sign in sign up
<<
Home , N11 road (Ireland), Regional road (Ireland)

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Safety Impact Assessment Report

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004

Issue 2 | 15 May 2019

This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party.

Job number 265455

Ove Arup and Partners Ireland Ltd

Arup 50 Ringsend Road 4 D04 T6X0 Ireland www.arup.com

Document Verification

Job title N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Job number Scheme 265455 Document title Road Safety Impact Assessment Report File reference

Document ref 265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 Revision Date Filename 265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-Issue 1.docx Issue 1 19 Mar Description 2019

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Martin Allen / Name Chris Bradish Mike Evans Thomas Connell Signature Issue 2 15 May Filename 26545 5-ARUP -GEN -XX -RP -ZM -0004 -Issue 2 .docx 2019 Description

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Martin Allen / Name Chris Bradish Mike Evans Thomas Connell Signature Filename Description

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name

Signature

Filename Description

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name

Signature

Issue Document Verification with Document 

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Contents

Page

1 Introduction 1 1.1 Overview 1 1.2 Scheme Background 1 1.3 Existing Road Network and Study Area 2 1.4 Report Overview 5 1.5 RSIA Team 5 1.6 Site Visit Details 5

2 Scheme Objectives 6 2.1 Overview 6 2.2 Economy 6 2.3 Safety 7 2.4 Environment 7 2.5 Accessibility and Social Inclusion 7 2.6 Integration 7 2.6.1 Physical Activity 7

3 Existing Road Network Safety Problems 8 3.1 Potentially Affected Existing Road Network 8 3.2 Existing Road Safety Issues 9 3.3 Collision History 10

4 Description of Alternative Transportation Solutions 14 4.1 Overview of Potential Transportation Solutions 14

5 Consequences of Options Considered 16 5.1 Road Safety Consequences of ‘Do Nothing’ and ‘Do Minimum’ Scenarios 16

6 Consequences of ‘Do-Something’ Transportation Solutions (Options 1-4) 17 6.1 Road Safety Objectives 17 6.2 Assessment of Effects on Traffic Flow 18 6.3 Assessment of Effects on Road Users in potentially affected areas 18 6.3.1 Existing N11/M11 Between Junction 4 and Junction 14 18 6.3.2 M11 Junction 4 to Junction 5 and Surrounds 20 6.3.3 N11 Junction 6 to Junction 7 and Surrounds 23 6.3.4 N11 Junction 8 to Junction 9 and Surrounds 28 6.3.5 N11 Junction 10 and the 33 6.3.6 N11 Junction 11 to Junction 12 and Surrounds 36

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup

\\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

6.3.7 N11 Junction 13 to Junction 14 and Surrounds 40 6.3.8 Greater Shankill Area (Including Junction 4) 44 6.3.9 Greater Bray Area 46 6.3.10 Greater Area 49

7 Climatic and Seasonal Influences on Safety 52 7.1 Flooding 52 7.2 Icy Conditions 52 7.3 Peak Period Traffic-Flows (Holiday Periods) 52

8 Comparison of Alternatives 54 8.1 Overview 54 8.2 Safety 54 8.3 Benefit 56

9 Conclusions and Summary 58

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup

\\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

1 Introduction

1.1 Overview Arup has been appointed to provide multi-disciplinary technical consultancy services for the delivery of Phase 1 - 4 of the Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) Project Management Guidelines (PMG) for the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme. The N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme proposes to alleviate congestion and improve safety, journey time reliability and the strategic function of the N11/M11 corridor. This commission commences at Phase 1 – Scheme Concept and Feasibility Studies of the TII PMGs, which includes the preparation of this Road Safety Impact Assessment (RSIA) report. This RSIA examines the existing road network within the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme and its environs and examines the impact that any potential transportation solutions could have from a road safety perspective.

1.2 Scheme Background The N11/M11 is comprised of Motorway, and road classifications for approximately 126km and connects Dublin in the east of the country to in the southeast of the country. The N11/M11 forms part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) providing a link between Dublin and as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: TEN-T Comprehensive and Core Networks: , ports, rail-road terminals and airports The section under consideration for this commission is approximately 22km long and extends from the M11/M50 junction (J4) to the N11/M11 junction at Coyne’s Cross (J14) as shown in Figure 2.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 1 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 2: M11/M50 Junction (J4) to the N11/M11 junction at Coyne's Cross (J14) This section traverses two Local Authority boundaries, Wicklow County Council and Dún Laoghaire – Rathdown County Council. A Section 85 agreement has been entered into by both local authorities which appoints Wicklow County Council (WCC) as the Lead Local Authority and Sponsoring Agent of the project. National Roads Office (KNRO) has been appointed by Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), acting as the Sanctioning Authority, to project manage the delivery of the scheme. The N11/M11 has been in service since 1991 following the completion of the Bray . The section between the M11 junction 4 and junction 6 was upgraded in 2005 and the section between junction 14 and junction 23 was designated motorway status in 2009. The completion of the above-mentioned upgrades to the north and south of this proposed scheme has highlighted the deficiencies and resultant safety issues on the remaining section, which has had limited intervention or upgrade over the years. Some sections of this portion of the N11/M11 corridor fall short in terms of current road design standards, with numerous direct accesses and at grade junctions. These deficiencies impact on traffic flow conditions and result in significant congestion during the weekday morning and evening peaks, thereby providing ineffective levels of service. Consequently, this section of the N11/M11 fails to meet its primary function as a strategic road.

1.3 Existing Road Network and Study Area The N11/M11 national road is the primary artery connecting Dublin to the south east of the country. In addition, the route provides access to international markets for freight and tourist traffic through Rosslare Europort (via the N25), as well as serving a high commuting demand within the Dublin metropolitan region.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 2 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Within the section of the N11/M11 under this commission, the route is of motorway designation for approximately 3.8km, commencing at Junction 4 to a point just north of Junction 6 (Bray, Fassaroe). The remainder of the route is a two- dual carriageway of varying standard but generally consistent cross section. To the south of the study area, the route returns to motorway designation at junction 14 (Coyne’s Cross) and continues as far south as . The M11 Gorey to PPP Scheme, currently under construction, will extend the length of motorway south by a further 26km. The existing N11/M11 within the study area is an amalgamation of several separate construction projects and upgrades over a period of approximately 50 years. This piecemeal completion of the road is reflected in the geometric characteristics and operational effectiveness of the route. A timeline summary of the various construction contracts/upgrades making up the present-day route is presented in Table 1 below. Table 1: N11/M11 Construction Timeline

Section of Existing Construction Contract / Upgrade Year of Opening N11/M11 Route Junction 4 (N11/M50) to Constructed as part of M50 South 2005 North of Junction 5 Eastern Motorway Contract Junction 5 to Junction 6 M11 Bray Bypass ( to 1991 Valery’s ) Junction 7 Kilcroney Dual Carriageway (Fassaroe c.1970 to Kilmacanoge) N11 Kilmacanoge to Improvement Scheme 2003 Junction 10 (Kilmacanoge – Glen of the Downs) Junction 10 Bypass c. 1972 Junction 11 N11 Kilpedder Design & 2008 Build Contract Junction 13 Newtown Mount Kennedy Bypass 1990 Junction 13 to Junction 14 Newtown Mount Kennedy to 2004 Ballynabarny Road Improvement Scheme

The overall study area for the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme is presented in Figure 3 below.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 3 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3: N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Study Area

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 4 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

1.4 Report Overview This RSIA report has been prepared in accordance with Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) Publications PE-PMG-02001 and PE-PMG-02005. The requirement to implement Road Safety Impact Assessments on infrastructure projects stems from EU Directive 2008/96/EC. The purpose of this report is to demonstrate, on a strategic level, the implications on road safety of the proposed options under consideration as part of the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme. The report will ensure that the implications on road safety of different planning alternatives are fully assessed as part of the concept and feasibility stage.

1.5 RSIA Team The RSIA team members are presented in Table 2 below: Table 2: RSIA Team Members

Road Safety Impact Assessment Team

Certified Road Safety Auditor: Thomas Connell

Road Designer: Martin Allen

The members were chosen in accordance with the requirements of TII Publication PE-STY-02003 ( Road Safety Impact Assessment – Impact Assessment Team Qualifications ). The proposed team was nominated to the Road Safety Division of TII and was accepted.

1.6 Site Visit Details Site visits were undertaken on 05/12/2018 and 14/03/2019 to assess the following elements: • Existing road network; • Local amenities; • Topography of the area; and • Existing traffic, pedestrian and cyclist movements. The weather at the time of the site visits was generally dry and overcast/cloudy, with some light showers.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 5 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

2 Scheme Objectives

2.1 Overview The objectives of the scheme are framed in accordance with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport (DTTaS) publication Common Appraisal Framework for Transport Projects and Programmes (March 2016) and TII Project Appraisal Guideline (PAG) Unit 3.0. Scheme objectives are framed under the following six criteria: • Economy; • Safety; • Environment; • Accessibility and Social Inclusion; • Integration; and • Physical Activity. The scheme objectives are recorded in the Project Brief and are summarised below.

2.2 Economy The specific ‘Economy’ Objectives of the project are as follows: • Improve the efficiency of the N11/M11 corridor between Junction 4 and Junction 14; • Improve efficiency, reliability and journey times within European Route 1(E01); • Improve connectivity with the wider European market by reliability of journey time between ports and ease of movement; • Improve resilience of the Irish market by improving connectivity to Rosslare Europort and the wider European market; and • Generate positive economic benefits to road users in terms of: • reducing journey times; and • improving journey time reliability.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 6 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

2.3 Safety The specific ‘Safety’ Objectives of the project are as follows: • To reduce the frequency and severity of collisions on the N11/M11 corridor between Junction 4 and Junction 14; and • To support the Government’s Road Safety Strategy.

2.4 Environment The specific ‘Environmental’ Objectives of the project are as follows: • To reduce CO2 emissions and particulate emissions through a reduction in fuel consumption; • To manage noise impacts in populated areas; • To minimise the impact on designated Natura 2000 sites; and • To seek to preserve existing well-established communities

2.5 Accessibility and Social Inclusion The specific ‘Accessibility and Social Inclusion’ Objectives of the project are as follows: • To provide a corridor that will encourage and support investment and employment in the wider area; • To improve road based public transport journey time and journey time reliability; and • To achieve the objective of national, regional and local planning policy.

2.6 Integration The specific ‘Integration’ Objectives of the project are as follows: • To improve connectivity to the national road network; • To provide continuity of road type between Junction 6 and Junction 15; • To improve connectivity to Rosslare Europort; • To be compatible with adopted land use objectives; and • To complement wider government policy.

2.6.1 Physical Activity The specific ‘Physical Activity’ Objectives of the project are as follows: • Promoting walking and cycling by providing a safer environment for non- motorised road users.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 7 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

3 Existing Road Network Safety Problems

3.1 Potentially Affected Existing Road Network Any potential transportation solutions for the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme involving amendments or additions to the existing road infrastructure has the potential to affect numerous junctions and roads within the study area. The following is a list of the existing roads which would potentially be affected by the proposed transportation solutions examined as part of the scheme concept and feasibility studies: • N11/M11 Motorway/Dual Carriageway • • R119 / R761 (Bray North) • Old Connaught (L2047) • R918 • Upper Dargle Road • Road (R117) • Herbert Road (L1956) • Kilcroney Lane (L1001) • Ballywaltrim Lane • Road (R767) • Southern Cross Road (R768) • Glencormick Road (L1019) / Avoca Handweavers Access • R755 ( /) • Bohilla Lane (L5529) • Kilmurray Cottages • Moorpark • Quill Road (L5029) • Donnelly’s Lane • Foxborough Lane • Red Lane (L1031 - Glenview) • Ballydonagh Road (L1028) • Drummin Lane • Glen Road (R762) • R774 / L1043 (Greystones) • L5046 (Kilpedder)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 8 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

• L1042 (/Seaview) • Kilpeddar Grove • Ballyronan Road (L5047) • Dublin Road (R772) • Garden Village Court (L50474) • Newcastle Road (L5050)

3.2 Existing Road Safety Issues As noted in Section 1.3, the existing N11/M11 within the study area has evolved as a series of separate construction projects and upgrades over a long period of time, rather than being the product of a single greenfield design. Significant portions of the current route were designed and constructed prior to the establishment of the (now TII) in 1993 and the implementation of consistent geometric standards across the national road network. With limited intervention or improvements occurring since, the route is characterised by major and in some cases, abrupt variations in design standard, operational efficiency and road layout. All of these factors have the potential to significantly impact on the safety of road users. The degree of congestion along sections of the existing route has major implications for road safety. During the AM and PM peaks in particular, traffic volumes north of junction 8 significantly exceed the threshold capacity corresponding to the provision of a minimum Level of Service D for the particular road type. Volumes above this threshold instigate volatile operation with little or no gaps in the traffic stream, restricted freedom to manoeuvre and significantly reduced driver comfort. High levels of lane occupancy directly equate to smaller distances between vehicles, forcing drivers to adjust their speed to account for the shorter stopping sight distances available. The problem is compounded as additional merging and weaving traffic enters the stream resulting in increased levels of occupancy and further congestion. The resulting breakdown of flow can encourage erratic and ill-disciplined driver behaviour, which can in turn increase the likelihood of incidents and accidents. There are a significant number of conflict points between vehicular traffic and vulnerable road users at junctions along the N11/M11 route. The existing proliferation of accesses along the route, including individual residential and commercial accesses, is not compatible with the safe operation of a strategic road. Many of these accesses are inconsistent in layout and exhibit sub-standard design elements, including restricted visibility and inadequate provision for safe merging and diverging movements. The lack of route consistency in terms of variable speed limit, junction layout and road geometry does not afford an intuitive layout for road users, particularly for those unfamiliar with the route. This contributes to the safety issues experienced on the section of the N11/M11 examined in this report.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 9 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

3.3 Collision History Table 3 below presents the number of recorded fatalities, serious injuries and minor injuries resulting from collisions within the study area for the period between 1996 and 2013. The geographical distribution of these collisions is presented in Figure 4. This data was obtained from the Road Safety Authority. It should be stressed that this data relates to the entire study area under consideration and is not solely limited to collisions along the N11/M11 road corridor. The data aligns with the nationwide trend of a reduced number of road fatalities and serious injuries experienced in recent decades, however it is noteworthy that the number of minor injuries has remained high and generally increased since 2007. Table 3: Collision Data Within the N11/M11 Study Area

Year Fatal Seriously Minor Injury Injury of Injured Unknown Severity 1996 7 27 124 8 1997 3 19 137 6 1998 4 13 135 12 1999 3 13 107 12 2000 4 18 126 4 2001 6 12 122 2 2002 2 14 62 4 2003 2 12 112 9 2004 5 10 67 6 2005 3 7 69 8 2006 4 4 60 1 2007 3 11 20 0 2008 0 11 121 1 2009 1 3 129 2 2010 1 6 131 5 2011 0 3 117 3 2012 0 8 143 6 2013 0 8 110 2 Total 48 199 1892 91

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 10 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 4: Distribution of Collision Within N11/M11 Study Area (1996-2013)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 11 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

It is evident from Figure 4 above that there is a proliferation of collisions in the following areas within the study boundary: • Shankill, including N11/M11 between Junction 4 (M50) and Junction 5 (Bray North); • Urban areas of Bray and Greystones; • N11 corridor between Junction 6 (Bray/Fassaroe) and Junction 7 (Bray); • N11 corridor at Kilmacanoge and Junction 8; and • N11 corridor through the Glen of the Downs (between Junction 9 and Junction 10). The increasing traffic volumes, particularly evident north of junction 8, significantly contribute to congestion and collisions within the study area. When the N11/M11 was first designed, it is unlikely that the traffic projections used included such large volumes of traffic both on the mainline and using the junctions. Many of the current junctions and sections of the N11/M11 mainline are currently over capacity and cannot adequately cater for the current traffic volume demands. The effects of heavy congestion and ineffective levels of service have the potential to lead to collisions in the following manners: • Driver frustration resulting from poor traffic flow can result in drivers making swift lane changes to queue jump and making sudden and unpredictable sharp direction changes in response to a perceived gap, all of which can result in collisions. • As congestion increases, adherence to the rules of the road can decrease, as evident by the illegal use of hard shoulders to avoid queues at junctions. • Motorists use adjacent residential which are not suitable for large traffic volumes or high speed to avoid congestion, which can lead to an increased likelihood of collisions between vulnerable road users and vehicular traffic. Heavy congestion can lead to an increase in rear-end shunt type incidents. The presence of non-standard junctions and accesses along the scheme can also contribute to an increase in rear-end shunt type incidents due to sudden braking caused by a vehicle unexpectedly joining the mainline from a sub-standard access or junction. Issues are highlighted during weekday morning and evening peaks where poor traffic flow and heavy congestion on the N11/M11 result in significant queuing at junctions, which can often extend into urban areas. Preliminary reviews of journey time data indicate that the section of the N11/M11 under consideration in this report is performing inefficiently and provides poor levels of service particularly during the peak periods. Furthermore, the junction 4 to junction 14 section of the N11/M11 is nestled between two sections of motorway which emphasises its issues with capacity and resultant congestion.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 12 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

The existing road network which may be affected by any road-based transportation solution contains a variety of road safety issues including those identified above. These issues are examined in detail in chapter six of this report. The data which is examined and detailed was obtained from the Road Safety Authority and covers the period between 1996 and 2013.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 13 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

4 Description of Alternative Transportation Solutions

4.1 Overview of Potential Transportation Solutions Numerous options can be considered as solutions to the transportation issues along the N11/M11 corridor. The public transport solutions recommended in the Transport Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2016 – 2035, combined with road- based options form the basis of the feasibility study for the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme. These combinations may have the potential to relieve the problems outlined above and deliver on the goals, objectives and specific transportation problems identified in the Project Brief. Potential options are outlined as follows: • Do Nothing Option: This scenario does not provide for any additional spend other than maintaining the existing infrastructure. • Do-Minimum Option: This is essentially maintaining the existing infrastructure and constructing committed projects along the route, but no more. • Option 1: This option involves the implementation of demand management measures to improve the efficiency of the N11/M11 corridor in order to prioritise the movement of strategic traffic on the N11/M11. This would be implemented in conjunction with public transport improvements within the corridor study area. • Option 2: This option involves the combination of on-line improvements to the existing N11/M11 corridor, consisting of junction upgrades to meet current standards, closure of direct accesses to improve road safety and demand management measures. This would be implemented in conjunction with public transport improvements within the corridor study area. • Option 3: This option involves the combination of on-line improvements to the existing N11/M11 corridor, consisting of junction upgrades to meet current standards, closure of direct accesses to improve road safety and capacity enhancement through provision of additional . This would be implemented in conjunction with public transport improvements within the corridor study area. • Option 4: This option involves the combination of offline N11/M11 routes with improved public transport provisions. Note that offline routes may be limited to certain sections of the route only where existing constraints indicate this to be feasible. Options 1 to 4 are defined as ‘Do Something’ options. All of the Do Something options comprise an element of public transport provision. However, once further work is carried out to develop a traffic model for this scheme, the possibility of an option that solely comprises public transport i.e. Do-Something Pubic Transport will be developed.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 14 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

This scenario would comprise a full build out of the public transport schemes as recommended in the Transport Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2016 – 2035, Connects, plus those schemes listed in other plans and polices and any other viable public transport options that could contribute to the overall transportation solution. Traffic modelling work will be undertaken to establish the feasibility of this public transport only option. In conjunction with public transport improvements, options 1 to 3 would seek to utilise the existing asset as efficiently as possible through a series of incremental interventions aimed at relieving congestion, improving journey times and improving safety for all road users. This would initially focus on the implementation of demand management measures and thereby limit the provision of capacity enhancing infrastructure insofar as possible. It is important to note that the range of demand management measures available for consideration are varied and wide-ranging, but all have the intended purpose of reducing travel demand on the N11/M11, such that it operates without congestion for longer and improves safety and journey time reliability. Demand management polices seek to influence road user behaviour, to encourage individuals to make journeys at off peak times, travel by a different mode such as cycling, walking and public transport, or avoid making the trip altogether. To achieve this objective, a range of both fiscal and non-fiscal measures can be implemented which serve either to reduce or divert demand or achieve a combination of both. Examples of fiscal demand management measures include: • Road user charging – this may be variable, i.e. related to time of day, vehicle class, emissions class etc. • Parking charges • Public transport subsidies • Fuel taxes Non-fiscal demand management measures may include: • Access control and restriction (e.g. ramp metering) • Public transport improvements • Traffic control measures (e.g. variable speed limits) • Smarter travel measures (e.g. intelligent transport systems, incident detection) • Road space reduction/travel restrictions Option 4 will investigate the feasibility of a road-based alternative to the N11/M11 corridor. The exact extent, location and detail of these options has not been developed at this stage and will be progressed during phase 2.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 15 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

5 Consequences of Options Considered

5.1 Road Safety Consequences of ‘Do Nothing’ and ‘Do Minimum’ Scenarios In the ‘Do Nothing’ and ‘Do Minimum’ scenarios, the existing infrastructure will essentially be maintained in its current state without further investment or improvement. A number of committed schemes will be included within the ‘Do Minimum’ scenario, however these are typically minor in nature when considered in the context of the overall study area and anticipated impact on the N11/M11 corridor. As such, these options would at best result in a continuance of the current transportation and safety issues experienced along the N11/M11 over time. Current trends and growth projections point to increasing traffic volumes and heightened congestion continuing. Existing issues with heavy traffic volumes and congestion are amplified during AM and PM peak traffic periods and result in raised occurrences of collisions during these periods. Within the ‘Do-Nothing’ and ‘Do-Minimum’ scenarios there is little to no scope for these issues to be alleviated and the potential for them to worsen is likely. A particular issue on the N11/M11 is the number of collisions which occur at sub- standard junctions and non-standard accesses that are located at numerous points along the N11/M11 route (based on the study period from 1996 to 2013). The ‘Do Nothing’ and ‘Do Minimum’ scenarios will not address existing junction deficiencies or remove sub-standard direct accesses and consequently these types of collisions can be expected to continue. The existing proliferation of direct residential and commercial access points is not compatible with the safe and efficient operation of a strategically important route. Pedestrians and other vulnerable road users within the study area require further consideration. Collision statistics indicate pedestrian involvement in 16% of all collisions within the study area. While the majority of these may be attributable to congestion and inadequate provision for vulnerable road users within urban areas, three collisions involving pedestrians occurred directly on the N11/M11 route. In the ‘Do-Nothing’ and ‘Do-Minimum’ scenarios, these vulnerable road users will at best remain at high risk.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 16 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

6 Consequences of ‘Do-Something’ Transportation Solutions (Options 1-4)

6.1 Road Safety Objectives The Scheme Objectives are outlined in Chapter two of this report. The objectives specifically relating to ‘Road Safety’ are further expanded below: • To provide a transportation solution that is designed in accordance with national and international best practice; • To provide a consistent and intuitive layout for drivers and to minimise and avoid unexpected and confusing layouts; • To significantly reduce the number of direct accesses onto the existing transportation corridor; • To reduce road traffic collisions; • To relieve areas of congestion and improve safety levels on all public roads; and • Providing a safer environment for vulnerable road users. The potential ‘Do-Something’ transportation options are more likely to meet the safety objectives of the scheme to varying degrees for the following reasons: • The demand management measures in Option 1 would aim to improve traffic flows at key locations to maximise the performance efficiency, flow and capacity of existing infrastructure resulting in a reduction of congestion issues currently experienced by the N11/M11; • The upgrading of sub-standard junctions and the removal of non-standard accesses in Option 2 would provide safer merges and diverges for vehicles joining or leaving the mainline and remove potential conflict points created by non-standard accesses; • The increased capacity resulting from Option 3 could reduce congestion and journey times thereby providing the associated safety benefits; • An offline option as per Option 4 could allow for the delivery of a fully standardised road layout and junctions offering all the safety benefits of a modern standard layout. • Potential Do-Something transportation options could increase the mode share of cyclists, pedestrians and public transport users by making facilities more readily available.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 17 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

6.2 Assessment of Effects on Traffic Flow Transportation options 1-4 have the potential to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on the section of N11/M11 under consideration. An analysis of existing journey time data on the route corridor indicates that PM peak journey times are on average 89% longer than the free flow journey times experienced on the same section of road. The proposed ‘Do Something’ options could assist in improving journey time reliability, increasing junction capacity and improving the overall operational performance of the N11/M11. Improved traffic flows leading to reduced congestion should result in a reduction in rear-end shunt type collisions and other collisions resulting from erratic driving behaviour during flow breakdown. The benefits of these improvements to traffic flow should be reflected in improved overall road safety.

6.3 Assessment of Effects on Road Users in potentially affected areas The current road networks, which would be affected by any proposed road-based transportation solution contain a variety of safety issues and these are discussed and detailed for each sub-area below. Any potential transportation solution which would involve the modification of or addition to road infrastructure would be designed with the aim of removing the existing safety issues and would not introduce any additional safety issues. Data relating to collisions is based on 1996 – 2013 figures as this is the most recently available information obtainable from the Road Safety Authority. This data includes the number of fatal, serious and minor casualties along with a summary of particular collision statistics for each area. It is noted that the total number of collisions is less than the overall number of casualties on account of multiple injuries arising from a single collision.

6.3.1 Existing N11/M11 Between Junction 4 and Junction 14 Tables 4 and 5 include collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 for the full extent of the existing N11/M11 corridor between junction 4 and junction 14. Table 4: Collision Casualties on N11/M11 Corridor Between Junction 4 and Junction 14 (1996 – 2013)

Study Area Injury Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury (Unknown Severity) 1996 5 8 25 3 1997 2 3 29 2 1998 1 2 19 3 1999 1 0 7 7 2000 1 1 13 0 2001 0 1 25 2 2002 0 3 5 0 2003 2 4 18 2

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 18 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Study Area Injury Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury (Unknown Severity) 2004 0 1 16 2 2005 1 2 13 6 2006 1 0 6 0 2007 2 5 4 0 2008 0 2 16 1 2009 1 0 27 0 2010 1 3 24 4 2011 0 0 11 0 2012 0 0 29 1 2013 0 2 22 0 Total 18 37 309 33

Table 5: Collision Statistics on N11/M11 Corridor Between Junction 4 and Junction 14 (1996 – 2013)

Total No. Collisions 232 100.00%

Time of Day AM Peak (07:00-10:00) 39 16.81% PM Peak (16:00-19:00) 43 18.53% Outside Peaks 150 64.66%

Collision Type Pedestrian Involvement 7 3.02% Single Vehicle Collision 87 37.50% Rear-End Collision 48 20.69% Head-On Collision 18 7.76% Other Collision Type 7 3.02%

Road Characteristics (where relevent/recorded) Straight 133 Bend 47 Hill/Crest 4 Gradient 17 Other 5

Vehicle Type Private Car 289 Goods Vehicle 4 Other 14

Weather Dry 160 68.97% Other 72 31.03% An examination of the statistics indicates an increased collision rate during the AM and PM peak times. This is to be expected in areas which suffer from serious congestion issues. The largest contributor to collisions is in the form of single vehicle incidents (37.5%), which can often be attributed to driver error, a pre- existing deficiency in the road infrastructure or weather conditions. Rear-end shunt type collisions (20.7%) are symptomatic of congestion issues where vehicles are travelling too closely for adequate stopping distance.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 19 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

The volumes of pedestrian involvement can give an indication of poor segregation between pedestrians and the . Since 2005, there have been eight fatalities recorded on the section of the N11/M11 under consideration between junction 4 and junction 14. Two of these incidents occurred during peak hours and three of the fatalities involved an interaction with pedestrians. Although recent decades have witnessed a downward trend in the number of road casualties nationwide, it is noteworthy that the numbers of fatal, serious and minor collisions recorded on the N11/M11 corridor have remained generally static. It is likely that the downward trend nationally has been offset by the doubling in traffic volumes on the N11/M11 between 1998 (32,911 AADT) and 2018 (69,989 AADT).

6.3.2 M11 Junction 4 to Junction 5 and Surrounds The M11 between junction 4 and junction 5 is a standard motorway originally constructed as the Bray/Shankill Bypass in 1991. The M11/M50 free flow interchange was added as part of the South Eastern Motorway Scheme in 2005. The surrounding area comprises the dense urban residential and commercial development of Bray and Shankill to the east and a proliferation of residential development in to the west. Junction 4 provides access to the M50 motorway and the greater south Dublin region while junction 5 provides the main point of access to the northern Bray area, as presented in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Junction 4 and Junction 5 Schematics This section of the route is subject to the highest traffic volumes on the N11/M11 corridor (77,589 AADT in 2018). Figure 6 and Tables 6 and 7 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the junction 4 to junction 5 area.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 20 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 6: Distribution of Collisions Junction 4 to Junction 5 (1996-2013) Table 6: Collision Casualties Junction 4 to Junction 5 (1996 – 2013)

M11 Junction 4 to Junction 5 and Surrounds Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 1 2 12 0 1997 0 1 12 1 1998 0 3 6 0 1999 0 1 13 2 2000 0 0 11 0 2001 0 2 7 0 2002 0 0 7 1 2003 0 2 10 0 2004 0 2 4 0 2005 1 0 2 0 2006 1 1 3 0 2007 1 1 3 0 2008 0 0 12 0 2009 0 0 14 0 2010 0 1 13 0 2011 0 0 12 0 2012 0 2 16 0 2013 0 0 8 1 Total 4 18 165 5

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 21 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 7: Collision Statistics Junction 4 to Junction 5 (1996 – 2013)

In the period 1996 to 2013, there were 4 fatalities and 18 serious incidents recorded in the junction 4 to junction 5 area. Two of the fatalities resulted from single vehicle collisions, one resulting from a collision with a ditch and the other from a collision with a pole. One of the two other fatal incidents involved a head on collision where a vehicle was recorded as being on the wrong side of the road, while the cause of the other fatality is unknown. 26.2% of collisions occurred during wet weather conditions – slightly below the N11/M11 average. The high involvement of pedestrians (20.8%) in collisions occurs within the urban areas adjacent to the M11 and can be attributed to high volumes and junction conflicts within the residential areas. A cluster of minor incidents is evident at the Wilford where commuting traffic from the R119 and R761 accesses the M11 motorway. The AM and PM peak traffic periods reflect an increased collision rate when compared with the rest of the 24hr period. During the PM peak, the southbound section of the M11 between junction 4 and junction 5 can experience the worst effects of the capacity, geometric and junction deficiencies present further south. Flow breakdown frequently occurs in the southbound direction with spot speeds in this area reducing to approximately 25km/h. The implementation of demand management measures as part of Option 1 could have a positive impact on the M11 mainline by regulating and streamlining contributing traffic flow. The precise nature of demand management measures would need to be carefully considered in this area. As the volumes of traffic are extremely high (above 75,000 AADT), a significant reduction in travel demand would be necessary if additional capacity is not to be provided. The provision of an improved public transport network would aim to cater for diverted demand and would be critical to the success of this option.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 22 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

As the M11/M50 junction is a free-flow interchange constructed to current design standards, it is unlikely that significant upgrade works to this junction would be implemented as part of Option 2. Upgrade works to junction 5 could be investigated with the aim of providing a more standard junction layout. However, it is not considered that this junction suffers from significant capacity issues at present and given that there are no minor direct accesses on this section of the route, it is concluded that option 2 would not offer any further safety benefit when compared to option 1. Option 3 would provide enhanced capacity in the form of additional traffic lanes and in conjunction with improved public transport provision would have a positive overall impact on road safety. Congestion relief and associated improvement in journey times could relieve driver frustration and the propensity for erratic behaviour. Improved public transport systems would reduce urban congestion within Bray and Shankill, creating a more desirable and safer environment for vulnerable road users. The implementation of Option 4 is unlikely to be desirable or feasible within this section of the N11/M11 corridor. Given the proximity of surrounding urban development and the nearby connection to the M50, it is not considered at this stage that a viable alternative corridor in this area of the scheme exists. Furthermore, the existing route is of a high motorway standard.

6.3.3 N11 Junction 6 to Junction 7 and Surrounds The M11 motorway changes to the N11 dual carriageway immediately north of junction 6. At this location, the speed limit reduces from 120km/h to 100km/h. The surrounding area comprises dense urban residential and commercial developments in Bray to the east, with a sparse mix of residential properties and privately owned undeveloped lands to the west. At junction 7, the surrounding area comprises primarily residential developments concentrated along Ballywaltrim Lane to the east and south of Kilcroney lane to the west. There are also a number of commercial developments in close proximity to junction 7 including Brennanstown Riding School, the Woodlands Academy – a private boarding school – and a Circle K service station. Both junction 6 and junction 7, as presented in Figure 7, currently experience severe capacity problems due to the sub-standard geometry on the merges and diverges and inadequate roundabout capacity to cater for the current traffic volumes.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 23 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 7: Junction 6 and Junction 7 Schematics Many commuters to Dublin from Bray access the N11 at junction 6 via the R918 Upper Dargle Road. This road can be heavily congested during peak hours and the capacity of the junction and network have a direct impact on the operation of the mainline. Similarly, the unconventional layout of junction 7 results in a conflicting movement whereby vehicles accessing the N11 northbound exert a dominance at the eastern roundabout and block vehicles exiting the N11 southbound. This is a significant contributor to PM peak congestion as the short diverge loop is insufficient to provide storage for queuing vehicles. Queuing extends back onto the already congested mainline, compounding the safety issues created by the steep mainline gradient and sub-standard horizontal alignment. Between junction 6 and junction 7, there are a number of sub-standard access points which have a direct impact on the capacity and safe operation of the N11/M11 at this location. Junction 6a, which provides access via the R117 to Enniskerry, is located on the northbound carriageway and significantly reduces the weaving distances available between junction 7 and junction 6. Furthermore, drivers wishing to access Enniskerry from the north are forced to carry on past Junction 6a and U-turn at Junction 7 to access the R117 from the south. On the southbound carriageway, two sub-standard junctions are located in close proximity connecting Dargle Lane (L1522) and Herbert Road (L1956) to the N11. Figure 8 and Tables 8 and 9 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the junction 6 to junction 7 area.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 24 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 8: Distribution of Collisions Junction 6 to Junction 7 (1996 – 2013 Table 8: Collision Casualties Junction 6 to Junction 7 (1996 – 2013)

N11 Junction 6 to Junction 7 and Surrounds Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 0 0 1 0 1997 2 1 8 1 1998 1 0 4 0 1999 0 1 1 0 2000 1 0 5 0 2001 1 0 8 1 2002 0 0 6 0 2003 1 0 3 0 2004 0 1 7 2 2005 0 1 8 6 2006 0 0 5 0 2007 1 0 0 0 2008 0 1 13 1 2009 1 0 10 0 2010 0 3 16 4 2011 0 1 9 2 2012 0 0 15 0 2013 0 0 7 1 Total 8 9 126 18

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 25 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 9: Collision Statistics Junction 6 to Junction 7 (1996 – 2013)

In the period from 1996 to 2013, there were no recorded fatalities in the junction 6 vicinity and only one serious incident. This occurred on the R918 approach to the eastern roundabout of the junction and was a single vehicle incident. A study of the collision history in the Junction 6a area suggests a significant issue exists at the diverge to the R117 from the northern carriageway of the N11/M11. Two fatalities and a cluster of serious and minor incidents are evident at the diverge. Another fatality was recorded at the R117 merge involving a pedestrian. The sub- standard merge and diverge lanes combined with high traffic volumes, tight bends and congested driving conditions are all likely to have contributed to the high density of incidents in this area. It is worth noting that a number of incidents can also be linked to the Herbert . This is located on the inside of a relatively tight bend on the mainline and both merges and diverges are sub- standard. The four fatalities recorded near junction 7 resulted from 3 separate incidents, all of which occurred in the southbound direction. Two of the incidents were classified as head-on collisions and the third was an unknown collision type. The serious incidents recorded in this locality did not occur on the N11/M11 mainline but on various points around Junction 7. A cluster of incidents can be observed around the locations of the and this is likely due to the heavy congestion experienced at the junction and the resulting driver frustrations and errors. The majority of the minor incidents in this area have occurred in the immediate vicinity of the junction merges and diverges and the eastern roundabout. This coincides with the largest traffic movements accessing the N11 from Bray. The junction 7 statistics indicate an increased collision rate during the AM and PM peak periods. The predominant type of collision recorded in the junction 7 area is the single vehicle type collision, accounting for 30% of all collisions. 20% of collisions in this area involve rear-end shunt type collisions which points to congestion as an issue.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 26 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

There is also an above average percentage of head-on collisions which may suggest issues relating to junction layout and alignment problems. There is no clear correlation between collision occurrence and weather conditions. The implementation of demand management measures as part of Option 1 could have a positive impact on the N11 mainline by regulating and streamlining contributing traffic flow. Smarter travel measures on the mainline such as variable speed limits have the potential to regularise journey times and alert road users to disruptive incidents such that trips can be altered or avoided. Limitations on access to the N11 could however impact negatively on road safety in the surrounding areas adjacent to the mainline. If such demand management measures only serve to divert vehicular demand and force reassignment to alternative routes, congestion on the adjacent road network may worsen. This scenario is likely to increase collisions and make the road network less attractive and safe for vulnerable road users without the provision of adequate facilities. The provision of an improved public transport network such that vehicular trip demand is reduced will be critical to the success of this option. Demand management measures adopted in isolation will fail to address the geometric deficiencies along the existing N11 and at the various sub-standard accesses, including junction 6 and junction 7. Any increase in speed attributable to flow regulation may expose the dangers of sub-standard geometry to a greater degree than the present situation. The implementation of Option 2 could involve upgrade works to junction 6 and 7 to increase capacity and meet current design standards. This could offer significantly greater safety benefits in comparison to option 1 by providing adequate space for vehicles to join and leave the N11/M11 and by removing the safety risks associated with the tight bends currently present on approach to the existing roundabouts. Option 2 could also result in improvements to road safety by the upgrading of junction 6a with the R117 and Herbert Road junction to provide standard and safer layouts. The existing non-standard accesses to the N11/M11 in this locality would be removed resulting in further improvements in road safety. Option 3 could provide enhanced capacity in the form of additional traffic lanes along with standard junction layouts and removal of direct accesses. In conjunction with an improved public transport provision, this could have a positive impact on road safety. Congestion relief and associated improvement in journey times could relieve driver frustration and the propensity for erratic behaviour. It should be noted however that this option would not address the existing gradient deficiency on the N11 at this location, however the provision of additional road space could provide extra for overtaking of slow moving heavy goods vehicles. Option 4 would allow for the provision of an off-line solution at this location which could fully address the range of issues currently experienced, including non-standard junctions, gradients and horizontal curvature. Existing issues with road alignment, both horizontal and vertical, could be fully eradicated by the implementation of an offline option resulting in a significant improvement in safety. A standardised mainline and junction at this location could reduce the

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 27 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

current transport and safety issues experienced by the R117 and Herbert Road junctions.

6.3.4 N11 Junction 8 to Junction 9 and Surrounds Junction 8, as presented in Figure 9, includes several sub-standard features which are not compatible with a safely operating dual carriageway.

Figure 9: Junction 8 Schematic This includes a reduced speed limit of 60km/h travelling southbound and 80km/h travelling northbound, enforced mainly due to the existence of multiple successive access points along this section of the route. Travelling southbound, the abrupt reduction in speed limit is notified by means of regulatory speed limit signs without a perceptible change in road cross section or environment. As a result, compliance with the reduced speed limit is not uniformly observed. The cluster of residential and commercial accesses leads to weaving movements and heavy braking on the N11 which are severely disruptive to the flow of through traffic. Egress from the busy Circle K service station is sited along the junction 8 diverge, thereby forcing egressing vehicles to cross the diverge lane in direct conflict with diverging traffic and without adequate space to accelerate and merge at an appropriate speed. Pedestrian facilities are provided on this southbound section of the route in the form of a 450m long footpath adjacent to the various frontage properties. This provides access to the bus stop in Kilmacanoge but forces pedestrians to cross the busiest access points and increases the risk of pedestrian / vehicle collisions. The footpath does not continue towards Junction 7 for Bray and with no available alternative route, this leads to pedestrians occasionally walking along the hard adjacent to high speed traffic. Travelling in the northbound direction, the existing junction 8 diverge comprises a mainline auxiliary lane which leads almost directly to a mini-roundabout, without provision of a connector/slip road to current TII standards. Merging traffic from the west must negotiate the same mini-roundabout before passing along a two- way road which also serves as access to a service station, before merging onto the mainline N11, sometimes at an inappropriately low speed. The presence of a bus stop immediately upstream of the merge can make this manoeuvre particularly hazardous. Furthermore, there is a lack of adequate weaving length provision between this merge and the subsequent diverge serving Avoca and Glencormack.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 28 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

This can result in vehicles merging at low speed conflicting with vehicles manoeuvring across the mainline. Junction 9, as presented in Figure 10, is located in the Glenview area to the north of the Glen of the Downs.

Figure 10: Junction 9 Schematic While the surrounding area is predominantly rural, there are a number of commercial and residential properties within the immediate junction vicinity. Capacity at junction 9 appears adequate for the volume of vehicles accessing the N11 mainline, however, the sub-standard layout of the merges and diverges together with the presence of bus stops on the northbound and southbound carriageways present a safety concern. Figure 11 and Tables 10 and 11 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the junction 8 to junction 9 area.

Figure 11: Distribution of Collisions Junction 8 to Junction 9 (1996-2013)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 29 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 10: Collision Casualties Junction 8 to Junction 9 (1996 – 2013) N11 Junction 8 to Junction 9 and Surrounds Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 2 5 13 2 1997 0 0 3 0 1998 0 0 6 0 1999 1 0 7 6 2000 1 0 6 1 2001 0 0 13 1 2002 0 0 1 0 2003 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 2005 0 0 2 0 2006 0 0 0 0 2007 0 2 0 0 2008 0 1 0 0 2009 0 0 2 0 2010 0 0 3 0 2011 0 0 3 0 2012 0 0 2 0 2013 0 1 9 0 Total 4 9 70 10

Table 11: Collision Statistics Junction 8 to Junction 9 (1996 – 2013)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 30 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

In the period 1996 – 2013, four fatalities have been recorded along this section of the N11, although none of these have occurred in recent years. One such incident involved a pedestrian and may be attributable to the lack of segregation between vulnerable road users and traffic through Kilmacanoge. Overall, the statistics reflect a higher than average pedestrian involvement in collisions compared to other sections of the N11. The two fatalities south of Kilmacanoge involved a head on collision and a single vehicle collision with a tree. These collisions occurred during December and were during night time hours. A large percentage of collisions in the Kilmacanoge area involve rear-end shunt type collisions (31%), which is likely attributable to a combination of braking and weaving as a result of an abrupt reduction in speed limit and the proliferation of accesses through the village. It should be noted that approval has been granted for the construction of a segregated service road along the southbound carriageway, which will provide a safer arrangement for vehicles accessing the private and commercial properties by segregating this traffic from mainline through flow. Vehicles egressing these properties will do so via the service road and will be directed to junction 8 to safely re-join the mainline N11. These measures will have a positive impact on road safety by removing the conflict points from the main carriageway and enabling the N11 speed limit to be increased to 100km/h. Further south, the majority of other serious and minor collisions occurred either in close proximity to the access points at Quill Road and junction 9, or on the N11 immediately north of the Glen of the Downs where 8 collisions have occurred in close proximity to each other. These collisions coincide with a sub-standard horizontal curve and reduction in speed limit to 80km/h in the southbound direction. The statistics indicate an increased collision rate during the PM peak period only which indicates that the bulk of collisions in this area are located along the southbound carriageway. There is also a higher than average pedestrian involvement in collisions in the area (11%), most probably linked to the lack of adequate pedestrian facilities connecting the bus stops with the surrounding residential and commercial properties. The number of collisions occurring during wet conditions (31%) aligns with the average along the corridor. Option 1 would see regulation of traffic flows implemented which could in turn have a positive effect on road safety in the area. Although junction 8 does not cater for the same high volumes of traffic joining the N11/M11 as some of the more northern junctions on the scheme, the area is still affected by heavy congestion during AM and PM peak traffic and the more consistent flows resulting from demand management measures could reduce journey time variance. Option 2 would involve the closure of any accesses not already removed as part of the planned service road works related to the service station and junction 8 slip road. The removal of all non-standard junctions and accesses along this section of N11/M11 could facilitate a potential increase in speed limit and resultant reduction in average travel times through the area. Improved traffic flows should have a positive effect on congestion in the area, and the removal of non-standard accesses would remove factors which contribute to collisions resulting from

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 31 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

sudden braking, thereby leading to an improvement in overall safety standards. Upgrades to standardise the junction 8 and 9 merges and diverges could be incorporated which could in turn improve the functionality of the junctions and the flow of traffic on this section of N11/M11. Extending the merges and diverges to standard lengths could provide more time and space for vehicles to safely leave and re-join the mainline – which could have a positive effect on the numbers of rear-end shunt type collisions resulting from sudden braking. Segregation of vulnerable road users from the carriageway could help to reduce the number of incidents involving pedestrians in the area. Bus stops on either side of the mainline in Kilmacanoge and Glenview would need to be incorporated safely into any upgrades to provide a safe means for to both leave and re-join the mainline. In conjunction with the safety benefits realised through the provision of standardised junction design and the closure of direct accesses, Option 3 could significantly alleviate the congestion currently experienced through Kilmacanoge. Offline improvement works as part of Option 4 in this area, could alleviate the current safety issues, particularly the number of single vehicle and rear-end shunt type incidents. Should the preferred option in this area be an alternative route offline, Kilmacanoge could be returned to a more attractive village without the high degree of severance created by the existing road. The removal of the N11/M11 from this busy area could have a positive safety benefit for pedestrians and vulnerable road users. An offline alignment could also facilitate the removal of the substandard horizontal curvature on the N11 at the northern end of the Glen of the Downs.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 32 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

6.3.5 N11 Junction 10 and the Glen of the Downs From the south of junction 9 to junction 10, the N11 traverses through the Glen of the Downs Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Through this area, the road is surrounded by dense woodland close to the carriageway. A number of significant road safety issues are present along this section of the route. The southbound carriageway includes an access to and from the Glen of the Downs Nature Reserve located immediately beyond a sub-standard horizontal curve. The reduced curvature, in combination with a reduction in forward visibility and the relatively steep downhill gradient on approach to the access has necessitated a reduction in speed limit in the southbound direction to 80km/h. In the absence of a dedicated diverge and merge from the nature reserve access, vehicles are forced to use the existing hard shoulder to decelerate on approach to and accelerate on departure from the access. Junction 10, as presented in Figure 12, provides access to the townlands of and Drummin via the Glen Road and Drummin Lane respectively.

Figure 12: Junction 10 Schematic The main junction layout is non-standard and problems exist with sub-standard lengths of merges and diverges and an extremely tight radius on the northbound diverge slip road. A bus stop near the junction on the southbound side is located on the outside of a tight bend with limited space for buses to re-join the mainline safely. The southbound diverge lane at junction 10 comprises of a short slip road with tight left-hand bend which is also a sub-standard layout. This diverge also includes a sub-standard crest curve which reduces stopping sight distance. A second left in - left out junction, further south, which consists of a short slip lane with sharp left turn and a private access located on the bend, provides alternative access to the R762. The northbound carriageway includes a merge at this location from the townland of Killickabawn. The merge is not of standard length and does not allow for vehicles to accelerate to a suitable speed to safely join the main carriageway. The northbound merge from junction 10 also acts as a diverge lane for vehicles exiting the N11/M11 to access a service road to the west – this is confusing for road users unfamiliar with the area and poses risks due to the unusual and sub-standard layout. Figure 13 and Tables 12 and 13 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the junction 10 and Glen of the Downs area.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 33 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 13: Distribution of Collisions Junction 10 and Glen of the Downs (1996 – 2013) Table 12: Collision Casualties Junction 10 and Glen of the Downs (1996 – 2013)

Junction 10 & Surrounds Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 1 1 6 1 1997 0 1 7 0 1998 0 1 5 3 1999 1 2 5 1 2000 0 0 3 0 2001 0 0 2 0 2002 0 3 0 0 2003 0 1 10 2 2004 0 0 5 0 2005 0 0 0 0 2006 0 0 0 0 2007 0 1 1 0 2008 0 0 4 0 2009 0 0 11 0 2010 0 0 7 0 2011 0 0 5 0 2012 0 0 6 0 2013 0 0 2 0 Total 2 10 79 7

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 34 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 13: Collision Statistics Junction 10 and Glen of the Downs (1996 – 2013)

Total No. Collisions 52 100.00%

Time of Day N11/M11 Average AM Peak (07:00-10:00) 5 9.62% 16.81% PM Peak (16:00-19:00) 7 13.46% 18.53% Outside Peaks 40 76.92% 64.66%

Collision Type Pedestrian Involvement 1 1.92% 3.02% Single Vehicle Collision 23 44.23% 37.50% Rear-End Collision 3 5.77% 20.69% Head-On Collision 5 9.62% 7.75% Other Collision Type 0 0.00% 3.02%

Road Characteristics (where relevent/recorded) Straight 19 Bend 18 Hill/Crest 1 Gradient 11 Other 0

Vehicle Type Private Car 63 Goods Vehicle 0 Other 2

Weather Dry 35 67.31% 68.97% Other 17 32.69% 31.03% The section of the N11 through the Glen of the Downs experiences collisions above the national average rate, with the number rising to twice above the national average rate at junction 10 and its approaches. Two fatal incidents have occurred during the period of the collision study, neither of which were in recent years. A large number of incidents resulting in minor and severe casualties have occurred throughout the Glen of the Downs and in the vicinity of junction 10, with collision numbers remaining almost static in recent years. The predominant accident type involves single vehicle collisions, which can often be attributed to driver error, a pre-existing deficiency in the road infrastructure or weather conditions. Demand management measures implemented under Option 1 in the junction 10 locality could result in a more controlled flow of traffic on the mainline and approaches to the mainline from the Delgany and Drummin areas. This could allow for merging traffic to join the N11/M11 in a safer manner and provide additional time for vehicles on the mainline to react to merging traffic, should the need arise. Implementation of additional public transport facilities could reduce the volume of commuters, from Delgany and Drummin, accessing the Dublin area via the N11/M11, which could result in benefits from reduced traffic volumes and reduced congestion. Option 2 could remove the sub-standard accesses from the mainline and standardise the merges and diverges as part of junction 10 upgrades. This could have a positive effect on safety along this section. The safety benefits of the provision of additional capacity, Option 3, in the Glen of the Downs locality may be slightly limited as the main cause for safety concern in this area is with the existing non-standard road alignment and non-standard

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 35 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

accesses. The provision of additional capacity in this area in conjunction with the rationalisation of accesses would however have a slightly positive effect by reducing mainline congestion making it both easier and safer for merging traffic to join the mainline. Option 4 could be the most beneficial solution from a safety perspective, as a wholly offline route could be designed and constructed to current standard requirements, thereby eliminating the problem associated with sub-standard geometric elements on the existing route. An offline route could significantly alter the topography of the surrounding area and could sever access on some existing local roads. Access to an offline route would be restricted to primary junctions – however, traffic patterns on local roads may alter and potentially increase to access these junctions, which could have the potential to impact adversely on road safety if such routes are unsuitable to cater for an increased demand.

6.3.6 N11 Junction 11 to Junction 12 and Surrounds Junction 11, as illustrated in Figure 14, provides access from the N11 to Greystones and via the R774 and to the northern side of Kilpedder village via the L1043.

Figure 14: Junction 11 Schematic The surrounding area is relatively rural, however there are a number of large residential areas in close proximity to the N11 and a number of commercial enterprises also between junction 11 and junction 12. Traffic volumes are significantly lower on this section of the route and the road environment transitions in character to a more rural dual carriageway. Between the two primary junctions, Kilpedder village can also be accessed via a diverge only junction on the northbound carriageway. This is sited opposite a left-in / left-out junction on the southbound carriageway serving the townland of Kilquade via the L1042. There are also three direct private accesses onto the N11 mainline between junction 11 and junction 12; two private residential accesses and one commercial access. Junction 12 provides access to and Roundwood to the west of the N11 via the R772 and R765, as presented in Figure 15.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 36 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 15: Junction 12 Schematic To the east of the N11, access is provided to a large residential development (Garden Village) along Ballyronan Road. Figure 16 and Tables 14 and 15 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the junction 11 and junction 12 area.

Figure 16: Distribution of Collisions Junction 11 to Junction 12 (1996-2013)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 37 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 14: Collision Casualties Junction 11 to Junction 12 (1996 – 2013)

N11 Junction 11 to Junction 12 and Surrounds Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 0 3 1 1 1997 0 0 12 0 1998 0 0 6 0 1999 0 0 4 0 2000 0 1 4 0 2001 0 1 5 0 2002 0 1 1 0 2003 0 0 1 0 2004 0 0 1 0 2005 0 1 3 0 2006 0 0 0 0 2007 0 1 2 0 2008 0 0 0 0 2009 0 0 4 0 2010 0 0 2 0 2011 0 0 2 0 2012 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 2 0 Total 0 8 50 1

Table 15: Collision Statistics Junction 11 to Junction 12 (1996 – 2013)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 38 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

During the study period between 1996 and 2013, there have been no fatal collisions along this section of the N11 route. A number of collisions resulting in serious and minor injury have occurred, with a large number of these clustered around the northbound diverge only junction serving Kilpedder and the southbound left-in / left-out junction serving Kilquade via the L1042. Three further collisions resulting in serious injury have also occurred at the primary junction locations; two at the junction 12 northbound merge and one at the junction 11 northbound diverge. There is no clear correlation between collision frequency and weather conditions. The mainline and junction capacity in the junction 11 vicinity appears to be sufficient for the traffic volumes in this area, however, the flow breakdown issues experienced further north can result in significant congestion as far south as Kilpedder during the AM peak hours. Demand management measures implemented under Option 1 on the N11 as a whole, could improve the continuity of flow in the most congested areas of the route further north and in turn assist in improving journey times and journey time reliability from the southern extents of the study area. An improvement in public transport facilities in the area could reduce the volume of commuters, from the Greystones, Kilpedder and Kilcoole areas currently accessing the Dublin area via the N11/M11, which could have a positive effect on road safety in the locality. Option 2 could standardise the junctions with the L5046 and L1042 and remove direct accesses from private and commercial properties onto the N11 by providing a safer alternative to link to the primary junctions. As evident from the collision data, these minor junctions are a clear point of conflict and furthermore limit the available weaving length between junctions 11 and 12. The northbound diverge lane to Kilpedder runs adjacent to several frontage properties and a commercial access. The road layout is not intuitive as diverging vehicles enter a two-way local road (L5026), with a stop line to prevent a direct conflict with oncoming vehicles on the local road. The length of the diverge lane appears insufficient to allow drivers to reduce speed to an appropriate level before entering the village, whereupon they encounter parked vehicles and pedestrian movements. On the southbound carriageway, the left-in / left-out junction serving Kilquade does not meet current design standards in terms of the merge and diverge lanes and is further complicated by the presence of a cul de sac entrance to a number of residential properties within the junction. Any option which improves the layout of these junctions, through application of current design standards could offer significant safety benefits for all road users. The provision of additional mainline capacity as part of Option 3 is unlikely to offer significant safety benefits at this location. As mentioned above, traffic volumes are significantly lower through this section of the route and may be within the capacity of the existing infrastructure, though this will need to be verified by more detailed traffic analysis. Recorded collisions have been localised at junctions and accesses with few incidents arising on the mainline N11. Any option which improves the junction layouts in this area, particularly the non- standard layouts at Kilpedder south and Kilquade are likely to offer the greatest road safety benefit.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 39 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Option 4 could allow for the provision of a fully standardised off line solution in the junction 11 locality. This could remove the existing issues with the L5046 and L1042 junctions as well as the existing non-standard accesses from this section of N11/M11. This option could provide an improvement in overall road safety and would be viewed as positive. However, given that existing collision rates in this area are relatively low and the route would appear to satisfy the current capacity requirements, the justification for an offline route may be difficult to achieve.

6.3.7 N11 Junction 13 to Junction 14 and Surrounds Junction 13 provides access to Newtownmountkennedy and Newcastle via the R772, as presented in Figure 17.

Figure 17: Junction 13 Schematic The surrounding area comprises a mixture of greenfield areas and sporadic residential and commercial development. The junction is unusual in layout as the northbound and southbound connector roads are separated by a distance of approximately 2km. The existing southbound merge consists of a loop type diverge which does not meet current TII geometric standard requirements. In the northbound direction, the existing diverge off the N11 mainline leads directly into the R772, with the one-way slip road becoming a two-way regional road at the end of the diverge. At this point, a right-turn access into a private estate crosses the slip road in a left diverge loop type arrangement, which is unlikely to represent an intuitive layout for those unfamiliar with the route. The northbound merge is located 1.4km to the north and consists of a short, low-radius connector road which does not comply fully with current standards. Junction 14 (Coyne’s Cross) is the southernmost junction within the study area, as presented in Figure 18.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 40 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 18: Junction 14 Schematic The N11 dual carriageway transitions to the M11 motorway at this junction and the speed limit increases from 100km/h to 120km/h. The surrounding area is generally rural in nature, however junction 14 does include access to a busy motorway service area. Furthermore, bus stops are located on both the northbound and southbound carriageways of the N11 approximately 1km north of junction 14, with pedestrian access provided via Dunran Road. Figure 19 and Tables 16 and 17 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the junction 13 to junction 14 area.

Figure 19: Distribution of Collisions Junction 13 to Junction 14 (1996-2013)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 41 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 16: Collision Casualties Junction 13 to Junction 14 (1996 – 2013)

N11 Junction 13 to Junction 14 and Surrounds Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 1 1 8 0 1997 0 4 3 0 1998 0 1 3 0 1999 0 0 3 0 2000 0 4 18 0 2001 0 3 5 0 2002 1 4 4 1 2003 1 2 15 5 2004 0 0 1 0 2005 0 0 6 1 2006 0 0 2 0 2007 0 1 1 0 2008 0 0 5 0 2009 0 0 5 0 2010 1 0 1 1 2011 0 0 7 0 2012 0 1 6 1 2013 0 1 1 0 Total 4 22 94 9

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 42 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 17: Collision Statistics Junction 11 to Junction 12 (1996 – 2013)

Four fatal collisions have occurred along this section of the N11 route during the study period. It is noteworthy that one of these involved a pedestrian and occurred close to the bus stop on the N11 northbound at the Dunran Road underbridge to the north of junction 14. One of the other fatalities was also recorded on the N11 at junction 13 and was recorded as being due to the driver taking avoidance action while travelling at a speed above the speed limit. There is no evidence of any correlation between road collisions and adverse weather conditions in this area. The predominant accident type involves single vehicle collisions (37%). The statistics also indicate that over twice as many collisions occur during the PM peak in comparison to the AM peak. Issues with particularly heavy congestion are not a regular occurrence in the junction 13 locality with driving conditions generally free flow. Demand management measures implemented as part of Option 1 could have a limited effect on road capacity and safety. However, public transport providers utilising the N11 could become more attractive if journey times and reliability are improved as a consequence of demand management along the entire route within the study area. However, it is noted that the population densities in this area are quite low in terms of serving significant public transport investment. While junction capacity may be sufficient, there are existing geometric deficiencies at the junction 13 merges and diverges where road safety standards could be improved through the implementation of Option 2 . There are no further direct access points along the N11 mainline between junction 13 and junction 14. The provision of additional mainline capacity as part of Option 3 is unlikely to offer significant road safety benefits at this location.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 43 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

As mentioned above, traffic volumes are significantly lower along this section of the route and within the capacity of the existing infrastructure. As existing collision rates in this area are relatively low, the road safety benefit from a fully offline option in this area is likely to be negligible. Given the need to tie-in to the existing M11 motorway at junction 14 and the fact that the route meets the current capacity requirements, it is unlikely that an offline route could be justified.

6.3.8 Greater Shankill Area (Including Junction 4) The Shankill area acts as significant contributor to the volume of traffic commuting to the southern metropolitan area of Dublin. The area immediately surrounding the N11/M11 comprises dense urban residential and commercial development. As there is no access to the junction 4 (M11/M50) freeflow interchange, the majority of vehicular traffic from Shankhill joins the N11 via the R837 to Loughlinstown Roundabout situated at the northern extent of the study area. Figure 20 and Tables 18 and 19 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the greater Shankill area.

Figure 20: Distribution of Collisions Within Greater Shankill Area (1996 – 2013) Table 18: Collision Casualties Within Greater Shankill Area (1996 – 2013)

Greater Shankill Area Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 1 2 10 2 1997 0 2 16 2 1998 0 0 21 1 1999 0 0 12 0

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 44 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Greater Shankill Area Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 2000 0 0 8 0 2001 0 0 15 0 2002 1 0 11 1 2003 0 2 10 0 2004 0 1 7 2 2005 1 2 8 0 2006 2 0 3 0 2007 1 2 2 0 2008 0 0 17 0 2009 0 0 17 0 2010 0 1 14 0 2011 0 0 14 1 2012 0 2 16 1 2013 0 1 20 0 Total 6 15 221 10

Table 19: Collision Statistics Within Greater Shankill Area (1996 – 2013)

Total No. Collisions 196 100.00%

Time of Day N11/M11 Average AM Peak (07:00-10:00) 37 18.88% 16.81% PM Peak (16:00-19:00) 47 23.98% 18.53% Outside Peaks 112 57.14% 64.66%

Collision Type Pedestrian Involvement 25 12.76% 3.02% Single Vehicle Collision 68 34.69% 37.50% Rear-End Collision 41 20.92% 20.69% Head-On Collision 9 4.59% 7.75% Other Collision Type 26 13.27% 3.02%

Road Characteristics (where relevent/recorded) Straight 123 Bend 24 Hill/Crest 4 Gradient 8 Other 12

Vehicle Type Private Car 239 Goods Vehicle 0 Other 25

Weather Dry 140 71.43% 68.97% Other 56 28.57% 31.03% Collisions are clustered along the main commuter routes entering and exiting Shankill and in proximity to Loughlinstown Roundabout. The numbers of collisions resulting in serious and minor injuries have remained relatively consistent and have not decreased in line with national trends, though traffic volumes have increased considerably in the same time period.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 45 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Statistics for the greater Shankill area indicate that collision rates increase during the AM and PM peaks. There is understandably an increased pedestrian involvement rate as the area is mainly residential. As a result, instances of pedestrian/vehicle conflict are more common than they would be the N11/M11. Any demand management or upgrades made on the N11/M11 must not negatively impact upon the already congested roads servicing the greater Shankill area. There is a significant risk of increasing the number of road safety issues in the greater Shankill area should works associated with the N11/M11 result in increased traffic volumes in the surrounding areas. Improved public transport facilities are of paramount importance in this area as reducing traffic volumes is seen as the most effective way of reducing collision rates. A reduction in traffic volumes and congestion should result in an improvement in overall driver behaviour, linked to improved driving conditions, and a positive road safety benefit for both motorised and vulnerable road users.

6.3.9 Greater Bray Area Bray is the largest town in Co. Wicklow and the fourth largest town in Ireland with a population of 32,600 (2016). The town is in a strategically important position within the greater Dublin metropolitan area and is a gateway to the county. As well as providing a higher order economic and social function for its local residents and the surrounding region, it is home to a significant commuting population with 45.5% of persons at work and living in Bray commuting to Dublin city and suburbs for employment in 2016. The town has strong transport links including access to the DART rail link and the N11/M11 corridor. However, given the presence of only one alternative crossing of the River Dargle within Bray town, the existing N11/M11 functions in part as an orbital route around the town, catering for the large volume of commuting traffic to the Dublin region and also for shorter trips between north and south Bray. Figure 21 and Tables 20 and 21 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the greater Bray area.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 46 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Figure 21: Distribution of Collisions Within Greater Bray Area (1996-2013) Table 20: Collision Casualties Within Greater Bray Area (1996 – 2013)

Greater Bray Area Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury Injury of Unknown Severity 1996 2 3 38 0 1997 2 3 43 3 1998 2 6 47 0 1999 1 6 36 8 2000 2 1 41 1 2001 1 4 46 2 2002 0 1 24 1 2003 1 1 26 0 2004 0 4 16 3 2005 0 1 21 6 2006 2 1 21 0 2007 1 4 1 0 2008 0 3 41 1 2009 1 2 47 1 2010 0 3 58 4 2011 0 2 47 2 2012 0 0 58 0 2013 0 4 44 2 Total 15 49 655 34

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 47 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 21: Collision Statistics Within Greater Bray Area (1996 – 2013)

Total No. Collisions 543 100.00%

Time of Day N11/M11 Average AM Peak (07:00-10:00) 78 14.36% 16.81% PM Peak (16:00-19:00) 111 20.44% 18.53% Outside Peaks 354 65.19% 64.66%

Collision Type Pedestrian Involvement 140 25.78% 3.02% Single Vehicle Collision 208 38.31% 37.50% Rear-End Collision 95 17.50% 20.69% Head-On Collision 31 5.71% 7.75% Other Collision Type 140 25.78% 3.02%

Road Characteristics (where relevent/recorded) Straight 362 Bend 57 Hill/Crest 8 Gradient 39 Other 7

Vehicle Type Private Car 595 Goods Vehicle 6 Other 57

Weather Dry 409 75.32% 68.97% Other 134 24.68% 31.03% In the period 1996 to 2013, there were 15 fatalities and a proliferation of collisions resulting in serious and minor injuries within Bray town and its environs. Recorded collisions included a large number of pedestrians (26%), single vehicle (38%) and rear end shunt type incidents (17.5%). Statistical data did not indicate any clear correlation with weather conditions. Collisions are clustered along the main commuter routes entering and exiting Bray and are particularly frequent around the main N11/M11 junctions servicing the town. Incidents have slightly increased in number over recent years due to increased traffic volumes, resulting in further conflict between vehicular traffic and vulnerable road users. The improvement in public transport systems has the greatest potential to relieve traffic congestion and improve road safety within Bray. As discussed previously in this report, limitations on access to the N11 as a demand management measure could impact negatively on road safety in the surrounding urban areas if such measures merely serve to divert vehicular demand and force reassignment to alternative routes. This could result in a worsening of congestion within Bray if actual vehicular trip demand is not reduced in tandem. However, if implemented correctly, Option 1 – a combination of demand management measures and improved public transport provision would improve safety for all road users both on the N11/M11 strategic corridor and the wider urban area. Option 2 would include the same demand management measures and public transport improvements as option 1 together with improved junction layouts and standard access provision on the N11/M11 route. While this option would be preferable from a safety perspective for vehicles accessing the national route, it would not offer any further safety benefit to the wider Bray urban area in comparison to option 1.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 48 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

The relative safety improvement of Option 3 in the Bray urban area would also be marginal. Connectivity to the N11/M11 would need to be carefully considered as capacity enhancement may simply encourage further commuter traffic if journey time reliability is improved. Such a scenario is unlikely to be sustainable and it is imperative that the nature of demand management measures seeks to increase the public transport mode share. As noted previously, the implementation of Option 4 is unlikely to be desirable or feasible within this section of the N11/M11 corridor. Given the proximity of surrounding urban development and the nearby connection to the M50, there is no viable alternative corridor in this area of the scheme. Furthermore, the existing route, albeit heavily congested, is of a high motorway standard.

6.3.10 Greater Greystones Area Greystones is a diverse urban area comprising a mix of residential, commercial and recreational zones. Despite a large population of 18,140 (2016), the town has managed to retain a ‘village’ character owing to an attractive built environment, coastal setting and an absence of major industry. Figure 22 and Tables 22 and 23 detail the collisions recorded in the period 1996 to 2013 in the junction greater Greystones area.

Figure 22: Distribution of Collisions Within Greater Greystones Area (1996 – 2013)

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 49 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 22: Collision Casualties Within Greater Greystones Area (1996 – 2013)

Greater Greystones Area Injury Year Fatal Seriously Injured Minor Injury (Unknown Severity) 1996 3 9 30 5 1997 0 1 25 0 1998 0 2 18 3 1999 1 4 12 1 2000 1 1 25 2 2001 1 2 20 0 2002 0 6 10 1 2003 0 1 28 2 2004 2 3 13 1 2005 1 3 13 0 2006 0 2 1 0 2007 0 3 2 0 2008 0 5 16 0 2009 0 1 21 0 2010 0 1 23 0 2011 0 1 11 0 2012 0 0 28 3 2013 0 1 20 0 Total 9 46 316 18

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 50 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

Table 23: Collision Statistics Within Greater Greystones Area (1996 – 2013)

Total No. Collisions 232 100.00%

Time of Day N11/M11 Average AM Peak (07:00-10:00) 32 13.79% 16.81% PM Peak (16:00-19:00) 45 19.40% 18.53% Outside Peaks 155 66.81% 64.66%

Collision Type Pedestrian Involvement 33 14.22% 3.02% Single Vehicle Collision 97 41.81% 37.50% Rear-End Collision 26 11.21% 20.69% Head-On Collision 27 11.64% 7.75% Other Collision Type 32 13.79% 3.02%

Road Characteristics (where relevent/recorded) Straight 106 Bend 59 Hill/Crest 12 Gradient 32 Other 7

Vehicle Type Private Car 287 Goods Vehicle 3 Other 18

Weather Dry 172 74.14% 68.97% Other 60 25.86% 31.03% The dispersion and type of collisions in the greater Greystones area follows a similar pattern to Bray with the number of collisions resulting in serious and minor injuries remaining stable in recent years. Recorded collisions included a large percentage of pedestrian (14%) and single vehicle (42%). Statistical data did not indicate any clear correlation with weather conditions. The statistics indicate an increased incident rate during the AM and PM peak travel times, which is to be expected given the high volume of commuter traffic in a town the size of Greystones. Collisions are clustered along the main commuter routes entering and exiting the greater Greystones area and are particularly clustered around the Old Dublin Road (R761) and the main N11/M11 junctions servicing the town. As is the case with Bray, improvements in the public transport network such that commuting demand on the N11/M11 route is reduced has the most potential to improve road safety within the Greystones-Delgany area. Online improvements along the N11/M11 corridor alone are unlikely to achieve significant road safety benefits within the urban areas. Vehicular collisions can only be reduced in these areas if vehicular trip demand is also reduced and improvements in public transport provision are needed to achieve this. A reduction in car journeys would greatly enhance the urban environment for pedestrians and cyclists with resultant road safety benefits.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 51 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

7 Climatic and Seasonal Influences on Safety

The variable weather conditions in Ireland throughout the year can have a direct influence on road safety. Variable weather conditions can cause flooding and icy conditions on the road network which in turn can lead to collisions due to aquaplaning or skidding. Sustained poor weather conditions can also cause maintenance issues such as and other road defects. Variable weather conditions combined with the resultant defects can result in collisions of all severities to occur. This has a significant impact on road safety as discussed under the headings below.

7.1 Flooding The majority of areas on the N11/M11 route are not subjected to flooding. Any improvements to the existing infrastructure or the provision of any offline infrastructure would be designed such that flooding will not cause any operational issues or would not cause risk or injury to road users. A detailed flood study would be prepared for the selected option to ensure that any proposals are not susceptible to flooding.

7.2 Icy Conditions Maintenance of major regional and national routes is a priority during icy weather due to the large volumes of traffic which use these routes. Therefore, the construction or upgrade of a national route would ensure enhanced safety to drivers during icy conditions by providing a well maintained, standard and predictable route for road users.

7.3 Peak Period Traffic-Flows (Holiday Periods) The wider area surrounding the N11/M11 corridor is highly scenic and environmentally sensitive, with several areas of outstanding natural beauty and high amenity value attracting both visiting tourists and the local population alike. The N11/M11 corridor serves as a distribution point from Dublin for onward journeys to the Wicklow Mountains, Glendalough Valley, Powerscourt Waterfall and Bray Head among others. Increases in traffic volumes can be observed during public holidays or on summer weekends as the outdoor amenities on offer attract large crowds from the nearby Dublin metropolitan area. Festivals and events such as the Bray Air Show also increase traffic volumes considerably in the northern portion of the study area. The provision of an upgraded on-line option, or off-line option, could alleviate some of these delays along the N11/M11 route during these peak periods, whilst providing a standard and safe road layout for road users. The associated reduction in congestion as a result of improvements could reduce driver frustration at problematic locations on the N11/M11 which in turn could lead to a positive change in driver behaviour and a potential reduction in overall collision occurrences.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 52 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 53 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

8 Comparison of Alternatives

8.1 Overview At this stage of the project there is no approved traffic model to assess and appraise the potential safety benefits accruing from each of the transportation options under consideration. During phase 2, a detailed Cost and Benefit to Accidents – Light Touch (COBALT) assessment will be undertaken to assess and quantify the change in the number of collisions and causalities as a direct result of the scheme. The appraisal is based on the assessment of the impacts of each option against the current situation as noted above and summarised below. A scaling statement is used to rank the options ranging from: • Highly positive; • Moderately positive; • Slightly positive; • Neutral; • Slightly negative; • Moderately negative; • Highly negative. In general terms, the implementation of each option in isolation may not necessarily have a fully positive impact on safety in the greater area, but when correctly implemented (sometimes in conjunction with another option) should result in a positive effect on road safety in the areas surrounding the implemented upgrades. It should also be noted that a proposed option may only realise road safety benefits if applied in a certain area at a specific time.

8.2 Safety The Do-Nothing scenario will not offer any safety benefit as it is essentially a continuation of the current situation. When future growth projections for the study area are considered, there is the real potential that current safety issues could worsen if nothing is done to address the transportation issues. Similarly, the Do Minimum scenario will not offer any major improvement as the existing situation could remain along the vast majority of route. It is acknowledged that the Kilmacanoge Service Road Scheme (discussed in Chapter 6) would form part of the do minimum scenario and would offer road safety benefits. However, this scheme is intended to address a specific localised problem and the road safety benefit accrued in the context of the wider N11/M11 corridor could be quite marginal. Option 1 could allow for demand management measures to be implemented along the existing N11/M11 route with the aim influencing driver behaviour such that trip demand is reduced.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 54 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

As discussed previously, the management measures available are wide ranging and the appropriate measure to be adopted will need to be carefully considered. This measure may vary along certain sections of the route depending on the particular site conditions encountered. Should demand management measures merely strive to divert vehicular demand and force reassignment to alternative routes, there is a potential for road safety issues to deteriorate in the adjacent road networks off the mainline route. For large numbers of vehicular commuters, the N11/M11 route is the only viable corridor to access employment in the Dublin metropolitan area. As such, only management measures which reduce trip demand will improve road safety for all road users. The provision of an improved public transport system and connectivity to it is an essential component in achieving this outcome. The ability of demand management measures alone to meet the road safety objectives of the scheme will need to be carefully assessed during phase 2. This is particularly pertinent at the northern extents of the scheme where traffic volumes significantly exceed thresholds for an acceptable level of service provision. Demand management and public transport improvements alone would need to remove a huge volume of demand on the N11/M11 to restore safe operation and levels of service if capacity enhancement is not provided through additional road infrastructure. Option 2 could provide a safer alternative as it could include the same benefits as option 1 whilst addressing existing capacity and geometric issues on the N11/M11 junctions. Many of these junctions give rise to road safety issues and are a focal point of conflicts and incidents. Junction improvements could remove the associated risk of vehicles either joining or leaving the main carriageway at points where insufficient space or visibility for turning manoeuvres to be made safely currently exist. This in turn could reduce the number of multi vehicle collisions on the section of N11/M11 under consideration. The upgrading of sub-standard junctions could also allow for a more efficient flow of traffic joining and leaving the mainline and a reduction in weaving problems around the junctions. Option 3 could involve significant alteration to the existing N11/M11 corridor by incorporating the junction and access improvements included in option 2, together with the provision of capacity enhancement via additional lanes where required. This could be implemented in conjunction with improvements in public transport. Option 3 could offer significant road safety benefits by providing a route that meets design current standard requirements and capacity needs. However, it is imperative for option 3 to be implemented in a sustainable manner such that road capacity enhancement does not foster a greater commuting demand, otherwise safety benefits may only be accrued in the short to medium term. Option 4 could entail the most significant degree of investment by providing a new route offline. The benefits of this option are difficult to ascertain at this stage as it is unlikely to be a viable solution in all areas given the existing environmental, engineering and human constraints. In theory, an offline corridor designed to the highest standards would significantly improve safety along the N11/M11 corridor. However, an offline option would significantly alter the surrounding topography, road network and travel patterns and the safety impacts of this would need to be assessed in great detail.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 55 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

It is likely that offline construction may only realise road safety benefits where existing deficiencies on the N11/M11 can be removed. As noted, Options 1, 2, 3 and 4 include provision for upgrading of varying portions of the existing infrastructure in combination with provision of additional public transport options where capacity is released. Therefore, all four options aim to reduce congestion and increase the mode share on public transport, which in turn could result in a reduction in the number of injury collisions and will have a positive rating from a road safety perspective. Options which can release capacity in the existing network will also facilitate improved provision for vulnerable road users. The overall scaling rating under the category of Safety is moderately negative for the Do-Nothing and slightly negative for the Do-Minimum options , with Options 1 - 4 rated slightly positive to highly positive. Table 24: Options Safety Rating

Do- Do- Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Nothing Minimum Safety Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Moderately Highly Negative Negative Positive Positive Positive Positive

8.3 Benefit As detailed, the proposed options could alleviate congestion and associated delays on the N11/M11. The proposed project could reduce journey time variance by removing or reducing traffic congestion and remedying capacity deficiencies. This serves to reduce absolute journey time and journey time variance for commercial vehicles, public transport and private car users. This also serves to reduce driver frustration, improve driver behaviour and create a safer road environment. Collisions due to sub-standard accesses combined with collisions at junctions account for many collisions on the section of the N11/M11 under consideration. The number and severity of these collisions could be reduced with the improvement and/or provision of additional infrastructure. The provision of additional infrastructure or upgrades and reconfiguration of the existing infrastructure could reduce the number of road users choosing to use the local road network or residential streets over the intended main routes in and out of townlands and could reduce the number of associated collisions which often involve pedestrians and other vulnerable road users. The provision of additional public transport facilities serving the main townlands in the study area could remove a large volume of traffic from the existing road network, thus lowering collision rates which in turn would lead to safer urban roads. The removal of traffic from urban areas could make these areas a much more desirable space for cyclists, pedestrians and other vulnerable road users. With the removal of traffic from these areas, the associated road space could be dedicated to vulnerable road users and public transport options such as those recommended within the Greater Dublin Area Transport Strategy (2016 - 2035).

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 56 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 57 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

9 Conclusions and Summary

An early examination of the transportation issues which affect road safety along the extents of the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme has been carried out. The following issues are the major contributory factors to road safety along the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme: • Significant congestion exists along the N11/M11 (Junction 4 to Junction 14) route; • Journey time unreliability due to uncertain quantum of delay; • Journey time variability throughout the day; • Peak hour traffic delays; • Higher AM and PM peak rear end shunt type collisions in northern section of the scheme; • Higher Rates of AM and PM collisions exist in northern section of the scheme; • Over capacity transport connections from the main commuter townlands to the south of the Greater Dublin Area are evident. The following are the key performance targets which the project intends to achieve to deliver on the objectives, resolve the transportation issues and enhance safety. • Improve the efficiency of the N11/M11 corridor between Junction 4 and Junction 14; • Improve efficiency, reliability and journey times within European Route 1(E01) • Improve connectivity with the wider European market by reliability of journey time between ports and ease of movement • Improve resilience of the Irish market by improving connectivity to Rosslare Europort and the wider European market • Generate positive economic benefits to road users • To reduce the frequency and severity of collisions on the N11/M11 corridor between Junction 4 and Junction 14; • To support the Government’s Road Safety Strategy; • To reduce CO2 emissions and particulate emissions through a reduction in fuel consumption; • To manage noise impacts in populated areas; • To provide a corridor that will encourage and support investment and employment in the wider area; • To improve road based public transport journey time;

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 58 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX

Wicklow County Council N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme Road Safety Impact Assessment Report

• To improve connectivity to the national road network; • To provide continuity of road type between Junction 6 and Junction 15; • To improve connectivity to Rosslare Europort; • To be compatible with adopted land use objectives; • To complement wider government policy; • Promoting walking and cycling by providing a safer environment for non- motorised road users. The current road networks, which would be affected by any proposed road-based transportation solution, experience a variety of road safety issues as previously outlined. Any potential road-based solutions would need to be designed with the aim of removing the contributing factors to road safety issues. The on-line options considered would aim to improve existing layouts, regulate traffic flows and reduce congestion in problematic areas along the N11/M11 and provide a safer more predictable journey. The online options carry a risk of simply relocating existing road safety issues elsewhere in the affected area. Careful consideration of the implementation of all options must be undertaken to ensure that an unsafe environment is not created in one area as a result of improvements elsewhere. All transportation solutions, where feasible, should comprise an element of public transport in line with existing strategies and local area development plans. The implications and benefits of public transport improvements in line with these strategies and plans will be investigated in Phase 2. An off-line solution would result in the provision of a high quality fully standardised route with the inherent road safety benefits. However, in the case of the N11/M11 Junction 4 to Junction 14 Improvement Scheme, the extents of fully offline options may be limited and are yet to be developed. Any proposed transportation solution which involves the addition of, or alteration to road infrastructure would be designed so as to not introduce additional road safety issues at any location impacted by the scheme. Good design practice must be followed with regards to all elements of road upgrades and all proposed transportation solutions must provide an acceptable standard of road safety for all road users. As noted in Table 24 the overall scaling rating under the category of Safety is slightly negative / moderately negative for the Do Nothing and Do Minimum scenarios, with Options 1-4 rated slightly positive to highly positive. This concludes the road safety impact assessment as part of the feasibility stage. However, this will be continually reviewed and applied through the design phases, particularly at Phase 2 Option Selection.

265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004 | Issue 2 | 15 May 2019 | Arup Page 59 \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\DUBLIN\JOBS\265000\265455-00\4. INTERNAL\4-04 REPORTS\4-04-03 INFRASTRUCTURE\5. RSIA REPORT\265455-ARUP-GEN-XX-RP-ZM-0004-ISSUE 2.DOCX