M20 - Cork to Limerick [preferred route chosen; in design - phase 3]

Isambard

Cork Trucker wrote: »

As pointed out, there is a difference in terms of what is allowed on a HQDC and what isn't allowed on a motorway. Plus in some instances a reduced speed limit, The Ballincollig bypass being the one rarity where the speed limit is 120kph despite not being a motorway.

and the road out almost as far as Midleton. Cork is quite enlightened re speed limits, there are several R roads with 100km/h limits.

Shedite27

Is there any feasibility or anything done on the Waterford-Mitchelstown section of that? Is there any plans at all for this or a direct Cork-Waterford route?

marno21

Shedite27 wrote: »

Is there any feasibility or anything done on the Waterford-Mitchelstown section of that? Is there any plans at all for this or a direct Cork-Waterford route?

A 55km upgrade of the N24 from Waterford to Cahir is in the National Development Plan.

However, it is one of 2 projects (out of 22) that has yet to be formally initiated.

A feasibility study on routing the Cork-Limerick upgrade via Mitchelstown or Cahir dismisses this option in 2007. It will likely do the same again.

The N24 between Cahir and Limerick Junction is also included in the NDP.

The relevance of all of this will be called into question when a new Government is likely to be brought in over the next few months with different priorities

niloc1951

Cookiemunster wrote: »

There is no physical difference between a HQDC and a motorway other than the colour of the signs.

And there shouldn't be any rest/parking areas on a motorway. Most of the ones that are there today are on roads that were designed as HQDC and then redesignated.

There are rest/parking areas on motorways throughout Europe so I don't follow your point that there shouldn't be any rest/parking areas on a motorway.
The examples on the M8 are treacherously dangerous, they have neither entry nor exit lanes to facilitate save exit from the mainline or re-entry to it.
If those roads are redesignated HQDC's then they shouldn't have motorway speed limits if they weren't designed and buit to motorway standard first day.
On the other side if the coin there is the N25 dual carriageway with a motorway speed limit but available to L drivers and slow moving agricultural and construction machinery of all sorts.
And let's not get started on the proliferation of LILO junctions designed to facilitate entry on motorways/dual carriageways in the wrong direction which have lead to so many deaths and serious injuries..
Shambles comes to mind. Rant over.

hans aus dtschl

Isambard wrote: »

and the road out almost as far as Midleton. Cork is quite enlightened re speed limits, there are several R roads with 100km/h limits.

No, not as far as Midleton: as far as Carrigtohill only.
There are houses directly on the N25 between Carrigtohill and Midleton, so 100kmh from Carrig on.

My personal favourite Cork road at the minute is the N8 "Tivoli Dual Carriageway".
This inner-city beauty has 100kmh limits, bus stops, footpaths, no hard shoulder, and a recently-added surprise "guess which lane" section at the end. It's bumper to bumper most mornings because it feeds into a single lane at Silversprings, but there's absolutely definitely no need for a bus lane here, no sir! Another lovely recent addition on this route - albeit on the recently-increased 80kmh section at Silversprings - was the cyclist "bunny hop" over the traffic island Eastbound! An absolute gem.

mikeym

https://www.thecork.ie/2019/07/03/greens-call-for-a-shift-from-a-car-first-approach-in-the-how-the-ndp-affects-the-region/

SeanW

Shedite27 wrote: »

Is there any feasibility or anything done on the Waterford-Mitchelstown section of that? Is there any plans at all for this or a direct Cork-Waterford route?

It should be pointed out that this is a Green Party tactic - they did the same thing to kill the Southern Metro in Dublin. They claim to be all about public transport and said they wanted a whole range of fantasy Metros and all sort of things ... that it just so happened wouldn't happen for ages even if we started them now ... just not a Green line upgrade because ... reasons.

Now we're expected to believe that the party of eco-extremism that wants little/no spending on roads is looking for a "regional motorway network" that just happens not to include the M20? Colour me skeptical, but I don't believe them, and I hope the people in Cork are wise enough to see through this nonsense.

Cookiemunster

niloc1951 wrote: »

There are rest/parking areas on motorways throughout Europe so I don't follow your point that there shouldn't be any rest/parking areas on a motorway.
The examples on the M8 are treacherously dangerous, they have neither entry nor exit lanes to facilitate save exit from the mainline or re-entry to it.
If those roads are redesignated HQDC's then they shouldn't have motorway speed limits if they weren't designed and buit to motorway standard first day.
On the other side if the coin there is the N25 dual carriageway with a motorway speed limit but available to L drivers and slow moving agricultural and construction machinery of all sorts.
And let's not get started on the proliferation of LILO junctions designed to facilitate entry on motorways/dual carriageways in the wrong direction which have lead to so many deaths and serious injuries..
Shambles comes to mind. Rant over.

The HQDCs around the country were redesignated as motorways in 2008. Some before they were even open. There is no physical difference in Ireland between a HQDC and a motorway other than the colour of the signs and the solid yellow line on the hard shoulder. They were all built to a 140kph (I think) design standard so the speed limit isn't an issue.

The HQDCs were designed with laybys segregated from the mainline by nothing other than a few bollards and no facilities. These aren't supposed to be on motorways in Ireland as they're dangerous, but were included as the roads were all designed and went through planning as HQDCs. On the continent they're properly segregated from the mainline and will have at least minimal toilet facilites.

We now have enough offline services (official and non official) on the motorway network that these laybys should be permanently closed.

Shedite27

SeanW wrote: »

It should be pointed out that this is a Green Party tactic - they did the same thing to kill the Southern Metro in Dublin. They claim to be all about public transport and said they wanted a whole range of fantasy Metros and all sort of things ... that it just so happened wouldn't happen for ages even if we started them now ... just not a Green line upgrade because ... reasons.

Now we're expected to believe that the party of eco-extremism that wants little/no spending on roads is looking for a "regional motorway network" that just happens not to include the M20? Colour me skeptical, but I don't believe them, and I hope the people in Cork are wise enough to see through this nonsense.

Couldn't give a hoots about the politics of it to be fair, just wondering if this Cork-Cahir-Waterford is competing against a Cork-Dungarvan-Waterford route, or whether there's only one on the table.

Cookiemunster

Shedite27 wrote: »

Tell that to the L plate drivers, farm drivers etc

Cork Trucker wrote: »

As pointed out, there is a difference in terms of what is allowed on a HQDC and what isn't allowed on a motorway. Plus in some instances a reduced speed limit, The Ballincollig bypass being the one rarity where the speed limit is 120kph despite not being a motorway.

Yeah lads, what's that got to do with the point I was making? Yes there are different rules for using as motorway as opposed to any other road, but that doesn't take away from the fact that there is no physical difference between a HQDC and a motorway.

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we leave HQDC argument for another thread and get onto the politicians to get the M20 built. Only a few more weeks to get the promises made before the election.

Mind you, promises by politicians might not be worth much.

hans aus dtschl

This MAY be off-topic (in which case I apologise and please delete) but is there anything to be said for the planned Blarney P&R and northern interurban cycle route to be included as requirements for the M20? These could be funded separately but should go for planning simultaneously.

My thinking here is:
We know that the M20 corridor needs to be upgraded.
Many people are calling for "no more roads" and even "no M20" for sustainability and emissions reasons. Their angle here is that we're too car-dependent. And they're right about that.
Many people are calling for an M40 North to be completed as a tie-in to the M20. Their angle here is that dumping M20 traffic into Blackpool is crazy. And they're right about that.
So is there anything to be said for acknowledging up-front the urgent need for these "modal shift" pieces of infrastructure to be delivered in tandem with the M20 and as per CMATS?
To try to compensate for the induced demand, so to speak!

And frankly, anything that takes the focus off dumping a small fraction of M20 traffic onto the M8 (at a very high monetary and social cost) is a positive thing.

steeler j

Shedite27 wrote: »

Couldn't give a hoots about the politics of it to be fair, just wondering if this Cork-Cahir-Waterford is competing against a Cork-Dungarvan-Waterford route, or whether there's only one on the table.

The cork to Waterford via cahir is probably more realistic than running Cork to Limerick via cahir

steeler j

Is the link between the m8 glanmire to the new m20 diffently not going ahead?

Limerick74

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

This MAY be off-topic (in which case I apologise and please delete) but is there anything to be said for the planned Blarney P&R and northern interurban cycle route to be included as requirements for the M20? These could be funded separately but should go for planning simultaneously.

My thinking here is:
We know that the M20 corridor needs to be upgraded.
Many people are calling for "no more roads" and even "no M20" for sustainability and emissions reasons. Their angle here is that we're too car-dependent. And they're right about that.
Many people are calling for an M40 North to be completed as a tie-in to the M20. Their angle here is that dumping M20 traffic into Blackpool is crazy. And they're right about that.
So is there anything to be said for acknowledging up-front the urgent need for these "modal shift" pieces of infrastructure to be delivered in tandem with the M20 and as per CMATS?
To try to compensate for the induced demand, so to speak!

And frankly, anything that takes the focus off dumping a small fraction of M20 traffic onto the M8 (at a very high monetary and social cost) is a positive thing.

Park & Rides are urgently required at all the major arteries (N20, M8, N22 etc) into Cork irrespective of M20 routing. The P&Rs must be complemented by regular bus & train services into the city. If CMATS can't progress these in time then the M20 project may have to assist by aquiring the P&R site etc.

This should be a priority for the CMATS, Galway Transportation Strategy and LSMATS in Cork, Galway & Limerick. It's a no brainer and also a good business opportunity for any services at the P&R sites such as fuel, food, charging points etc.

hans aus dtschl

Limerick74 wrote: »

also a good business opportunity for any services at the P&R sites such as fuel, food, charging points etc.

I didn't even think of this and of course you're right. There's scope for a lot of commercial integration into a P&R. Hotel/Accommodation, Food, Car Services and light retail, etc. I don't know if the M20 can incorporate that level of planning, but my point was that any traffic analysis must surely consider WHERE the traffic goes after the M20.

All traffic isn't going directly to Patrick's Street / O'Connell Street but proper traffic integration into the urban endpoints should surely be as much of a priority as the diversion of traffic around those urban endpoints.

Chris_5339762

steeler j wrote: »

Is the link between the m8 glanmire to the new m20 diffently not going ahead?

We are now more sure than before the the M8 Glanmire to M20 will NOT be going ahead as part of the M20 project. It will be progressed seperately, likely several years later than the M20, if that even happens itself. Awful decision.

Gunner3629

Cork Trucker wrote: »

As pointed out, there is a difference in terms of what is allowed on a HQDC and what isn't allowed on a motorway. Plus in some instances a reduced speed limit, The Ballincollig bypass being the one rarity where the speed limit is 120kph despite not being a motorway.

The N25 between Carrigtwohill West Junction 4 and Dunkettle is also 120km. Having it a Motorway would be a nightmare for local farmers and L drivers though.

steeler j

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

We are now more sure than before the the M8 Glanmire to M20 will NOT be going ahead as part of the M20 project. It will be progressed seperately, likely several years later than the M20, if that even happens itself. Awful decision.

Yes very bad decision, wasn't sure if it was caxed only saw a report on it

niloc1951

Gunner3629 wrote: »

The N25 between Carrigtwohill West Junction 4 and Dunkettle is also 120km. Having it a Motorway would be a nightmare for local farmers and L drivers though.

A) such drivers and vehicles shouldn't be allowed mix with 120km/h traffic
the L3004 (old N25) is available as a parallel route to non-motorway traffic

Restore the new N25 dualcarriageway to a 100km/h N road speed limit OR designate it a Motorway and keep the L drivers and agri/construction machinery off it

hans aus dtschl

niloc1951 wrote: »

the L3004 (old N25) is available as a parallel route to non-motorway traffic

I'd say the problem is with the Dunkettle interchange.
Yet again, they did not consider these users in the original design and only have a brief interest in accommodating them in the new design: they won't be able to get past Dunkettle without going into Glanmire!

Cork Trucker

This is part of an M20 discussion on the tweet machine

https://twitter.com/mcguyver123/status/1219749680818663425?s=21

marno21

wrote:

Liam Quaide has been sensible from what I can see. He's one of the good ones.

Oliver Moran comes out with some crazy stuff that looks good on paper that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Also, why would a Cork North Central candidate suggest connecting Limerick and Waterford in such a way that has significant drawbacks for Cork? It makes no sense

I drove from Limerick to Cork today and it took 1hr 50mins with a brief stop in Caherconlish (via the R513 and M8). It's no surprise the region is being held back when the thought of driving between the cities is physically repulsive.

What I'm most looking forward to is watching this East Limerick nonsense die another overdue death. Sick to **** of it at this stage.

Pete_Cavan

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

I'd say the problem is with the Dunkettle interchange.
Yet again, they did not consider these users in the original design and only have a brief interest in accommodating them in the new design: they won't be able to get past Dunkettle without going into Glanmire!

Those users being farm machinery and L drivers, why should either be accommodated? Farm machinery won't be undertaking long journeys, particularly no going west of Dunkettle. L drivers are a veryssmall percentage of drivers and the status is only really intended for a short time, they should not be much of a concern.

hans aus dtschl

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Those users being farm machinery and L drivers, why should either be accommodated? Farm machinery won't be undertaking long journeys, particularly no going west of Dunkettle. L drivers are a veryssmall percentage of drivers and the status is only really intended for a short time, they should not be much of a concern.

They might only be a small subset of users but they still need to get over the Glashaboy river, and sending them on a detour into Glanmire village isn't a workable solution due to existing congestion.
There's still plenty agricultural land on both sides of the Glashaboy and L drivers are in the region of 5% of the overall or thereabouts (~120k ish people out of ~2m ish)

riddlinrussell

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

They might only be a small subset of users but they still need to get over the Glashaboy river, and sending them on a detour into Glanmire village isn't a workable solution due to existing congestion.
There's still plenty agricultural land on both sides of the Glashaboy and L drivers are in the region of 5% of the overall or thereabouts (~120k ish people out of ~2m ish)

Wouldn't this also include cyclists? Any provision looks to have been a not very serious afterthought.

niloc1951

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

They might only be a small subset of users but they still need to get over the Glashaboy river, and sending them on a detour into Glanmire village isn't a workable solution due to existing congestion.
There's still plenty agricultural land on both sides of the Glashaboy and L drivers are in the region of 5% of the overall or thereabouts (~120k ish people out of ~2m ish)

No need to go via Glanmire, there is a connection to the JLT roundabout/interchange at the southern end of M8 where the last couple of hundred metres of it is no longer motorway status. SEE HERE

Isambard

niloc1951 wrote: »

No need to go via Glanmire, there is a connection to the JLT roundabout/interchange at the southern end of M8 where the last couple of hundred metres of it is no longer motorway status. SEE HERE

that's what I was thinking, the link near to the old hotel?

hans aus dtschl

niloc1951 wrote: »

No need to go via Glanmire, there is a connection to the JLT roundabout/interchange at the southern end of M8 where the last couple of hundred metres of it is no longer motorway status. SEE HERE

Isambard wrote: »

that's what I was thinking, the link near to the old hotel?

That goes bye bye very soon (as part of Dunkettle interchange upgrade).

All that traffic, AND all of the Dublin-Cork traffic AND half of the Little Island traffic will go around a Little island dumbell interchange. Which is next-level stupid IMO, but what would I know!

hans aus dtschl

riddlinrussell wrote: »

Wouldn't this also include cyclists? Any provision looks to have been a not very serious afterthought.

Cyclists have a horrifically poor East-West provision as part of Dunkettle Interchange. But a provision nonetheless.

The design of the Dunkettle Interchange scheme has an arm north of the interchange under the M8, to link East from town.
Westbound is the issue really.

I think they're perhaps expected to join Little Island, Dublin, Glanmire traffic over a new Little Island West dumbell interchange.