Limerick Northern Distributor Road Plan

chicorytip

Glenomra wrote:

I know a few of them and think that they will accept the system as it will enable people get home quickly from UL. The greater good.!!!!!!!

By car! Could they not walk or cycle?

lukejr

chicorytip wrote: »

This sounds utterly daft. The numbers using that entrance is minute in the overall context and the majority of those cycle or walk. So, just leave things as they are. The roads are simply too narrow to accomodate traffic other than local residential. Installing traffic lights!! Where precisely? The negative environmental impact of these developments on what is an idyllic rural recreational area could be disastrous.

The roads aren't that narrow, Burlington Textiles shipped carpets to all over Europe from that plant so they aren't that bad - just need an upgrade.

Whats happening

lukejr wrote: »

chicorytip wrote: »

This sounds utterly daft. The numbers using that entrance is minute in the overall context and the majority of those cycle or walk. So, just leave things as they are. The roads are simply too narrow to accomodate traffic other than local residential. Installing traffic lights!! Where precisely? The negative environmental impact of these developments on what is an idyllic rural recreational area could be disastrous.

The roads aren't that narrow, Burlington Textiles shipped carpets to all over Europe from that plant so they aren't that bad - just need an upgrade.

To Gillogue from Larkins is a fine wide road, maybe a bit tight 1/3 in, the issue relates to the 1.1KM from Gillogue to the UL boundary where cars will exit. This has 2 hump back bridges that only fit 1 car, and much of the 1.1KM stretch can only take 1 car

phog

It's a controlled environment, it will be fine as a temporary measure.

mdmix

Whats happening wrote: »

To Gillogue from Larkins is a fine wide road, maybe a bit tight 1/3 in, the issue relates to the 1.1KM from Gillogue to the UL boundary where cars will exit. This has 2 hump back bridges that only fit 1 car, and much of the 1.1KM stretch can only take 1 car

they are only allowing 1 way traffic (for an hour each morning and evening) so it wont be a problem, aside from inconveniencing a few residents.

topper75

mdmix wrote: »

they are only allowing 1 way traffic (for an hour each morning and evening) so it wont be a problem, aside from inconveniencing a few residents.

If Gillogue residents are against it, they will have an easy case getting a rejection, even against the might of UL. It is quite an imposition on an old quiet section of road. There could be engineering concerns with those little humpback bridges. When was the last time they were even repointed?

Glenomra

topper75 wrote: »

If Gillogue residents are against it, they will have an easy case getting a rejection, even against the might of UL. It is quite an imposition on an old quiet section of road. There could be engineering concerns with those little humpback bridges. When was the last time they were even repointed?

From what I hear the locals are willing to put up with the inconvenience to enable people get home quicker from UL. They are Clare people and the people benefiting are Clare people also. Just saying!!!!The two bridges over the canal and Blackwater were recently inspected and found to be in good structural repair. A few minor repairs required which will be carried out soon according to my source. The one gripe the locals have is that UL failed completely to communicate with them. The northern distributor road is in real trouble. They can't get permission to link to the Mackey roundabout from the transport authority. Undermining of the viability of the tunnel. That compounds their problems with the special area of Conservation etc etc etc. UL have little choice but to look for alternatives.

kilburn

Glenomra wrote: »

From what I hear the locals are willing to put up with the inconvenience to enable people get home quicker from UL. They are Clare people and the people benefiting are Clare people also. Just saying!!!!

Surprised they are against the new road so.

I presume you will be inspecting the Kings Island flood defenses plan next week to ensure it will cause no flooding issues up stream?

Glenomra

kilburn wrote: »

Surprised they are against the new road so.

I presume you will be inspecting the Kings Island flood defenses plan next week to ensure it will cause no flooding issues up stream?

Problem with the proposed road is the crossing through a special area of Conservation. Can't happen. Flooding in kings island cant impact Lisnagry though developments in Lisnagry can impact King's island.

topper75

Glenomra wrote: »

Problem with the proposed road is the crossing through a special area of Conservation. Can't happen.

Not quite true to say can't happen. These special areas can be circumvented ultimately for a project if the right case is made.

Killaloe gets a new bridge going over an SAC in 2020, despite dragged out attempts to prevent it in the courts. That is one Irish case.

There are other precedents for this in Europe.

Glenomra

topper75 wrote: »

Not quite true to say can't happen. These special areas can be circumvented ultimately for a project if the right case is made.

Killaloe gets a new bridge going over an SAC in 2020, despite dragged out attempts to prevent it in the courts. That is one Irish case.

There are other precedents for this in Europe.

I agree that certain projects have been given planning permission on special areas of Conservation including at killaloe. It is very difficult to get such planning and getting more difficult each year as more environmental issues arise. In the seven years since killaloe bridge got permission further criteria have been introduced . Possibly this project will also get permission but it will be a long contentious process imo. Another variable that had recently arisen is the prohibitive cost involved in linking a four lane dual carriageway with the Mackey roundabout. Even if TII gave permission to join the roundabout, thereby undermining the tunnel's finances, according to the planners redesigning the roundabout would cost tens of millions. Look at the estimates for the proposed work on the Dunkettle roundabout in cork. 110 to 170 million. Unbelievable. The Mackey link would not be comparable but its another problem added to a long list of potential problems relating to this proposal.

phog

Glenomra wrote: »

Even if TII gave permission to join the roundabout, thereby undermining the tunnel's finances,

You've mentioned this a few times - what loss of revenue? Who uses the tunnel now that will switch to this road when it's built?

If anything I think it will increase the tunnel usage.

Glenomra

phog wrote: »

You've mentioned this a few times - what loss of revenue? Who uses the tunnel now that will switch to this road when it's built?

If anything I think it will increase the tunnel usage.

maybe, you are right, personally I don' know, but I do know that the owners of the tunnel don't share your opinion. They claim that it would undermine their finances. A neighbour of mine, a lorry driver, spends approximately 30 euro a day on the tunnel. he can't wait for the distributor road\by-pass as he claims it will save him thousands a year.

Cookiemunster

Glenomra wrote: »

maybe, you are right, personally I don' know, but I do know that the owners of the tunnel don't share your opinion. They claim that it would undermine their finances. A neighbour of mine, a lorry driver, spends approximately 30 euro a day on the tunnel. he can't wait for the distributor road\by-pass as he claims it will save him thousands a year.

Have you any quotes from Direct Route to back that up? Direct Routes finances are guaranteed by the government. If the number of users fall short of 23k vehicles a day, they get a top up from state funds.

phog

Glenomra wrote: »

maybe, you are right, personally I don' know, but I do know that the owners of the tunnel don't share your opinion. They claim that it would undermine their finances. A neighbour of mine, a lorry driver, spends approximately 30 euro a day on the tunnel. he can't wait for the distributor road\by-pass as he claims it will save him thousands a year.

Most East Clare and Corbally traffic heading to Dublin use Killaloe or O'Briensbridge to get to the M7 and I don't see that changing until this road is built and I certainly don't see too many heading to join the motorway before the tunnel.

Don't the tunnel owners get revenue from the council or government because tunnel usage isn't what was projected.

Anecdotal evidence would suggest trucks are actively avoiding the tunnel already so your poor neighbour must be one of the few that are using it regularly.

Glenomra

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Have you any quotes from Direct Route to back that up? Direct Routes finances are guaranteed by the government. If the number of users fall short of 23k vehicles a day, they get a top up from state funds.

No. I don't have any published quotes from Direct Route regarding the potential impact by the proposed road on the tunnel's finances, nor am I aware that they ever publicly issued same. My opinion is based on conversations with 3 Limerick Councillors, from different political parties, that the Transport department etc have expressed serious concerns to the road planners regarding same. Anecdotal I accept, but maybe one of the other posters could use their contacts to confirm\contradict same.

mitresize5

while were speaking anecdotally, I've used the tunnel twice a day most days this summer at peak time and now that I think if it I cant remember seeing a 40ft truck once on it

Glenomra

mitresize5 wrote: »

while were speaking anecdotally, I've used the tunnel twice a day most days this summer at peak time and now that I think if it I cant remember seeing a 40ft truck once on it

over 24,500 vehicles pass through the tunnel each day and you use' the tunnel twice a day most days this summer at peak time and now that I think if it I cant remember seeing a 40ft truck once on it'. now that's amazing

Cookiemunster

Glenomra wrote: »

No. I don't have any published quotes from Direct Route regarding the potential impact by the proposed road on the tunnel's finances, nor am I aware that they ever publicly issued same. My opinion is based on conversations with 3 Limerick Councillors, from different political parties, that the Transport department etc have expressed serious concerns to the road planners regarding same. Anecdotal I accept, but maybe one of the other posters could use their contacts to confirm\contradict same.

Maybe you should stop statng your opinion as fact so. Councillors won't have any inside info on Direct Routes operations or their opinions on the LNDR. It's a private company reporting to TII, not LCCC.

Glenomra

I am not stating my opinion as fact. Three individual limerick councillors told me, one as recently as last week, that Direct Routes Limerick informed them and the road planners that they are opposed to the LNDR linking with the Mackey roundabout. That is a fact. Now, maybe the councillors invented the story but there's no disputing the fact that they told me the above info.

Phileas Frog

Glenomra wrote: »

I am not stating my opinion as fact. Three individual limerick councillors told me, one as recently as last week, that Direct Routes Limerick informed them and the road planners that they are opposed to the LNDR linking with the Mackey roundabout. That is a fact. Now, maybe the councillors invented the story but there's no disputing the fact that they told me the above info.

Why would it matter a jot to Direct Route? They get paid either way

geotrig

And to add to that, if they tolled the lndr it would be a choice of which is more suitable and not using one to avoid the other . I've been in favour of this road all along and had just assumed if it joined at the markey roundabout that it would be tolled somehow. That or get rid of the toll on the tunnel..

Glenomra

geotrig wrote: »

And to add to that, if they tolled the lndr it would be a choice of which is more suitable and not using one to avoid the other . I've been in favour of this road all along and had just assumed if it joined at the markey roundabout that it would be tolled somehow. That or get rid of the toll on the tunnel..

The LNDR is being planned as a dual carriageway with roundabouts . It isn't viable as a tolled road. There's one way of making a very significant difference to traffic flows in limerick. Let the government buyout the tolling company and allow free passage of vehicles. This would cost a lot of money but increase the number of vehicles fro. A current 24000 per day to an estimated 40000 per day. That would have a very beneficial impact on limerick traffic.

oppiuy

Glenomra wrote: »

The LNDR is being planned as a dual carriageway with roundabouts . It isn't viable as a tolled road. There's one way of making a very significant difference to traffic flows in limerick. Let the government buyout the tolling company and allow free passage of vehicles. This would cost a lot of money but increase the number of vehicles fro. A current 24000 per day to an estimated 40000 per day. That would have a very beneficial impact on limerick traffic.

Driving to and from from West Clare into Plassey daily id certainly like to see the NDR built as it would save me a lot of time in the car. I could get into work quicker if i used the tunnel, prob save 10-15mins but at 4 euro a day, 80 a month i choose the drive in through the city. If their was no toll i would certainly use the tunnel.

At the moment the city is fairly quiet without the schools, but if the tunnel was free it would probably be like that more often

phog

Glenomra wrote: »

The LNDR is being planned as a dual carriageway with roundabouts . It isn't viable as a tolled road. There's one way of making a very significant difference to traffic flows in limerick. Let the government buyout the tolling company and allow free passage of vehicles. This would cost a lot of money but increase the number of vehicles fro. A current 24000 per day to an estimated 40000 per day. That would have a very beneficial impact on limerick traffic.

You seem to want to suggest anything and I mean anything that will prevent the building of the LNDR.

Most people that avoid the toll avoid it because it doesn't suit their journey rather than it costs them €1.90.

The LNDR will directly link more vehicles to the toll than the existing road network and will in all probability increase the flow through the tunnel.

73hdkgo

Few pictures of the ongoing work at the Gillogue back entrance to UL.

Glenomra

phog wrote: »

You seem to want to suggest anything and I mean anything that will prevent the building of the LNDR.

Most people that avoid the toll avoid it because it doesn't suit their journey rather than it costs them €1.90.

The LNDR will directly link more vehicles to the toll than the existing road network and will in all probability increase the flow through the tunnel.

If what you say is correct, maybe you could explain why Leo Varadker, then minister for transport, referring to the Limerick Tunnel, put on record,' it would be cheaper for the Government to pay the toll and make it free for HGVs to use the tunnel. In the “toll holiday” last November, 20 per cent more trucks went through tolls, but in Limerick the increase was 70 per cent'. So an increase of 70% in HG vehicles using the tunnel when there was no toll!!!!!!

phog

Glenomra wrote: »

If what you say is correct, maybe you could explain why Leo Varadker, then minister for transport, referring to the Limerick Tunnel, put on record,' it would be cheaper for the Government to pay the toll and make it free for HGVs to use the tunnel. In the “toll holiday” last November, 20 per cent more trucks went through tolls, but in Limerick the increase was 70 per cent'. So an increase of 70% in HG vehicles using the tunnel when there was no toll!!!!!!

Completely missing the point again and trying to count apples as oranges.

Glenomra

phog wrote: »

Completely missing the point again and trying to count apples as oranges.

Do you believe that the figures for cars would be different than those for HGVs, if they were allowed pass through the tunnel free.

phog

Glenomra wrote: »

Do you believe that the figures for cars would be different than those for HGVs, if they were allowed pass through the tunnel free.

Yes, obviously people will try avoid a toll. I use Condell Rd to get out the Dock Rd sometimes but if I was getting the tunnel toll free then I might use that option but the building of the LNDR will not change that practice - why would it?