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

N22 - Farranfore to Killarney [route options published]

1235»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,576 ✭✭✭Rows Grower


    Now, now Peter lets just stick to the facts shall we?

    In the previous page you made 5 posts, 4 of them cited cost as an inhibiting factor to building a bypass.

    The other post was some faux indignation at a reference to how much money our government is spending in other areas.

    "Very soon we are going to Mars. You wouldn't have been going to Mars if my opponent won, that I can tell you. You wouldn't even be thinking about it."

    Donald Trump, March 13th 2018.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    I don't agree with you Marno in that we can agree it's not a "bypass" in name, but it's absolutely not a distributer either. It's one of the earlier glut of "relief roads" which serves neither function properly as it tries to do both. We have these in Carrigaline, Midleton, Dungarvan, etc and we're talking about (and have built!) outer relief roads of the outer relief road in all of the above cases.

    It has been very clearly been used as a development facilitator to open up the town to unplanned sprawl (same as in the other mentioned towns). There's empty fields in the middle of town and development on the "relief" road. That makes no sense from a planning perspective.

    So I don't see the value in another road to relieve the relief road: it's absolutely certain that the Co Co will allow massive development at every junction of any such new road, until the point that it partly ceases to function again when traffic queues up (like the Oatencake interchange). The current "relief" road would serve no real purpose other than to encourage local people to use the car for every journey (it's in no way a distributor, it'd be a car-oriented development facilitator). And a 30-year lifespan for the original asset is reasonably poor. As others have said, I'd rather see an overall Killarney transport plan. And if another outer road is still warranted within that plan, then fair enough. But plugging another road onto the side is of little use.

    N22-N71 is going to be a really difficult job but it could track from N71 across the flood plain (raised), then cross the river to the south, joining the Mill Road, then leaving it again to tie into N22 North of the Lislivigeen roundabout at an upgraded free-flow junction. It's be a massive project I'd say, loads of structures. I don't see any realistic route to the West of town. Another question is: would locals be happy with the Muckross tourist traffic not going directly through the town? You'd hope there wouldn't be huge pushback.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,663 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Fully agree with what you say about the existing road. It's a 90s style relief road that was a good attempt for its time but has outgrown its use. And has been absolutely destroyed with development.

    The new road would be sufficiently far from the town that it would be an actual bypass. I would 100% agree that for this and similar schemes there should be rules at national level to protect these new roads from development. TII are planning this with the western section of the M6 Galway City Ring Road, the section from the N59 to the R336 will be a "protected road"

    Also agree re: the N71 link. It'll be a tricky one from an engineering pov. Would locals object? Some certainly would but the N71 is so heavily trafficed in summer it turns locals off using it anyway. Should the N71 link go ahead the Muckross Road might actually be usable in summer again as from there to the Mission Road/Beach Road junction is just a car park at peak times.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Yep I'd be strongly pushing for the N71-N22 link to get done, and for the northern part of the Muckross road to get an "urban realm" upgrade. I use it a bit (car and bike) and it's not awful just a bit haphazard. You'd hope that given less traffic to facilitate, they could do something coherent on it. Simple stuff like raising the footpath would make a big difference. It's Woodlawn road to Countess road really that's really poor.

    On the outer relief road, as I say if it's warranted with a holistic view of town traffic then fine, but I hate the idea that "we've tried nothing else so we're going to do the same thing again". If they made any attempt at all to sort out the town you wouldn't mind it too much, but as it stands you just couldn't trust the Co Co at all. I'd say the second any outer road is completed, the NW section will be Kerry Co Co's new "devlopment" zone unfortunately. Without forcing a coherent town transport plan before the road is done, its existence will be factored into any transport plan they'll just abuse it completely.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,874 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    in fairness the Longford and Wexford bypasses are still proper bypasses without development plonked on them bar at roundabouts and they still function fairly well with 100kmh limits. Far better than any of the other half arsed ones like Killarney



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Yep, slightly different era/age probably helped those two I suspect



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,663 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    To correct the record, I was referring to those bypasses having active replacement plans (in the shape of the N4 Mullingar-Rooskey and the N11/N25 Oilgate-Rosslare Harbour schemes) rather than requiring replacement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 975 ✭✭✭lordleitrim


    https://www.radiokerry.ie/news/sufficient-funding-in-place-to-ensure-preferred-route-for-farranfore-to-killarney-bypass-will-be-selected-this-year-401162

    If the preferred route is selected before year end, what does that necessarily mean for progressing to the next stage?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,392 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    The Preferred Transport Solution now published and open for consultation;

    Can't see it taking much traffic off the existing Killarney "bypass", most traffic is going to/from Killarney anyway and will continue to use that. Would be doing well to get it built from south of Killarney as far as where it crosses the existing N22 north of the town.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,392 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    As the preferred route for the road has junctions and link roads basically touching the rail line north and south of Killarney, they should at least consider P&Rs. To make them attractive, more regular trains would be required on the line than is currently the case.

    To make that workable, they could run a shorter train (<100m) doing a certain stretch. A new platform at Killarney on the main line just south of Park Road could allow for through trains to not have to use the station branch and all that involves.

    It's a town that has a lot of people driving into it who don't actually need their car there, apart from as a means of accessing the town. For a lot of tourists and workers coming into the town, leaving their car on the outskirts and taking a short train journey in could be attractive.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,663 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    http://twitter.com/micheallehane/status/1879298787015090576

    Bullish this scheme.

    Post edited by marno21 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,501 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    Text of that comment, to save anyone else having to go to the cesspit:

    "New: Independent TDs Michael and Danny Healy-Rae have reached an agreement to support the incoming government. Tonight they are only saying “job done” and will reveal more details of their agreement early tomorrow."

    Most of this scheme is outside of their base, and thus may as well be on Mars: the most Healy-Rae thing to do would be to phase it, do the Killarney bit and then forget about the rest.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,663 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    The old trick of changing the URL to twitter.com doesn't seem to be working anymore to render the tweet (unless I may be doing it wrong).

    It may be outside their base but while Danny Healy-Rae campaigns in the Killarney and hinterlands area, Michael seeks votes in the rest of the county. This N22 project is an all of Kerry project really as it's a significant improvement for Tralee-Cork, Dingle-Cork etc travel times.

    Danny Healy-Rae said on Radio Kerry in early December that progression of this scheme (as opposed to the incessant stonewalling of the scheme that occured between 2021 and now) is a red line for him in Government support negotiations. It remains to be seen how that works out.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,501 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    There was no ”stonewalling” on N22. Between 2021 and 2022, N22 Farranfore-Killarney was allocated €1.8 million euro. That was clearly enough to bring it to a preferred corridor, and the public consultations on that closed just before Christmas. I think any pause is more about where the roads budget was being spent: right after upgrading a long, expensive stretch of N22 up to the Kerry border, doing another long, expensive stretch of N22 wouldn’t play well outside of Kerry. (I dislike that attitude, but it really does exist - witness the opposition to DART+ and Metro from rural TDs)

    N22 is a classic Healy-Rae vehicle: it’s going through the stages, and is going to happen with or without them, but people don’t know that, so the H-Rs will be able to stick their name all over it by the time it becomes public again when the final design is submitted for planning.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,392 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Not actually part of N22 Farranfore to Killarney but Kerry Co Co are planning to get rid of the Park Road Roundabout, to be replaced with protected signalised junction;

    Part 8 - N22 MD O Shea Roundabout to Ballycasheen Road Upgrade and L3907 Ballycasheen Active Travel Project | Kerry County Council



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Wow junction upgrades, protected junctions, cycle facilities…this isn't a terrible effort in fairness. But you can clearly see KCC are really struggling with modern designs. Just scanning the drawing I can see about 10 really basic errors. It's so frustrating.

    I know I always love an oul' road underpass through a junction (I've seen these work well abroad) but again I really do think there's room for one at Park Road Roundabout. I just superimposed one over the roundabout in the attached drawing, it looks like it's very doable. The catch is…this solves the N22 "bypass" traffic very well, but as we've been saying over and again, the issue is actually local traffic. They need a local transport scheme. Providing a bypass is neither the problem or the solution.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Just offhand, some details stood out:

    Killarney Heights retains two entrances and two exits 50m apart on an N road.

    The Heights two entrances and exits are adjacent to two further car park entrances and exits approx. 50 metres apart, giving 4 private companies dedicated entrances and exits on a 160m stretch…all starting 40 metres from a roundabout…on an N road.

    Two entrances/exits to Woodlands Road industrial estate on a 150m stretch, just 300m away from the first roundabout, and no raised or signalised crossings of either.

    But nah, what they REALLY need is a bypass of the above really obvious urban road design mistakes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,501 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    In fairness to Kerry CoCo, the Heights currently has three successive entrances onto a National Primary road, not two, so this new plan is a major reduction. But, the other two entrances on that side of the road both serve the same premises: Daly’s Texaco/SuperValu.

    There's no space for the necessary diverge/merge roads for an underpass at this junction, unfortunately, and I think even if there were, the long construction time required would kill the idea stone dead. Killarney’s economy is heavily reliant on people in rental cars arriving from Dublin. Whatever is done here needs to be quick and do-able over a single winter.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    I did notice the third entrance to the hotel yep! Mad stuff. There's no reason there can't be two entrances overall there on that stretch: just join the car parks and have one in/out near the roundabout, directly accessing Daly's and one further on accessing the hotel. They'd both end up with more parking!

    I think there is space for the diverge/merge roads: what I superimposed over the map was actually at scale. But you'd need to CPO parts of car parks. And you're probably right about the long construction time. But it'd be a better solution in the town than a relief relief road.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement