Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

N26 Ballina Bypass

13»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 2,846 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    I have to say that I also don’t fully see where they’re coming from.

    As you say, 2+2 is out of the question on financial grounds, so the puzzle is why 2+1 has been resurrected for this. 2+1 was dropped after trials in the 2000s because it was shown to promote some unsafe behaviours under high traffic conditions, particularly drivers racing to overtake at the end of their “2” sections.

    However, it’s worth noting that not one of the retrofitted 2+1 schemes has been reverted to single carriageway - not even the worst-performing one on N20 south of Mallow. Leaving a known unsafe road design in place would leave the councils and TII open to charges of criminal negligence if there were an accident there, and there have been accidents on these roads (as everywhere), so the only logical conclusion is that despite the poor driver behaviour at lane-drops, the 2+1 layout is still safer than using an undivided single carriageway. And on roads with lower traffic, like this one, the rush to overtake is probably much less pronounced too.

    Whether single or 2+1, they’d still need parallel access roads. Keeping the old alignment as local access and provide fewer, more highly-controlled junctions with the new road is the normal way this is done. As far as I’m aware, the policy for any new national road build is to prevent private entrances where possible.

    It’ll be interesting to see if the old junction standards for 2+1 are amended or just re-published: they, along with the road type itself, were withdrawn from the official standards about ten years ago.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,838 ✭✭✭Westernview


    The messaging seems very confusing. Hard to believe a limit if 80kph would apply between Mayos two main towns no matter what option is chosen. On a new alignment or upgraded route I'd rule that out.

    I'm also surprised at the mention of 2+1 as it seemed to be a road type that isn't favoured anymore. I would think it has to be either type 2DC or SC (much more likely). I travel that road a lot and there is quite a lot of slow moving traffic so Id hope that will be a big factor in route selection.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 2,846 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    You’ve misread the quote - not hard, considering how convoluted it is. I’ve highlighted the main point:

    “All new sections of the rural road network that are to have a speed limit of over 80 km/h, which have not yet entered the planning process, should be designed as divided roads and include appropriate segregated provisions for pedestrians and cyclists.”

    To put that guidance another way: ”From now on, single carriageway roads are only recommended where the speed limit on the road will be 80 km/h or lower”

    This road is expected to have a 100 km/h speed limit, and it had not been submitted for planning at the time of that guidance, so under that new guidance, it was re-designed as a divided road type. The limit, on completion, will be 100 km/h.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,838 ✭✭✭Westernview


    Thanks for the clarification. I hadnt see the wording, only the comments here.

    It's going to be interesting to see what will happen here. It will have to be 100 km/h.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 929 ✭✭✭DumbBrunette


    Councillors in Ballina pushing the long delayed eastern bypass of the town, from the Sligo road to the N26.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,838 ✭✭✭Westernview


    It really needs to be pushed. I'd hate to see the gridlock in about 10 years time if its not built.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 929 ✭✭✭DumbBrunette


    The June update from the council has this project going to ABP in Q2, i.e. by the end of this month. This has slipped from Q1, but I assume it means it's pretty much ready to go.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23 Bmomoran


    Based on latest update statutory process due to start in Q4 2025



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 929 ✭✭✭DumbBrunette




Advertisement