M11/N11 - M50 (J4) to Coyne's Cross (J14) [options published]

loyatemu

prunudo wrote: »

The accesses wouldn't have to be closed if they chose an offline route. By detrunking the existing n11 it gives the route back to the communities for local accesd and doesn't cut them off any further. You also don't loose more of the Glen of the downs to roadway. The environmental laws are much stronger now than when the project was planned in the 90s, its going to be very difficult to satisfy a widening of the existing road through a special area of conservation.

except the offline options for going around the glen are, if anything, worse than the option of widening through the glen (possibly that's deliberate to soften us up to the idea of widening).

The Glen already has a 4 lane highway going through it, if a gun was held to my head, I'd accept another 2 lanes added to that road before I'd accept the sort of heavy engineering required to go over the hills on either side.

prunudo

I suppose at the end of the day we can debate and discuss the options till the cows come home but they will probably decide their route regardless of what the public say or want.
As it is, their route choices are dividing communties, pitting people from both sides of the road against each other and all because of bad and unsustainable planning by the local authorities.
I think as you say they threw out some routes to make people stomach the red route. I think orange and pink routes are non runners, but the cyan route isn't as hair brained as some think.

Thud

loyatemu wrote: »

except the offline options for going around the glen are, if anything, worse than the option of widening through the glen (possibly that's deliberate to soften us up to the idea of widening).

The Glen already has a 4 lane highway going through it, if a gun was held to my head, I'd accept another 2 lanes added to that road before I'd accept the sort of heavy engineering required to go over the hills on either side.

it's mostly farmland (on a steep hill) and the military firing range

hometruths

The reason they have included the offline options is they have to by law because of the EU Habitats directive which applies to the Glen of the Downs as it is a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1992/43/2007-01-01#src.E0008

The directive states that a Member State may only approve a project if:

only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned

So they have to ask themselves will the proposed road development affect the integrity of the SAC? It is probably safe to assume the answer is yes, it will. In which case the following applies:

If, in spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected

Which means that in order to carry out improvements on the existing N11 the decision making body has to both:

a) confirm that there are no alternative solutions - i.e explain why they are not choosing blue, pink or orange routes

b) justify choosing the red route in the overriding public interest.

And obviously the reasoning given for both a and b will be open to objection and legal challenge by those so inclined.

Having read the directive I would not be so sure upgrading the existing N11 is a shoe in.

rd1izb7lvpuksx

Thud wrote: »

it's mostly farmland (on a steep hill) and the military firing range

The Kilpeddar range is long gone - you can barely make out the remains of the firing points and butts now.

prunudo

Tinley Purple Turpentine wrote: »

The Kilpeddar range is long gone - you can barely make out the remains of the firing points and butts now.

They actually use it for various film and tv productions now. You'd often see the crew vehicles parked in there as you pass the gates. But either way its a lot higher up than the cyan route which roughly follows the pylons and gas line. Which in themselves may cause issues to whether the route is viable.

prunudo

Oh dear, looks like they've used the same artist for their renders as the m28 steering group.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=104568504356676&id=103469624466564

marno21

prunudo wrote: »

Oh dear, looks like they've used the same artist for their renders as the m28 steering group.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=104568504356676&id=103469624466564

"Alexa merge two pictures of Interstate interchanges in Houston and rural Wicklow"

prunudo

marno21 wrote: »

"Alexa merge two pictures of Interstate interchanges in Houston and rural Wicklow"

I fear whatever route they go with things will get messy.

SeanW

Dear Lord, is that a link to Waterford Whispers News or the Onion?

AAAAAAAAA

prunudo wrote: »

Oh dear, looks like they've used the same artist for their renders as the m28 steering group.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=104568504356676&id=103469624466564

Clearly this is a big deal, lets just demolish Delgany and let that be that.

prunudo

AAAAAAAAA wrote: »

Clearly this is a big deal, lets just demolish Delgany and let that be that.

Unfortunately developers and planning authorities will and have done more to damage the charm of Delgany village than this road will as I don't believe either orange or pink routes are a runner.

hometruths

Looks like local opinion is coalescing against everything but some sort of fudge on the red route.

Flyers are being handed out making a submission as easy as ticking a box. Except there is no box to tick saying I oppose the Red Route and I support Cyan/Orange/Pink!

Reati

prunudo wrote: »

Oh dear, looks like they've used the same artist for their renders as the m28 steering group.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=104568504356676&id=103469624466564

I look forward to sitting in traffic for years to comes thanks to the unelected citizen defenders of wicklow. I'm sending in submissions of support from my local area.

prunudo

schmittel wrote: »

Looks like local opinion is coalescing against everything but some sort of fudge on the red route.

Flyers are being handed out making a submission as easy as ticking a box. Except there is no box to tick saying I oppose the Red Route and I support Cyan/Orange/Pink!

I've always viewed any plans in a pragmatic view. The road needs to be upgraded, but knocking every plan and proposal while posting sensationalist photos and articles isn't the answer either, I just hope these people are prepared for what may come with a red route upgrade. As I always say, be careful what you wish for.

Pete_Cavan

Reati wrote: »

I look forward to sitting in traffic for years to comes thanks to the unelected citizen defenders of wicklow.

Even if there was no opposition you would still be sitting in traffic for years to come, such is the length of time it takes to deliver a new motorway. Anyone who thinks that an offline motorway is the solution has to accept a further decade of sitting in traffic first.

hometruths

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Even if there was no opposition you would still be sitting in traffic for years to come, such is the length of time it takes to deliver a new motorway. Anyone who thinks that an offline motorway is the solution has to accept a further decade of sitting in traffic first.

That sort of thinking led to the decision to widen it twenty years ago instead of a longer term solution.

There were plenty of people saying then that it was a short sighted measure since it would have to be widened again in twenty years time.

hometruths

prunudo wrote: »

I've always viewed any plans in a pragmatic view. The road needs to be upgraded, but knocking every plan and proposal while posting sensationalist photos and articles isn't the answer either, I just hope these people are prepared for what may come with a red route upgrade. As I always say, be careful what you wish for.

I agree and I think the support for the red route is a little knee jerk and short sighted in as far as they are rushing to support it because they think it is the most likely option to happen and thus they think supporting it is in best interests of trying to ensure the options of the golf club don't happen.

I think that is not in the long term interests of the entire local area. I would like to have seen them to take a proper look at Cyan first and debating the merits of that before rushing to support red.

Pete_Cavan

schmittel wrote: »

That sort of thinking led to the decision to widen it twenty years ago instead of a longer term solution.

There were plenty of people saying then that it was a short sighted measure since it would have to be widened again in twenty years time.

Had an offline road been built twenty years ago, it would also be heavily congested today and it would still be feeding traffic into already congested roads. There would be people today calling for it to be widened, like with the N7. Fact is roads don't reduce traffic, they attract more. Roads are not a long term solution, it has been proven here and the world over.

hometruths

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Had an offline road been built twenty years ago, it would also be heavily congested today and it would still be feeding traffic into already congested roads. There would be people today calling for it to be widened, like with the N7. Fact is roads don't reduce traffic, they attract more. Roads are not a long term solution, it has been proven here and the world over.

Motorways can handle a higher volume of traffic with less congestion due to average speeds being maintained thanks to access and exit roads designed to ensure departing and joining traffic do so at higher speeds.

This has been proven here and the world over.

Roads themselves may not be a long term solution but that is different debate to the question being raised by WCC re the N11 upgrade which is essentially very simple:

Which option do you support - attempting to solve the problem by a relatively minor upgrade to the existing N11 or attempting to solve the problem by building a continuous motorway connecting North Wicklow to the M50?

hometruths

I also think whatever option is chosen will involve a decade give or take sitting in traffic.

prunudo

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Had an offline road been built twenty years ago, it would also be heavily congested today and it would still be feeding traffic into already congested roads. There would be people today calling for it to be widened, like with the N7. Fact is roads don't reduce traffic, they attract more. Roads are not a long term solution, it has been proven here and the world over.

They screwed up the design 20 years ago by driving a dual carriageway through the middle of Kilmacanogue. If they have built a proper offline route the traffic would be heavy but you wouldn't have the congestion you do now. A lot of the congestion is coming from the numerous local access points, you have local traffic mixing with mainline traffic, people joining the n11 and leaving after 1 or 2 turns, thats one of the biggest issues. People joining at Newtown to leave at Greystones, Drummin to Barry's bridge, Kilmacanogue to Kilcroney, people using it to bypass Bray from one junction to the next. The whole thing is a mess.
As you say, we could be waiting 10 years but I'd sooner wait for them to build it right than create another fudge.

loyatemu

prunudo wrote: »

If they have built a proper offline route the traffic would be heavy but you wouldn't have the congestion you do now.

whilst you're right about the problems all the minor junctions cause (and many of them could be closed tomorrow), the route would still be at or very close to capacity for a 2+2 even if they were closed.

Capacity for a 4 lane road is around 2K cars per lane, which is pretty much the peaktime throughput at Kilmac. I can't see how a 3+3 wouldn't be instantly at capacity in 10 years time either.

Endlessly widening the road to cater for that peaktime surge is not the answer.

machaseh

Rather than widening the motorway, they could spend the money on electrifying + doubling the railway tracks between greystones and Wicklow Town, so that a fast commuter train service could be run. Then extend better local bus services into county Wicklow.

Many people living in co. Wicklow and even Wexford have no option but to drive to dublin every day, as the train services are too slow and infrequent to be viable. Getting these people out of their cars and into the train to Dublin would substantially ease congestion on this road.

L1011

machaseh wrote: »

Rather than widening the motorway, they could spend the money on electrifying + doubling the railway tracks between greystones and Wicklow Town, so that a fast commuter train service could be run. Then extend better local bus services into county Wicklow.

Many people living in co. Wicklow and even Wexford have no option but to drive to dublin every day, as the train services are too slow and infrequent to be viable. Getting these people out of their cars and into the train to Dublin would substantially ease congestion on this road.

The railway tracks aren't even double to Greystones.

The cost of re-tunnelling Bray Head alone would likely exceed the cost of this project, before the further works and purchasing new EMUs

prunudo

Yes the trainline should be upgraded but that doesn't address the issues of local traffic mixing with mainline in the n11. Whether this is done via an offline route or as loyatemu has suggested via parallel link roads, the upgrading of the road is a must.
As schmittel says the fact some local people are so dead against the various routes and wanting the red route is a knee jerk reaction. They are right to be worried and object but they seem to have little concern about the issues a red route upgrade will bring to the communities, residents and businesses along the existing n11.

u140acro3xs7dm

L1011 wrote: »

The railway tracks aren't even double to Greystones.

The cost of re-tunnelling Bray Head alone would likely exceed the cost of this project, before the further works and purchasing new EMUs

Currently, it is standing room only from Greystones at peak times, it also takes an hour to get into town. This section needs to be sorted before they extend another 20 km down the coast.

Reati

prunudo wrote: »

Yes the trainline should be upgraded but that doesn't address the issues of local traffic mixing with mainline in the n11. Whether this is done via an offline route or as loyatemu has suggested via parallel link roads, the upgrading of the road is a must.
As schmittel says the fact some local people are so dead against the various routes and wanting the red route is a knee jerk reaction. They are right to be worried and object but they seem to have little concern about the issues a red route upgrade will bring to the communities, residents and businesses along the existing n11.

It's nimbyism all the way.

loyatemu

L1011 wrote: »

The railway tracks aren't even double to Greystones.

The cost of re-tunnelling Bray Head alone would likely exceed the cost of this project, before the further works and purchasing new EMUs

they're purchasing new rolling stock anyway, the cost of a 3km tunnel with no stations is not as high as you think. If they go for all the offline options for the N11 I wouldn't expect much change from half a billion. Looking at the road option in isolation is poor planning, they say that much themselves in the consultation document, though there isn't much else in it to show how they are comparing the costs to other options.

machaseh

loyatemu wrote: »

they're purchasing new rolling stock anyway, the cost of a 3km tunnel with no stations is not as high as you think. If they go for all the offline options for the N11 I wouldn't expect much change from half a billion. Looking at the road option in isolation is poor planning, they say that much themselves in the consultation document, though there isn't much else in it to show how they are comparing the costs to other options.

It also doesn't have to be 2 tracks all the way to wicklow town, it is okay to have stretches of single track when necessary as long as they are laid out carefully so that a good frequency of say one train every 20 mins can be achieved.

As for the N11, it would be better to build a new M11 motorway a bit further from Bray town. The current route can then be downgraded and turned into much-needed housing. I am not necessarily against road infrastructure, but it has to be laid out as sustainably as possible and should come in conjunction with parallel transport links (in this case the train line).

Also, extending LUAS from brides glen into Bray Town would also entice more people to use the Luas for going to places such as dundrum, routes that most people would currently be driving.