Athlone bypass! should it be a motorway?

flazio

flazio wrote: »

Nothing stopping them (apart from cost of course) from widening the bridge a smidgen (fill in that hole between the lanes), Look at the M50 toll bride, and beside this barriered slow lane they could put in a cycle/walkway
I just thought I'd throw in a suggestion as an alternative to make the best of what we've got. I'll admit I've no engineering education or anything but you know it always takes some to ASK why not before someone gives the answer.

A second (third) bridge would be preferred over all other options, but is very unlikely to happen on cost grounds.

KevR

I don't think I have seen any pedestrians or cyclists crossing the bridge. See plenty of them from the Coosan junction to the Eastern end of the Bypass. From looking at the map pedestrians/cyclists can get between some these junctions without using the Bypass and without having to go right into the Town Centre.

From near the Coosan Junction to near the Kilmartin's junction:
Bypass: 5.8km
Through Town: 4.3 km

From near the Coosan Junction to near N55 junction:
Bypass: 1.8km
Through Town: 0.9km

From near the Coosan Junction to Blyry Industrial estate:
Bypass: 3.6km
Through Town: 3.3km

So plenty of alternative routes for pedestrians and cyclists there and slow moving vehicles in fact (they don't have to go right into the town centre where the streets are narrow for the above alternatives). Any cyclists crossing the river - they can use the bridge in town, it won't take that much longer when you're on a bike. Never see pedestrians on the actual bridge or near it so I'm not so sure providing an alternative route is an issue for them either.

The only issue with put motorway restrictions on the Bypass is the small number of slow moving vehicles which use the Bypass bridge to cross the river. It won't be a nice detour for them having to go into the town to use the bridge but they shouldn't really be using the Bypass (a busy high speed road) from a safety point of view.

When you take away pedestrians/cyclists/slow vehicles who do not use the bridge and have good alternative routes out of the equation we are left with a tiny minority who will be inconvenienced by a redesignation. I think the benefits of a redesignation outweigh this inconvenience.

munchkin_utd

Has anyone seen sheep or cattle being herded across the bridge come to think of it? Thats 100% legal now on this normal run of the mill road.

Actually, if you let your mind and imagination wander, you could perfectly legally march a circus with fire juggling uncyclists and 1kmh plodding elephants down this run of the mill country lane. You mightnt get away with a trapeeze across the carraigeway but apart from that anything goes!

Heck, the Athlone Patricks day parade would look the part on that bridge too dont ye think? The by pass is a local facility so should be utilised to the full for local purposes.

Can anyone think of other novel ideas you could put the road to seeing as it isnt a high speed interurban link but rather a local country lane?

Maybe speed ramps should be installed to slow the cars coming off the motorways either side of the by pass in case some pedestrians (or elephants!) get killed.

BluntGuy

Why not turn the hard shoulder into a car park? A cheap, easy solution to create extra parking for the local people.

Tech3

munchkin_utd wrote: »

high speed interurban link

Everyone against it should read the above. If its not redesignated motorway we will see the N6 carpark in a few years time with burger king, mcdonals, harvey norman branching off it with lilo junctions

BluntGuy

I agree with the sentiments above: whether these people like it or hate it, the Athlone Bypass is now part of the M6 inter-urban route and when the rest of the M6 opens, it is going to look very silly indeed sandwiched inbetween two motorways.

Tech3

BluntGuy wrote: »

Why not turn the hard shoulder into a car park? A cheap, easy solution to create extra parking for the local people.

I agree maybe have pedestrian access on the median and extra layby areas for caravans. Maybe close the fast lane for picnics on Sundays as well. The Athlone bypass is where its all going to happen :rolleyes:

mysterious

BluntGuy wrote: »

I agree with the sentiments above: whether these people like it or hate it, the Athlone Bypass is now part of the M6 inter-urban route and when the rest of the M6 opens, it is going to look very silly indeed sandwiched inbetween two motorways.

So is the bypass part of the road network for the traffic that uses it to cross the Shannon.


Who gives a flying **** what you think or who ugly it may look that it might not be a blue road. Common sense and logic prevails on this matter, not how it may look from a map!


There is no alternative route for traffic to facilitate all slow vehicles and what not over the Shannon. As For Pedestrians and cylists **** em. Give the road special status. Someone better start posting pics of cyclists and pedestrians. cus I think your all getting obsessed over it and looking for some excuse to make it a motorway and to make the Dublin Galway road look pretty.


Post pictures NOW. and Stop making mountains out of moehills.

mysterious

KevR wrote: »

I don't think I have seen any pedestrians or cyclists crossing the bridge. See plenty of them from the Coosan junction to the Eastern end of the Bypass. From looking at the map pedestrians/cyclists can get between some these junctions without using the Bypass and without having to go right into the Town Centre.

From near the Coosan Junction to near the Kilmartin's junction:
Bypass: 5.8km
Through Town: 4.3 km

From near the Coosan Junction to near N55 junction:
Bypass: 1.8km
Through Town: 0.9km

From near the Coosan Junction to Blyry Industrial estate:
Bypass: 3.6km
Through Town: 3.3km

So plenty of alternative routes for pedestrians and cyclists there and slow moving vehicles in fact (they don't have to go right into the town centre where the streets are narrow for the above alternatives). Any cyclists crossing the river - they can use the bridge in town, it won't take that much longer when you're on a bike. Never see pedestrians on the actual bridge or near it so I'm not so sure providing an alternative route is an issue for them either.

The only issue with put motorway restrictions on the Bypass is the small number of slow moving vehicles which use the Bypass bridge to cross the river. It won't be a nice detour for them having to go into the town to use the bridge but they shouldn't really be using the Bypass (a busy high speed road) from a safety point of view.

When you take away pedestrians/cyclists/slow vehicles who do not use the bridge and have good alternative routes out of the equation we are left with a tiny minority who will be inconvenienced by a redesignation. I think the benefits of a redesignation outweigh this inconvenience.

Get the facts straight.

Pedestrians don't use the bridge. There is no footfall or reason for pedestrians to use this bridge.

mysterious

It is not going to be a motorway until a proper alternative route is made. There is far too much local, slow and yes farm vehicles using this bridge to cross over the Shannon. The road carries over 30,000 vehicles. 2/3 of it is NON N6 TRAFFIC. The road limit is staying at 100kmh. So less of this crap please.

Lets stop the bull**** aboutu how it will affect N6 traffic. The road has been opened for nearly 20 years stop making up nonsense about it.

Tech3

mysterious wrote: »

It is not going to be a motorway until a proper alternative route is made.

There is an alternative route. The bridge in the town centre can be used to cross the river Shannon and plus its not very far from the bridge on the current dc so it wont make a huge difference in time for farmers etc to get to their destination.

Lets stop the bull**** aboutu how it will affect N6 traffic. The road has been opened for nearly 20 years stop making up nonsense about it.

What nonsense its was always part of the N6 now that two motorways are on either end of the bypass it would be obvious to make it motorway to prevent it from inappropriate development. I dont care what speed is on the road once it is protected from any development. That is my main concern about leaving it dual carriageway.

BluntGuy

mysterious wrote: »

Who gives a flying **** what you think or who ugly it may look that it might not be a blue road. Common sense and logic prevails on this matter, not how it may look from a map!

Common sense dictates to me, that if I use the bypass I shouldn't be at risk of one of the handful of farmers with slow vehicles ploughing into me.

There is no alternative route for traffic to facilitate all slow vehicles and what not over the Shannon. As For Pedestrians and cylists **** em. Give the road special status. Someone better start posting pics of cyclists and pedestrians.

Your unique brand of non-logic continues to baffle me... I think the "special status" thing has been discussed before.

Your last two comments aren't even worth a response:

cus I think your all getting obsessed over it and looking for some excuse to make it a motorway and to make the Dublin Galway road look pretty.

Post pictures NOW. and Stop making mountains out of moehills.

Stark

munchkin_utd wrote: »

Maybe speed ramps should be installed to slow the cars coming off the motorways either side of the by pass in case some pedestrians (or elephants!) get killed.

I nominate the guys who did the Roundwood speed ramps for optimal placing of the ramps.

mysterious

tech2 wrote: »

There is an alternative route. The bridge in the town centre can be used to cross the river Shannon and plus its not very far from the bridge on the current dc so it wont make a huge difference in time for farmers etc to get to their destination.

The town suffers chronic congestion. Thus this is why the bypass was built. What about the N55 and N63? they have to go down narrow streets. The bridge is a medieval bridge that cant cope with traffic at present.


I don't respect you dismissing this fact, just because you want the bypass a motorway.

What nonsense its was always part of the N6 now that two motorways are on either end of the bypass it would be obvious to make it motorway to prevent it from inappropriate development. I dont care what speed is on the road once it is protected from any development. That is my main concern about leaving it dual carriageway.

So is Roscommon and Westmeath on either side.
So is the N63 and N55 on either side.
So is the town and surrounding county on either side.

The bridge and bypass remains open as an all purpose road


To hell about the pretty map. Protected developement my eye. The building boom is over.

My concern my arm......

SeanW

mysterious wrote:

The road carries over 30,000 vehicles. 2/3 of it is NON N6 TRAFFIC.

Ok, hold on lemme get this straight. You are - directly or indirectly - stating that 20000 vehicles per day will be forced off the M6 if redesignated.

That's a pretty big claim. I'm going to have to call shenanigans on this as I assume you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back this up.

You have also totally failed to answer the point that a non-redesigned N6 Bypass is open to abusive developments - we've all seen Kew Gardens, the Mahon Point down in Cork.

If the N6 is NOT redesignated, it WILL be destroyed with such developments. AND EVERYBODY KNOWS IT.

If you're just going to keep on posting made up facts, posting psychobabble about irrevelant foreign road law, attacking straw men and dodging the questions, I'm going to petition the mods to close this thread.

mysterious

BluntGuy wrote: »

Common sense dictates to me, that if I use the bypass I shouldn't be at risk of one of the handful of farmers with slow vehicles ploughing into me.

Common sense says thats not the problem and it never were a problem.


I think you should understand what common sense means, and not get to excited of been overtly enthusiastic of blue roads.

Your unique brand of non-logic continues to baffle me... I think the "special status" thing has been discussed before.

Your last two comments aren't even worth a response:

Well I don't think a farmer would plough into you, as I dont think you deserve much of a response to say such idiocy like above.

mysterious

SeanW wrote: »

Ok, hold on lemme get this straight. You are - directly or indirectly - stating that 20000 vehicles per day will be forced off the M6 if redesignated.

That's a pretty big claim. I'm going to have to call shenanigans on this as I assume you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back this up.

You have also totally failed to answer the point that a non-redesigned N6 Bypass is open to abusive developments - we've all seen Kew Gardens, the Mahon Point down in Cork.

If the N6 is NOT redesignated, it WILL be destroyed with such developments. AND EVERYBODY KNOWS IT.

If you're just going to keep on posting made up facts, posting psychobabble about irrevelant foreign road law, attacking straw men and dodging the questions, I'm going to petition the mods to close this thread.

Oh the development crap.


ROFL...
The boom is over
The world is in a receesion
The bypass is surrounded by development ON BOTH SIDES and there ARE NO developments been built on the bypass directly or indierectly. The motorway will not stop development from going ahead if the town limits are surpassing the bypass which it is. So again stop looking for excuses.

The bypass has been around for 20 years.


Its not the issue here. The issue here is you want a blue road.

SeanW

I'm still waiting for you to provide facts and evidence to support your 20,000 vehicles claim.

Either prove your claim or admit its a load of cobblers.

And you are totally ignoring the fact that Ireland has a long history of wrecking dual carriageways with inappropriate development - I believe Kew Gardens was built in the 1980s (but I could be wrong) and there was a full on recession at that time too.

I refer to post 154
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61169712&postcount=154

and some other posts which stated that property developers (FFs main constituency) have had things to say about the reclassification as had some West Athlone councillors who feared reclassification would damage prospects for development (i.e. limit their ability to give their buddies planning permission for shops and housing estates and build LILOs all over the place).

Face facts - it's more than just "I want my blue line." Far more.

G_R

mysterious,

will u please directly quote this comment and reply to the following and not dodge it,

the ONLY traffic banned off the road is ones unable/not allowed to use a motorway. Other cars can still use it. Do u understand this? I think you dont since u keep saying that 2/3 (20,000 vehicles according to u) of the traffic will be forced on to town streets. That is utter bull***t.

Tech3

mysterious wrote: »

The town suffers chronic congestion. Thus this is why the bypass was built. What about the N55 and N63? they have to go down narrow streets. The bridge is a medieval bridge that cant cope with traffic at present.

All this makes no claim that the Athlone bypass shouldnt be a motorway. It doesnt make a difference even if you were true that a lot of traffic comes from the the surrounding areas. It doesnt force it off the road if it is motorway. Unless you seem to think the majority of traffic is agricultural!

The bridge and bypass remains open as an all purpose road


To hell about the pretty map. Protected developement my eye. The building boom is over.

My concern my arm......

Theres motorway signs going up at the moment on the bypass, I hate to break the bad news to you.

BluntGuy

mysterious wrote: »

I think you should understand what common sense means, and not get to excited of been overtly enthusiastic of blue roads.

Common sense to me is knowing that of the so-called 20,000 local traffic, only a tiny percentage will be banned from using the road. A percentage that shouldn't really be using the road regardless of classification.

mysterious

I never once said 20,000 vehicles would be banned.


I mentioned the FACT that 20,000 vehicles from Athlone and local areas use the bridge to cross the shannon as a second crossing the other 10,000 would be the long distance galway traffic.


Don't twist what I said people.:)

mysterious

BluntGuy wrote: »

Common sense to me is knowing that of the so-called 20,000 local traffic, only a tiny percentage will be banned from using the road. A percentage that shouldn't really be using the road regardless of classification.

If you think its a tiny percentage.


Then why do you make such a big deal about it.:)

Cus you waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant it motorway.

L1011

mysterious wrote: »

If you think its a tiny percentage.


Then why do you make such a big deal about it.:)

Cus you waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant it motorway.

Because each and every slow moving vehicle on a high speed, strategic route is an extreme danger.

You are the only person on here with an insane desire for the road to be one way or another - you want your D2AP and will lie, rant, scream and shout to get it.

Unfortunately for you the NRA have already basically made the final junction defacto motorway on the ground (but I doubt you'd know this as I doubt you use the road frequently, if at all; unlike many of the other posters) and its still quite likely that the entire thing *will* be redesignated once Dempsey is less scared of irritating a few farmers - post Lisbon, I'd suggest. You're not getting your D2AP, no matter how many lies you make about 20,000-odd tractors and learners being made drive through Athlone.

SeanW

mysterious wrote: »

I never once said 20,000 vehicles would be banned.


I mentioned the FACT that 20,000 vehicles from Athlone and local areas use the bridge to cross the shannon as a second crossing the other 10,000 would be the long distance galway traffic.


Don't twist what I said people.:)

You implied it by giving 2/3 of 30000 vehicles as a reason not to go motorway.

Even if that figure is true, most of those of course will be Categoy B vehicles, driver either by a fully licensed driver or an already lawbreaking L-driver. In short - they will not be affected.

But you are the one who quoted these vehicles as a reason not to go Motorway. Which makes no sense unless they are affected by the change.

So, out with it mystery boy - do you have any statistics (factual, not made up) about how much traffic would be diverted back through Athlone town?

mysterious

SeanW wrote: »

You implied it by giving 2/3 of 30000 vehicles as a reason not to go motorway.

Even if that figure is true, most of those of course will be Categoy B vehicles, driver either by a fully licensed driver or an already lawbreaking L-driver. In short - they will not be affected.

But you are the one who quoted these vehicles as a reason not to go Motorway. Which makes no sense unless they are affected by the change.

So, out with it mystery boy - do you have any statistics (factual, not made up) about how much traffic would be diverted back through Athlone town?

I applied it, cus the majoirity of the Athlone bypass is not predominently N6 long distance traffic.


I make my points VERY clear. And indeed they are VERY CLEAR. Funny that you drop the "development Elephant crap"

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

Because each and every slow moving vehicle on a high speed, strategic route is an extreme danger.

It's not going to be high speed.


I've already explained this to you.


What part of this do not understand. The speed limit is 100kmh. Traffic doesnt go very slow on the bypass.


You really are looking for some ridiculous argument " i waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant my motorwa"

SeanW

mysterious wrote: »

It's not going to be high speed.

What part of this do not understand. The speed limit is 100kmh. Traffic doesnt go very slow on the bypass.

100 kilometers IS high speed vis-a-vis horses, pedestrians, cyclists and whatever else that is allowed on a dual carriageway. With the DC integrated into the rest of the M6 route it will be a problem.

Funny that you drop the "development Elephant crap"

I haven't "dropped" it I was trying to get some facts out of you regarding your 20000 vehicles a day nonsense.

So I will repeat question one more time: "So, out with it mystery boy - do you have any statistics (factual, not made up) about how much traffic would be diverted back through Athlone town?"

I also know that you are determined to ignore recent Irish history and so there's probably no point.

On the ground examples like Kew Gardens in Dublin, Mahon Point in Cork, and all of the tomfoolery that the planners down in Co. Clare have been up to, AS WELL AS the talk of development on the Western side and developers input into the plans ... doesn't fit very well with your

I WAAAAAAAAAAANT MY GREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN LINE

nonsense, so you will ignore it.

KevR

Now that you mention it I saw some tinker plodding along in the hard shoulder on a horse yesterday evening. When he came to one of the junctions he had to cross over the merge lane to continue on the mainline hard shoulder.

I suppose he was legally entitled to be there so what can I say?

G_R

mysterious wrote: »

I never once said 20,000 vehicles would be banned.


I mentioned the FACT that 20,000 vehicles from Athlone and local areas use the bridge to cross the shannon as a second crossing the other 10,000 would be the long distance galway traffic.


Don't twist what I said people.:)

you said that all the traffic from the National Secondary Routes will be forced to use the towns bridge. That is not true.