're using that logic then how about a toll on the M9 to pay for Newlands X? it being the only MIU without any toll on its length.

mysterious

Stupido wrote: »

the extra lane will be on the central reservation. Can't see the need for taking down existing bridges. 3 lanes makes sence, but should go all the way to Portlaoise to the M7/M8 split

The Naas road bridges have pillars right next to the HS, and the Naas road resveration will barely fit two running lanes and a central concrete barrier, the verges on the edges will have to be used.

Please read up.:rolleyes:

mysterious

ardmacha wrote: »

This toll would mean 3 on the Cork route for 240km of motorway, or 1 every 80km. Tell the people in Kells that is unfair, as they face two tolls over 60Km reaching Dublin.



What is unviable about them. These were the National roads until 20 years ago. There is traffic in the towns, but there is traffic in Navan, Drogheda, Fermoy and other other towns bypassed by toll roads.

Yes but the M3 is a toll built motorway. I dissagree with two tolls here too.


There is already a toll at Portlaoise, and then put one at Newbridge. It just wont work. Since the Newbridge motorway isn't a toll. Why are you suggesting to put one there.

The road between Kildare and Naas will not able to cope with the toll diversion. This is a totally different comparison. The people of Kells have a choice to either pay one toll on the M3 while avoid the other or still use the existing route.

We are talking about long distance traffic been stung on the busier M7 sections. Two tolls is enough for each inter urban. Another one at Newbridge is just going to cause mayhem.

There was a car crash on the M7 last year or the year before, that forced 25,000 cars both M7/M9 NB to use the old road. There were 4 hour congestion in Newbridge, Naas and Kilcullen.

The M3 is a high quality standard toll motorway. The existing N3 is far better qaulity than the toll alternate than that of the Naas to Newbridge section. Also the traffic avoiding the tolls for the M3 would be far less than 15,000 cars avoiding the Newbridge section. This amount of traffic is not sustainable on the Old R445 and Kilcullen roads.

murphaph

mysterious wrote: »

The Naas road bridges have pillars right next to the HS, and the Naas road resveration will barely fit two running lanes and a central concrete barrier, the verges on the edges will have to be used.

Please read up.:rolleyes:

You could easily widen the M7 between Naas and the M9 by using the central reservation. It would be perfectly acceptable to eliminate the HS through the overbridges if neccessary.

murphaph

mysterious wrote: »

The existing N3 is far better qaulity than the toll alternate than that of the Naas to Newbridge section

The Naas-Newbridge section of the R445 is dual carriageway throughout. The N3 is entirely single carriageway where the M3 will take over. You are talking nonsense here.

L1011

murphaph wrote: »

The Naas-Newbridge section of the R445 is dual carriageway throughout. The N3 is entirely single carriageway where the M3 will take over. You are talking nonsense here.

Admittedly some of the "existing" N3 has been upgraded to WS2 (albeit buslane rather than H/S along its sides) on a new alignment to allow the N3 and is as a result a high quality road; but the R445 Nass-Newbridge DC is still of higher quality and capacity than this.

Those comparing tolls based on sheer number need to be reminded that the N3 tolls are going to be very low - about 1.50 each - compared to other tolls.

mysterious

murphaph wrote: »

The Naas-Newbridge section of the R445 is dual carriageway throughout. The N3 is entirely single carriageway where the M3 will take over. You are talking nonsense here.

No i'm not, this through traffic will have to go through Naas and Newbridge. These are huge towns the existing roads are already heavily trafficked. I'm aware of the small DC section but this route serves both towns of over 20,000 each. There doesn't need to be other traffic on this route, fine and well as a toll alternative, but the remainder of the route is a narrow single carriegway going through Naas, Kildare and Newbridge. The Curragh roundabout R445 is already at capacity. The Naas Ball flyover is also at capactiy. Where do you suggest the toll avoiding traffic to turn back onto the M7. Seriously if your trying to back up the argument of tolling this section of M7, you better get a good argument fast.

The M7 was designed to bypass these towns a toll is already at Portloaise you cannot expect to toll futher 30km up when this motorway was in place since the late 80s and another motorway at the M50.

It's you who is talking nonsense. That DC is only a 4km in lenght it still ends in Newbridge. The Newbridge to Kildare road is extremely narrow as the road entering Naas. There is currently alot of traffic using these roads already.

There is no toll alternative. we are talking about 60,000 vehicles a day. A toll here when there is a toll on the M50 and Portloaise, it just wont work.

To be quite frank I wouldn't pay for it.

mysterious

murphaph wrote: »

You could easily widen the M7 between Naas and the M9 by using the central reservation. It would be perfectly acceptable to eliminate the HS through the overbridges if neccessary.

The Naas overbridges have to go, the traffic is to high and it's safer to refit the bridges. The bridges here are the oldest in Ireland. 1983. It's cost benifetial if they knock the old bridges rather than repariing them and squeezing three lanes into them.

The Newbridge to Naas section is perfectly wide enough though

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

Admittedly some of the "existing" N3 has been upgraded to WS2 (albeit buslane rather than H/S along its sides) on a new alignment to allow the N3 and is as a result a high quality road; but the R445 Nass-Newbridge DC is still of higher quality and capacity than this.

Those comparing tolls based on sheer number need to be reminded that the N3 tolls are going to be very low - about 1.50 each - compared to other tolls.

Also the toll avoidance traffic impact would be far minimal since there is less traffic, cheaper toll prices, better quality toll M3 motorway and smaller towns and with less local traffic.

The R445 just would not be able to carry a toll alternative of a much busier M7 motorway. The M3 is designed more efficiently with better junctions and better road links of the motorway like any toll motorway.

The M7 at Naas would need enormous amount of work.

• you'd need to widen the lanes, third access of the Naas bypass.
• significant Upgrade the Curragh and Naas ball flyover to {facilitate the toll alternative off the M7. the Curragh roundabout and Naas ball flyover area already at capacity.
• The south west Naas bypass SB exits slip would have to be upgraded
• upgrade the Curragh roundabout and widen the bridge
• a bypass of Kilcullen since M9 toll,will mean kilculln would be clogged
• a bypass of Newbridge also
• a bypass of Naas. the toll traffic cannot use the main street.
• The north ring of naas will not be suffient either, as the road services sallins and northern fringes of the town
• You would have to spend a fortune building new signs on the toll alternative route, since Kildare, Newbridge and Naas R445 is daggered and snaking all over the place.

Seriously tolling this would be a disaster.

G_R

ye come on being serious about it tolling this road is simply not an option.

about a month ago i was coming home from dublin. we decided to go off at naas north, go to mcdonalds in naas and then back on at naas south...a completely stupid idea; it took us nearly an hour cos of traffic. imagine an extra couple of thosand toll avoiders using the road....it would be chaos!

back on topic, it needs ta be widened cos at rush hour traffic moves very slowly at this section however traffic does keep movin so it shouldnt be done till after newlands x imo

marmurr1916

dannym08 wrote: »

ye come on being serious about it tolling this road is simply not an option.

about a month ago i was coming home from dublin. we decided to go off at naas north, go to mcdonalds in naas and then back on at naas south...a completely stupid idea; it took us nearly an hour cos of traffic. imagine an extra couple of thosand toll avoiders using the road....it would be chaos!

back on topic, it needs ta be widened cos at rush hour traffic moves very slowly at this section however traffic does keep movin so it shouldnt be done till after newlands x imo

The N7 is already 3 lanes each way from the M50 to the start of the M7.

The NRA are going to widen the M7 to 3 lanes each way from its start to its junction with the M9.

Tolling this section would be a bad idea.

G_R

marmurr1916 wrote: »

The N7 is already 3 lanes each way from the M50 to the start of the M7.

i know that i didnt say anything about the N7. I was talking about the section from where the N7 becomes the M7 and where the M9 splits off

marmurr1916 wrote: »

The NRA are going to widen the M7 to 3 lanes each way from its start to its junction with the M9.

again i know, i am the OP

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Tolling this section would be a bad idea.

exactly what i said

Irish and Proud

mysterious wrote: »

The Naas overbridges have to go, the traffic is to high and it's safer to refit the bridges. The bridges here are the oldest in Ireland. 1983. It's cost benifetial if they knock the old bridges rather than repariing them and squeezing three lanes into them.

The Newbridge to Naas section is perfectly wide enough though

...not only would I do what you suggest, but I'd also make sure that the replacement bridges would allow for a 4th lane each way without loosing the hard-shoulder. Also, the replacements could accommodate any necessary widening of roads going into Naas - given that the town has grown substantially since the Naas Bypass was built. Retaining the existing bridges would be a bit stupid IMO!

Regards!

ardmacha

It's cost benifetial aif they knock the old bridges rather than repariing them and squeezing three lanes into them.

Has anyone noticed that there is a lack of money around and that the government is spending a third more than it has by way of income.
How exactly is it cost beneficial to knock the old bridges?

mysterious

ardmacha wrote: »

Has anyone noticed that there is a lack of money around and that the government is spending a third more than it has by way of income.
How exactly is it cost beneficial to knock the old bridges?

Thank the elite and bankers that make the money, that make this recession.

Becauser the old naas bypass bridges are old and the barriers on the verges have to be replaced the embankments need ot be tidied also, the old bridges need to be serviced. If the upgrade goes ahead they will need to be assesesed.

If they are going to widen the road here and spend all this money. they may well not do this and just build a wide modern 3 lane bridge adjacent to it, rather than spending millions retouching really old bridges that will still not fit 3 lanes down it. This short sightness in this country has got to stop. It's driving me bananas. It's the reason we runn out of money in the first place. We never EVER get things built right the first time.

These bridges are not wide enough so I don't see the pont in spending more money repairing inadequate bridges. There is only 4 I think anyhow. The rest of the bridges further down are ok.

mysterious

Irish and Proud wrote: »

...not only would I do what you suggest, but I'd also make sure that the replacement bridges would allow for a 4th lane each way without loosing the hard-shoulder. Also, the replacements could accommodate any necessary widening of roads going into Naas - given that the town has grown substantially since the Naas Bypass was built. Retaining the existing bridges would be a bit stupid IMO!

Regards!

I wonder how they are going to sort out the Naas ballflyover.
I remember when the naas road upgrade was going on they repaired this bridge rather than widening it.

Good god, I was just so pissed, when I seen this illogic. The road here was at capactiy for the last 5 years. When the Naas road was opened people were asking why didnt they widen the Naas bypass.

The country council and the NRA ignored this again, and just spent a fortune resurfacing the Naas bypass.

I really get so ****ing pissed off at the idiocy of this country. Please learn and knock these bridges and replace them with a proper wide lane bridge. We don't learn in this country we have a habit of doing as sure it will do.

It won't do, if you go back 10 years later and spend millions rebuilding something that should of been built first hand.:mad:

BluntGuy

I have to agree with Mysterious on this one.

Whenever this is built, it needs to be properly future-proofed. That does mean no messing about when it comes to the bridges. Make them wide-enough for D4M. It may not be needed for 30 years, but if and when it is needed, it'll make the job easier.

mysterious

BluntGuy wrote: »

I have to agree with Mysterious on this one.

Whenever this is built, it needs to be properly future-proofed. That does mean no messing about when it comes to the bridges. Make them wide-enough for D4M. It may not be needed for 30 years, but if and when it is needed, it'll make the job easier.

I'm wondering if it's possible to widen the Naas ball flyover without knocking it. It is wide enough, but the pillars are too close to the verges.

Going SB, there is at least 5metre embankment that is adjacent to the SB slip joining. The NB section 5metre embankment going onto the Naas road is the NB loop heading to Dublin.

Could the shift theses pillars, by building a central pillar, thus taking out the two adjacent ones. The beams that carry the road were replaced when the Naas road was upgraded.

This would give 3running lanes + hard shoulder each way and possibly a verge.

I would prefer to see them building another bridge right next to it, the arrangment of the existing road layout is fine.

Irish and Proud

mysterious wrote: »

I wonder how they are going to sort out the Naas ballflyover.
I remember when the naas road upgrade was going on they repaired this bridge rather than widening it.

Good god, I was just so pissed, when I seen this illogic. The road here was at capactiy for the last 5 years. When the Naas road was opened people were asking why didnt they widen the Naas bypass.

The country council and the NRA ignored this again, and just spent a fortune resurfacing the Naas bypass.

I really get so ****ing pissed off at the idiocy of this country. Please learn and knock these bridges and replace them with a proper wide lane bridge. We don't learn in this country we have a habit of doing as sure it will do.

It won't do, if you go back 10 years later and spend millions rebuilding something that should of been built first hand.:mad:

...or maybe it's their intention after all - remember how cosy the relationship between the government and the builders etc is - like it's jobs for the boys - and we the taxpayer get the honourable privilege of paying for it!!! :rolleyes::mad:

Regards!

leitrim lad

im hopeing it goes ahead in the next year or so naas/ newbridge a bit dead this weather on the work front,would help the area

Irish and Proud

mysterious wrote: »

Could the shift theses pillars, by building a central pillar, thus taking out the two adjacent ones. The beams that carry the road were replaced when the Naas road was upgraded.

...no, the deck reinforcement would be a problem as the two span arrangement would result in different points of contra-flexure (different bending stresses) along the deck. Unfortunately, the only thing for it is the jack-hammer. While they're at it, a four lane replacement could be built.

Regards!

L1011

Was checking out the bridges when driving this route today. If this was to be done on the cheap I think we'd get away with one bridge replacement - the last on the old Naas Bypass has space for three lanes and not even a narrow hard strip under it; the others could take 3 plus a meagre hard shoulder; one of them could even take full 3+HS no bother.

jmkennedyie

FYI the Sallins Bypass / Osbertstown scheme involves two new bridges over M7 for the interchange, one just East and one just West of where current farm access bridge exists. I think the farm bridge is not in use and would be demolished. If they built these new bridges would give road capacity to demolish & rebuild Maulin bridge if necessary.

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

Was checking out the bridges when driving this route today. If this was to be done on the cheap I think we'd get away with one bridge replacement - the last on the old Naas Bypass has space for three lanes and not even a narrow hard strip under it; the others could take 3 plus a meagre hard shoulder; one of them could even take full 3+HS no bother.

Nope your wrong.
There has to be barriers alongside the pillars and that takes up room.

There is no room on any of the current Naas bypass bridges for 3 lanes and HS.:rolleyes:

L1011

mysterious wrote: »

Nope your wrong.
There has to be barriers alongside the pillars and that takes up room.

There is no room on any of the current Naas bypass bridges for 3 lanes and HS.:rolleyes:

Could you tell the NRA that, seeing as central pillars are now frequently blended in to Jersey step barriers on schemes across the country.

Once again, please stop making up specifications that don't exist.

There is also no minimum width for H/S on an Irish motorway - have you see the estuary bridge on the M1?

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

Could you tell the NRA that, seeing as central pillars are now frequently blended in to Jersey step barriers on schemes across the country.

Once again, please stop making up specifications that don't exist.

There is also no minimum width for H/S on an Irish motorway - have you see the estuary bridge on the M1?

I'm not making up specificatations. That MEDIAN is NOT wide enough for for 2 x 3.5running lanes, 2x 1 metre strip, and 2 HS.

The existing H.S is only 2.5metres. Your not going to get a another 3.5running lane in there. The Naas bypass median is wide but not that wide. It's actually pathetic to even hear you are saying it will fit. The Left pillars are right beside the HS.

If you really could pay attention to things like I do. The The median width is narrower than the other side:P

You really really need to go back and look again.:D:D
I'd hate to take your advice on this one. When we Irish people make enough blunders with future proofing our infrastructure. I think just like everyone on this board since the bridges are in need of servicing they may as well go.

Bards

mysterious wrote: »

When we Irish people make enough blunders with future proofing our infrastructure. .

you really are a ticket Mysterious. You give out about the NRA when they do future proof roads and then you moan that they shouldn't be Motorway just normal DC or WS2

you can't have it both ways.

L1011

mysterious wrote: »

I'm not making up specificatations. That MEDIAN is NOT wide enough for for 2 x 3.5running lanes, 2x 1 metre strip, and 2 HS.

The existing H.S is only 2.5metres. Your not going to get a another 3.5running lane in there. The Naas bypass median is wide but not that wide. It's actually pathetic to even hear you are saying it will fit. The Left pillars are right beside the HS.

If you really could pay attention to things like I do. The The median width is narrower than the other side:P

You really really need to go back and look again.:D:D
I'd hate to take your advice on this one. When we Irish people make enough blunders with future proofing our infrastructure. I think just like everyone on this board since the bridges are in need of servicing they may as well go.

I'd have the view you don't think like anyone else on this board...

The median isn't 7 metres + width of pillar wide under the bridges; that is true. However, the H/S under all bar one bridge is not as far out as it is capable of being. On cheaply widened motorways across Europe, there is often no H/S under bridges.

There is sufficient room to widen the road to D3M without high costs - at worst, the last bridge (westbound) would need to be replaced. We are not going to have the money to widen it with bridge replacements any time in the next decade.

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

I'd have the view you don't think like anyone else on this board...

The median isn't 7 metres + width of pillar wide under the bridges; that is true. However, the H/S under all bar one bridge is not as far out as it is capable of being. On cheaply widened motorways across Europe, there is often no H/S under bridges.

There is sufficient room to widen the road to D3M without high costs - at worst, the last bridge (westbound) would need to be replaced. We are not going to have the money to widen it with bridge replacements any time in the next decade.

Wouldn't it be cheaper if we didn't think like you and the NRA. Because it's this lack of foresight is the reason we keep coming back to these roads every decade.

All the Naas Bypass bridges are the same width, you clearly have no idea what your talking about at this stage.


There is 64,000 vehicles a day using this road. Almost 10,000 more than the total capacity of a D2M lane road.

This road needs future proofing, not a 2 minute fix.

The Naas bypass is one of the fastest growth sections in terms of traffic and is way above the average.

We have to many people in the NRA and the design office with your stance on road building. It's turning out to be a disaster. With all the Inter urbans coming on, I really don't see how it is cost benifetive to save these old bridges that are really inadequate to sustain future traffic considering they will have to be replaced in the next decade. The rust is even appearing and the bridges are red in colour due to this. These are the oldest motorway bridges in the country, It's just not logical to save them while upgrading the Bypass.

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

I'd have the view you don't think like anyone else on this board...

The median isn't 7 metres + width of pillar wide under the bridges; that is true.

Okay the width of a jersey pillar in 1 metre strips is 3metres min.
Take this of the 5-6 metre median. You barely have enough room for a Running lane never mind a HS.

HS at present is 2.5metre. Converting this to a 3.5metre running lane, plue barrier to protect the Left pillar and a Jersey barrier on the central pillar, means its going to be very tight for a D3M with no HS. The traffic for a D3M road is 93,000 A.A.D.T. It would be deemed insanity to keep these bridges when you can bet these bridges after your idea of an upgrade will have to go anyway in the near future. So why not just get it right NOW.

There is no room, and it's just a waste of time doing all this when the existing bridges are outdated. Plus I don't like this busy section of motorway without HS either.

L1011

mysterious wrote: »

All the Naas Bypass bridges are the same width, you clearly have no idea what your talking about at this stage.

There are different distinct types of central pillar on the bridges; so this is clearly impossible. Do you even KNOW the road in question?

L1011

mysterious wrote: »

So why not just get it right NOW.

Because we have no money. If it is to be built with new bridges, it will not get built.

mysterious wrote: »

Plus I don't like this busy section of motorway without HS either.

There would be H/S except under the bridges. Have you ever seen the M25 in the UK? Makes the Naas Bypass look like a country boreen. No hard shoulders under most bridges.

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

Because we have no money. If it is to be built with new bridges, it will not get built.

Money is circular, it circulates.

The money is always there,
We are "slaves" in this reality. Thats why we say things like. There is "no money"

I'm throwing it out there, don't know if people will understand what I'm getting at. But Noel Dempsey has money he's building his dream house in Meath at the minute. Bankers have the money. But right now they want to put us into hibernation.

There would be H/S except under the bridges. Have you ever seen the M25 in the UK? Makes the Naas Bypass look like a country boreen. No hard shoulders under most bridges.

So what, you don't want the Naas road upgraded properly?
M25 is far older and far wider than the Naas bypass. There is alot of bridges much much wider than our bridges. Some don't have a HS, I know. But alot are been replaced. At the minutre they are widening the road to 4/5 lanes each way.

The Naas bypass bridges do need to go. There is only three, it actually won't cost a whole lot more, since these bridges have to be worked on regardless. It would be saving alot to actually replace them now, then doing a half arse job only to replace it in 10 years.

L1011

The M25 opened in 1986. Two sections of it are older than the Naas Bypass, that is all. They're also only widening the road further on certain sections.


And you're delusional if you think the state can even easily borrow money at this stage.

ardmacha

We are "slaves" in this reality

Quite. Some of us base our proposals on reality. Tough, isn't it.

Others though don't have restrict themselves to reality, much more fun.

spacetweek

mysterious wrote: »

Wouldn't it be cheaper if we didn't think like you and the NRA. Because it's this lack of foresight is the reason we keep coming back to these roads every decade.

We have to many people in the NRA and the design office with your stance on road building. It's turning out to be a disaster.

This is rich coming from the guy that doesn't want an M9 on the grounds that it isn't needed, while the existing road winds it way through narrow streets in medieval towns.

mysterious wrote: »

Money is circular, it circulates.

Round spinning money! In a washing machine!

spacetweek

Bumping this as two relevant parts have moved to public consultation (thanks to richiek83 on Skyscrapercity).
Planning doc on Kildare Co-Co's website.

- Widening of the M7 from Naas North to M7/M9 split (Jct 9-11)
- Building of the Osberstown interchange (presumably Jct 9A) and R407 Sallins Western Bypass.

The plans will be on display on 29th May in Aras Cill Dara, Naas. Pity they aren't on the web though, at least as far as I can see.