Road Needs Study (1998)

Amtmann

I recently emailed the NRA about the Road Needs Study (1998), asking if they had any copies in stock. Sure enough they did, and I received the report in the post today (for free). It makes great reading. Here are some pictures:

















It's interesting to see how the plans for the interurban routes evolved out of this study. Partial dualing only was recommended on the N9, for instance, while the schedule for rolling out DC on the N6, N7 and N8 was quite different to what followed. Seen as how the study is free to acquire, I recommend all roadsies to email the NRA and order their copy today.

L1011

I suspect they'll run out of them quite quickly if we all go asking for a copy!

To me it looks like the plan then was to leave a section of WS2 in the N6 between Ballinasloe and Loughrea (and to preseve the 1970s routing via Loughrea), its just as well this one didn't get done.

Tech3

Well I just emailed them now to see if I can get in a grab one before the rest of the road nerds get there to it. It would be a great read if I manage to get it.

Sponge Bob

Any chance they could root out and email someone a PDF or a word document that we can convert to PDF, how hard is that ???

What is true is that this is the bible of long term road planning in Ireland and a valuable historic and reference document.

Tech3

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Any chance they could root out and email someone a PDF or a word document that we can convert to PDF, how hard is that ???

What is true is that this is the bible of long term road planning in Ireland and a valuable historic and reference document.

Thats true it should'nt be that hard to convert it to a PDF file.

Sponge Bob

tech2 wrote: »

Thats true it should'nt be that hard to convert it to a PDF file.

Seeing as the miserable greens are making them revisit it ( by cancelling 94 road projects that are programmed as a result of that very road needs survey from 1998) it may be wise for the NRA to conduct another one pronto so those miserable greens realise how much is yet to be done.

However driver behaviour and testing and the ban on L plates....together with the reduced lethality of the roads overall would seem to demand a revisitation at this time. Many roads have seen a reduction in lethality that cannot be attributed to any engineering expenditure.....maybe a lack of American tourists instead

murphaph

That's a very interesting document. Originally nothing more than mostly S2 was planned for the M9 because they clearly envisaged upgrading the N77 to take traffic from Kilkenny to the M8! while the N20 states that a dual carriageway is required.....hmmmm, poltics intervened there anyway!

Tech3

Folks ye should email the NRA now if you really want one as there is only a few copies left I have been told.

wellbutty

I emailed them yesterday morning and they're already out of them...ye feckers! Thanks for the heads up though Furet.

spacetweek

wellbutty wrote: »

I emailed them yesterday morning and they're already out of them...ye feckers! Thanks for the heads up though Furet.

Yep same response for me. Gosh darn it!

Furet, any chance of scanning it in for us?

BTW, what is that amazing road on the front cover?

Aidan1

Thats the 'East Cork Parkway' a section of the N25 between Cork and Midleton.

Bards

Mine arrived in the post today:D

marmurr1916

Fair play Furet. Any chance anyone's going to scan and upload a copy to the web?

Interesting to see the amount of red sections (Backlog) on the 1998 map. I wonder how many of those sections have been improved since then?

road_high

murphaph wrote: »

That's a very interesting document. Originally nothing more than mostly S2 was planned for the M9 because they clearly envisaged upgrading the N77 to take traffic from Kilkenny to the M8! while the N20 states that a dual carriageway is required.....hmmmm, poltics intervened there anyway!

Yes I think Kilkenny and the South east got a far better deal than envisaged in 1998. Though an upgrade of the N77 is still hugely desirable and indeed very neccessary, the M9 as it has been built ticks far more boxes as against the 1998 study.
For instance;
- The 3 largest urban centres in the south east are all now/soon will be linked together by motorway. Traffic between these is significant. A road to Dublin via M9 is accomodating all this inter region movement.
- The M9 is shorter for Kilkenny traffic as against link to M8. Not 100% would have chosen this route, whereas for the M9 thye almost certainly will.
- The M9 makes a complete job of road upgrades in the south east. No need to go back and build again like the Moone bypass where the road unfortunately was obsolete when it opened. Though it did serve us very well for a decade.
- Acts a cohesive link running through the centre of the region.

mysterious

mfitzy wrote: »

Yes I think Kilkenny and the South east got a far better deal than envisaged in 1998. Though an upgrade of the N77 is still hugely desirable and indeed very neccessary, the M9 as it has been built ticks far more boxes as against the 1998 study.
For instance;
- The 3 largest urban centres in the south east are all now/soon will be linked together by motorway. Traffic between these is significant. A road to Dublin via M9 is accomodating all this inter region movement.
- The M9 is shorter for Kilkenny traffic as against link to M8. Not 100% would have chosen this route, whereas for the M9 thye almost certainly will.

Traffic on the N9 isn't that significant, I know your from the SE and I know you got your motorway but please. don't waffle.

None of the inter urbans had motorway capacity traffic. Bar the Nenagh to Limerick, Cork Fermoy and, Portlaoise to M7/M8 split and Adare N21. (based on 2015 levels)

road_high

mysterious wrote: »

Traffic on the N9 isn't that significant, I know your from the SE and I know you got your motorway but please.

I don't know cos I don't have the traffic figures to hand. Just from my own observations driving it weekly/daily, the old N9 between Carlow and Kilcullen was one hell of a busy single carriageway road.

don't waffle.

Please drop the condescending tone ta, you loose any respect I might have your argument/opinion.

Tech3

mysterious wrote: »

Traffic on the N9 isn't that significant, I know your from the SE and I know you got your motorway but please. don't waffle.

Mysterious you may be right with the AADT figures but considering the N9 was very poor many used the N11/M11 so the AADT will rise further once the whole motorway will be completed. Also how much less was it construct a WS2 over a HQDC at the time? Not much I would imagine and the road is future proofed for decades to come.

Bards

tech2 wrote: »

Mysterious you may be right with the AADT figures but considering the N9 was very poor many used the N11/M11 so the AADT will rise further once the whole motorway will be completed. Also how much less was it construct a WS2 over a HQDC at the time? Not much I would imagine and the road is future proofed for decades to come.

Traffic between Kilkenny and Waterford will increase substantially once the M9 is complete. I know many people who say that once the road is complete they will travel more between the two centres for both business & pleasure. I have put off trips (and even canceled some) for as long as possible before I have to travel on the N9/N10 as it is one head-wrecking road

I'm sure Mfitzy has heard the same being said in Kilkenny and further afield

Chris_533976

I still think the overall question should be which should have gotten priority.

M20 or M9.

I say that M20 Mallow - Croom should have gotten priority (and been designed years ago)

Say build half the M9 and half the M20, then we'd all be better off.

The fact that the M9 is (nearly) done and the M20 hasnt been touched and wont be pre 2015 is disgraceful.

Bards

Chris_533976 wrote: »

I still think the overall question should be which should have gotten priority.

M20 or M9.

I say that M20 Mallow - Croom should have gotten priority (and been designed years ago)

Say build half the M9 and half the M20, then we'd all be better off.

The fact that the M9 is (nearly) done and the M20 hasnt been touched and wont be pre 2015 is disgraceful.

so we'd end up with two half finished roads instead of one completly finished Inter-urban motorway - a typical Irish solution indeed

road_high

tech2 wrote: »

Mysterious you may be right with the AADT figures but considering the N9 was very poor many used the N11/M11 so the AADT will rise further once the whole motorway will be completed. Also how much less was it construct a WS2 over a HQDC at the time? Not much I would imagine and the road is future proofed for decades to come.

Unfortunately we only have 09 figures for the N9 at Leighlinbridge (below) and Mullinavat.

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Daily Volume 14695 15776 16373 16662 17180 16979 16690

Tech3

mfitzy wrote: »

Unfortunately we only have 09 figures for the N9 at Leighlinbridge (below) and Mullinavat.

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Daily Volume 14695 15776 16373 16662 17180 16979 16690

I would expect AADT figures at Mullinavat to significantly increase maybe around the 20,000 mark.

Chris_533976

Bards wrote: »

so we'd end up with two half finished roads instead of one completly finished Inter-urban motorway - a typical Irish solution indeed

Having the 'road' finished here isnt totally relevant IMO. It would be better overall to have half of the M20 done (removing the dangerous Mallow - Croom bit) and half the M9 done (removing half the dangerous bit of that).

I agree that both need doing overall, but having one done with the other untouched AND on the long finger is daft.

Amtmann

spacetweek wrote: »

Furet, any chance of scanning it in for us?

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Fair play Furet. Any chance anyone's going to scan and upload a copy to the web?

I would of course scan it, but I don't have easy access to a scanner, plus I'm preparing to move abroad for 5 months in two weeks' time, so I'm really busy at the moment. If no one has scanned it by the time I get back, I'll try to get it done - but that won't be until July at the earliest i'm afraid!

wellbutty

Yet another great thread hijacked by the "M20 should've been built over the M9" brigade. Lucky ye're not in a position of power or else AADT figures would be the only factor in justifying a road schmeme improvement. I drove up and down from Dublin a few times over the weekend, lethal car-breaking potholes that KK county council couldn't be arsed filling in (the location of the "Welcome to Waterford City" sign inside their boundary is far more important), the 19th century horse & carriage alignment, unbelievable width, awful drainage, numerous villages...give me a break lads and sing us a new one.

On topic, how many pages are in the document Furet? If there's not too many I'd scan it and post you back the original.

murphaph

wellbutty wrote: »

Yet another great thread hijacked by the "M20 should've been built over the M9" brigade.

I don't recall ever stating that before this thread, so I hope I'm not in this "brigade" you talk about, but it sort of jumps out at you, if you read the document from 1998 that is, that the N9 was never due to receive a motorway as traffic was to be sent along an upgradded N77 to the M8 and along the upgraded N25/N11 corridor but the FF "one for everyone in the audience" policies kicked in somewhere along the line. I'm happy the M9 will exist though, but it wasn't meant to, at least not before the M20.

wellbutty wrote: »

Lucky ye're not in a position of power or else AADT figures would be the only factor in justifying a road schmeme improvement. I drove up and down from Dublin a few times over the weekend, lethal car-breaking potholes that KK county council couldn't be arsed filling in (the location of the "Welcome to Waterford City" sign inside their boundary is far more important), the 19th century horse & carriage alignment, unbelievable width, awful drainage, numerous villages...give me a break lads and sing us a new one.

Apart from the sign thing, that could be the N20 you're talking about. You can't deny that the N20 was seen as a higher priority by the NRA than the southern end of the N9. THAT IS FACT according to this 1998 source. That's all we're talking about, how it's interesting that things can be influenced by politics and so on.

wellbutty

No murphaph I wasn't referring to you. I do accept the N20 is dire, as is the N24 by the way and plenty of others. The 1998 document recommends that the N20 be dualled by 2019, it's still on schedule isn't it? Yes the South East did benefit in the intervening period after being neglected since Irish independance. It's lucky for us all that the 1998 study wasn't implemented to the extent outlined in the document or else we'd end up with a lot more road downgrades than the N24 Fiddown/Piltown bypass. As Mfitzy said, "The M9 makes a complete job of road upgrades in the south east." The M20 will have its day, we'll have ours in May (assuming BAM come back from the Christmas holidays!).

spacetweek

mysterious wrote: »

None of the inter urbans had motorway capacity traffic. Bar the Nenagh to Limerick, Cork Fermoy and, Portlaoise to M7/M8 split and Adare N21. (based on 2015 levels)

2015 levels estimated in 1998 are wrong and have probably been surpassed already.

The current motorways were planned based on revised figures which anticipated motorway being needed along those routes. Hence, motorways.

Amtmann

Plus of course AADT was not the sole consideration: also important were

• town bypass provision
• the creation of better road geometries
• the removal of multiple private accesses
• the elimination of the multitude of at-grade junctions and cross-roads
• the provision of better over-taking capacity

Zoney

wellbutty wrote: »

The M20 will have its day, we'll have ours in May (assuming BAM come back from the Christmas holidays!).

Not if the Greens have their way, whereas as you say the M9 is a done deal now.

So excuse a bit of agitation in favour of the M20 if you please - I should note that I have nevertheless argued the valid reasons for the M9 (certainly north of N10, but given the amount the existing road inhibits travel, I argued for south of that also) on a number of occasions.

The N20 is at least of similar importance I would argue to the N9, and I would suggest similarly at present inhibits commerce and is detrimental to safe travel.

BTW, this map in fairness does seem to prioritise routes solely on the basis of their state at the time and traffic volume. Those are of course major considerations, but I consider the interurbans first argument as not without merit given the strategic importance and travel time. Nevertheless, it would have been preferable had the originally promised date of 2006 been held to, in order that other routes (such as M20 and things like Newlands and Arklow-Rathnew) could have got a look-in. As far as I can see, the slow start to the interurbans was mainly from artificially limited go-ahead of projects that were artificially small, in order to allow domestic construction industry (FOFF) to gear up to handle most of the jobs. Given the dead end that was jobs-wise, it made no sense bar lining certain people's pockets.

Chris_533976

wellbutty wrote: »

Yet another great thread hijacked by the "M20 should've been built over the M9" brigade. Lucky ye're not in a position of power or else AADT figures would be the only factor in justifying a road schmeme improvement. I drove up and down from Dublin a few times over the weekend, lethal car-breaking potholes that KK county council couldn't be arsed filling in (the location of the "Welcome to Waterford City" sign inside their boundary is far more important), the 19th century horse & carriage alignment, unbelievable width, awful drainage, numerous villages...give me a break lads and sing us a new one.

Ok lets compare the N9 to the N20 using your own comments about the N9.

lethal car-breaking potholes - Check. Theres one persistent one near Buttevant that is more of a pit than a hole. That entire area is a cracked surface track at the moment.

the 19th century horse & carriage alignment - Check. A section of the N20 around Buttevant can be shown on OS maps to follow the exact same alignment that it did in the 1800s.

unbelievable width - Check. Large sections around Buttevant and the entire of the Mallow - Croom section are lethally narrow.

awful drainage - Check. The N20 is jammed in Mallow every time theres heavy rain. That section clogs up due to flooding far more often that the N9.

numerous villages - Lets list them. Rathduff, Newtwopothouse, Buttevant, Ballyhea, Charleville, O'Rourkes Cross, Banogue.

Seems to me the N20 has lots in common with the N9, only the M9 is nearly built due to a political decision to fast track it, with the M20 still not off the drawing board. Roads should be built on need, not on which constituency gets its TD to shout the loudest, which has been what happened on the M9 and hindered the M20.

wellbutty

We both acknowledge that both roads needed to be replaced, one scheme was classified as an MIU and the other part of the Atlantic Corridor. Unfortunately all schemes can't be built at the same time, the country ran out of money and we got our lucky break here in the south east.

Yes politics had a hand in it but that's democracy man. I think it would be a lot worse if a good, perfectly safe wide road was replaced with a motorway as a result of political intervention, this is not the case with the M9.

Chris_533976

True I argued from day one that Cork to Limerick should have been classed as an MIU, as it connects the 2nd and 3rd cities in the Republic. Connecting to Dublin shouldnt make a road an MIU.

Also the likes of Castleisland and Tullamore should NOT have been touched before the M20. Ridiculous.

fricatus

Oh here we go again with all this Martin Cullen crap... yes, of course he was probably instrumental in getting the M9 built, but those who attack the decision constantly ignore the facts that support it. I seem to remember a lot of opposition to the project that had a lot more to do with politics than demographics, and it was in spite of this opposition that the M9 was built. I am happy to debate this but let's stick to facts.

I did an analysis of the populations around our major cities. I got a map of all the DEDs and determined which ones were for the most part within a 25 km circle of each one. I then got out the 2006 census figures and filled them all in. If anyone wants a copy of the Excel file, PM me, but this is the bottom line that I came up with:

Dublin: 1,320,053
Cork: 313,382
Limerick: 175,693
Galway: 138,790
Waterford: 124,001

There are two points that stand out from this analysis:


1. The Dublin area is very dominant in population terms, so its weight alone probably justifies some of the motorway connections that are being built. One very crude method for determining how much traffic will flow between two places would be to multiply their populations, which gives us the following figures:
Cork-Limerick: 55,059 million
Waterford-Dublin: 163,688 million

This is a very crude and simplistic analysis, but it provides a starting point. Limerick is closer to Cork than Dublin is to Waterford, which would have an impact, but that's balanced by the fact that Dublin's concentration of sporting, cultural and business attractions, plus its airport and port make it a bigger destination than its population vis-a-vis Cork (four times bigger) would suggest.

Similarly, arguments that the M20 would connect on to Galway and Sligo can be countered by the argument that the M9 connects on to the Dublin-Belfast corridor.


2. The difference in population betweeen the Galway and Waterford areas is negligible. I'm always amazed at how Galway consistently punches above its weight, whereas the opposite always seems to be the case for Waterford.

It's interesting to note that most of Galway's catchment population is in the Galway West constituency, whereas the catchment population around Waterford is balkanised into Waterford, South Tipperary, Wexford and Carlow/Kilkenny. Maybe this inadvertent gerrymandering has something to do with it.

I've never once heard any arguments against the M4/M6 being built, yet it serves the same number of people as the M9. Remember that outside the Dublin/Kildare area the only large town along the M4/M6 is Athlone, whereas the M9 serves both Kilkenny and Carlow, each of which is bigger than Athlone. The M9 also manages to be quite a bit shorter than the M4/M6, so one would presume that it's better value and ought to have been prioritised! At any rate, if the M6 is justified (in being prioritised over the M20, or indeed in being built at all), then clearly so is the M9.


Just a few other miscellaneous thoughts:

- AADT only tells you about actual road usage. It tells you little about route demand. If the AADT on route A-X is double that on route B-X where the populations of A and B are the same, then you have to ask questions like whether road B-X is losing traffic to alternative routes, or to alternative modes of transport, or indeed whether the nature of the two roads is such that one encourages trips to be made (because it's fast, untolled, etc.), and the other discourages trips (because it's tolled, narrow, unpleasant, dangerous, etc.).

- I think the way the MIUs were built was a mistake, because they cement the dominance of Dublin at the expense of the other cities' competitiveness. Whereas a company might have had three offices, say in Dublin, Cork (to also cover Waterford 2 hours away) and Galway (to also cover Limerick 2 hours away), now they can locate in west Dublin and cover all five cities, none of which is more than 2 hours away. There is no incentive to locate branch offices in any of the other cities now, whereas if all the cities were connected by fast links, at least then they would all benefit from the efficiencies brought about by the new roads.

L1011

Chris_533976 wrote: »

Also the likes of Castleisland and Tullamore should NOT have been touched before the M20. Ridiculous.

I've never done Castleisland through (only ever terminated a journey there); and while Tullamore and the other village it bypassed (Mucklagh?) were a pain I'd suspect I could name about 20 more needed schemes than it with ease! As it was, a bit of proper signage and a traffic light reprioritisation would have put much traffic on to the sort-of inner bypass.

Aidan1

within a 25 km circle of each one

I've no intention of wading into the boosterism debate, but I would question your methodology, and more specifically the appropriateness of using the same simple metric for cities of very different sizes- the only way you could get those figures is to go from 25km of the outer edge of the cities, which works fine for some (Cork and Dublin for the most part - though Dublin should probably be slightly larger), but tends to overestimate the size of Waterford (and Limerick) in relative terms, and underestimate the size of Galway. Essentially, the different geography of each city has an effect on how it'll show up in that analysis.

Page 119 onwards of this gives the CSO view;

http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/census2006_volume_1_pop_classified_by_area.pdf

In short this includes 'environs', and gives a very different set of results than yours. In the case of Cork, there are four towns of over 10,000 people you can include as part of the urban area (thanks largely to the LUTS/CASP type plans), three of which would fall into your analysis (your figures are not far off of what the LAs in Cork use for strategic planning purposes - around 350k in the harbour area). Similarly, Ennis and Shannon would fall into the Limerick bailiwick, but in ways they are a separate economic entity). Waterford, as a much smaller city doesn't have the same economic range as the larger cities, and adding the same distance to it's boundaries exagerates it's actual size. Galway, due to the very poor planning involved, has a very widely dispersed pattern or urban generated rural housing, and unplanned commuter towns.

Also, the maps on page 6 here show that the commuter belts for the cities differ wildly, with Dublin and Galway having a very large amount of relatively long distance commuting, Cork and Limerick with less, and Waterford with very little.

http://www.cso.ie/Census/..%5Ccensus%5Cdocuments%5CIntroduction.pdf

I'm not questioning the fundamental point you make btw - Waterford is balkanised in terms of LA responsibility, but to a lesser extent and effect than Limerick. Similarly, the SE is the most disadvantaged region in Ireland - due primarily to the lack of a single large urban centre. There's a great article by Meredith and Commins called "Soft Factors, Hard Realities: Assessment of Location, Distance and Economic Development in Wexford and Clare" that covers this very well. It's a little old, but it's very good.

http://www.teagasc.ie/publications/2004/20040330/paper06.asp

invincibleirish

fricatus wrote: »

Similarly, arguments that the M20 would connect on to Galway and Sligo can be countered by the argument that the M9 connects on to the Dublin-Belfast corridor.

Doesn't the M9 connect with euroroute 01 via the M7 & Red Cow? if it were a case that The SE needed to be connected to this route then the most logical and cost effective to do would have been to connect via the M/N11?.

fricatus wrote: »

2. The difference in population betweeen the Galway and Waterford areas is negligible. I'm always amazed at how Galway consistently punches above its weight, whereas the opposite always seems to be the case for Waterford.

Surely the opposite is the case? rural Co. Galway has the WRC & N17 Atlantic corridor whilst Galway City has, far the most part, been left behind without significant investment in the cities public transport and the bypass been continously held up?.

Contrast to the ORR, N25 bridge & M9 all being signed sealed and delivered since 2004 it might give supporters of Fahey & O' Cuiv an indication of how its meant to be done.

fricatus wrote: »

I've never once heard any arguments against the M4/M6 being built, yet it serves the same number of people as the M9. Remember that outside the Dublin/Kildare area the only large town along the M4/M6 is Athlone, whereas the M9 serves both Kilkenny and Carlow, each of which is bigger than Athlone. The M9 also manages to be quite a bit shorter than the M4/M6, so one would presume that it's better value and ought to have been prioritised! At any rate, if the M6 is justified (in being prioritised over the M20, or indeed in being built at all), then clearly so is the M9.

The M4/6 is a commuter M-way to Athlone with Tolls either side of it. the M9 has no tolls and is in close proximity to other recently built M-ways.

fricatus wrote: »

- AADT only tells you about actual road usage. It tells you little about route demand. If the AADT on route A-X is double that on route B-X where the populations of A and B are the same, then you have to ask questions like whether road B-X is losing traffic to alternative routes, or to alternative modes of transport, or indeed whether the nature of the two roads is such that one encourages trips to be made (because it's fast, untolled, etc.), and the other discourages trips (because it's tolled, narrow, unpleasant, dangerous, etc.).

Surely the main increase in traffic on the M9 will come from people realising its not worth their while to use public transport options to travel between the SE and Dublin when its quicker to use the car? I don't know how well patronised the Railway service is to the SE but i would hazard a guess the M9 will take a significant chunk out of its ridership.

And surely the other main increase in M9 traffic will come from the inevitable rezoning that will occur at junctions just outside the SE towns hinterland? more sprawl.

fricatus wrote: »

- I think the way the MIUs were built was a mistake...

Thankfully we agree on something:).

mysterious

fricatus wrote: »

Dublin: 1,320,053
Cork: 313,382
Limerick: 175,693
Galway: 138,790
Waterford: 124,001

There are two points that stand out from this analysis:


1. The Dublin area is very dominant in population terms, so its weight alone probably justifies some of the motorway connections that are being built. One very crude method for determining how much traffic will flow between two places would be to multiply their populations, which gives us the following figures:
Cork-Limerick: 55,059 million
Waterford-Dublin: 163,688 million

This is a very crude and simplistic analysis, but it provides a starting point. Limerick is closer to Cork than Dublin is to Waterford, which would have an impact, but that's balanced by the fact that Dublin's concentration of sporting, cultural and business attractions, plus its airport and port make it a bigger destination than its population vis-a-vis Cork (four times bigger) would suggest.

Similarly, arguments that the M20 would connect on to Galway and Sligo can be countered by the argument that the M9 connects on to the Dublin-Belfast corridor.

If you were actually not from Waterford I would take your points more seriously. But you just scream local gombeenism and its really really sad for the simple reason you always bring the argument to this all the time.

Why constantly try beef up something in a chicken that is no beef. Wateford is a small city, deal with it.

2. The difference in population betweeen the Galway and Waterford areas is negligible. I'm always amazed at how Galway consistently punches above its weight, whereas the opposite always seems to be the case for Waterford.

It's interesting to note that most of Galway's catchment population is in the Galway West constituency, whereas the catchment population around Waterford is balkanised into Waterford, South Tipperary, Wexford and Carlow/Kilkenny. Maybe this inadvertent gerrymandering has something to do with it.

I'm sorry to be blunt. But South Tipperary is out of your argument since its catchment is majorly the M8. Your arguments are just so ridicolous.

I've never once heard any arguments against the M4/M6 being built, yet it serves the same number of people as the M9.

wrong.

Just wrong.

Remember that outside the Dublin/Kildare area the only large town along the M4/M6 is Athlone, whereas the M9 serves both Kilkenny and Carlow, each of which is bigger than Athlone. The M9 also manages to be quite a bit shorter than the M4/M6, so one would presume that it's better value and ought to have been prioritised! At any rate, if the M6 is justified (in being prioritised over the M20, or indeed in being built at all), then clearly so is the M9.

Oh my god to that. Shakes head.

Motorways don't attract popultations based on counties and number of towns along its route, its only a minute factor. The catchement revolves around Where the population generally is centered and where the route is centered to the next major population centre. Stop making petty justifications.

- I think the way the MIUs were built was a mistake, because they cement the dominance of Dublin at the expense of the other cities' competitiveness. Whereas a company might have had three offices, say in Dublin, Cork (to also cover Waterford 2 hours away) and Galway (to also cover Limerick 2 hours away), now they can locate in west Dublin and cover all five cities, none of which is more than 2 hours away. There is no incentive to locate branch offices in any of the other cities now, whereas if all the cities were connected by fast links, at least then they would all benefit from the efficiencies brought about by the new roads.

I agree the only motorways that were imo were plausible, where Dublin to Athlone, Dublin to SE Portlaoise (M7/M8) Limerick bypass. with motorway extended to Adare and South Croom. I would have to say I would agree with some parts of the N20 as motorway or least DC. Motorway from Dublin to Arklow. and Dublin to Dunshuaglin.

The rest of the routes would be a mixture of 2+2 WS2 bypass and DCs.

fricatus

invincibleirish wrote: »

Doesn't the M9 connect with euroroute 01 via the M7 & Red Cow? if it were a case that The SE needed to be connected to this route then the most logical and cost effective to do would have been to connect via the M/N11?.

Yes, you're probably right. My arguments are more for a motorway link between Dublin and Waterford than the M9 per se, but Kilkenny and Carlow were too big to be ignored.

invincibleirish wrote: »

Surely the opposite is the case? rural Co. Galway has the WRC & N17 Atlantic corridor whilst Galway City has, far the most part, been left behind without significant investment in the cities public transport and the bypass been continously held up?.

I don't see the public transport thing as relevant to this discussion, since both Galway and Waterford have been equally badly let down in this area.

invincibleirish wrote: »

Contrast to the ORR, N25 bridge & M9 all being signed sealed and delivered since 2004 it might give supporters of Fahey & O' Cuiv an indication of how its meant to be done.

I'll grant you, Waterford has had a good few years in transport, but only after about 30 bad ones. Remember Waterford needed the ORR back in the day when Galway got the Quincentennial bridge built, so it's ebb and flow. Also, I don't see how you can "contrast" anything with the M9 being delivered when the M6 is already open.

invincibleirish wrote: »

The M4/6 is a commuter M-way to Athlone with Tolls either side of it. the M9 has no tolls and is in close proximity to other recently built M-ways.

Sorry buddy, not being smart, but I just don't understand this point.

invincibleirish wrote: »

Surely the main increase in traffic on the M9 will come from people realising its not worth their while to use public transport options to travel between the SE and Dublin when its quicker to use the car? I don't know how well patronised the Railway service is to the SE but i would hazard a guess the M9 will take a significant chunk out of its ridership.

And surely the other main increase in M9 traffic will come from the inevitable rezoning that will occur at junctions just outside the SE towns hinterland? more sprawl.

How does any of this differ from the situation with any of the MIUs?

invincibleirish wrote: »

Thankfully we agree on something:).

I'd say we agree on a lot more than you think we do!

marmurr1916

mysterious wrote: »

I agree the only motorways that were imo were plausible, where Dublin to Athlone, Dublin to SE Portlaoise (M7/M8) Limerick bypass. with motorway extended to Adare and South Croom. I would have to say I would agree with some parts of the N20 as motorway or least DC. Motorway from Dublin to Arklow. and Dublin to Dunshuaglin.

The rest of the routes would be a mixture of 2+2 WS2 bypass and DCs.

Why bother? Instead of building continuous motorways, you'd have ended up with something like 70km of motorway, 16km of DC, 16km of WS2, 8km of 2+2and so on.

The marginal extra cost of building motorways (compared to DCs and/or 2+2s) has been more than covered by the savings made through having larger contracts (eg - Cashel to Cullahill) with reduced administration costs for the state compared to the cost of administering several, smaller contracts and PPPs.

PPPs, although flawed, have reduced the amount of money the state would have had to either borrow (incurring interest payments) or raise in general taxation.

Given the constraints on the state's ability to borrow, PPPs have often been the only way to ensure the funding of major road improvement schemes.

How many contractors would have been interested in building Cashel to Cullahill as a PPP if it had been designed as a mixture of WS2, 2+2 and DC?

Under current financial conditions, we should concentrate efforts on improving the Atlantic Corridor (including the N25 between Cork and Waterford), improving the N33/N2 from the M1 to Ardee and northwards to the border (in anticipation of an improved A5), and improving the N24, especially the Limerick to Cahir section.

These routes should be prioritised over all others.

mysterious

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Why bother? Instead of building continuous motorways, you'd have ended up with something like 70km of motorway, 16km of DC, 16km of WS2, 8km of 2+2and so on.

The marginal extra cost of building motorways (compared to DCs and/or 2+2s) has been more than covered by the savings made through having larger contracts (eg - Cashel to Cullahill) with reduced administration costs for the state compared to the cost of administering several, smaller contracts and PPPs.

PPPs, although flawed, have reduced the amount of money the state would have had to either borrow (incurring interest payments) or raise in general taxation.

Given the constraints on the state's ability to borrow, PPPs have often been the only way to ensure the funding of major road improvement schemes.

How many contractors would have been interested in building Cashel to Cullahill as a PPP if it had been designed as a mixture of WS2, 2+2 and DC?

Under current financial conditions, we should concentrate efforts on improving the Atlantic Corridor (including the N25 between Cork and Waterford), improving the N33/N2 from the M1 to Ardee and northwards to the border (in anticipation of an improved A5), and improving the N24, especially the Limerick to Cahir section.

These routes should be prioritised over all others.

I agree, but my point was, to bascially point out that the M9 wasn't justified and to keep constantly making white elephant biased points that make no sense or relevance to this counter argument is pontless.

If you really want to get to the reality, as I said, only the roads I mentioned would actually get motorway status.

Waterford is a small city end the story, it has it's motorway now could we please stop this bull****. I'm saying this politely also. This has been done in to the death of it at this stage. I don't understand why the SE people still moan and making petty points about this, when they had the most spending on infrastructure in recent years and having two interubands, a bypass of Kilkkenny, Two bypasses of Waterford (with the suir bridge practically empty) the M9 motorway built in less than 3 years in one go, Ashford Rathnew and N11 upgrades.

Now they want a DC N25, N30 and New Ross bypass aswell?

Get off it people.


Gort Tuam
Newlands cross
N20 northern section (Adare bypass)
Longford N5

Are prority.

Bards

mysterious wrote: »

Waterford is a small city end the story, it has it's motorway now could we please stop this bull****. I'm saying this politely also. This has been done in to the death of it at this stage. I don't understand why the SE people still moan and making petty points about this, when they had the most spending on infrastructure in recent years and having two interubands, a bypass of Kilkkenny, Two bypasses of Waterford (with the suir bridge practically empty) the M9 motorway built in less than 3 years in one go, Ashford Rathnew and N11 upgrades.
.

...

Cork is a small City
Limerickjis a small City
Galway is a small City

how can you call a route through the heart of Waterford City a bypass:rolleyes:

the M9 will have taken 4 - 4.5 years from start of construction in mid/2006 (Carlow Bypass) to mid-end/2010

we have done the whole M9 debate to death and the nay sayers lost (According to the poll) so get over it

why does every thread on the MIU's end up debating the M9.. it is getting very old hat at this stage

mysterious

Bards wrote: »

...

Cork is a small City
Limerickjis a small City
Galway is a small City

how can you call a route through the heart of Waterford City a bypass:rolleyes:

the M9 will have taken 4 - 4.5 years from start of construction in mid/2006 (Carlow Bypass) to mid-end/2010

we have done the whole M9 debate to death and the nay sayers lost (According to the poll) so get over it

why does every thread on the MIU's end up debating the M9.. it is getting very old hat at this stage

Because people like you bring it up. You really are gas, because your the very one that thanked Fricatus starting the rant.

Lol.... Please stop trying to fool yourself. Your every much as guilty for these local gobeenism rants. You've started threads on these issues. Lmfao.

BluntGuy

Mysterious, this is probably the third time this week I'm asking you to cool it with the agressiveness. One more time and it's a two-week ban, as per our charter. Please: Attack the post, not the poster.

Carawaystick

marmurr1916 wrote: »

PPPs, although flawed, have reduced the amount of money the state would have had to either borrow (incurring interest payments) or raise in general taxation.

Explain to me how a private co can raise the cash cheaper than a govt?

This week the govt raised €1.5Billion at a yield of 3.something%
If a Private co needed to raise €100Million they'd need to pay more, as there is a higher risk of them not repaying it.
so now they private co has a higher repayment on their debt and the govt pays them this higher rate plus some amount of profit for them.

The govt can plan to run at a break even and pay lower interest. how are ppp's a good idea?

The govt can toll a road without it being a ppp.

Aidan1

The main reason for the ire over the M9 is that it is the outcome of a political decision made as soon as one M. Cullen became Minister for Transport - there is no mystery or even an element of conspiracy theorising about that, it's a matter of historical record. So, purely by dint of these political shenanigans, a piece of infrastructure got built that is, on the surface at least, far in excess of what is required, while other roads that are just as dangerous as the N9, and carry more traffic, will go for at least another 10 years before replacement.

Though I hate to admit it, Mysterious has a point - to a large extent the M9 unnecessarily duplicates other routes, and effectively undermines the logic behind much of the 1998 RNA, and the decisions that were taken even before that (mainly as to the route of the M7/M8 - if Waterford was to get a direct M-way connection, it would have been easier and cheaper to bring the M8 to Kilkenny, and diverge just south of there for Cork and Waterford). So it's an expensive way of deviating from policy, and is largely responsible for the over provision of motorway.

So while it's a sunk asset now, and it will benefit the people of Waterford and the SE hugely over the coming years, that shouldn't mean that people can't discuss the effect political clientelism has on policy decisions that cost the exchequer very large amounts of money, be that the WDC or the M9. And just because those decisions might be criticised doesn't mean that anyone is criticising the locations themselves, or the people that happen to live there.

Sponge Bob

I refuse to get in involved in this M9 vitriol for the same reasons as Aidan because the time to do it was before the contracts were signed. Once they were signed it becomes pointless save as an interesting historical fact. I said before that I wish Waterford the very best with the decent new road and I still do.

Cullen had a lot less to do with it than he claims, the only road he delivered was the R Road bypass of Waterford.

The decision to connect all the Main Cities to Dublin _first_ was made in the late 1990s with the first NDP and Cullen was not even in the cabinet. Prior to this decision the likes of the N20 and N24 had about the same national status as the N9 or N6 because they connected a main city to a main city.

The NRA then had to follow national policy as announced in the NDP ...the NRA never took much heed overlays onto the NDP such as the national Spacer Strategy or T21.

Of course the first 50 miles out of Dublin in EVERY direction was always a national priority because they were an absolute disgrace...inadequate as they were by about 1970 ...the interesting bit is how they ever became a priority on the much less trafficked midland sections.

But yes Aidan, this is about the history of roads policy ...not about actual policy which has been chucked out to quangos so that Dempsey can blame anybody but himself for everything.

We still have Noel Dempsey in charge and Noel has told us in no uncertain that his next legislative and policy priority will be to make us clean footpaths outside our houses. Noel is not even responsible for footpaths.....Gormley is

fricatus

Aidan1 wrote: »

...if Waterford was to get a direct M-way connection, it would have been easier and cheaper to bring the M8 to Kilkenny, and diverge just south of there for Cork and Waterford). So it's an expensive way of deviating from policy, and is largely responsible for the over provision of motorway.

I agree with this point. The best thing in my view would have been two motorways from Dublin to Cork, one going near Kilkenny and Waterford, and the other going near Birr and Limerick. This could have split off towards Galway near Birr. The decision to shadow the old N-routes was wrong.

Aidan1 wrote: »

So while it's a sunk asset now, and it will benefit the people of Waterford and the SE hugely over the coming years, that shouldn't mean that people can't discuss the effect political clientelism has on policy decisions that cost the exchequer very large amounts of money, be that the WDC or the M9. And just because those decisions might be criticised doesn't mean that anyone is criticising the locations themselves, or the people that happen to live there.

The problem that I have, Aidan1 is that Waterford and the south-east have fallen behind the rest of the country since the 1970s, precisely because of political decisions made back then that weren't based on need or demographic facts. It disgusts me that when we finally do get what we've needed for years, that it was because of that same clientelism. Because of that, I can't deny people their right to criticise, but I feel that they should view things in the context of "40 years of hurt" rather than the bonanza of the past five.

What I find puzzling in all this is that a motorway link from Dublin to Galway was taken as a given, whereas the one from Dublin to Waterford was attacked and derided as unnecessary. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the impression I always got, and when you look at the population figures, it would seem that each one is as necessary (or not!) as the other. Yes, Waterford is smaller than Galway, but so is its boundary, so what would you expect

It's only when you compare like with like that you get a true picture of an area's population profile, and that's why I analysed a 25 km circle around each city, rather than relying on political boundaries. I know Dublin is too big for this analysis to be reliable, but Galway, Limerick and Waterford are of similar scale (25 km out puts you well in the countryside), so I stand over my analysis where these three cities are concerned.

mysterious

fricatus wrote: »

I agree with this point. The best thing in my view would have been two motorways from Dublin to Cork, one going near Kilkenny and Waterford, and the other going near Birr and Limerick. This could have split off towards Galway near Birr. The decision to shadow the old N-routes was wrong.

No it wouldn't make any sense to put the M7 up to Birr. Since The N21/N20 Tralee, Ennis, Kilarney and other towns west and south of Limerick would be off the Dublin radar.

The fact of the matter remains as Aidan said stands. Waterford M9 was not needed, they should of made a spur to the M8 or M11. It was a complete waste of money.

The problem that I have, Aidan1 is that Waterford and the south-east have fallen behind the rest of the country since the 1970s, precisely because of political decisions made back then that weren't based on need or demographic facts. It disgusts me that when we finally do get what we've needed for years, that it was because of that same clientelism. Because of that, I can't deny people their right to criticise, but I feel that they should view things in the context of "40 years of hurt" rather than the bonanza of the past five.

You really need to stop this victimisation fiasco. The SE didn't lose out soelty, because all of Ireland lost out and was poor in the 70s.


[/quote]
What I find puzzling in all this is that a motorway link from Dublin to Galway was taken as a given, whereas the one from Dublin to Waterford was attacked and derided as unnecessary. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the impression I always got, and when you look at the population figures, it would seem that each one is as necessary (or not!) as the other. Yes, Waterford is smaller than Galway, but so is its boundary, so what would you expect [/quote]

Because Galway was the last and final centre to get the motorway spec. Your argument is futile for the simple reason if you keep using this argument its not fair, Sligo should of gotten a motorway too.

Waterford in comparison to its size as got more investement that both Galway and Limerick comblined. Not only that but the SE has to Motorway/DCs to Dublin now.

It's only when you compare like with like that you get a true picture of an area's population profile, and that's why I analysed a 25 km circle around each city, rather than relying on political boundaries. I know Dublin is too big for this analysis to be reliable, but Galway, Limerick and Waterford are of similar scale (25 km out puts you well in the countryside), so I stand over my analysis where these three cities are concerned.

I cant believe your dragging that back up.

Tech3

After reading the whole book over the last two days, an excellent report on the study of the national road network. It's a must for any road enthusiast. It would take up a lot of time to scan it, 100 pages.

It's worth gathering the OPT 1994-1999 too for earlier schemes that were constructed like the M1 to the Border.

charlemont

one of the few things they got right in ireland is the layout of the national primary routes, they connect all our main towns and cities as for the m9 eventually a road would have been needed anyway to carlow so at least it connects these towns on the N9 N10, kilkenny and carlow are relatively large by irish standards so it would have been pointless to follow the old t7 via newross the existing n9 would eventually have to be upgraded anyway . same as in m20 its the best decision to go by mallow and rathluirc .. look these roads arent exactly huge autobahns they are irish motorways for irish traffic, with that horrible concrete barrier inches from the overtaking lane