hans aus dtschl wrote: » I had sort of glossed over that aspect of it. I'm also heavily in favour of a build. I'd just prefer an M20 instead of an N20 HQDC.
Sam Russell wrote: » My preference is for a build - any route and now.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Yep, hence my tentative preference for an offline build.
Isambard wrote: » well if it's Motorway built on line, that will be provided. If it's offline there's no need for a secondary route to be built
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Coming at it from the completely opposite side, not having a proper secondary route for cyclists/tractors/pedestrians is crazy too.
AugustusMinimus wrote: » It’s the main road between the 2nd and 3rd cities in the state. I assume 2+2 must be considered but will get rejected in favour of motorway. 2+2 would have tractors, cyclists and even pedestrians on an inter urban. Crazy.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Could the first mention of dual carriageway in this conversation be referring to 2+2 rather than HQDC?
cjpm wrote: » I'd say the days of high quality dual carriageway new builds are coming to an end. Crazy having traffic travelling at 120KPH on a road shared with cyclists, tractors etc
AugustusMinimus wrote: » If done via an online build, a second road for non motorway traffic would need to be constructed in the case of a motorway. It would be utter lunacy to build an online DC instead of a motorway.
Ball boy wrote: » Is there a difference in the width of area taken from a CPO point of view between a dual carriage way and a motorway?
Isambard wrote: » HQ Dual Carriageway and Motorway are virtually the same bar the colour of the signs and some of the regulations such as no stopping. The actual road would be identical.
Aontachtoir wrote: » They really haven't decided if the road is going to be a motorway? I just assumed it would be.
pigtown wrote: » That's interesting. Did he say why Colbert Station couldn't handle the extra trains? Also, where was the Guinness terminal?
Sam Russell wrote: » Was there any discussion about the existing line to LJ, and removing the LC gates and dualling the line? Was there any view on Luas type use of the old alignment out towards Croom? Obviously, it would need to go across the city towards the University, or out towards the Ennis Road or both rather than just going to Colbert.
rounders wrote: » Thanks for that! I wasn't going to bother with a consultation but since it sounds like it's actually worth doing I just booked in for tomorrow at 2:30. You sound like you're up the Limerick end, I'm down the Cork end so I'll see if I can gather more info for this end of the route
rounders wrote: » - No decision yet on whether it's going to be a Duel Carriageway or Motorway. Still very much up in the air
rounders wrote: » https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-40202702.html Just seen this on the Echo. Two public meetings for the two cork route
spacetweek wrote: » Hi all. I had a video consultation on the M20 scheme with a guy from the project team yesterday. Informative and he really knew his sh*t.
Sam Russell wrote: » Was there any discussion about the existing line to LJ, and removing the LC gates and dualling the line?
Sam Russell wrote: » Was there any view on Luas type use of the old alignment out towards Croom? Obviously, it would need to go across the city towards the University, or out towards the Ennis Road or both rather than just going to Colbert.