N7 - Newlands Cross upgrade

pistolpetes11

Any update if this project is going ahead after the recent cuts ?

spacetweek

pistolpetes11 wrote: »

Any update if this project is going ahead after the recent cuts ?

Yes it is, next year.

starviewadams

Bollocks!

Was hoping it would be shelved in the recent cuts,can hardly sleep here at all after 4am with all the trucks going by,will only get worse once they raise the junction.Not to mention the construction noise too.

sdanseo

starviewadams wrote: »

Bollocks!

Was hoping it would be shelved in the recent cuts,can hardly sleep here at all after 4am with all the trucks going by,will only get worse once they raise the junction.Not to mention the construction noise too.

The sleeping habits of residents are not the primary concern when redesigning what is probably the busiest signal-controlled intersection in the country. You'll be moving house before they leave it as is for much longer, even if it was shelved it'd be taken down soon enough. Needs urgent attention.

Tragedy

The more I drive the N7>N9>Kilcullen, the more I think fixing Newlands X without running three lanes to the N9 turnoff is essentially pointless and will help alleviate peak traffic not a jot. The N7 before and after Naas is just a complete mess from 4:30pm until around 6:30pm.

Wild Bill

Tragedy wrote: »

The more I drive the N7>N9>Kilcullen, the more I think fixing Newlands X without running three lanes to the N9 turnoff is essentially pointless and will help alleviate peak traffic not a jot. The N7 before and after Naas is just a complete mess from 4:30pm until around 6:30pm.

That's a bit like saying fixing my broken arm is pointless without getting a haircut :cool:

Jayuu

Tragedy wrote: »

The more I drive the N7>N9>Kilcullen, the more I think fixing Newlands X without running three lanes to the N9 turnoff is essentially pointless and will help alleviate peak traffic not a jot. The N7 before and after Naas is just a complete mess from 4:30pm until around 6:30pm.

It may not solve all the problems but making the junction freeflow will smooth out the traffic flow. I find a lot of the problems in the immediate aftermath of NewlandsX outbound is that because traffic has come to a complete stop it takes way too long for it to get back up to speed again. By removing that stop it should keep traffic flowing easier out the Naas Road.

However I don't think it going to do a lot for inbound traffic because of the bad design on the N7/M50 interchange. You're still going to have all the M50 traffic hitting one lane to get onto the M50 with the inevitable last minute lane changers. Until that problem is rectified I can see still delays there streaming back to the NewlandsX junction.

Stark

sdeire wrote: »

The sleeping habits of residents are not the primary concern when redesigning what is probably the busiest signal-controlled intersection in the country. You'll be moving house before they leave it as is for much longer, even if it was shelved it'd be taken down soon enough. Needs urgent attention.

You should try petitioning them to have some sort of soundproofing works done. I live right next to the N4/M50 junction and I can't hear a thing as they have sound barriers between the houses and the road.

sdanseo

Stark wrote: »

You should try petitioning them to have some sort of soundproofing works done. I live right next to the N4/M50 junction and I can't hear a thing as they have sound barriers between the houses and the road.

The lad I quoted should, not me. I'm in the North County - couldnt give a monkey's what the noise is like on the N7 :P

Tragedy

Wild Bill wrote: »

That's a bit like saying fixing my broken arm is pointless without getting a haircut :cool:

It's a bit like saying its pointless only fixing one fracture when you have multiple ones. Yesterday at 4:50pm I averaged slightly over 60kmh from after NX to Naas South, with 5minutes of stop start traffic between Kill and M7.

NX needs to be done, but I don't see it having much of an impact on peak commuting time unfortunately.

L1011

Tragedy wrote: »

It's a bit like saying its pointless only fixing one fracture when you have multiple ones. Yesterday at 4:50pm I averaged slightly over 60kmh from after NX to Naas South, with 5minutes of stop start traffic between Kill and M7.

NX needs to be done, but I don't see it having much of an impact on peak commuting time unfortunately.

Anyone who leaves at Rathcoole or Kill is likely to benefit massively from NX being done, as is anyone who needs to turn on to the N7 from Belgard or who lives inside NX and works outside, e.g. at Citywest.

The widening is needed but its expensive and not planned yet.

starviewadams

Stark wrote: »

You should try petitioning them to have some sort of soundproofing works done. I live right next to the N4/M50 junction and I can't hear a thing as they have sound barriers between the houses and the road.

Us and the rest of the long term residents of our road have before and we were fobbed off each time by SDCC/NRA/DOT etc.That was when the country had money,doubt they'd spring for it now.

Hopefully when the works completed they'll put up the wooden panels that were put in during the upgrade works further down the N7,think that was KCC not SDCC though.

All that seperates us from the N7 now is a grass verge and some trees.

JupiterKid

I can't fathom why the M7 wasn't widened whan it was resurfaced a couple of years back. It would have been the perfect opportunity to have widened it then.

The money of course is just not avaialble now so it's going to be quite a while before this section is improved. I also think that most of the bridges will have to be knocked and replaced.

L1011

JupiterKid wrote: »

I can't fathom why the M7 wasn't widened whan it ws resurfaced a couple of years back. It would have been the perfect opportunity to have widened it then.

The money of course is just not avaialble now so it's going to be quite a while before this section is improved. I also think that most of the bridges will have to be knocke and replaced.

They only resurfaced the Naas BP not the full length that has to be widened

There is one bridge that will definitely need replacing if we want hard shoulders.

Pete_Cavan

Stark wrote: »

You should try petitioning them to have some sort of soundproofing works done. I live right next to the N4/M50 junction and I can't hear a thing as they have sound barriers between the houses and the road.

Noise barriers are pretty standard on NRA projects now, I would be very surprised if they were not included as part of the design.

spacetweek

Indeed when that resurfacing was taking place I thought it was widening! Was annoyed when I found out it wasn't. Total waste of time. It might have to be resurfaced again when they widen it.

pistolpetes11

Driving home to Newbridge from Dublin Today and noticed every bridge from Junction 9 till just after Junction 11 Had a 2 cameras up on the bridge either side of the bridge attached to a big steel box on the ground.

I wonder what they are monitoring with these ?

Wild Bill

spacetweek wrote: »

Indeed when that resurfacing was taking place I thought it was widening! Was annoyed when I found out it wasn't. Total waste of time. It might have to be resurfaced again when they widen it.

That is a bit like the nonsense posted by Tragedy.

Resurfacing a disintegrating pavement is manifestly not a "waste of time" - simply because they didn't do something else as well.

Get a grip folks :cool:

Tragedy

The main road where I live was fully resurfaced earlier this year leading to a lovely smooth road to drive. 6 months later 75% of it was dug up to lay new Gas pipes for Bord Gáis.

According to you, this is perfectly logical and not a waste of time.

Wild Bill

Tragedy wrote: »

The main road where I live was fully resurfaced earlier this year leading to a lovely smooth road to drive. 6 months later 75% of it was dug up to lay new Gas pipes for Bord Gáis.

According to you, this is perfectly logical and not a waste of time.

Eh...no.

According to me, repaving the Naas bypass without also widening it was not a waste of time. :cool:

Tragedy

Wild Bill wrote: »

Eh...no.

According to me, repaving the Naas bypass without also widening it was not a waste of time. :cool:

According to you, repaving the Naas bypass when plans were underway to widen it which would result in repaving it fully a second time was not a waste of time.

Get it correct, makes a big difference

hi5

They have trees alright but I dont see any boarding.


http://roads.southdublin.ie/dmdocuments/Newlands%20Cross%20EIS/Chapter%2003.pdf

Irish and Proud

Tragedy wrote: »

The main road where I live was fully resurfaced earlier this year leading to a lovely smooth road to drive. 6 months later 75% of it was dug up to lay new Gas pipes for Bord Gáis.

According to you, this is perfectly logical and not a waste of time.

That really annoys me! :mad:

What the hell is wrong with this world - would it not be obvious to send out a notice telling energy and communications companies: '<<local authority>> intends to resurface <<specify road>> shortly and will not allow any road opening on the stretch in question thereafter (for 5 years). All utility companies must undertake any works required in the short term (5 years) before <<date>> - any emergency opening in the specified 5 year period will be subject to a penal fee borne by the utility company. It must also be noted that utility companies are responsible for ensuring that their pipework is robust enough to resist any damage caused by the resurfacing works - again, any opening as a result of damaged pipework will be subject to council fees and the cost of pipework repairs must be borne by the utility company.' If the councils can't pass such bylaws, then obviously, our state laws need updating.

Ridiculous!

Irish and Proud

Tragedy wrote: »

According to you, repaving the Naas bypass when plans were underway to widen it which would result in repaving it fully a second time was not a waste of time.

Get it correct, makes a big difference

I'd have to agree with you - there was at least talk of widening the Naas bypass when it was being resurfaced. When the resurfacing works were underway, some of us here thought they might be widening the road - I thought it would have been the obvious this to do. While the resurfacing was needed then, there's still no excuse for not putting in the 3rd lane - most of the flyovers have IMO enough room for a 3 lanes and a reduced hard shoulder each way. The flyover at Maudlins would probably have to be knocked though.

Regards!

Irish and Proud

Irish and Proud wrote: »

That really annoys me! :mad:

What the hell is wrong with this world - would it not be obvious to send out a notice telling energy and communications companies: '<<local authority>> intends to resurface <<specify road>> shortly and will not allow any road opening on the stretch in question thereafter (for 5 years). All utility companies must undertake any works required in the short term (5 years) before <<date>> - any emergency opening in the specified 5 year period will be subject to a penal fee borne by the utility company. It must also be noted that utility companies are responsible for ensuring that their pipework is robust enough to resist any damage caused by the resurfacing works - again, any opening as a result of damaged pipework will be subject to council fees and the cost of pipework repairs must be borne by the utility company.' If the councils can't pass such bylaws, then obviously, our state laws need updating.

Ridiculous!

My understanding is that they do their very best to do something like this anyway,
In most cases, a road is dug up a few months before it's resurfaced, so it usually works out OK, but not always!
Nothing pisses off the road management than someone digging up a road they're just had resurfaced!

Wild Bill

Tragedy wrote: »

According to you, repaving the Naas bypass when plans were underway to widen it which would result in repaving it fully a second time was not a waste of time.

Get it correct, makes a big difference

What I said was "repaving the Naas bypass without also widening it was not a waste of time"

And building the NX interchange without widening the Naas bypass would not be a waste of time either.

You may write any ridiculous nonsense you wish - but please don't attribute it to me.

pistolpetes11

pistolpetes11 wrote: »

Driving home to Newbridge from Dublin Today and noticed every bridge from Junction 9 till just after Junction 11 Had a 2 cameras up on the bridge either side of the bridge attached to a big steel box on the ground.

I wonder what they are monitoring with these ?

So does anyone know what all the cameras are for ?

pistolpetes11

pistolpetes11 wrote: »

So does anyone know what all the cameras are for ?

I think they're average speed cameras for traffic monitoring, not for speeders, just for traffic management purposes.

limklad

Jayuu wrote: »

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..

I fully agree with it. It was bad design for multi lane traffic and heavy traffic and poor Traffic analysis. Anytime i head to Dublin on evening or morning rush hour traffic, most traffic is going on the M50 (N&S) rahter than heading into the city.
More sign posts farther out the N7 towards Nass would help before Newlands Cross. Same goes for Luas red cow Sign posts, it would certainty would help to know, especially, if the driver is in the third (2nd overtaking) Lane. The writing on the road do not help in heavy traffic as they are covered over with vehicles. It only works if there are no vehicles in front. Overhead signs on multi lane roads are best.

pistolpetes11

Deleted User wrote: »

I think they're average speed cameras for traffic monitoring, not for speeders, just for traffic management purposes.

On every bridge and just from J9 to J11 seems strange