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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
964 km of motorway in Ireland by 2015.
Comments
-
marmurr1916 wrote: »Ireland's population is projected to grow to 5.5 million by 2050 and most of this will be concentrated in the larger urban centres. It makes sense to build decent links between them.
Most of that population will be concentrated in one area - Dublin.marmurr1916 wrote: »Anyway the NRA's policy is to build future improved sections of national primary route to at least 2+2 standard on routes 1-25. Many of these 2+2 sections will do for the forseeable future but it would make sense to upgrade them to HQDC/motorway standard at some point.
In fact, it might even make more sense to build motorways between the major centres now. It would actually save money in the long-term.
The recession won't last forever so we'll be able to afford this programme when the economy recovers.
All well and good but remember NRA policy is not Government policy. its taken over a decade yet now we're only coming to the conclusion of the original Inter Urban programme. what you propose is a commitment to endless miles of potentially little used infrastructure. I think its better to build whats needed when needed. That means avoiding situations like where the SRR upgrades were put on hold whilst the M8 got priority.0 -
invincibleirish wrote: »The N20 carries considerably more traffic now at all points then the N24 does according to the NRA counters.
An M20 will serve Cork/Limerick and several population centres in between. An M24 will be going through pretty much open countryside to Cahir.
Journey times between Cork Limerick on a 120km/hr M20 will surpass any time an upgraded M8 & M24 will offer, and there wont be a toll to negotiate.
What you propose is a case of White Elephant infrastructure. Sure the N24 is a national route between 2 Cities, but the N20 is a more important national route used by more people both now and in the future and thus is entitled to be ahead in the queue for money to be upgraded (if there is any).
Agreed.
There is little point in upgrading the N24 before then N20.
An M20 would cater for towns that currently don't have a motorway link. I can see a 2+2 N24 or even an M24 in the future, perhaps 5 to 15 years. But it should not take priority over other schemes.0 -
invincibleirish wrote: »All well and good but remember NRA policy is not Government policy. its taken over a decade yet now we're only coming to the conclusion of the original Inter Urban programme. what you propose is a commitment to endless miles of potentially little used infrastructure. I think its better to build whats needed when needed. That means avoiding situations like where the SRR upgrades were put on hold whilst the M8 got priority.
I can certainly see your point. The SRR does need to be sorted out as it gets a larger amount of usage than an average section of the M8.
BUT... in a national context, which one is more important. The M8 is part of the major artery between the Republic's two biggest cities (and of course all the towns that lie inbetween). OVERALL, the M8 will serve many more people than the SRR upgrades (even if the AADT on an average section is lower).
I'm not saying the SRR upgrades aren't important or needed. I use that road quite a lot myself, but certainly in a national context, the M8 was right to priority.
I would however not like to see the M17 take priority over the M20.0 -
I can certainly see your point. The SRR does need to be sorted out as it gets a larger amount of usage than an average section of the M8.
BUT... in a national context, which one is more important. The M8 is part of the major artery between the Republic's two biggest cities (and of course all the towns that lie inbetween). OVERALL, the M8 will serve many more people than the SRR upgrades (even if the AADT on an average section is lower).
I'm not saying the SRR upgrades aren't important or needed. I use that road quite a lot myself, but certainly in a national context, the M8 was right to priority.
Im not saying the M8 should be left incomplete, im just saying that a section of it could have been postponed by a year or two to free up cash for the 2 remaining SRR interchanges.(or even better lightly used parts of other interurbans be temporarily postponed)
Think about it Mitchelstown -Fermoy is long fingered for 2/3 years, there is a Mitchelstown bypass already in place.
Now apply it to everyday usage, the SRR interchanges are used by a multiple of the number that will be using sections of the M8 whilst M8 traffic would only have to negotiate one non DC section with little potential for traffic problems for a few extra years.
To tie it back in to the theme of the thread i just dont see the point in committing to building expensive infrastructure in then ame of 'national' development/interest whilst ignoring obvious bottlenecks.0 -
invincibleirish wrote: »Im not saying the M8 should be left incomplete, im just saying that a section of it could have been postponed by a year or two to free up cash for the 2 remaining SRR interchanges.(or even better lightly used parts of other interurbans be temporarily postponed)
Think about it Mitchelstown -Fermoy is long fingered for 2/3 years, there is a Mitchelstown bypass already in place.
Now apply it to everyday usage, the SRR interchanges are used by a multiple of the number that will be using sections of the M8 whilst M8 traffic would only have to negotiate one non DC section with little potential for traffic problems for a few extra years.
To tie it back in to the theme of the thread i just dont see the point in committing to building expensive infrastructure in then ame of 'national' development/interest whilst ignoring obvious bottlenecks.
Well I'd have to agree with your point about the Mitchelstown bypass. The Mitchelstown-Fermoy was by far one of the best stretches of the old N8, and doesn't really suffer from traffic problems.
But I guess they were just anxious to get the whole route finished. It makes sense, it means they won't have to go to the extra expense of finishing it later.
The Bandon and Sarfield road roundabouts do need some major sorting out though. I wouldn't have minded if the Mitch-Fermoy section was put on hold for that. But ANYTHING ELSE (except the M20) I wouldn't have accepted...0 -
If we can't build them roads now, at least buy up the bloody land for them now and build it in 5 or 10 years time! Land value is falling, but will not fall too much further so it would not be a waste of public money to buy this land. Then in years to come tender out the design and build of these roads. However, future PPPs should be on the concept that a design and build for a SET FIGURE RETURN. Toll bridges only exist while a set figure return exists then they are removed/or kept at a 20% rate to cover road maintainance. /rant0
-
invincibleirish wrote: »Most of that population will be concentrated in one area - Dublin.
No. Greater Dublin currently has 30% of the population of the ROI. If you include Northern Ireland it has about 22% of the total population of the island.
If we're serious about balanced regional development (and the existence of the National Spatial Strategy suggests we are) then the main population centres need to have decent infrastructure.invincibleirish wrote: »All well and good but remember NRA policy is not Government policy. its taken over a decade yet now we're only coming to the conclusion of the original Inter Urban programme. what you propose is a commitment to endless miles of potentially little used infrastructure. I think its better to build whats needed when needed. That means avoiding situations like where the SRR upgrades were put on hold whilst the M8 got priority.
Endless miles of potentially little used infrastructure? Hardly. I'm proposing the improvement of the busiest national primary routes and the upgrading of certain national secondary routes which would provide a super-bypass of Dublin, relieving congestion on the M50 and avoiding the need to build the DOOR motorway.0 -
But think about it. Cashel, Cahir, Fermoy, Urlingford, Mitchelstown and many other towns and villages would be missing out on a motorway link.
So what... I can name five other towns of similar size that, under the current system, aren't near a motorway.
They aren't called inter-urbans for nothing, they're supposed to link the cities. We've chosen to do that as wastefully as possible, with a motorway from Dublin to Galway and a Motorway from Dublin to Limerick example. If they had been combined as far as Birr, and the M9/M8 combined for a Dublin-Kilkenny-Waterford-Cork route, there'd be plenty of money left over and the M20 would have been already been built. Pood old Urlingford would have had to make do with an empty and unused N8.
The mindset that every TD must have a motorway in his/her constituency is precisely the reason that we're still building now. If we had competent government, an efficient and useful network would have already been build.
The case for building a motorway system as dense as the German one isn't there: 80 million people live in Germany. You can be sure if we had let German engineers plan our network that they'd have come up with something much more efficient.0 -
marmurr1916 wrote: »No. Greater Dublin currently has 30% of the population of the ROI. If you include Northern Ireland it has about 22% of the total population of the island.
If we're serious about balanced regional development (and the existence of the National Spatial Strategy suggests we are) then the main population centres need to have decent infrastructure.
You misread me, the GDA is going to be where most of the increased population growth you cite will occur, the other urban areas will remain somewhat static in conmparison IIRC.
This country isnt serious about balanced regional development. the NSS is a plan that was a sop to 'interests' taking precedent over careful planning. Why? because having 8 'gateways' and 9 'hubs' (compromising over 20 urban areas ranging in size from Cork to Cavan) is not a strategy that will produce results, focusing development in these areas & Dublin is beyond the means of a small country.marmurr1916 wrote: »Endless miles of potentially little used infrastructure? Hardly. I'm proposing the improvement of the busiest national primary routes and the upgrading of certain national secondary routes which would provide a super-bypass of Dublin, relieving congestion on the M50 and avoiding the need to build the DOOR motorway.
the case for connecting the regional cities to Dublin was dubious enough, remember a Motorway is designed for 55k a day, outside of the GDA these numbers are rarely reached. You seem to be citing the old mantra of building big new shiny roads which will spur economic investment. No they wont and having a Derry - Galway Motorway/DC or Waterford - Limerick is all well and good but unless the traffic volumes come near justifying building it in the first place it will be a waste of money! Money that can be used to build Roads/rail elsewhere that more people will be likely to use.0 -
Advertisement
-
Every time there's been proposals to improve transport infrastructure in Ireland we get the same arguments: we can't afford it, nobody will use it.
I'm not convinced at all by these arguments. Luckily the NRA has taken the decision to build a proper network of primary routes most of which will consist of motorways and 2+2s.
Roll on decent roads in Ireland. The End!0 -
marmurr1916 wrote: »Every time there's been proposals to improve transport infrastructure in Ireland we get the same arguments: we can't afford it, nobody will use it.
I'm not convinced at all by these arguments. Luckily the NRA has taken the decision to build a proper network of primary routes most of which will consist of motorways and 2+2s.
Roll on decent roads in Ireland. The End!
Indeed, no doubt 30years ago when the Naas bypass was been designed/built people were making the same argument, I know i've heard talk that alot of people originally thought the Westlink was a white elephant when it was built and that's only 20years ago.0 -
So we will have a huge motorway network for our population. By comparison, the UK will have 3.5 times our network length with 15 times our population. Even Germany will only have 12 times our network length with 20 times our population.
This had to happen. Our planning system required people to live in isolated rural housing and drive to the cities for work. So we had to build roads.
Cowen says now the only infrastructure that can be built now are roads under contract and he's right. Why build rail when we've spread our population like butter across our fields and valleys?0 -
Yup, the motorway system as it's being built is basically a reflection of corrupt Irish planning.
This is more obvious to people who have spent long amounts of time in less corrupt countries.0 -
Cowen says now the only infrastructure that can be built now are roads under contract and he's right. Why build rail when we've spread our population like butter across our fields and valleys?
Well, we did have a huge rail system already, but the government consigned it to the dustbin. Another huge waste of resources.0 -
Lennoxschips wrote: »Well, we did have a huge rail system already, but the government consigned it to the dustbin. Another huge waste of resources.
Northern Ireland's probably did worse under the UTA and much of that network was either narrow gauge or shockingly badly built.
However, if the lines had remained open it might have provided more of an impetus to upgrade them. Can't really tell what would have happened at this stage.
The closures from the 1950s onwards were far, far more stupid - The Youghal line in Cork would almost certainly be a valuable commuter service if still open, Waterford/Dungarvan possibly too.0 -
Advertisement
-
So we will have a huge motorway network for our population. By comparison, the UK will have 3.5 times our network length with 15 times our population. Even Germany will only have 12 times our network length with 20 times our population.
This had to happen. Our planning system required people to live in isolated rural housing and drive to the cities for work. So we had to build roads.
Cowen says now the only infrastructure that can be built now are roads under contract and he's right. Why build rail when we've spread our population like butter across our fields and valleys?
It's about bloody time someone made the above point (in bold)!
I happen to live in one of those rural houses (living with parents) - wish I could afford to move out, but at the moment, I'm stuck with no transport (I don't drive), maintenance headaches (1/2 acre garden and large house), and if I try to walk, there's plenty of aggressive dogs around - sure this is Meath - why would we need transport when everyone has a car? - Sure who would be walking anyway? - Sure we all drive no matter what! If anyone wonders why the Navan Rail Line is in doubt, you've got your answer - this is Meath where the car rules supreme.
If in doubt, they're gradually scrapping the hard-shoulder on the old N1 (south of Europa Hotel) - apparently, MCC sees it as a regional road where the H/S is no longer neccessary - of course, there's no path provided either - that's on a road carrying up to 20K pcus/day - but who'd be walking or cycling anyway - IMO - it's disgusting, this practice of removing hardshoulders thereby ignoring the needs of cyclists and pedestrians.
Regards!0 -
Lennoxschips wrote: »Well, we did have a huge rail system already, but the government consigned it to the dustbin. Another huge waste of resources.
+1
Especially the Harcourt and Navan lines - around the time they were building the Victoria tube line in London...
...but sure railways were out of fashion! :rolleyes:
Regards!0 -
Lennoxschips wrote: »Well, we did have a huge rail system already, but the government consigned it to the dustbin. Another huge waste of resources.
There is nothing environmentally or economically beneficial abbout railway lines with no passenger demand such as Rosslare-Limerick. They're just lines on a map that cost a fortune to sustain.
The answer to our stupid choice of population dispersal is lots of roads.
When the market value of an Irish rural house has fallen beneath its replacement cost, people will wonder why they were ever built.0 -
No, the answer is to stop and reverse our population dispersal, and particularly to build up our regional cities and towns rather than make even more a mess out of Dublin.
Providing good road and rail links between Galway, Limerick and Cork would have been sensible. However, we're going to just about going to have a DC between Limerick and Galway (goat track still for the N20), and have a mediocre rail link between Limerick and Galway (better Limerick-Cork connections should have been a higher priority, but no doubt a bigger project as double-tracking Limerick-Limk Jctn and rearranging the layout there would have been needed, and maybe arrangements on the Cork line to cope with more traffic).
Of course the N20 could have been started already but for the initial muffing up of the roads programme resulting in over-budget (back in the late 90s early 00s) and not finishing by 2006 (the new promise of 2010 may still be broken). People seem content to think "ah sure at least they're being done" in response to the interurbans not having been finished two years ago, but the slippage by 4 years has had drastic impact. Imagine what would be underway now going into 2009, despite the downturn.0 -
... and have a mediocre rail link between Limerick and Galway (better Limerick-Cork connections should have been a higher priority, but no doubt a bigger project as double-tracking Limerick-Limk Jctn and rearranging the layout there would have been needed, and maybe arrangements on the Cork line to cope with more traffic).
I'm assuming CIE still owns the land that made up the Cork Limerick Direct line. If so I think it would make more sense reopening it (it goes through Croom and Buree I think). Going by the 1906 map on wikipedia it's around the length of track from Limerick to Ennis. At least it would give alot more direct connection to Cork then going through Limerick-Junction.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Map_Rail_Ireland_Viceregal_Commission_1906.jpg0 -
Advertisement
-
There should be no argument really. Build it if it is required. If not required just yet, buy the land and build it some time in the near future when there is more of a need for it.0
-
so does any one else actually believe Northern Ireland still has a better road network? i doubt it!0
-
Lennoxschips wrote: »So what... I can name five other towns of similar size that, under the current system, aren't near a motorway.
They aren't called inter-urbans for nothing, they're supposed to link the cities. We've chosen to do that as wastefully as possible, with a motorway from Dublin to Galway and a Motorway from Dublin to Limerick example. If they had been combined as far as Birr, and the M9/M8 combined for a Dublin-Kilkenny-Waterford-Cork route, there'd be plenty of money left over and the M20 would have been already been built. Pood old Urlingford would have had to make do with an empty and unused N8.
The mindset that every TD must have a motorway in his/her constituency is precisely the reason that we're still building now. If we had competent government, an efficient and useful network would have already been build.
The case for building a motorway system as dense as the German one isn't there: 80 million people live in Germany. You can be sure if we had let German engineers plan our network that they'd have come up with something much more efficient.
Well I'm for building motorways that link as many towns as possible to the system. Yes motorways are primarily for inter-city travel, but they shouldn't be exclusively for that. The M7, M6, M9 and M8 all link countless towns and villages to a high-quality network, and I think that is good value.
And I lived in England for years so I know what a messy motorway system is.
I think our current plan is fine, and is one of the only things this idiotic, corrupt and wasteful government has managed to get right.0 -
One-off rural housing is a blight on the landscape but it's not solely the fault of the politicians.
Irish people built these houses and the planning system which facilitated them was a reflection of the peoples wishes.
Don't blame successive governments for acceding to peoples wishes.
The individuals who built or bought one-off rural housing without demonstrating a need (working/living in the area) for these houses are as much to blame as politicians, especially local politicians.
Many times in the past, people were refused planning permission for one-off rural houses. They appealed to their local councillors for help. There used to be a mechanism (a Section 4 motion) whereby councillors could vote to overturn the decision of the planning officials and grant permission for these houses.
This was done by councillors despite the fact that the cost of servicing these houses is much higher than if they were built in towns or villages.
Why don't the councillors care about the extra costs? Because we don't have any system of local taxation for non-commercial property in Ireland and therefore councillors don't worry about saving taxpayers' money since they won't gain any votes from doing so. In fact the votes are in getting the planning permission.
If we had a system of local taxation (not a council tax like in the UK, but maybe a local income tax) then those responsible (local councillors) for spending that money would be much more careful as they'd lose votes if taxes had to be raised because of their foolish planning decisions.
Let's not forget that Irish people voted for the government that abolished local residential taxation back in 1977. No political party since has made any credible or serious proposal for the re-introduction of some form of local taxation. Why? Because they know the voters wouldn't wear it.
Whose fault is that?0 -
marmurr1916 wrote: »One-off rural housing is a blight on the landscape but it's not solely the fault of the politicians.
Irish people built these houses and the planning system which facilitated them was a reflection of the peoples wishes.
Don't blame successive governments for acceding to peoples wishes.
The individuals who built or bought one-off rural housing without demonstrating a need (working/living in the area) for these houses are as much to blame as politicians, especially local politicians.
Many times in the past, people were refused planning permission for one-off rural houses. They appealed to their local councillors for help. There used to be a mechanism (a Section 4 motion) whereby councillors could vote to overturn the decision of the planning officials and grant permission for these houses.
This was done by councillors despite the fact that the cost of servicing these houses is much higher than if they were built in towns or villages.
Why don't the councillors care about the extra costs? Because we don't have any system of local taxation for non-commercial property in Ireland and therefore councillors don't worry about saving taxpayers' money since they won't gain any votes from doing so. In fact the votes are in getting the planning permission.
If we had a system of local taxation (not a council tax like in the UK, but maybe a local income tax) then those responsible (local councillors) for spending that money would be much more careful as they'd lose votes if taxes had to be raised because of their foolish planning decisions.
Let's not forget that Irish people voted for the government that abolished local residential taxation back in 1977. No political party since has made any credible or serious proposal for the re-introduction of some form of local taxation. Why? Because they know the voters wouldn't wear it.
Whose fault is that?
Yes I totally agree.
Many people have chosen to build their houses in the middle-of-nowhere™ where their houses are very expensive to provide for.0 -
No, the answer is to stop and reverse our population dispersal, and particularly to build up our regional cities and towns rather than make even more a mess out of Dublin.
Providing good road and rail links between Galway, Limerick and Cork would have been sensible. However, we're going to just about going to have a DC between Limerick and Galway (goat track still for the N20), and have a mediocre rail link between Limerick and Galway (better Limerick-Cork connections should have been a higher priority, but no doubt a bigger project as double-tracking Limerick-Limk Jctn and rearranging the layout there would have been needed, and maybe arrangements on the Cork line to cope with more traffic).
Of course the N20 could have been started already but for the initial muffing up of the roads programme resulting in over-budget (back in the late 90s early 00s) and not finishing by 2006 (the new promise of 2010 may still be broken). People seem content to think "ah sure at least they're being done" in response to the interurbans not having been finished two years ago, but the slippage by 4 years has had drastic impact. Imagine what would be underway now going into 2009, despite the downturn.
But people always think 'ah sure' to everything. That's why the government can get away with being so corrupt.
I totally agree with you on that point. Everytime a politician - who shouldn't even be doing this mind you - opens a new stretch of road 'ahead of schedule' I almost feel sick. Lads, unless you've got some sort of magical time machine, NONE OF THE INTER-URBANS are ever going to be delivered ON SCHEDULE BECAUSE THE TIME WAS UP AGES AGO.
I'm glad they're being done, but they should've been done already. Still, I don't like to be the pessimist.0 -
Well I'm for building motorways that link as many towns as possible to the system. Yes motorways are primarily for inter-city travel, but they shouldn't be exclusively for that. The M7, M6, M9 and M8 all link countless towns and villages to a high-quality network, and I think that is good value.
I'd argue the opposite. These towns were already served by decent quality roads (N8/N7/N6) that were adequate for towns of that size.
If the motorways had been built along a different corridor, near other "countless towns and villages" which weren't already on a major national primary route, then even more towns and villages served as a result. And we'd wouldn't have had to build more motorway to do it.
As it is, the likes of Cahir are served by motorway bypass dating from 2008 and a National Primary bypass dating from the 1990s. While other towns of similar size are still on secondary primary horsetracks.
The duplication of existing routes is wasteful.0 -
I'm assuming CIE still owns the land that made up the Cork Limerick Direct line. If so I think it would make more sense reopening it (it goes through Croom and Buree I think). Going by the 1906 map on wikipedia it's around the length of track from Limerick to Ennis. At least it would give alot more direct connection to Cork then going through Limerick-Junction.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Map_Rail_Ireland_Viceregal_Commission_1906.jpg
I think that they might not, to be honest. And just carefully dredging up a memory of the arrangement of Bruree from my memory I don't think relaying track is straightforward around there and although I'd appreciate a look at an contemporary OS map for Charleville at the time, I think that might not be exactly straightforward either.There should be no argument really. Build it if it is required. If not required just yet, buy the land and build it some time in the near future when there is more of a need for it.
The issue is that different people have different views on whether it is required or not.Idbatterim wrote: »so does any one else actually believe Northern Ireland still has a better road network? i doubt it!
I was somewhat disillusioned by the poor condition of road surface the last time I drove to Donegal via parts of NI.Well I'm for building motorways that link as many towns as possible to the system. Yes motorways are primarily for inter-city travel, but they shouldn't be exclusively for that. The M7, M6, M9 and M8 all link countless towns and villages to a high-quality network, and I think that is good value.
And I lived in England for years so I know what a messy motorway system is.
I think our current plan is fine, and is one of the only things this idiotic, corrupt and wasteful government has managed to get right.
I think that we are better off recognising the amount of traffic using the roads concerned rather than focusing on how the towns along said route compare to cities in other countries. The profile of traffic on the N20 route pretty much demands a motorway route in my view, with reasonable access for the towns along said motorway. In general, it needs to be recognised that the route as it stands carrries a hell of a lot of traffic from midpoints on it to the endpoints; it's not just purely LK to C traffic and vice versa.marmurr1916 wrote: »One-off rural housing is a blight on the landscape but it's not solely the fault of the politicians.
Irish people built these houses and the planning system which facilitated them was a reflection of the peoples wishes.
Don't blame successive governments for acceding to peoples wishes.
The individuals who built or bought one-off rural housing without demonstrating a need (working/living in the area) for these houses are as much to blame as politicians, especially local politicians.
Many times in the past, people were refused planning permission for one-off rural houses. They appealed to their local councillors for help. There used to be a mechanism (a Section 4 motion) whereby councillors could vote to overturn the decision of the planning officials and grant permission for these houses.
This was done by councillors despite the fact that the cost of servicing these houses is much higher than if they were built in towns or villages.
Why don't the councillors care about the extra costs? Because we don't have any system of local taxation for non-commercial property in Ireland and therefore councillors don't worry about saving taxpayers' money since they won't gain any votes from doing so. In fact the votes are in getting the planning permission.
If we had a system of local taxation (not a council tax like in the UK, but maybe a local income tax) then those responsible (local councillors) for spending that money would be much more careful as they'd lose votes if taxes had to be raised because of their foolish planning decisions.
Let's not forget that Irish people voted for the government that abolished local residential taxation back in 1977. No political party since has made any credible or serious proposal for the re-introduction of some form of local taxation. Why? Because they know the voters wouldn't wear it.
Whose fault is that?
I'm going to keep this short and simple: the alternatives that we got over the last 10 years; the commuter ville estates with the management companies and poor access to commuter roads and public transport are worse from a lifestyle point of view.Lennoxschips wrote: »I'd argue the opposite. These towns were already served by decent quality roads (N8/N7/N6) that were adequate for towns of that size.
If the motorways had been built along a different corridor, near other "countless towns and villages" which weren't already on a major national primary route, then even more towns and villages served as a result. And we'd wouldn't have had to build more motorway to do it.
As it is, the likes of Cahir are served by motorway bypass dating from 2008 and a National Primary bypass dating from the 1990s. While other towns of similar size are still on secondary primary horsetracks.
The duplication of existing routes is wasteful.
I'd include the Mitchelstown bypass as an example. The issue is that it takes such a long time to get those motorway bypasses done that short term solutions wind up being necessary.0 -
I'm new here but does anyone know why the N25 Waterford City Bypass has not been upgraded to a motorway standerd. I travel on it a lot and it should be a motorway. The new road network into Waterford City is fantastic and state of the art.0
-
Fair play Jamie for opening this thread, great to read through it again, hopefully the mods won't lock it now:rolleyes:
Anyway the answer to your question is here, can't remember which,,,,
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055434201
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055775226
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055708913
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055531024
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055775226
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055828745
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055469706
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055709478
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055775226
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055708913
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20553729620 -
Advertisement
-
Despite the total mess this country is well and truly mired in - the motorway network that has been developed over the past decade is a great achievement and one of the few positive legacies of the boom/bubble era.0
-
There will still be more railway in ireland in 2015 than motorway. When the inconnector is built and the merto north these toll bridges wont be as full.
There will be a big shift back to public transport because it will be the other options that hopefully will be efficent. I hope oil prices dont go to 200 dollars a barrell or there wont be many cars on the dualcarriage ways
Dont get me wrong i not against dualcarriage ways they have made life alot easier for the whole country i just feel that more money should be placed into public transport. I feel that there is far to much money spent on them and there should be a shift in focus to public transport like some european countries who in the past have started to spend more on rail infrastructure than motorways. In my heart i feel alot more money should have been put into public transport at the start of the celtic tiger we probably be as far on with a modern rail infracture and ultimely a efficent rail company to run it.When the government has to answer for their carbon emmisions in the future they may shift the focus to the public transport system ran than the cushy PPP system
If oil goes to 200 dollars a barrel, then electric cars (which will have better batteries by 2015) will become a real option. Generation by wind, water or nuclear will ensure that private cars never go away.0 -
If oil goes to 200 dollars a barrel, then electric cars (which will have better batteries by 2015) will become a real option. Generation by wind, water or nuclear will ensure that private cars never go away.
Hmm, maybe for the top earners, the rest of us will be walking or on the bus. It's not the price of oil, it's tha availability that will decide the number of vehicles on the road.
Back on topic!
Anyway that's at least another decade away, we'll get some good use out of the motorways first.0
Advertisement