N2 - Ashbourne to Kilmoon Cross [route options published]

lucernarian

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

What a load of nonsense. Large parts of the US interstate network are way below volume....didn't stop them being built. The destination is the important thing.

Build the motorway past Slane (wide median of course) and then to the border to Derry.

Slane will soon be Dublin suburb so makes COMPLETE sense to build motorway now.

I'd have to call that an awful waste of money, much like the 2+2 ideas for beyond Ardee. Or at best a VERY low priority. But the title of this thread is the name of a scheme that is being investigated and would eliminate current issues for the forseeable future.

marno21

lucernarian wrote: »

I'd have to call that an awful waste of money, much like the 2+2 ideas for beyond Ardee. Or at best a VERY low priority. But the title of this thread is the name of a scheme that is being investigated and would eliminate current issues for the forseeable future.

You can call it what you like, it's not happening.

2018-2027 on the N2:

Ashbourne-Kilmoon Cross
Slane bypass (short stub)
Ardee-Castleblayney
Clontibret-NI border

For consideration post 2027:

Kilmoon-Slane
Slane-Collon

Ashbourne-Kilmoon will likely be motorway/Type 1. The rest 2+2 at a maximum.

There will be no motorway or wide medians in Monaghan. That's nonsense

lucernarian

marno21 wrote: »

You can call it what you like, it's not happening.

2018-2027 on the N2:

Ashbourne-Kilmoon Cross
Slane bypass (short stub)
Ardee-Castleblayney
Clontibret-NI border

For consideration post 2027:

Kilmoon-Slane
Slane-Collon

Ashbourne-Kilmoon will likely be motorway/Type 1. The rest 2+2 at a maximum.

There will be no motorway or wide medians in Monaghan. That's nonsense

I'm not sure what part of my post that's related to. My point was that a scheme to Kilmoon Cross should probably be motorway...

marno21

Meath County Council has engaged the services of Technical Advisors to commence the planning and design of the scheme. I am advised that it typically takes three to five years from this point through Phases 1 – 4 of the Project Management Guidelines, in order to have the scheme ready to submit to An Bord Pleanála for planning approval. This year, TII has provided an allocation to Meath Co. Co. of €250,000 to allow the scheme to progress to planning and design.

The latest (non) answer.

Carawaystick

Wouldn't grade seperating the junctions, with the crossing roads going over the existing N2 be a cheaper solution?
3 bridges, at the Curragha, snailbox and Killmoon

17larsson

The cheapest, easiest solution is to disable the traffic lights at peak hours.
Last Tuesday morning the lights went red stopping a long line of cars and all that came out from Tayto direction was one car and he was going left!

Irish Steve

Carawaystick wrote: »

Wouldn't grade seperating the junctions, with the crossing roads going over the existing N2 be a cheaper solution?
3 bridges, at the Curragha, snailbox and Killmoon

And unfortunately, you've omitted the junction with the biggest traffic volume, the Ratoath road junction with the traffic lights, and the proximity of properties on both sides to the junction mean that a grade separation bridge is not possible at that location.

17larsson wrote: »

The cheapest, easiest solution is to disable the traffic lights at peak hours.
Last Tuesday morning the lights went red stopping a long line of cars and all that came out from Tayto direction was one car and he was going left!

There is no doubt that the lights are a contributor to the problems, but the number of accidents without them was a driving factor in the decision to put them in, the underlying problem is that the road as presently structured is already operating beyond design capacity, and that's not likely to get any better as time goes on, due to the lack of ability from a number of departments to really address the planning issues of road usage. If the M1 and M3 were not tolled, that would help significantly, but the downside is that at some stage, Slane will be bypassed, and that will only add to the problems, as it will make it a lot easier for HGV's to use the N2 to connect to the M1 and avoid the tolls and delays.

The problems with the N2 are already impacting business expansion and development, Tayto Park want to expand, and build a state of the art conference/hotel facility, but it won't be happening until the roads are sorted, due to the additional pressure that the extra traffic from them would generate.

marno21

Route options published: https://www.n2rath2kilmoon.ie/

Options include traffic management, public transport improvements, online widening and a new offline dual carriageway.

loyatemu

like the N11 plans this seems like an upgrade purely to cater for commuter traffic, and like the N11 I hope they show more imagination than just going for "more road".

marno21

The route options have been whittled down: https://e4fb0bde-bbae-4674-bdef-7d177538285a.filesusr.com/ugd/ec908e_3ab5e025f76e4e9182ad8bd18e163671.pdf

More information here: https://www.n2rath2kilmoon.ie/public-consultation-2

This scheme seems particularly vulnerable to Green Party interference.

Irish Steve

The whole thing has degenerated into another consultants know best farce.

The original public consultation exposed how narrow the thinking was in relation to this plan, with most of the "preferred" options involving significant costs as a result of upgrading the end intersection of the existing motorway. A number of viable options that would also improve the flow of HGV traffic in to the industrial estates at the Northern end of Ashbourne were put to the relevant people, and those suggestions have been completely ignored, as have the option to take the new route off the existing motorway line before the last junction, which would involve far less disruption during the construction phase, and avoid significant expensive civil works to keep the local water supply running without problems, due to the proximity of the water tower to the junction location.

They've also chosen to ignore completely the exisiting Tayto Park implication, which in normal times is significant during the summer months, and they've not made any proposals to improve the access to Tayto. To add insult to injury, the proposals for Kilmoon cross junction are a complete disaster, that junction is a road safety nightmare now, and the latest proposal does nothing to improve that mess, so as far as I am concerned, the entire scheme is doomed to be a significant expensive failure that will end up having to be revisited at even more cost sooner rather than later.

This consultation will be the same mess as the original consultation on the line of the M2, which ended up as a failure, due to their not listening to the local voices in relation to the location of the Ashbourne South (and Ratoath) intersection connections, which has resulted in the Baltrasna road becoming a dangerous rat run.

And yes, the "green" influence will only end up costing local residents more in terms of delays and problems, and probably result in a higher carbon footprint as a result, but the chances of any of that grouping even understanding the real implications of their twisted agenda is about the same as the chances of an Irishman getting to stand on the moon.

spacetweek

Good summary. I’d encourage everyone to fill out the survey, highlighting Irish Steve’s points.

My choice goes with blue/yellow but with a Tayto Park junction - Dublin-facing slips are sufficient. Also Kilmoon Cross itself must be bypassed, the scheme cannot simply terminate in the middle of it.

roadmaster

spacetweek wrote: »

Good summary. I’d encourage everyone to fill out the survey, highlighting Irish Steve’s points.

My choice goes with blue/yellow but with a Tayto Park junction - Dublin-facing slips are sufficient. Also Kilmoon Cross itself must be bypassed, the scheme cannot simply terminate in the middle of it.

I am sure there is more detailed drawing they never would have designed it to terminate at the Cross would they?

marno21

Irish Steve wrote: »

The whole thing has degenerated into another consultants know best farce.

The original public consultation exposed how narrow the thinking was in relation to this plan, with most of the "preferred" options involving significant costs as a result of upgrading the end intersection of the existing motorway. A number of viable options that would also improve the flow of HGV traffic in to the industrial estates at the Northern end of Ashbourne were put to the relevant people, and those suggestions have been completely ignored, as have the option to take the new route off the existing motorway line before the last junction, which would involve far less disruption during the construction phase, and avoid significant expensive civil works to keep the local water supply running without problems, due to the proximity of the water tower to the junction location.

They've also chosen to ignore completely the exisiting Tayto Park implication, which in normal times is significant during the summer months, and they've not made any proposals to improve the access to Tayto. To add insult to injury, the proposals for Kilmoon cross junction are a complete disaster, that junction is a road safety nightmare now, and the latest proposal does nothing to improve that mess, so as far as I am concerned, the entire scheme is doomed to be a significant expensive failure that will end up having to be revisited at even more cost sooner rather than later.

This consultation will be the same mess as the original consultation on the line of the M2, which ended up as a failure, due to their not listening to the local voices in relation to the location of the Ashbourne South (and Ratoath) intersection connections, which has resulted in the Baltrasna road becoming a dangerous rat run.

And yes, the "green" influence will only end up costing local residents more in terms of delays and problems, and probably result in a higher carbon footprint as a result, but the chances of any of that grouping even understanding the real implications of their twisted agenda is about the same as the chances of an Irishman getting to stand on the moon.

Thanks a million for this post. This is the type of local, knowledgeable input on schemes that is most welcome on this forum, as it really puts schemes into perspective for those of us who are not familiar with the area and are just looking at drawings on a map.

As spacetweek suggested, sending in Irish Steve's points to the public consultation feedback system is most encouraged.

spacetweek

marno21 wrote: »

As spacetweek suggested, sending in Irish Steve's points to the public consultation feedback system is most encouraged.

I've done it, but paraphrased of course and with my own input added.

Pete_Cavan

I had another look at the options here and I don't see how the benefits could outweigh the cost of building new offline road here. The existing road is fine in most ways (incredibly straight, reasonably wide, limited enough properties with direct access onto the road, etc.). Surely it would be easier, faster to deliver and possibly cheaper to just build two LILO junctions? One at the R152 junction and the other at the R155 junction. By removing traffic crossing the road and having decent slips for traffic turning on/off the N2, the safety issues are addressed. This would actually improve access to Tayto Park and sort out the Kilmoon Cross junction, things which none of the route options identified do!

lucernarian

That wouldn't be as sexy as a project that allows a minister to cut a ribbon for it.

And targeted N2 grade-separated junctions would do wonders such as at Kilmoon. And use money saved towards improving the shambolic R network in southeast Meath.

But LILOs are not enough, traffic movements "across" the road are far too numerous and important.

Pete_Cavan

lucernarian wrote: »

That wouldn't be as sexy as a project that allows a minister to cut a ribbon for it.

And targeted N2 grade-separated junctions would do wonders such as at Kilmoon. And use money saved towards improving the shambolic R network in southeast Meath.

But LILOs are not enough, traffic movements "across" the road are far too numerous and important.

LILOs at the R152 and R155 junctions could also be designed to pick up some of the other minor junctions beside them. I am not suggesting that all traffic movements across the road be eliminated, or that there should be closed central median or anything like that, just that the main junctions get dealt with in an appropriate manner.

The traffic lights on the N2 is a disaster and needs to be removed but new road isn't needed to do that. Building a couple of km of offline road here but leaving Kilmoon Cross junction on the mainline doesn't achieve much. The road itself is not a problem, the junctions are, address the junctions not the road.

L1011

GSJs on single carriageway roads are rather disliked these days; in low traffic conditions drivers often drive faster in areas with them as it 'feels' like a motorway.

Pete_Cavan

L1011 wrote: »

GSJs on single carriageway roads are rather disliked these days; in low traffic conditions drivers often drive faster in areas with them as it 'feels' like a motorway.

I have to assume that the options set out for this project will contain fewer junctions, or no junctions between Rath and Kilmoon Cross, otherwise what would be the point of it? Surely people are more likely to drive faster on a newly built road with no/fewer junctions? TII are currently looking at add a LILO on the N17 in a similar situation to this. I seriously doubt this section of N2 would feel like a motorway if LILOs were added, it would be a small change with 90% of the road remaining the same.

L1011

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I have to assume that the options set out for this project will contain fewer junctions, or no junctions between Rath and Kilmoon Cross, otherwise what would be the point of it? Surely people are more likely to drive faster on a newly built road with no/fewer junctions? TII are currently looking at add a LILO on the N17 in a similar situation to this. I seriously doubt this section of N2 would feel like a motorway if LILOs were added, it would be a small change with 90% of the road remaining the same.

This project will be dual carriageway.

My statement was in reference to you suggesting adding junctions to the existing S2.

That won't happen, for the reason I gave.

Irish Steve

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I have to assume that the options set out for this project will contain fewer junctions, or no junctions between Rath and Kilmoon Cross, otherwise what would be the point of it? Surely people are more likely to drive faster on a newly built road with no/fewer junctions? TII are currently looking at add a LILO on the N17 in a similar situation to this. I seriously doubt this section of N2 would feel like a motorway if LILOs were added, it would be a small change with 90% of the road remaining the same.

Hopefully, if the relevant people have any sense, which is not a given, there will be a new junction between Rath and Kilmoon to facilitate easy access to Tayto Park, given the volumes of traffic it attracts already, and that is not likely to reduce any time soon given the very significant expansion plans that have already been discussed.

That's part of the problem, the existing access in to the Tayto area is very poor, and makes the problems at the traffic lights more serious during the summer months. A grade separated junction with a suitable quality feeder road to Tayto Park is pretty much an essential part of this upgrade, but the planners seem to be trying to pretend that Tayto doesn't exist or generate any traffic flow, which is very much not the reality on the ground for the local residents.

I have to admit to serious doubts about the validity of engaging with these supposed surveys, a number of valid points were made to the scheme designers at the first consultation, and none of those ideas have been taken on board, they seem determined to get local rubber stamp approval for the scheme as designed, and making changes to reflect local user opinion is just not in their remit, the attitude is very much they are the consultants, and they must be right, and the opinions of local people who drive these roads every day seems to count for nothing.

The long term impact of Covid on the economy, combined with the delusional impact of the Green party will probably mean that this scheme will be lucky to break ground in under 10 years, if local experience with other schemes is anything to go by.

Pete_Cavan

L1011 wrote: »

This project will be dual carriageway.

My statement was in reference to you suggesting adding junctions to the existing S2.

That won't happen, for the reason I gave.

Like I said, they are adding a LILO on the N17 a few km from another at Claremorris so it would appear to be acceptable. Can't see how they could justify building a dual carrigeway here and part of it offline, if the problem is one junction then address that problem directly, whats proposed seems to just move the problem up to Kilmoon Cross.

L1011

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Like I said, they are adding a LILO on the N17 a few km from another at Claremorris so it would appear to be acceptable. Can't see how they could justify building a dual carrigeway here and part of it offline, if the problem is one junction then address that problem directly, whats proposed seems to just move the problem up to Kilmoon Cross.

That's on a section that is already GSJed/overpassed and hence already has the problems that brings. They are NOT going to do it here.

Pete_Cavan

L1011 wrote: »

That's on a section that is already GSJed/overpassed and hence already has the problems that brings. They are NOT going to do it here.

The recently built Ballaghaderreen Bypass has a LILO too. I don't see what the issue is, I have seen LILOs used on single carriageway roads around Europe. If speeding is a concern, enforcement is the solution. Traffic Management is clearly an option under consideration which would see junctions upgraded.

All the route corridor options start north of Rath roundabout which suggests that the roundabout will remain. If that is the case, the new road will not be motorway, even is it is built to motorway standards. That would lead to far more speeding than LILOs on the existing road.

marno21

Meath County Council have opened a pre-application consultation with An Bord Pleanala for this scheme

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/308087.htm

This scheme is moving surprisingly quick.

Carawaystick

The Kilmacthomas bypass in Waterford on the N25 has Lilos, loads of german highways also have them, to prevent crossing traffic.

Where is all the traffic coming from on the N2? is much of it Toll dodgers, cos I don't think building a new road is the way to deal with that.

spacetweek

Another round of public consultation underway on this. An emerging preferred route has been picked. They went with E-2, the one that runs immediately to the west of the N2 until the R155, then swinging further west before coming back to hit Kilmoon Cross.
See the official scheme site and click through to see the Round 3 Consultation: https://www.n2rath2kilmoon.ie/

The interfaces at either end haven't been nailed down yet and are still shown as large hatched areas.

For ref, here is the map showing all options from last summer.

marno21

It's definitely going to be a Type 1 dual so that'll in effect become an extension of the M2 to north of Kilmoon Cross given that they are providing an alternative route etc.

I'd imagine there will be a GSJ at the northern end of the scheme and a GSJ replacement for the Rath Roundabout also.

spacetweek

Looks like it'll be a short new motorway so.