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

Sam Russell

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Finally because trucks are limited to 55MPH they do not necessarily need a motorway or even dual carriageway. Good quality lane along the M28 would be adequate to serve Rosslare. It quite possible that the new road to Foynes will develop business at that port and pull tonnage from Rosslare

Foynes is not in competition with Rosslare as Rosslare is a RoRo port while Foynes is a bulk shipment port - not even LoLo. Waterford is LoLo. Foynes is more in competition with Arklow.

Your point about HGVs being restricted to 100 Km/h is valid, but motorways allow them to maintain that speed as the motorway is less curved and has less hills and gradients. If the dual carriageway is built to the same spec except for the provision of hard shoulders, then the truck will make the same progress. However, there is a tendency for roundabouts to be put in rather than grade separated junctions.

Hibernicis

Bass Reeves wrote: »

M20 is probably the most critical piece of infrastructure in the country. It opened up the whole western side of the country. It not just critical for Cork and Limerick but for Kerry, Clare, Galway, Mayo and Sligo

With it in place you will have Three major cities with a combined population of nearly half a million people and 220k than that within 15-20 minutes of the motorway. Finally you will have another 3-400k people living within 20-50 minutes of it.

The M20 has the possibility to create an economic hub with 3 international Airports adjacent to it, two large ports one of them an exceptionally deep water port.

This area should have no housing pressure like Dublin and should turn Cork to Galway into a sub 100 minute trip bar getting in and out of both cities.

The M28 will provide no access to Kerry add 10-15 minutes on to the journey. Do nothing for 7-8k commuter journeys existing on the M20 or the natural business hubs that exist along this route already. Provide no additional development potential like Charlesville and Mallow have.

Finally because trucks are limited to 55MPH they do not necessarily need a motorway or even dual carriageway. Good quality lane along the M28 would be adequate to serve Rosslare. It quite possible that the new road to Foynes will develop business at that port and pull tonnage from Rosslare

Fully agree with all your points relating to the M20 (first four paragraphs)

Struggling to make any sense of the last two paragraphs relating to the M28 ? e.g. I can’t see how upgrading the N28 to motorway could add 15 mins to a route to Kerry. Nor should it have any impact on access to Rosslare or Foynes.

I can’t see any competition between the M28 and the M20 projects. In fact they complement each other extremly well and are both urgently required, together with the CNRR which would link them (via the m40/M8 or however that eventually works out). Then you would have the full “Atlantic Corridor”, the benefits of which you set out very well at the start of your post.

alias no.9

KrisW1001 wrote: »

Cork isn't a replacement for the UK land-bridge. Calais-Folkstone-Holyhead-Dublin is more or less a straight line. Calais-Rosslare-Dublin is a dog-leg, but at least each part brings you closer to the destination. Change Rosslare to Cork in that journey, and now you've spent an extra four hours at sea for the privilege of driving an extra 80 km to get to your destination. (Leaving aside how slow it can be to get Ringaskiddy to the N40).

I know there's a whole country outside of Dublin, but Dublin and its surrounding counties have the highest number of businesses and people, and that's why they are the destination for most goods imported into the country.

Cork still has potential to grow, but any expansion of Cork port services wouldn't get permission with N28 in the current state it's in. M20 would also be needed in order before you could consider Cork as a port option between the western half of the country and the continent.

As a benchmark, the sailing time from Cork to Roscoff is an hour shorter than Rosslare to Roscoff. All routes from Ireland direct to Europe have their own dog leg around landsend giving Cork a marginal time advantage, I don't know where you get the 4 hours extra at sea from?

snotboogie

KrisW1001 wrote: »

Cork isn't a replacement for the UK land-bridge. Calais-Folkstone-Holyhead-Dublin is more or less a straight line. Calais-Rosslare-Dublin is a dog-leg, but at least each part brings you closer to the destination. Change Rosslare to Cork in that journey, and now you've spent an extra four hours at sea for the privilege of driving an extra 80 km to get to your destination. (Leaving aside how slow it can be to get Ringaskiddy to the N40).

I know there's a whole country outside of Dublin, but Dublin and its surrounding counties have the highest number of businesses and people, and that's why they are the destination for most goods imported into the country.

Cork still has potential to grow, but any expansion of Cork port services wouldn't get permission with N28 in the current state it's in. M20 would also be needed in order before you could consider Cork as a port option between the western half of the country and the continent.

The expansion of the Port of Cork is underway

KrisW1001

I meant further expansion

snotboogie

KrisW1001 wrote: »

I meant further expansion

It's a 100 million euro expansion that isn't even open yet. They won't be expanding again for decades id imagine.

cgcsb

Bass Reeves wrote: »

M20 is probably the most critical piece of infrastructure in the country.

That is a bit of a stretch really. Do you mean transport projects currently in planning? If so it's projected usage numbers are a small fraction of projected usage numbers of basically all the intra-city public transport projects.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

With it in place you will have Three major cities with a combined population of nearly half a million people and 220k than that within 15-20 minutes of the motorway. Finally you will have another 3-400k people living within 20-50 minutes of it.

The M20 has the possibility to create an economic hub with 3 international Airports adjacent to it, two large ports one of them an exceptionally deep water port.

This area should have no housing pressure like Dublin and should turn Cork to Galway into a sub 100 minute trip bar getting in and out of both cities.

The M28 will provide no access to Kerry add 10-15 minutes on to the journey. Do nothing for 7-8k commuter journeys existing on the M20 or the natural business hubs that exist along this route already. Provide no additional development potential like Charlesville and Mallow have.

Finally because trucks are limited to 55MPH they do not necessarily need a motorway or even dual carriageway. Good quality lane along the M28 would be adequate to serve Rosslare. It quite possible that the new road to Foynes will develop business at that port and pull tonnage from Rosslare

Commuting long distances by driving on motorways and suburbanisation of large rural areas is officially canned as a policy, it failed in greater Dublin and will fail elsewhere. High level policy is now directed at 'compact growth' in existing urban centres with new development concentrated on brownfield sites. The only stumbling block is that government policy has made city living unaffordable but that will of course change, the cost of housing is currently hanging this government so you'll likely see a u-turn in the coming months and years on that. In 2019 the majority of new housing completions were apartments for the first time, so clearly we're gradually becoming a more urbanised and centralised country.

Bass Reeves

cgcsb wrote: »

That is a bit of a stretch really. Do you mean transport projects currently in planning? If so it's projected usage numbers are a small fraction of projected usage numbers of basically all the intra-city public transport projects.

Yes I do. Cork/ Limerick motorway will create a hub with Galway that will drive development outside Dublin. While it projected usage numbers may seem smaller it's the development it allows. WFH will allow people much more choice as to where they live and work. It will also allow people more choice in where they flow career choices. Companies will also have much more choice where they locate. Critical population density for larger companies will not be asuch of an issue where staff only attend office 1-2 days a week.

cgcsb wrote: »

Commuting long distances by driving on motorways and suburbanisation of large rural areas is officially canned as a policy, it failed in greater Dublin and will fail elsewhere. High level policy is now directed at 'compact growth' in existing urban centres with new development concentrated on brownfield sites. The only stumbling block is that government policy has made city living unaffordable but that will of course change, the cost of housing is currently hanging this government so you'll likely see a u-turn in the coming months and years on that. In 2019 the majority of new housing completions were apartments for the first time, so clearly we're gradually becoming a more urbanised and centralised country.

Motorways are not just for cars. Pre COVID price bus companies carried multiplies of what any train carried to Dublin every day from Cork and Limerick. Irish population density is not really suitable for rail even if more infrastructure existed it dose not and new build rail infrastructure takes too long to build numbers and frequency of service. Buses give much more flexibility.

I saw a report recently that by 2030 that EV's will be in the same price as existing ICE vehicles.

cgcsb

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Yes I do. Cork/ Limerick motorway will create a hub with Galway that will drive development outside Dublin. While it projected usage numbers may seem smaller it's the development it allows. WFH will allow people much more choice as to where they live and work. It will also allow people more choice in where they flow career choices. Companies will also have much more choice where they locate. Critical population density for larger companies will not be asuch of an issue where staff only attend office 1-2 days a week.

How can a motorway 'create a hub' specifically and where else in the country has this happened before as a result of motorway development? As for 'the development it allows', development dependent on motorways is more/less banned by the planning system at this stage. Certainly TII won't allow for it their junction design. Covid or no covid people will naturally gravitate back towards the cities as they've done since the industrial revolution. Motorways are designed for intercity travel.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Motorways are not just for cars. Pre COVID price bus companies carried multiplies of what any train carried to Dublin every day from Cork and Limerick.

Well there is no direct rail link at present so it makes sense that the bus is a more common choice. :pac:

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Irish population density is not really suitable for rail even if more infrastructure existed it dose not and new build rail infrastructure takes too long to build numbers and frequency of service. Buses give much more flexibility.

Untrue, Ireland's intercity rail routes are very busy, despite having the minimum of investment in the past 100 years. So much so that the 2027 rail strategy envisages doubling the frequency of Dublin-Cork for example. Sweden has about one third the population density of Ireland and it operates a rail network 5 times longer than ours, so clearly population density isn't a valid excuse, it's poor planning to depend on roads only and we love poor planning in this country

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I saw a report recently that by 2030 that EV's will be in the same price as existing ICE vehicles.

Only way that could happen is if ICE cars were taxed out of competitiveness, which most likely will happen, but that just means lower car ownership for all, as opposed to a straight up switch to EV. The lithium and cobalt elements used to make batteries are rare. If you ask Elon Musk what he plans to do about that he'll rant and rave about mining asteroids in the inner solar system. :pac:

Lower car ownership is likely the future, perhaps car sharing schemes will become more popular in rural areas without a public transport alternative, or perhaps electric mopeds will come to Europe (they're everywhere in China). As we can see now the number of 17-24 year olds with a drivers license has been falling, largely due to the cost of owning a car. Not many young folks with 3 grand to spend on insurance and 5 grand to spend on buying a car plus other car costs and then have enough money to pay the 2 grand rent a month on their studio flat. Remember this generation will be poorer than the last according to the ESRI.

Edit:

I'm not arguing against developing a Cork-Limerick motorway. I support the scheme becuase of the efficiencies it offers in transport of freight and the improvement in quality of life offered to the towns it bypasses, but not for the regressive reasons you do.

Saying it's the most important transport project in the state right now is balderdash though. For example, metrolink is likely to carry 50 million people per year. Cork's luas project about 45 million people per year. The current N20 accommodates about 7 million per year. The M50, the busiest and most expensive road in the state, carries in the region of 45 million a year.

A lot more people take short trips than long trips and that's to be encouraged by planning policy.

serfboard

cgcsb wrote: »

The current N20 accommodates about 21 million per year. The M50, the busiest and most expensive road in the state, carries in the region of 45 million a year.

Where are you getting these figures from?

cgcsb

serfboard wrote: »

Where are you getting these figures from?

https://www.tii.ie/roads-tolling/operations-and-maintenance/traffic-count-data/

the 21 should be more like 7

serfboard

cgcsb wrote: »

https://www.tii.ie/roads-tolling/operations-and-maintenance/traffic-count-data/

I thought so.

cgcsb wrote: »

Saying it's the most important transport project in the state right now is balderdash though. For example, metrolink is likely to carry 50 million people per year. Cork's luas project about 45 million people per year. The current N20 accommodates about 7 million per year. The M50, the busiest and most expensive road in the state, carries in the region of 45 million a year.

Your public transport figures are people, your road figures are vehicles, and you make the assumption that each vehicle carries only one person - so not counting cars with more than one person, and defintely not counting buses.

Now who's talking balderdash?

cgcsb

serfboard wrote: »

I thought so.

Your public transport figures are people, your road figures are vehicles, and you make the assumption that each vehicle carries only one person - so not counting cars with more than one person, and defintely not counting buses.

Now who's talking balderdash?

In Ireland cars carry an average of 1.1 people.

hans aus dtschl

cgcsb wrote: »

How can a motorway 'create a hub' specifically and where else in the country has this happened before as a result of motorway development? As for 'the development it allows', development dependent on motorways is more/less banned by the planning system at this stage. Certainly TII won't allow for it their junction design. Covid or no covid people will naturally gravitate back towards the cities as they've done since the industrial revolution. Motorways are designed for intercity travel.


Well there is no direct rail link at present so it makes sense that the bus is a more common choice. :pac:



Untrue, Ireland's intercity rail routes are very busy, despite having the minimum of investment in the past 100 years. So much so that the 2027 rail strategy envisages doubling the frequency of Dublin-Cork for example. Sweden has about one third the population density of Ireland and it operates a rail network 5 times longer than ours, so clearly population density isn't a valid excuse, it's poor planning to depend on roads only and we love poor planning in this country


Only way that could happen is if ICE cars were taxed out of competitiveness, which most likely will happen, but that just means lower car ownership for all, as opposed to a straight up switch to EV. The lithium and cobalt elements used to make batteries are rare. If you ask Elon Musk what he plans to do about that he'll rant and rave about mining asteroids in the inner solar system. :pac:

Lower car ownership is likely the future, perhaps car sharing schemes will become more popular in rural areas without a public transport alternative, or perhaps electric mopeds will come to Europe (they're everywhere in China). As we can see now the number of 17-24 year olds with a drivers license has been falling, largely due to the cost of owning a car. Not many young folks with 3 grand to spend on insurance and 5 grand to spend on buying a car plus other car costs and then have enough money to pay the 2 grand rent a month on their studio flat. Remember this generation will be poorer than the last according to the ESRI.

Edit:

I'm not arguing against developing a Cork-Limerick motorway. I support the scheme becuase of the efficiencies it offers in transport of freight and the improvement in quality of life offered to the towns it bypasses, but not for the regressive reasons you do.

Saying it's the most important transport project in the state right now is balderdash though. For example, metrolink is likely to carry 50 million people per year. Cork's luas project about 45 million people per year. The current N20 accommodates about 7 million per year. The M50, the busiest and most expensive road in the state, carries in the region of 45 million a year.

A lot more people take short trips than long trips and that's to be encouraged by planning policy.

I agree with your final conclusions, but just popping in to say that battery tech is advancing very rapidly and it is expected that purchase costs for electric cars will drop below those of ICE vehicles soon, without government intervention:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/may/09/electric-cars-will-be-cheaper-to-produce-than-fossil-fuel-vehicles-by-2027

Although this goes against your point, it's a positive bit of news.

cgcsb

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

I agree with your final conclusions, but just popping in to say that battery tech is advancing very rapidly and it is expected that purchase costs for electric cars will drop below those of ICE vehicles soon, without government intervention:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/may/09/electric-cars-will-be-cheaper-to-produce-than-fossil-fuel-vehicles-by-2027

Although this goes against your point, it's a positive bit of news.

Although ev prices are dropping, there's a limit, lithium and cobalt are elements we cant make more of them

https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilwinton/2020/08/17/could-lithium-shortage-scupper-accelerating-sales-of-electric-cars/?sh=7ef6b8c076e5

Isambard

can't see it, where are the precious metals coming from ? as they get scarcer, they will get dearer

snotboogie

cgcsb wrote: »

Untrue, Ireland's intercity rail routes are very busy, despite having the minimum of investment in the past 100 years. So much so that the 2027 rail strategy envisages doubling the frequency of Dublin-Cork for example. Sweden has about one third the population density of Ireland and it operates a rail network 5 times longer than ours, so clearly population density isn't a valid excuse, it's poor planning to depend on roads only and we love poor planning in this country
.

Swedens population density is massively skewed by its huge uninhabitable North. The better figure to look at is urbanisation, Sweden is at 88% compared to Ireland at 63%. Swedens cities are also far bigger than Irelands. Stockholm metro population is 2.6 million, Gottenburgs is 1 million, Malmos is 700k. Dublin is 1.6 million, Cork's is 300k, Limericks is only 150k...

cgcsb

snotboogie wrote: »

Swedens population density is massively skewed by its huge uninhabitable North. The better figure to look at is urbanisation, Sweden is at 88% compared to Ireland at 63%. Swedens cities are also far bigger than Irelands. Stockholm metro population is 2.6 million, Gottenburgs is 1 million, Malmos is 700k. Dublin is 1.6 million, Cork's is 300k, Limericks is only 150k...

Right so we'll ignore population density so, lets look at urbanisation. It is official government policy to urbanise the population, with project Ireland focussed on 'compact urban growth'. So logically to reach this goal, as per the Swedish example, encouraging development along motorways is counter productive.

So we have Ireland 63% urbanisation (With an ambition to increase that) and Sweden at 88%, they also have about double our population that hardly justifies their 5 times larger rail network?

You point to their frozen north being uninhabited. But of course we also have a sparsley populated region north of galway city and west of Mullingar. Perhaps not as sparse as North Sweden but we don't operate any rail services in a large wedge of the country within that box.

Bass Reeves

cgcsb wrote: »

How can a motorway 'create a hub' specifically and where else in the country has this happened before as a result of motorway development? As for 'the development it allows', development dependent on motorways is more/less banned by the planning system at this stage. Certainly TII won't allow for it their junction design. Covid or no covid people will naturally gravitate back towards the cities as they've done since the industrial revolution. Motorways are designed for intercity travel.

Motorways are not just designed for intercity travel. They are designed to alleviate traffic issue. The M50 is a motorway half way around in what is a small city in the European context. Business need population volumes to exist and to locate in an area. This is the reason that for a he last 15-20 years development has been top heavy in Dublin. WFH will change that to an extent but you will still need population groupings to create hubs. This was a he stupidity of the famous attempt by the FF government of the noughties to creat a spacital strategy that is as basically try to develop everywhere with no coordinated plan. This corridor will give s population grouping of a million plus in an area that is 90 minutes end to end

cgcsb wrote: »

Well there is no direct rail link at present so it makes sense that the bus is a more common choice. :pac:



Untrue, Ireland's intercity rail routes are very busy, despite having the minimum of investment in the past 100 years. So much so that the 2027 rail strategy envisages doubling the frequency of Dublin-Cork for example. Sweden has about one third the population density of Ireland and it operates a rail network 5 times longer than ours, so clearly population density isn't a valid excuse, it's poor planning to depend on roads only and we love poor planning in this country

We do not have the population densities to support trains. Trains carry hundreds of passengers even thousands. This prevents frequency of service and there was s very limited off peak services. I think in an Irish context rail carries. Actually more people walk to work than take buses and trains combined and the same applies for cycling. For all the investment in rail it only provides transport for 2% of commuters

cgcsb wrote: »

Only way that could happen is if ICE cars were taxed out of competitiveness, which most likely will happen, but that just means lower car ownership for all, as opposed to a straight up switch to EV. The lithium and cobalt elements used to make batteries are rare. If you ask Elon Musk what he plans to do about that he'll rant and rave about mining asteroids in the inner solar system. :pac:

With technology changing so fast it seems that like for like EV will cost the same as similar present day ICE cars.

cgcsb wrote: »

Lower car ownership is likely the future, perhaps car sharing schemes will become more popular in rural areas without a public transport alternative, or perhaps electric mopeds will come to Europe (they're everywhere in China). As we can see now the number of 17-24 year olds with a drivers license has been falling, largely due to the cost of owning a car. Not many young folks with 3 grand to spend on insurance and 5 grand to spend on buying a car plus other car costs and then have enough money to pay the 2 grand rent a month on their studio flat. Remember this generation will be poorer than the last according to the ESRI.

With the possibility that COVID or similar viruses ring an issue for the next 5-10years minimum cars may become.more of a necessity. Insurance is dropping substantially my you g lad who are s 22git quoted 800euro for insurance on an 2008 1.6 diesel car. A nice two bed house bed in a midsized town off the corridor is costing 7-800/ month at present. 3 bed are not much more expensive

cgcsb wrote: »

Edit:

I'm not arguing against developing a Cork-Limerick motorway. I support the scheme becuase of the efficiencies it offers in transport of freight and the improvement in quality of life offered to the towns it bypasses, but not for the regressive reasons you do.

Saying it's the most important transport project in the state right now is balderdash though. For example, metrolink is likely to carry 50 million people per year. Cork's luas project about 45 million people per year. The current N20 accommodates about 7 million per year. The M50, the busiest and most expensive road in the state, carries in the region of 45 million a year.

A lot more people take short trips than long trips and that's to be encouraged by planning policy.

I hope you can now see why it is the.most critical.piece of infrastructure that we are planning at present. The metrolink with COVID loading may only carry 20-25 million /year or even less. With WFH the demand for it may disappear

cgcsb

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Motorways are not just designed for intercity travel. They are designed to alleviate traffic issue.

Nope, TII isn't having that anymore, they'll bypass towns and relieve traffic in those towns alright but policy is no longer going to look to motorways to solve capacity issues.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

The M50 is a motorway half way around in what is a small city in the European context. Business need population volumes to exist and to locate in an area. This is the reason that for a he last 15-20 years development has been top heavy in Dublin. WFH will change that to an extent but you will still need population groupings to create hubs. This was a he stupidity of the famous attempt by the FF government of the noughties to creat a spacital strategy that is as basically try to develop everywhere with no coordinated plan. This corridor will give s population grouping of a million plus in an area that is 90 minutes end to end

Pro-ruralists have been harping on about remote working for decades. Still few people opted for it pre covid and likely people will return to similar working patterns.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

We do not have the population densities to support trains. Trains carry hundreds of passengers even thousands.

Yes we do, in fact we already have trains that are very heavily used, that's why the NTA/Irish Rail have set out the DART+, Cork Commuter and intercity network review to dramatically increase capacity. Your theory is debunked by the existence of Sweden. Even if you chopped the top half of Sweden off, Ireland is still more densely populated with less rail coverage.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Actually more people walk to work than take buses and trains combined and the same applies for cycling.

This is standard in most countries because the vast majority of trips are short. In Dublin for example walking is the most used mode of transport, same in basically all cities in Europe.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

For all the investment in rail it only provides transport for 2% of commuters

This state has never invested in rail so 2% is hardly surprising. In the context of Limerick-Cork, it's an intercity journey and intercity journeys are a tiny fraction of daily trips, which is why public/active transport in cities is so much more important than any intercity motorway.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

With the possibility that COVID or similar viruses ring an issue for the next 5-10years minimum cars may become.more of a necessity.

might as well plan for an asteroid strike also.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Insurance is dropping substantially my you g lad who are s 22git quoted 800euro for insurance on an 2008 1.6 diesel car. A nice two bed house bed in a midsized town off the corridor is costing 7-800/ month at present. 3 bed are not much more expensive

:pac: lol @insurance dropping.
Young people don't want to live in a 'mid-sized town'. That's why globally more and more people are living in bigger and bigger cities.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I hope you can now see why it is the.most critical.piece of infrastructure that we are planning at present. The metrolink with COVID loading may only carry 20-25 million /year or even less. With WFH the demand for it may disappear

Oh please stop :pac: 45% of the adult population are vaccinated within 6 months of the vaccine becoming available and metrolink won't open before 2030. There is a WFH order right now and Dublin is still about 50% of it's usual heaving self, can you imagine when restrictions are lifted.

Bass Reeves

cgcsb wrote: »

Nope, TII isn't having that anymore, they'll bypass towns and relieve traffic in those towns alright but policy is no longer going to look to motorways to solve capacity issues.


Pro-ruralists have been harping on about remote working for decades. Still few people opted for it pre covid and likely people will return to similar working patterns.

Headline policy is often not the policy that is driven by facts on the ground. This has nothing to do with being pro ruralist. Government deals with the reality on the ground. Look at the present new policy to encourage and fund mini business/working hubs in smaller towns and villages and the finding of them . This is a recognition of the reality on the ground

cgcsb wrote: »

Yes we do, in fact we already have trains that are very heavily used, that's why the NTA/Irish Rail have set out the DART+, Cork Commuter and intercity network review to dramatically increase capacity. Your theory is debunked by the existence of Sweden. Even if you chopped the top half of Sweden off, Ireland is still more densely populated with less rail coverage.

Again you comparisons with Sweden is flawed. Sweden is a highly urbanized country.

cgcsb wrote: »

This is standard in most countries because the vast majority of trips are short. In Dublin for example walking is the most used mode of transport, same in basically all cities in Europe.

While the amount walking and cycling is not unusual on s European basis the punt using Ra is miniscule and other than Dublin no other city has managed to have any useful rail commuting numbers

cgcsb wrote: »

This state has never invested in rail so 2% is hardly surprising. In the context of Limerick-Cork, it's an intercity journey and intercity journeys are a tiny fraction of daily trips, which is why public/active transport in cities is so much more important than any intercity motorway.

might as well plan for an asteroid strike also.

The state has invested in rail but in reality it is a slush fund for rail staff and we have never managed due to population density to develop commuter services that work other than in Dublin.

cgcsb wrote: »

:pac: lol @insurance dropping.
Young people don't want to live in a 'mid-sized town'. That's why globally more and more people are living in bigger and bigger cities.

Young single people do not but a large amount of younger families prefer it and WFH will allow more that option

cgcsb wrote: »

Oh please stop :pac: 45% of the adult population are vaccinated within 6 months of the vaccine becoming available and metrolink won't open before 2030. There is a WFH order right now and Dublin is still about 50% of it's usual heaving self, can you imagine when restrictions are lifted.

I do not know what you point with the Pacman signed. However we will ignore that rubbish

COVID is far from over. It is unlikely that public transport will return to pre COVID loadings any time in the near future.

There is no doubt that Dublin will again get livly but working day loading will be effected by WFH. It now government policy and as well major MNC and financial companies see the cost advantages. Expect commuting to reduce by 20-30%. The push will be to supply transport options to people at off peak times

cgcsb

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Headline policy is often not the policy that is driven by facts on the ground. This has nothing to do with being pro ruralist. Government deals with the reality on the ground. Look at the present new policy to encourage and fund mini business/working hubs in smaller towns and villages and the finding of them . This is a recognition of the reality on the ground

There have been lots of these schemes from pro ruralist governments since the foundation of the state. All failures and the country continues to slowly urbanise.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Again you comparisons with Sweden is flawed. Sweden is a highly urbanized country.

Your argument was based on population density not urbanisation. Clearly your density argument is flawd. As for urbanisation according to Project Ireland 2040 we'll be almost as urbanised as Sweden by the mid century.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

While the amount walking and cycling is not unusual on s European basis the punt using Ra is miniscule and other than Dublin no other city has managed to have any useful rail commuting numbers

Well of course not because our planning system promotes one off and car dependent developments, and there's been no investment in rail. Something which is changing albeit not quickly enough.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

The state has invested in rail but in reality it is a slush fund for rail staff and we have never managed due to population density to develop commuter services that work other than in Dublin.

Where do you see this investment in rail? This state has never built a new rail line and there's only one small electrified route. Only Cork and Dublin have commuter rail and both are heavily used with the system in Dublin being completely over subscribed so clearly there is sufficient density and demand.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I do not know what you point with the Pacman signed. However we will ignore that rubbish

It's an old fashioned laugh emoji because you're talking about the current pandemic in the context of metrolink, a project that will not be complete till 2030. That's a load of rubbish i'm afraid.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

COVID is far from over. It is unlikely that public transport will return to pre COVID loadings any time in the near future.

RTE reporting that traffic in Dublin is back to 85% pre covid levels so clearly you're wrong on that front also, travel demand will no doubt reach pre covid levels very soon.

Truckermal

https://www.corkbeo.ie/news/local-news/plan-new-service-station-restaurant-20655741

Somebody must be thinking the M20 is a long way away looking to build a Service Station just above the existing one in Mallow.

Limerick74

Truckermal wrote: »

https://www.corkbeo.ie/news/local-news/plan-new-service-station-restaurant-20655741

Somebody must be thinking the M20 is a long way away looking to build a Service Station just above the existing one in Mallow.

Seems crazy to be planning an identical service station a few hundred metres up the road from the existing. Must be on the other side of the road, but still crazy.

Truckermal

Limerick74 wrote: »

Seems crazy to be planning an identical service station a few hundred metres up the road from the existing. Must be on the other side of the road, but still crazy.

Exactly and the existing one is a Bottleneck! It's actually on the same side...

cjpm

Truckermal wrote: »

https://www.corkbeo.ie/news/local-news/plan-new-service-station-restaurant-20655741

Somebody must be thinking the M20 is a long way away looking to build a Service Station just above the existing one in Mallow.

They are on the route of a number of the proposed routes of the Mallow Northern Bypass. And will be only a few km from the N20/N72/N73 junction.

Isambard

I suspect it's a redevelopment of the N20 plaza or a reinstatement of the former service station almost next door, to the south. Probably the latter as the townlands mentioned extend right down to the old railway bridge. Very od decision as most of the passing trade will disappear once the M20 is built

Isambard

cjpm wrote: »

They are on the route of a number of the proposed routes of the Mallow Northern Bypass. And will be only a few km from the N20/N72/N73 junction.

I understood the northern relief road was to follow the old railway line formation and thus be off the route.

cjpm

Isambard wrote: »

I understood the northern relief road was to follow the old railway line formation and thus be off the route.

That is one of the proposed routes and likely to be the most expensive due to the residential zoning of some of the route.

If the M20 and the Northern relief road ever get built, then the proposed service station will be adjacent to the realigned N72.

cjpm

Isambard wrote: »

I suspect it's a redevelopment of the N20 plaza or a reinstatement of the former service station almost next door, to the south. Probably the latter as the townlands mentioned extend right down to the old railway bridge. Very od decision as most of the passing trade will disappear once the M20 is built

It says in the article that it’s a brand new development, north of the town. West of the current N20 I believe.