M17/M18 - Gort to Tuam [open to traffic]

marno21

Baldilocks wrote: »

Drove the new road over the past few days, massive improvement on the old road.

But it's not very straight, does anyone know why the route is so twisty??

And secondly, the approaches to the R332 bridge over the N17 are quite steep, does anyone know why they are so??

To me it seems to twist around the place to avoid the plethora of one off houses and other such developments scattered around Galway city's hinterland, the CPO of which would drive the price up.

Given the twistiness of the scheme, it would've made more sense to build it closer to Oranmore and plough through whichever houses etc it needed to. We now have a twisty scheme far from Galway that, if straight, would be shorter even with the deviation towards the city.

Middle Man

marno21 wrote: »

To me it seems to twist around the place to avoid the plethora of one off houses and other such developments scattered around Galway city's hinterland, the CPO of which would drive the price up.

Given the twistiness of the scheme, it would've made more sense to build it closer to Oranmore and plough through whichever houses etc it needed to. We now have a twisty scheme far from Galway that, if straight, would be shorter even with the deviation towards the city.

We seriously need to rethink our obsession with property - it doesn't exactly make us Irish look very wise or capable in the eyes of others. The property mindset not only gets in the way of infrastructure which benefits all, but also gets in the way of indigenous enterprise (SMEs etc.) by way of excessive rents.

As you said, just plow through all this stupid mindset (both mentally and physically) - the only thing I'd change is: firstly use railways (where justified) to bulldoze the fabric of bad planning instead - that way, there would be far less excuses like "building more roads is not the solution blah...blah...blah..." A precedent needs to be set...

Roads and cars are not the problem, selfish/apathetic attitudes and bad planning practices are!

m17

The 17 at bauilpuil 01/01/1601/01/18

AugustusMinimus

Baldilocks wrote: »

Drove the new road over the past few days, massive improvement on the old road.

But it's not very straight, does anyone know why the route is so twisty??

And secondly, the approaches to the R332 bridge over the N17 are quite steep, does anyone know why they are so??

M18 between Ennis and Gort is incredibly twisty. Ridiculously so.

Why is the M17/M18 being build to this standard when the Dublin interurbans were arrow straight by comparison?

frozenfrozen

I love the curves. At night you can put your high beams on even with traffic in the distance ahead of you

m17

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

M18 between Ennis and Gort is incredibly twisty. Ridiculously so.

Why is the M17/M18 being build to this standard when the Dublin interurbans were arrow straight by comparison?

The m18 was never designed to be a motorway it was planned to be a dual carriageway

AugustusMinimus

m17 wrote: »

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

M18 between Ennis and Gort is incredibly twisty. Ridiculously so.

Why is the M17/M18 being build to this standard when the Dublin interurbans were arrow straight by comparison?

The m18 was never designed to be a motorway it was planned to be a dual carriageway

It was designed as a HQDC, as were the vast majority of sections on the Dublin interurbans. They were later reclassified to motorway.

Hence they were designed to the same specification but built to different standards.

Baldilocks

it could still be alot straighter regardless of the design standard applied. Straight lines are 'shorter' than a 'wiggly' one, and thus the road would use less resources to build, and be cheaper.

We don't have the population density for rail to viable, particularly in the west of the country.

Baldilocks

Baldilocks wrote: »

it could still be alot straighter regardless of the design standard applied. Straight lines are 'shorter' than a 'wiggly' one, and thus the road would use less resources to build, and be cheaper.

We don't have the population density for rail to viable, particularly in the west of the country.

It was probably cheaper to swerve the road and buy up some extra farmland and add a few metres of roadway here and there than to buy up the odd house every couple of km's.

Gwynston

frozenfrozen wrote: »

I love the curves. At night you can put your high beams on even with traffic in the distance ahead of you

Why?
There's nothing annoys me more than people using high beam unnecessarily on a motorway - especially on the opposite carriageway where they don't bother dipping because they think it's not blinding anyone on the other side due to the road being so wide, or the barrier partially blocking the view, or some other reason

And if you think having high beam on isn't bothering anyone a distance in front of you (regardless of how bendy the motorway might be) you're WRONG! :mad: If you can see any red tail lights any distance in front of you, believe me - your high beam in their mirrors is VERY annoying.

I personally hardly never use high beam on a motorway, especially if there are ANY cars anywhere in view on either carriageway. They're simply not necessary! Their purpose is to help you better see the path of the road a distance in front of you, but motorways are designed to not have any unexpected changes of direction. Dipped lights and plenty of reflective road studs are easily effective enough on motorways.

flazio

I do use beams late at night but remain very aware of traffic in the opposite direction or further ahead and dip as I would on a two way road.
The reason being to give myself as much warning as possible to any debris that may be on the motorway ahead such as boxes, blown truck tyres, road kill or potential road kill.

mickdw

I dont see an issue with the curves. It can safety be driven at speeds far in excess of the limit. Id have a much bigger problem with the junctions on the older part of this motorway where slip roads are not provided. You therefore have the dangerous situation of people slowing from motorway speeds into side roads and also some struggling to get up to speed joining the road.

frozenfrozen

Gwynston wrote: »

Why?
There's nothing annoys me more than people using high beam unnecessarily on a motorway - especially on the opposite carriageway where they don't bother dipping because they think it's not blinding anyone on the other side due to the road being so wide, or the barrier partially blocking the view, or some other reason

And if you think having high beam on isn't bothering anyone a distance in front of you (regardless of how bendy the motorway might be) you're WRONG! :mad: If you can see any red tail lights any distance in front of you, believe me - your high beam in their mirrors is VERY annoying.

I personally hardly never use high beam on a motorway, especially if there are ANY cars anywhere in view on either carriageway. They're simply not necessary! Their purpose is to help you better see the path of the road a distance in front of you, but motorways are designed to not have any unexpected changes of direction. Dipped lights and plenty of reflective road studs are easily effective enough on motorways.

Jesus wept

I'm not even reading that after the first line

I'm well aware of how to not blind people.

Then tail lights disappear and I want to use my high beams to make sure there's no wildlife that could literally instantly kill me on my motorbike I'll turn my high beams on

Irish_rat

Baldilocks wrote: »

But it's not very straight, does anyone know why the route is so twisty??

A straight motorway is incredibly boring to drive. Curves ensures the driver is constantly focused on the road.

Gwynston

frozenfrozen wrote: »

Jesus wept
I'm not even reading that after the first line
I'm well aware of how to not blind people.

If you don't read past the first line, then it's not fair to quote my entire message, as you're not replying in context. :rolleyes:

If you are able to correctly assess when to dip your lights when you can see tail lights coming in and out of view ahead of you, then you're fine with me!

But there are plenty of drivers on motorways who can't seem to do that and just assume it's OK to keep high beam on if someone is "far enough" ahead, or on the other carriageway. And windy motorways like (back on topic ) the M17/M18 just makes them worse...

prunudo

Gwynston wrote: »

But there are plenty of drivers on motorways who can't seem to do that and just assume it's OK to keep high beam on if someone is "far enough" ahead, or on the other carriageway. And windy motorways like (back on topic ) the M17/M18 just makes them worse...

There are also plenty to fail to realise that they are blinding drivers of vans and trucks on the opposite side of the road. Seems to be particularly bad on motorways with concrete barriers.

frozenfrozen

jvan wrote: »

There are also plenty to fail to realise that they are blinding drivers of vans and trucks on the opposite side of the road. Seems to be particularly bad on motorways with concrete barriers.

Same with motorbikes, it's really only low cars that don't get blinded by high beams of someone on the other side of a motorway

Sam Russell

Mod: M17/M18 Tuam bypass please.

m17

The m18 at kiltiernan 03/01/1703/01/18

m17

The m17 ballybanagher 04/01/1604/01/18

f2

Middle Man wrote: »

We seriously need to rethink our obsession with property - it doesn't exactly make us Irish look very wise or capable in the eyes of others. The property mindset not only gets in the way of infrastructure which benefits all, but also gets in the way of indigenous enterprise (SMEs etc.) by way of excessive rents.

As you said, just plow through all this stupid mindset (both mentally and physically) - the only thing I'd change is: firstly use railways (where justified) to bulldoze the fabric of bad planning instead - that way, there would be far less excuses like "building more roads is not the solution blah...blah...blah..." A precedent needs to be set...

Roads and cars are not the problem, selfish/apathetic attitudes and bad planning practices are!

there was an incident where a cave was a roost for bats which was avoided so not just houses

m17

The m18 at gortroa 22/06/17

veryangryman

Decided i'd try and find out the thinking behind the way the M17 is numbered and some signage issues - got a reply from NRA a few days ago.


Hi.. roadswise there are currently signage inconsistencies id like to fixed as they dont fit with policy.

1. M17 north of rathmorrissey has double digit junction numbers. Need to either rename them as junction 1 and 2 or rename the motorway m18 as it continues the m18s junction numbers.

2. Tuam road R362 signage in Athlone should no longer signpost for Tuam as the M6 and M17 should be the de facto route. Change to brideswell on signs in or around Athlone.

3. Finally....Lads ye need to seriously stand upto Galway council on the Claregalway to Bohermore stretch. This should have become a regional road at the time instead of N83.



Thank you for your email of 8 November 2017 regarding the above. At the outset, I wish to apologise for the delay in responding to your enquiry. The position in relation to your enquiry is as follows.


As you may be aware, junction numbers on the M17 follow on from both the M6 and the M18. The system of numbering of junctions along the motorway and national road networks in Ireland was designed to ensure that each junction has a unique identifier to assist emergency services and other response agencies in wayfinding during callouts.



With regard to signage on the R362, I should advise that the remit of TII relates to light rail and the national road network only i.e. roads with an ‘N’ or ‘ M’ designation. The road to which you refer is a non-national road and, accordingly, is a matter for Roscommon County Council, which is the road authority for the area. To be of assistance, your observations in this regard will be forwarded to Roscommon County Council for consideration.



In relation to the N83, it should be noted that the classification of national and regional roads is a matter for the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport (DTTaS). In the circumstances you may wish to contact the Roads Division of DTTaS at roadsdivision@dttas.ie in relation to the matter.



I hope that this information is of assistance to you.

m17

veryangryman wrote: »

Decided i'd try and find out the thinking behind the way the M17 is numbered and some signage issues - got a reply from NRA a few days ago.


Hi.. roadswise there are currently signage inconsistencies id like to fixed as they dont fit with policy.

1. M17 north of rathmorrissey has double digit junction numbers. Need to either rename them as junction 1 and 2 or rename the motorway m18 as it continues the m18s junction numbers.

2. Tuam road R362 signage in Athlone should no longer signpost for Tuam as the M6 and M17 should be the de facto route. Change to brideswell on signs in or around Athlone.

3. Finally....Lads ye need to seriously stand upto Galway council on the Claregalway to Bohermore stretch. This should have become a regional road at the time instead of N83.



Thank you for your email of 8 November 2017 regarding the above. At the outset, I wish to apologise for the delay in responding to your enquiry. The position in relation to your enquiry is as follows.


As you may be aware, junction numbers on the M17 follow on from both the M6 and the M18. The system of numbering of junctions along the motorway and national road networks in Ireland was designed to ensure that each junction has a unique identifier to assist emergency services and other response agencies in wayfinding during callouts.



With regard to signage on the R362, I should advise that the remit of TII relates to light rail and the national road network only i.e. roads with an ‘N’ or ‘ M’ designation. The road to which you refer is a non-national road and, accordingly, is a matter for Roscommon County Council, which is the road authority for the area. To be of assistance, your observations in this regard will be forwarded to Roscommon County Council for consideration.



In relation to the N83, it should be noted that the classification of national and regional roads is a matter for the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport (DTTaS). In the circumstances you may wish to contact the Roads Division of DTTaS at roadsdivision@dttas.ie in relation to the matter.



I hope that this information is of assistance to you.

The n83 starts at bother na dtreabh/tuam road junction, bohermore is the r336

m17

The m18 at raheen/kiltartan 27/09/17

marno21

Traffic data for the new scheme is now available at https://www.nratrafficdata.ie

5 counters along the route, between Gort and Kilternan, Kilternan and Rathmorrissey, Rathmorrissey and Annagh Hill, Annagh Hill and Tuam and along the Tuam bypass (north of the Ballygaddy Road interchange).

The flow decreases steadily as you go north, the busiest section is Kilternan to Gort, and the quietest is as you approach Tuam.

The traffic drop north of Gort surprises me the most. Sure you can leave at Kilternan and take the old road to Galway, but what's the advantage of using the old road from Gort to Kilternan?

marno21

marno21 wrote: »

The traffic drop north of Gort surprises me the most. Sure you can leave at Kilternan and take the old road to Galway, but what's the advantage of using the old road from Gort to Kilternan?

I suspect that a significant amount of traffic is going towards Athlone via Loughrea, they do not want to take the longer tolled route.

marno21

Deleted User wrote: »

I suspect that a significant amount of traffic is going towards Athlone via Loughrea, they do not want to take the longer tolled route.

Given the traditionally low figures on the N66 (would've been around 3k AADT), I would've assumed that traffic joining at Gort would've negated M18N->N66 traffic.

Middle Man

marno21 wrote: »

Traffic data for the new scheme is now available at https://www.nratrafficdata.ie

5 counters along the route, between Gort and Kilternan, Kilternan and Rathmorrissey, Rathmorrissey and Annagh Hill, Annagh Hill and Tuam and along the Tuam bypass (north of the Ballygaddy Road interchange).

The flow decreases steadily as you go north, the busiest section is Kilternan to Gort, and the quietest is as you approach Tuam.

The traffic drop north of Gort surprises me the most. Sure you can leave at Kilternan and take the old road to Galway, but what's the advantage of using the old road from Gort to Kilternan?

We won't really know the true usage levels of this road scheme until around the summer - figures thus far for 2018 are heavily distorted by the quieter winter period. In any case, we'll only really know how successful the scheme is in a couple of years when traffic trends start to emerge (economic magnet effect etc.).

D Trent

marno21 wrote: »

Traffic data for the new scheme is now available at https://www.nratrafficdata.ie

The traffic drop north of Gort surprises me the most. Sure you can leave at Kilternan and take the old road to Galway, but what's the advantage of using the old road from Gort to Kilternan?

Everyone takes the gort exit to go into Corrib oil for coffee or diesel, when they come out again they're on the old road heading for Coole park having forgot the motorway's now open !