The NRA must be stopped

L1011

w2_3vc wrote: »

With Derry again you would go cross country along the M6 and up the N55.

I said I wasn't going to engage you, but this one has to be dealt with:

No, no you wouldn't. Not now and not ever. The N55 is a terrible, lethal death trap of a road. The only reason you're even claiming this is because you know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of the national road network and are going off what a computer told you.

You would currently either take the N17/N4/N15/N13 or M6/M4/M50/M1-N2(variety of options)/A5. You would never, ever, ever consider the N55 - no matter what a bad route planner told you. That your sum knowledge of roads comes from this shows why you haven't got a clue about anything relating to the M17 project.

Tech3

w2_3vc wrote: »

I can agree on the N18 and a section of the N17 beyond Claregalway being upgraded to DC; but there is no way that a motorway specification capable of handling 50,000 plus AADT was required for a route that is at 11,000 at Gort, 12,000 at Tuam and 22,000 at a pinchpoint in the middle. Are you trying to justify a 50,000 capacity on AADT of 11,000 and 12,000 respectively when the N25 DC handles 45,000 AADT?

Type 2 dual carriageway can handle 20K max. The AADT at Claregalway is already 23K and will rise in the coming years. Therefore a type 1 dual carriageway is needed. If you will remember in the past we spent billions upgrading roads because we thought traffic would not increase that much such as the M50 and 90's bypasses along the major inter urban routes.

So how do you account for the M3 toll shortfall exposure reported in the Irish Times?

This is due to Toll dodging and the NRA cant do much about it. I already replied to this before and explained in full why figures on the M3 and N18 Limerick tunnel were below forecasted levels.



Repetitive posts and not allowing the discussion to follow on is known as soapboxing and will lead to infractions. I will lock the thread if it continues in this fashion. Please read the forum charter before continuing posting on thread, thanks.

How do you account for the purchase of land that they have no planning consent or funding to develop?

Could you give some examples please. You are not referencing any of the information you are posting here.

antoobrien

w2_3vc wrote: »

Every regional university has numerous courses; the point I was making was that specific courses of which medicine is particularly notable have built reputations that draw people from a larger catchment than those living at home. Go to any City Centre bar during term time and you will meet a large number of students not living at home.

I never said that there weren't a significant number of people that aren't from Galway, I just put your notions into perspective. The overwhealming majority of people attending NUIGalway (& GMIT for that matter) are Galway based. When I did my computing course we had about a 1/3 split: 1/3 from outside Co Galway, 1/3 from the county and 1/3 from town. And we were a more diverse bunch than most of the classes I knew people in. So please, stop basing your plans for Galway on second hand knowledge.

w2_3vc wrote: »

If you were going to Carrick on Shannon you wouldn't go on the N17 beyond Claregalway; if you were going from Carrick on Shannon to Cork or Limerick you certainly wouldn't go on the N17. With Derry again you would go cross country along the M6 and up the N55. The strategic benefit simply is not there.

I've gone to Carrick plenty of times with my family and on my own, I've ALWAYS gone N17 to Boyle and cut across. The M6 doesn't make your route feasible, it's a longer drive along a worse road (I use the N55 on occasion, with the exception of the Section between Miltown and Baala the N17 is a superior road).
There are two things that justify your blindness to reason:
1) The N55 is quiet compared to the N17
2) It doesn't go through Claregalway and Tuam (Edgewords town isn't a patch on either) which are major traffic bottlenecks

I avoid Claregalway most of the time (I know how), but Tuam is far harder to miss if you're not willing to put up with a 100 mile detour. Why on gods good earth go that way, it would make far more sense to that the N63 to Roscommon & Longford from Galway and you don't even have to use the N17 - which seems to be your reason for using this way (as many people who know how to avoid Claregalway are well aware).

w2_3vc wrote: »

The AADT counts half between Claregalway and Tuam; my guess is that they would half again by the time you hit the Mayo border. Commuters yes; intercity traffic a very small trickle.

Clearly a DC would be more than adequate; a motorway with a capacity of 50,000 is sheer farce.

Perspecitve, they double going the other way and as has been pointed out dual carriageway CAPACITY is 20,000. That readily justifies motorway to the N63, and since it's negligible extra cost to construct (over a DC, which I think you'll agree given the usage of 15,000 cars at Corofin is justified to Tuam) why not go to Tuam with the motorway?

w2_3vc wrote: »

Anything in Mayo will go either N5 or N60/M6; they will also route through Dublin Port as there are more frequent sailings to Holyhead and cheaper shipping rates to Liverpool also the roads in South Wales are very poor quality; what is lost in geographical distance you get back in terms of faster journey times.

I got to the Ryder Cup this year by using the Rosslare Ferry. The roads in south Wales are not very poor as you described them (in fact it's better than the N25 from Cork to Rosslare) and if the transport infrastructure was half as good as it was to Dun Loaghaire and Dublin Port (M50, N11, & Port Tunnel) the shipping rates would improve because it would be far more competitive, that's just basic economics working.

w2_3vc wrote: »

It is through a detailed 5 - 20 year plan that you create the correct base to make a rail system work; what would make a rail plan is not the current base it is providing a large supply of business space in the docklands and Ceannt Station and Oranmore. Is all that space going to be delivered in the next 2 years, no, can it be delivered over ten years, yes. Plan for the future.

Your plan is fatally flawed because it's reliant on a Dart model rail system for Galway, which is ludicrous. Could you imagine for a second what would happen if the Dart ran only south into Connolly from North Dublin and didn't get to the business centeres. Remember when the Dart was opened there was no IFSC etc and Temple Bar a was still a pipe dream.

How do you propose to get the rail system to the West side of Galway. It will cost hundreds of millions in land, unless you decide to use the ring road you believe exists (or build it alongside the route of the proposed GCOB similar to the BART in San Francisco bay). That is the greatest white elephant I have heard of.

w2_3vc wrote: »

I would have my own suspicions that 75% of the Gort traffic is destined for Galway as would at least that percentage of the N63 and N17 traffic.

I can agree on the N18 and a section of the N17 beyond Claregalway being upgraded to DC; but there is no way that a motorway specification capable of handling 50,000 plus AADT was required for a route that is at 11,000 at Gort, 12,000 at Tuam and 22,000 at a pinchpoint in the middle.

If you bothered to read the linked page you'd see that that figure is for a point 6 KM south of Gort (which could even be in Co Clare). Given the fact that there are several towns with large (for Galway) populations along this route, all of which add to the traffic on this route (similar to what happens coming from Tuam) a DC is required. Given the fact that capacity figures for DC are 20,000 this would run out of capacity in short order approaching Galway and there's no sense in yo-yoing between motorway and HQDC (which is particularly annoying at Athlone, but that's another argument).

Are you trying to justify a 50,000 capacity on AADT of 11,000 and 12,000 respectively when the N25 DC handles 45,000 AADT?

Nope, there are plans to upgrade the N25. I hope it happens too because it required for far too long, just has we need a decent road network unlike our current mess of roads such as the N17,N55,N63,& N83 - which aren't good enough to hold the traffic that they do carry. The N25 carries a lot of traffic that would be on smaller roads like these, so thanks for providing justification for this road. What the N25 has done for Cork this can help to do for Galway, as well as making our roads safer by moving traffic from roads like the ones I mentioned.

w2_3vc wrote: »

So how do you account for the M3 toll shortfall exposure reported in the Irish Times?

A lot of cheapskates who are being penny wise but pound foolish. I know several people who drive the Loughrea to Ballinasloe and Kinnegad to Kilcock roads because there is a toll there instead of using the Motorways. Rather silly in the long term because you use more petrol speeding up and slowing down, than going at a constant speed, and then there's wear and tear on the car as breakpads (& to a lesser extent tires) don't wear out nearly as quick when not breaking as much.

w2_3vc wrote: »

How do you account for the purchase of land that they have no planning consent or funding to develop?

Brilliant, best time to buy land for these roads or put purchase agreements in place for that matter. It's also the best time to deliver these roads - they will create jobs (hence taxes, which will help to pay for these roads). We need capital investment over the next few years to ensure that when the recession ends, we are not left behind and that goods that can be manufactured here are not unnecessarily lost to points east because Dublin is too bloody expensive and the rest of the country is unreachable.

There are several roads that they do have permission to build over the next few years (they're in the four year plan announced in November). So what land are you talking about? I thought I heard the New Ross-Enniscorthy motorway/dual-carriageway project that the times is talking about is one of the few roads that is approved over the next few years. Anyone care to correct me on this.


Finally

Any objection from An Taisce about removing agricultural land makes me laugh because in Galway, particularly west of the Corrib, they object to using land for agricultural purposes, draining it or making any use of it other than looking pretty.

w2_3vc

tech2 wrote: »

Type 2 dual carriageway can handle 20K max. The AADT at Claregalway is already 23K and will rise in the coming years. Therefore a type 1 dual carriageway is needed. If you will remember in the past we spent billions upgrading roads because we thought traffic would not increase that much such as the M50 and 90's bypasses along the major inter urban routes.

The M50 was upgraded not because demand rose in line with national traffic growth; it was upgraded because it became the new main street of Dublin with projects such as Liffey Valley Shopping Centre; Parkwest Business Park, Citywest Business Park etc. The share of commercial activity the stretch between N4 & N7 took from the entire Metro region with a population of 1.6m; went off the scale. It must be remebered that the M50 was designed as a by-pass of Dublin for through traffic; it was not designed to move commuters from N3 to Citywest or N1 to Parkwest, that is largely what happened. What also didn't help was the placement of a toll Plaza beside a bridge that constrained their ability to build a better feeder system to the toll booths and the advent of contact fee tolling has also helped.


The M50 has 100,000 movements per day which is a factor of 2 to its original design spec of 50,000; the N17 at Tuam has 12,000 and N18 at Gort 11,000 or slightly over 20% of design spec; that would required compound growth at high levels for 30 - 40 years to get even close to design spec. There is no way that the population of or commercial activity of any City in Europe will grow that proportion. It is simply wastefully over-specified.

tech2 wrote: »

This is due to Toll dodging and the NRA cant do much about it. I already replied to this before and explained in full why figures on the M3 and N18 Limerick tunnel were below forecasted levels.



Repetitive posts and not allowing the discussion to follow on is known as soapboxing and will lead to infractions. I will lock the thread if it continues in this fashion. Please read the forum charter before continuing posting on thread, thanks.

Toll dodging is not something that can be proven; it is normative it goes from the experience of I know someone / people who do it to therefore the reason the numbers don't exist is simply because of an observation.

Even if it were true it simply proves that people are not prepared to pay for the project how else does one measure true utility other than people being prepared to pay for something?

tech2 wrote: »

Could you give some examples please. You are not referencing any of the information you are posting here.

Its actually the first line of this thread

<H1>Claim that roads body still buying farmland





FRANK McDONALD Environment Editor
THE NATIONAL Roads Authority (NRA) is continuing to buy up farmland for road schemes that no longer have Government approval due to cutbacks in the capital spending programme, an environmental group has claimed.
Plan Better, a coalition formed by An Taisce, Friends of the Earth, Feasta and Friends of the Irish Environment, said 22,000 acres of agricultural land could be purchased over the next four years for “ghost roads”.
A spokesman for the NRA said it had “no comment” to make on Plan Better’s claim.
According to the group, the Government agreed with the EU and International Monetary Fund that no major road scheme would start in 2012 or 2013. Yet €600 million had been allocated for new roads in 2012 and another €260 million the following year.
“With every kilometre of motorway removing 25 to 30 acres of land from agriculture, the road building authority gambles that a future government can be browbeaten into building around 800km of motorway after it has bought some 22,000 acres of land,” said Plan Better.
“The latest move in the NRA’s landgrab is evident in Wexford where steps to purchase land have just been taken in the case of the New Ross-Enniscorthy motorway/dual-carriageway project. More than half-a-dozen other schemes are also being moved towards land purchase.”
Plan Better said this was happening even though traffic levels on the road network had fallen by 7 per cent over the past two years and the NRA would have to pay €100 million to contractors for two toll roads – the M3 and Limerick tunnel – due to low traffic.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1227/1224286317335.html

</H1>

I've ALWAYS gone N17 to Boyle and cut across.

I am disappointed by this

Sponge Bob

w2_3vc wrote: »

. It must be remebered that the M50 was designed as a by-pass of Dublin for through traffic; it was not designed to move commuters from N3 to Citywest or N1 to Parkwest, that is largely what happened.

That is true but the celtic tiger and its office parks happened in between, that simply could not have been anticipated during the 1980s.

The M50 has 100,000 movements per day which is a factor of 2 to its original design spec of 50,000; the N17 at Tuam has 12,000 and N18 at Gort 11,000 or slightly over 20% of design spec;

You are conflating absolute capacity with 'design spec' while a road may have an absolute capacity of 50,000 before it turns iinto a car park the comfortable traffic level would be around half that or a tad more.

The M50 pre upgrade was capable of handling 30,000 comfortably and 50,000 at most ....bumper to bumper.

It now has a comfortable capacity of around 100,000 , three through lanes and the hopper lanes between junctions give us around 100,000 capacity ...only at the new LOWER speed limits mind.

Without the hopper lanes it would be maxed out again at 100,000 movements were it only 3 lanes.

It ( the M17/M18) is simply wastefully over-specified.

Again the road only has a comfortable capacity of around 30,000 movements per day. You will find that the stretch from Oranmore to the M17/M18 junction will be rather slow at times once this is built...although they took enough land on that stretch for a third lane to be added in future.

The N18 and the N17 ..near Galway...both take 20k plus movements per day although some are local to Oranmore and Claregalway.

You also seem to wilfully ignore is the logistics aspect. For reliable and timely delivery of goods and for reliable bus running you need to overspec thr roads so that buses and trucks have the space to overtake and stick to their schedules.

A road that has a comfortable capacity for 30,000 cars would not be able to service 30,000 trucks and buses in the same space.

A commuter motorway ( not a long distance one) would have slower traffic and with that comes closer vehicle spacing and therefore more units can fit on that road in 'comfort', this is not as comfortable a speed for long distance traffic.

So do educate yourself on levels of service at a certain capacity.

Toll dodging is not something that can be proven; it is normative it goes from the experience of I know someone / people who do it to therefore the reason the numbers don't exist is simply because of an observation.

I regularly dodge tolls

w2_3vc

Sponge Bob wrote: »

That is true but the celtic tiger and its office parks happened in between, that simply could not have been anticipated during the 1980s.

Office parks have been around Internationally since the 1970s; it is simply a question of where you put them; the IFSC was the correct location, City West was not.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

You are conflating absolute capacity with 'design spec' while a road may have an absolute capacity of 50,000 before it turns iinto a car park the comfortable traffic level would be around half that or a tad more.

I disagree; you would not describe the N25 DC at Littleisland as a car park and it handles 45,000 AADT.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The M50 pre upgrade was capable of handling 30,000 comfortably and 50,000 at most ....bumper to bumper.

It now has a comfortable capacity of around 100,000 , three through lanes and the hopper lanes between junctions give us around 100,000 capacity ...only at the new LOWER speed limits mind.

Without the hopper lanes it would be maxed out again at 100,000 movements were it only 3 lanes.

There were supplementary issues with the M50 on top of it being two lanes not least of which was the configuration of the junctions such as the Mad Cow etc. I have no doubt that had regional planning guidelines of the late 1990's been implemented the M50 whilst requiring junction upgrades at N3, N4, N7 could have been upgraded much more incrementally starting with N3 - N7.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Again the road only has a comfortable capacity of around 30,000 movements per day. You will find that the stretch from Oranmore to the M17/M18 junction will be rather slow at times once this is built...although they took enough land on that stretch for a third lane to be added in future.

I can't disagree that the pinchpoint is between N63 and where the N17 enters Galway; the road however has a much higher capacity than 30,000 AADT; DCs reglarly carry 40,000 - 50,000 AADT. However whatever way you look at this the AADT at Gort is 11,000 and at Tuam 12,000; it is vastly over specified.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The N18 and the N17 ..near Galway...both take 20k plus movements per day although some are local to Oranmore and Claregalway.

Whilst I don't see the usage levels on the N18 to justify it on AADT alone I do see the spatial planning benefits of ensuring a DC standard to connect Galway with Shannon Airport, Limerick and Cork. At Claregalway as explained above there is a pinchpoint where significant local traffic originating on N63 and the rural suburbs off the N17 converge on Galway.

The N64 now renamed N18 from Oranmore to Claregalway certainly has very low usage and figures are not cited to back up this requirement.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

You also seem to wilfully ignore is the logistics aspect. For reliable and timely delivery of goods and for reliable bus running you need to overspec thr roads so that buses and trucks have the space to overtake and stick to their schedules.

I don't accept that for two reasons; firstly the route in question has very limited logistics usage and secondly logistics route planners will plan routes to avoid large settlements at peak times.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

A road that has a comfortable capacity for 30,000 cars would not be able to service 30,000 trucks and buses in the same space.

But with HCV usage in single digits for all bar pre morning commute the actual logistics usage on N17 Tuam as roughly 1,000 - 1,200 movements per day and for Gort something similar.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

A commuter motorway ( not a long distance one) would have slower traffic and with that comes closer vehicle spacing and therefore more units can fit on that road in 'comfort', this is not as comfortable a speed for long distance traffic.

So do educate yourself on levels of service at a certain capacity.

There is very little long distance traffic on this road due unlike the M6.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

I regularly dodge tolls

You are not the only one; Irish people have always had a tendancy to avoid paying for anything they don't have to. The NRA clearly could have predicted this; like the M3 the M17 has a very similar pattern of heavy usage just outside the City falling away in substantial increments to a level of usage that is borderline DC and most certainly not Motorway.

Tech3

w2_3vc wrote: »

I can't disagree that the pinchpoint is between N63 and where the N17 enters Galway; the road however has a much higher capacity than 30,000 AADT; DCs reglarly carry 40,000 - 50,000 AADT. However whatever way you look at this the AADT at Gort is 11,000 and at Tuam 12,000; it is vastly over specified.

Whilst I don't see the usage levels on the N18 to justify it on AADT alone I do see the spatial planning benefits of ensuring a DC standard to connect Galway with Shannon Airport, Limerick and Cork. At Claregalway as explained above there is a pinchpoint where significant local traffic originating on N63 and the rural suburbs off the N17 converge on Galway.

If you read the previous post from antoobrien you will note the AADT counter at Gort is south of the town which is the quietest part of the Galway-Limerick road. This is due to it being out of the commuter zones. You have Ennis-Limerick and Gort-Galway. N18 north of Gort is much much busier as it's a commute route.

Correct the AADT is lower north of the N63 junction which you keep mentioning, but Tuam needs to be bypassed and the N17 to Tuam from Claregalway is not up to standard. Therefore it makes sense to get it all done in one PPP scheme. I cant see why the stretch from Claregalway-Tuam needs to be argued so much. It needs to be upgraded.

The N64 now renamed N18 from Oranmore to Claregalway certainly has very low usage and figures are not cited to back up this requirement.

Figures are not cited to show there is very low usage too!

Sponge Bob

tech2 wrote: »

Figures are not cited to show there is very low usage too!

Figures get in the way of a good moan, the N18 Claregalway-Oranmore section is pretty much at capacity for an extra urban 2 lane.

Again W3/An Taisce HQ is missing the key point.

When the N17 was designed there was a design choice of 2+1 @ c.15k movements per day or Type 1 @ 50k max ( 30k at a reasonable speed) . These capacities at interurban not commuter speeds.

Since it was designed and as ever delayed by perma moaners like an Taisce a new standard has replaced 2+1 for new build which is interchangeably called 2+2 or Type 2 around here.

We would probably not have fallen out over a Type 2 north of the N63 ....were this design option available over three years ago.....but it wasn't. One had to design for an inadequate 14000-15,000 or an adequate 50,000 and that was that

Therefore the road had to be Type 1 from the N63 to Tuam. The Tuam Bypass was retrodesigned as 2+2 because it was a small jobbie intended as 2+1 originally, bit of a history here not that you will trouble yourself with it.

But thanks to perma moaners like An Taisce and their associates such as Isaac the redesign of the N63 - Tuam section would have been too onerous and would take too long. Solution.!!....why don't they stop their interminable moaning, delays, and cost escalations incurred by hiring their eco consult buddies and then maybe the road design process would not take as long and could be revisited more easily.

The N25 section you mentioned is an URBAN section and is restricted speed wise, you obviously did not read my explanation of why these roads have a higher capacity. Sadly interurban traffic has to share this road to bypass Cork.

BTW A new ring road is proposed North of Cork for long distance traffic to get it off the congested southern ring which is not really upgradeable.

But for now the N17 will be Type 1 and that is that.

w2_3vc

tech2 wrote: »

If you read the previous post from antoobrien you will note the AADT counter at Gort is south of the town which is the quietest part of the Galway-Limerick road. This is due to it being out of the commuter zones. You have Ennis-Limerick and Gort-Galway. N18 north of Gort is much much busier as it's a commute route.

Figures are not cited to show there is very low usage too!

The answer to why figures are not cited are clearly in your second last line, ' as its a commute route' you don't see many people commuting to Claregalway or Oranmore.

Correct the AADT is lower north of the N63 junction which you keep mentioning, but Tuam needs to be bypassed and the N17 to Tuam from Claregalway is not up to standard. Therefore it makes sense to get it all done in one PPP scheme. I cant see why the stretch from Claregalway-Tuam needs to be argued so much. It needs to be upgraded.

The question is at what level do you carry out these upgrades; I sense that public pressure to move from a historical position of delivery of 10 kms bypasses on key routes such as M1, M6, M7; which was justified pressure if you are building a 250kms road you don't get best value for money doing it 25 contracts.

Clearly the reaction to this was an over-reaction to the opposite end of the spectrum; can you really say that Tuam needed a motorway bypass on that level of AADT?

Would have it have been any less attractive to a contractor to be given a single project at three design specs?

As for the N64 section; if the N17 were upgraded to type 2 DC with a grade seperation at keys junctions; did it even need an upgrade if unfettered access were provided at either end to N17 and N6/N18 through grade seperation.

Sponge Bob

w2_3vc wrote: »

The answer to why figures are not cited are clearly in your second last line, ' as its a commute route' you don't see many people commuting to Claregalway or Oranmore.

The northern section of the N18 primarily an inter urban but one where commuter traffic tries to dodge Claregalway. It will be a commuter route soon enough and is adequate as such.

Clearly the reaction to this was an over-reaction to the opposite end of the spectrum; can you really say that Tuam needed a motorway bypass on that level of AADT?

Christ you an Taisce lot are simply incorrigible, it is NOT A MOTORWAY BYPASS...end of!!!!!!!!

Would have it have been any less attractive to a contractor to be given a single project at three design specs?

Not in Ireland where An Taisce and their associated eco consultancies will cause nothing but trouble. In a properly structured DBO contract a menu of 2 types could be considered but in reality the moaners have to be dealt with pre contract and enquiry. A menu of 3 types is an admission you haven't a clue what you are at.

Tech3

w2_3vc wrote: »

The answer to why figures are not cited are clearly in your second last line, ' as its a commute route' you don't see many people commuting to Claregalway or Oranmore.

You are misquoting my post.

Clearly the reaction to this was an over-reaction to the opposite end of the spectrum; can you really say that Tuam needed a motorway bypass on that level of AADT?

Tuam is not getting a motorway bypass. It's being build 2+2 around the town.

w2_3vc

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The northern section of the N18 primarily an inter urban but one where commuter traffic tries to dodge Claregalway. It will be a commuter route soon enough and is adequate as such..

The inter urban on this is a lot less than 10,000 if total AADT North of Gort is at 11,000.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Christ you an Taisce lot are simply incorrigible, it is NOT A MOTORWAY BYPASS...end of!!!!!!!!.

At a cost of €500m in a much cheaper construction environment this is far from a cheap road. The Tuam section may be 2 & 2; the reality is that a lot more of the route should have been 2 & 2.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Not in Ireland where An Taisce and their associated eco consultancies will cause nothing but trouble. In a properly structured DBO contract a menu of 2 types could be considered but in reality the moaners have to be dealt with pre contract and enquiry. A menu of 3 types is an admission you haven't a clue what you are at.

People have the right to an opinion it is called a democracy; I come back to the toll top ups on the M3 clearly someone needs to keep an eye on the NRA.

Tech3

w2_3vc: This is your last warning. Soapboxing is not tolerated on this forum. Anyone more of this and you will recieve an instant ban from the roads forum

w2_3vc

tech2 wrote: »

You are misquoting my post.

I will rephrase it then; in the same post you stated that traffic levels N18 north of Gort are much busier than a point that has a more inter-urban function; reason being that the nearer section is a commuter route and you also pointed out that the is no data for the N18 section previously known as the N64.

The traffic data sets produced by the NRA are not the most comprehensive and that means that from time to time one has to deduce traffic usage levels by looking at other sections of the network and working out the linkages; based on commuter use being the dominent use; I made what I see as a clear link; that is why I feel the M18 and N17 should have seen seperate projects. I would ask how many decisions are being taken without fully adequate data sets to look at real demand?

I support infrastructural development but in these times of austerity it is not the time to build anything that is a multiple of current need levels.

w2_3vc

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Christ you an Taisce lot are simply incorrigible,

Where did I state that I am a member of An Taisce? I have stated clearly on this thread that I am not a member of that organisation; do not speak for them; do not represent their views.


They however did not bankraupt the country and to state that any environmental organisation is a problem after what unfolded in Ireland over the past 2 years displays a great immaturity. Unrealistically scoped development schemes have left this country with a debt mountain it will be paying back for the next 2 -3 decades.

Examining every line of every specification and asking the question do we really need this? is the only way this country will get itself back to a position of strength.

veryangryman

Im all for questioning the validity of overdone vanity projects such as

M9 Waterford-Kilkenny section (Cullens baby) - should have been smaller spec - bypasses of the villages/towns en route of course
M3 (Dempseys complete waste baby). Couple of WS2 bypasses of Navan etc would have done the trick there also

And i agree that long distance commuting by car needs to be discouraged where possible. If you live in Navan, try getting a job there instead of these nonsensical long trips - lifes too short for commuting

However....

People living within 10-15 miles of a decent sized city on what is practically an inter-urban line (Sligo is officially a city) should be given DC/Motorway to get them into the city relatively fast - I dont think thats too much to ask.

W2_3vc, we know you dont work for Taisce, its just that your points seem to be as much, if not more, dated than theirs. M18 to Tuam with the 2+2 bypass is not a vanity project.

w2_3vc

I think you find as economies mature that they tend to invest a higher proportion of their capital budgets on rail targeted at limiting traffic growth as no matter how many roads you build between cities the actual cities themselves are the ultimate capacity constraint; my view is that with M1,M4,M6,M7,M8,M20,M18 virtually done that a solid foundation has been laid down in terms of road infrastructure. You can consider that view backward that is your right but I suspect from your post above that you also see benefit in offering a range of transport options.

On Sligo I don't think anyone considers it a City it has a sub 20k population and its AADT on N4 at a figure as low as 5,394 at Dromod strongly suggests that it is unlikely to generate a sufficient contribution to make the N17 stack up as an Atlantic corridor.


I agree that the criteria for connecting commuter towns where there are established flows that people should have a decent road; it is a matter of opinion as to where one sees the correct point on the route to change from motorway to DC and DC to 2 & 2; with the linkage of old N18 and N17 (south of Claregalway - Oranmore) to my mind being particularly vain.

I also agree on M3 the AADT north of Navan at around 8,000 really does highlight why specifications need to be very closely examined; a motorway delivering a mere 8,000 AADT should lead to resignations.

antoobrien

w2_3vc wrote: »

I support infrastructural development but in these times of austerity it is not the time to build anything that is a multiple of current need levels.

In gods name why? Perfect chance to get much needed infrastructure at a lower cost that during normal or booming economic periods. Plus it creates jobs that allow people (builders, who are out of jobs) to not be on the dole, which in turn allows me to pay less in taxes & prsi or get out of this mess quicker.

w2_3vc wrote: »

People have the right to an opinion it is called a democracy; I come back to the toll top ups on the M3 clearly someone needs to keep an eye on the NRA.

Your opinions are not in question - the fallacy that an taisce is in any way democratic is. People attempted to join an tasice this year in an attempt to being them awauy from environmental extremism and had their membership revoked and fees returned without warning (published in the city tribune in September i think). These are not the actions of a democratic organisation.

w2_3vc wrote: »

Toll dodging is not something that can be proven; it is normative it goes from the experience of I know someone / people who do it to therefore the reason the numbers don't exist is simply because of an observation.

Even if it were true it simply proves that people are not prepared to pay for the project how else does one measure true utility other than people being prepared to pay for something?

Toll dodging is a recognised phenomenon by people that use motorways. We know people that do it regularly, some of our posters even admit to it.

w2_3vc wrote: »

I am disappointed by this

Why because i can read a map or because I know how to get north from Galway.

w2_3vc wrote: »

The N64 now renamed N18 from Oranmore to Claregalway

Come on that happened 17 years ago (I had to look it up because I don't remember it being anything else). Why is that fact even relevant, considering the only thing that happened to this road in the past 20 years was a minor (unrelated) alignment change and some surfacing works?

antoobrien

w2_3vc wrote: »

I think you find as economies mature that they tend to invest a higher proportion of their capital budgets on rail targeted at limiting traffic growth

Ireland closed railways between the 70's and now. The only new lines to open up are Luas & WRC, and yet our economy grew massively in the 90s.

w2_3vc

Ireland during the 1980's delivered DART; 1990's twin tracked Dublin Maynooth and opened commuter stations between Dublin and Kildare, extended Dart to Malahide and Greystones and expanded rolling stock on the Northern Line dramatically.

The 2000's saw further capacity enhancements and rolling out of Luas. The extension of the Ennis Limerick line to Athenry was against CIE advice, Rail users Ireland advice and was doomed to failure for three reasons

1. 2 hour interval between trains
2. 2 hour journey time is less competitive than the bus or drive
3. Physical route has 60 plus level crossings and is much longer than the road

There are two forms of investment in rail that are taking place on a large scale Internationally

1. High Speed rail such as ICE or TGV - not appropriate to Ireland as the costs aren't matched by the population density.

2. Commuter rail - this is appropriate to Ireland but needs the right planning framework for 5 years prior to an investment being delivered to ensure the passenger numbers are delivered to give critical mass to any service.

Why because i can read a map or because I know how to get north from Galway.

The N17 doesn't go to Boyle whilst the accepted established route is N63 to Ross and then N61 to Elphin.

Toll dodging is a recognised phenomenon by people that use motorways. We know people that do it regularly, some of our posters even admit to it.

But does that not mean that it should be taken into account when negotiating targets that if not met expose the exchequer?

antoobrien

w2_3vc wrote: »

The N17 doesn't go to Boyle

oops my bad, that should be cut across to Boyle from Tobbercurry, but i'll tell you what we can split the differnce and go the Dunmore to Ballyhanuis road, turn right at Cloonfad and go Castlerea, Frenchpark, then Boyle

antoobrien

w2_3vc wrote: »

But does that not mean that it should be taken into account when negotiating targets that if not met expose the exchequer?

Nah, what you do is put extraordinarly low speed limits on them then pay the Gardai to do their jobs and fine anyone that twiches, just like they used to do when these roads were N roads

KevR

@w2_3vc: Don't worry - we don't have to choose between road and rail. We can spend money on improving both!!!

The UK built their road/motorway network decades ago. At the time they largely focused on road building, public transport investment took a back seat. There is still a little road building/upgrading going on in the UK at the moment but the focus has shifted to public transport*........ because the road network is ALREADY in place!!

*Crossrail in London; Metrolink extensions and improvements in Manchester; High Speed line between London and the Channel Tunnel; new high speed lines also being planned.

Same goes for many other countries - they focussed on road building until they had a good network in place and then shifted their focus to public transport.

Let's get our roads* done right (for the most part!) first and then we can spend time and money getting our public transport sorted.

*Including but not limited to the M17/18, GCOB, M20...

Oldtrier

It is extremists like this that drive people away from legitimate environmental causes. How can you compare mass killing to road building?

Sponge Bob

w2_3vc wrote: »

Examining every line of every specification and asking the question do we really need this? is the only way this country will get itself back to a position of strength.

We do that all the time around here....and then you come on quoting Frank McDonald who allegedly got his information from James Nix ...only according to you though.

It was a substandard and crap article for what pretends to be a serious newspaper to start with. Your contributions since have at least maintained the spirit of that crap article. I dunno where you get your Gort figures from...link the source if you actually have one but it looks like south of Gort data not north of Gort.

As for An Taisce....they are nothing but a self selecting and self serving clique that gets the jobs for the eco boys as assuredly as any brown envelope loving planners or politicians do.

The country will only get itself into a "position of strength" once the eco vermin and the venal and corrupt politicians and planners no longer strangle it at birth. The sad thing about An Taisce is that they ultimately became equally as narrowly self serving as Fianna Fáil did.

And neither is worth saving. Life must move on beyond these idiots.

limklad

w2_3vc wrote: »

Ireland during the 1980's delivered DART; 1990's twin tracked Dublin Maynooth and opened commuter stations between Dublin and Kildare, extended Dart to Malahide and Greystones and expanded rolling stock on the Northern Line dramatically.

Dart used Existing old Railway Lines, a route available over 100 years previously before the introduction of the DART. The only thing New they did is to add electrification for part of the route. The Government had to borrow from Europe to buy carriages and engines with the Electrification (Overhead wires) of the Line with no changes to the Already existing Railway tracks. This is not the Same as Building New Railways Lines.
They used an Old line to add capacity along the coast. They restored a route using existing old rarely used railway line to Pearse station and Connelly in the North in a more modern manner from the devastating cross country railway cull starting from the 50's to the 80's.
They been very few lines restored. Why? Because of the poor management of CIE/IR to get cost of travelling down and frequency in the various lines and poor investment by the Government up to the late 90's.

Up to recently it was far more cost effective for me to drive my car to Dublin rather than rail. The other problem is times of Travel. Having a car will get me from A to B back to A, where there is no public transport. Because I grew up near a country village with No public Transport, I have No choice to get a car. Also the unreliability of the Public Transport despite reports of improvement suggested over the Celtic Tiger is still poor here in Limerick especially late in the evening.

I work normal office Hours and when I need to travel at evening and weekends. I am not the only one who lack confidence in Irish PT. Yet When I travel in Foreign countries, It is a breeze despite the Language barrier. I am impress with Cost, frequency of travel and large number of destinations especially in country villages in remote areas in Third world countries. Here In Ireland a suppose 1st world country we have poor standards for high costs. That why we need better roads because we cannot deliver proper PT without such high costs.

Dublin Underground is a white elephant. There is already a connection between Docklands and Heuston station for Passengers. It call the Luas. For CIE/IR there is already a railway line available to connect Heuston Station in which the a relativity low cost as it is the Phoenix Park Railway Tunnel that connects to the Connolly/Docklands via Drumcondra. The Lines need upgrade and the Tunnel updated. They can update existing lines.

There is already commuter Trains available from Heuston to Hazelhatch.

The recent country Bus pulled by the government in this recession put more cars back onto the road because of lack of PT which increase need for cars and requirement for improved roads.

etchyed

THIS:

limklad wrote: »

Dart used Existing old Railway Lines, a route available over 100 years previously before the introduction of the DART. The only thing New they did is to add electrification for part of the route. The Government had to borrow from Europe to buy carriages and engines with the Electrification (Overhead wires) of the Line with no changes to the Already existing Railway tracks. This is not the Same as Building New Railways Lines.
They used an Old line to add capacity along the coast. They restored a route using existing old rarely used railway line to Pearse station and Connelly in the North in a more modern manner from the devastating cross country railway cull starting from the 50's to the 80's.
They been very few lines restored. Why? Because of the poor management of CIE/IR to get cost of travelling down and frequency in the various lines and poor investment by the Government up to the late 90's.

Up to recently it was far more cost effective for me to drive my car to Dublin rather than rail. The other problem is times of Travel. Having a car will get me from A to B back to A, where there is no public transport. Because I grew up near a country village with No public Transport, I have No choice to get a car. Also the unreliability of the Public Transport despite reports of improvement suggested over the Celtic Tiger is still poor here in Limerick especially late in the evening.

I work normal office Hours and when I need to travel at evening and weekends. I am not the only one who lack confidence in Irish PT. Yet When I travel in Foreign countries, It is a breeze despite the Language barrier. I am impress with Cost, frequency of travel and large number of destinations especially in country villages in remote areas in Third world countries. Here In Ireland a suppose 1st world country we have poor standards for high costs. That why we need better roads because we cannot deliver proper PT without such high costs.

and THIS:

Dublin Underground is a white elephant. There is already a connection between Docklands and Heuston station for Passengers. It call the Luas. For CIE/IR there is already a railway line available to connect Heuston Station in which the a relativity low cost as it is the Phoenix Park Railway Tunnel that connects to the Connolly/Docklands via Drumcondra. The Lines need upgrade and the Tunnel updated. They can update existing lines.

...are completely contradictory. D- for clarity of purpose and expression. Your post seems to lack an obvious overarching point. You bemoan the nature of rail investment in the 80s as simply utilising old lines and commend the ease of use and reliability of public transport abroad, but then criticise a project that would involve major new-build of track and increase the capacity of Dublin's rail network threefold.

This red herring about a white elephant has got to stop. I've written this post too many times, and can't be bothered explaining the merits of DART Underground once again to someone who can't be bothered to listen. Do some research before forming an opinion, please.

EDIT: Can't help myself.

There is already a connection between Docklands and Heuston station for Passengers. It's called the Luas.

That's NOT what DART Underground is effing for! Nor is Metro North for people to get from St. Stephen's Green to the airport, while we're on it.

limklad

etchyed wrote: »

THIS:

and THIS:

...are completely contradictory. D- for clarity of purpose and expression. Your post seems to lack an obvious overarching point. You bemoan the nature of rail investment in the 80s as simply utilising old lines and commend the ease of use and reliability of public transport abroad, but then criticise a project that would involve major new-build of track and increase the capacity of Dublin's rail network threefold.

This red herring about a white elephant has got to stop. I've written this post too many times, and can't be bothered explaining the merits of DART Underground once again to someone who can't be bothered to listen. Do some research before forming an opinion, please.

EDIT: Can't help myself.

That's NOT what DART Underground is effing for! Nor is Metro North for people to get from St. Stephen's Green to the airport, while we're on it.

You clearly do not know the History of the Dart and what the Dublin Underground is meant for. It not for Luas neither Metro North.

Here Look it up: http://www.irishrail.ie/projects/dart_underground.asp

Irish Rail DART wrote:

The DART Underground tunnels will be approximately 7.6 Km in length and will connect the Northern and Kildare rail lines, with underground stations strategically located at Spencer Dock, Pearse, St. Stephen’s Green, Christchurch and Heuston Station, as well as a new surface DART station at Inchicore.

Dublin Underground is a White Elephant and not needed when there is a simple upgrade on the Phoenix tunnel line can do. Luas is handling traffic from Dart Lines (Connely station) to Heuston Line for passengers and http://www.rpa.ie/en/Pages/default.aspx Integrated Ticket System will help there to prevent multiple types ticket from different railway operators. DART already been upgraded with extra carriages. local commuter trains to Heuston station are already in place.

Metro North would be more useful than Dublin Underground but we cannot afford that either in the short term (20+ years).

Amtmann

Stay on topic lads.

w2_3vc

If the entire post made my Spongebob isn't soapboxing; what is?

Sponge Bob wrote: »

We do that all the time around here....and then you come on quoting Frank McDonald who allegedly got his information from James Nix ...only according to you though..

Post a single link from your 16,000 plus posts to you expressing any scepticism of over-specified schemes such as the M3 or Limerick Tunnel to back up your assertion that you read every line of every specification.


The article has been posted on the thread 3 times; Frank McDonald is the most respected infrastructure correspondant in the Country bar none.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

It was a substandard and crap article for what pretends to be a serious newspaper to start with. Your contributions since have at least maintained the spirit of that crap article. I dunno where you get your Gort figures from...link the source if you actually have one but it looks like south of Gort data not north of Gort. .

The data mentions Gort; it is issued by the NRA and is one of only 3 sets of data on the route; I've seen shopping centres 100m long with larger data collection sets.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

As for An Taisce....they are nothing but a self selecting and self serving clique that gets the jobs for the eco boys as assuredly as any brown envelope loving planners or politicians do. .

You have no evidence of this; but I would remind you that one of their former chairpersons was instrumental in setting up the public outcry that led to the tribunals that found out Rambo, Lowry etc

Seeing as you love them so much here's 9 minutes of Ian Lumley I googled and found on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2o7Z3KVj-o&feature=player_embedded

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The country will only get itself into a "position of strength" once the eco vermin and the venal and corrupt politicians and planners no longer strangle it at birth. The sad thing about An Taisce is that they ultimately became equally as narrowly self serving as Fianna Fáil did..

I would suggest their message is no different now to 5 - 15 years ago; before the economy was screwed by unrealistic demand projections in just about every sector from housing to retail to road schemes.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

And neither is worth saving. Life must move on beyond these idiots.

Complete soapboxing; not worthy of an answer; seeing as I am in charitable mood I will give you an investment tip; the floods in Australia will sink their stock market further than it should; climate change may give you an opportunity to pick up some bargains; I am continuing to buy oil futures WTI is heading for $200 and that without Putin or Chavez turning off the pumps or an invasion of Iran. People like you with all your eggs in one basket make it so easy for people to make money.