N7 - Newlands Cross upgrade

PseudoFamous

I was under the impression that this thread was about a Junction on a motorway, not about taxation, banking or bailouts

weehamster

As a temporary measure, why doesn't SDCC simply ban right turns, erect temporary concrete barriers across the medium and if anyone needs to get to the far side, use the junctions before and after Newlands X to get accross. I can't see why it won't work.

We simply don't have the cash but we need to solve the congestion, even if it's only temporary.

Jayuu

weehamster wrote: »

As a temporary measure, why doesn't SDCC simply ban right turns, erect temporary concrete barriers across the medium and if anyone needs to get to the far side, use the junctions before and after Newlands X to get accross. I can't see why it won't work.

We simply don't have the cash but we need to solve the congestion, even if it's only temporary.

Honestly I don't think this would be a workable solution for right turning traffic (i.e. traffic looking to get to the far side of the road).

Yes, rightbound traffic from Tallaght > N7 inbound or the N7 outbound > Clondalkin could go as far as Junction 2 to turnaround. But it would add a bit to their journey and put a lot of strain on that junction. There would be a lot of complaints but you possibly could get away with it.

However rightbound traffic from Clondakin > N7 outbound or N7 inbound > Tallaght) would be forced in beyond the M50 junction because its not possible to do a loop on the M50/N7 interchange as its currently configured. Therefore all this traffic would have to continue through to the Nass Road/Nangor Road junction which has a huge amount of traffic lights to be negotiated in order to do a loop around. It would create huge congestion on this junction and simply be unworkable.

spacetweek

Jayuu wrote: »

However rightbound traffic from Clondakin > N7 outbound or N7 inbound > Tallaght) would be forced in beyond the M50 junction because its not possible to do a loop on the M50/N7 interchange as its currently configured.

Nah, you could use Monastery Road junction.

Tech3

Guys, this thread is for discussing Newlands Cross upgrade. I have deleted the off topic posts. If you want to discuss a possible default, please post in the Irish Economy/Politics forum.

Thanks

veryangryman

Tech3 wrote: »

Guys, this thread is for discussing Newlands Cross upgrade. I have deleted the off topic posts. If you want to discuss a possible default, please post in the Irish Economy/Politics forum.

Thanks

I think that discussing why the scheme isnt going to be built, the way that it could have already been built and the possibility of ways to get it built (ie defaulting) are quite on par for the topic.

Suggestion for happy medium Tremolo/Tech3 - maybe a topic to discuss the pros.cons for road building if or when we default?

Jayuu

spacetweek wrote: »

Nah, you could use Monastery Road junction.

You're right although I would say that this option would be even less suitable for the amount of diverted traffic that you'd have by closing the junction.


And thanks Tech3 for bringing us back on topic!

Conway635

Conway635 wrote: »

If you wanted to be really cheap you could always have a unidirectional mini-flyover for outbound only!

C635

Something like this?



http://www.cbrd.co.uk/photo/hogarth-flyover/

The Hogarth Flyover is more than just a bridge carrying traffic - it's a metaphor for the whole of British transport planning in the late 20th century. It was constructed in the early 1970s as a temporary solution to the traffic problems at the Hogarth Roundabout, which was due to be rebuilt in the near future as part of the Ringway plans. It was quickly put together with a cheap steel frame and was designed to last no more than a few years. But, as you've probably guessed by now, the temporary flyover is still there: it's been in situ for more than 30 years and there's no intention to do anything with it now.

ClareVisitor

We have something similar where I live in Chelmsford in Essex. It is a single lane flyover over a roundabaout similar to the Hogarth Roundabout, but it changes direction in the morning and evening to go with the major flow of traffic in (morning) and out (evening) of town.

jack presley

ClareVisitor wrote: »

We have something similar where I live in Chelmsford in Essex. It is a single lane flyover over a roundabaout similar to the Hogarth Roundabout, but it changes direction in the morning and evening to go with the major flow of traffic in (morning) and out (evening) of town.

When I lived in Bristol in the late 90's there was a 'temporary' road like this that has been there since the 70's.

Guy:Incognito

I still cant understand why Belgard roud from Tallaght to outbound Naas Road isnt a slip? It's completely pointless having traffic building up on the Belgard road when theres room for a long slip road on the Naas road. it's not going to solve all the problems but it alleviates one.

spacetweek

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I still cant understand why Belgard roud from Tallaght to outbound Naas Road isnt a slip? It's completely pointless having traffic building up on the Belgard road when theres room for a long slip road on the Naas road. it's not going to solve all the problems but it alleviates one.

It's more important to have freeflow slips on offramps than onramps because offramps end in a set of traffic lights. Onramps merge with the mainline. I see they will have a much longer approach lane NB on Belgard though, which will provide a lot more stacking space than at present.

That said, they've loads of room here, so it's a little odd.

Deedsie

What is going on with this junction? Has it been totally shelved?

L1011

Waiting to see if BAM Balfour Beatty can get someone to lend them the cash. Which will likely be when our bond yeilds are below 6% or so at the highest. They're 8.6%-ish for ten year which is what is the generally quoted figure.

robert muldoon

MYOB wrote: »

Waiting to see if BAM Balfour Beatty can get someone to lend them the cash. Which will likely be when our bond yeilds are below 6% or so at the highest. They're 8.6%-ish for ten year which is what is the generally quoted figure.

I think we will be hearing from Leo Varaker before the end of the month

antoobrien

MYOB wrote: »

Waiting to see if BAM Balfour Beatty can get someone to lend them the cash. Which will likely be when our bond yeilds are below 6% or so at the highest. They're 8.6%-ish for ten year which is what is the generally quoted figure.

Current bond yields on bloomberg:
1 year: 8.311 %
2 year: 9.7 %
3 year: 9.123%
5 year: 8.22%
10 year: 8.692%

Sponge Bob

Watch that 10 year chart

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=GIGB10YR:IND#chart

Deedsie

robert muldoon wrote: »

I think we will be hearing from Leo Varaker before the end of the month

What makes you think that? Positive or negative news?

Sponge Bob

The 10 year chart implies a funding cost of around 12-14% to the contractor borrowings. However as the ructions in Greece this week did not spill over unduly into Irish yields the PPP funding model may creak back into life for certain projects if the yield curve remains in a stable to hull down position as now.

Waiting another month or two will do no harm.

Leo is due to announce the very short list of road projects that are not dead in a National Development sort of announcement this month and I would be confident that the N7 will be included...even if it is essentially on life support rather than dead.

Jayuu

Has the cost of just the NX upgrade ever been specified? I know its currently bundled with the N11 Rathnew-Arklow scheme but I'm wondering if funding can't be found for the whole scheme could the NX scheme be decoupled from it and if so would it be possible to fund just that.

It would be great to get both done but really I think most people could live without the N11 part of the upgrade wheras NX is a huge bottleneck that needs to be resolved.

PseudoFamous

Jayuu wrote: »

It would be great to get both done but really I think most people could live without the N11 part of the upgrade wheras NX is a huge bottleneck that needs to be resolved.

I could argue that due to the higher amount of fatalities on the N11 gap, it's a matter of national urgency that it needs to be upgraded. It also is a huge bottleneck during rush hour, and even more so when the Dubs are trying to get to and fro their holiday homes.

You're not the only one with problems.

Sponge Bob

No point decoupling the schemes. The land is bought and fenced for the N11 and the 2 schemes should come in at no more than €150m the pair for construction costs.

If we cannot get a €150m PPP scheme off we can not get any of the €2bn order PPP schemes off either.

Wild Bill

Given the rather hairy exit from the N7 onto the M50, which even now results in queues and queue hoppers as well as confused drivers - it seems that eliminating NX might be good news for all other directions but could lead to a right pile-up coming off the N7 on to the M50. :eek:

Wild Bill

Wild Bill wrote: »

Given the rather hairy exit from the N7 onto the M50, which even now results in queues and queue hoppers as well as confused drivers - it seems that eliminating NX might be good news for all other directions but could lead to a right pile-up coming off the N7 on to the M50. :eek:

Possible, but the removal of the lights will eliminate the "starting grid" effect that they currently have on drivers and the traffic will arrive at the M50 in a more even flow rather than in "burps".

BuzzFish

PseudoFamous wrote: »

I could argue that due to the higher amount of fatalities on the N11 gap, it's a matter of national urgency that it needs to be upgraded. It also is a huge bottleneck during rush hour, and even more so when the Dubs are trying to get to and fro their holiday homes.

You're not the only one with problems.

I could argue that a drop in speed limits and few average speed camera's would sort the issue on he N11 in terms of the accident rates and the queues at the Newland Cross junction has waaaaaaay longer tailbacks and a lot more often than the N11 gap

We have bigger problems.

L1011

BuzzFish wrote: »

I could argue that a drop in speed limits and few average speed camera's would sort the issue on he N11 in terms of the accident rates and the queues at the Newland Cross junction has waaaaaaay longer tailbacks and a lot more often than the N11 gap

We have bigger problems.

Speed limit has already been dropped, speed-activated signs installed and powered catseyes placed.

Average speed cameras are at the very least not licenced here and there is a chance they wouldn't be legally usable here at all for that matter.

N11 is a higher priority in my eyes, despite having to use NX sometimes multiple times a day.

Deedsie

Personally I think Newlands cross upgrade is more important than the N11! I really hope it gets the go ahead.

Chris_5339762

For safety reasons, the N11 gap needs filling more urgently than Newlands needs fixing.

Whilst I hate Newlands and am always on about how it should not exist in its current form, I accept that there is a bigger priority.

Jayuu

Wild Bill wrote: »

Given the rather hairy exit from the N7 onto the M50, which even now results in queues and queue hoppers as well as confused drivers - it seems that eliminating NX might be good news for all other directions but could lead to a right pile-up coming off the N7 on to the M50. :eek:

They made a right mess of the N7 > M50 exit all right. Give that they had three lanes inbound they should have designed it so that the left lane became the M50 (N) exit, the middle lane the M50 (S) exit and the right lane the through road across the motorway. The two M50 lanes could then have further divided into two nearer the exit.

While this wouldn't have eliminated all of the lane jumping and queue hoppers it would have made far more sense than the current arrangement.

However as somebody has stated, by having traffic moving more regularly to the M50 the flow should smooth out a bit.

Chris_5339762

Also like what happened with the N4 junction, once Newlands is done and we have a few weeks of jams at the N7 -> M50, the NRA will come out with the line painters and fix it.