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

M28 - Cork to Ringaskiddy [advance works pending; 2024 start]

Options
14950515254

Comments

  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,361 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    The venue for Cork’s new daily parking convention between 7 and 9am



  • Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭DylanQuestion


    I just checked the drawings and you’re right. I didn’t realise that it went so far north/west! The merge now reminds me of the N40 East merge at J6, but with more space for the right lane to merge onto the mainline. The left lane has a huge run to merge. Hopefully that will help reduce crashes a lot



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    It’ll be worse than ever. You’ll have 2 lanes from M28 and 1 lane from Rochestown all trying to merge into the N40 mainline.


    The merge from N28 needs to continue as an auxiliary lane over the Douglas Flyover until merging into mainline after this.


    I can’t see that glover ever being widened to 3 lanes though.



  • Registered Users Posts: 409 ✭✭EnzoScifo




  • Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭DylanQuestion


    I love trees, and live next to the road, so I'm devastated to see them go. However, it is a necessary evil. It was also clearly obvious that the trees would have to go. Mount Oval wanted their slip road, what did they expect? Plus, the Steering Group complained about the trees going as a reason to reject it



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭TheSunIsShining


    Mount Oval was originally supposed to have an exit along those lines. Was supposed to go down through the valley and come out right next to the Maryborough Hill bridge. OFlynns had bought the house right next to the bridge to facilitate it (house would have to have been knocked) but I think it was the Council who wouldn't go for it



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    A shame because there was plenty of space to do it and it would have take stress off Clarke’s Hill.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    Peter Horgan's main point is that communication in relation to this project is very poor. And he is correct, communication has been dismal from the outset allowing rumour, mischief making and downright lies to flourish. People on this thread, who have an understanding of how the process works and who the players are, struggle to keep up to date, never mind Joe or Josephine Public. When you see the professional way in which the progress on the M20 project is communicated and the public are kept informed, you realise just how bad this project's communications are. Apart from a one line update in 2021, the project page on the Cork National Roads Office's website hasn't had an update since 2017. If the M28 communication had been on the mark from the get-go there is every chance that the toss pots in the steering group would have failed to get a foothold.

    Post edited by Hibernicis on


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    Agree that it is a real shame to see those trees go, we have already seen far too many trees disappear from the southern hills and these ones were particularly visually significant. Also agree that it was obvious that they had to go to facilitate the off ramp and widening of the carriageway.

    I think it's disingenuous to hold the residents of Mount Oval or anywhere else accountable for the decision regarding the retention and upgrading of the Mount Oval exit. When the NRA and Cork County Council presented their plans for the M28 in 2015, including the closure of the off ramp, they were confronted with the proposed rerouting of this traffic via the exit at Rochestown Church, onward to the Rochestown Road and up Clarkes Hill. The issues raised were the existing queueing on the N28 mainline and the existing capacity constraints at a number subsequent points, and how much worse these would become with the additional traffic. They readily admitted that the proposed improvements (traffic lights to replace the roundabout, traffic lights at the base of Clarkes Hill and a right turn lane on the Rochestown Road at the base of Clarkes Hill with a capacity for 4/5 cars) were inadequate, and would cause gridlock during rush hours. They also accepted that the video/model they had produced showing 3/4 cars per minute flowing smoothly from the N28 exit to Clarkes Hill was wildly unrealistic. I was present when they agreed to take this back to the drawing board and come up with a workable alternative. Certainly there were some who wanted the exit to remain open, but the NRA engineers were adamant that it was substandard and couldn't be done. There was a lot of surprise at the time when the revised plan was published showing the upgraded exit, especially as it still went straight into a housing estate. No other alternative was proposed by the NRA as far as I am aware.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    There was also originally going to be a slip from the Carr’s Hill Interchsnge to Maryborough Hill but the Maryborough Ridge residents kicked up about it.

    That slip in particular is a terrible loss in terms of helping traffic flow. It would have linked the Old Carrigaline Road to Maryborough Hill.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    The Carr’s Hill interchange as initially proposed was a dog’s breakfast. It was completely re-designed in 2016 to its current dumbbell form which offers much greater connectivity. The two way Maryborough Hill to Carr’s Hill link road, which will run from Maryborough Hill to the Carr’s Hill west roundabout, and which was first introduced as part of this redesign, offers a far more useful connection. It will provide a vehicular connection between the Old Carrigaline Road and Maryborough Hill.

    For active travel users, phase four of the Ballybrack Valley Pedestrian and Cycle scheme will link Maryborough Hill to the Old Carrigaline Road and onwards to the existing phases of the Ballybrack Valley Pedestrian and Cycle route.



  • Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭DylanQuestion


    Was the Maryborough Hill connection entirely removed pre-2016?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    That’s not right. The initial design proposed include a link through Maryborough Ridge to access Maryborough Hill.

    This was removed due to resident complaints and replaced by a link road to run down the side of Douglas Golf Club to access Maryborough Hill which is a horrible solution.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    Read my post. What's not right. I never said that there wasn't a link through Maryborough Ridge. There was.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    How was it initially a dog’s breakfast? The initial design was the same as now, except that the Marlborough Ridge link was removed and replaced by the current one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    The initial design couldn't have been more different. Rather than the dumbbell that emerged from the 2016 redesign, the original plan for that junction was a single roundabout linking the M28 with Carr's Hill.

    From my notes at the time:

    At the time Maryborough Ridge link was proposed, the location and configuration of the Carr's Hill interchange was very different. In fact it wasn't an interchange at all, it was a roundabout with five roads exiting/entering. One of these was the Maryborough Ridge road which would have been the main access to the M28 for all points from the east end of Passage West to the RPH with traffic routed via Coach Hill, Clarkes Hill and Maryborough Hill. (Note that the Maryborough Hill link road wasn't part of the plan at that stage, it didn't appear until after the interchange was redesigned). The Carr's Hill roundabout would almost certainly have been a complete disaster. There was no way it could have coped with the volume of traffic, especially given that it was planned to close the Mount Oval off ramp and divert all that traffic to this roundabout as well. I remember talking to one of the engineer's in Maryborough Hotel in November 2015 at the initial public consultation and suggesting to him that they name the roundabout wisely as it would probably get top billing on AA Roadwatch from the day it opened to the day 10 or 15 years later when it was rebuilt as a proper interchange at enormous expense. He laughed and said that he couldn't disagree. Fortunately it was completely redesigned, still a bit quirky but a lot better.




  • Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭TheSunIsShining


    Personally, I think switching the slip into Mount Oval to be an exit route through the valley and linking with Maryborough Hill flyover might have been better. That would then have linked Mount Oval to the Carrs Hill junction. But not sure how the traffic would have been?



  • Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭DylanQuestion


    Adding to the post in the Dunkettle thread, standard of merging at Bloomfield is so bad. This morning, there were 4/5 cars holding up the merging lanes by staying in the right hand lane trying to merge across the solid white line to get onto the N40 main lane as fast as they can. If they actually followed the rules and stayed in the left merge lane, then used the full length of the merge lane, their lives would be so much easier and traffic would flow a lot smoother



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    Update from Dronehawk showing progress on the enabling works.

    Ballyhemiken/Rafeen quarry incorrectly referred to as Coolmore quarry.



  • Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭Mr.CoolGuy


    I can't get my head around why they have not incorporated a greenway as part of the works between North Carrigaline and douglas. The corridor is there. Surely it should have been done in conjunction.

    This focus on having all future active travel connections between Carrigaline and the city go via Monkstown and Passage just shows they're not serious about them from a commuting perspective. They still just see these things as a recreation thing for young families to pass time on a Sunday.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    I would hazard a guess that this scheme has been in the system and in legal limbo for so long that it was designed etc before all of those requirements came in. Now its a case of just build it, don't touch the plans.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,361 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Yes indeed. Same as with the N5 and N22 schemes recently completed.

    TII/Cork Councils will likely propose active transport interventions on the N28 corridor in the next few years as they already have on the N5 through Roscommon.



  • Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭Mr.CoolGuy


    I understand why it would not have been considered at the outset of the project, but there seemingly being no discussion at all around it at this time is a bit worrying, unless I missed anything. They could and should be getting a lot of the boring stuff through the design and planning phase now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    The councils have gone to ground on lee to sea. They seem to be focusing on fighting local Carrigaline and Rochestown Road pressure groups against active travel measures first.

    I kind of understand why they wouldn't tie the Lee to Sea into the M28, which was already fighting its own local pressure groups. The Lee to Sea route is effectively being heavily fought by NIMBYs.

    They've also committed to the active travel upgrade of the legacy Carrs Hill road, within the scope of this project. Albeit loosely and without specific detail.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    It was actually part of the Steering Group's case that the M28 Planning Application was submitted quite literally on the eve of Directive 2014/52/EU coming into force in Irish law and that this was a deliberate attempt by the NRA and CCC to avoid the more onerous requirements of that Directive by allowing it to be considered under the previous Directive 2011/92/EU. And that ABP should have picked up on this and judged it against the newer Directive. The High Court disagreed.

    Crazy to think that almost 10 years have elapsed and the road corridor is still predominantly grass.

    That said, it's actually a pity that Active Travel wasn't incorporated into this project. It would have been very easy to do. Leaving aside the Lee to Sea which is not really relevant, Active Travel could easily have been incorporated from Rochestown to Shannonpark to Rafeen to Shanbally and on to Ringaskiddy along the line of the existing N28 with some additions, workarounds and deviations, with a number of possible routes for a spur or spurs to Carrigaline. The M28 construction phase would be the ideal time to put in any underpasses, over bridges, safe and attractive segregation etc. And in this case, the length of the route and profile of its usage would have made it an exemplary case for Active Travel. Hopefully it will be retrofitted in due course, but it's certainly a missed opportunity.

    Post edited by Hibernicis on


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,167 ✭✭✭prunudo


    The irony of course, is that had the steering group not objected and caused delays. The project wouldn't have been as effected by inflation costs and there would be more money in the public purse to spend on a seperate active travel scheme.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    That, together with the fact that the sum total of their efforts amounted to zilch. Not one single solitary change to the plans. Nothing, except a substantial increase in costs, a delay of at least three years, thousands of hours lost by commuters and thousands continuing to risk their lives daily on a thoroughly sub standard road.

    No wonder they removed all traces of their failed efforts and their miserable selves by shutting down their web presence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    You're right on both this post and the last one. They were looking to simply kill the project rather than improve it unfortunately.

    Luckily I have seen direct responses from the County Council about their intentions for the old road. They're still not sure whether it'll be a quiet route or segregated route. Hopefully the latter.



  • Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭DylanQuestion


    New road signage at the junction of Carrigaline Road and Church Road in Douglas refers to the road as the M28. All other new signs say N28



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    https://x.com/CoffeyGroup/status/1750609919953322180

    Some pictures from early this year from Coffee Group's twitter showing M28 prelim work



Advertisement