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

N2 - Slane Bypass [planning decision pending]

Options
12526272931

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 214 ✭✭smokie72




  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,380 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    smokie72 wrote: »

    https://twitter.com/leovaradkar/status/1206614043223633920

    Lots of talking. Not very much building


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    marno21 wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/leovaradkar/status/1206614043223633920

    Lots of talking. Not very much building

    Ah, so there is a general election coming soon.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,404 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    marno21 wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/leovaradkar/status/1206614043223633920

    Lots of talking. Not very much building

    And they’re be even less if those Green clowns get their two cents into the next
    Coalition


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,552 ✭✭✭veryangryman


    Why do RTE do a 10 paragraph article about the route being revealed without revealing the route? The fk, do they just assume people read the article, nod and move on without scrutinizing the subject matter?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,404 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Why do RTE do a 10 paragraph article about the route being revealed without revealing the route? The fk, do they just assume people read the article, nod and move on without scrutinizing the subject matter?

    Because our journalists have a desperately low understanding of anything remotely technical when covering stories. Usually these days with RTE a story like this is swung around to focus on climate change and eco warriors who oppose the road/progress rather than the desperately needed infrastructure


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,872 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    The lady on the RTE news that they were interviewing basically said "There are motorways either side of Slane. Can't we make the lorries use those? And leave the landscape alone?"


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,404 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    The lady on the RTE news that they were interviewing basically said "There are motorways either side of Slane. Can't we make the lorries use those? And leave the landscape alone?"

    I didn't see the clip but can only imagine this anti road/anti development tripe would be given its usual RTE prominence.

    There is motorways love but they don't solve the decades long issues at Slane.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,380 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21




  • Registered Users Posts: 14 unicorn97


    What was the chosen preferred route?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,704 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    According to the slane bypass website it looks like they are very close to picking the route

    http://www.n2slanebypass.ie/MDT0806GR0003D07%20A3%20PUBLIC%20CONSULTATION%20DAY%20NOV%202019.pdf


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,380 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    The final N2 Slane bypass route has been published:

    http://www.n2slanebypass.ie/documents/MDT0806-RPS-00-N2-DR-C-DG0001%20S3%20P03.pdf

    The options selection report is also available here: http://www.n2slanebypass.ie/documents1.htm

    The scheme is now at design phase, ecology surveys have begun and topographical studies will begin in June. Detailed ground investigation works will begin later in 2020.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,380 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Few bits from the report:

    3.4km of Type 1 single carriageway. 3 roundabouts (N2 South, N51 & N2 North). Also will include traffic management measures in Slane, details of which are outlined in the report. Cost is approx €38m.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,807 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Single carriageway? :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,820 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Single carriageway is sufficient for Slane, particularly if the N2 south of Ardee is reduced to an R road, which should happen. Single carriageway is also less likely to attract such opposition as the previous proposal and cost less, both making it more likely to happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,511 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Type 1 SC doesn't cost any significant amount less than T2DC. May be easier to get it through planning as T1SC and then amend.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,704 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I believe it only costs 10% extra


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,036 ✭✭✭duffman3833


    i myself would prefer the single carriageway as it will keep speed and noise down. I'm very close to this bypass and the less room it takes up the better as its going to be going over the boyne valley. I'm glad to see clogs turning to get this in motion but it may be a few years before we see anything physical happen


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,380 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    TII seem keen on the M1 being the main route for long distance traffic south of Ardee, even if they are extending the M2 north to Kilmoon Cross

    When the shortest possible route for this scheme was chosen it did seem likely it would be a barebones job. It’s just to provide a second river crossing here and nothing else, Type 1 over Type 2 was likely chosen due to volume. (The traffic volumes outlined in the options selection report would advocate Type 1 SC for a scheme of this length)


  • Registered Users Posts: 667 ✭✭✭BelfastVanMan


    marno21 wrote: »
    TII seem keen on the M1 being the main route for long distance traffic south of Ardee, even if they are extending the M2 north to Kilmoon Cross

    When the shortest possible route for this scheme was chosen it did seem likely it would be a barebones job. It’s just to provide a second river crossing here and nothing else, Type 1 over Type 2 was likely chosen due to volume. (The traffic volumes outlined in the options selection report would advocate Type 1 SC for a scheme of this length)

    I wonder if...and IF... they decide to downgrade the N2 south of Ardee... would the M2 become our first 3-digit motorway; I.E. a regional motorway?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,820 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    L1011 wrote: »
    Type 1 SC doesn't cost any significant amount less than T2DC. May be easier to get it through planning as T1SC and then amend.

    I don't think those cost comparisons will hold true for this given it is a short stretch of road and the bridge will be a significant proportion of the cost. Doubling the width of the bridge here will have a big impact on cost.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,820 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    marno21 wrote: »
    TII seem keen on the M1 being the main route for long distance traffic south of Ardee, even if they are extending the M2 north to Kilmoon Cross

    I know it has its own thread but I'd be amazed if the new road to Kilmoon Cross actually happened. When looking for projects to cut, this will surely be near the top of the list. The case for it must have been fragile already given the existing road is of decent standard with just a couple of problem junctions. Also can't see how the environmental case for a new section of motorway can be made there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,511 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    I don't think those cost comparisons will hold true for this given it is a short stretch of road and the bridge will be a significant proportion of the cost. Doubling the width of the bridge here will have a big impact on cost.

    Eh, the point is that they have a virtually identical land take and pavement size. The bridge won't be doubled in size, it will be the same size for either type due to future proofing a T1SC for dualling.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,000 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    I know it has its own thread but I'd be amazed if the new road to Kilmoon Cross actually happened. When looking for projects to cut, this will surely be near the top of the list. The case for it must have been fragile already given the existing road is of decent standard with just a couple of problem junctions. Also can't see how the environmental case for a new section of motorway can be made there.
    Yea agreed totally, it's just asking to be cut. It's a Greenie's nightmare and is 100% just for commuter traffic.
    L1011 wrote: »
    Type 1 SC doesn't cost any significant amount less than T2DC.
    That's an often repeated piece of misinformation on here.
    You're just talking about the build cost and forgetting about the maintenance cost. In the long run maintenance costs more than the build cost, so needs to be minimised.
    L1011 wrote: »
    May be easier to get it through planning as T1SC and then amend.
    I certainly hope they don't, it's a very sneaky piece of sleight of hand.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,511 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    spacetweek wrote: »
    That's an often repeated piece of misinformation on here.
    You're just talking about the build cost and forgetting about the maintenance cost. In the long run maintenance costs more than the build cost, so needs to be minimised.

    I was talking about build cost as I suspect was Pete_Cavan.

    Maintenance costs could be reduced by slightly increasing build costs and using armco, not cheese wire.
    spacetweek wrote: »

    I certainly hope they don't, it's a very sneaky piece of sleight of hand.

    You remember how basically the entire MIU network was granted planning as DC (avoiding local meetings screeching about "motorways")? Yeah, we're well used to this.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,704 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I posted this I think a year or two ago this is TII'S view on type 2


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,872 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    Sensible choice to make it Single. I think its the only logical solution here, a compromise between the environment and traffic.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,807 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    I know it has its own thread but I'd be amazed if the new road to Kilmoon Cross actually happened. When looking for projects to cut, this will surely be near the top of the list. The case for it must have been fragile already given the existing road is of decent standard with just a couple of problem junctions. Also can't see how the environmental case for a new section of motorway can be made there.
    I sure hope not, I remember travelling to Dublin from the North one evening and I saw a continuous stream of traffic going the other way, from the end of the M2 well into Meath at least. It would be insane not do something at least as far as beyond Kilmoon Cross.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,380 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    The latest:

    * Ground investigation works (boreholes) to be complete by November 2020
    * Archaelogical investigation works to commence in November 2020
    * Topopgrahical survey & geophysical survey were completed in September 2020

    www.n2slanebypass.ie


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,036 ✭✭✭duffman3833




Advertisement