Limerick Northern Distributor Road Plan

zulutango

phog wrote: »

Answered already in this thread - a few times - why do we need to repeat it

I must have missed it. There's also new readers here who won't want to trawl back through the thread. Could you explain please?

phog

zulutango wrote: »

I must have missed it. There's also new readers here who won't want to trawl back through the thread. Could you explain please?

Well then it might be good for you and them to start at page one and have good long read.

zulutango

Why the attitude, Phog? Would it be so difficult for you to explain why the traffic is so bad that the LNDR is necessary?

Mc Love

phog wrote: »

I offered to do one with you but you choose to ignore it - I know our survey might achieve very little but it would correct your misconception of who uses what lanes and why

Oh yeah, I'm going to take a day off work or a morning off to do an unpaid survey? Come on man!

geotrig

TBH im finding this thread and other threads painfull these days....i understand i get equally annoyed but it also shows how split the public are on how the city moves forward and I assume the politians are the same....it nearly makes brexit seem civilised ....
The only thing I'm taking from these threads at the moment is the lack of progress on anything in the city in general everything is objected to.
some for okish reason some for selfish some seem to be just for .
The likes of curragower house which is flavour of the week was for sale for ages iirc yet no one else bought it to fix it up!
We do need to build some roads we do need to incorporate cycling infrastructure and routes ,encourage city living but mostly we do need to embrace progress and change instead of being stuck in this circular argument because at this rate in 20 years time we will still have little progress and limerick will be a shadow of its former industrious past.

zulutango

The LNDR is moving backwards, not forwards. It's car centric planning from the 1950's which will really stunt Limerick's long term potential.

keane2097

I don't personally feel that the fact that I didn't buy Curragower House means I'm not in a position to think the proposed bulldozing and replacement of it is a mistake.

phog

Mc Love wrote: »

Oh yeah, I'm going to take a day off work or a morning off to do an unpaid survey? Come on man!

You must have done some survey already to make the point that the majority of traffic in the left lane over the bridge goes out the dock road but there's no need to take a day off to prove your view as incorrect - a sample (an hour at most) at peak times should be enough

Off peak traffic are hardly going to use the left lane to head out the dock road.

geotrig

zulutango wrote: »

The LNDR is moving backwards, not forwards. It's car centric planning from the 1950's which will really stunt Limerick's long term potential.

In your opinion do you think we need any new roads /road developments in limerick ?
You complained of being stuck on a very slow moving road during the week that you where stuck on which has very adequate cycle lanes if i understood it correctly
I personally still think the north side of the city is underdeveloped but that is just a personal opinion.

Also can I query what is an acceptable distance out form the city for development ?

keane2097 wrote: »

I don't personally feel that the fact that I didn't buy Curragower House means I'm not in a position to think the proposed bulldozing and replacement of it is a mistake.

No but did you lodge a objection when the planing was sought ? probably not, don't get me wrong I am all for preserving as much of our decent building stock as possible.
This was for sale ,eventually bought and planning applied for ,i even half recall it been posted about here iirc and some thought it was ok, i dont remember as much as a furore over it at the time.

mdmix

geotrig wrote: »

which has very adequate cycle lanes if i understood it correctly

as has been pointed out, the cycle lanes are not adequate when you come to the bridge, or anywhere after that until you get out of the city again. they only provide access to 3 small estates up to the bridge.

what would be adequate would be a cycle lane across the bridge, and a lane along a route towards the entrance to the riverbank to UL, and a separate lane going to raheen.

Phileas Frog

zulutango wrote: »

The LNDR is moving backwards, not forwards. It's car centric planning from the 1950's which will really stunt Limerick's long term potential.

Dig up all the roads lads. The city doesn't need any :rolleyes:

keane2097

geotrig wrote: »

No but did you lodge a objection when the planing was sought ? probably not, don't get me wrong I am all for preserving as much of our decent building stock as possible.
This was for sale ,eventually bought and planning applied for ,i even half recall it been posted about here iirc and some thought it was ok, i dont remember as much as a furore over it at the time.

I didn't - as I explained on another thread a tweet from An Taisce gave me the impression that the planning had been rejected in the first place, and to be honest I didn't really understand the process to go along with it. You can rest assured that if/when an appeal is made I will have no problem stumping up the 50 quid to add an observation or whatever it is for whatever that will be worth. The furore over this house has had the effect of engaging at least one local with the planning process anyway.

phog

zulutango wrote: »

Why the attitude, Phog? Would it be so difficult for you to explain why the traffic is so bad that the LNDR is necessary?

There's no attitude but I'm not going to rinse and repeat the discussion here just to humour you or anyone else. I think at this stage I and other posters know your views of this road and I'm also fairly sure it's not going to change so if you want to make an argument about this road go ahead but don't expect me to freshen up the debate for you.

zulutango

I'm always up for changing my mind, but if I'm not presented with a decent argument to do so, then it's unlikely to happen.

phog

zulutango wrote: »

I'm always up for changing my mind, but if I'm not presented with a decent argument to do so, then it's unlikely to happen.

I doubt you will but you seem to have time on you hands so go ahead and re-read the thread.

Mc Love

phog wrote: »

You must have done some survey already to make the point that the majority of traffic in the left lane over the bridge goes out the dock road but there's no need to take a day off to prove your view as incorrect - a sample (an hour at most) at peak times should be enough

It's an observation on my commute to work on Henry st, that most of the traffic I observe using the left lane are going right instead of left or straight on to get past the queue in the right hand lane. The bridge could be reduced to a two lane two way road in my opinion given the amount of traffic using the left lane, that could use the right hand lane.

phog wrote: »

Off peak traffic are hardly going to use the left lane to head out the dock road.

So you agree - that during peak times traffic using the left lane are heading out the dock road?

phog

Mc Love wrote: »

It's an observation on my commute to work on Henry st, that most of the traffic I observe using the left lane are going right instead of left or straight on to get past the queue in the right hand lane.

It's incorrect

So you agree - that during peak times traffic using the left lane are heading out the dock road?

I agree that some traffic use the left lane to turn out the Dock road, I disagree your claim that the MAJORITY of the traffic using the left lane turns out the Dock Road - there is a huge difference in what we're saying.

damowill

One says black, the other says white, we get it!!

an FYI, this thread is almost 11 years old, first started on 14-07-2008. You have to laugh at the progress of Phase 1/2 to the Old Cratloe road, which will be done at sometime. However the remaining phases are but a pipe dream (for some!!)

zulutango

geotrig wrote: »

In your opinion do you think we need any new roads /road developments in limerick ?
You complained of being stuck on a very slow moving road during the week that you where stuck on which has very adequate cycle lanes if i understood it correctly
I personally still think the north side of the city is underdeveloped but that is just a personal opinion.

Also can I query what is an acceptable distance out form the city for development ?

The only sensible infrastructure to build is that which supports sustainable transport modes. Infrastructure that supports the private car above sustainable modes should be a thing of the past.

Not sure of your point about the cycle lanes / Condell Road? We built a tunnel and it didn't solve the traffic. Because literally all the evidence shows us that building new roads only solves traffic problems in the short term. Ultimately you get more traffic problems. If the LNDR is built, it will open up a lot of existing agricultural land for development. You're talking about hundreds or thousands of extra vehicles being based there. So, you're still going to have the traffic problems on the Corbally Road. It's not as if the people now living and working over there aren't going to try and head through the city. They will of course. And you'll get more people choosing to live further from the city and drive to it because the LNDR will enable them to skirt around it. That development model is going to turn Limerick into the new Galway. Who wants that?

Mc Love

phog wrote: »

It's incorrect

I must be blind so or seeing things.

phog wrote: »

I agree that some traffic use the left lane to turn out the Dock road, I disagree your claim that the MAJORITY of the traffic using the left lane turns out the Dock Road - there is a huge difference in what we're saying.

Indeed there is a huge difference, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree

geotrig

zulutango wrote: »

The only sensible infrastructure to build is that which supports sustainable transport modes. Infrastructure that supports the private car above sustainable modes should be a thing of the past.

Not sure of your point about the cycle lanes / Condell Road? We built a tunnel and it didn't solve the traffic. Because literally all the evidence shows us that building new roads only solves traffic problems in the short term. Ultimately you get more traffic problems. If the LNDR is built, it will open up a lot of existing agricultural land for development. You're talking about hundreds or thousands of extra vehicles being based there. So, you're still going to have the traffic problems on the Corbally Road. It's not as if the people now living and working over there aren't going to try and head through the city. They will of course. And you'll get more people choosing to live further from the city and drive to it because the LNDR will enable them to skirt around it. That development model is going to turn Limerick into the new Galway. Who wants that?

OK fair enough,let me pose what infrastructure could we build instead to support sustainable transport? Again for me this isn't about just corbally, its the whole northside.

My point on the Condell rd was that it has provided cycle lanes, yet you chose to drive. Nothing more to it but it shows that even the converted need to use these roads now and again.

zulutango

geotrig wrote:

My point on the Condell rd was that it has provided cycle lanes, yet you chose to drive. Nothing more to it but it shows that even the converted need to use these roads now and again.

I wasn't driving ðŸ˜

But I still don't follow your point? It's not like if someone thinks that there should be a lot more safe cycling infrastructure that they can't also drive too when they need to.

phog

Mc Love wrote: »

I must be blind so or seeing things.



Indeed there is a huge difference, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree

There no need to agree to disagree - the offer still stands

Mc Love

This tweet says it all

https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/994812571625623553?s=19

phog

I was on the Longpavement road this morning and was shocked at the amount of cars coming in from East Clare, they queued from the lights at Watch House Cross back to Quinsborough House, the crazy thing is once the lights went green they then had to queue again to turn right at the lights at Hassetts Cross.

This road will eliminate all that unnecessary queuing.

topper75

phog wrote: »

I was on the Longpavement road this morning and was shocked at the amount of cars coming in from East Clare, they queued from the lights at Watch House Cross back to Quinsborough House, the crazy thing is once the lights went green they then had to queue again to turn right at the lights at Hassetts Cross.

This road will eliminate all that unnecessary queuing.

Phase 1 alone (Coonagh-Knocklisheen) will really relieve both Hassetts X and Ivans X. So many people will benefit across the north of the city.

topper75

Mc Love wrote: »

This tweet says it all

What did this wise Lewis Mumford guy propose as an alternative - people spinning flax at home in their cottages?

More people -> more cars -> more roads

Only a plague stops this.

Phileas Frog

topper75 wrote: »

What did this wise Lewis Mumford guy propose as an alternative - people spinning flax at home in their cottages?

More people -> more cars -> more roads

Only a plague stops this.

Or a Final Solution. Perhaps that's what zulutango is proposing?

Mc Love

topper75 wrote: »

What did this wise Lewis Mumford guy propose as an alternative - people spinning flax at home in their cottages?

More people -> more cars -> more roads

Only a plague stops this.

More traffic congestion.

It should be:

Less roads > less cars > more people > more cycling infrastructure > more public transport.

damowill

More people, yes. But more people should be encouraged to live in Cities or closer to them. Its easier & cheaper to provide for housing, connecting to servies like electricity, gas, water, sewerage, waste, telephone, broadband, and live in areas with good connection to roads & public transport and cycle infrastructure. Not only that but peoples commute times are shorter and it saves on the environment.

Corbally road, Kileely rd, Ennis rd, Condell rd are already busy. A ring road around Limerick will increase developments in those areas, which will only out pressure on roads inbound/outbound of Limerick. Westbury should never have been built. But more Westbury's will follow, populations of Meelick, Parteen, Ardnacrusha, Clonlara will increase and you will have a new University town.

Limerick CC's policy is to bring jobs to Limerick City Centre with office space ear marked for the Hanging Gardens, Opera Centre, Bishops Quay, Cleeves as well as others. You could drive around that ring road all day but the fact is you still have to cross one of the few bridges within Limerick City to get into Limerick ....