hans aus dtschl wrote: » Cyclists have a horrifically poor East-West provision as part of Dunkettle Interchange. But a provision nonetheless. The design of the Dunkettle Interchange scheme has an arm north of the interchange under the M8, to link East from town. Westbound is the issue really. I think they're perhaps expected to join Little Island, Dublin, Glanmire traffic over a new Little Island West dumbell interchange.
niloc1951 wrote: » The safest solution for East to West cycle traffic would be a simple 'cut & shut' or maybe a bored tunnel, if ground topography permits, under the N25 against the northern side of the existing rail tunnel. That would more or less parallel the proposed West to East route.
Limerick74 wrote: » https://www.live95fm.ie/news/live95-news/taoiseach-says-m20-needs-to-be-built/
prunudo wrote: » Good to hear but was he not the one who pulled the plug on the original plan when he was Minister for Transport.
prunudo wrote: » there was no reason it couldn't have been postponed rather than completely canning the project.
blindsider wrote: » So how long has he been Taoiseach, and why is he saying this (publicly) now? I'm sure that is has nothing to do with a little event in Feb......! :O)
Cookiemunster wrote: » In fairness, he's been saying it publicly since the project was reactivated (after he became Taoiseach) and he was responding to being asked about Ryan wanting to scrap it. Yes he should never have canned it back in the day and the rate of progress now is ridiculously slow but it's not exactly news that he's in favour of it
Aontachtoir wrote: » I think he gets an unfair rap, to be honest. The FG/Lab government at the time was completely under Troika rules, because FF had destroyed the economy. Will be interesting to see who is the first to call for the M20 to be cancelled when the next downturn comes - and come it will.
Reputable Rog wrote: » I just knew you’d be on defending FG once again. The road wax designed and the CPO’s were ready, all that work undone. I know some of the people who worked on the design and they’re still furious over the cancellation.
wrote:
Isambard wrote: » for the hundredth time, it's about decent roads for the people of North Cork and South Limerick and saving lives. End to end traffic is a lesser concern, sending that via Cahir won't achieve the first object , most traffic will still have to use the N20.
Aontachtoir wrote: » Not so much defending FG/Lab as defending politicians making tough choices for what was viewed as the best course for the nation. You seem to be forgetting that the German, French, Dutch, Austrian etc taxpayers who were paying to keep our schools open and hospitals running at that time didn't really want to shell out for a rather expensive stretch of motorway (or anything beyond that which was needed to immediately stabilise the economy and prevent the implosion of our banks). If politicians make very expensive promises in good times (keep the pension age at 65! Build the M20! Build thousands and thousands of houses!) some of them will have to be cancelled in hard times. But the Irish people reward politicians who make these promises, so they have to keep making them or they will lose at the next election. There was no way in heaven or hell that we could have afforded the M20 during the crash. We couldn't even afford to keep the country running from day to day without help from Europe. What matters now is electing a government that will not ruin our economy with massive increases in spending (without corresponding massive increases in tax) leading to another crash and the re-cancellation of the M20.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Isn't that a straw man argument though? They didn't need to completely can the project for eternity: they could have kept it going through planning while spending minimal money to ensure traffic levels and design constraints remained within the limits of the original studies' parameters? It just sounds like a cop out to say "there was a crash and no money was left". There was money, and we kept money flowing into what we considered "critical" projects like the M18/M17. We kept money flowing into hospitals and schools because they were important enough. The M20 was not considered important enough. It was not a high enough priority. So it was ultimately a political choice rather than an engineering or budgetary one, to can the M20. Now you can say you agree with the political choice or not, but it's not true to say there was no choice whatsoever because of the lack of money. We found money to set up Irish Water in an effort to grow a new off-balance revenue stream for water as a utility. This again may be viewed as a good decision or a bad decision, but we must acknowledge that it was a decision. So there was a lack of foresight in taking the decision to can the M20 entirely, IN MY OPINION.
steeler j wrote: » Very true,it would be interesting to know the % of traffic that goes end to end now
marno21 wrote: » M20 feasibility study in 2007 showed that at the time around 2,500 vehicles per day would switch to a motorway via Mitchelstown. In other words, total non runner.
steeler j wrote: » Last year there was about 17000 vehicles between mallow and Cork so if u take 2500 off that u still have around 15000 on that scretch of road and that would need upgrading as well so I don't see the argument in running it via cahir for money saving
marno21 wrote: » Indeed. No matter what M20 route is taken Cork-Mallow will need an upgrade to dual carriageway, for capacity and more importantly for safety reasons. The existing road is a dangerous mess.
Isambard wrote: » and yet a year or two ago they totally rebuilt the 2+1 section and are currently completely renewing the section from the Wild Goose turn to the roundabout. Where are there priorities or do they know something we don't ?
