Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Motorway Service Areas May Be Delayed Up To A Year...

13

Comments

  • #62
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Furet wrote: »
    Large-scale works are going on off the Cashel bypass after you pass exit 9 and continue northbound.

    Rumour has it that a McDonalds restaurant is going to be constructed there, obviously privately funded. This might not be true; but I wouldn't be surprised.

    This is exactly the kind of thing we don't want and makes it all the more important we get those MSAs up and running ASAP.

    Yes, have a McDonalds off the Cashel Bypass, but as part of a concentrated MSA where all services can be accessed. I don't want to see random tiny developments popping up all over the place...

    And please tell me these works aren't close to junction 8, because it may just be the first step towards shoving a retail park onto that junction.


  • #63
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    This is exactly the kind of thing we don't want and makes it all the more important we get those MSAs up and running ASAP.

    Yes, have a McDonalds off the Cashel Bypass, but as part of a concentrated MSA where all services can be accessed. I don't want to see random tiny developments popping up all over the place...

    And please tell me these works aren't close to junction 8, because it may just be the first step towards shoving a retail park onto that junction.


    I'm afraid that's exactly where they are.


  • #64
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Furet wrote: »
    I'm afraid that's exactly where they are.

    Well, if they are building a McDonalds that is bad news...

    This is where the Department Of Transport and the NRA really need to buck up and make it clear what the legislation is. What's the point in having motorways if developments such as this are going to take place anyway.

    Also, I wonder if they know what the legislation regarding advertising on motorways is. Is it the same as the UK (I think it's you can only have two advertisements every X miles - I can't quite remember now).

    I can just see "Big Mac" advertisements every kilometre of the road. Hellish image.

    I really hope this is just some kind of ancillary work do to with the Cullahill-Cashel scheme or something else.

    I'll try and see if there's any links to this otherwise a few calls may have to be made on Monday to find out what's going on.


  • #65
    marmurr1916
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭marmurr1916


    The NRA really need to get their act together fast on this.

    The lack of rest areas will continue to encourage the type of stupidity that regularly prevails on Irish motorways.

    I counted 17 cars and trucks parked illegally on the hard shoulders of the M7 between Naas and Portlaoise on Thursday as I was heading to Cork on the bus.

    Almost all the drivers were speaking on mobiles or looking at maps.

    There were another 2 trucks parked in one of the laybys on the M8 between Cahir and Mitchelstown, even though it was clearly marked 'Garda Only'.

    As if that wasn't bad enough, there was a truck actually driving along the hard shoulder on the M7 near Monasterevin.

    Of course there wasn't a Garda vehicle in sight on the motorways for the whole journey.

    The one Garda car that I did see was parked on the outskirts of Johnstown in Co. Kilkenny, trying to catch people who were exceeding the 80 km/h limit on the R639 (ex-N8).

    Unfortunately, the bus turned off at the temporary roundabout south of Cullahill and didn't rejoin the M8 'til north of Cashel.

    Still it was interesting to see the old N8 (now R639) so quiet: almost eerie!


  • #66
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Did anybody else notice that on the cover of the M6 EIS you can see a picture of lay-by with a truck parked merrily in it.

    http://www.nra.ie/Publications/EISPublications/file,15892,en.pdf

    Just sums it all up...


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    I was too busy being beguiled by the badger, the thistle and the hedgehog.


  • #68
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Furet wrote: »
    I was too busy being beguiled by the badger, the thistle and the hedgehog.

    I suppose they were hoping everyone would be...

    In all honesty, that picture shouldn't have been used because it seems to suggest that that kind of lay-by parking is acceptable.

    It single-handedly demonstrates exactly why we need MSAs.


  • #69
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Why were the parking areas on the N/m6 built if not to be parked on?


  • #70
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 74,464 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    Why were the parking areas on the N/m6 built if not to be parked on?

    They were built to be parked in when it was still a national road...

    The exit slips were short enough that getting out of them in to traffic on a Friday afternoon was difficult the one time I tried it; that was at 100km/h running speed too!


  • #71
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    Why were the parking areas on the N/m6 built if not to be parked on?

    They were built when the road was originally intended to simply be HQDC. But when the road became motorway they forgot to remove them...

    The NRA is PERFECTLY AWARE that Lay-Bys are NOT allowed on motorways, evident from the fact that just a few weeks before the Carlow Bypass opened, the lay-bys were ripped up and replaced with hard shoulder.

    On the M8 Cashel-Mitchelstown, the former lay-bys are cleary marked "Garda Only". On the M8 Cullahill-Cashel scheme, for some odd reason, the lay-bys remain, but there are no parking signs, so clearly they are intended for Garda Use.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    Well unless they can find a way to magically build a bridge without any staff on the ground I can see lane closures, road closures, delays, tailbacks and other such painfulness on the cards.
    Nah, it'll be minor. They put up two overbridges on the M50 for the Luas around Carrickmines and disruption was minimal. Rural stretches of motorways in Ireland are quiet - a lot more so than the M50.
    BluntGuy wrote: »
    They were built when the road was originally intended to simply be HQDC. But when the road became motorway they forgot to remove them...

    The NRA is PERFECTLY AWARE that Lay-Bys are NOT allowed on motorways, evident from the fact that just a few weeks before the Carlow Bypass opened, the lay-bys were ripped up and replaced with hard shoulder.
    Agreed, but I think the blame here lies not in the truck driver in the picture (which could have been taken when the road was still HQDC), but in the NRA for not removing the laybys. Garda Only areas should not resemble truck stops.


  • #73
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    spacetweek wrote: »
    Nah, it'll be minor. They put up two overbridges on the M50 for the Luas around Carrickmines and disruption was minimal. Rural stretches of motorways in Ireland are quiet - a lot more so than the M50.

    There's unfortunately one key difference.

    The reason you had minimal disruption when the M1 and M4 had extra interchanges added on, and the M50 had minimal disruption when they were putting up overbridges is because they are wide-median motorway, meaning that generally, workers could work in the median with minimal disruption.

    With narrow-median, I suspect the case could be somewhat different, what with part of the median having to be removed in order to accomodated bridge columns.

    Of course, that could be avoided using single-span bridging, but it depends on specific location.


  • #74
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Extract from the NRA's reply to my latest e-mail:

    Question:

    Could you confirm the approximate dates the remaining six MSA EIS plans will be published? When is it expected these will go to tender? Is 2010 truly a realistic goal for the completion of all these service areas?
    It is anticipated that the remaining motorway service area applications will be submitted to An Bord Pleanála by the end March 2009. It is expected that up to six service areas will be completed by the end of 2010.

    Which six areas do you think it will be?


  • #75
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    Well by all accounts, they needn't bother with any on the M8. I've heard multiple confirmations now that McDonalds and a petrol station are indeed being constructed at junction 8 on the northbound side.

    Which is strange, because there's no access to junction 8 on the northbound carriageway. But lo, McDonalds and their partners are to build one (seriously)!
    Can you believe that?

    And can you believe that a little further north a developer has apparently purchased 30 acres of land halfway between Horse and Jockey and Cashel and plans to build something there, too. Permission hasn't been granted - yet - but I honestly have no faith in the powers that be at this point in time. Presumably the NRA could veto this; the question is, will they? And if not, why not? Where are our investigative journalists?


  • #76
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Furet wrote: »
    Well by all accounts, they needn't bother with any on the M8. I've heard multiple confirmations now that McDonalds and a petrol station are indeed being constructed at junction 8 on the northbound side.

    Which is strange, because there's no access to junction 8 on the northbound carriageway. But lo, McDonalds and their partners are to build one (seriously)!
    Can you believe that?

    And can you believe that a little further north a developer has apparently purchased 30 acres of land halfway between Horse and Jockey and Cashel and plans to build something there, too. Permission hasn't been granted - yet - but I honestly have no faith in the powers that be at this point in time. Presumably the NRA could veto this; the question is, will they? And if not, why not? Where are our investigative journalists?

    I cannot tell you how... annoyed (that's putting it very lightly) I am at these revelations.

    Already, our new road network is going to be marred by inappropiate developments. It's not even FINISHED yet and they're already planning to ruin it.

    The NRA are clearly powerless. And if they do have any power, they clearly are not applying it.

    We cannot allow our new road infrastructure to be recked in the same manner that the SRR in Cork was. Any developments should be part of focussed MSAs. Why couldn't McDonalds have located in the Cashel one? Why couldn't the petrol station join a consortium bidding to build the Cashel MSA?

    And then there's the horrible advertising signage that's yet to come, the possibility the NRA won't bother with the Cashel MSA... so many drawbacks... and all for what?

    Big Macs?

    I sincerely hope this is only still a rumour...


  • #77
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    The NRA are clearly powerless. And if they do have any power, they clearly are not applying it.

    Except of course when they block plans to build vital commuter train stations, such as at Dunkettle.

    South Tipperary is absolutely full of environmental vandals, both in town and country. Now watch them ruin the M8, one piece at a time.


  • #78
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Furet wrote: »
    Except of course when they block plans to build vital commuter train stations, such as at Dunkettle.

    South Tipperary is absolutely full of environmental vandals, both in town and country. Now watch them ruin the M8, one piece at a time.

    I was a fool to even hope that our new MIUs wouldn't be recked by the usual corruption. I expect similar "development strategies" to be outlined for the other MIUs in due course.

    What was the point in even making these roads motorway if this is just going to happen?


  • #79
    Amtmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭Amtmann


    Even the order in which the EISs have been released suggests poor judgement.


  • #80
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Furet wrote: »
    Even the order in which the EISs have been released suggests poor judgement.

    I agree.

    The ones that are currently at tender are two for the M1 and one for the M4. Rubbish choices. They only cover a small amount of the network.

    They should have done the M7 Mountrath, M6 Athlone and M1 Balbriggan, that way they'd have Dublin-Cork, Dublin-Limerick, Dublin-Galway and Dublin-Belfast covered.


  • #81
    G_R
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,028 Mod ✭✭✭✭G_R


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    On the M8 Cashel-Mitchelstown, the former lay-bys are cleary marked "Garda Only". On the M8 Cullahill-Cashel scheme, for some odd reason, the lay-bys remain, but there are no parking signs, so clearly they are intended for Garda Use.


    on the M8 between thurles and urlingford on both sides of the road there is lay-by's, and 250m before there is a small sign saying

    P 250m

    its the P they use for car parks so i assume they mean parking.

    ill try and snap a photo nxt time im going by in the passenger seat


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    dannym08 wrote: »
    on the M8 between thurles and urlingford on both sides of the road there is lay-by's, and 250m before there is a small sign saying

    P 250m

    its the P they use for car parks so i assume they mean parking.

    ill try and snap a photo nxt time im going by in the passenger seat

    I'm hastily wrapping presents at the moment so I can't give a full response. :)

    But AFAIK there are no P signs, at least not on the Lay-by I remember.

    Anyway I drove on the stretch the night it opened and already a lorry was parked in it.


  • #83
    G_R
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,028 Mod ✭✭✭✭G_R


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    I'm hastily wrapping presents at the moment so I can't give a full response. :)

    But AFAIK there are no P signs, at least not on the Lay-by I remember.

    Anyway I drove on the stretch the night it opened and already a lorry was parked in it.

    if you look at the video Furet posted here:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055447633&page=3

    and skip to 1:15 you can see the P sign clearly


  • #84
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,298 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    The overall MSA plan is a little overkill TBH, and some of the locations are a bit strange. Between this, the DOOR and the lack of motorway regulations on most DCs approaching Dublin, there's plenty that can and will go wrong in the next few years in terms of dodgy planning. Strap in.


  • #85
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    dannym08 wrote: »
    if you look at the video Furet posted here:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055447633&page=3

    and skip to 1:15 you can see the P sign clearly

    Yes, I've already seen that vid and I've seen P signs at each of the lay-bys (although he was travelling northbound, I was travelling southbound...)

    Anyway, they're a disgrace, but in the absense of MSAs there is a limited (and I mean very limited) justification for them...

    As soon as the MSAs are up and running they should be ripped out or turned into Garda Only areas (preferably the first option, as people tend to ignore the "Garda Only" signage on the Cahir-Mitchelstown stretch).


  • #86
    G_R
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,028 Mod ✭✭✭✭G_R


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    Anyway, they're a disgrace, but in the absense of MSAs there is a limited (and I mean very limited) justification for them...

    As soon as the MSAs are up and running they should be ripped out or turned into Garda Only areas (preferably the first option, as people tend to ignore the "Garda Only" signage on the Cahir-Mitchelstown stretch).

    +1


  • #87
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Oh btw, in case I haven't already said, only six of the twelve MSAs will be finished by 2010 the NRA stated.

    I expect that to drop to five, then four... then none.


  • #88
    parsi
    Site Banned Posts: 5,904 ✭✭✭parsi


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    I'm hastily wrapping presents at the moment so I can't give a full response. :)

    But AFAIK there are no P signs, at least not on the Lay-by I remember.

    The signs are there alright. I was driving down home from Newbridge with the old fella and couldn't wait to see that sign so that we could pull in and he could have a smoke without the car being shaken by passing traffic.

    Pisses me off that this is the extent of the laybys that are provided...


  • #89
    childoforpheus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 120 ✭✭childoforpheus


    BluntGuy wrote: »
    ...people tend to ignore the "Garda Only" signage on the Cahir-Mitchelstown stretch.

    I think they should have installed gates or lifting barriers as shown in the NRA's policy document for the location and layout of laybys (page 20). This would prevent people parking in the "Garda Only" areas.
    Link: http://www.nra.ie/Publications/DownloadableDocumentation/RoadDesignConstruction/file,15582,en.pdf (425kb)


  • #90
    Bluetonic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,588 ✭✭✭Bluetonic


    Nothing new hear really, but worthy of a post.
    NRA seeks tenders for motorway service stations
    Sunday, January 18, 2009 By Nicola Cooke
    The National Roads Authority (NRA) has bought sites for the country’s first motorway service stations, though it will be next year before they are in operation.

    The authority is seeking tenders for two service areas on the M1 between Dublin and Belfast - one northbound, between Dundalk and Castlebellingham, and one southbound, between Balbriggan and Lusk. It has also sought tenders for a service area on theM4 between Enfield and Kinnegad. Tenders must be submitted by February 20.

    The NRA originally said that there was no need for service stations on motorways, but later changed its view. It has now also identified a need for stations on theM3 motorway, which is under construction between Clonee and Kells in Co Meath, and on the outskirts of Limerick city.




    The NRA has also identified nine other locations for motorway services areas. These are on the N6 at Rathmorrisey in Galway, on theM6 east of Athlone, on the M7 at Mountrath and N7 east of Nenagh, on the N8 at Cashel and Kilworth, on the N9 at Kilcullen and north of Kilkenny, and on the N11 north of Gorey.

    Detailed site assessment and final site selection have been undertaken for each of the locations. The facilities to be built include 24-hour services, public toilets and showers, food provision from 6am to 10pm, parking facilities for cars and heavy goods vehicles, and indoor and outdoor children’s play areas.

    The planning approval process for service areas involves the submission of a service area scheme to An Bord Pleanála. Five schemes have been submitted to the board: for the M1 north and southbound, M4 at Enfield, N6 at Rathmorrissey andN11 at Gorey.

    Oral hearings were held by An Bord Pleanála for the M1 and M4 schemes last July. Permission for a service area at Enfield was granted late last year, and decisions in respect of the other two ‘tranche one’ schemes have yet to be made, according to an NRA spokesman.

    ‘‘It is anticipated that the remaining nine schemes will be submitted before the end of March, with oral hearings before the summer this year,” he said. ‘‘The PPP [public private partnership] tender process for the first tranche of service areas, covering the twoM1 sites and the M4 site, will be complete by mid-2009.

    ‘‘Assuming approval by An Bord Pleanála, construction will be completed and these service areas open in 2010.I t will be 2011 for the rest.”

    http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=IRELAND-qqqm=news-qqqid=38908-qqqx=1.asp


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Yeah... 2011.

    Kinda different to their original promise of having MSAs on all the major interurban routes by 2010.

    Their crappy choice of Tranche 1 locations means that the Dublin-Limerick, Dublin-Cork and Dublin-Waterford routes won't have MSAs for the next three years.

    It will be a ridiculous situation. Dublin-Cork for example will be 257 km (roughly 220 km of which will be motorway, without an MSA). Nearly as bad will be Dublin-Limerick - 200 km and Dublin-Waterford - 150 km.


Advertisement