M9? - Is it a waste of money?

BluntGuy

The Waterford Bypass will open in 2009, I'm sure.

However, the big question remains, will it be motorway?

This official documentation seems to state so, but as far as I'm aware, the scheme doesn't have a motorway order attached:

Niall F

I read in another thread the Waterford by-pass will not be motorway.
On the original thread title, I believe the M9 is the right way to go. I don't use the current N9 myself a lot but the road certainly requires upgrading. For probably the very first time, a road is being built now that shouldn't require upgrading for a very long time. I think it will be of great benefit to the area. Planning for the future!! I wonder will it catch on? Doubt it

dowlingm

@johnnyc - How is LUAS as built a "waste of money" exactly? It could have been done better, sure, but it's one of the few public transport modes the public embraces fairly readily and demands expansions to.

johnnyc

ah luas in my mind was a waste of public money it cost way too much, if you think about it for the cost of the luas you would pay for a metro line which would be more high capacity at todays prices.

bk

johnnyc wrote: »

ah luas in my mind was a waste of public money it cost way too much, if you think about it for the cost of the luas you would pay for a metro line which would be more high capacity at todays prices.

The two Luas lines cost €800 million, it is being estimated that Metro North is going to cost €4 to 5 Billion. Big price difference, there was no way you could build a Metro line for just €800 million.

BTW the Green line can be upgraded to Metro line, it was designed for this from the start.

dowlingm

johnnyc - not saying this to be argumentative but the fact is that you get several times more LRT-km for the price than conventional subway. Even when you have to tunnel it, the lack of requirement for high floor platforms means LRT stations can be simpler - one entrance/exit can serve both directions and on the surface the segregation requirements are far less strict. I'm okay with Metro North but Metro West is much more suited to light rail.

LUAS was less expensive, expandable and reminded people that if ILDA and IE Human Resources wasn't allowed screw it up moving people by rail was still a good idea.

sk8board

The existing road from Kilkenny or Carlow to waterford, in particular from Paulstown, into Gowran, Dungarvan, Thomastown, Ballyhale, Mullinavat and Ferrybank is without doubt the worst and most dangerous piece of road linking two cities in the country (probably in western europe for that matter).

There is pretty much no opportunity to overtake for about 20 miles, irrespective of what you are stuck behind, or how slow its going.

For anyone travelling on it for their first time, those 2 sudden turns under the railway bridges (about a mile or two apart around Mullinavat) are enough to scare the bejesus out of the best of us.

Take one trip on this road, and then ask yourself if the M9 is a waste of money.

dowlingm

sk8board, I have driven the existing road and I agree with you that it is not fit for purpose.. However, that is not an argument for motorway, just a new road alignment. The road design capacity should then be a matter for traffic studies and forecasting, not a political/GAA jersey/he got one so I get one basis.

johnnyc

the luas was cheap - original cost from 280 to 860 million what great value. People are on about the GDA population increase can the area handle the increase no it cant. So the m9 motorways,will help to attract development outside of the GDA and will help the southeast to develop to its full potential.

sk8board

dowlingm wrote: »

sk8board, I have driven the existing road and I agree with you that it is not fit for purpose.. However, that is not an argument for motorway, just a new road alignment. The road design capacity should then be a matter for traffic studies and forecasting, not a political/GAA jersey/he got one so I get one basis.

I don't believe there is any way to re-align that particular piece of road. The geography of the road makes it completely impossible. There isn't even any room to just build a new road next to the existing one, nor room to widen the existing one; coupled with the way it winds its way along the steep hill-side between ballyhale and mullinavat.

Hence a new road was the only way.

invincibleirish

johnnyc wrote: »

will help to attract development outside of the GDA and will help the southeast to develop to its full potential.

Will it? i doubt it.

My guess is that the M9 and M25 will give the local councils(of whom the idea of co-operation in things such as planning are a laughable fantasy) ample opportunity to allow for sprawl of a few industrial estates, perhaps a few out of town shopping centres and the lovely suburban estates plonked down in a field 'only 30 minutes drive' from anywhere.

With it comes the usual lack of foresight so public transport will be non existent, as will the most basic facilities like shops (at least within walking distance). The cost of doing business out of a motorway industrial park will always be cheaper then in either the Kilkenny or Waterford urban areas.

dowlingm

sk8board - sorry wasn't clear - I meant a new road but not necessary motorway

johnnyc - obviously LUAS doesn't go to Waterford however the Kildare Route Project, which is also "money spent in Dublin" should improve travel times by rail from Waterford by reducing holdups of Intercity trains behind commuter trains in that corridor.

BluntGuy

Somebody mentioned this point before, but if the motorway had been built on schedule, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The road was meant to open in 2007:

http://n9-n10kilcullen-waterford.ie/project-programme.htm

All the MUIs are late according to official documentation.

SeanW

mike65 wrote: »

Working from this point, the bigger you are the more you "deserve" so the weak get weaker relative to the largest city which of course is Dublin, the capital is already acting like a blackhole sucking in investment and resources which is why it and its hinterland have such a high per capita income compared to the rest of the country esp the SE and NW.

What the country needs is balanced growth that requires what is at times disproportionate investment in specific regions to stop the skewing towards the "centre".

I realise Dubs will snort at this citing shocking infrastructure deficits in the capital, I would say - true. Thats what happens when the regions are underfed - Dublin gets bloated.

Quite the opposite, Dublin has been neglected and its infrastructure hobbled (sometimes intentionally) partly because of this kind of attitude.

The fact is that cities - where people historically and presently come to trade goods and services in large and efficient quantities - are wealth generators. Imagine Bavaria without Munich or the U.K. without London. And Dublin's infrastructure is among the worst of any capital city in Europe - partly because of neglect and partly malice.

I'll give you one example - Irish aviation. For example, the first air services agreement between Ireland and the U.S. in the '40s forbade any air travel between Dublin Airport and the U.S. whatsoever. The American airliners and the U.S. Civil Aeronautics Board became so agitated with our governments obstinate refusal to allow U.S. airlines to fly into Dublin that they threatened to throw Aer Lingus out of JFK if we didn't change our attitude in 1971. The government of the day had to find a way to keep the CAB from doing that while at the same time appeasing the Shannon trade union mafia and the professional victims in the West.

Finally, TWA was allowed to run services between Dublin and the U.S. with the "Shannon Stopover" madness which continued in one form or another until 2008.
Did you know also that Dublin Airport's runway is only 2.637 km long? That's the shortest of any main runway of any capital city in Europe? Ireland does have a longer and much higher spec runway, but it's in (Guess where) Shannon. This was done to force heavily laden planes to stop in Shannon to partially unload - but planes coming from the East primarily use Manchester Airport for this purpose. Another own goal.

In the early 1980s the E.C. paid the Irish government to build a DART network for Dublin City, a 3 line system based on the DRRTS (Dublin Railway Rapid Transport Study) from the 70s, the gov't pocketed the money and forced CIE to borrow to build the 1 line now existing - on tracks that were already there.

Dublin City is also very much car dependent and during the boom years there was no planning or attempts to keep property prices in check and little attempts to develop public transport except the Luas which was badly needed. Hence you now have people who live as far out as Tipperary, Western Co. Longford and Newry and work in Dublin. It's no longer a question "Boston Vs. Berlin" for Dublin's transport system, more like Los Angeles Vs. Lagos. If we allow that to happen we may as well pack it in.

Anyone who thinks Ireland or any part of it is going to get better off by screwing Dublin is living on cloud cuckoo land.

bk wrote: »

The two Luas lines cost €800 million, it is being estimated that Metro North is going to cost €4 to 5 Billion. Big price difference, there was no way you could build a Metro line for just €800 million.

I just want to correct this inaccuracy - the Metro will cost €4-5 billion partly because of the model of finance - the Public Private Partnership - which is like a giant Hire Purchase arrangement. i.e. it's a very expensive way to finance a project and much more expensive than government paying for construction (which is how they built the Luas).
Actual cost of the Metro should be something like 1.8-3 billion.

Chris_533976

BluntGuy wrote: »

Somebody mentioned this point before, but if the motorway had been built on schedule, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The road was meant to open in 2007:

http://n9-n10kilcullen-waterford.ie/project-programme.htm

All the MUIs are late according to official documentation.

This is the one that depresses me the most.

http://www.thrdo.com/n25newrossdates.html

New Ross bypass - Open 2007.

BluntGuy

Chris_533976 wrote: »

This is the one that depresses me the most.

http://www.thrdo.com/n25newrossdates.html

New Ross bypass - Open 2007.

The whole website is depressing...

Húrin

I am against covering the country in money-wasting and environmentally damaging motorways in general, and the M9 does not fall into my threshold of which motorways are necessary. I don't think Waterford is big enough to justify it. Improve the N9 fine and improve rail, canal and bus services, but M9 is the wrong way to go.

sk8board

Húrin wrote: »

I don't think Waterford is big enough to justify it.

and it will never expand without it, making it a necessity. Improving the n9 has been found to be impossible for decades, its only recently that we have the money to finally get the south-east connected to the rest of the country.

In the past decade we've almost covered Dublin to Belfast/Galway/Cork/Waterford/Limerick/Kilkenny via motorway or dual-carriageway.

Had they done this before announcing decentralisation, it might have been more successful
Its not exactly the American freeway project from the 50's, but its crucial all the same.

invincibleirish

sk8board wrote: »

and it will never expand without it, making it a necessity. Improving the n9 has been found to be impossible for decades, its only recently that we have the money to finally get the south-east connected to the rest of the country.

Null and void argument, expand? connected?, this isnt the building of the pacific railroad, its a Motorway, which will still be running in parallel to the M8 and N/M11 for large parts.

sk8board wrote: »

In the past decade we've almost covered Dublin to Belfast/Galway/Cork/Waterford/Limerick/Kilkenny via motorway or dual-carriageway.

Everyone knows this? why repeat it?

sk8board wrote: »

Had they done this before announcing decentralisation, it might have been more successful
Its not exactly the American freeway project from the 50's, but its crucial all the same.

The decentralisation programme is a failure, the M9 would not have changed this.

BluntGuy

Húrin wrote: »

I am against covering the country in money-wasting and environmentally damaging motorways in general, and the M9 does not fall into my threshold of which motorways are necessary. I don't think Waterford is big enough to justify it. Improve the N9 fine and improve rail, canal and bus services, but M9 is the wrong way to go.

You make a valid enough point, but canal services?

Bards

... and Galway, Cork Limerick are Big enough to justify their Motorways??

M9 is replacing two roads The N9 and the N10, traffic figures need to take this into account which they dont; as the NRA do not publish figures for the N10.

M9 is shortest of all the motorways, and is the worst national route in the country.
Sections of the M9 carry the same volume of traffic and higher as sections of the M6,M7, M8

http://www.nra.ie/NetworkManagement/TrafficCounts/TrafficCounterData/html/N06-11.htm M6 10K to 12K AADT

http://www.nra.ie/NetworkManagement/TrafficCounts/TrafficCounterData/html/N07-10.htm M7 9K to 13K AADT

http://www.nra.ie/NetworkManagement/TrafficCounts/TrafficCounterData/html/N08-12.htm M8 10K to 13K AADT

http://www.nra.ie/NetworkManagement/TrafficCounts/TrafficCounterData/html/N09-12.htm M9 12K to 17K AADT

The Road is currently being built so this thread is a pointless excercise

BluntGuy

Bards wrote: »

The Road is currently being built so this thread is a pointless excercise

I strongly disagree with that statement.

I have acknowledged over and over again that the road is being built and that nothing is going to stop that.

The intended purpose of the thread is to reflect on how the situation was handled and discuss if it could've been handled better or if it was handled correctly. It's an oppurtunity for those who support it to justify why it is under construction and an oppurtunity for those who don't to state why it shouldn't have gone ahead.

An excercise that is far from pointless...

Bards

BluntGuy wrote: »

I strongly disagree with that statement.

I have acknowledged over and over again that the road is being built and that nothing is going to stop that.

The intended purpose of the thread is to reflect on how the situation was handled and discuss if it could've been handled better or if it was handled correctly. It's an oppurtunity for those who support it to justify why it is under construction and an oppurtunity for those who don't to state why it shouldn't have gone ahead.

An excercise that is far from pointless...

All those who are against it are arguing the AADT figures. why isn;t there a thread encompassing all the other MIU's whether or not they should have been built and is it a waste of money???

Or change the title of the Thread. to "M9 - Is it value for Money?" this would be a fairer and more positive title

BTW when is the Poll going to Close?

Chris_533976

I still stand by my argument that the M9 is needed. But I do think that one section of it should have been postponded and Mallow - Croom of the M20 built with that hunk of cash.

invincibleirish

Bards wrote: »

All those who are against it are arguing the AADT figures. why isn;t there a thread encompassing all the other MIU's whether or not they should have been built and is it a waste of money???

Or change the title of the Thread. to "M9 - Is it value for Money?" this would be a fairer and more positive title

BTW when is the Poll going to Close?

The argument strictly is not about AADTs, the argument is about whether or not the M9 deserves priority over at least a dozen other schemes with similar AADTs as well as schemes that whilst not politically glamourous would have eliminated critical pinch points around the network.

In particular given the tough economic times would it have been wise to cancel/postpone at least the northern sections of the M9 to allow other more important projects to be built.

I do think the the MIU programme has wasted a lot of money, the Interurban programme if rationalised could have been built by now, instead we are facing into recession with huge financial commitments to building duplicate green field motorways whilst our cities choke in congestion.

I understand why our S/E posters are so protective of the M9 and wish to quell debate, i'm pretty certain you're intelligent people who know full well that the whole process around how the M9 got priority reeks of that peculiar kind of corruption that we're so good at doing in Ireland.

Bards

invincibleirish wrote: »

The argument strictly is not about AADTs, the argument is about whether or not the M9 deserves priority over at least a dozen other schemes with similar AADTs as well as schemes that whilst not politically glamourous would have eliminated critical pinch points around the network..

......and as I have repeatedly said before the M9 is not being prioritised, but will finish in line with the other MIU's

we can go over and over the same ground ad nauseum until we are both blue in the face, but we are always going to disagree, so what's the point

invincibleirish

Bards wrote: »

......and as I have repeatedly said before the M9 is not being prioritised, but will finish in line with the other MIU's

Now now Bards, i think you're being deliberately cute and avoiding the point in question, the M9 would not be built today without Mr. Cullens 'influence' in proceedings.

road_high

invincibleirish wrote: »

Now now Bards, i think you're being deliberately cute and avoiding the point in question, the M9 would not be built today without Mr. Cullens 'influence' in proceedings.

Shock horror...........local minister delivers for constituency

Bards

invincibleirish wrote: »

Now now Bards, i think you're being deliberately cute and avoiding the point in question, the M9 would not be built today without Mr. Cullens 'influence' in proceedings.

The M9 is part of the NDP 2000 - 2006, before Minister Cullen was elected to Senior Office and should have been completed in 2006. Only thing Cullen did was break the project into 4 phases as opposed to the two originally planned

Anyway if you have to go down the road of Politics to justify why the M9 should or should not be built then you have lost the argument.

Fact is N9 has more or less the same volume of traffic as the other MIU's and as such building the N9 as motorway is/was the right course of action.

invincibleirish

Bards wrote: »

The M9 is part of the NDP 2000 - 2006, before Minister Cullen was elected to Senior Office and should have been completed in 2006

Yes a lot of things were in the 2000-2006 NDP, but the problem with that plan, is that not a lot if got built or was on time because every constituency was promised goodies which of course the country couldnt afford, i suppose you can call it the 'one for everyone in the audience' approach to politics.

Cullen was promoted to the DoT in 2004 btw.

mfitzy wrote: »

Shock horror...........local minister delivers for constituency

you say it like its a good thing:).