Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

N22 - Macroom to Ballyvourney (Macroom Bypass) [open to traffic]

Options
1818284868794

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭ADKELMAC


    I’m not saying it’s chronic now. It’s generally how we operate in Ireland

    Like the situation we had with traffic in Macroom for the last 25 years or so we had to wait until it the traffic situation was chronic before we got the new road.

    similarly with many of our national major projects. ie children’s hospital.



  • Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭ADKELMAC


    I’m not looking for a private junction. Yes it might be 6kms from Macroom. The idea of having it there is so anybody can use to avoid the town not just those coming out of town.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,542 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    If the western side of Macroom really is going to be planned for more housing (which I don’t think is a good idea), then something like this is what would be done...

    About 2~3 km of new road that would still cost less than a new junction, and provide benefits for people who don’t even use N22. Plus it would opens up a lot of land area for housing.

    I actually think something like this is a bad idea, because any development in Macroom should be focused on making the town more densely populated: that gives local businesses more local customers, and it’s easier to get good services (clinics, transport, etc.) for the people who live in the town. Low-density ribbon development like we already have at Codrum is a good way to destroy rural towns - it takes the worst bits of living in the country (no easy access to services; car dependence) and adds the worst bits of living in a town (closeness of neighbours, traffic). It’s much better to spend the money on the town centre than encouraging sprawl into the countryside.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,405 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    The whole point of a dual carriageway bypass is to serve the greatest number of people efficiently with junctions where they’re most justified. Given the length of this scheme and population density the number of junctions built/planned is perfectly adequate. I’m sure plenty of small villages would lone junctions at various points in our motorway network (I can think of loads) but that would be ridiculous ultimately



  • Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭ADKELMAC


    Such a new road would open up a lot of land for development potential, improve access even more than what has been already delivered & possibly satisfy those who wished to see a completed junction with slips at Carrigaphooca.

    I ve no idea what it would cost to buy the land for such a route, let alone construct it or get planning approval but whoever owned the land along such a route could see their land value increase significantly. I wouldn’t mind owning a bank of land like that. Lucky people they’d be

    Post edited by ADKELMAC on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭ClmAlfie


    You're right this is not a good idea, but not cos of what you said. The road going through at the start of the land from the roundabout on the Millstreet Road, news houses are built there. And plus going through land in Codrum, it's Michael Creed's land or next to it. Thought you said you knew the area!

    That plan would have cost alot more than putting sliproads at Carrigaphooka. There are old roads on either side of the bypass which can be adjusted and join onto the bypass.

    Anyway I do agree with you about the Millstreet Cross junction and I like your idea, it's the cheapest option. It could work and there is space for it. But Millstreet road is already a very busy road as there are a good few housing estates and businesses. It will even get more busier with traffic to get on/off at the bypass. People living there are complaining about it.

    And also I do think no 40 bus won't be using the bypass, they still have to use the old road

    So wouldn't it be alot better to built sliproads at Carrigaphooka?



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,829 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Surely a new distributor type road would be better built east of the Millstreet road? Put a roundabout at the N22 exit and build a new road going east (existing lanes only go west to Millstreet road) and then south to link with the old N22 and the town. That then opens up the land adjoining the town for development, would be a more natural way for the town to grow.

    It doesn't solve the "problem" of people from further west accessing the N22 (I'm still not convinced that it is a big issue) but a roundabout could still be created at Millstreet cross.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,542 ✭✭✭KrisW1001



    Don’t get hung up on the exact location of stuff - I drew that in five minutes - if there’s a 10 m wide track of undeveloped ground, there’s room for a road, footpaths and verge. I’d be surprised if somewhere in the County Council there wasn’t a plan for something like what I drew, but you’d only find out about it if you asked for planning along its exact route.

    I did say the idea was a bad one, and I agree that the Creed factor would count against it: rezoning of that land would make its owners very wealthy, and the fact that so many are related to a former FG TD would create a political scandal that the party could do without. All I was showing was how future expansion to the west of Macroom would not require a junction at Carrigaphuca, but as I said, it’s the wrong idea.

    But really, 3 km of urban single carriageway and a couple of roundabouts wouldn’t cost as much as a grade separated junction at Carrigaphuca. The roads around the junction location are unsuitable for use as slip-roads. Only the old N22, north of the new road was close to the same level. Everything else would need to be built up to the height of the road. You would need to clear back much further on the southern side to safely reach the elevation of the road. On the northern side, for traffic wishing to head west, you need to build a new slip-road right here: R618 - Google Maps - that’s an expensive job that would require blasting and then banking. It’s at least ten million.

    Yes, the Number 40 bus will still go into Macroom: it has to stop there to pick up passengers. But its next stop is Baile Mhic Íre, and I suspect it’ll get there by joining the bypass at Millstreet Road. Bad news for the passengers who’d get themselves dropped at the Mons bar, but that’s progress..

    @Pete_Cavan yes, this would be more in line with creating a higher-density core in Macroom, and another reason to add a link here would be to improve the second problem at Millstreet Road junction for HGVs: lorries coming from Cork going to Millstreet itself have to make a fairly tight right turn to turn north; a roundabout would fix this.


    On a different subject: Google Maps doesn’t seem to know about this road opening at all. It’s been a week, but it still shows the old route.



  • Registered Users Posts: 276 ✭✭Salvadoor


    Incorrect. We had to wait until there was funding, until al the objections were cleared, until there wasn't a recession, until the Kerry snail was accommodated and a myriad of other reasons.


    You're not getting your sliproad for the imaginary HGVs that are choking up Macroom and I guess your the protest has had zero effect.


    So enjoy your traffic free, I mean congested, town because I for one will never set foot (or wheel) in there again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭ADKELMAC


    Say it ain’t so Salvadoor. The town will miss you.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 276 ✭✭Salvadoor


    Personal attacks, tsk tsk tsk. Just shows you lost the argument



  • Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭ClmAlfie


    Pete_Cavan

    Are you saying from Millstreet Cross junction that there should be a new road to go north east of Macroom ? If that's the case, there was talks years ago that there should be a new road that way. But unfortunately there's a new fire station, new housing estates, big hills along that way. Don't think it would work and even putting a roundabout at Millstreet Cross, that won't work. I know there's land but it the houses by the cross, it's too near. I could be wrong. The only one that will work is KrisW1001 idea at the junction.

    KrisW1001

    The no 40 bus won't be going on the bypass from Millstreet Road for Ballyvourney and vice versa. It still will be using the old route.

    Google do need to be updated, not even showing the new fire station and new houses



  • Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭ADKELMAC


    The idea of the road is to allow people the option of not wheeling in or walking through the town , you have that option…some don’t.

    I m a road user. Not a resident.

    The protest was nothing to do with me.


    €280 million if public money has been spent on a well needed, well built road. However, for the sake of 2 slip roads many cannot actually bypass Macroom town if they’re travelling to/from the Mons/Cill na Martra area.

    Post edited by ADKELMAC on


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 12,048 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cookiemunster


    That will be a tiny number of people/vehicles. With the vast majority using the bypass there will be no delays when these road users have to go through Macroom. Junctions are not built for every road user.



  • Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭ADKELMAC


    Granted, the number of road users from the Mons etc may not be huge but every extra vehicle into the town affects the town, its residents, service users. That’s the same with every town.

    Bringing HGV traffic through a built up area when it’s avoidable is regrettable. We want go get away from that. Not fair to residents or road users. Unfortunately Macroom, Charleville and other towns know the cost.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,048 ✭✭✭niloc1951


    A simple solution to the hairpin turn from the R618 eastbound to the R582 northbound and vice versa would be the CPO of about 60sqm of land at the junction and the realignment of the junction to a straightforward T junction.




  • Registered Users Posts: 21,330 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Could the location take a roundabout and does the volume of traffic justify it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,829 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    I was saying building a new road from the new N22 Millstreet road junction (which you think there should be another junction west one) going east parallel to the new N22. That then opens up a lot of land for the town to expand but quite close to the existing town core. Another new road from that could run south (so the new roads form a T) and tie into the first part of the new fire station access road, therefore not needing a new junction with the old N22.

    I know it doesn't solve your problem but it would take pressure off Millstreet cross. A roundabout would suffice there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭ClmAlfie


    Something will have to be done at the Millstreet Cross junction. Doesn't matter about the volume of traffic. It's the trucks, regardless of the size, are finding difficult to turn left for Millstreet. They have to make a big wide turn, going onto the opposite side of the road, then reverse back and turn again to go on the the left side of the road. Either a better junction or a roundabout



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,885 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    Finally used the new section both ways today. So nice not to have to drive the bends, I actually give them the middle finger on the way back - I hope no-one saw me.

    A fantastic drive and on the way back especially, I was at the ex-temporary roundabout before I knew it. The one observation I'd have is the surface of the second section is not as smooth as the surface of the first section, which was interesting.

    Roll on Section 3 in hopefully October.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,131 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    It saves a lot of time and particularly it makes the journey much more bearable.

    It's hard to quantify the driver fatigue accrued by the bad bends but I really notice the difference of not needing to do these any more. I seem to arrive at each side much less fatigued.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,390 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    One of the greatest arguments in favour of projects like this. It just makes the drive easier, more straightforward and you have dependable journey times. Before Macroom was a lottery but come October Coolcower-Slievereagh will be a dependable 15 minutes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 44 peter.teahan



    Approx 13 mins I'd say. Was there talk of the speed limit being increased to 120km/h once all completed?



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,330 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Drove on it both ways today. Wonderful experience, congrats to all involved.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,048 ✭✭✭niloc1951


    Not a chance of a 120km/h speed limit. The road isn't built to that standard, there are no hard shoulders and no slowing/acceleration slip lanes at the junctions



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,214 ✭✭✭Packrat


    I very much doubt it. That's motorway speed and this isn't a motorway. No hard shoulders, bends too tight etc.

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • Registered Users Posts: 44 peter.teahan



    They should bring in a 110km/h for these Type 2 dual carriageways as there are a good few of them here now and probably more to come, new Westport N5 etc :)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,214 ✭✭✭Packrat


    A modern road is designed with a particular speed limit in mind. They are generally reducing not increasing limits.

    There is no chance of any speed limit going up.

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • Registered Users Posts: 752 ✭✭✭Jayuu


    Agreed.

    I mean assuming a consistent speed of 100km you'd do the 22km in 13m 12s. Assuming a consistent speed of 110km you'd do the 22km in 12m. Assuming a consistent speed of 120km you'd do the 22km in 11m.

    It's not really that much of a saving in time is it really even if they did increase the limit.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 21,330 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    We know speed kills. So how many lives are worth going from 110 to 120 km/h for?



Advertisement