M11/N11 - M50 (J4) to Coyne's Cross (J14) [options published]

Pete_Cavan · 16-11-2019 9:19am

An offline route will only facilitate traffic getting to the gridlock further north faster. It will also attract more traffic which will make things worse. Justthe mention of 3 Lane motorway tells you how mad this is. Why widen the mouth of the funnel when the end part stays the same?

Any offline build should be public transport only. A bus lane in either direction linking in to QBCs and/or BusConnects corridors would actually improve journey times for commuters and incentivise the use of public transport. It would also be a lot cheaper and far greater value for money than trying to accommodate a constantly growing number of cars.

prunudo · 16-11-2019 9:42am

I know what you mean about getting the traffic there sooner but it makes no sense to build an offline route just for public transport which would then be away from the population areas.

medoc · 16-11-2019 10:25am

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

An offline route will only facilitate traffic getting to the gridlock further north faster. It will also attract more traffic which will make things worse. Justthe mention of 3 Lane motorway tells you how mad this is. Why widen the mouth of the funnel when the end part stays the same?

Any offline build should be public transport only. A bus lane in either direction linking in to QBCs and/or BusConnects corridors would actually improve journey times for commuters and incentivise the use of public transport. It would also be a lot cheaper and far greater value for money than trying to accommodate a constantly growing number of cars.

Id do a two lane offline M11 and reduce the existing N11 to single carriageway through the villages. Better for local traffic and also public transport.

SeanW · 16-11-2019 6:04pm

You'd want to leave the existing N11 as either a dual carriageway or a 4 lane road single. The law requires that a motorway has an alternate route for non-motorway traffic. Learner drivers, agricultural vehicles and so on. So the old N11 would still need one lane each way for general traffic. But the other lane and hard shoulders could be handed over to buses, cyclists and so on. But the motorway should only be two lanes, the majority of commuting should be by public transport. Preferably by DART, but improving the Greystones line would be massively expensive.

marno21 · 16-11-2019 6:10pm

SeanW wrote: »

You'd want to leave the existing N11 as either a dual carriageway or a 4 lane road single. The law requires that a motorway has an alternate route for non-motorway traffic. Learner drivers, agricultural vehicles and so on. So the old N11 would still need one lane each way for general traffic. But the other lane and hard shoulders could be handed over to buses, cyclists and so on.

A single carriageway with bus lanes would surely be more than sufficient for any needs. Bus priority where it merges with the M11 mainline too via metering for general traffic

SeanW · 16-11-2019 6:29pm

As I see it, the only difference between a four lane road and dual carriageway is that a DC removes the possibility for head-on collisions. I see the optimal solution as something like this.

New 2 lane-each-way offline motorway.
Then the existing dual carriageway which was:
hard shoulder - traffic lane - traffic lane - divider - traffic lane - traffic lane - hard shoulder
becomes
cycle lane - bus lane - traffic lane - divider - traffic lane - bus lane - cycle lane.

Basically just leave the existing DC as is (physically) and repaint it with new markings for new usage.

medoc · 16-11-2019 6:58pm

marno21 wrote: »

A single carriageway with bus lanes would surely be more than sufficient for any needs. Bus priority where it merges with the M11 mainline too via metering for general traffic

It would be better for the villages if it was reduced to single carriage way through them. Probably wouldn’t be necessary or cost effective to reduce the full length of bypassed N11. I remember reading about similar in the UK where a village that has an A road dualer through it was reduced and restored to a village street when bypassed. Can’t remember where but the before and after pictures were amazing.

hometruths · 16-11-2019 9:38pm

I think the idea of developing offline option and upgrading public transport priorities on existing N11 stretch sounds good but how realistic is this option from WCC/NRA's point of view?

Presumably the cost of any of the offline options will be enormous in comparison to upgrading current road? Both in terms of a construction point of view as well as the level of CPOs required.

In addition to the cost factor I think it is likely that there will be enormous local opposition to the offline options, particularly the two that cut through the golf club and Delgany hinterland.

Does anybody really think that one of the offline options is likely to be a runner?

Pete_Cavan · 16-11-2019 11:23pm

The chances of an offline motorway being built are practically zero. Even if it were to be chosen as the preferred option, inspite of the enormous cost and engineering difficulties, local opposition and appeals on environmental grounds will see the project kicked around every court in this country and Europe for so long that the basis of every decision made along the way we be out of date and the whole process will have to start again.

Using the existing N11 for buses is unlikely to be successful. The road will still need major upgrades to make it suitable and the funding is unlikely to be forthcoming if a fortune is already being spent on an offline road. The offline road will make driving more attractive and undermine bus services. Turning the existing road into a village street will further undermine it, although I don't see that as being a serious proposal as the majority of Kilmac is already on one side of the road, we should be looking to reduce or eliminate the homes and businesses on the other side rather than pandering to them.

There is little or no capacity for further traffic north of the split, facilitating more south of it will only create more congestion. I don't think it will happen but the only thing that will ease congestion is an offline public transport corridor. It being away from population is a benefit not a hindrance, buses depart from population centres and travel direct to Dublin with reliable journey times, the demand would be far too great for a single bus service stopping at every town.

Panjandrums · 16-11-2019 11:44pm

Widen the hardshoulder and remark it as a bus lane that can be used during rush hour at 60kmph.

It would have to be heavily policed but nothing that modern technology can't handle. Set up a system whereby the bus lane network is monitored by cameras watched by people working from home.

donvito99 · 17-11-2019 9:11pm

Panjandrums wrote: »

It would have to be heavily policed but nothing that modern technology can't handle. Set up a system whereby the bus lane network is monitored by cameras watched by people working from home.

Lord Ross recently ruled this out in his great wisdom.

He said that the Guards were perfectly capable of enforcing usage of bus lanes...:pac:

spacetweek · 17-11-2019 9:43pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

There is little or no capacity for further traffic north of the split, facilitating more south of it will only create more congestion. I don't think it will happen but the only thing that will ease congestion is an offline public transport corridor. It being away from population is a benefit not a hindrance, buses depart from population centres and travel direct to Dublin with reliable journey times, the demand would be far too great for a single bus service stopping at every town.

I fully understand the phenomenon of induced traffic, but I really don't agree with your argument here. The heavy traffic south of the split already exists. Widening the road just caters to what's already there.
I don't follow your logic about the bus lane. The existing road is the place for it. If it passed on old roads through all the villages it would take forever.

Pete_Cavan · 17-11-2019 10:23pm

spacetweek wrote: »

I fully understand the phenomenon of induced traffic, but I really don't agree with your argument here. The heavy traffic south of the split already exists. Widening the road just caters to what's already there.

Cater for what's already there plus entice others (including thousands of new Wicklow residents over the next few years) to take their car to Dublin every day. And what happens when they all get to Dublin, which is already congested as is?

I don't follow your logic about the bus lane. The existing road is the place for it. If it passed on old roads through all the villages it would take forever.

I was referring to the comment that it makes no sense to build an offline route just for public transport which would then be away from the population areas. Using the existing N11 for public transport makes no sense, unless all you want is a sop to public transport which does little to improve it while you make the alternative more attractive. Giving cars a lovely new straight motorway (or even 3+3 if some here had there way!) while leaving buses to deal with the inadequate junctions and access on the existing road will undermine bus services. Not only will you have the effects of induced demand, you will be prioritising cars over buses which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing.

hometruths · 17-11-2019 10:32pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Cater for what's already there plus entice others (including thousands of new Wicklow residents over the next few years) to take their car to Dublin every day. And what happens when they all get to Dublin, which is already congested as is?

I was referring to the comment that it makes no sense to build an offline route just for public transport which would then be away from the population areas. Using the existing N11 for public transport makes no sense, unless all you want is a sop to public transport which does little to improve it while you make the alternative more attractive. Giving cars a lovely new straight motorway (or even 3+3 if some here had there way!) while leaving buses to deal with the inadequate junctions and access on the existing road will undermine bus services. Not only will you have the effects of induced demand, you will be prioritising cars over buses which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing.

What about building the lovely new motorway offline and then when ready convert the existing dual carriage way into bus corridor + 1 line for traffic? Would not take much in the way of an upgrade.

Pete_Cavan · 17-11-2019 11:45pm

schmittel wrote: »

What about building the lovely new motorway offline and then when ready convert the existing dual carriage way into bus corridor + 1 line for traffic? Would not take much in the way of an upgrade.

It would be hugely inferior to the offline motorway and would not entice people out of their cars, the opposite in fact. Recipe for continued gridlock in and around Dublin and repeating the same mistakes which caused the current disaster that is Dublin's public transport.

SeanW · 18-11-2019 1:55am

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It would be hugely inferior to the offline motorway and would not entice people out of their cars, the opposite in fact. Recipe for continued gridlock in and around Dublin and repeating the same mistakes which caused the current disaster that is Dublin's public transport.

How so? Buses, that (almost by definition) often serve local areas, would be well suited to using the existing N11 if that was given over to public transport, for example, can you think of a better way to take all the traffic out of Kilmacanogue and improve bus services to it than to redirect general traffic out of it and convert the existing road to bus-priority?

Buses - in particular local bus services - do not have the same requirements as lorries and long distance private traffic. General traffic is generally point-to-point, that is, the operator is in one specific place and wishes to proceed as quickly as possible to another, without indirect routing or stops. A local bus service on the other hand must stop in multiple places to be of use to the people who want to use it. The current N11 dedicated largely to buses would have the best of both worlds - plenty of local villages basically on the mainline for local services to serve, but it's also an unbroken-media dual carriageway which is perfect for express buses not serving the local area. Buses are also not legally permitted to travel at 120kph (I think there are various limits, 60,80 maybe 100kph for buses) so they don't benefit from being on a motorway vs a limited access dual carriageway. Trucks do though because it is generally recognised that large numbers of lorries should be on the most segregated type of road that is feasible - and the N/M11 is the main route to Rosslare Port. At the type of traffic levels the N/M11 has, provisions for breakdowns are also a good idea, so again, the need for a motorway type route is there.

Cyclists are similar to local buses in that they tend not to be doing the kind of speeds or distance that require motorway type levels of segregation from local access, so handing them the hard shoulders of the existing route would surely be a good move. But to reallocate the hard shoulders of the current route would be a questionable idea because if a motor vehicle broke down there would be a real problem.

No-one here is proposing a large scale increase in capacity from private motorists. What some of us think best is to connect the main section of M11 to the M50 for an unbroken Motorway, (2 lanes each way plus hard shoulder) being fine for that. This is to replace an unbroken median dual carriageway that is being used like a motorway and has some similar features (2 lanes each way plus hard shoulders) but has a lot of uncontrolled local access and All Purpose designation.

Granted there would be some increase in the capacity for general traffic, as leaving one lane each way free on the old road would effectively give general traffic 3 lanes instead of 2 each way (2 lanes on the motorway, 1 lane remaining on the old road) but I fail to see how this solution would be so horrible for cyclists and bus users considering they'd be getting 2/3s of the existing route.

prunudo · 18-11-2019 7:52am

Another plus for an offline motorway is that it takes local traffic off the mainline. A huge amount of traffic and a cause of the stop start nature of the congestion is people who are joining the road and then leaving after 1 or 2 junctions. An offline route would free up the traffic movements. People living in Kilmacanogue and working in Bray won't be interacting with mainline traffic anymore etc.
There will be opposition to it, but people need to face some hard facts. Its either an offline solution or more of the Glen of the Downs will need to be taken. Its a special area of conversation now which I don't think it was back in the 90/00s project so its going to be even harder to satisfy any eis.

hometruths · 18-11-2019 7:57am

And yet another plus for offline is that they can it build it with much less disruption to traffic during construction phase and connect it at the end.

Widening and upgrading the existing N11 would cause traffic chaos for ages whilst they undertook the works.

Pete_Cavan · 18-11-2019 8:49am

SeanW wrote: »

How so? Buses, that (almost by definition) often serve local areas, would be well suited to using the existing N11 if that was given over to public transport, for example, can you think of a better way to take all the traffic out of Kilmacanogue and improve bus services to it than to redirect general traffic out of it and convert the existing road to bus-priority?

I can think of a better way to take all the traffic out of Kilmac, get a large number of car users into buses. These would be bus services geared towards commuters, not Dublin Bus type which stop every couple of hundred metres and serving every village. You need numerous routes, leaving from each population centre and not stopping until they reach suitable destinations in Dublin. Buses need suitable infrastructure to ensure that journey times are predictable and reliable which is not going to happen on a substandard N11. A new offline motorway just makes driving more attractive and undermines attempts to provide an alternative.

prunudo · 18-11-2019 9:43am

@ Pete Cavan, I'm confused about what you are suggesting. Are you suggesting an offline public transport only route, widening existing route to allow for bus lane or removing a regular lane completely and turning it into a bus lane and have n11 as single carriageway (with no offline alternative)?

Pete_Cavan · 18-11-2019 10:54am

prunudo wrote: »

@ Pete Cavan, I'm confused about what you are suggesting. Are you suggesting an offline public transport only route, widening existing route to allow for bus lane or removing a regular lane completely and turning it into a bus lane and have n11 as single carriageway (with no offline alternative)?

I am suggesting the following (all of which is pretty much fact);

1. A new offline motorway is unlikely to be built in the next decade as it will be the subject of much opposition and endless appeals so isn't a solution to a problem that needs solving now
2. A new offline motorway, should it ever clear all the planning hurdles, will be extremely expensive due to the geography and environmental mitigation but will be of limited benefit due to lack of capacity for cars in and around Dublin so very difficult to justify the spend
3. The only way to reduce and limit traffic long term is to utilise more efficient modes of transport but will only be as good as the infrastructure it operates on

Is the goal here to reduce congestion and facilitate shorter commutes to Dublin or is it just to build more roads?

prunudo · 18-11-2019 11:04am

So you're not suggesting anything, just dismissing all the solutions that other posters are proposing. Its all well and good repeatedly saying public transport this and public transport that but how do you propose that its integrated with the confined spaces of the existing route. You can't just turn hard shoulders into bus lanes without having provision for cyclists, slip lanes etc. Therefore there's going to have to be land take all along the whole route.
And this idea that the offline routes are somehow pushing the boundaries of engineering is nonsense, they're not alpine passes or gorges that they will building through.

sideswipe · 18-11-2019 11:04am

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I am suggesting the following (all of which is pretty much fact);

1. A new offline motorway is unlikely to be built in the next decade as it will be the subject of much opposition and endless appeals so isn't a solution to a problem that needs solving now
2. A new offline motorway, should it ever clear all the planning hurdles, will be extremely expensive due to the geography and environmental mitigation but will be of limited benefit due to lack of capacity for cars in and around Dublin so very difficult to justify the spend
3. The only way to reduce and limit traffic long term is to utilise more efficient modes of transport but will only be as good as the infrastructure it operates on

Is the goal here to reduce congestion and facilitate shorter commutes to Dublin or is it just to build more roads?

Can't argue too much with your points although you saying something is 'fact' doesn't necessarily make it so.

On the highlighted point- the purpose is to bring an existing road up to an acceptable standard.

You can drive from the M50 to Galway down to Limerick and back to Dublin on high quality motorway standard road. You get just beyond the Dublin/Wicklow border and have to drive through a village and then a few miles later a narrow nature reserve. I don't disagree the need to get people out of their cars but we also need to see an important road artery for the east and south east brought up to standard.

marno21 · 18-11-2019 11:24am

There are several stretches of dual carriageway in Ireland built before standards were a thing and while they were sufficient in the 1980s, they are vastly substandard in the 2020s. The three that immediately come to mind are the N11 here, the N18 between Bunratty and Limerick and the N25 between Carrigtwohill and Midleton. They all have immense safety issues and are worth fixing for that alone. Both the N11 and N25 stretches are included in the National Development Plan.

When you look at it like this even. The M11 at Gorey is carrying 9000 vehicles per day and is vastly better standard than the N11 at Kilmacanogue carrying 53000 vehicles per day.

prunudo · 18-11-2019 11:25am

sideswipe wrote: »

Can't argue too much with your points although you saying something is 'fact' doesn't necessarily make it so.

On the highlighted point- the purpose is to bring an existing road up to an acceptable standard.

You can drive from the M50 to Galway down to Limerick and back to Dublin on high quality motorway standard road. You get just beyond the Dublin/Wicklow border and have to drive through a village and then a few miles later a narrow nature reserve. I don't disagree the need to get people out of their cars but we also need to see an important road artery for the east and south east brought up to standard.

And therein lies the problem. Arup have been tasked with upgrading the existing m11/n11 and bringing it up to standard. While public transport is badly needed, the scheme is about making the road safer and fit for purpose. So to that extent, you can't knock the consultants for the route options they've brought forward.

Pete_Cavan · 18-11-2019 11:55am

prunudo wrote: »

So you're not suggesting anything, just dismissing all the solutions that other posters are proposing. Its all well and good repeatedly saying public transport this and public transport that but how do you propose that its integrated with the confined spaces of the existing route. You can't just turn hard shoulders into bus lanes without having provision for cyclists, slip lanes etc. Therefore there's going to have to be land take all along the whole route.
And this idea that the offline routes are somehow pushing the boundaries of engineering is nonsense, they're not alpine passes or gorges that they will building through.

What solutions have others put forward? An offline road which will take a decade to come to fruition (if ever) and will only lead to more traffic for which there is no capacity for further north and minimal if any improvement in committing times! Can that honestly be considered a solution?

I didn't say public transport should be confined spaces of the existing route, I did say it needs suitable infrastructure for it to be successful and this is where the focus should be. I also didn't say anything about pushing the boundaries of engineering, that is your nonsense. It clearly is less than ideal terrain to be constructing a road through and as such will be expensive. Environmental protection is becoming more stringent all the time and will impact on what can be done and the cost of same.

Pete_Cavan · 18-11-2019 12:05pm

sideswipe wrote: »

Can't argue too much with your points although you saying something is 'fact' doesn't necessarily make it so.

On the highlighted point- the purpose is to bring an existing road up to an acceptable standard.

You can drive from the M50 to Galway down to Limerick and back to Dublin on high quality motorway standard road. You get just beyond the Dublin/Wicklow border and have to drive through a village and then a few miles later a narrow nature reserve. I don't disagree the need to get people out of their cars but we also need to see an important road artery for the east and south east brought up to standard.

But what is being said here is that it needs an offline route to be brought up to standard for cars but the existing road with all its issues is grand for public transport. Public transport being at the bottom of the priorities list. Mentioning the road to Galway or Limerick highlights my point, do we just want to be able to say that we have motorway all the way to the south east or do we want to provide acceptable journey times for commuters along the corridor? Motorway to the south east is a noble ambition but will almost certainly lead to more congestion.

prunudo · 18-11-2019 12:24pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

What solutions have others put forward? An offline road which will take a decade to come to fruition (if ever) and will only lead to more traffic for which there is no capacity for further north and minimal if any improvement in committing times! Can that honestly be considered a solution?

I didn't say public transport should be confined spaces of the existing route, I did say it needs suitable infrastructure for it to be successful and this is where the focus should be. I also didn't say anything about pushing the boundaries of engineering, that is your nonsense. It clearly is less than ideal terrain to be constructing a road through and as such will be expensive. Environmental protection is becoming more stringent all the time and will impact on what can be done and the cost of same.

Ideally what they should do is create a double track trainline south of Bray and as someone else mentioned elsewhere having it connecting with a park n ride near Rathnew. But that doesn't address the purpose of this whole scheme which is to solve the safety and capacity issues with the n11. Whether they build a new offline route or widen the existing route there are going to be environmental issues.

loyatemu · 18-11-2019 12:45pm

neither of the routes around Glen of the Downs is feasible IMO - to the west is too steep without massive cuttings through the hills, which given the proximity to the Glen and the Sugarloaf will never happen. To the east ploughs through a lot of expensive land owned by wealthy people (and is also pretty environmentally damaging).

And for what, to solve a traffic problem that only exists for a couple of hours a day in each direction? And would be swallowed up by increased traffic within 10 years (the previous widening was only 15 years ago).

For the cost of what's proposed they could double the railway line to Wicklow Town, electrify it, put in park and rides (I suggested location further up the thread) and put a bus lane on the hard shoulder of the existing N11 (not easily through GotD, though a tidal arrangement might work there). Probably with change left over.

josip · 18-11-2019 12:59pm

loyatemu wrote: »

For the cost of what's proposed they could double the railway line to Wicklow Town, electrify it, put in park and rides (I suggested location further up the thread) and put a bus lane on the hard shoulder of the existing N11 (not easily through GotD, though a tidal arrangement might work there). Probably with change left over.

What are the cost estimates of the road proposals and double tracking?

M11/N11 - M50 (J4) to Coyne's Cross (J14) [options published]

Comments