Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

The NRA must be stopped

1678911

Comments

  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,505 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011


    miles deas wrote: »
    A little quote from another road authority:
    "Managing Down Costs on Highway Schemes

    Idea 224 - Defer Widening By Allowing Hard-Shoulder Running"

    Its no the idea its the sentiment hundreds of radical ideas to save money. Now why can't we do the same fellas? lets design a road.

    Hard shoulder running can only work on dual carriageways with full width hard shoulders, e.g. pre mid 2000s standard DCs in this country. All it does is allow you to have 3 lanes at peak times.

    It is not an economic option except where land prices are horrendous. It requires safety zones to be built, often structures to be altered (bridges are frequently lower over the hard shoulder), gantries to be put in place, a monitoring system to be put in place, etc.

    Can I take it that you seem to assume it'd work on WS2s? If you want to kill every farmer in rural Ireland within a week, it might be an idea.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 Sponge Bob


    A low cost alternative is to INTERSPERSE 2+2 ( guaranteeing overtaking ) with Offline Type 1 S2 or Type 2 S2 on long rural routes and at PREDICTABLE intervals.

    Hard shoulder running is for protected WS2 alignments FFS :(

    On a Road like the N5 there are sections of WS2 that can become 2+2 like the Charlestown Bypass, add some S2 and maybe a bit of 2+2 around Ballaghadereen and we are getting somewhere. Add a few laybys on the S2 bits and "Move Over" laws with enforcement/revenue raisng opportunities and we are REALLY getting somewhere. The magic word is PREDICTABLE . PREDICTABLE = SAFE.

    Same with the N21 across West Limerick and North Kerry...heck we just kinda did that in Castleisland in between 2 high quality S2 sections.

    However for safety and economy we must bypass the existing S2 Primary network because we raddled it with Bungalows B&Band Country and Western emporia instead of protecting it after we built it .....between 1965 and 1980 in the main.

    We built what should have been a reasonably good road network once, then we made ****e of it. Never let that happen again.

    But that is a discussion for another thread, starting from scratch with your 2 slides. One for S2 and one for D2 types with land take.

    Hop to it lad !!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    MYOB go look up Bent Flyberg he's now a prof. at my old alma mater. Also consider this if we have no money we will have to build infrastructure using PPP's now when the private company goes to a bank and asks for money for a project in Ireland they will most likely say no as its to risky or they will charge a hefty interest rate to cover the risk of loan default that will drive up the costs on projects. Consider also this the main economic benefit for big road justification is value of time savings. That is the time saved getting to productive work or in the case of freight to destination is factored as approx. 84% of the benefit of a big road. Now CSO figures show average wages are down also freight traffic is down 40%. The balance of costs and benefits is the major contributor to justifying a big road and the Dept. of Finance when in hard times is a very big fish. It has no interest in roads it has every interest in the bottom line. Please consider the mid-sized road option. I want to make sure things tick over but in a more reasonable way.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Now your talking Sponge sparse 2+1 is what the Swedes call it but it could be sparse 2+2 in places. I'm in contact with them:

    " What is the cost of an average km of sparse 2+1 compared to standard 2+1? Depends a lot of the existing road!! So far we have build it on existing 9 m wide roads and just widened it up on places with overtaking lanes. That means that w are widening the road on just approx 40 % of the length instead of 100% and off course the investment cost are much lower because of that – and we are getting nearly the same effects – we think"

    I'll do the slide now.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 Sponge Bob


    The Swedes can do that because they protected their alignments. We cannot without GSJs on 2+2 to give turnback opportunities. It is doable....we have to do it between Limerick and Shannon where we still have median crossovers in some places IIRC despite adding GSJ turnbacks in places.

    We will not be able to do long stretches, accept that.

    Where are the feckin slides, you know the NRA are around these parts every day and you cannot even produce two simple slides for us :(


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 304 ✭✭ runway16


    All of the median crossings on the N18 between Limerick and Shannon have now been removed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    As Promised. I hope they are. Nobody has a moretorium on good ideas and if they take something from this great. Maybe there not but your ideas will be better than mine. Here you are:

    Comparison%20UK%20Irish%20Single%20Carrigeway.png


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 Sponge Bob


    I likes that, now start a new thread on the myriad design standards and their applicability. :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Bob you start it for 2 reasons:
    1. This is the first forum I've ever really been on and I don't know the tricks to keep it going.
    2. Your the made man here with mates not me. If I do it I'll be just sitting there with no input.
    Get behind this and see where it goes.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 Sponge Bob


    Take my word for it, nobody will say boo to a thread on the subject as long as the recent 'Type 2 for the Bewildered' stuff is left here. Just start it and tell us your considered theory on the matter. That is how things work around here. I told you this is not a fractious forum because it isn't. It did not even have a moderator until an idiot with tourettes called Mysterious showed up c.2008 :(

    The twin graphics and offline land take stats are essential because the entire future model is predicated on that.

    Much easier for the NRA to browse as well ...as they do :cool:


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Hi, I created a new thread please invite all to put ideas in. I was hoping to populate it with a few ideas first. But up to you. Here's, the thread:

    Post IMF Road Design Standards


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭ Amtmann


    miles deas wrote: »
    Tremelo can you point me to that Dail costings quote?

    Here you go. My figures were a little wrong (I was working from memory) but you will clearly see now the difference between Type 2 and motorway standard:
    Deputy Frank Feighan: I asked a question about the 2+2. It is effectively a single carriageway without the hard shoulder.

    Mr. Fred Barry: The road is wider and so on.

    Deputy Frank Feighan: What is the difference per yard between a 2+2 and a single carriageway?

    Mr. Fred Barry: Depending on specifics, the difference is €2.5 million or €3 million per kilometre.

    Deputy Frank Feighan: What about a single carriageway?

    Mr. Fred Barry: No, that is the difference between the two. The Deputy asked about the difference between a standard single carriageway and a 2+2. The difference in cost is between €2.5 million and €3 million per kilometre. Individual schemes vary but that is the kind of difference we are talking about.

    Chairman: Does 2+2 refer to a dual carriageway?

    Mr. Fred Barry: A 2+2 road is a dual carriageway but of a lower standard than a motorway.

    Deputy Frank Feighan: The Drumsna to Rooskey road, which is a 2+2 road, is very successful. How much does it cost per kilometre?

    Mr. Fred Barry: Approximately €8 million per kilometre.

    Link is here for more context.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Thanks Tremelo have you seen the new thread?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭ Amtmann


    miles deas wrote: »
    Thanks Tremelo have you seen the new thread?

    Yup I have indeed, I'm delighted we're all getting on a lot better now. Great to get some new blood posting in the forum :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Thanks Tremelo,

    Signing off now, night.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,106 antoobrien


    miles deas wrote: »
    Now CSO figures show average wages are down also freight traffic is down 40%.
    Can't let you away with that without some proof, both links or documents please.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,110 KevR


    miles deas wrote: »
    A little quote from another road authority:
    "Managing Down Costs on Highway Schemes

    Idea 224 - Defer Widening By Allowing Hard-Shoulder Running"

    Its no the idea its the sentiment hundreds of radical ideas to save money. Now why can't we do the same fellas? lets design a road.

    Recent story in the UK press saying the Highways Agency could have saved £1 Billion by using Hard Shoulder Running on London's M25 instead of widening the road.

    The people who were arguing that Hard Shoulder Running should have been done tried to make it seem like the end result would be the exact same and it would have saved £1 Billion. Yes, it would have saved the money right now but the end result would not have been the same and it might end up costing billions more 10/20 years down the line!!!!

    As someone else has posted - HSR is only used at peak times, safety zones have to be constructed, extensive traffic monitoring systems have to be put in place and maintained.

    By widening the road - the extra lane will be available all day, there will be less of a need for reduced speed limits (M25 has variable speed limits). They can then also implement HSR 10/20 years down the line at a reasonable cost.

    It would be very difficult, very disruptive and very costly to widen a road that is already using HSR. Doing HSR first might save money in the sort term but it's definitely the worse option in the long term.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Hi antobrien, No probs. From the CSO Road Freight Transport Survey 2009:

    CSO_-Road_Freight_Transport_Survey_2009_-_page_8_Summary_Text.png

    see link, here, page 8.

    Regarding CSO Average Earnings and Labour Costs Q3. 2010:

    CSO_Average_Wage_Q3._2010.png

    See, link, page 1. Notice how the fall in wages gets worse quarter on quarter whilst the economic situation continues. This ain't good Tremelo that's why we need options.

    KevR regarding Hard Shoulder Running I think the opened hard shoulder is only for 2+ occupant vehicles. I might be wrong though. I know a guy in the HA whose in that section next time we chat I'll ask. I think the idea of the 2+ occupants in lane is some form of Travel Demand Management. The idea is you lock in the benefits of new roads by discouraging single occupant vehicle use. If it works people in the slow moving lanes watch the full cars zooming passed them in the high occupancy uncongested lane. They start to car share to gain the benefit of the lane and paradoxically congestion decreases. Tony Blair said in some transport document or other "You can't build yourself out of trouble" or something along those lines. But don't kill me for saying that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Why do none of my bloody links work? just put the titles into Google they'll be the first hit and soz.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,052 ✭✭✭ veryangryman


    KevR wrote: »
    Recent story in the UK press saying the Highways Agency could have saved £1 Billion by using Hard Shoulder Running on London's M25 instead of widening the road.

    The people who were arguing that Hard Shoulder Running should have been done tried to make it seem like the end result would be the exact same and it would have saved £1 Billion. Yes, it would have saved the money right now but the end result would not have been the same and it might end up costing billions more 10/20 years down the line!!!!

    As someone else has posted - HSR is only used at peak times, safety zones have to be constructed, extensive traffic monitoring systems have to be put in place and maintained.

    By widening the road - the extra lane will be available all day, there will be less of a need for reduced speed limits (M25 has variable speed limits). They can then also implement HSR 10/20 years down the line at a reasonable cost.

    It would be very difficult, very disruptive and very costly to widen a road that is already using HSR. Doing HSR first might save money in the sort term but it's definitely the worse option in the long term.

    Wouldnt this technically (not officially guys, technically) make the M25 a 3+3 road

    or a 4+4 or 5+5 depending on the lanes

    I mean in laymans terms, a 2+2 has no hard shoulder so by removing it and using it as a lane, the road becomes an "X+X" road where X is the number of lanes


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭ dubhthach


    miles deas wrote: »
    Why do none of my bloody links work? just put the titles into Google they'll be the first hit and soz.

    Miles I fixed your links, they were showing up like:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/transport/2009/roadfreight09.pdf

    instead of:
    http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/transport/2009/roadfreight09.pdf

    I'm not sure how the www.boards.ie/vbulletin/ got in on it, but given that you are new to Boards it can take awhile to get use to the functionality. ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    Thanks dubhthach.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,106 antoobrien


    miles deas wrote: »
    A little quote from another road authority:
    "Managing Down Costs on Highway Schemes

    Idea 224 - Defer Widening By Allowing Hard-Shoulder Running"

    Its no the idea its the sentiment hundreds of radical ideas to save money. Now why can't we do the same fellas? lets design a road.
    KevR wrote: »
    Recent story in the UK press saying the Highways Agency could have saved £1 Billion by using Hard Shoulder Running on London's M25 instead of widening the road.

    The people who were arguing that Hard Shoulder Running should have been done tried to make it seem like the end result would be the exact same and it would have saved £1 Billion. Yes, it would have saved the money right now but the end result would not have been the same and it might end up costing billions more 10/20 years down the line!!!!

    As someone else has posted - HSR is only used at peak times, safety zones have to be constructed, extensive traffic monitoring systems have to be put in place and maintained.

    By widening the road - the extra lane will be available all day, there will be less of a need for reduced speed limits (M25 has variable speed limits). They can then also implement HSR 10/20 years down the line at a reasonable cost.

    It would be very difficult, very disruptive and very costly to widen a road that is already using HSR. Doing HSR first might save money in the sort term but it's definitely the worse option in the long term.

    And then you have cases like the Tuam Rd in Galway (between Galway & Claregalway, not a DC) where the hard shoulder has been used for years to create safe right turn junctions. Except the hard shoulder started subsiding and the report in the local press at the time stated that the hard shoulders weren't built to the same standards as the rest of the road. They'd to put traffic restrictions in place for months to fix it.

    We need to be very careful about suggestions like this, because they may not be suitable, and could create even more dangerous situations.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭✭✭ miles deas


    I guess we need to take the best and most applicable from elsewhere and adapt it to our needs. Having said that I'm sure there are a few ideas we could dream up ourselves. Did I mention the new thread on "Post IMF Road Design Standards". Shameless plug:)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,110 KevR


    Wouldnt this technically (not officially guys, technically) make the M25 a 3+3 road

    or a 4+4 or 5+5 depending on the lanes

    I mean in laymans terms, a 2+2 has no hard shoulder so by removing it and using it as a lane, the road becomes an "X+X" road where X is the number of lanes

    To a degree it would an X+X but there would be lay-bys every 500m and enforced lower limits when the HS is in use.

    All the M25 is at least D3M at the moment. Some sections are already D4M and they are widening some more to D4M at the moment.

    It's D6M on the Western section near Heathrow and I think* they might also have HSR on that section as well meaning it effectively becomes a 7+7 :eek: road at peak times.


    *correct me if I'm wrong. I remember when a gas explosion closed that stretch at some stage last year, there were 7 lanes stopped traffic in one direction if I'm not mistaken.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12 ✭✭✭ Cress


    'Scrapping of N21 road plan welcomed' - http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0310/1224291779178.html

    Glad to hear it. Penny finally dropping on the recent orgy of unecessary road-building in Ireland?

    Tremelo wrote: »
    BTW, Cress, it would be nice if you contributed more actively in your own thread.
    Point taken, but it's not my main area of activity on the net. I just look in sometimes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,738 ✭✭✭✭ corktina


    Cress wrote: »
    'Scrapping of N21 road plan welcomed' - http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0310/1224291779178.html

    Glad to hear it. Penny finally dropping on the recent orgy of unecessary road-building in Ireland?


    .

    tell that to the relatives of the first person to die because this road has not been replaced with a much safer new one.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 Sponge Bob


    Cress wrote: »
    ' Penny finally dropping

    Is that you James Nix :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 44 ✭✭✭ blacktopper


    Roads are out of fashion, of the European priority transport axis/projects 21 are Rail and only 5 are road. The 5 road projects earmarked by the EU, 2 have a Irish responsibility we have all but completed our responsibilities on them. We have not met our responsibilities on completing the rail projects. Rail is the new road. Unfortunately there are few ideas to make road building more affordable, See this thread "post IMF Road Design Standards"


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 44 ✭✭✭ blacktopper


    Rail is far safer than roads. You should not even enter into a safety argument when comparing to rail. Its laughable.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement