Limerick Transport

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby teak » Mon Sep 13, 2010 11:14 am

How about this one ?

A breakthrough road off the loop round to the tunnel-bound road and then onto the inner roundabout before the old Roxboro Swimming Pool . . .

Another thing I'd like to raise here is this.
Traffic signposting upon the new orbital road.
Basically everything related to these.
Design, size, location, prominence, colour-coding, symbol-coding, lettering size, etc, etc.
And most of all -- why always - always - Rennicks ?

The new signs at the nodes of the orbital route are terrible.
Black & white, too small, block capital letters, no colour nor symbol coding.
And no prominence.

When is someone from LCC going to be sent on a course to Holland or Germany on signs ?
Attachments
2InboundRoutes.jpg
2InboundRoutes.jpg (32.25 KiB) Viewed 7987 times
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:08 pm

teak wrote:How about this one ?

A breakthrough road off the loop round to the tunnel-bound road and then onto the inner roundabout before the old Roxboro Swimming Pool . . .


Image

That map is not detailed enough, it does not show the merging lane coming from Galway travelling towards Cork.

Your suggestion would bisect it. (See above)

They would have to re-configure the interchange into a Clover Leaf one to achieve that, like the one below.

See previous post.

Image
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby teak » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:10 pm

Follow the grade up the west loop then slip off onto another graded embankment that lifts the M20-N20 link high enough to clear the Galway-Cork loop.
A kinked slip road would result -- perhaps not safe at night.

Tunnelling the Galway-Cork under the M20-N20 slip (or vive-versa) would be expensive as the rock is so close to the surface.

What a hames they made of it. :mad:
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:02 pm

teak wrote:What a hames they made of it. :mad:


My own warped mind :rolleyes: tells me the PPP people behind this €660 million project (toll collection) would have no complaints about the hames made at Rosbrien.

Would love to get the full story from the City Manager Mr. Mackey and the City Councillors (2003) Cronin, Power, Kennedy, Ryan, Leddin, Hourigan, O’Hanlon, Fahy, Bourke, Leddin, Walsh, Gilligan, Cross, Scully, Wallace, Byrne and Sadlier.
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:09 pm

Plans to build a bus lane in Limerick are partially accepted (Limerick Leader)

By Nick Rabbitts

WORK is set to commence on the first part a bus lane on Limerick city's southern exit over the next week after councillors voted to progress the work from the county boundary to Punches Cross.

At a heated city hall meeting this afternoon, a proposal by Independent councillor John Gilligan to start the first phase the work on the €5m bus lane project was accepted by nine votes to seven.

The news will come as a disappointment to four of Fine Gael's five southside city councillors, plus the O'Connell Avenue/Ballinacurra Residents Association, who have vigirously campaigned against the building of a green bus route on the city's southern exit.

Fine Gael councillors Michael Hourigan, Kevin Kiely and Diarmuid Scully voted in favour of Cllr Gilligan's proposal, with the remainder joining Labour councillor Joe Leddin in voting against the multi-million euro proposal.

The remainder of the proposed bus lane - which could bring in O'Connell Avenue - is set to be debated at the beginning of next year, with a variety of different proposals in place.


A bird‘s eye view (see bing.com)of O’Connell Avenue from Punch’s Cross to St. Joseph’s Church reveal to me that most of residents (not all) have some form of parking to their homes (rear or driveway). Some have even got together and blatantly converted their front gardens into a car-park, thus destroying its residential character.

Those O'Connell Avenue residents that are blocking the bus lane proposals are holding the city to ransom!

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby teak » Thu Sep 16, 2010 2:42 pm

A bird‘s eye view (see bing.com)of O’Connell Avenue from Punch’s Cross to St. Joseph’s Church reveal to me that most of residents (not all) have some form of parking to their homes (rear or driveway). Some have even got together and blatantly converted their front gardens into a car-park, thus destroying its residential character.

Those O'Connell Avenue residents that are blocking the bus lane proposals are holding the city to ransom!


Nonsense.

Walk round the back lanes -- if there are any -- and you'll see that a lot of the houses have elaborate extensions into the back gardens.
But whatever about that there is no reason that a householder ought be expected to give up his backgarden for the greater good. The amenity value of front gardens on this road is already nil owing to the noise, pedestrians and litter.

To me the solution is very simply this.
The biggest component of O'Connell Ave traffic is the trans-commuters, i.e. people simply using it as their habitual through-road to their destinations in the city or in southern suburbs/county.
These trans-commuters may readily be encouraged to use Prospect Hill, Hyde Road and Roxboro Road routes that will lead onto the new city orbital route.
That would remove at least 70% of the existing O'Connell Avenue traffic.
After that there would be no need for a bus-lane, even if the number of buses doubled.
Since the 2 existing lanes are quite broad, the present ability of motorists to tuck in on both sides to allow an ambulance to pass is retained. (With an additional bus-lane this capability is lost as the 3 lanes would then be minimally sized.)

It really defies belief that, in all this controversy, no one seems to question why the trans-commuters ought not move.
It is always either the residents ought move on their parking retention; or the council ought move on their green route proposals.
Why should the habits of trans-commuters take priority over residents to the extent that they lose their parking or lose any bit of garden that they may have ?

One thing is clear.
If a bus-lane is brought in, then families will start to move away from O'Connell Avenue.
We all know what will happen then.
Homes will be converted to cheap flats/offices.
Neither tenants nor landlords will maintain these fine old buildings and the whole area -- one of the best areas architecturally -- will become run-down.
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:15 pm

teak wrote:Nonsense.

Walk round the back lanes -- if there are any -- and you'll see that a lot of the houses have elaborate extensions into the back gardens.


Well for example Verona Esplanade Terrace and McNamara’s Terrace have rear parking.

In fact I counted around 150 residential houses, 5 schools, 7 shops, 1 church, 2 pubs and 1 restaurant along O’Connell Avenue from Punch’s Cross to St. Joseph’s Church.

From what I see only about a quarter of the 150 residential houses would have a parking issue.

In fact parking spaces will coexist with the bus lane as seen in this example (Opposite Mount School).

Image

How many residential houses do you think are affected and where?

It really defies belief that, in all this controversy, no one seems to question why the trans-commuters ought not move.
It is always either the residents ought move on their parking retention; or the council ought move on their green route proposals.
Why should the habits of trans-commuters take priority over residents to the extent that they lose their parking or lose any bit of garden that they may have ?


You would not be advocating that the city changes the layout of its street grid? O’Connell Street is the main street of the city and O’Connell Avenue its natural extension. Unfortunately cars are like mobile phones, nearly everybody has one and that is the problem, not public transport. O’Connell Avenue always was and always will be one of the main public roads leading into the city centre. Private property (cars) should be kept on private property. Before the advent of the motor car, people did not leave their horse drawn cars on the road when they didn’t use them? The original Military Road looked great without all those parked cars too.

One thing is clear.
If a bus-lane is brought in, then families will start to move away from O'Connell Avenue.
We all know what will happen then.
Homes will be converted to cheap flats/offices.
Neither tenants nor landlords will maintain these fine old buildings and the whole area -- one of the best areas architecturally -- will become run-down.


Yeah Landlords buying up family homes for renting purposes was once a general problem in many parts of the city. College Court housing estate near the UL was such an example. It was purpose built for families with ample green space for kids to play. Unfortunately when houses came on the market, landlords out bided younger families and rented them out to six students or so per house. Eventually the estate died as a neighbourhood. This trend may have in the meantime reversed itself since the building of student villages or apartments.

By the way, will the O’Connell Avenue residents get all those new footpaths, new public lighting, new trees for free? My road got upgraded five years ago and was billed by the local authority to the tune of €8,000.
Attachments
MilitaryRoad1900.JPG
MilitaryRoad1900.JPG (108.04 KiB) Viewed 7954 times
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby teak » Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:32 pm

I doubt if anyone will be billed for enhancements on this project.

You appear to base your thinking on the maps and images of the proposed plan as shown by LCC.
(cf. image below.)

Just go there some w/end evening or early morning and measure the street and footpaths.

First thing you'll see is that the block from Wolfe Tone St to Roden St is wrong.
One can't fit a bus-lane in here without loss of the parking on the west side.
Even if you take a bit from both pavements.

That leaves 39 cars to go into 18 parking spaces on the eastern side.

I am not "advocating a change in the layout of its street grid".
I advocate that the pattern of through-commuter traffic be altered so that :

1) The heritage and streetscape of O'Connell Avenue is conserved in the most effective way -- i.e. by enabling families and owners of businesses to continue living there and caring for their properties.

2) Priority for the use of this route (at least during peak hours) is given to
* Emergency vehicles -- e.g. Garda, FB, CD, Amb/P-M
* City-route buses -- both commuter and tourist
* Taxis
* Residents/proprietors and their guests/customers

There is no basis for through-commuters demanding access via O'Connell Avenue just because they have done so in the past.
In any case, the planned pedestrianisation of central O'Connell St will make it more awkward for many to exit on O'Connell Ave than from other nodes on the city orbital route.

Sure, people coming in via Hyde Rd will remark on the state of the place, lack of amenities, kids playing with broken trolleys, sneakers on telephone wires, etc.
But isn't it high time that city council funds were applied to help the decent families of this area rather than cover-up the state of things there ?
Attachments
LCC  Map of Wolfe Tone St to Roden St.jpg
LCC Map of Wolfe Tone St to Roden St.jpg (95.68 KiB) Viewed 7955 times
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby foinse » Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:54 pm

teak wrote:2) Priority for the use of this route (at least during peak hours) is given to
* Emergency vehicles -- e.g. Garda, FB, CD, Amb/P-M
* City-route buses -- both commuter and tourist
* Taxis
* Residents/proprietors and their guests/customers

There is no basis for through-commuters demanding access via O'Connell Avenue just because they have done so in the past.
In any case, the planned pedestrianisation of central O'Connell St will make it more awkward for many to exit on O'Connell Ave than from other nodes on the city orbital route.


RE the Emergency services, the provision of a bus lane will greatly improve the ability of these vehicles to move through traffic, Emergency vehicles are permitted to use bus lanes so having such a lane means a permanently open lane for them when required.

With regard to your idea to move traffic to Hyde road, the only way to effectively do this is to make O'Connell Ave 1 way, thus eliminating the chance of through traffic moving along it. Otherwise you'll have the council saying "from now we will use Hyde road" and the motorist saying "bugger off, O'Connell Ave is quicker". The residents of O'Connell Avenue will be much more annoyed with the road being 1 way than having bus lanes.

On the issue of not having a place to park, those spaces on O'Connell Avenue are a public convenience on public property. Not private parking places for residents. There is access to the rear of the property, yes they may loose 6 feet off their substantial gardens to the rear, but so what.

I have just bought a house which has no on street parking near it because the road is too narrow, and I have a considerably smaller garden than the residents of O'Connell Avenue. Yet in order for me to park my car I'm planning to make an entrance from the rear access I have in order to park. If I was to act in the manner that the residents of O'Connell Avenue are acting, I should be lobbying my local councillor and LCC for parking spaces to be provided outside my property.

But it's a public road and as such I have no right to make such demands. Just like the residents of O'Connell Ave have no right to hold the city to ransom, over public parking spaces which are the property of LCC not the residents, They're a privilege not a right.

PS while I'm on here has anyone heard of / able to verify the rumours that the roundabout at Shannon Bridge is to be removed in favour of traffic lights?
foinse
Member
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby Dan Sullivan » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:50 pm

teak wrote:A bird‘s eye view (see bing.com)of O’Connell Avenue from Punch’s Cross to St. Joseph’s Church reveal to me that most of residents (not all) have some form of parking to their homes (rear or driveway). Some have even got together and blatantly converted their front gardens into a car-park, thus destroying its residential character.

Those O'Connell Avenue residents that are blocking the bus lane proposals are holding the city to ransom!


Nonsense.

Walk round the back lanes -- if there are any -- and you'll see that a lot of the houses have elaborate extensions into the back gardens.
But whatever about that there is no reason that a householder ought be expected to give up his backgarden for the greater good. The amenity value of front gardens on this road is already nil owing to the noise, pedestrians and litter.

To me the solution is very simply this.
The biggest component of O'Connell Ave traffic is the trans-commuters, i.e. people simply using it as their habitual through-road to their destinations in the city or in southern suburbs/county.
These trans-commuters may readily be encouraged to use Prospect Hill, Hyde Road and Roxboro Road routes that will lead onto the new city orbital route.
That would remove at least 70% of the existing O'Connell Avenue traffic.
After that there would be no need for a bus-lane, even if the number of buses doubled.
Since the 2 existing lanes are quite broad, the present ability of motorists to tuck in on both sides to allow an ambulance to pass is retained. (With an additional bus-lane this capability is lost as the 3 lanes would then be minimally sized.)

It really defies belief that, in all this controversy, no one seems to question why the trans-commuters ought not move.
It is always either the residents ought move on their parking retention; or the council ought move on their green route proposals.
Why should the habits of trans-commuters take priority over residents to the extent that they lose their parking or lose any bit of garden that they may have ?

One thing is clear.
If a bus-lane is brought in, then families will start to move away from O'Connell Avenue.
We all know what will happen then.
Homes will be converted to cheap flats/offices.
Neither tenants nor landlords will maintain these fine old buildings and the whole area -- one of the best areas architecturally -- will become run-down.


This thing about ambulances is interesting, how do ambulances work at present with only one lane and parking?

As for the trans commuters, how exactly would they practically be encouraged to use other routes?
Dan Sullivan
 

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby teak » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:55 pm

At present ambulances pass by sirening cars ahead of them who then move over as close as possible to parked cars on their side of the street.
The ambulance then runs down the middle of the road between the 2 jammed lanes of cars.

Trans-commuting cars would be encouraged to use alternative routes by a combination of traffic flow design that would allow quicker flow via these routes -- making it a matter of self-interest for motorists to use them and save commuting time -- and smart signposting at junctions on commuter routes into/out of the city.
For example, a car coming in off the M20 to the South Ring Road (I know, it needs to be reconnected but it is to be done, we're told) would see an electronic sign at the Treaty Tools traffic lights. This would show inward route options, where they meet the city orbital route and an indication of what the relative traffic density on each route was at that moment (Heavy, Moderate, Light).
At junctions from the South Ring Road onto each of the 3 inward routes, prominent symbol signposts would be placed, clearly showing the point at which this route meets the city orbital route. (I think that all signposts guiding traffic onto or off the orbital route ought have a distinctive symbol for the COR, perhaps a scaled plan of it with a traffic direction arrow within it.)
Cars leaving the city at evening rush hours would see simple symbol signposts at street corners to lead them onto the orbital route from city centre streets and then bigger prominent signs at various points at which they could leave the COR for their southern destinations.
The prominent signs at COR nodes would show a spur off the COR symbol and a list of destinations reachable via that route.

Sure, there is no way to keep trans-commuters out if they really want to go down O'Connell Ave.
But with good traffic flow design, clear signposting and, above all, effective promotion by the councillors and LCC management alike on local media, the vast majority would see it as advantageous to themselves to adhere to it.
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:45 pm

foinse wrote:PS while I'm on here has anyone heard of / able to verify the rumours that the roundabout at Shannon Bridge is to be removed in favour of traffic lights?


See this weekend’s edition of the Limerick Leader (page 7).

The tunnel dodgers won’t like it. ;)

The city centre orbital route (Mallow Street) will now get a higher profile here.

Obviously a traffic calming measure and it should make the riverfront promenade safer for pedestrians to cross.
Attachments
LimerickLeaderPage7.JPG
LimerickLeaderPage7.JPG (34.57 KiB) Viewed 7946 times
RoundaboutShannonBridge.jpg
RoundaboutShannonBridge.jpg (59.02 KiB) Viewed 7946 times
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby Dan Sullivan » Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:43 pm

teak wrote:At present ambulances pass by sirening cars ahead of them who then move over as close as possible to parked cars on their side of the street.
The ambulance then runs down the middle of the road between the 2 jammed lanes of cars.



But there is only one lane per side with parking either side, so it is self evident that ambulances are more trapped at present. With a bus lane there would be no parking on one side and the bus would only run (about 4/5 times per hour?) occasionally meaning there would plenty of room for the ambulances. This notion of ambulances having more of a problem with a bus lane is pure nonsense cooked up to worry people.
Dan Sullivan
 

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby Goofy » Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:20 pm

CologneMike wrote:See this weekend’s edition of the Limerick Leader (page 7).

The tunnel dodgers won’t like it. ;)

The city centre orbital route (Mallow Street) will now get a higher profile here.

Obviously a traffic calming measure and it should make the riverfront promenade safer for pedestrians to cross.


There are also plans to change the parkway roundabout to traffic lights. The plans include moving the Parkway entrance further down Childers road.
Goofy
Member
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:45 am

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby Goofy » Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:30 pm

Double post
Goofy
Member
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:45 am

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby teak » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:28 pm

The ambulance overtaking manoeuvre described is what ambulances presently do when they are called out during rush hours.

Under the proposed scheme, the passage of an ambulance during rush-hours will be determined by the pace of vehicles ahead of them on the bus-lane, i.e. buses and taxis.
You say there'll be no more than 4/5 buses per hour down O'Connell Ave.
Even one bus route alone at present is scheduled to deliver buses at the rate of 1 per 10 minutes. With the new Green Route southern axis, I'd expect more buses to be put on so as to enable collection of people from all the main estates on either side of the road to Raheen.
With the additional bus routes and a 10 minute interval on each of them, there would be a bus on O'Connell Avenue every 2 minutes.
Then of course there is the taxis. These will be much more frequent than buses.
At rush hours it will not always be possible or advantageous for them to switch lanes so as to overtake buses.
So how does an ambulance (or squad car or fire tender) proceed ?

This is an observation, not a scare-off.
And it is not against buses on this route, nor a much-needed improvement of our bus service.
It is simply against the way the road-space is being appropriated by through-commuters in the name of bus-users but at the expense of residents and business owners.
Alternative routes are available for the through-commuters.
These ought be utilised.
That way one can have both an improved bus-service and a vital community.
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby foinse » Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:24 pm

teak wrote:The ambulance overtaking manoeuvre described is what ambulances presently do when they are called out during rush hours.

Under the proposed scheme, the passage of an ambulance during rush-hours will be determined by the pace of vehicles ahead of them on the bus-lane, i.e. buses and taxis.
You say there'll be no more than 4/5 buses per hour down O'Connell Ave.
Even one bus route alone at present is scheduled to deliver buses at the rate of 1 per 10 minutes. With the new Green Route southern axis, I'd expect more buses to be put on so as to enable collection of people from all the main estates on either side of the road to Raheen.
With the additional bus routes and a 10 minute interval on each of them, there would be a bus on O'Connell Avenue every 2 minutes.
Then of course there is the taxis. These will be much more frequent than buses.
At rush hours it will not always be possible or advantageous for them to switch lanes so as to overtake buses.
So how does an ambulance (or squad car or fire tender) proceed ?

This is an observation, not a scare-off.
And it is not against buses on this route, nor a much-needed improvement of our bus service.
It is simply against the way the road-space is being appropriated by through-commuters in the name of bus-users but at the expense of residents and business owners.
Alternative routes are available for the through-commuters.
These ought be utilised.
That way one can have both an improved bus-service and a vital community.


As a member of the local emergency services (i won't say which), I have to say. We love bus lanes, there's either a free lane on the left to go up, or it acts as a lane for other vehicles to go into allowing us to proceed much safer than the present system allows.. Cities which are way way way busier than Limerick seem to be able to get around this "issue".
foinse
Member
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby Tuborg » Thu Sep 23, 2010 2:36 pm

Confirmation that M7 Limerick to Birdhill will finally open at 4pm on Tuesday next, almost 18 months late. They have been testing the repaired section over the last couple of weeks so hopefully this is the end of the sorry saga.

No more Daly's Cross on dark, miserable Winter evening's!! :)

'Bog' motorway to open next week ([url='www.independent.ie/national-news/bog-motorway-to-open-next-week-2345634.html']Irish Independent[/url])

By Paul Melia

ENGINEERS have constructed massive reinforced concrete enforcements to support a road that collapsed into a bog late last year.

And the National Roads Authority (NRA) said yesterday that the successful works mean the M7 Nenagh to Limerick road will finally open next Tuesday, September 28 -- more than a year behind schedule.

The construction of the 38km road from Annacotty to Nenagh in Co Tipperary was contracted to Bothar Hibernian almost four years ago and was due for completion in June 2009.

However, the contractors ran into serious difficulties at Anaholty bog, where the almost-completed road collapsed into the bog in December last year.

The contractors built a concrete-and-steel bridge -- called a Load Transfer Platform -- to provide a stable base, and the NRA said this meant the road could finally open.

The €425m road is the second-last section of the Dublin to Limerick motorway, and will link the Limerick southern ring road with the existing Nenagh bypass.

It includes 28km of motorway, and a 10km upgrade of the Nenagh bypass to motorway standard.

The road will bypass the towns of Birdhill, Daly's Cross and the Lisnagry rail level crossing.

Up to 20,000 vehicles a day will use it, and it will knock eight minutes from journey times.




Public not liable for motorway sinking into bog ([url='www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0921/1224279367703.html']Irish Times[/url])

TIM O'BRIEN

THE NATIONAL Roads Authority has said the taxpayer will not be liable for delays caused by a section of the new M7 motorway sinking into a bog in Co Tipperary.

The €425 million 28km dual-carriageway section between the Nenagh bypass and the Limerick Southern Ring Road was initially to have opened completely in June 2009, but subsidence was noticed on a section of the road at Annaholty bog near Birdhill.

A section between Nenagh and Birdhill junction was opened to traffic at Easter, but motorists travelling the route to Limerick have had to use the old N7 between Birdhill and Annacotty due to the delay caused by the difficulties at Annaholty bog.

According to the National Roads Authority, the final section will now open next Tuesday, September 28th, following the building of “an underground bridge” across the bog.

The road authority said that a 100-metre section of the road was excavated and replaced with a reinforced concrete slab, which was connected to solid ground at depths of up to 30 metres by a series of reinforced piles.

The cost of the extra work was estimated in the region of €2 million to €3 million.

However, an authority spokesman said the design-and-build nature of the contract would ensure the taxpayer was not liable for the additional cost.

The remedial works were successfully completed in August. This was followed by load testing to ensure the integrity of the road in the area before it was certified fit for traffic.

The opening paves the way for the final section of the M7, between Castletown and Nenagh, which is now expected in November.

This project starts at the most easterly junction of the Nenagh bypass and finishes at the Borris- in-Ossory interchange.

The final section will then deliver motorway continuous standard connections between Northern Ireland and Co Clare via the M50 and the new Shannon tunnel.

Tuborg
Senior Member
 
Posts: 753
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 3:07 am

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:01 pm

Dan Sullivan wrote:I think it is curious that in the various discussions about the bus lanes in from the south that the issue of having to reroute the buses away from Todds (because we're going to have a pedestrian only O'Connell st. at that point hasn't been raised. The opportunity is there to connect the city buses with the regional services at the station if we're going to move from Todds as the main city centre stop.


I have yet to see a system bus-flow plan (if any) for all of the city routes operating through the proposed Orbital Route.

The University and the Regional Hospital destinations must connect with the bus / railway station.

Alternatively a new bus service just circulating around the Orbital Route could link up with all the other bus routes criss-crossing the city centre?

Any updates on the new bus station proposal?
Attachments
Orbit.jpg
Orbit.jpg (90.76 KiB) Viewed 7887 times
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:16 pm

Limerick city to get 16 new sets of traffic lights (Limerick Leader)

By Nick Rabbitts

FURTHER traffic disruption could be on the way after Limerick City Council confirmed the orbital route is to have 16 new sets of traffic lights.

As part of the circular route around the city centre, senior engineer Vincent Murray has said sets of traffic lights are still to be installed at the Abbey Bridge, the Parnell Street/Mallow Street junction as part of a junction alteration, and at the Dock Road/Shannon Bridge junction, meaning the removal of the Shannon Bridge roundabout.

There are also expected to be traffic lights installed on side-streets to give traffic entering main streets ample opportunity to join.

Mr Murray confirmed this will eventually mean 16 new sets of traffic lights in the city - with many already in place, including the junction at Upper William Street.

This week, new traffic lights on the Condell Road, near the Salesians School, were switched on for the first time.

The move led to chaos at rush hour, with some claiming it was a ploy designed to force people into the €1.80-a-car Limerick Tunnel to save time.

But tunnel general manager Tom King described this as a "conspiracy theory".

Mr Murray also dismissed the claims: "No, the lights are not designed to force people into the tunnel. We need to balance the needs of motorists commuting through the city with the needs of other people in the city, including schools and local traffic," he said.

The remaining sets of traffic lights on the orbital route are expected to be fitted over the next few months


Let’s hope that they will be synchronised along the orbital route.
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby CologneMike » Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:40 am

New section of M7 motorway opens (Irish Times)

KATHRYN HAYES

THE LAST section of the €424 million motorway from Limerick to Nenagh was finally opened yesterday, with up to 20,000 vehicles expected to bypass some of the country’s worst accident spots.

The opening of the Birdhill to Limerick section of the M7 was delayed by over a year. Work started on the 12.5km section of the scheme in 2006 and it was scheduled to open in May 2009. However, the contractors ran into major difficulties when part of the road sank into a bog at Annaholty. As a result, a 100m section of the road had to be excavated and rebuilt from scratch.

Speaking at yesterday’s official opening, Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey said: “It was extremely difficult, it delayed the project by almost 12 months and undoubtedly caused huge difficulties but they’ve found a solution which I’m told is very reliable.”

The completed €424 million contract won by Bothar Hibernian included 28km of dual carriageway, with a single carriageway link to the main road at Birdhill and the upgrading of 10km of the Nenagh bypass to dual carriageway standard.

According to the National Roads Authority, the Nenagh to Limerick section of the M7 will result in safer journeys and time savings for some 20,000 motorists, who will bypass accident spots like Daly’s Cross and Yellowbridge.

Journey times to Dublin will be reduced further when the final section of the M7, from Castletown in Co Laois to Nenagh, opens later this year.

This will allow motorists to bypass Roscrea, Moneygall and Toomevara, completing the M7 motorway between Limerick and Dublin. Mr Dempsey said the roads authority was reviewing roads plans for the next 25 years, but said no new motorways were planned.

Instead, work would be carried out on upkeep and maintenance of existing road networks.

© 2010 The Irish Times


[INDENT]Speaking at yesterday’s official opening, Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey said: “It was extremely difficult, it delayed the project by almost 12 months and undoubtedly caused huge difficulties but they’ve found a solution which I’m told is very reliable.”[/INDENT]

Better late than never!

However only time will tell how very reliable the solution is.

See previous post.
User avatar
CologneMike
Old Master
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby pigtown » Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:53 pm

I have done a bit of crayoning and attached is my fantasy rail network for Limerick.
http://maps.google.ie/maps?hl=en&xhr=t&q=ireland&cp=3&safe=off&qscrl=1&nord=1&rlz=1T4GGLL_enIE385IE385&um=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&ion=1&biw=1366&bih=532&wrapid=tlif130930018798410&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=nl
It includes 5 heavy rail lines that I would envisage running hourly at peak and and every two hours off peak, apart from the Ennis line which would run hourly throughout the day.

A more concise suburban network would run every 15 minutes on the lines between Patrickswell, Annacotty Industrial Estate and Cratloe. To eliminate the need to reverse out Colbert Station, a new station would be constructed on the existing bus maintenance yard.

Two tram lines would run every 15 minutes North-South and East-West through the city, with the East-West line connecting up both Colbert Station and the new station. The North-South line terminates at an interchange with heavy rail at Father Russell Road but I wonder would it make sense* to continue the tram line through a tunnell as far as the regional hospital as it is the only way I can think of to link the hospital up with the network.

I haven't included stops because a) there are too many and b) they clutter up the map.

So, what say you?
* obviously it wouldn't make sense to build most of this proposal now but a tunnel is a significant undertaking.
pigtown
Member
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 6:50 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby foinse » Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:51 pm

That's just a zoomed out image of Ireland.
foinse
Member
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby teak » Mon Jul 04, 2011 5:29 pm

Yeah, you messed up somewhere there.
Got us all excited about a new train transport system and then a fierce let-down.

Fix it up and make a real image out of it, then upload that image.
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Limerick Transport

Postby pigtown » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:33 pm

Right I cant' figure out how to ink to my google maps so heres some print screened images of it. I can zoom in closer again if ye like.
Attachments
Limerick 2040.png
Limerick 2040 central.png
pigtown
Member
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 6:50 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland



cron