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

And everything you say about Kilmac is somewhat true for Kilpedder where northbound you have a pub, houses, a livery yard and to a lesser extent the shop all within metres of a 100kph speed limit. Then soundbound you have Sunnybank plus car dealership (and the Kilquade road residents) which since 2003 and the median closures has been cut off from the rest of the village all because they ploughed the original 70's and 80's route through the centre of the village, following the existing single lane road.
This is probably the final chance to get this upgrade right, if they make a haims of it again we will have decades of grid lock and knock on effects from people being afraid to make hard decisions.

prunudo wrote: »

This is probably the final chance to get this upgrade right, if they make a haims of it again we will have decades of grid lock and knock on effects from people being afraid to make hard decisions.

A new road is going to guarantee a decade of gridlock! Consultations, design, planning, appeals, procurement and construction will take that. In the meantime, nothing is done with public transport and the population continues to grow. When the new road opens, it could be over capacity from day one as more people choose to commute by car (which they are effectively being encouraged to do with the provision of the new road) and the M50 and N11 will be gridlocked so the traffic has nowhere to go. In no way can this be considered getting things right.

Bus lanes are the only medium term solution and even if a new road were pursued, it would still be worth the money. It would actually be invaluable when the new road is going through endless appeals and legal battles. Regardless of thoughts on a new road, bus lanes are absolutely needed, saying anything else completely ignores reality.

loyatemu

parallel service roads where required will cater for local traffic and cyclists. The only real pinch point is GotD, it's possible some sort of greenway type solution could be put in there for cyclists. The hard-shoulders are certainly wide enough for bus-lanes, except again in GotD which is a fairly short stretch (it might be possible there to reconfigure the alignment to fit 5 lanes with no HS, which would allow for an inbound bus lane).

People saying is vital that this route be end-to-end 120km/h motorway - why? Because Wexford is such a strategically important metropolis? No-one is suggesting this for Sligo, or Cavan. Because Rosslare is such a busy port (it's not)? That's not why this upgrade is being mooted anyway, it's purely about commuter traffic. The N11 needs some improvements but not at any cost (financial or environmental).

loyatemu wrote: »

Because Rosslare is such a busy port (it's not)?

And the trucks are limited below the motorway speed limit anyway!

Obviously Rosslare could become important (and there's probably a bigger question as to whether frieght needs to be focused on dublin city centre anyway).

loyatemu

Macy0161 wrote: »

And the trucks are limited below the motorway speed limit anyway!

Obviously Rosslare could become important (and there's probably a bigger question as to whether frieght needs to be focused on dublin city centre anyway).

Dublin is a much busier port - how much freight comes through Rosslare bound for Dublin? And when it does is it so time critical that it has to use N11 at rush hour?

Thud

for bus lanes to work you need a bus service that is as good if not better than driving.
currently bus services (coach and Dublin bus)are inferior to driving in:
1) journey time
2) reliability (bus doesn't arrive or is late)
3) capacity (bus arrives full)
4) convenience (how many connections for a to b, can bus stop at supermarket etc)
5) cleanliness (Dublin buses in winter are damp and smell bad)
6) comfort (standing in the wind and rain waiting for a mystery bus to arrive to maybe get a standing spot if you are lucky)
7) long term planning (will your bus route be cancelled if unprofitable bus private company or in next round of cutbacks by Dublin bus)

Until buses get a reputation of being at least better than a car for some or most of these people will stay in their cars.
I drive to a luas park and ride because the Luas is at least reliable, faster than an car for city sections and clean (most of the time).

building a bus lane prior to fixing the bus service won't change the traffic pattern on the m11/n11

Thud wrote: »

I drive to a luas park and ride because the Luas is at least reliable, faster than an car for city sections and clean (most of the time).

building a bus lane prior to fixing the bus service won't change the traffic pattern on the m11/n11

But before they provided that nice reliable Luas service they had to put down the track

.
Not an identical comparison to a bus service I'll admit, but there are similarities.

Thud

which of the above points would a new bus lane resolve?
it might reduce journey time but the bus will still hit traffic once inside the M50

Thud wrote: »

which of the above points would a new bus lane resolve?
it might reduce journey time but the bus will still hit traffic once inside the M50

1,2 and 6 on current services.

However, I don't think anyone has suggested that it doesn't need to be done with an expansion of bus capacity or routes. And most likely would not be Dublin Bus tbh. And if they did it would be by winning the contract rather than being given it.

A big problem with this scheme is that given the space constraints by solving one problem you create another. And there are so many problems with the current set up, particularly between jn5 and jn12, that if you solve one it has a knock on effect.
Take for example all the local road access, these are encouraging commuters to rat run and cheat when the traffic is heavy. Close the access and now you have communites cut off or local businesses loosing trade. We disrupt locals to appease those moving further and further away from the big cities to commute back in again.
The whole model is broken but I can't see that changing. Something has to give and unfortunately as much as I don't want to see virgin land being turned into motorways, I think long term an offline route is far better than more badly designed half measures.
Short term, variable speed limits, ramp metering and hard shoulder bus lanes during peak time where space allows will help. But the fact the traffic has jumped 30k in less than 20 years, I don't think buses are the golden goose people think they are, they will help, but won't stop the volume increasing.

Convert hard shoulders north of Kilmac to bus lanes. Build a bus depot along with a P&R beside Rathnew. Tender for operators to provide a set level of service on set routes. That gets things going for a few million, meanwhile you work on closing accesses, parallel service road at Kilmac and sorting out junctions to further improve the service.

Raising issues with providing a decent bus service yet wanting a motorway built on the side of a steep hill is beyond ridiculous.

prunudo wrote: »

I think long term an offline route is far better than more badly designed half measures.
Short term, variable speed limits, ramp metering and hard shoulder bus lanes during peak time where space allows will help. But the fact the traffic has jumped 30k in less than 20 years, I don't think buses are the golden goose people think they are, they will help, but won't stop the volume increasing.

And what happens when the new road results in traffic increasing by another 30k less than 20 years after it opens? A new road is the definition of a badly designed half measure, it has been proven time and time again.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

And what happens when the new road results in traffic increasing by another 30k less than 20 years after it opens? A new road is the definition of a badly designed half measure, it has been proven time and time again.

Until a time that Wicklow and Wexford coco stop granting permission for housing developments with not a care for the fact these people are going to commute back to Dublin for work, traffic is going to keep growing. Stapling a bus lane onto an already badly designed section of road is not going to change that.
Ideally the trainline should be double tracked but that doesn't address the knock on congestion further up the line. But this is a thread about the n11/m11 upgrade and in my mind, long term the best option for this is to create an offline route bypassing the villages of Kilmacanogue, Kilpedder and the Glen of the Downs properly once and for all.

prunudo wrote: »

But this is a thread about the n11/m11 upgrade and in my mind, long term the best option for this is to create an offline route bypassing the villages of Kilmacanogue, Kilpedder and the Glen of the Downs properly once and for all.

New roads have been proven to not be a long term solution to too much commuter traffic. In the absence of anything else being done, the new road would probably be over capacity the day it opens, such is the length of time it will take to come to fruition!

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Convert hard shoulders north of Kilmac to bus lanes. Build a bus depot along with a P&R beside Rathnew. Tender for operators to provide a set level of service on set routes. That gets things going for a few million, meanwhile you work on closing accesses, parallel service road at Kilmac and sorting out junctions to further improve the service.

Raising issues with providing a decent bus service yet wanting a motorway built on the side of a steep hill is beyond ridiculous.

Sounds good, but how would you propose integrating a new bus lane with the R768 intersection without doing a major roads project?
"gets things going", sounds a bit like "Get Brexit done".

josip wrote: »

Sounds good, but how would you propose integrating a new bus lane with the R768 intersection without doing a major roads project?

Why do you think that junction would require major works? You just have to put up with merging traffic, not ideal but it's not the end of the world. The idea is that buses reduce the number of cars using the junction. An additional merging lane could be provided if necessary.

"gets things going", sounds a bit like "Get Brexit done".

No building a new offlinemotorway is like "Get Brexit done", i.e. starting with some fanciful notion of a better future without knowing how to get there, any recognition of how difficult that will be or how long it will take. Much like Brexit, the new road won't even achieve what it was intended to do as the everything it was based on will have changed so much in the time it takes to deliver it. In five years time and the offline motorway is bogged down in planning and appeals and no end in sight, meanwhile the situation continues to deteriorate as nothing else can happen, yeah sounds like Brexit alright.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Why do you think that junction would require major works? You just have to put up with merging traffic, not ideal but it's not the end of the world. The idea is that buses reduce the number of cars using the junction. An additional merging lane could be provided if necessary.

Sounds like you've more experience of these kind of reworks than me.
Can you explain how the additional buslane would work here in this case and on the other side of the junction?

https://goo.gl/maps/5HNCDChhChCZ7Tv59

What does it replace if you're only converting the hard shoulder and not doing a major rework?

josip wrote: »

Sounds like you've more experience of these kind of reworks than me.
Can you explain how the additional buslane would work here in this case and on the other side of the junction?

https://goo.gl/maps/5HNCDChhChCZ7Tv59

What does it replace if you're only converting the hard shoulder and not doing a major rework?

The idea that turning hard shoulders into bus lanes and it won't have a detrimental effect on the rest of the day to day workings of the road is up there with brexiteers and their unicorns.

Bus lane may have negative effects on the none public transport vehicles. The point is to make the buses work, not make everything hunky dory for those that will come up with any excuse to not get out of their car.

Macy0161 wrote: »

Bus lane may have negative effects on the public transport vehicles. The point is to make the buses work, not make everything hunky dory for those that will come up with any excuse to not get out of their car.

So what, screw up the safe functioning of a 2 lane road just to help congestion for a couple of hours each way. I don't think people realise how busy this road is during the day. Its not just commuters that use it. The project needs to be done right and also in a way that doesn't endanger the other road users, particularly cyclists and people turning off or merging at the numerous junctions and local roads.

Everyone is going to be discommoded during whatever upgrade! I was commuting from North Wicklow during the building of the current road, the M50 link. Difference is, if we focus on Public Transport, it's a solution, not just a short term measure until it fills with more cars.

As also a cyclist, I seem to manage ok with the current junctions, (when motorists are actually looking at the road, mirrors and blindspots not their phones). I'm not really seeing what difference it makes for me on the bike at junctions compared to the hard shoulder full of debris it is now.

loyatemu

prunudo wrote: »

So what, screw up the safe functioning of a 2 lane road just to help congestion for a couple of hours each way. I don't think people realise how busy this road is during the day.

you're proposing building a new 6-lane motorway through the hills for the sake of a few hours congestion a day.

I'm not saying no work should be done on the N11 - clearly to provide bus-priority measures, work will have to be done at junctions, service roads built, some realignment may be necessary - it will still be a major project. But the idea of offline new-build to provide more space for cars during rush hour is insane. It's not environmentally acceptable in 2019 and will be even less so after it's been tied up in planning and the courts for 10 years.

loyatemu wrote: »

you're proposing building a new 6-lane motorway through the hills for the sake of a few hours congestion a day.

I'm not saying no work should be done on the N11 - clearly to provide bus-priority measures, work will have to be done at junctions, service roads built, some realignment may be necessary - it will still be a major project. But the idea of offline new-build to provide more space for cars during rush hour is insane. It's not environmentally acceptable in 2019 and will be even less so after it's been tied up in planning and the courts for 10 years.

I'm not proposing anything, that is the job for Arup and Wicklow coco. I'm just saying that of the route options I believe the offline options of blue into cyan are the best options in the long run. Anything that will be planned for the red route will be to the detriment of the households, businesses and amenties along the current road. Give the existing n11(jn6 to jn 12) back to public transport, local journeys, cycling and the communities its cut in 2 and build a proper functioning motorway for people who want to travel more than 2 junctions at a time.
Afaik any possible 6 lane upgrade would only be as far as junction 7 but maybe this has changed. I also dont buy this notion that roads are bad for the environment, sure in 10 years we'll all have electric vehicles. And thats also before you take into account commerical vehicles also use roads. Our demand on transport isnt going to disappear in 10 years time.

How much space will electric vehicles save? Less pollution coming from the same traffic jams...

loyatemu wrote: »

you're proposing building a new 6-lane motorway through the hills for the sake of a few hours congestion a day.

I'm not saying no work should be done on the N11 - clearly to provide bus-priority measures, work will have to be done at junctions, service roads built, some realignment may be necessary - it will still be a major project. But the idea of offline new-build to provide more space for cars during rush hour is insane. It's not environmentally acceptable in 2019 and will be even less so after it's been tied up in planning and the courts for 10 years.

I'm not arguing for or against any of the proposed solutions.
As regards your point "for the sake of a few hours congestion a day", wouldn't all infrastructure be designed with peak usage in mind ?

It's very funny to read the N7 widening thread where posters are complaining about the lack of improvement the extra lane has made inbound and conversation has moved to public transport as the solution. Yet here...

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It's very funny to read the N7 widening thread where posters are complaining about the lack of improvement the extra lane has made inbound and conversation has moved to public transport as the solution. Yet here...

You know full well that they are 2 vastly different projects and the n11 has far more obstacles to overcome.
And for the record I've never said I was against public transport options, we just differ on how it is integrated with the new road upgrade.

SeanW

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It's very funny to read the N7 widening thread where posters are complaining about the lack of improvement the extra lane has made inbound and conversation has moved to public transport as the solution. Yet here...

Macy0161 wrote: »

Everyone is going to be discommoded during whatever upgrade! I was commuting from North Wicklow during the building of the current road, the M50 link. Difference is, if we focus on Public Transport, it's a solution, not just a short term measure until it fills with more cars.

I doubt if there are more than a small minority, if any, on these boards that are opposed to public transport. Indeed, my suggestion is for a clear improvement in public transport, by rededicating 2/3s of the current route to buses and cyclists when the long distance traffic has been taken out of places like Kilmacanoge, where it should not be routed through to begin with, and which requires a solution other than a bit of paint for bus lane in any case.

loyatemu wrote: »

you're proposing building a new 6-lane motorway through the hills for the sake of a few hours congestion a day.

I think 1 person may have suggested building a new 3+3 motorway, but that view is not universal.

And for the record, this is not just about commuting. There are reasons to have continuous long distance motorway links that have nothing whatsoever to do with commuting, which is obvious if you look at a map of Ireland for 5 seconds. Not everything is about commuters, although there are serious problems for commuters at the present time. I agree though that Ireland and the main cities in particular must have better public transport especially as a way to deal with commuter problems.

The faux concern for public transport and cyclists is pathetic, it is just a deflection to tick a few boxes while pursuing a policy which is counterproductive to those goals. Let them eat cake. Just sticking a few bus routes on the existing road would provide a terrible service and would not be attractive v driving on the new road.

The existing road will still need a major overhaul with accesses closed and junctions sorted to make it suitable for high quality public transport and cycling. That is not going to happen while the suggestion of an offline road exists, the money and disruption won't be justifiable. Even if the offline road opens at some point in the future at enormous cost, money will go to other more deserving cases rather than spent on a road which has just been bypassed.

I have no doubt that most people aren't against the idea of providing public transport, as long as private transport is prioritised. That is what would be happening if a new road is built. It is also not going to improve commutes, not in the 10 years or more it will take to deliver a new road or after when induced demand swamps it.