M20 - Cork to Limerick [preferred route chosen; in design - phase 3]

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would say we have a habit of planning something wonderful and then planning the same something even better, and then finding it is too expensive, and cancelling the project only to bring the project back up again after a few decades, and starting again with a blank page.

The M20 has already been planned a decade ago. The Dart expansion was planned 5 decades ago. Dart underground got as far as a railway order before being cancelled and redesigned and cancelled. Metro North was fully planned before it was cancelled and redesigned.

Build it NOW - it will do, rather than trying to get it right to satisfy the perfectionists but not built.

Ah no, there's a happy medium. We can do it right, and there's time in the schedule to design it right. There's no call to just "build anything" now.
Remember this project wasn't canned because its design became too expensive, it was canned because funding ran out for all projects. The previous design wasn't overly lavish or complex. We really don't have to worry about ridiculous notions here, there's only a handfull of open questions like:
Are there local environmental / archeological / geological issues
Did they consider the M8 alignment
Did they consider the rail options on the same corridor
Where should the junctions / tolls be
Is there a viable alternate route available
Did they consider the Cork Northern Ring Road

KrisW1001 wrote: »

A 2+2 would require a separate segregated cycleway. That's the design standard in force now.

(I think 2+2 would be shortsighted, and a Motorway is the way to go, but whichever it ends up being, there won't be cyclists on it)

I wasn't aware of this, thanks KrisW1001.

Isambard wrote: »

yes but it was built in a different world where we had no money and traffic was lighter.

Traffic was always going to get heavier and while money might have been short it would have cost a huge amount less to do it future-proofed in the first time around.
The cost of additional borrowing to do it right first time I'm sure would only be a fraction of the extra millions it cost to put it right later.

In the Cork L.U.T.S. plan of 1978, the population was projected to increase from about 200,000 to 300,000 by 2001, now the Cork Metropolitan Area has a population of over 400,000

Remember, politicians will only sanction the minimum expenditure to secure re-election, it's called short-termism and never delivers for tomorrow.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised to see it phased with Blarney to Mallow and Charleville to existing M20 prioritised and the existing road plus the Localised Bypasses left in between. Both could be built as motorway with the bit in the middle deferred for later.

mallow to CHarlevile is the worst bit of road, it would be madness to do it thjat way

BelfastVanMan wrote: »

And after all that they put a dual carriageway bypass.in castleisland

So, they do it right sometimes.[/quote]

I cannot see the rational for it. I cannot ever see the road from it to Abbeyfeale being upgraded to dual carriageway. Its similar to Ennis to above Gort and onto Tuam. Motorway was not needed for that section. High-class single carriageway would have sufficed.

https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/home/601760/minister-objects-toproposed-m20-routes-in-county-limerick.html

irishfeen wrote: »

Heard it from a reliable source that if the M20 ever actually comes to be built it will almost certainly have a cycle route and other “green” initiatives a-joining along its length.

This will also be the case with regards Mallow by-pass.

Good

Submission by Green Party councilor. I agree with some of his points around needing sustainable transport, an alternative to cars but the suggestion that a lot of people can switch over to a bike or train for their transport needs as a solution isn't sustainable. He mentions the need to upgrade the route but dismisses all proposals on the table for the road options.

Btw - This objection was retweeted by the minister for transport which gives me great hope in the route being funded to construction......

https://twitter.com/AlanOC_Green/status/1350160938146652160?s=20

I love the greens and their ability to overlook basic maths/science.

They championed Diesel cars, and look at how that turned out

At the end of the day, while it is about moving people, all calculations should be based on moving mass (weight). Energy is required to move mass, and trains, well, they're not light!
A standard Irish rail carriage weighs 63,000kg (CAF Mark 4, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_4_(Iarnr%C3%B3d_%C3%89ireann) and will carry 71 people, the 201 engine weighs 108,000kg. The max number of carriages currently pulled is 5. Thus mass required to move 1 person is 1191kg. This is hardly a quick win! A VW golf weighs upto 1500kg, but can move 4 people. The mass required to move 1 person is 375kg. Even at 2 people per car, it's 750kg of transport mass per person, that's a 37% weight reduction on the train.
Not all cars are full - absolutely, but then neither are all trains. They might be on a friday evening/monday morning, but for the rest of the week??
Trains rarely (almost never) get you to your final destination, therefore extra kilometres and time will be added to most journeys.
The same logic applies for transport of goods.

That all said, as a country, public transport in our cities is very poor and is in dire need of significant improvement (buses, bus corridors, trams, etc.).

We need to focus on the energy required to move people, and the maths needs to include the mass of the vehicle

rounders wrote: »

Same! I voted greens cause I can see we need to do something for the environment but they just seem to be a joke, especially Eamon Ryan.

You voted for the Green Party and are surprised that they're not rowing in behind building a big motorway?

donvito99 wrote: »

You voted for the Green Party and are surprised that they're not rowing in behind building a big motorway?

I'm not surprised they aren't massive supporter of motorways. I am surprised by how little of anything they are doing though. Granted it we have the pandemic but the green deal and all that seems to have got watered down a lot already. That's before we actually see how much will actually get built

The Greens are like every political party - they contain a range of opinions on road transport, from pragmatic to bat**** crazy. There are environmentally justifiable reasons for road-building, despite the high cost to the environment: motorways take through-traffic out of populated areas, they reduce the fuel consumption of heavy goods traffic, and they are safer. Also, roads aren't combustion engines: future, electrified, transport will still need roads to run on.

Personally, as someone who has regularly voted Green, but also supports road building, I think M20 should be one of the last motorways built in the State - after this one, there are very few routes that justify this capacity, except on the ground that there's huge commuter demand, and commuter traffic is always the wrong reason to build a motorway. Instead of adding lanes in and out of the cities, we should be improving the routes between the motorways, and routes in rural areas, many of which haven't changed since the 1950s. For the cities we should be spending on better public transport (rail, light-rail, both with free park-and-ride facilities) instead of encouraging more and more people to drive all the way in to work and back every day. But none of these things are "either-or": everything is important.