Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

N25 - Carrigtwohill to Midleton [route options published]

24567

Comments



  • Bacchus wrote: »
    I agree that fixing Lakeview just moves the problem down the road but I don't think it exacerbates it. Also, naive as this may be, you have to consider upgrades such as Dunkettle, the N28, the N25, Lakeview flyover as part of an overall plan to improve traffic flow. The problem with the big picture though is that the stretch from Midleton to Youghal doesn't seem to have a plan... and westbound from Dunkettle is going to be a car park.

    Personally, in fantasy world, I'd rather keep that stretch as it is, stop focusing on putting dual carriageways everywhere, and focus on rail links to encourage drivers off the road and onto trains going from Waterford/Dungarvan/Youghal to Midleton/Carrigtwohill/Little Island/City. That'll never happen though :(

    Waterford and Dungarvan certainly won’t happen given that the Waterford line ran through Lismore and Mallow before going south to Cork. The Dungarvan to Mallow section was sold off to farmers in the 60s.

    Youghal was always a dead end for trains.




  • Bacchus wrote: »
    I agree that fixing Lakeview just moves the problem down the road but I don't think it exacerbates it. Also, naive as this may be, you have to consider upgrades such as Dunkettle, the N28, the N25, Lakeview flyover as part of an overall plan to improve traffic flow. The problem with the big picture though is that the stretch from Midleton to Youghal doesn't seem to have a plan... and westbound from Dunkettle is going to be a car park.

    Personally, in fantasy world, I'd rather keep that stretch as it is, stop focusing on putting dual carriageways everywhere, and focus on rail links to encourage drivers off the road and onto trains going from Waterford/Dungarvan/Youghal to Midleton/Carrigtwohill/Little Island/City. That'll never happen though :(

    None of those schemes will be effective without a north ring road should only be 3 junctions on that N22, M20, M8. I hope the south ring is never widened to three lanes would be a very bad investment like the M50 widening.




  • None of those schemes will be effective without a north ring road should only be 3 junctions on that N22, M20, M8. I hope the south ring is never widened to three lanes would be a very bad investment like the M50 widening.

    There were 3 further junctions in planning.

    Poulavone, Hollyhill and R614. In truth that’s not many junctions. Plenty of space between each junction.

    If there isn’t a junction for Ballincollig at Poulavone how do you deal with local traffic given the current section between N22 and Poulavone will be integrated into this scheme.




  • There were 3 further junctions in planning.

    Poulavone, Hollyhill and R614. In truth that’s not many junctions. Plenty of space between each junction.

    If there isn’t a junction for Ballincollig at Poulavone how do you deal with local traffic given the current section between N22 and Poulavone will be integrated into this scheme.

    Replied on the N40 NRR thread, don't want to drag this one off topic.




  • Bacchus wrote: »
    I agree that fixing Lakeview just moves the problem down the road but I don't think it exacerbates it. Also, naive as this may be, you have to consider upgrades such as Dunkettle, the N28, the N25, Lakeview flyover as part of an overall plan to improve traffic flow. The problem with the big picture though is that the stretch from Midleton to Youghal doesn't seem to have a plan... and westbound from Dunkettle is going to be a car park.

    Personally, in fantasy world, I'd rather keep that stretch as it is, stop focusing on putting dual carriageways everywhere, and focus on rail links to encourage drivers off the road and onto trains going from Waterford/Dungarvan/Youghal to Midleton/Carrigtwohill/Little Island/City. That'll never happen though :(

    A large portion of traffic stuck at Lakeview every morning is going to Midleton/carrigtwohill/little island, it's hardly fair to keep traffic sitting there every morning when it can be cheaply fixed just to not add some traffic to dunkettle.


  • Advertisement


  • marno21 wrote: »
    Carrigtwohill-Midleton is in the NDP because it's cheap, passes lots of tests on paper and deals with an overcapacity section of the N25 on paper by removing safety issues and improving flow.

    The lack of Midleton-Youghal is disappointing but not surprising.

    We don't necessarily need Midleton to Youghal dual carrigageway as much as we need Killeagh and Castlemartyr by-pass.

    And in actual fact, the by-pass routes for both would be shorter than the current road layout.




  • Gunner3629 wrote: »
    We don't necessarily need Midleton to Youghal dual carrigageway as much as we need Killeagh and Castlemartyr by-pass.

    And in actual fact, the by-pass routes for both would be shorter than the current road layout.
    Traffic volumes on the N25 Midleton-Youghal are currently above the traffic limits for single carriageway upgrades. The only solution for this stretch is a new dual carriageway replacement.




  • None of those schemes will be effective without a north ring road should only be 3 junctions on that N22, M20, M8. I hope the south ring is never widened to three lanes would be a very bad investment like the M50 widening.

    Exactly, even if you had 3 lanes on the South ring, the bottleneck will continue to be the tunnel with only 2 lanes in each direction.




  • Gunner3629 wrote: »
    We don't necessarily need Midleton to Youghal dual carrigageway as much as we need Killeagh and Castlemartyr by-pass.

    And in actual fact, the by-pass routes for both would be shorter than the current road layout.

    It would be utter insanity to build 2 bypasses with dualling. What an insane waste of money thatd be.

    HQDC all the way to Youghal is badly needed.




  • It would be utter insanity to build 2 bypasses with dualling. What an insane waste of money thatd be.

    HQDC all the way to Youghal is badly needed.

    I'm not saying I think a dual carriage isn't needed, what I'm saying is I'd take the village by-passes over no improvement at all. Which seems what is going to happen - nothing.


  • Advertisement


  • marno21 wrote: »
    Traffic volumes on the N25 Midleton-Youghal are currently above the traffic limits for single carriageway upgrades. The only solution for this stretch is a new dual carriageway replacement.

    It would certainly be the best solution but it seems priorities are on Carrigtwohill-Midleton, even though they already have Dual carriage.




  • Gunner3629 wrote: »
    I'm not saying I think a dual carriage isn't needed, what I'm saying is I'd take the village by-passes over no improvement at all. Which seems what is going to happen - nothing.

    It simply won’t happen. It would fail on any cost benefit analysis with the bypasses being over capacity straight away when built.




  • Gunner3629 wrote: »
    It would certainly be the best solution but it seems priorities are on Carrigtwohill-Midleton, even though they already have Dual carriage.
    The 1998 Road Needs Study stated that a dual carriageway was required from Midleton to Youghal to deal with traffic levels. It's now almost 2019, the year that study focus period ends [1998-2019] and the route isn't even selected for this yet.

    The 1998 Road Needs Study effectively recommended a new road all the way from Macroom to Youghal. Since then, only Ovens-Midleton (where most of the Dunkettle-Midleton section was already done) is complete. The rest isn't even in planning.




  • Also I read an article today that they have to go right back to Project Appraisal for the Carrigtwohill - Midleton section, as per the new NRA/TII guidelines.

    Which is utterly disappointing considering the time and money spent on the previous plans.

    It also means that any new development is even further away from deliverance. Which effectively means any improvements to N25 between Midleton and Youghal are even further away as they'd never do both simultaneously.




  • It simply won’t happen. It would fail on any cost benefit analysis with the bypasses being over capacity straight away when built.

    The bypass of Youghal is mostly one lane, and is a much longer route than either intended bypass of Killeagh or Castlemartr. Why would the cost benefit ratio be any different?




  • marno21 wrote: »
    The 1998 Road Needs Study stated that a dual carriageway was required from Midleton to Youghal to deal with traffic levels. It's now almost 2019, the year that study focus period ends [1998-2019] and the route isn't even selected for this yet.

    The 1998 Road Needs Study effectively recommended a new road all the way from Macroom to Youghal. Since then, only Ovens-Midleton (where most of the Dunkettle-Midleton section was already done) is complete. The rest isn't even in planning.

    Very interesting. It has always been a lower priority route and looks set to continue in that fashion. East Cork being discriminated against, considering Macroom and Ballyvourney will shortly be by-passed on the West side.




  • Gunner3629 wrote: »
    The bypass of Youghal is mostly one lane, and is a much longer route than either intended bypass of Killeagh or Castlemartr. Why would the cost benefit ratio be any different?

    That bypass now needs to be updated to 2+2 only 15 years after completion.




  • That bypass now needs to be updated to 2+2 only 15 years after completion.

    Not surprised at all. Atleast it looks like they have room for 2+2 there without too much work.




  • Gunner3629 wrote: »
    Which is utterly disappointing considering the time and money spent on the previous plans.

    It also means that any new development is even further away from deliverance. Which effectively means any improvements to N25 between Midleton and Youghal are even further away as they'd never do both simultaneously.

    TII have stated that the Midleton-Youghal project will be considered after 2027. It was not included in the 2018-2027 National Development Plan.
    Gunner3629 wrote: »
    Very interesting. It has always been a lower priority route and looks set to continue in that fashion. East Cork being discriminated against, considering Macroom and Ballyvourney will shortly be by-passed on the West side.

    Political power pushed Macroom-Ballyvourney ahead
    Gunner3629 wrote: »
    Not surprised at all. Atleast it looks like they have room for 2+2 there without too much work.

    As AugustusMinimus was alluding to, the Youghal bypass was considered to be correctly built in 2002. There was no 2+2 back then, it was wide two lane, which the Youghal bypass is.

    Ideally there should be a Midleton-Kinsalebeg project including bypassing the Lakeview roundabout, bypassing Killeagh/Castlemartyr on a new alignment, upgrading the Youghal bypass and providing a new crossing of the River Blackwater.





  • As AugustusMinimus was alluding to, the Youghal bypass was considered to be correctly built in 2002. There was no 2+2 back then, it was wide two lane, which the Youghal bypass is.

    Ideally there should be a Midleton-Kinsalebeg project including bypassing the Lakeview roundabout, bypassing Killeagh/Castlemartyr on a new alignment, upgrading the Youghal bypass and providing a new crossing of the River Blackwater.

    Can a 2+2 be retrofitted to the youghal bypass?? Doesn't look like at the bridges??

    Still think consideration should be given to fermoy-dungarvan instead of N25 upgrades to cater for commuter traffic, just have different towns expanding. Especially given the constraint of the youghal blackwater bridge. Little point having dual carriageway all the way to youghal and then have that horrific alignment for a few kms including accident blackspot at grange crossroads.


  • Advertisement


  • Can a 2+2 be retrofitted to the youghal bypass?? Doesn't look like at the bridges??

    Still think consideration should be given to fermoy-dungarvan instead of N25 upgrades to cater for commuter traffic, just have different tiwns expanding. Especially given the constraint of the youghal blackwater bridge. No point having dual carriageway all the way to youghal and then have that horrific alignment for a few kms including accident blackspot at grange crossroads.

    I can see some advantages to that idea for commuters in Waterford, as they'd have the M8 from Fermoy onwards, but that wouldn't help anyone in East Cork and that is where most of the N25 commuter traffic to Cork originates - Youghal, Killeagh, Castlemarytr, Ballycotton, Ballymacoda, etc.

    Its similar to the argument with the Cork-Limerick road. Do you make a motorway from Cork to Limerick via Mallow or use the existing M8 road as a partial route to Limerick and create a motorway from Mitchelstown to Limerick via Hospital. The latter being more cost effective but wouldn't serve the North Cork traveller quite so well.




  • Gunner3629 wrote: »
    I can see some advantages to that idea for commuters in Waterford, as they'd have the M8 from Fermoy onwards, but that wouldn't help anyone in East Cork and that is where most of the N25 commuter traffic originates - Youghal, Killeagh, Castlemarytr, Ballycotton, Ballymacoda, etc.

    Its similar to the argument with the Cork-Limerick road. Do you make a motorway from Cork to Limerick via Mallow or use the existing M8 road as a partial route to Limerick and create a motorway from Mitchelstown to Limerick via Hospital. The latter being more cost effective but wouldn't serve the North Cork traveller quite so well.

    I suppose that's the crux of it, the national road network is supposed to be for strategic traffic, the problem is that strategic traffic numbers aren't high enough to get the cost benefit ratio high enough. The main benefits derive from journey time savings in the Cost benefit assessment. Hence majority of all schemes rely on commuter traffic to make economic sense, hence piecemeal road upgrades being built to cater predominantly for commuter traffic.

    The N25 upgrades if progressed should be heavily funded by development contributions.




  • Youghal was prioritised back in the day because it was a ridiculous bottleneck, far worse than Castlemartyr or Killeagh currently is. Also, with the one way routes and the city gate ( https://goo.gl/maps/uvMWYezG8nA2 ) , anything larger than a small lorry going to Rosslare for the ferry, could barely fit through it. Once the hairpin bends at The Ring in Dungarvan got done back in the late 80s, this became suddenly a major issue and was fixed quick-smart.

    Castlemartyr and Killeagh are at least wide enough, even though they cause dreadful tailbacks thesedays.




  • Castlemartyr and Killeagh are at least wide enough, even though they cause dreadful tailbacks thesedays.

    I don't know about Kileagh but it'll be interesting to see once the bridge is redone how the traffic flow through the village will be. With the new road markings gone down last week there seems to be an effort to stop local traffic trying to turn off into their estates from holding up a queue of traffic. It's a small measure but I've seen it plenty of times where all it takes is a couple of cars trying to get across traffic to hold up the whole show. If they can improve the management of cars across the bridge (particularly those turning right for Ladysbridge/Garryvoe)even just a little bit it could help flow too.

    Obviously I don't think the above will solve the issue of traffic bottlenecks in Castlemartyr, but they might just ease it a little.




  • None of those schemes will be effective without a north ring road should only be 3 junctions on that N22, M20, M8. I hope the south ring is never widened to three lanes would be a very bad investment like the M50 widening.

    If there is any real move to widen the N40 then proper analysis should first be performed as to why there's such heavy personal car usage on that corridor.
    IMO big investment should go into sustainable transport as a priority. The housing and employment hubs dotted around the outskirts of the city should be integrated with each other and the city.

    On that note any Carrigtwohill-Midleton upgrade needs to be fully focused not on creating an incentive for more cars (higher throughput), but rather on safety. Which basically means giving pedestrians/cyclists/homeowners a proper high-quality alternative route.
    Given the quality of cycle/pedestrian infrastructure in the East Cork area to date, I'm less than optimistic.




  • If there is any real move to widen the N40 then proper analysis should first be performed as to why there's such heavy personal car usage on that corridor.
    IMO big investment should go into sustainable transport as a priority. The housing and employment hubs dotted around the outskirts of the city should be integrated with each other and the city.

    On that note any Carrigtwohill-Midleton upgrade needs to be fully focused not on creating an incentive for more cars (higher throughput), but rather on safety. Which basically means giving pedestrians/cyclists/homeowners a proper high-quality alternative route.
    Given the quality of cycle/pedestrian infrastructure in the East Cork area to date, I'm less than optimistic.

    The N25 upgrade is primarily safety and quality of life driven. All local access removed with new access roads at the side.

    Will improve things for those living on this road along with providing new roads for pedestrians and cyclists.




  • This will be one of those schemes where 95% of people driving on the N25 will be complaining about "pointless roadworks".

    The objective here is to bring the N25 along this stretch up to the required standard. At the minute, it's very poor in comparison to the N25 west of Carrigtwohill with the accesses, varying widths, alignment deficiencies etc.

    It's an awful pity they didn't include it as part of an M25 Youghal-Carrigtwohill scheme as for 99% of people, this upgrade will be meaniningless to them but at the same time David Stanton can go around rabbiting on about how the N25 is getting investment and the Government are looking after the area.




  • The N25 upgrade is primarily safety and quality of life driven. All local access removed with new access roads at the side.

    Will improve things for those living on this road along with providing new roads for pedestrians and cyclists.

    Yes and I'm 100% in favour of this. Unfortunately I'll be quite (pleasantly!) surprised if a high quality design is provided.

    What I'm fully expecting is an inappropriate attempt to re-purpose and re-use the Waterrock/BallyRichard and/or Ballintubber roads, with some kind of line-painting amounting to a 3-way conflict with simultaneous "cyclist priority", "pedestrian priority" and "motorists please slow down" and effectively no change other than to remove the current desire route for some users.




  • Yes and I'm 100% in favour of this. Unfortunately I'll be quite (pleasantly!) surprised if a high quality design is provided.

    What I'm fully expecting is an inappropriate attempt to re-purpose and re-use the Waterrock/BallyRichard and/or Ballintubber roads, with some kind of line-painting amounting to a 3-way conflict with simultaneous "cyclist priority", "pedestrian priority" and "motorists please slow down" and effectively no change other than to remove the current desire route for some users.
    I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, and you can give out to me after if I'm wrong. :)

    The recent N86 upgrade in Kerry, and the N63 upgrade in Galway have seen segregated pedestrian/cycling facilities provided where the existing road has been upgraded and no alternative exists. Given that there's one road between Carrrigtwohill and Midleton there's a good chance of multi modal facilities being integrated here.


  • Advertisement


  • Bacchus wrote: »
    I don't know about Kileagh but it'll be interesting to see once the bridge is redone how the traffic flow through the village will be.

    The highlighted bit intrigues me. Are they going to do something about the bridge or is it just remarking the road ?


Advertisement