M4 - Maynooth to Leixlip [planning and design underway]

buffalo

Funnily enough I was clearing out my phone today and found this from October last year. Local FG rep justification for upgrading: he wants a "wider traffic jam"

L1011

The section from Maynooth to Kilcock was resurfaced a few months ago.

riddlinrussell

buffalo wrote: »

Funnily enough I was clearing out my phone today and found this from October last year. Local FG rep justification for upgrading: he wants a "wider traffic jam"

"A wider traffic jam, he's not wrong! Seeing that as a positive is bonkers though, also talking total nonsense about 'more off ramps' does he expect to retain the current one and add a second one on the third lane?

donvito99

riddlinrussell wrote: »

"A wider traffic jam, he's not wrong! Seeing that as a positive is bonkers though, also talking total nonsense about 'more off ramps' does he expect to retain the current one and add a second one on the third lane?

File under 'Local Politician Talks Total Shite To Get 3 Column Inches In The Local Paper So That The Seat He Won By 21 Votes Is Protected'.

veryangryman

Students would be able to drive straight into the college

Just wow. The man is living in the wrong century

marno21

https://irl.eu-supply.com/ctm/Supplier/PublicPurchase/179479/0/0?returnUrl=ctm/Supplier/PublicTenders&b=ETENDERS_SIMPLE

Tender out for traffic surveys for the project.

Pete_Cavan

Rather than just adding a second junction at Maynooth, they should build two new junctions, one either side of the existing one, and close J7 which is unsuitable.

Mimon

L1011 wrote: »

The section from Maynooth to Kilcock was resurfaced a few months ago.

It's a really bad job. Water pools in channels on it during heavy rain.

On the congestion, they should use the hard shoulder further out as an exit lane for Maynooth and the Celbridge/Leixlip exit.

buffalo

Mimon wrote: »

On the congestion, they should use the hard shoulder further out as an exit lane for Maynooth and the Celbridge/Leixlip exit.

Because congestion is solved by added more capacity, and the hard shoulder doesn't serve any purpose?

Fred Cryton

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There's no justification in upgrading it (i.e. widening or junction upgrades) from Kilcock to Maynooth (and probably none in upgrading it from Maynooth to Leixlip) as all you are doing is enabling the congestion. The money would be far better off being spent on P&R facilities, etc.

"enabling the congestion"...fancy words which are completely meaningless. People like you would have argued against the motorway in the first place when faced with the old congested single lane road into Dublin.

riddlinrussell

Fred Cryton wrote: »

"enabling the congestion"...fancy words which are completely meaningless. People like you would have argued against the motorway in the first place when faced with the old congested single lane road into Dublin.

2 lane roads allow overtaking of slow traffic, well designed on/off slips allow safer leaving/joining of traffic at speed, minimum requirements for curves and distances between junctions improve speed and safety. I would probably fall under your 'People like you' as a member of the green party. I would never suggest that this road be a single carriageway, I'm in favour of the M20 being built. But I would strongly oppose 3+ laning any more of our network, that's an american 'solution' that has resulted in more induced demand and more pollution and congestion anywhere it has been tried.

If a 2 lane motorway isn't solving your problem you need to look at what NEEDS to move by road and work on getting everything else OFF the road, via increased bus services, improved rail links, improved pedestrian and cycling facilities, all of those can either be timetabled to ensure congestion is minimised (Train and Bus) or are so space efficient that induced demand will take a long time to fill the provided routes, while being non polluting, good for public health, and FAR cheaper to 'widen'/upgrade when demand requires it.

Seth Brundle

Fred Cryton wrote: »

"enabling the congestion"...fancy words which are completely meaningless. People like you would have argued against the motorway in the first place when faced with the old congested single lane road into Dublin.

Firstly what exactly are "people like me" given that you don't know me? In fact, I believe that the motorway is a good thing.
Secondly, the road doesn't need widening. It needs altrernatives to remove a lot of the unnecessary journeys and freeing up space. At peak times, the road is congested. Making it wider won't make it less congested - all traffic models show that if you widen roads, then more traffic will use them.
But hey, I don't want to spoil your rant.

Mimon

buffalo wrote: »

Because congestion is solved by added more capacity, and the hard shoulder doesn't serve any purpose?

Yeh, would not be ideal to lose the hard shoulder but the intention of adding an exit lane would be to take traffic that are exiting there able to get off the motorway a lot sooner.

Also was there any need for the emoji and self righteous tone of your post?

buffalo

Mimon wrote: »

Yeh, would not be ideal to lose the hard shoulder but the intention of adding an exit lane would be to take traffic that are exiting there able to get off the motorway a lot sooner.

Also was there any need for the emoji and self righteous tone of your post?

There probably wasn't, but both aspects of what you propose won't solve any problems and show extreme short-term thinking, so it was difficult to resist.

Losing the hard shoulder means no refuge in case of breakdown, etc. on a 120kph carriageway, which is a serious consequence.

An extra lane for a few hundred metres just for an exit adds very little extra capacity, and what little capacity it adds will soon be used up by induced demand. You'll end up with - as mentioned a few posts above - a wider traffic jam. Meaning more congestion with the extra pollution that brings, but without any journey time improvements.

marno21

Scheme website launched @ https://maynoothleixlip.ie/

Options selection underway.

buffalo

marno21 wrote: »

Scheme website launched @ https://maynoothleixlip.ie/

Options selection underway.

Quick scan of the feasibility report - one mention of CO2, in the context of road freight. No estimate of the extra journeys induced and facilitated by the expansion, and associated increase in emissions.

specialbyte

Section 10.1:

There is an extensive public transport network in the study area serving commuters. However, there is a high dependency on private cars as a preferred mode of transport (>60% for those living in Maynooth but working outside of Maynooth). Therefore, the modal shift from private car to public transport has not materialised.

That section has me super worried that instead of trying to tackle their primary problem: too many cars using the motorway causing congestion and safety issues, that they will optioneer their way towards road expansion because public transport 'doesn't work'. Then they say:

Bus services utilising the M4 must negotiate the same traffic volumes as private cars, which disincentivises take up of public transport alternatives to the private car.

Maybe there's a chance that the preferred option might be to shift people out of their cars into public transport. Then they say:

There may also be a perception that public transport may be convoluted and is not reliable.

What about public transport is "convoluted"? Inconvenient maybe. Too slow definitely.

I'm pretty wary of highway engineers trying to justify never ending motorway widening on this project. We really need to stop widening the motorways into Dublin. It's a waste of time and money. It doesn't work. Induced demand will fill up the new road space quickly. This area needs better public transport. It needs local employment to reduce long distance commuting. It needs local walking and cycling facilities.

This report doesn't fill me with great hope of a sustainable plan that fits our national climate obligations.

Mimon

buffalo wrote: »

Because congestion is solved by added more capacity, and the hard shoulder doesn't serve any purpose?

Pre Covid people (including myself when it was really bad) would sue the hard shoulder as an exit lane anyway.

Pete_Cavan

For me, the only realistic option is Alternative 3b: Full bus lanes between Junction 5 and Junction 7 and widening into central median. There may be some elements of other options along with that, such as upgrades to or links between certain R roads. J7 needs to be upgraded as well, the current set up is totally substandard. It would require a bit of CPOing immediately west of the junction but it should be upgraded to the same junction type as J5, with a second bridge added to the west and new ramps west of it.

Irishphotodesk

in my view a proper review of the road network would allow them to see that congestion is generally caused because of an accident or negligent driving, the volume of traffic along the road is caused by commuters forced out of dublin for cheaper properties, the lack of similar jobs outside the dublin is concerning.

the issues are multi-factored but it seems to be ignored or not taken into consideration when reviewing roads network, its essentially like if Irish water was doing a review of a piping system because water isn't flowing fast through a pipe and only blaming the pipe - trying to adjust the pipe or widen the pipe when they need to look at where the water flow is coming from or if the pipe has any blockages to see where the actual issue is, the widening of the road is probably not the best solution.

As Pete_Cavan says the realistic alternative is a dedicated bus lane the whole journey to help improve the public transport network and try to encourage road users to use the public transport, however, this would also need constant surveillance and road traffic enforcement or it would be abused (if I had any input I would suggest a series of ANPR cameras along the route with dedicated CCTV in support, if the vehicle is not on the approved list automatic fine sent with accompanying CCTV footage, over time it should be effective and should be done for all dedicated bus lanes).

I have used this commute for in excess of 10yrs and I rely on my vehicle to move from location to location when in Dublin - so for me - its possible that I would use public transport and something like a gocar while in Dublin (but only if the costs were significantly lower).

Naos

Any update on the re-surfacing of the Leixlip section of the road?

L1011

Its not going to be resurfaced - nothing will be done until this plan progresses.

Naos

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118125651#Comment_118125651

So it will be resurfaced when the plan progresses, so it will be resurfaced?

L1011

It'll be replaced. But it's years and years away. Nothing will happen in the short term

spacetweek

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118130007#Comment_118130007

No point even commenting on this thread anymore. No way this scheme will go ahead. Have you seen the COP26 reporting?

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118134320#Comment_118134320

It'll be sold as a public transport improvement project. Deceitfully, but that won't stop it being claimed that's why its being done.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117231787#Comment_117231787

Shocked that you are publicly admitting to using the emergency lane/hard shoulder on a motorway when you feel self justified to do so, especially as you don't give any evidence that you do or did so for emergency reasons - please do give examples of why you did use the emergency lane/hard shoulder for emergency reasons as they can be excusable.

I've been a regular user of the M4 for over a dozen years and not once have I contemplated using the emergency lane/hard shoulder as a driving lane. If the traffic on the motorway is at a standstill or barely moving, there's a reasonable possibility that there may have been an incident ahead and that emergency services may require use of the emergency lane/hard shoulder. Even if it's not the case, it's always best to err on the side caution and assume that this is the case rather than think "I'm more important than everyone queuing in front of me and I'll do whatever I can do to get ahead, **** everyone else!".

KrisW1001

Using the hard shoulder as an exit lane is the lesser evil compared to staying in the main carriageway if the exit you need to take is also backed up.

markpb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118145490#Comment_118145490

How is that? If there's an incident ahead that's causing congestion, staying on the mainline keeps the HS clear for responders. Using the HS as an exit means you're potentially going to get in their way if there's congestion or if the incident is between you and the exit. It's also likely to cause additional incidents as people ahead of you try to enter the HS or exit ramp. I'm not talking about someone jumping into the HS a few meters before it turns into the exit ramp, it's the idiots who drive 250+ meters in the HS, who have no visibility of what's in the HS when they enter it and who are putting their own time ahead of everyone elses.

KrisW1001

Have a think about how motorway exit and entry roads interact with the hard shoulder, and you’ll see why first responders don’t use it. The normal tactic is to move out, force drivers to create space between their traffic lanes, and then drive down that. In the German highway code, this is known as a Rettungsgasse (“rescue way”), and it is a requirement for drivers in stopped traffic to form one, by moving left or right depending on the lane they’re in... it’s something we should adopt, I think.