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

Amtmann · 15-12-2008 10:53am

Between 1995 and 2005 Germany built 1000 km of autobahn - according to wikipedia, anyway.

dowlingm · 15-12-2008 2:55pm

Furet wrote: »

Between 1995 and 2005 Germany built 1000 km of autobahn - according to wikipedia, anyway.

A lot of that would be upgrades in East Germany, presumably?

E92 · 15-12-2008 2:56pm

There is a very good reason why the Germans are no longer building a lot of Autobahns - they don't need to. We are embarking on something they started before WW2. We are that far behind. We *have* to spend lots of taxpayers money on Motorways - the country simply cannot afford not to, otherwise we will be less capable of taking any advantage of an upturn in the economy. That's a big part of what did us the last time - we had the money but no infrastructure. It's about time certian individuals dug their heads out of the sand and stopped wishing that every road in the country was a boreen. Even if we didn't have the level of traffic on the roads that we do have - we need Motorways anyway as part of this very advanced concept called "forward planning".

We saw the lack of foresight the last time we underinvested in the roads - the Nenagh bypass was only a single carriageway and already has to be upgraded because of a lack of intelligence and a lack of forward planning.

If we settle for substandard single carriageway again instead of faster, safer and crucially future proofed Motorways then we are shooting ourselves in the foot. We will be forced to do things like the Nenagh bypass or soon enough the Croom bypass all over again.

You might say that we could just go for Dual Carriageways- but these are exactly the same as Motorways just with less restrictions - so what's the point in not going staight to the top and doing the right thing for the country?

Why not just do it right the first time? Are we really serious about ignoring the fact that Motorways reduce fatalities by as much as a factor of 10 over mere single carriageways?

When we do catch up with the road network the Germans have - then guess what - we won't need to spend billions on new roads either.

I have nothing against investment in public transport - anything that allows me to get where I want to go by car faster and with less traffic I'm all for but I am 100% opposed to investment in it at the expense of the much needed and long overdue investment in roads.

The car is far too good an invention for people to ever want to give up. Even with Congestion charges, pay as you drive schemes, hikes in tax, whatever other crackpot ideas some left wing socialists come up with - we still all drive in our cars.

Why? Because it's quite simply better than any other form of transport that exists. The proof of the car's superiority is the fact that such a large majority of people still use them even with all the the things like speed scameras, extortionate parking taxes, outrageous road tax, VRT, fuel tax, insurance and all the other considerable expenses of running a car.

The ironic thing is that those who are against Motorways on environmental grounds would be complaining if they packed to capacity too - "because not enough people are using public transport" of whatever excuse they feel like using. You can't have it both ways folks!

D.L.R. · 15-12-2008 3:06pm

It should be obvious that the sooner these projects get built, the sooner they'll help the country to function better. Don't see the point in waiting 12/24/36 months for the N11 or Newlands, for example. Its a hindrance not having them there already. That hindrance costs money every single day.

Amtmann · 15-12-2008 3:45pm

dowlingm wrote: »

A lot of that would be upgrades in East Germany, presumably?

Presumably. A lot like the upgrades we're making.

Amtmann · 15-12-2008 3:59pm

E92 wrote: »

You might say that we could just go for Dual Carriageways- but these are exactly the same as Motorways just with less restrictions - so what's the point in not going staight to the top and doing the right thing for the country?

An important point. Or, as someone suggested here lately, if we are serious about safety and improving N roads, we'd -- get this -- build a load of 2+1! (Right. Try changing a flat tyre on 2+1. Or fancy being stuck behind a combine harvester on the 1 side of a 2+1. Would these 2+1s be grade separated? Because, if yes, then why not go the whole hog, future-proof them, and make them 2+2 to motorway standard. That way, when the impending environmental armageddon does eventually strike, we can use them to channel all that flood water away.)

When we do catch up with the road network the Germans have - then guess what - we won't need to spend billions on new roads either.

Another good point. When the roads are built, that'll be it. If we get them done by 2020, they'll still be there in 2220. There won't be any need for more investment in roads - it'll be levitating trains or what have you from then on.

invincibleirish · 15-12-2008 4:20pm

Furet wrote: »

An important point. Or, as someone suggested here lately, if we are serious about safety and improving N roads, we'd -- get this -- build a load of 2+1! (Right. Try changing a flat tyre on 2+1. Or fancy being stuck behind a combine harvester on the 1 side of a 2+1. Would these 2+1s be grade separated? Because, if yes, then why not go the whole hog, future-proof them, and make them 2+2 to motorway standard. That way, when the impending environmental armageddon does eventually strike, we can use them to channel all that flood water away.)

2+1 has a bad rep,but it does work in that it is safer then a single carriageway road it would replace. It just is not effective on roads like the N20 due to the Mallow-Cork being a busy commuter road.

I think 2+1 has a future as a low cost upgrade for roads that have a profile like the N71, eg roads that need an upgrade but dont require full blown 2+2 or Motorway, especially for quieter sections.

Future proofing is an admirable but expensive concept, what gets future proofed and what doesnt?

Amtmann · 15-12-2008 4:33pm

I am strongly in favour of linking Galway to Cork by motorway.
That is my position on the M20. I would be more amenable to building it from Limerick to an M8 junction at Mitchelstown, but that's not going to happen at this stage. However, good points have been made about the need to bypass the likes of Charleville et al, and there are too many deaths on the existing road as it is. So yes, I would say 'build it'.

Historically, Ireland has always been very internally disconnected. That fact was reflected by the preponderance of different forms of Gaelic spoken on the island, and in the wildly varying accents that one finds down to this day. Unlike southern, central and western Europe, Ireland was a great unknown until the Tudors made a determined effort to map the interior from the late-sixteenth century onwards to facilitate their conquest.
The coastline, on the other hand, was very well known to continental cartographers, sailors, and governments. Galway was a major port, and had mercantile links with the Portuguese and Spanish empires in early modern times. So too did Cork, Dublin and Waterford. Christopher Columbus travelled to Galway in the 1470s, and Irish seamen crewed several galleons in King Charles V's expanding navy. In the fifteenth century Galway citizens very probably knew more of Lisbon and San Sebastien than they did of Clonmel or Cashel (these were major settlements at the time).
But, to the early modern explorer Ireland's interior was an unknown wilderness of forest and bog. What lay behind the ring of mountains that encircle the coast like a great natural wall was a wonderland filled with massive, haunted woods and enchanted, malefic marshes. Werewolves, spirits, fairies and demons were as real as one's own neighbour.

I mention this not only because of the historian in me, but because of a post I read here the other day by a Galway contributor who said Cork felt 'remote' from him. As someone living in Cork, Galway feels fully remote from me, too. And no, I'm not advancing that as the argument in favour of the M20. I'm doing it to point out that Ireland still suffers from a fundamental disconnect. A rail line will partly alleviate this, as will a motorway connection. Together, they would unify the west coast in a way that has never been done before.

BluntGuy · 15-12-2008 5:19pm

I believe the M18 and M20 are as necessary as the other MIUs. Cork is less than 100 km from Limerick and yet the journey can take up to two hours, sometimes even more. That's ridiculous.

Lennoxschips · 15-12-2008 8:40pm

The Germans now only build motorways if the traffic numbers justify it.

The Danes want to build a bridge between Puttgarden and Rodby, which would be a motorway bridge, linking Hamburg and Copenhagen.

You'd think that such a route would need a motorway, but the Germans have looked at the traffic numbers and decided they'll leave the road on their side of the bridge as a single carriageway road for the forseeable future.

That's the attitude they've adopted.

If modern day German engineers had planned the Irish road system they wouldn't have built half of the motorways we have. "Sure we may as well build a motorway while we're at it" is not an argument in their book. Indeed, Ireland will soon have more motorway per capita than Germany.

cjpm · 21-01-2009 4:04pm

I heard today that Arup are proposing to close Ivy Bridge, 3 miles north of Grenagh, just left of the N20. Iarnrod Eireann demolosed the old bridge years ago, and there was such public pressure they had to bulid a replacement. Now Arup are suggesting that this road should be closed, thus making the new bridge redundant!! Crazy stuff, if they just lowered the proposed M20 at that point an overbridge could be built and retain the Ivy Bridge. Problem solved!!

The Word Is Bor · 21-01-2009 6:30pm

cjpm wrote: »

I heard today that Arup are proposing to close Ivy Bridge, 3 miles north of Grenagh, just left of the N20. Iarnrod Eireann demolosed the old bridge years ago, and there was such public pressure they had to bulid a replacement. Now Arup are suggesting that this road should be closed, thus making the new bridge redundant!! Crazy stuff, if they just lowered the proposed M20 at that point an overbridge could be built and retain the Ivy Bridge. Problem solved!!

This bridge then connect directly onto the existing N20, no? The M20 is proposing to use the existing N20 for the motorway therefore prohibiting access from this road.

So you want the motorway lowered (meaning additional earthworks) so that an overbridge (meaning additional earthworks and an additional structure) can be built to where exactly?

cjpm · 22-01-2009 2:44am

Well if Ivy bridge was retained then it would not be necessary to build a new road from Ivy Bridge to Burnfort, east of the mainline (2K long) for the non-motorway traffic!! The idea of linking Ivy Bridge to Burnfort seems like a bit of a non runner due to the sleep valley just south of Burnfort, it would be ridiculous to send traffic that way due to the gradients that would be required!!

The alternative route from Grenagh could be built west of the mainline, making it possible for the OLD Cork Mallow Road to be used for non-motorway traffic, and there would be no need to build an overbridge or lower the mainline. However Ivy Bridge may need to be widened on one side as it has a large skew currently.

spacetweek · 22-01-2009 2:18pm

Lennoxschips wrote: »

The Germans now only build motorways if the traffic numbers justify it.

The Danes want to build a bridge between Puttgarden and Rodby, which would be a motorway bridge, linking Hamburg and Copenhagen.

You'd think that such a route would need a motorway, but the Germans have looked at the traffic numbers and decided they'll leave the road on their side of the bridge as a single carriageway road for the forseeable future.

That's the attitude they've adopted.

If modern day German engineers had planned the Irish road system they wouldn't have built half of the motorways we have. "Sure we may as well build a motorway while we're at it" is not an argument in their book. Indeed, Ireland will soon have more motorway per capita than Germany.

Don't agree with this. There's a major difference between Ireland and the UK/Germany/France. In Ireland, the secondary and distributor road network is horrific. In those other countries, it's great.

In Germany, if a motorway is planned and then cancelled, you can ask the inhabitants to use the old road - which would be a WSC or possible even D2. In Ireland, that just isn't the case. The old road is frequently a winding country lane.

We're not the same as Germany and we need to be creating a good network of roads that replaces our existing ones. Downgrading new road projects from motorway to SC is not the way to go.

The M20 is vital.

IIMII · 22-01-2009 4:11pm

cjpm wrote: »

I heard today that Arup are proposing to close Ivy Bridge, 3 miles north of Grenagh, just left of the N20. Iarnrod Eireann demolosed the old bridge years ago, and there was such public pressure they had to bulid a replacement. Now Arup are suggesting that this road should be closed, thus making the new bridge redundant!! Crazy stuff, if they just lowered the proposed M20 at that point an overbridge could be built and retain the Ivy Bridge. Problem solved!!

Sorry, don't know the area in question of the top of my head, though I've travelled the road. Could you explain a wee bit more?

cjpm · 22-01-2009 9:43pm

IIMII wrote: »

Sorry, don't know the area in question of the top of my head, though I've travelled the road. Could you explain a wee bit more?

About 3 miles north of Grenagh the old Cork Mallow road still exists and runs parallel to the N20, its quite a good road,about 7.5m wide almost totally flat(i.e. no real gradient) and busy enough, a lot of people from Mourneabby use it to go to Cork, via Ivy Bridge (a relatively new road over rail bridge).

Now Arup in all their wisdom have decided to neglect the fact that the old Cork Mallow road is ideal for an alternative route as its totally flat & good for heavy slow loads etc, and they are proposing to build a road to Burnfort, which is over 500ft above sea level to take all the non motorway traffic!!!

It's nuts, the road to get to Burnfort drops into a deep valley with steep hills on either side. Why would you build a new road with 8% gradients if there's a totally flat alternative??!!??

The mourneabby people who use Ivy Bridge will have to double back to get to cork as a result, it's b*llsh*t, i've a buddy from the area who's livid about it. (One of his neighbours met with Arup)
I don't know any more...

The Word Is Bor · 14-02-2009 2:38pm

Constraints Report and Route Selection Report available to download.http://www.corkrdo.ie/n20_cork_limerick_motorway_scheme_publications.php

Chris_533976 · 14-02-2009 3:32pm

Thanks for those

Dont think anyone will ever be able to sift through it all though!

Edit: Doing searches of the PDFs for the word "toll" reveals nothing.

corktina · 14-02-2009 4:08pm

cjpm wrote: »

About 3 miles north of Grenagh the old Cork Mallow road still exists and runs parallel to the N20, its quite a good road,about 7.5m wide almost totally flat(i.e. no real gradient) and busy enough, a lot of people from Mourneabby use it to go to Cork, via Ivy Bridge (a relatively new road over rail bridge).

Now Arup in all their wisdom have decided to neglect the fact that the old Cork Mallow road is ideal for an alternative route as its totally flat & good for heavy slow loads etc, and they are proposing to build a road to Burnfort, which is over 500ft above sea level to take all the non motorway traffic!!!

It's nuts, the road to get to Burnfort drops into a deep valley with steep hills on either side. Why would you build a new road with 8% gradients if there's a totally flat alternative??!!??

The mourneabby people who use Ivy Bridge will have to double back to get to cork as a result, it's b*llsh*t, i've a buddy from the area who's livid about it. (One of his neighbours met with Arup)
I don't know any more...

the old cork mallow road didnt run through Grenagh...are you sure you got that right? a map would help

Húrin · 14-02-2009 4:17pm

I'm not familiar with the N20, so I can't make any real recommendations for it, but I would be inclined to think that building an expensive motorway is overkill.

E92 wrote: »

No good 10 or 15 years time saying that we now need to upgrade the road again from say 2+1 or 2+2(as some propose) to DC because the traffic volumes have increased, we may not necessarily need a motorway from Cork to Limerick at the moment, but we sure as hell will need one in the future as if we don't already.

Cork - Limerick is a disgrace for a road that is supposed to be connecting the second and third biggest cities in this country.

What makes you think that motor traffic is going to increase over the next 15 years? Oil is cheap cos of the recession now, but its price trend is bound to be irreversibly upwards over the next few decades.

Only by Irish standards are Cork and Limerick cities. Of course, the second and third cities of the UK, Germany and France need motorways connecting them, but it's not the same here.

The Word Is Bor · 14-02-2009 4:59pm

Húrin wrote: »

I'm not familiar with the N20, so I can't make any real recommendations for it, but I would be inclined to think that building an expensive motorway is overkill.

What makes you think that motor traffic is going to increase over the next 15 years? Oil is cheap cos of the recession now, but its price trend is bound to be irreversibly upwards over the next few decades.

Only by Irish standards are Cork and Limerick cities. Of course, the second and third cities of the UK, Germany and France need motorways connecting them, but it's not the same here.

Why not have a read of Chapters 20 and 21? There is very little difference between a motorway and a dual carriageway. The motorway would be a strategic entity which should be more secure than a dual carriageway from the point of view of adjacent/ribbon development.

mysterious · 14-02-2009 7:35pm

Húrin wrote: »

I'm not familiar with the N20, so I can't make any real recommendations for it, but I would be inclined to think that building an expensive motorway is overkill.

What makes you think that motor traffic is going to increase over the next 15 years? Oil is cheap cos of the recession now, but its price trend is bound to be irreversibly upwards over the next few decades.

Only by Irish standards are Cork and Limerick cities. Of course, the second and third cities of the UK, Germany and France need motorways connecting them, but it's not the same here.

It's not just a road connecting Limerick and Cork,

It connect's

Irelands
2nd
3rd
4th
cities together

Also connecting Cork port, Shannon Airport, Ennis and the Atlantic corridor. This route is a vital trunk route for the entire western Region.

Traffic averages about 14,000 a day and has 13% H.G.V

The road would be more expensive to rebuild. So a motorway seems to make more sense.

Sponge Bob · 20-04-2009 11:31pm

N20 Northern Section Now Includes the N21 Adare Bypass and avoids a complex junction near Patrickswell . This necessitated a new route selection process for the Adare Bypass, submissions closed today .

Brochure

http://www.midwestroads.ie/N21%20Adare%20Bypass/Pdf/N21%20Public%20Consultation%20Brochure%20April%2009%20for%20Web.pdf

Lennoxschips · 20-04-2009 11:40pm

The green one looks the most logical one.

The black one is the one that will get built as long as the developers are still in power.

Amtmann · 20-04-2009 11:49pm

I agree with Lennoxschips. The green option should also be the cheapest to build by far.

mysterious · 21-04-2009 12:51am

corktina · 21-04-2009 8:01am

well Ive only looked at the map but the black route looks better value for money...sligghtley longer than the green one but not overly as some of that shown black is already there....this option would be more streamlined and the N20/21 junction would be less of a botleneck imho.

Irish and Proud · 21-04-2009 11:25am

mysterious wrote: »

...yeah, your route suggestion looks best IMO - A simple M20/M21 fork would suffice at the Eastern end - if not, a freeflow trumpet similar to the one at St Nessan's (R510) further up the N20 would be the perfect job.

Well done mate!

mysterious · 21-04-2009 11:50am

corktina wrote: »

well Ive only looked at the map but the black route looks better value for money...sligghtley longer than the green one but not overly as some of that shown black is already there....this option would be more streamlined and the N20/21 junction would be less of a botleneck imho.

The black one is actualy very expensive, since some of it is an online upgrade, and it has many underbridges, overbridges to construct. It has to go over a river and a railway line twice also.

corktina · 21-04-2009 4:19pm

what would you call that blue thing entering Adare from the south east then? maybe it dont need a bridge...a Ford perhaps will suffice?

BluntGuy · 21-04-2009 6:09pm

Whatever happens, the M20/N21 (or M21 since I'm sure the segment leading to the motorway will be under motorway restrcitions) junction MUST be fully free-flow.

No more stupid M7/M9 nonsense that will force certain traffic back onto old roads for no good reason. And please, no roundabouts...

mysterious · 21-04-2009 9:19pm

Whoever drew up the route options, obviously just got a pen, and went

Oh lets just scribble a few lines in! Make sure the black line looks immaculate so the developers can build off my lovely black line.

Serously who drew the Blue line ffs? Look at it worming all over the place and then only to meet the N21 at a right angle and facing North. for christ sake like?:rolleyes: If I drew that, I would seriously would expect people to think, I was taking the pisstake......

Is it just me or something here, The routes are redicoulous. The N21 should be the purple route I purposed. It should have motorway restrictions, so the idea of joining it to a Stupid Dumbell at Croom Is a no go plan!

clon · 12-05-2009 7:32pm

Here is the link to the emerging prefered route for the Adare bypass, it is on display to the public in The Dunraven Arms hotel in Adare today.Not sure if link is working below.

http://www.midwestroads.ie/N21%20Adare%20Bypass/Pdf/N21%20Public%20Brochure%20Preferred%20Route.pdf

Typewriter · 12-05-2009 7:49pm

clon wrote: »

Here is the link to the emerging prefered route for the Adare bypass, it is on display to the public in The Dunraven Arms hotel in Adare today.Not sure if link is working below.

http://www.midwestroads.ie/N21%20Adare%20Bypass/Pdf/N21%20Public%20Brochure%20Preferred%20Route.pdf

:eek:

EDIT: Brochure attached...

Chris_533976 · 12-05-2009 8:37pm

Anyone notice the 3 2 1 signs on that brochure are in motorway blue, but that its N21 dual carriageway with no mention of motorway???

OOOPS

dowlingm · 12-05-2009 9:28pm

Build the black route on the bed of the railway line. It's never going to be reinstated and it's dishonest to pretend otherwise. Even if Foynes was to be reinstated as a railway port, it should be with a new coastal alignment rather than a dogleg via Adare.

Obviously from a sustainability POV I would run a RegioCitadis from Colbert to Adare through Raheen but like I said - that ain't going to happen.

Cool Mo D · 12-05-2009 9:31pm

dowlingm wrote: »

Build the black route on the bed of the railway line. It's never going to be reinstated and it's dishonest to pretend otherwise. Even if Foynes was to be reinstated as a railway port, it should be with a new coastal alignment rather than a dogleg via Adare.

Obviously from a sustainability POV I would run a RegioCitadis from Colbert to Adare through Raheen but like I said - that ain't going to happen.

Would this really make construction any easier? A single track railway isn't going to fit a dual carriageway. And the line to Foynes is gone, but it's a possibility that a commuter service to Adare could be developed, or a direct line frm Limerick to Cork reinstated.

bill_ashmount · 12-05-2009 9:44pm

mysterious wrote: »

Serously who drew the Blue line ffs? Look at it worming all over the place and then only to meet the N21 at a right angle and facing North. for christ sake like?:rolleyes: If I drew that, I would seriously would expect people to think, I was taking the pisstake......

Looks like they are going with it

Chris_533976 · 12-05-2009 9:54pm

Actually the blue line pretty much guarantees full access junctions. They'll build either a trumpet or a dumbbell at the M20/21 junction. With the black line, you would get an M7/8 or M7/9 restricted junction.

I dont know anything else about the area so cant comment more on the other options, but thats just what I've noticed.

Tech3 · 12-05-2009 10:08pm

The blue route might be the longest but judging on the map less overbridges/underpasses have to be built. Thats why its curving in order to avoid crossing over a local road.

L1011 · 12-05-2009 10:17pm

dowlingm wrote: »

Build the black route on the bed of the railway line. It's never going to be reinstated and it's dishonest to pretend otherwise. Even if Foynes was to be reinstated as a railway port, it should be with a new coastal alignment rather than a dogleg via Adare.

The track is extant and legally open so this isn't a possibility without a closure order - which won't be forthcoming. That its (I believe) disconnected from the rest of the network doesn't seem to affect whether a line is legally open or not...

Its also a single line, is this wide enough even for a 2+2 to be built on?

Zoney · 12-05-2009 10:41pm

I'm guessing the NRA were against the black route too due to the possibility of local politicians organising a development free for all along its route - it being quite close to the village.

That said, the black route looked a lot more sensible in terms of route and length.

dowlingm: while I certainly don't see anything happening with the railway line in the short or even medium term, I still think your suggestion is rather shortsighted and just a bit of a case of trying to prove a point. At the very least, a railway corridor in state ownership between Limerick and Foynes is I would consider, a valuable asset, even if not in use and requiring reinstatement.

mysterious · 13-05-2009 3:24am

Chris_533976 wrote: »

Actually the blue line pretty much guarantees full access junctions. They'll build either a trumpet or a dumbbell at the M20/21 junction. With the black line, you would get an M7/8 or M7/9 restricted junction.

I dont know anything else about the area so cant comment more on the other options, but thats just what I've noticed.

OMG A PACK OF MONKEYS...

my routewas the best good god. the blue route is just daft, windy, bendy and pontless. It goes to ****ing croom for christ sakes. Blaps itself on the N21 at a ****ing right angle.

Who ever came up with that blue route is a retard. No offence but it has to be said:mad:

mysterious · 13-05-2009 3:28am

tech2 wrote: »

The blue route might be the longest but judging on the map less overbridges/underpasses have to be built. Thats why its curving in order to avoid crossing over a local road.

yes the blue route is so bendy it ends perpindicula to the N21 and starts at Croom

This is actually a sick joke.

you would save time going through Adare, seriously look at how redicoulos it be would for N21 commuters travelling on this bypass daily.

Instead of building an actual bypass, they are building a serpent racetrack.

gjim · 13-05-2009 9:53am

It looks like the selected route involves no house demolition and keeps as far as possible away from existing houses hence the bendiness. All others would have involved demolition. I guess, they decided that CPOing family homes around there would be expensive and politically fraught.

A slightly non-obvious example of how allowing once-off houses to be scattered around the countryside results in greater expense and more inefficiencies in infrastructure provision. In this case, it has increased the capital cost of an important piece of national infrastructure and worse, will impose an burden in terms of efficiency on all users of the road for the foreseeable future.

mysterious · 13-05-2009 4:22pm

They should make a formula one track out of it, its no excuse for this kind of sh!te

Zoney · 13-05-2009 6:04pm

mysterious wrote: »

They should make a formula one track out of it, its no excuse for this kind of sh!te

The route may be more meandering than would be preferable, but avoiding cost and hassle of knocking down people's houses, and probably staving off any of the usual "bypass development" shenangans is indeed worth a min or two of travel in my book (and that is *all* it will be for DC travel). Add to that what Chris pointed out about the likelihood of a full junction at the new N21/M20 point (the black route would almost certainly have been restricted - despite the not so odd fact that people from North Kerry/West Limerick also travel to/from Cork as well as Limerick).

I do however think the western tie-in should be aligned to the west instead of the current plan for a perpendicular connection.

Do not forget either that the existing N21 east of Adare will provide a perfectly adequate link between the village and the M20 - presumably there will be a restricted freeflow junction for it (as would have been planned for the black route which would have commenced along the line of the existing N21).

The final plan may be sub-optimal, but it isn't some kind of oddity dropped from outer space!

Chris_533976 · 13-05-2009 7:48pm

This will be 2+2 anyway so the right angled junction will be a roundabout REGARDLESS of any continuation past Adare. So a right angled turn will make no difference.

Zoney · 13-05-2009 9:01pm

Well, even if it is 2+2 it should be grade separated IMO.

mysterious · 13-05-2009 9:37pm

The blue route is just bonkers..

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

Comments