NRA: removing pedestrian and cycle ways along the old N3

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:26pm #1

I'm not sure where to post this as it covers a few counties but it's gone beyond a joke.

According to this weekend's Meath Chronicle, the National Roads Authority (NRA), in building the new M3 from Dublin to Cavan, has removed the hard shoulder which previously allowed people to walk and cycle to their local towns, replaced them with roundabouts and bus lanes and in the process has forced anybody who wants to walk to their local town to go on the M3 motorway in the same lane as cars and trucks. You couldn't invent this stuff. This is happening in every single town across the M3 and the NRA, not the local councils in Fingal, Meath and Cavan, is directly responsible for removing these necessary walking routes to villages and towns. They are going to continue to do the same thing to other towns unless we all get out there and stop them now before it's too late (the M3 is due to open this summer).

What sort of intelligence is behind the thinking of the engineers in the National Roads Authority who "planned" this? How long before one of our children is killed? It will be too late then, too late.

Anyway, there's a public meeting in Dunshaughlin, Co Meath, tomorrow, Monday 26 April, at 9pm in the Community Centre, to restore these essential pedestrian rights in all of the affected towns. It's the NRA and its multi-billion euro budget that is being taken on by small communities so bring as many people with you as you can.

http://www.m3roundabouts.org/

Join the Facebook group

Sign the Petition

El Weirdo · 25-04-2010 1:30pm

You want people to be allowed to walk and cycle along the hard shoulder of a motorway?

Mark200 · 25-04-2010 1:32pm

Yeah em... motorways aren't for cyclists or pedestrians. Not even the hard shoulder.

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:32pm

El Weirdo wrote: »

You want people to be allowed to walk and cycle along the hard shoulder of a motorway?

It's much better, and safer, than them walking on the actual motorway, isn't it? Ideally a path would obviously be preferable but until that happens the hard shoulder will have to do as it has done for decades before now.

brianthebard · 25-04-2010 1:32pm

From what I've read about Meath County council lately the government should just suspend them and have Gormley take on their role directly for a while.

mikom · 25-04-2010 1:37pm

Why do all the pics on the site show people walking outside the barriers.
Is there a facebook group to petition them to at least put the steel between them and the cars?

El Weirdo · 25-04-2010 1:38pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

It's much better, and safer, than them walking on the actual motorway, isn't it? Ideally a path would obviously be preferable but until that happens the hard shoulder will have to do as it has done for decades before now.

There is a difference between a dual carriageway and a motorway.

AFAIK you have never been able to walk along the hard shoulder of a motorway.

I am open to correction.

pfm · 25-04-2010 1:39pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

It's much better, and safer, than them walking on the actual motorway, isn't it? Ideally a path would obviously be preferable but until that happens the hard shoulder will have to do as it has done for decades before now.

It has never been legal to walk or cycle on a motorway. You seem to be confusing motorways "M roads", with national routes "N roads".

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:39pm

mikom wrote: »

Why do all the pics on the site show people walking outside the barriers.

Because the other side of the barrier is private property/somebody's farm/a field.

stepbar · 25-04-2010 1:41pm

He's talking about the work that's going on to realign the N3 so that traffic can get on to the M3.

rossie1977 · 25-04-2010 1:42pm

El Weirdo wrote: »

AFAIK you have never been able to walk along the hard shoulder of a motorway.

I am open to correction.

you never have no, this is the sign that greets you up upon entering an irish motorway

http://www.drivingschoolireland.com/image/m2.gif

segaBOY · 25-04-2010 1:43pm

This should be posted in the motors forum.

This is a stupid campaign. Have you ever noticed these signs every time you enter a motorway?

expectationlost · 25-04-2010 1:43pm

so the situation is temporary, or will there still no local access after the n3/m3 work is finished?

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:44pm

pfm wrote: »

It has never been legal to walk or cycle on a motorway. You seem to be confusing motorways "M roads", with national routes "N roads".

Exactly. These old walking ways were along the hard shoulder on the N3 and now, where the M3 (which obviously never existed before) meets the N3, the M3 has subsumed the old walking routes into towns and villages rather than A) letting the M3 meet and N3 further outside all the towns and thus allow local residents to continue to walk along the hard shoulder into their towns, or

build pedestrian paths near the M3 if they want to bring the M3 that close to the towns.

mikom · 25-04-2010 1:44pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Because the other side of the barrier is private property/somebody's farm/a field.

The other side of the barrier is not private property in the pics I have seen.
The field fences are further still.

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:44pm

segaBOY wrote: »

This should be posted in the motors forum.

This is a stupid campaign. Have you ever noticed these signs every time you enter a motorway?

It's far, far from stupid, which is a hell of a lot more than can be said for your post.

segaBOY · 25-04-2010 1:45pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

you never have no, this is the sign that greets you up upon entering an irish motorway

http://www.drivingschoolireland.com/image/m2.gif

Darn, beat me to it!!!

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:47pm

mikom wrote: »

The other side of the barrier is not private property in the pics I have seen.
The field fences are further still.

Yeah, it is. The NRA is using/leasing the field while construction of the M3/N3 junction continues at that spot.

segaBOY · 25-04-2010 1:49pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

It's far, far from stupid, which is a hell of a lot more than can be said for your post.

The title of your post was "NRA: removing pedestrian and cycle ways along the M3". This would lead me to believe that you are talking about the motorway itself, where no pedestrians or cyclists are allowed.

stepbar · 25-04-2010 1:49pm

segaBOY wrote: »

This should be posted in the motors forum.

This is a stupid campaign. Have you ever noticed these signs every time you enter a motorway?

Perhaps if you read the initial post and looked at the website you'd find that he's not talking about walking on the motorway :rolleyes:

Slutmonkey57b · 25-04-2010 1:49pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

I'm not sure where to post this as it covers a few counties but it's gone beyond a joke.

(.... lunatic culchies blithely sauntering down a major thoroughfare thereby increasing the likelihood of serious accidents......)

What sort of intelligence is behind the thinking of the engineers in the National Roads Authority who "planned" this? How long before one of our children is killed? It will be too late then, too late.

Yes. Yes, clearly it's the fault of the planners that your children will get killed - walking along the side of a main road where there's no pavement, never mind a motorway. After all, it's not like there is any other way for children to travel from town to town, now is it?

And people wonder why all the tragic road accidents tend to happen down the country.

SugarHigh · 25-04-2010 1:51pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnO9Jyz82Ps

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:51pm

expectationlost wrote: »

so the situation is temporary, or will there still no local access after the n3/m3 work is finished?

According to the NRA, and reiterated last week, this is their permanent solution. They have said that after they hand the M3/new N3 junctions over to the respective county councils it is up to them what they do with it. But as the NRA has removed the walking ways the council is saying that they, the council, should not have to pay to restore them out of their budget.

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 1:57pm

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Yes. Yes, clearly it's the fault of the planners that your children will get killed - walking along the side of a main road where there's no pavement, never mind a motorway. After all, it's not like there is any other way for children to travel from town to town, now is it?

And people wonder why all the tragic road accidents tend to happen down the country.

This is an ignorant thing to say. The sole public way people have had of walking to their local towns has been via the hard shoulders. These have now been removed so their sole way of walking to the same places is on the M3/N3 itself.

mikom · 25-04-2010 2:00pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Yeah, it is. The NRA is using/leasing the field while construction of the M3/N3 junction continues at that spot.

Barrier to field fence is always part of the roads property.
Sure what good would it be to the farmer.

By the way.... http://picasaweb.google.com/110222013258993711773/M3RoundaboutsActionGroupPhotos#5461556939530716818

People on the left...... mental.

People on the right...... a bit of cop on.

segaBOY · 25-04-2010 2:01pm

stepbar wrote: »

Perhaps if you read the initial post and looked at the website you'd find that he's not talking about walking on the motorway :rolleyes:

I realise they are now talking about roundabouts leading up to the motorway and local roads leading up to it but that was a very poorly written title.

Besides would Meath County Council not the the guys to contact about the local roads as opposed to the NRA?

stepbar · 25-04-2010 2:01pm

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Yes. Yes, clearly it's the fault of the planners that your children will get killed - walking along the side of a main road where there's no pavement, never mind a motorway. After all, it's not like there is any other way for children to travel from town to town, now is it?

And people wonder why all the tragic road accidents tend to happen down the country.

"Tragic accidents".... you might wan't to expand on that, with specific reference to the amount of people who were killed out walking a main national primary road.

Lets say a joe soap like me wants to walk home from somewhere and come across a roundabout like this. So you think that ok that I would have to risk my life crossing a roundabout?

And before you say anything, the N3 itself is very safe to walk and has hard shoulders on both sides the whole way to Dublin. We're not talking about a country lane here. Unless you plan doing a "Fr Horan" you're very safe.

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 2:01pm

segaBOY wrote: »

The title of your post was "NRA: removing pedestrian and cycle ways along the M3". This would lead me to believe that you are talking about the motorway itself, where no pedestrians or cyclists are allowed.

The M3 has subsumed the N3, and thus the walking routes, at this point and as a result the right of pedestrians to walk to local towns has been removed. This has already been said, and two alternative ways that they could have avoided the current problem have been mentioned.

segaBOY · 25-04-2010 2:08pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

The M3 has subsumed the N3, and thus the walking routes, at this point and as a result the right of pedestrians to walk to local towns has been removed. This has already been said, and two alternative ways that they could have avoided the current problem have been mentioned.

Fair enough, best of luck with the campaign, motors is prob the best place for this thread.

squod · 25-04-2010 2:31pm

Fair play for brining this to peoples attention. See you there.

**Timbuk2** · 25-04-2010 2:43pm

Online petitions are about as useful as a wheelchair with pedals.

oppenheimer1 · 25-04-2010 3:08pm

Of course this will cause accidents. What sort of simpletons would go walking on a national primary road? FFS, theres even a picture of someone pushing a buggy?!!?

Go on do us a favour and do Darwin proud.

biko · 25-04-2010 3:12pm

After Hours -> Infrastructure

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 3:22pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Of course this will cause accidents. What sort of simpletons would go walking on a national primary road? FFS, theres even a picture of someone pushing a buggy?!!?

Go on do us a favour and do Darwin proud.

:rolleyes: Then again, you could actually read the thread and you will discover that the NRA has removed pedestrian access to the towns and villages by subsuming the existing N3 outside each urban area leaving local residents without walking access to these towns.

baalthor · 25-04-2010 3:36pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

:rolleyes: Then again, you could actually read the thread and you will discover that the NRA has removed pedestrian access to the towns and villages by subsuming the existing N3 outside each urban area leaving local residents without walking access to these towns.

From a safety POV, should pedestrians have been walking on the N3 shoulder in the first place?

I presume this affects people who are several miles outside Navan for example?

Dostoevsky · 25-04-2010 4:01pm

baalthor wrote: »

From a safety POV, should pedestrians have been walking on the N3 shoulder in the first place?

Probably not but the houses were there long before the N3 was built on their traditional access ways so they had no alternative but to use the N3's hard shoulder. At present they have nothing along the side of the road to walk on due to the M3 subsuming the N3 at this point.

baalthor wrote: »

I presume this affects people who are several miles outside Navan for example?

Precisely. And people within a couple of kilometres of Dunshaughlin and Kells. I believe there is a similar problem in Trim connected with new road and roundabout construction (but not the M3).

Aard · 25-04-2010 4:24pm

OP, could you give an example of a journey between two affected towns?

oppenheimer1 · 25-04-2010 6:27pm

Yes its an accident waiting to happen, but you have to ask yourselves whos fault is it? People in that area know its unsafe to walk on the road, yet continue to do so. See the photo above, hardly observing the keep left rule? If the route is used by plenty of people on foot, then the community should be looking for footpaths behind the barriers, not reinstatement of the hard shoulder.

EDIT: Just had a look at m3roundabouts.org , Christ they're walking on the carriage way when the locals could easily choose to walk behind the crash barrier.... the mind boggles.

hi5 · 25-04-2010 6:58pm

People fight tooth and nail for the right to one off housing and the right to build on their own land.
Then expect someone else to pay for foothpaths and street lighting.

Euro_Kraut · 25-04-2010 7:07pm

Off-road inter town cycle and pathways are the way forward. Busy roads should be left to motor vehicles. Its not like in an urban environment where space restrictions mean that road space must be shared.

On network of rural cycle/walking paths is planned in the National Cycling policy. It would be attractive from a tourist perspective and also from a safety perspective. We are way behind most of Europe on this.

I'm pretty keen on my cycling but there is no way I would support this campaign to be honest. Cyclists and pedestrians should not be sharing a road with a speed limit of greater than 80kmp/h. Its not reasonable to make car go slower on inter urban routes so the only viable alternative is off road routes.

oppenheimer1 · 25-04-2010 7:21pm

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Off-road inter town cycle and pathways are the way forward. Busy roads should be left to motor vehicles. Its not like in an urban environment where space restrictions mean that road space must be shared.

On network of rural cycle/walking paths is planned in the National Cycling policy. It would be attractive from a tourist perspective and also from a safety perspective. We are way behind most of Europe on this.

I'm pretty keen on my cycling but there is no way I would support this campaign to be honest. Cyclists and pedestrians should not be sharing a road with a speed limit of greater than 80kmp/h. Its not reasonable to make car go slower on inter urban routes so the only viable alternative is off road routes.

A lot of the old railway alignments could be opened up as new inter-town foot and cycling highways. The routes would be relatively flat and might even prove popular with the more casual cyclist.

Euro_Kraut · 25-04-2010 7:31pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

A lot of the old railway alignments could be opened up as new inter-town foot and cycling highways. The routes would be relatively flat and might even prove popular with the more casual cyclist.

That has been touted. Not sure it would work in Meath as the old lines there are back in use now. Also there is an issue I understand around private owners of certain parts of old lines.

Its a great idea I think. The most obviously route that come to my mind that could be used in this way is the Clifden-Galway routes.

Overall though we need a lot more routes than just what the old railways can provide. Would be a good start prehaps.

Slutmonkey57b · 25-04-2010 8:08pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

This is an ignorant thing to say. The sole public way people have had of walking to their local towns has been via the hard shoulders. These have now been removed so their sole way of walking to the same places is on the M3/N3 itself.

How is it ignorant? Like someone pointed out above, exactly why aren't the pedestrians in the video walking behind the barrier, if they are "being forced" to walk along the motorway? As to the people walking their kids to school along the motorway.... well... hmm.. if only there was some sort of metal cage on wheels you could put them in to take them to and from school safely. Maybe, a big one, if there are a lot of them all going to the same place?

etchyed · 26-04-2010 3:30am

Dostoevsky wrote: »

The M3 has subsumed the N3, and thus the walking routes.

Dostoevsky, I actually agree with you that roads with hard shoulders should have been replaced like-for-like.

But could you be a bit more careful with the way you phrase this? If you had in the first place the last three pages of sniping may not have been as bad. Stop referring to people "walking on the M3" and walking routes being "subsumed" by the M3. Maybe you mean the M3 project in general but the way you're phrasing it leaves you open to nitpicking.

segaBOY · 26-04-2010 11:02am

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Yes its an accident waiting to happen, but you have to ask yourselves whos fault is it? People in that area know its unsafe to walk on the road, yet continue to do so. See the photo above, hardly observing the keep left rule? If the route is used by plenty of people on foot, then the community should be looking for footpaths behind the barriers, not reinstatement of the hard shoulder.

EDIT: Just had a look at m3roundabouts.org , Christ they're walking on the carriage way when the locals could easily choose to walk behind the crash barrier.... the mind boggles.

I have to agree with this post. Another great bug bearer of mine is when people don't simply keep as far right as they can while walking on the road.

Whenever I'm walking on a rural road I make sure to keep in as close to the ditch as possible.

However plenty of times I have come around corners to meet people walking double file on the road (which takes up over half of the road sometimes) which means I have to completely overtake into the oncoming lane.

If the person in the picture could just keep in a foot or so more it would already make a big difference for people using that lane.

GeneHunt · 26-04-2010 1:14pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

At present they have nothing along the side of the road to walk on due to the M3 subsuming the N3 at this point.

Precisely. And people within a couple of kilometres of Dunshaughlin and Kells. I believe there is a similar problem in Trim connected with new road and roundabout construction (but not the M3).

Hi Dostoevsky,

I think you need to stop referring to the the "M3" or "M3 motorway" in this thread and with your campaign in general, as it is misleading. Your could refer to the M3 project or the M3 link roads for the M3.

I believe you do not want pedestrians on the actual motorway, with traffic passing at 120kph beside them, but on the link roads of the M3, but please comfirm. Looking at this thread and the website and the fact that I know the area that is the problem for you and your group - it is where the new R125 joins the N3 with a roundabout north of Dunshaughlin. I do agree that there is no footpath at or on this roundabout, however I think Meath County Council is at fault here, as they realigned the N3 at both sides of Dunshaughlin with Bus lanes the year before the roundabout was built. The next roundabout (Dansany road - L2208) south of the above-mentioned roundabout has footpaths and the footpath continues on over the new M3 bridge. The new R125 section has a width hard shoulder and lots of locals can be seen out walking this new road each day. It also has footpaths for pedestrians on the new bridge and roundabouts of junction 6. So the M3 contractors are building footpaths around there roundabouts. Went the bus lane was installed in 2008 (I think) north of Dunshaughlin, the County Council should have installed a footpath then and also specified a footpath on M3 construction drawings that a footpath by installed on the N3/R125 roundabout to join with there footpaths.
IMO you are barking up the wrong tree, go after Meath council!
Also your group should have been more informed by visiting the County Council Office in Dunshaughlin, they had drawings up on display for a few years showing these new roads, junctions and roundabouts that were going to be built in the area, as I used to look at them went I'd go in to Tax my car...

The other roundabout mentioned in your website (under Some Scary Pictures...) the "Drumree roundabout" or "roundabout at Drumree" is the roundabout where the R125 joins the R154. I am at a total lose to why this roundabout should have a footpath. Don't get me wrong, but why should this roundabout have a footpath - it is in a VERY rural area. The new R125 has a width hard shoulder all the way up to this roundabout, but the R154 never had on hard shoulder or a footpath. Anyone that walks the new R125 upturns at this point and walks back the Dunshaughlin. I can only think of one person that walks that stretch of the R154 and it's not Dee Reilly!:rolleyes:

GeneHunt · 26-04-2010 1:17pm

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Probably not but the houses were there long before the N3 was built on their traditional access ways so they had no alternative but to use the N3's hard shoulder.

Can you explain this statement a little better, please!
I do know the N3 from Dunshaughlin to Navan is a relatively new road in the history of Ireland as the Dunshaughlin via Dunsany, Kilmessan to Navan was the old road, the current N3 has been there now for about a century or so.;)

Zoney · 26-04-2010 2:01pm

Agree with GeneHunt's comments - even reading the OP and other posts carefully, it isn't entirely clear what is being talked about (although it seems to be link roads and re-aligned former N3 being discussed, *not* the M3 itself which would be absurd).

It is important that people don't think that you are lobbying for people to be allowed to walk along a motorway proper.

Obviously · 27-04-2010 11:23pm

I'm a parent in Dunshaughlin - just noticed how bad all these roundabouts are since this group highlighted it.

I think it's clear from the m3roundabouts.org site - the issue is with "Access roads for the new M3 motorway...". It's not about walking on a motorway - that's almost as thick as the roundabout designs.

Now, about the "ye shouldn't walk on roundabouts" comments...
Some roundabouts have been plonked in the middle of small communities - it used to be relatively safe to walk to your neighbours. Some are plonked between houses and their nearest town or village. Not everybody is young and nimble and able to hop in behind the crash barrier - especially if pushing a buggy, a wheelchair (yes, one of these about 20metres from a wheelchair user!) or out for a cycle with the kids. They are deathtraps inserted into rural communities - there is no doubt. Even a hard shoulder on the roundabout would have been better than what's there!

Even where there are paths, they're half-arsed - I don't see a single safe one from Dunboyne to Fairyhouse, Dunshaughlin and Kells. This flies in the face of government Social, Health and Tourism policies. Oh yeah, and the road safety ones!

GeneHunt · 28-04-2010 7:07pm

Todays Pat Kenny Show covered the Dunshaughlin roundabouts issue.

The report is at 36m45s on todays show.

Link
http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-r...010-04-28.smil

M3 roundabouts · 28-04-2010 8:33pm

El Weirdo wrote: »

You want people to be allowed to walk and cycle along the hard shoulder of a motorway?

No! Of course we don't want to walk on motorways! All these roundabouts you see in pics and film footage are in and around our village. In order to help traffic flow easily from our villages to the new motorway the NRA built many roundabouts and sometimes new roads. They are all great for cars but absolutely lethal for pedestrians. We HAVE to cross these roundabouts to get to school, GAA club, visit friends. And, because absolutely no consideration has been given to pedestrians many residents all along the M3 now have to drive the few hundred metres to the GAA pitch/ school etc.

NRA: removing pedestrian and cycle ways along the old N3

Comments