N52 - Tullamore to Kilbeggan (M6) [route options published]

marno21

This has been reactivated by TII as a pipeline scheme.

Will consist of a 2+2 dual carriageway between the northern end of the Tullamore bypass and the M6

Recent article on it here:

http://www.tullamoretribune.ie/articles/news/59277/new-drive-to-revive-plan-for-tullamore-kilbeggan-road/

road_high

The most unnecessary scheme I can think of....

Middle Man

road_high wrote: »

The most unnecessary scheme I can think of....

AADT measurement of 13,323 in 2017...

https://www.nratrafficdata.ie/c2/gmapbasic.asp?sgid=ZvyVmXU8jBt9PJE$c7UXt6

Well above the design level for Type 1 Single AFAIK - the next spec up is a 2+1 retrofit for 14,000. If a new build is required, then the next specification is Type 2 Dual for a capacity of 20,000.

roadmaster

Middle Man wrote: »

AADT measurement of 13,323 in 2017...

https://www.nratrafficdata.ie/c2/gmapbasic.asp?sgid=ZvyVmXU8jBt9PJE$c7UXt6

Well above the design level for Type 1 Single AFAIK - the next spec up is a 2+1 retrofit for 14,000. If a new build is required, then the next specification is Type 2 Dual for a capacity of 20,000.

if you are dueling Tullamore/ M6 , You could nearly Duel Mullingar/M6. i drove Birr to Navan yesterday and between Mullingar and the M6 i actually dont think it would cost a fortune to convert it to Type 2 with only major works required around Belvedere

medoc

€300k for the next stage planning of the N52 Tullamore to Kilbeggan. This was originally 2+2 when first under planning by the old NRA before the recession, I’m not sure if it’s still 2+2.

https://www.offalyexpress.ie/news/home/362243/offaly-td-welcomes-300-000-funding-for-tullamore-kilbeggan-link-road.html

BelfastVanMan

medoc wrote: »

€300k for the next stage planning of the N52 Tullamore to Kilbeggan. This was originally 2+2 when first under planning by the old NRA before the recession, I’m not sure if it’s still 2+2.

https://www.offalyexpress.ie/news/home/362243/offaly-td-welcomes-300-000-funding-for-tullamore-kilbeggan-link-road.html

Be a complete waste of a new road if it isn't 2+2..

roadmaster

BelfastVanMan wrote: »

Be a complete waste of a new road if it isn't 2+2..

Its 2 + 2 already its just missing the barrier!

L1011

roadmaster wrote: »

Its 2 + 2 already its just missing the barrier!

That's the bits nearer to the M6 and Tullamore; this scheme is to deal with the narrower bit in between, these bits with no shoulders etc

roadmaster

L1011 wrote: »

That's the bits nearer to the M6 and Tullamore; this scheme is to deal with the narrower bit in between, these bits with no shoulders etc

no i mean the whole stretch as i often met cars 3/4 a breast on all sections. i dont know how people havent being killed to date.

L1011

roadmaster wrote: »

no i mean the whole stretch as i often met cars 3/4 a breast on all sections. i dont know how people havent being killed to date.

There is no way 3 or 4 cars can fit abreast on the middle section.

roadmaster

L1011 wrote: »

There is no way 3 or 4 cars can fit abreast on the middle section.

i was driving home at Christmas and around the graveyard a car going north was using the filter lane for over taking while a car going south two cars in front of me pulled nearly in to the grave yard wall to allow a car that was up its rear to get by. there might not be room a lot of the way but that does not stop crasy overtaking

marno21

Presumably the southernmost section of this will reuse the stretch built as part of the Tullamore bypass.

The rest of it will likely be offline.

medoc

marno21 wrote: »

Presumably the southernmost section of this will reuse the stretch built as part of the Tullamore bypass.

The rest of it will likely be offline.

Yes the bit from the Silver River to the R443 Arden roundabout is WS2 and was built to be retrofitted to 2+2 when the Kilbeggan link was constructed. It was supposed to be offline to the east of Durrow from there.

annfield1978

Tender has come for Phases 1 to 4

spacetweek

Surely one of the less necessary schemes banging about right now.

Last Stop

spacetweek wrote: »

Surely one of the less necessary schemes banging out right now.

It has a pretty high AADT and is less than 10km so I’d say it is justified.

Improving the N52 and N80 would link all the inter-urban motorways without using the M50 which would be a massive plus

marno21

It’s 4.6km of Type 2 dual. If it weren’t included in the programme there’s not much that would take its place

bennyineire

spacetweek wrote: »

Surely one of the less necessary schemes banging out right now.

You obviously don't drive that stretch of road do you

Cookiemunster

bennyineire wrote: »

You obviously don't drive that stretch of road do you

Just because you find it to be a bad road doesn't mean that there aren't higher priority roads elsewhere in the country.

bennyineire

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Just because you find it to be a bad road doesn't mean that there aren't higher priority roads elsewhere in the country.

You obviously don't either, I can play this game all day long. As has been mentioned numerous times there is an upcoming lack of big projects being shovel ready anytime soon so moving ahead with these smaller projects makes sense

Cookiemunster

bennyineire wrote: »

You obviously don't either, I can play this game all day long. As has been mentioned numerous times there is an upcoming lack of big projects being shovel ready anytime soon so moving ahead with these smaller projects makes sense

I didn't say that this shouldn't go ahead. However your sense of entitlement because you use the road undermines your argument. There are people all over the country saying the same thing. My section needs to be done, you don't drive on it so you don't know how bad it is! Luckily that's not how projects are decided on.

annfield1978

RPS awarded Phases 1 to 4

kala85

Anyone know where I can get the road design plan and spec for this

bennyineire

Contract for planning & design was just signed a few weeks ago. So I'd imagine you would have to wait until they actually plan and design it first

kala85

Will there be any compulsory purchases of land or is it just widening the existing road

BelfastVanMan

kala85 wrote: »

Anyone know where I can get the road design plan and spec for this

AFAIK, it will be approx. 500m to 1km to the east of the existing road.

steeler j

Is there talk of the bypass being upgraded to 2+2 ?

kala85

Will the new road be dual carriage way

marno21

kala85 wrote: »

Will the new road be dual carriage way

It hasn’t been decided yet but 2+2 is assumed as the existing road is already wide single carriageway

BelfastVanMan

marno21 wrote: »

It hasn’t been decided yet but 2+2 is assumed as the existing road is already wide single carriageway

Well, the northern and southern ends are WS2, but the central section is old S2, which has narrow hard shoulders, but it is certainly still one of the better sections of existing N52.

BelfastVanMan

Certainly, anything less than 2+2 would be shortsighted, IMHO.

kala85

What's ws2

SeanW

Wide Super 2. A previous standard for single carriageway and the widest/best. New single carriageways are at most Super 2, which is narrower.

Edit: I stand corrected. It means Wide Single 2 lane.

BelfastVanMan

WS2 generally seems to be the same overall width of 2+2; meaning many WS2 roads potentially can be converted to 2+2; as long as they aren't riddled with side entrances, private accesses etc.

Like the N20 between Cork and Mallow, for example.

BelfastVanMan

SeanW wrote: »

Wide Super 2. A previous standard for single carriageway and the widest/best. New single carriageways are at most Super 2, which is narrower.

I never knew it meant "Wide Super 2-lane". I always thought it meant "Wide Single 2-Lane".

marno21

WS2 = wise/single/2 lane
Wide S2 is 2.7m wider than normal Type 1 SC

Wide S2 = 15m wide, 2+2 is 16.5m wide.

BelfastVanMan

marno21 wrote: »

WS2 = wise/single/2 lane
Wide S2 is 2.7m wider than normal Type 1 SC

Wide S2 = 15m wide, 2+2 is 16.5m wide.

Aye, that's what I thought.

Cheers Marno.

marno21

BelfastVanMan wrote: »

Aye, that's what I thought.

Cheers Marno.

With those figures 2+2 is an absolute no brainer, 10% extra landtake for 2 extra lanes.

It's a good thing in retrospect that the amount of WS2 built in the 2000s was relatively small in the finish vs what was proposed in the Roads Needs Study. It really is a waste of tarmac expanding a road from 6m to 15m with no extra lanes, and the fact that many WS2 schemes are similar in characteristic to runways means the speed on them is lethal, and no barrier to prevent head on collisions. And that's before you take all the overtaking into consideration.

The upgrading of many legacy WS2s such as the N20 Croom bypass, Mallow-Cork, Jamestown/Drumsna bypass etc over the coming years will be most welcome.

Chris_5339762

Agreed. They are well known to be desperately dangerous, partly because the extremely wide road gives you a very bad sense of speed and hence, distance to the oncoming car that you know in your heart is perfectly far enough away to pass the slowpoke in front of you but of course it isn't and now you have a 200+kmh closing speed.

Carawaystick

All those saying WS2 is dangerous never cycled on 2+2....

BelfastVanMan

Carawaystick wrote: »

All those saying WS2 is dangerous never cycled on 2+2....

Fair point, however, this should prove that alternative cycling/pedestrian routes should be mandatory with 2+2s.

Carawaystick

Once theyre built to international best practice, Dutch interurban cycle ways are 4m, and 2m for walking

marno21

https://www.westmeathindependent.ie/2020/06/11/plans-moving-forward-for-new-tullamore-to-kilbeggan-road/

First public consultation on the scheme to begin Monday

Scheme website pending at www.n52tullamoretokilbeggan.ie

kala85

Is 2 plus 2 a, dual carriage way

marno21

kala85 wrote: »

Is 2 plus 2 a, dual carriage way

Traffic volumes would signal a 2+2 from end to end. With no real need for intermediate junctions it shouldn't be a too hefty scheme

marno21

Route options to be published in Q4.

marno21

Route options published: https://www.n52tullamoretokilbeggan.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/map.jpg

Pete_Cavan

Option 2 (purple) is the obvious route. Is this intended to be 2+2? I would have thought single carriageway would suffice, spending some money removing some roundabouts at the southern end of the Tulamore Bypass would be more beneficial.

searay

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Option 2 (purple) is the obvious route. Is this intended to be 2+2? I would have thought single carriageway would suffice, spending some money removing some roundabouts at the southern end of the Tulamore Bypass would be more beneficial.

I agree. I drive along that stretch regularly from Kilbeggan and taking the N80 to Carlow. The stretch due to be replaced is the best section of the route by far.

Better junctions at the Portarlington road and n80 crossing would be a better investment.

bennyineire

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Option 2 (purple) is the obvious route. Is this intended to be 2+2? I would have thought single carriageway would suffice, spending some money removing some roundabouts at the southern end of the Tulamore Bypass would be more beneficial.

Single carriage way us already at capacity at peak times, I believe the current traffic volumes already meet the criteria for 2+2 so a good bet it will be that.

Option 3 looks better to me TBH

spacetweek

It's gonna be dual, TII confirmed it previously.