M28 - Cork to Ringaskiddy [advance works ongoing; 2025 start; 2028 completion]

gerogerigegege wrote: »

do you live in the area or have you visited the area?

I live in the area and this scheme will hugely reduce traffic issues in the area. It will do wonders for Douglas overall with Rochestown Road traffic being hugely reduces. Traffic going through Mount Oval will also reduce.

This is nothing more than a scaremongering campaign by people who have little else to do with people who know no better believing them.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

the Mulcon valley will be destroyed even further.
an awful shame and shouldn't be allowed happen.

Its an "awful shame" if you are an obsessive NIMBY who considers their house an investment and nothing more. That's about it.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

building a motorway beside your home won't affect the price of your house?

wow. that's amazing.

I'm pretty certain my house would be worth a fraction of what it is if the M4 hadn't been built rather near to it - due to the gridlock, smog and noise it alleviated. But I'm not singularly obsessed with the value of my house anyway.

Ludo wrote: »

This I don't believe for a second. Particularly the Rochestown Road part. I live on Coach Hill myself. I don't see it reducing any traffic and in fact can only make things worse but I don't think it will have any major affect so not bothered either way other than by the waste of money.
And why would it reduce traffic thru Mount Oval?

Mount Oval is used as a rat run to access garryduff and Moneygurney travelling south on the N28. This is because the junction with the N28 and the Rochestown Road and the N28 is clogged at rush hour.

The upgraded Carrs Hill junction will provide an additional exit onto the old Carrigaline Road and Maryborough Hill via a new access road. Will make things a lot better.

Can you elaborate by the way how it will make things worse?

Ludo wrote: »

This I don't believe for a second. Particularly the Rochestown Road part. I live on Coach Hill myself. I don't see it reducing any traffic and in fact can only make things worse but I don't think it will have any major affect so not bothered either way other than by the waste of money.
And why would it reduce traffic thru Mount Oval?

Waste of money? The years of bottle neck between shannonpark roundabout and the N40 is getting lost here with all the rochestown talk, never mind the development of Ringaskiddy port. Some of you need to realise you are living in an Urban area not West Cork.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

lots don't want it to happen.
I'd suggest you get used to it

ABP does not give much truck to price-obsessed NIMBYs, thankfully. Nothing has changed since last time you battered on about it.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

the residents of the South side of the city are worried about the destruction of parts of where they live. The noise pollution, air pollution, sound pollution etc.
hopefully this won't go ahead.

Carrs Hill is a very dangerous road especially for cyclists. There have been a number of deaths on it over the past 10 years.
There is too high a volume of traffic on the road for its size and this is only increasing with carraigaline growing and industries in ringaskiddy recovering.

This road is well overdue.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

not wanting to destroy a wooded area is a concern. there's already high noise levels in the area. People don't want anymore increases in sound pollution.

What's your alternative?

gerogerigegege wrote: »

that's the job of the highly paid engineers.
NIMBY thanks.

Well if that's the kind of submission you've put forward during public consultation I'd say keep going, road might get an early start

gerogerigegege wrote: »

that's the job of the highly paid engineers.
NIMBY thanks.

They already have a plan, the one you don't like.

Do you really not have an alternative idea?

gerogerigegege wrote: »

should the engineers not seek another route if asked to do so by the concerned public?
that is their job.

Depends on the concerns, it's there full of self interest and deemed trivial they will be ignored for the benefit of the motoring public.

c montgomery wrote: »

Depends on the concerns, it's there full of self interest and deemed trivial they will be ignored for the benefit of the motoring public.

Remove the word "motoring" there. The scheme as planned is of huge benefit to the public - in general. Anyone who has to suffer the congestion, pollution it creates etc as well as everyone who buys anything that goes through Ringaskiddy.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

should the engineers not seek another route if asked to do so by the concerned public?
that is their job.

If there is a coherent, researched and structured argument to be made, yes.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

they need to make another. They are the experts, not the general public.

The burden of proof is on those who claim there is an alternative. Crying "I don't want this (cause I think it'll make my house worth less, because I think my home is an investment and I read the Daily Wail)" doesn't equate to there being an alternative.

If you can come up with an alternative - and stop with the Daily Wail style arguments - people might debate you. Without that, you are a screeching NIMBY.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Mount Oval is used as a rat run to access garryduff and Moneygurney travelling south on the N28. This is because the junction with the N28 and the Rochestown Road and the N28 is clogged at rush hour.

Yep...I use it myself every day as a rat run on the way home from work, but not for the reason you think. The minor upgrade of the junction of rochestown road and clarkes hill is not going to help much without upgrading the roads in the area in general.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

The upgraded Carrs Hill junction will provide an additional exit onto the old Carrigaline Road and Maryborough Hill via a new access road. Will make things a lot better.

Can you elaborate by the way how it will make things worse?

It may make things worse as more cars will now potentially travel up Coach Hill to access the N28 south which they cant do currently. And Coach Hill needs to be widened as is it now without putting more traffic onto it with no plans to deal with the issue. There is no footpath and barely room for 2 cars to pass as is. It is very dangerous for pedestrians now as cars flly through the narrow section at times without due care.

It prob wont make much of a difference though so no big deal.

cc wrote: »

Waste of money? The years of bottle neck between shannonpark roundabout and the N40 is getting lost here with all the rochestown talk, never mind the development of Ringaskiddy port. Some of you need to realise you are living in an Urban area not West Cork.

No doubt the road needs to be upgraded. No need for a motorway though which won't allow cyclists anyway of course.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

The pollution argument is a complete mcguffin.

The reduction in congestion would lead to a reduction in pollution if anything.

That was my point - although possibly you were on the same tack.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

you're beginning to sound silly now. maybe take a break for yourself:)

Come up with an alternative, rather than screeching about what has been proposed.

You posted, repeatedly, about an apparent alternative before and then denied knowledge of it. Waiting a few weeks hoping we'd forget doesn't work.

You were also directed to the Cork forums to discuss non construction related content. Why haven't you?

Ludo wrote: »

It may make things worse as more cars will now potentially travel up Coach Hill to access the N28 south which they cant do currently. And Coach Hill needs to be widened as is it now without putting more traffic onto it with no plans to deal with the issue. There is no footpath and barely room for 2 cars to pass as is. It is very dangerous for pedestrians now as cars flly through the narrow section at times without due care.

It prob wont make much of a difference though so no big deal.

Doubt people would go that far out of their way and use Coach Hill though. Agreed on the fact that a section of Coach Hill badly needs to be widened.

I wouldn't mind a new road from the top of Clarke's Hill to the Monastery Road by the way.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

I posted a petition to call for an alternative.
if you read back I pointed this out to you because you failed to understand.
NIMBY. thanks.

No, you asked people to write in citing an alternative. That didn't exist. Becuase you hadn't actually read what you asked people to do.

Why you think things are different a few weeks later astounds me.

gerogerigegege wrote: »

you don't consider destroying a wooded area again right beside peoples homes an argument?

You'd have to tell me how many acres, the type of trees, is it mature, is it public or private land etc or you could start with a google map link if that's not too much trouble

gerogerigegege wrote: »

wooded area is to the left of the road (which had destroyed the majority of the area) on the right of the photo. not sure of size etc.
extremely close to the houses in Rochestown Rise etc
http://ie.geoview.info/rochestown_rise,29748456w

Thanks for posting. In an urban area I wouldn't be looking to reroute a motorway for that unless it was protected. I think it would you have a better chance in trying to get new trees planted along the route to offset their loss.