N3 - Clonee to M50

marno21

MOD: I have renamed this thread to encompass all works planned on the N3 between Clonee and the M50, which is being progressed now to design & planning as part of the National Development Plan

marno21

The N3 Snugborough Interchange upgrade has now gone to tender

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase_frameset.asp?PID=149873&B=ETENDERS_SIMPLE&PS=1&PP=ctm/Supplier/publictenders

annfield1978

marno21 wrote: »

The N3 Snugborough Interchange upgrade has now gone to tender

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase_frameset.asp?PID=149873&B=ETENDERS_SIMPLE&PS=1&PP=ctm/Supplier/publictenders

Any award on this?

Is this upgrade of the junction the same project as mentioned in the NDP?

roadmaster

marno21 wrote: »

The N3 Snugborough Interchange upgrade has now gone to tender

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase_frameset.asp?PID=149873&B=ETENDERS_SIMPLE&PS=1&PP=ctm/Supplier/publictenders

The Fun when that starts the traffic will be back to butllersbridge!

marno21

marno21 wrote: »

The N3 Snugborough Interchange upgrade has now gone to tender

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase_frameset.asp?PID=149873&B=ETENDERS_SIMPLE&PS=1&PP=ctm/Supplier/publictenders

https://irl.eu-supply.com/ctm/Supplier/PublicPurchase/149874/0/1?returnUrl=ctm/Supplier/PublicTenders&b=ETENDERS_SIMPLE

Awarded to BAM. €13.94m

spacetweek

An entire year delay there. I wonder if Ryan procrastinated on purpose.

SeanW

Will/can any of the N3 be redesignated to motorway as a result of these works?

roadmaster

SeanW wrote: »

Will/can any of the N3 be redesignated to motorway as a result of these works?

I think there is too many exits to close together in that area for that to happen

spacetweek

roadmaster wrote: »

I think there is too many exits to close together in that area for that to happen

Not a dealbreaker - and some left-in-left-out exits are due to be closed.

Pete_Cavan

Consultation on Emerging Preferred Option now open;

https://consult.fingal.ie/en/consultation/n3-m50-clonee-non-statutory-public-consultation-scheme-update-emerging-preferred-option

Following the Stage 2 Assessment, DS2 Central Median Widening was selected as the Emerging Preferred Option. The existing wide central median will be minimised to form an additional running lane in each direction. Improvements are planned to the Inbound Bus Lane as a complementary measure alongside the DS2 Central Median Widening option.

I can see a logic in an additional outbound lane, but an additional inbound lane is not going to achieve anything. You can widen the wide end of the funnel as much as you want but if the narrow end stays the same, things aren't getting through it any faster.

The bus lane is clearly an afterthought thrown in to pacify. If anything, the bus lane should be added to the median to give buses a good run without having to deal with traffic joining/exiting at junctions.

cgcsb

Can't believe this is a serious project. So When the extra traffic gets to Dublin it'll meet a bus only road at old cabra road and have to go to Phibsboro where there'll surely be new anti car measures in the coming months. Seems a ridiculous waste. Should just add new bus lanes.

Peregrine

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Consultation on Emerging Preferred Option now open;

https://consult.fingal.ie/en/consultation/n3-m50-clonee-non-statutory-public-consultation-scheme-update-emerging-preferred-option



I can see a logic in an additional outbound lane, but an additional inbound lane is not going to achieve anything. You can widen the wide end of the funnel as much as you want but if the narrow end stays the same, things aren't getting through it any faster.

The bus lane is clearly an afterthought thrown in to pacify. If anything, the bus lane should be added to the median to give buses a good run without having to deal with traffic joining/exiting at junctions.

That is so bad. I don't even know what to say.

spacetweek

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I can see a logic in an additional outbound lane, but an additional inbound lane is not going to achieve anything. You can widen the wide end of the funnel as much as you want but if the narrow end stays the same, things aren't getting through it any faster.

If a large amount of the inbound traffic exits onto the M50, it mightn't matter that the N3 is much narrower as you get closer to the city centre.

ongarboy

spacetweek wrote: »

If a large amount of the inbound traffic exits onto the M50, it mightn't matter that the N3 is much narrower as you get closer to the city centre.

Agreed. The few times I had to drive to work pre covid, it would be bumper to bumper from Clonee junction to M50 where most traffic split off to join M50 North or south lanes and remaining city bound
traffic flowed relatively freely from M50 junction to Halfway House roundabout. Yes, gridlock resumed from there into the city and will regardless but an extra lane inbound for the section proposed in this thread would definitely make a positive difference for the section in question. I don't understand why some here seem to think that partial but significant improvement is a waste. It would be like Kerry bound motorists giving out that the Naas bypass is a waste because you still get stuck in Adare.

Pete_Cavan

ongarboy wrote: »

Agreed. The few times I had to drive to work pre covid, it would be bumper to bumper from Clonee junction to M50 where most traffic split off to join M50 North or south lanes and remaining city bound
traffic flowed relatively freely from M50 junction to Halfway House roundabout. Yes, gridlock resumed from there into the city and will regardless but an extra lane inbound for the section proposed in this thread would definitely make a positive difference for the section in question. I don't understand why some here seem to think that partial but significant improvement is a waste. It would be like Kerry bound motorists giving out that the Naas bypass is a waste because you still get stuck in Adare.

It's nothing like like Kerry bound motorists giving out that the Naas bypass is a waste because you still get stuck in Adare. Kerry bound from Dublin you have most of the motorway network in front of you with 150km of motorway before you hit the roadblock that is Adare. That is in no way comparable to driving east from Clonee.

Approaching Dublin city is always going to be congested, the city just can't accommodate all the cars we pour into it every day. The problem is we are throwing more and more money at accommodating cars in the hope that some day we might solve the congestion problems. Look at the major job that was done at J6, it of course is great but now they want to widen west of it. Attracting more cars is only going to undermine the investment into J6 as it will eventually become a congested mess again. Doing the same on the N4 and N11 is going to flood the M50 and make it more difficult to join from all junctions.

cgcsb

ongarboy wrote: »

Agreed. The few times I had to drive to work pre covid, it would be bumper to bumper from Clonee junction to M50 where most traffic split off to join M50 North or south lanes and remaining city bound
traffic flowed relatively freely from M50 junction to Halfway House roundabout. Yes, gridlock resumed from there into the city and will regardless but an extra lane inbound for the section proposed in this thread would definitely make a positive difference for the section in question. I don't understand why some here seem to think that partial but significant improvement is a waste. It would be like Kerry bound motorists giving out that the Naas bypass is a waste because you still get stuck in Adare.

Except the kerry to Dublin driver would only rarely make this journey the clonee road is being built to accommodate daily car commuting. Something which we're supposed to be reducing. The same money could build a comprehensive and complete cycle network across D15 and produce a better outcome.

Even better a new public transport walking and cycling bridge from castleknock golf course to liffey valley would slash congestion on the M50. At the moment North South journeys in West Dublin are only possible by car on the westlink and folks wonder why the M50 is congested

CatInABox

The NTA are not supportive of this project, taking a wait and see approach. They're saying that the Greater Dublin Area Transport Strategy will be updated next year, and that it will likely contain further measures to reduce emissions.

https://twitter.com/__kbaker__/status/1404829005631705100/


EDIT: This guys twitter handle must break Boards twitter embed function, but it's at that link

Peregrine

CatInABox wrote: »

The NTA are not supportive of this project, taking a wait and see approach. They're saying that the Greater Dublin Area Transport Strategy will be updated next year, and that it will likely contain further measures to reduce emissions.

https://twitter.com/__kbaker__/status/1404829005631705100/

Finally. Some sense. This conversation should have happened before spending millions on consultants to design the project.

It's also worth reviewing if it's wise to have a state agency dedicated to increasing car usage when every other arm of the government is doing the opposite. Merge TII and the NTA.

Pete_Cavan

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Consultation on Emerging Preferred Option now open;

https://consult.fingal.ie/en/consultation/n3-m50-clonee-non-statutory-public-consultation-scheme-update-emerging-preferred-option



I can see a logic in an additional outbound lane, but an additional inbound lane is not going to achieve anything. You can widen the wide end of the funnel as much as you want but if the narrow end stays the same, things aren't getting through it any faster.

The bus lane is clearly an afterthought thrown in to pacify. If anything, the bus lane should be added to the median to give buses a good run without having to deal with traffic joining/exiting at junctions.

The consultation is now closed. From a quick look at some of the submissions, most seem to be opposed to the project on environmental grounds and/or for similar reasons to that which I stated above.

My favour comment in a submission is definately; "Adding more lanes to ease traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity".

Aontachtoir

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

My favour comment in a submission is definately; "Adding more lanes to ease traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity".

Those kids and their funny memes.

Of course, the response to that could include "tightening your belt doesn't cure obesity, it just hurts you and ruins the belt" or "if a person at the age of 25 can't fit into the same clothes they wore when they were 5, that doesn't mean they're obese."

Growing cities need growing infrastructure. Hopefully there will be an objective, non-ideological review of this project, which will ultimately lead to a combination of improved PT and improved road capacity.

donvito99

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The consultation is now closed. From a quick look at some of the submissions, most seem to be opposed to the project on environmental grounds and/or for similar reasons to that which I stated above.

My favour comment in a submission is definately; "Adding more lanes to ease traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity".

Aontachtoir wrote: »

Those kids and their funny memes.

Of course, the response to that could include "tightening your belt doesn't cure obesity, it just hurts you and ruins the belt" or "if a person at the age of 25 can't fit into the same clothes they wore when they were 5, that doesn't mean they're obese."

Growing cities need growing infrastructure. Hopefully there will be an objective, non-ideological review of this project, which will ultimately lead to a combination of improved PT and improved road capacity.

Well, they're not wrong. Much like the M50, there will be little observable improvement at off peak times and at peak the place will still be an expensive car park, only wider.

buffalo

Aontachtoir wrote: »

Those kids and their funny memes.

Of course, the response to that could include "tightening your belt doesn't cure obesity, it just hurts you and ruins the belt" or "if a person at the age of 25 can't fit into the same clothes they wore when they were 5, that doesn't mean they're obese."

Growing cities need growing infrastructure. Hopefully there will be an objective, non-ideological review of this project, which will ultimately lead to a combination of improved PT and improved road capacity.

You could improve PT now by making one of the existing lanes exclusively for PT, which would also improve capacity as it would carry far more passengers than single occupancy cars which dominate motor traffic. Cheap too!

Aontachtoir

buffalo wrote: »

You could improve PT now by making one of the existing lanes exclusively for PT, which would also improve capacity as it would carry far more passengers than single occupancy cars which dominate motor traffic. Cheap too!

I'm not sure reducing capacity is the best way to increase capacity, but maybe I've missed a memo. Is the theory that the only reason people aren't getting the bus now is because there isn't a fully continuous bus lane on this road, and that taking a lane away from everyone else would lead to such a major increase in bus use that traffic would actually go down?

IngazZagni

I don’t think an extra city bound lane would help but an additional outbound lane would be a great help. There’s quite a big pinch point with 4 lanes reducing to 2 lanes with cars merging, exiting and local castleknock to blanch traffic all using this small stretch. This pinch also causes traffic on the M50 southbound towards junction 6 with slow exiting traffic due to said buildups.
This would have been a priority to me over building an additional bridge at the N3 Snugbouough junction which is currently under construction.

buffalo

Aontachtoir wrote: »

I'm not sure reducing capacity is the best way to increase capacity, but maybe I've missed a memo. Is the theory that the only reason people aren't getting the bus now is because there isn't a fully continuous bus lane on this road, and that taking a lane away from everyone else would lead to such a major increase in bus use that traffic would actually go down?

Perhaps you need to specify what capacity you'd like to increase - people or vehicles?

Aontachtoir

buffalo wrote: »

Perhaps you need to specify what capacity you'd like to increase - people or vehicles?

I'm not sure what the meaningful difference is. We don't have self-driving buses/cars/taxis etc in this country. People are moved by vehicles, and vehicles move people. The more of one you move, the more of the other you must make room for.

buffalo

Aontachtoir wrote: »

I'm not sure what the meaningful difference is. We don't have self-driving buses/cars/taxis etc in this country. People are moved by vehicles, and vehicles move people. The more of one you move, the more of the other you must make room for.

The meaningful difference is the efficiency with which certain vehicles move people. Taking a lane for private cars and giving it to busses would increase capacity would reduce capacity for vehicles but increase the capacity for people significantly. These are figures from the US, but I imagine much the same for here:



Or here's a visual aid:

Aontachtoir

buffalo wrote: »

The meaningful difference is the efficiency with which certain vehicles move people. Taking a lane for private cars and giving it to busses would increase capacity would reduce capacity for vehicles but increase the capacity for people significantly. These are figures from the US, but I imagine much the same for here:

Or here's a visual aid

While I'm sure the Cycling Promotion Foundation is utterly objective and has no agenda of its own when it comes to directing transport investment, I'm not sure comparing a fully-loaded bus to uniformly single-occupant cars is an accurate reflection of Irish road use. It gets a great picture though.

Are the figures you quote for transport modalities based on real-world usage? Or are they what would happen in an ideal world? Transferring road capacity from private transport to PT only reduces traffic if everyone using that lost capacity moves to PT. How likely is that to happen?

buffalo

Aontachtoir wrote: »

While I'm sure the Cycling Promotion Foundation is utterly objective and has no agenda of its own when it comes to directing transport investment, I'm not sure comparing a fully-loaded bus to uniformly single-occupant cars is an accurate reflection of Irish road use. It gets a great picture though.

From my experience living in different parts of Dublin, it's a very accurate reflection of Irish road use for pre-Covid commutes. Packed busses, single occupancy cars for the vast majority.

Aontachtoir wrote: »

Transferring road capacity from private transport to PT only reduces traffic if everyone using that lost capacity moves to PT. How likely is that to happen?

Very unlikely if we keep expanding space for private traffic and don't provide continuous and prioritised bus lanes. We definitely won't be reach the "ideal world" that way.

riddlinrussell

Aontachtoir wrote: »

While I'm sure the Cycling Promotion Foundation is utterly objective and has no agenda of its own when it comes to directing transport investment, I'm not sure comparing a fully-loaded bus to uniformly single-occupant cars is an accurate reflection of Irish road use. It gets a great picture though.

Are the figures you quote for transport modalities based on real-world usage? Or are they what would happen in an ideal world? Transferring road capacity from private transport to PT only reduces traffic if everyone using that lost capacity moves to PT. How likely is that to happen?

If you have a continuous, dedicated, enforced bus lane all the way into a town, then the journey by bus becomes reliable, predictable and efficient.

The key factor in getting people to switch modes is a combination of reliability and frequency, if you know you will show up ad a bus stop and the bus will arrive when it says it will, and if you miss one then another will be there in 5/10/15 minutes then you are more likely to take the bus.

If you can then make fare structures easier (say like a 90 minute fare across transport modes) and dedicated routes mean every bus always takes 10/20/30 minutes to get you to town, then a large proportion of people will chose the bus over fluctuating car travel times.

You might not get everyone to shift, but nobody is trying to get every car off the road, just the ones that don't absolutely 'need' to be there.