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

Isambard

Aontachtoir wrote: »

I'm quite surprised by the strong defence being given to the M20 in this thread, given the opposition which many posters seem to have to the Galway bypass. The Greens strongly oppose both projects for the same, consistent reasons.

If building a proper bypass for Galway alongside heavy investment in PT is not part of a sustainable solution because it is "20th century thinking", will inevitably and only lead to urban sprawl and rapid, unsustainable traffic increases, and could be easily replaced with a couple of buses and bus lanes, why are the Greens wrong to say the M20 should be cancelled for the same reasons?

Scrapping the road would mean not investing well over one billion euro in our road network, which could be diverted elsewhere. I am surprised not to see more posts supporting the Greens' calls to put that money into more bus services between rural towns, faster trains between Cork and Limerick, and traffic calming measures in accident spots on the N20 to further reduce traffic capacity and disincentivise driving, given the support I have seen on this board for those options in Galway. Surely if an anti-car, pro-PT plan works in County Galway it should work in Cork and Limerick too?

we'd like those things too, but the reality is Rural Ireland depends on the car and more so the truck for it's transport needs that rail can never meet and the bus can't unless it has the roads first.

Sam Russell

Aontachtoir wrote: »

I'm quite surprised by the strong defence being given to the M20 in this thread, given the opposition which many posters seem to have to the Galway bypass. The Greens strongly oppose both projects for the same, consistent reasons.

If building a proper bypass for Galway alongside heavy investment in PT is not part of a sustainable solution because it is "20th century thinking", will inevitably and only lead to urban sprawl and rapid, unsustainable traffic increases, and could be easily replaced with a couple of buses and bus lanes, why are the Greens wrong to say the M20 should be cancelled for the same reasons?

Scrapping the road would mean not investing well over one billion euro in our road network, which could be diverted elsewhere. I am surprised not to see more posts supporting the Greens' calls to put that money into more bus services between rural towns, faster trains between Cork and Limerick, and traffic calming measures in accident spots on the N20 to further reduce traffic capacity and disincentivise driving, given the support I have seen on this board for those options in Galway. Surely if an anti-car, pro-PT plan works in County Galway it should work in Cork and Limerick too?

I think you are missing a very important difference.

Galway already has the € billion spent on the M17 and M18 to provide a long distance motorway that allows a good connection for Galway to Shannon and Limerick. Un fortunately, it is too far East to benefit Galway as Claregalway is still jammed with rush hour traffic.


The bypass is a distributor road to allow more car access to the city and more access to sprawl. It does nothing for public transport.

Aontachtoir

Isambard wrote: »

we'd like those things too, but the reality is Rural Ireland depends on the car and more so the truck for it's transport needs that rail can never meet and the bus can't unless it has the roads first.

The Greens would argue that Ireland (rural or urban) is car dependent because there is too much investment in roads and not enough in PT. Buses can and do get to any town on and near to the N20. Instead of making it easier for the people living in these towns and villages to get around or travel to Cork/Limerick in their own cars, shouldn't we prevent further car dependence by cancelling much-needed road infrastructure and making rural residents depend more on buses?

Again, I strongly support building the M20. I just can't see why a person would support building/upgrading the M20 but then oppose building/upgrading other necessary roads (like the M6 in Galway or the M3 in Dublin), when the same arguments for and against can be applied to each project.

hans aus dtschl

Aontachtoir wrote: »

The Greens would argue that Ireland (rural or urban) is car dependent because there is too much investment in roads and not enough in PT. Buses can and do get to any town on and near to the N20. Instead of making it easier for the people living in these towns and villages to get around or travel to Cork/Limerick in their own cars, shouldn't we prevent further car dependence by cancelling much-needed road infrastructure and making rural residents depend more on buses?

Again, I strongly support building the M20. I just can't see why a person would support building/upgrading the M20 but then oppose building/upgrading other necessary roads (like the M6 in Galway or the M3 in Dublin), when the same arguments for and against can be applied to each project.

One's an urban distributor, the other's a point-to-point interurban link.
Both need PT and active transport evaluation but that's where the similarities end. Neither go ahead until a comprehensive PT and active transport evaluation has been completed.

In urban areas, distributors should often not been built until some modal shift has been achieved, or it will be a waste of money. We made this mistake in Dublin and Cork already (M50, N40).

The M20 project includes evaluation of PT. Dedicated active transport is not realistic as an alternative on the entire corridor. But it's still included.

They're totally different and unrelated projects.

Aontachtoir

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think you are missing a very important difference.

Galway already has the € billion spent on the M17 and M18 to provide a long distance motorway that allows a good connection for Galway to Shannon and Limerick. Un fortunately, it is too far East to benefit Galway as Claregalway is still jammed with rush hour traffic.

The bypass is a distributor road to allow more car access to the city and more access to sprawl. It does nothing for public transport.

Cork and Limerick have seen billions invested in their road infrastructure. We are proposing to invest at least a billion more (especially in Cork) because there are still clear gaps in the network. If Galway and Claregalway do not benefit from the M17/M18 (which was not designed to functionally bypass either location for commuter traffic), then there are still clear gaps in the network there too which should be fixed with further investment.

The Galway bypass will allow for traffic to be routed out of the city centre, and thus create more breathing room for PT and cars/trucks to function alongside each other. If it leads to sprawl, that is the sign of a bad planning system, not that there is a problem with the road. Besides, those exact same risks exist for the M20, which will make commuting from Mallow, Buttevant, Charleville, Croom etc much much easier. Furthermore, as buses already travel the N20 just fine, it is hard to see how upgrading it to M20 will help public transport in any significant way.

Basically, it's hard for me to get my head around opposing the M6 on the basis of the government already having invested in the region, or the risk of development in newly-accessible locations, or not enough focus on PT, while supporting the M20 despite the exact same points applying.

Sam Russell

Aontachtoir wrote: »

Cork and Limerick have seen billions invested in their road infrastructure. We are proposing to invest at least a billion more (especially in Cork) because there are still clear gaps in the network. If Galway and Claregalway do not benefit from the M17/M18 (which was not designed to functionally bypass either location for commuter traffic), then there are still clear gaps in the network there too which should be fixed with further investment.

The Galway bypass will allow for traffic to be routed out of the city centre, and thus create more breathing room for PT and cars/trucks to function alongside each other. If it leads to sprawl, that is the sign of a bad planning system, not that there is a problem with the road. Besides, those exact same risks exist for the M20, which will make commuting from Mallow, Buttevant, Charleville, Croom etc much much easier. Furthermore, as buses already travel the N20 just fine, it is hard to see how upgrading it to M20 will help public transport in any significant way.

Basically, it's hard for me to get my head around opposing the M6 on the basis of the government already having invested in the region, or the risk of development in newly-accessible locations, or not enough focus on PT, while supporting the M20 despite the exact same points applying.

The Galway bypass will not open this decade. The PT solution could be up and running in a year or so.

The same applies to the M20, but could be pushed quickly with political priority. But the rail alternative, via Limerick Junction could come quickly, particularly with the political will.

Isambard

Aontachtoir wrote: »

The Greens would argue that Ireland (rural or urban) is car dependent because there is too much investment in roads and not enough in PT. Buses can and do get to any town on and near to the N20. Instead of making it easier for the people living in these towns and villages to get around or travel to Cork/Limerick in their own cars, shouldn't we prevent further car dependence by cancelling much-needed road infrastructure and making rural residents depend more on buses?

Again, I strongly support building the M20. I just can't see why a person would support building/upgrading the M20 but then oppose building/upgrading other necessary roads (like the M6 in Galway or the M3 in Dublin), when the same arguments for and against can be applied to each project.

all very well if you live next to a train station or on a bus route. Small Town Ireland will never have a high frequency bus/train service and rural Ireland , no service at all. In fact, one bus an hour is an impossible dream

veryangryman

"Modal shift". There's been a reregistered user back for more.

Good god that phrase depresses me as it was used 5 or 6 years back and IMO jinxed the project for both sides. Galway remains crawlway since then

biddyearley

munchkin_utd wrote: »

the M18/M17 does not connect Tuam to the outside world, it connects the south west of Ireland (including Cork) with the north west of Ireland

If you have ever done a long distance journey up the west coast you'd more than appreciate the road, and more than appreciate that what it replaced was a much much worse road, and in more need of replacement, than the N20.

The N20 is in need of improvement, but its far from the worst national primary road in the country

High volume of traffic, bottle-necked and extremely dangerous at times.

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we keep to the M20, please.

Probably pointed out before but it's still mad to think that the main, major road between our 2nd and 3rd cities has speed ramps...

Isambard

serfboard wrote: »

<snip> Quoting deleted post .

pointless comparison then . The N20 is head and shoulders worse than a former N road that already got bypassed by a Motorway, which is what we need to relieve the N20.

Sam Russell

Mod: Posts ignoring warning above in post #7271 deleted.

Isambard

feel free to delete my 7273 now too Sam..


[Edit: You are OK, Sam]

KrisW1001

Here's my pessimistic/realistic prediction:

Type 1 DC ("Motorway") from Blarney to north of Mallow
Type 2 DC (2+2) from Mallow to existing Croom bypass
Type 1 DC ("Motorway") from Croom bypass to N21

Overall route would remain designated as N20; i.e., not subject to Motorway regulations, but the Type 1 sections would be given a 120 km/h speed-limit (as already done on N22, N25 in Co. Cork)

Type 1 on the Mallow-Cork section will be environmentally "excused" by the electrification of the Cork-Mallow rail service, with more frequent services. (Although if a Cork area commuter railway is being taken seriously, money will eventually have to be found for extra track between Mallow and Blackpool to prevent interference between commuter and inter-city services on that stretch.)

AugustusMinimus

KrisW1001 wrote: »

Here's my pessimistic/realistic prediction:

Type 1 DC ("Motorway") from Blarney to north of Mallow
Type 2 DC (2+2) from Mallow to existing Croom bypass
Type 1 DC ("Motorway") from Croom bypass to N21

Overall route would remain designated as N20; i.e., not subject to Motorway regulations, but the Type 1 sections would be given a 120 km/h speed-limit (as already done on N22, N25 in Co. Cork)

Type 1 on the Mallow-Cork section will be environmentally "excused" by the electrification of the Cork-Mallow rail service, with more frequent services. (Although if a Cork area commuter railway is being taken seriously, money will eventually have to be found for extra track between Mallow and Blackpool to prevent interference between commuter and inter-city services on that stretch.)

Beyond insanity if they go with something like that.

Sam Russell

I suppose they could build it all as motorway, but still call it N20, so keep the fiction that it is still not the M20.

The built the Kinnegad to Athlone as the N6, and then re-designated it as the M6.

AugustusMinimus

Sam Russell wrote: »

I suppose they could build it all as motorway, but still call it N20, so keep the fiction that it is still not the M20.

The built the Kinnegad to Athlone as the N6, and then re-designated it as the M6.

2+2 ain’t HQDC though. Nowhere else in Europe would such a setup be contemplated.

KrisW1001

Not true. You forget how low our population density is by European standards. Nowhere else in Europe would all of M18/M17 have been built as a motorway, or M9: a direct motorway link to serve a city of 50,000 people is nonsense in a European context (I am from Waterford; this isn’t begrudgery, just a statement of fact).

In any case, what I posted was the pessimistic prediction; I think it will be higher standard than that. Even that pessimistic scenario, though is a huge improvement on the route that exists now.

AugustusMinimus

KrisW1001 wrote: »

Not true. You forget how low our population density is by European standards. Nowhere else in Europe would all of M18/M17 have been built as a motorway, or M9: a direct motorway link to serve a city of 50,000 people is nonsense in a European context (I am from Waterford; this isn’t begrudgery, just a statement of fact).

In any case, what I posted was the pessimistic prediction; I think it will be higher standard than that. Even that pessimistic scenario, though is a huge improvement on the route that exists now.

What I mean is that no other country would build a completely new 90km of motorway linking 2 cities but drop about 25km of it to 2+2 standard.

My view is that we’ve had enough half measures in this country to last a lifetime.

Isambard

I suppose there may be some saving to do that. It's second best though, not really suitable for the status of the Cities it would link.

As for the railway, for most of the day there is one train an hour each way , rising to only two in busier hours. There would be no need for a third track. I think personally that calling it a Cork to Mallow rail service is short-sighted. The chance would be there to run semi-fast to Limerick Junction or even Limerick itself. connecting in and out of the Intercity service at the junction and offering an improved service to Charleville and new stations north of Mallow.

KrisW1001

Mallow-Croom is 45 km, nearly exactly half the scheme length.

Plenty of countries would build a 90 km expressway between urban areas of 300k and 150k, but upgrade the end sections to motorway to account for higher traffic.

My thinking was a variation of the “it’s not the end-to-end traffic that matters” argument, but one that looks at the road as meeting the demand for end-to-end traffic, but upgrading it where local needs dictate. So, where the road needs higher capacity, in areas of higher population, there is higher capacity, and where it goes through a long area of low population, then it only needs to cater for the end-to-end capacity.

To be clear again, I think the most likely outcome is N20 Type 1 DC at 120 km/h all the way, but what I’ve presented is a realistic, if unlikely, alternative to that.

@Isambard, the reason for extra track is that there are also two more stations proposed for the north side of Cork city. That increases the time the commuter trains will spend on the track (you just know that these new stations will not be built as side tracks, but rather as simple stops on the main line). Plus, if you add more Cork-Limerick (and Cork-Tralee) services, you’re fighting with the commuter trains again.

Isambard

KrisW1001 wrote: »

Mallow-Croom is 45 km, nearly exactly half the scheme length.

Plenty of countries would build a 90 km expressway between urban areas of 300k and 150k, but upgrade the end sections to motorway to account for higher traffic.

My thinking was a variation of the “it’s not the end-to-end traffic that matters” argument, but one that looks at the road as meeting the demand for end-to-end traffic, but upgrading it where local needs dictate. So, where the road needs higher capacity, in areas of higher population, there is higher capacity, and where it goes through a long area of low population, then it only needs to cater for the end-to-end capacity.

To be clear again, I think the most likely outcome is N20 Type 1 DC at 120 km/h all the way, but what I’ve presented is a realistic, if unlikely, alternative to that.

@Isambard, the reason for extra track is that there are also two more stations proposed for the north side of Cork city. That increases the time the commuter trains will spend on the track (you just know that these new stations will not be built as side tracks, but rather as simple stops on the main line). Plus, if you add more Cork-Limerick (and Cork-Tralee) services, you’re fighting with the commuter trains again.

a dual track line on ten minute headways could handle 6 trains an hour, tighter headway than that possible with modern computer signalling. Modern electric trains take very little time to stop and restart , how many trains per hour were you envisioning? Surely there would not be demand beyond a half hourly service Mallow/Cork with one fast and one stopper, there would be plenty of capacity.

Adding an extra track on any line and this one in particular would increase the costs astronomically, most of it is on embankments or in cuttings and extra land would be needed too. (you do realise this is already twin tracked?)

marno21

Irish motorways built post 2006/2007 are quite low standard though. They are much lower standards than motorways built before then, junctions/width/alignment. Compare how straight and wide the M1 is compared with section so motorway in the south and west for example.

Ireland doesn’t presently use any type of access control other than motorway so some sections of the current motorway network would be “expressways” in other countries. We are bringing it in tho, the N25 between Kilmeaden and New Ross is to become a protected road/expressway when the middle section gets built.

AugustusMinimus

marno21 wrote: »

Irish motorways built post 2006/2007 are quite low standard though. They are much lower standards than motorways built before then, junctions/width/alignment. Compare how straight and wide the M1 is compared with section so motorway in the south and west for example.

Ireland doesn’t presently use any type of access control other than motorway so some sections of the current motorway network would be “expressways” in other countries. We are bringing it in tho, the N25 between Kilmeaden and New Ross is to become a protected road/expressway when the middle section gets built.

The M18 is particularly noticeable. It is incredibly twisty with a narrow margin. The days of very straight motorways with wide centre markings are gone.

Sam Russell

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

The M18 is particularly noticeable. It is incredibly twisty with a narrow margin. The days of very straight motorways with wide centre markings are gone.

They built the M11 in little bits, as they did the M6 section from Kinnegad to Athlone. Perhaps a few tranches of the M20 could be built to pass the bad bits first, and join it all up later.

I would think they should just build it now though.

Isambard

i believe motorways are not built straight on purpose to avoid driver boredom. The M8 north of Mitchelstown is a prime example, the old N7 was pretty straight and the motorway weaves about all over.

L1011

They may also alter the route for ground conditions, reducing the number of CPOs, avoiding archaeological features etc.

In the old days, the straightest route was seen as the best often.

mdmix

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

What I mean is that no other country would build a completely new 90km of motorway linking 2 cities but drop about 25km of it to 2+2 standard.

My view is that we’ve had enough half measures in this country to last a lifetime.

Except trains or other public transport right? half measures everywhere but roads!

AugustusMinimus

mdmix wrote: »

Except trains or other public transport right? half measures everywhere but roads!

This is the roads forum.