200kms of road reclassified motorway except Athlone bypass

marinbike

Chris_533976 wrote: »

Costs a lot more in land take though, and needs more maintenance than the concrete barriers.

So concrete is best, as steel and wire barriers dont get maintained properly in any case.

It doesn't when you offset the savings made for future lane additions. It saves you from the enormous costs involved in dismantling and widening bridges/overpasses as well as having to excvate new on-ramps. Having a wide median is much cheaper to add extra lanes

serfboard

marinbike wrote: »

Its easier to utilize a wide median dual carraigeway for future lane additions. The Naas Road is a good example. This DC was built a good few yrs ago but since it had a wide median, it allowed them to utilize it for the new lanes rather than dismantling bridges and realigning on-ramps.

Yes, wide median is better for upgrades and it was far-seeing (or maybe lucky?) to have built it as such, but when you consider that the Naas DC feeds 3 inter-urban motorways (M7/M8/M9) it was maybe not all that brilliant to extrapolate future road needs.

The other splits of note in the country are the M1/M2 at Ardee, and the M4/M6 at Kinnegad.

Outside of those, and on parts of routes not near the cities, is wide median really necessary in terms of future road widening? I don't think so.

Chris_533976

Yes, some of the concrete stuff should be wide median (M7/M8 scheme, limerick SRR II). But realistically stuff like Culahill - Cashel of the M8 or the middle bits of the M9 are way under travelled for a motorway and you'd need a country of like 10 million population to warrent upgrades (crappy terminuses notwithstanding )

Carawaystick

marinbike wrote: »

Theres several reasons for it:

Its easier to utilize a wide median dual carraigeway for future lane additions. The Naas Road is a good example. This DC was built a good few yrs ago but since it had a wide median, it allowed them to utilize it for the new lanes rather than dismantling bridges and realigning on-ramps.

There were only overbridges at the Dublin end of the Naas road before the widening for the golf. this might even have been at the 3 lane section, I can't remember altogether. All the overbridges at Kill, Johnstown etc are new.

All the roads that could forseeably need widening have wide medians, apart from the M7 to the M8 split from Port Laoise.
I can't see traffic on the M6 increasing to need 3 lanes each way for example.

marinbike wrote: »

Wide Median Dual Carraigeways are better because at night time, you can put your full lights on without fear of blinding oncoming cars (The wide space allows for this). Also, it makes more sense to have wide roads since a lack of space is not a problem here in ireland. The wide median Dual Carraigeways should have a tar-macked median instead of the grass; this facilitates less maintenance.

The wide median is more driver friendly.

You can only use full headlights where there is something in the way blocking your lights from dazzling oncoming traffic, the wide median itself doesn't guarantee this. On the M1 for example you need to dip lights a lot of the time.

Having a hard surface on the median will increase the capacity needed for the drainage of the road and cause increased flooding compared to allowing a soft median slow the runoff.

murphaph

You don't have to build wide median to ensure bridges are upgradable! You just build the bridges wider. Anyway, as already mentioned-we'd need to double our population before most of these narrow median stretches will never carry traffic volumes in excess of their design specs. We are building a relatively dense network of motorway remember, more akin to the German Autobahn model than the UK one. If all planned road improvements see the light of day, there would realistically be 4 routes from Cork to Dublin!! Wasting money on wide median roads now (and don't kid yourselves-the extra land take would significantly add to the costs) would mean fewer schemes would be built at all.

Most of the traffic volumes along many stretches of our new motorways would no justify anything more than an S2 in the UK!

BrianD

Deleted User wrote: »

I suppose the only advantage the emergency phones have now is that you have a direct line to the relevant services, with a mobile it's "who do you call?" and it ain't ghostbusters.

Maybe there should be small signs along the hard shoulder with "useful numbers", every 500m or so.

It also allows the relevant authority pinpoint where you are. Once you lift the phone, they know where you are. A lot of Irish people struggle with directions or can't do so concisely. Plus on m-ways it's always more difficult given a lack of land marks etc.

Carawaystick

BrianD wrote: »

It also allows the relevant authority pinpoint where you are. Once you lift the phone, they know where you are. A lot of Irish people struggle with directions or can't do so concisely. Plus on m-ways it's always more difficult given a lack of land marks etc.

or even km markers like in most other countries...

sdanseo

As regards the Athlone bypass...I was coming off the M6 onto the bypass a while back and the only thing forcing me to slow was the road itself; not safe to keep 120-130 up. No way it can be reclassified as full motorway without easing some of the curves out. Maybe this urban motorway lark a-la M50?

Tbh, the N4 at leixlip should easily be 120kmh yet the Athlone would be far more deserving of 80 or the current 100. Pile of bollocks.

Tech3

sdonn wrote: »

As regards the Athlone bypass...I was coming off the M6 onto the bypass a while back and the only thing forcing me to slow was the road itself; not safe to keep 120-130 up. No way it can be reclassified as full motorway without easing some of the curves out. Maybe this urban motorway lark a-la M50?

Tbh, the N4 at leixlip should easily be 120kmh yet the Athlone would be far more deserving of 80 or the current 100. Pile of bollocks.

If its redesignated motorway it will be with 100km/hr limits.

marinbike

murphaph wrote: »

You don't have to build wide median to ensure bridges are upgradable! You just build the bridges wider. Anyway, as already mentioned-we'd need to double our population before most of these narrow median stretches will never carry traffic volumes in excess of their design specs. We are building a relatively dense network of motorway remember, more akin to the German Autobahn model than the UK one. If all planned road improvements see the light of day, there would realistically be 4 routes from Cork to Dublin!! Wasting money on wide median roads now (and don't kid yourselves-the extra land take would significantly add to the costs) would mean fewer schemes would be built at all.

Most of the traffic volumes along many stretches of our new motorways would no justify anything more than an S2 in the UK!

You forgot to consider the re-aligning of the on-ramps! That costs a lot of money. Now is the time to be buying land since prices have fallen!

Most roads in this country are narrow and surely its more logical to have wide roads?

BrianD

Carawaystick wrote: »

or even km markers like in most other countries...

People wouldn't see KM markers in the dark and they may not have noted them in the event of the emergency. Lifting the SOS phone pinpoints their location plus or minus the distance to the next SOS phone.

Carawaystick

BrianD wrote: »

People wouldn't see KM markers in the dark and they may not have noted them in the event of the emergency. Lifting the SOS phone pinpoints their location plus or minus the distance to the next SOS phone.

Yeah, but the cost difference to install them is large. And it won't happen, even thought it should.

Even where there are sos phones, I don't think there's markers to the nearest one.

Using the sos phone locates the user exactly, but km markers help emergency services find the correct location as they drive there.

BrianD

Carawaystick wrote: »

Yeah, but the cost difference to install them is large. And it won't happen, even thought it should.

Even where there are sos phones, I don't think there's markers to the nearest one.

Using the sos phone locates the user exactly, but km markers help emergency services find the correct location as they drive there.

IS there a doubt that SOS phones will be installed on the reclassified routes?

I don't think I've ever seen KM markers anywhere else apart from those yellow signs they use here. Plus if the SOS phones are numbered are 2km apart then do they not serve the same purpose? If a person lifts phone number 99 on the M8 (if it exists) then the dispatcher will no that the person is between junction X and Y.

Victor

Moved to Infrastructure.

BluntGuy

Have there been any updates as to what's happening with the Athlone Bypass and the installation of emergency phones on the new stretches.

billbond4

I spotted a camera on top of the speed is in Kilometers per hour sign going westbound at lunchtime yesterday and on top of a sign outside Ganleys.
But they took them down at lunchtime, anyone else notice them?

invinciblePRSTV

invincibleirish wrote: »

Why are sections of the N25, already at 120km/hr, not being reclassified whilst sections of the N2 & N20 are?

This wasn't answered when i asked previously. Can anyone explain why sections of the N25/22 around Cork, the 120km designated Ballincollig Bypass & Dunkettle - Carrigtwohill, haven't been re-designated with Blue Signs? particularly as alternative routes appear to be in place.

I ask as yesterday evening taking the slip road from Ballincollig west onto the road i saw a guy leading his family of wifey & kids on bikes onto the H/S, a very stupid thing to do imo.

Chris_5339762

The original plans were to have Cork to Waterford (possibly Rosslare?) 2+2 with some GSJs and higher quality sections like on the Waterford bypass and around New Ross.

2+2 junctions are roundabouts generally and 2+2 isnt up to motorway standard. So if you reclassified the good bits you'd end up with lots of bits of M between N road. Would look silly.

invinciblePRSTV

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

The original plans were to have Cork to Waterford (possibly Rosslare?) 2+2 with some GSJs and higher quality sections like on the Waterford bypass and around New Ross.

2+2 junctions are roundabouts generally and 2+2 isnt up to motorway standard. So if you reclassified the good bits you'd end up with lots of bits of M between N road. Would look silly.

So what if it looks silly on a map Chris, it's crazy not to have restrictions on sections of the road with familys on bikes wandering down the Green Signed GSJ. even without the SRR upgrades & upgrades between C'hill & Midleton the whole stretch from Ballincollig to M'ton should have restrictions of some sort anyway to prevent such nonsense.

ardmacha

Perhaps there should be an "expressway" or similar which could apply a package of restrictions without requiring full motorway status.

invinciblePRSTV

ardmacha wrote: »

Perhaps there should be an "expressway" or similar which could apply a package of restrictions without requiring full motorway status.

How About N with Motorway restrictions UK style?

N25 (M)

dubhthach

I don't see why this section of the N25 just can't be a M25. To come up with some sort of "N road with motorway restrictions" the politicians up i Teach Laighin would have to get off their arses and pass a new law creating such a beast.

L1011

Could have sworn the ability for 'special roads' as such exists in the 1993 legislation but there is no matching legislation to allow it to be retrospectively applied...

The 1993 Act was fairly forward, it legislated for UK style motorway services. Which we still haven't got! The only UK-ish HQDC services ever built here is now part derelict, part knocked and the smallest part operational... (ex-Hamills, N4, Mullingar) and it didn't even need that legislation.

Zoney

Maybe one could just add emergency phones (aren't the new ones solar power with batteries plus radio link?) to any future 2+2 N25 and then call it M25 despite the lack of hard shoulder? After all there are sections of motorway in the UK and elsewhere (same class as motorway) with no hard shoulder. As for roundabouts, well, even motorways can terminate at them. The main thing is having sparse junctions and no median breaks. Surely with start/end of motorway restriction signs it's not an issue having one in the middle of one?

In other words, why not just do one of our "good" Irish fudges instead of sticking to the rigid British code that leaves motorway class road as all-purpose, or requires "special" no pedestrian restrictions.

marmurr1916

Zoney wrote: »

Maybe one could just add emergency phones (aren't the new ones solar power with batteries plus radio link?) to any future 2+2 N25 and then call it M25 despite the lack of hard shoulder? After all there are sections of motorway in the UK and elsewhere (same class as motorway) with no hard shoulder.

The UK's M90 has sections with no hard shoulder, just 'Emergency Laybys'.

Zoney wrote: »

As for roundabouts, well, even motorways can terminate at them. The main thing is having sparse junctions and no median breaks. Surely with start/end of motorway restriction signs it's not an issue having one in the middle of one?

There's a short section of motorway in the Greater Manchester that has a roundabout in the middle, at a junction with another motorway.

wild handlin

Anyone know why Sligo - Collooney (N4) hasn't been reclassified to Motorway (or at least 120km Speed limit?). It all appears to be up to standard with other roads (such as the (N) M18) yet it's still 100kmh.

Are there any plans to change this strech to 120kmh?

L1011

wild handlin wrote: »

Anyone know why Sligo - Collooney (N4) hasn't been reclassified to Motorway (or at least 120km Speed limit?). It all appears to be up to standard with other roads (such as the (N) M18) yet it's still 100kmh.

Are there any plans to change this strech to 120kmh?

NRA dislike short isolated bits of motoray that join any other, thats the reason given for the N28 anyway, so I can take it it applies here.

notel70

BluntGuy wrote: »

Have there been any updates as to what's happening with the Athlone Bypass and the installation of emergency phones on the new stretches.

These are a waste of money and out dated.

What are the odds of someone with no phone in their car breaking down beside one?

If i did breakdown beside one id ring my insurance/local garage from my mobile phone, and i'd say so would most others

nordydan

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

How About N with Motorway restrictions UK style?

N25 (M)

We don't need this Nx(M) stuff, leave that for the English. Makes no sense.

And can you imagine the signage errors? :rolleyes:

N25(M
(N25M)
(N25)M
{N25-["M"]}

L1011

notel70 wrote: »

These are a waste of money and out dated.

What are the odds of someone with no phone in their car breaking down beside one?

If i did breakdown beside one id ring my insurance/local garage from my mobile phone, and i'd say so would most others

Lots of stretches of the M6 and M9 have little to no mobile coverage

Tourists and dozy drivers aren't going to have the slightest clue where they are.

They are still needed.