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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Should the M28 Cork-Ringaskiddy motorway be built? [project approved]

13567…26

Comments

  • #102
    Golfer50
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Golfer50


    marno21 wrote: »

    1. Destruction of Douglas and Rochestown
    2. Noise pollution above limits
    3. Air pollution above limits
    4. Massive congestion
    5. TII told them the EIS indicated significant environmental impacts to residents
    6. This is a motorway for the Port of Cork only (their new point)

    1. Conclusively disproved in EIS. Doulas impact negligible and Rochestown has traffic reductions due to the improved interchange at Carrs Hill
    2. disproved in EIS
    3. disproved in EIS
    4. Depending on point of view, traffic will be moved around but the general impact will be positive
    5. Absolute lie we discovered this week
    6. If it was only for the Port of Cork there would be no interchanges north of Ringaskiddy
    It is really about perspective.

    6. I believe YOU stated previously that road improvement is to be a motorway because of the core port designation . . .therefore a motorway for the port? yes?

    5. I'm not privy to what was said prior to the publication of the EIS but anyone reading the figures for noise etc can hardly call this a positive environmental impact.

    4. The changing of the Rochestown exit to a signalised one will undoubtedly cause problems. At the moment there are big queues to exit at peak times, often clogging the lane back to N40east/west. This blockage is not addressed at all in the plans . . . thee won't be a free flow of traffic from Jack Lynch Tunnel to Ringaskiddy
    Traffic from Passage is already severely hampered in this area and I can only see the addition of traffic lights at Clarke Hill and Rochestown off ramp exacerbating this. Further housing plans near Rochestown Monastery will only lead to further congestion.
    If Douglas bound traffic does not exit at this often clogged Rochestown exit, the other option is the Carrs Hill Interchange and then using Marlborough hill to travel to Douglas. This leads to the Fingerpost junction which is already at breaking point at many times of the day and especially the weekends.

    (3. Must admit I didn't look into this yet)

    2. Read the TII's own design goals - 60dB . . . but upped to double that for this development . . because the 60 is already exceeded at present! Read the WHO guidelines, read the EU guidelines . . all far exceeded here - FACT

    1. The traffic management around Douglas is already so finely poised that any small tweak can cause massive congestion . . . things such as Fridays, or even Saturdays, or a wet day etc etc . From reading much of the EIS I don't believe this will change.

    You did state lately that you are not a user of the N28 at present and so I have to take it that neither are you familiar with the traffic flows in the area in the surrounding hinterland. I am.

    Luckily all the postings here will not be taken into account when ABPleanala looks at this. As someone stated at the recent meeting, we all want to see the Port develop and have better traffic flow from Carrigaline but we have only one chance to get the infrastructure right for us and the generations ahead. This route is the easiest for TII but surely not the best given all the limitations.

    Oh, and this being an EU funded development where's the rail?

    " . . .in 2011, the Commission set a target of shifting as much as 30 % of road freight transported over distances greater than 300 km to other modes of transport such as rail or waterborne transport by 2030, and more than 50 % by 2050." 2016 Report, European Court of Auditors

    The M28 is a development of the NORTH SEA - MEDITERRANEAN corridor which in Ireland connects Belfast to Cork Port - 433 KLMs, something ABP choose to ignore in its Port of Cork decision this time around.

    Oh well, lets hope they make a more favourable judgement this time.


  • #103
    AugustusMinimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,561 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    Golfer 50.

    One of the big purposes of the new Carr's Hill Interchange is to allow full access for the Old Carrigaline Road to the M28 and of course the N40.

    The plan is also to build a bridge from Grange to the Old Carrigaline Road over the stream.

    The overall point is to take huge volumes of traffic out of Douglas West coming down from Grange and Donnybrook who have to go through Douglas at present.

    On the Fingerpost. If you come off at Carrs Hill in future to access to Douglas, you will almost certainly use the Old Carrigaline Road. This will allow you access to that future bridge. You can also turn left into the centre of Douglas before the fingerpost or the next left after that again before the fingerpost.

    In essence, accessing Douglas from the N28 side will no longer have to involve the Fingerpost. The EIS envisages a reduction in traffic on both the Rochestown Road and the Fingerpost.

    Finally, signalising both the Rochestown and Fingerpost roundabouts have nothing to do with the M28 and will go ahead regardless of the M28.


  • #104
    Golfer50
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Golfer50


    AugustusMinimus wrote: »

    The plan is also to build a bridge from Grange to the Old Carrigaline Road over the stream . . . .

    . . .Finally, signalising both the Rochestown and Fingerpost roundabouts have nothing to do with the M28 and will go ahead regardless of the M28.

    What page of EIS is this bridge please?
    Signalising the Rochestown Road is in the EIS and is therefore to do with M28


  • #105
    Ludo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,015 ✭✭✭Ludo


    Golfer50 wrote: »
    What page of EIS is this bridge please?
    Signalising the Rochestown Road is in the EIS and is therefore to do with M28

    That bridge is never gonna happen...and certainly not as part of the M28 build so not relevant at all.

    The report also makes bad reading for Coach Hill...+76.5% increase mentioned in one section. But no sign of a road improvement which is already needed now without increasing it as the report says it will.


  • #106
    Kevwoody
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭Kevwoody


    Golfer50 wrote: »
    What page of EIS is this bridge please?
    Signalising the Rochestown Road is in the EIS and is therefore to do with M28


    The point he's making is that it will go ahead regardless of the M28 being done.


  • #107
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Golfer50 wrote: »
    It is really about perspective.

    6. I believe YOU stated previously that road improvement is to be a motorway because of the core port designation . . .therefore a motorway for the port? yes?

    It's being built as motorway simply because it's an EU TEN-T Core route. It's a Core route because of the port. If there was no port/TEN-T rule it would be built as HQ dual carraigeway.

    If it was a "port motorway" it would have 0 junctions between the Port and the N40. It has 7. Therefore it's a motorway for the Port, Rochestown, Maryborough, Douglas (via Carrs Hill), Carrigaline, Shanbally, Ringaskiddy and Barnhely.
    4. The changing of the Rochestown exit to a signalised one will undoubtedly cause problems. At the moment there are big queues to exit at peak times, often clogging the lane back to N40east/west. This blockage is not addressed at all in the plans . . . thee won't be a free flow of traffic from Jack Lynch Tunnel to Ringaskiddy
    Traffic from Passage is already severely hampered in this area and I can only see the addition of traffic lights at Clarke Hill and Rochestown off ramp exacerbating this. Further housing plans near Rochestown Monastery will only lead to further congestion.
    If Douglas bound traffic does not exit at this often clogged Rochestown exit, the other option is the Carrs Hill Interchange and then using Marlborough hill to travel to Douglas. This leads to the Fingerpost junction which is already at breaking point at many times of the day and especially the weekends.

    At present, traffic beginning on the N28 at Bloomfield has two opportunities to exit the N28 at Douglas. Rochestown/R610 and the Maryborough slip. Now it has three via a full grade seperated interchange at Carrs Hill. This has the added benefit of removing a rat run via the Maryborough off slip and providing full access to the ex R609/Carrigaline Road and avoiding the Rochestown congestion. Further link roads can be added to the Carrs Hill interchange to improve access to Douglas.
    2. Read the TII's own design goals - 60dB . . . but upped to double that for this development . . because the 60 is already exceeded at present! Read the WHO guidelines, read the EU guidelines . . all far exceeded here - FACT

    Were the M28 to not go ahead the existing N28/Sli Carrigdhoun will still exist between Carrs Hill and the N40. So the noise will remain M28 or no M28.

    Quite a few people living in the area bought their houses aware of the existince of the N28 which has been there since 1995. If noise is such an issue then it's not a good idea to live in an urban/semi urban area where noise is a reality.
    1. The traffic management around Douglas is already so finely poised that any small tweak can cause massive congestion . . . things such as Fridays, or even Saturdays, or a wet day etc etc . From reading much of the EIS I don't believe this will change.

    Hence TII trying their best here to improve things. The rest of the improvements, with local and regional roads, is a matter for the council to solve.
    You did state lately that you are not a user of the N28 at present and so I have to take it that neither are you familiar with the traffic flows in the area in the surrounding hinterland. I am.

    I'm not a regular user of the N28 but the team working on the scheme on behalf of TII will have studied them quite a lot and taken all these factors into account when choosing the design unveiled in late 2015. The M28 wasn't designed using crayons and a map.
    Luckily all the postings here will not be taken into account when ABPleanala looks at this. As someone stated at the recent meeting, we all want to see the Port develop and have better traffic flow from Carrigaline but we have only one chance to get the infrastructure right for us and the generations ahead. This route is the easiest for TII but surely not the best given all the limitations.

    What's the alternative route? Via Ballinhassig or the Airport? Long circuitous routes burning a lot more diesel being suggested by people so concerned about pollution? Millions extra spent on a route no one will use while the existing N28 will reach breaking point? TII did a route selection process before we got to this stage and the only viable route is via the route chosen. This is all in the EIS if you want to have a look.
    Oh, and this being an EU funded development where's the rail?

    " . . .in 2011, the Commission set a target of shifting as much as 30 % of road freight transported over distances greater than 300 km to other modes of transport such as rail or waterborne transport by 2030, and more than 50 % by 2050." 2016 Report, European Court of Auditors

    The M28 is a development of the NORTH SEA - MEDITERRANEAN corridor which in Ireland connects Belfast to Cork Port - 433 KLMs, something ABP choose to ignore in its Port of Cork decision this time around.

    Oh well, lets hope they make a more favourable judgement this time.

    The port at Tivoli is rail connected and is generally unused. The terrain between Ringaskiddy and the rail network at either Cobh or Cork city is difficult and would require tunnelling, perhaps ruling out the project on cost viability grounds.

    A rail link between Ringaskiddy and Cork doesn't solve the fact that 29,000 cars and growing use the N28 on a road capable of comfortably handling less than 10,000 daily.


  • #108
    Golfer50
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Golfer50


    marno21 wrote: »
    The port at Tivoli is rail connected and is generally unused. The terrain between Ringaskiddy and the rail network at either Cobh or Cork city is difficult and would require tunnelling, perhaps ruling out the project on cost viability grounds.
    Agreed, but I was merely making the point that once again Ireland needs a derogation because we are road obsessed.
    marno21 wrote: »
    If it was a "port motorway" it would have 0 junctions between the Port and the N40. It has 7. Therefore it's a motorway for the Port, Rochestown, Maryborough, Douglas (via Carrs Hill), Carrigaline, Shanbally, Ringaskiddy and Barnhely.
    So you are trying to make a point that a port motorway is more than a motorway to a port? I don't honestly know of any motorway that doesn't have junctions. The proposed M28 will of course have junctions because its piggy backing and taking the existing road route. . . . .
    marno21 wrote: »
    At present, traffic beginning on the N28 at Bloomfield has two opportunities to exit the N28 at Douglas. Rochestown/R610 and the Maryborough slip. Now it has three via a full grade seperated interchange at Carrs Hill. This has the added benefit of removing a rat run via the Maryborough off slip and providing full access to the ex R609/Carrigaline Road and avoiding the Rochestown congestion. Further link roads can be added to the Carrs Hill interchange to improve access to Douglas.
    At present traffic southbound from Bloomfield has one option for Douglas, the Rochestown/R610.
    The only slip road is to Mount Oval and not a route for Douglas bound traffic.
    I don't understand your point about a Maryborough rat run, perhaps you are confusing north and south bound traffic?
    Your proposition that Carrs Hill interchange will give another route to Douglas for south bound traffic would mean an addition of approximately 2.5 kms to your journey from Bloomfield. I don't think people will do that.
    marno21 wrote: »
    The M28 wasn't designed using crayons and a map.
    I believe they choose the route because there was a pre existing road in the northern section to work with. . . but squeezing a motorway with such heavy predicted traffic, through what is a heavily populated area, adding to the noise and nuisance already present (fact), and culminating in a single carriageway towards the Jack Lynch Tunnel at Bloomfield is hardly going to win a design award in my opinion.
    marno21 wrote: »
    Quite a few people living in the area bought their houses aware of the existince of the N28 which has been there since 1995. If noise is such an issue then it's not a good idea to live in an urban/semi urban area where noise is a reality.
    The noise when the original road was planned and built (I was here) and the noise reality now are vastly different. You cannot say that just because there is noise here already, people should suck it up. As I pointed out previously, present noise far exceeds TII's targets for a new build and the EIS admits that this route means they cannot do anything to achieve levels even near their own targets! That can't be right.

    Indeed, the methodologies used in this EIS to graph noise levels north of the Rochestown Road fall well short in my opinion - a point I'll be making strongly in my submission!


  • #109
    tipperary
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 447 ✭✭tipperary


    Had a look through the EIS, the lack of an upgrade to Bloomfield for the M28 - N40 eastbound traffic seems to result in fairly substantial queueing - average 8am to 9am journey time estimated at 6.3 minutes in 2035, compared with 1.8 minutes in the 'do nothing' scenario.
    Curious, is there a fee associated with making a submission to ABP on the EIS? No refernce to any fee on the N28 website.


  • #110
    Limerick74
    Registered Users Posts: 468 ✭✭Limerick74


    tipperary wrote: »
    Had a look through the EIS, the lack of an upgrade to Bloomfield for the M28 - N40 eastbound traffic seems to result in fairly substantial queueing - average 8am to 9am journey time estimated at 6.3 minutes in 2035, compared with 1.8 minutes in the 'do nothing' scenario.
    Curious, is there a fee associated with making a submission to ABP on the EIS? No refernce to any fee on the N28 website.

    €50 to make a submission see http://www.pleanala.ie/about/Fees/Fees-Guide%202011-EN%202016.pdf


  • #111
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    tipperary wrote: »
    Had a look through the EIS, the lack of an upgrade to Bloomfield for the M28 - N40 eastbound traffic seems to result in fairly substantial queueing - average 8am to 9am journey time estimated at 6.3 minutes in 2035, compared with 1.8 minutes in the 'do nothing' scenario.
    Curious, is there a fee associated with making a submission to ABP on the EIS? No refernce to any fee on the N28 website.
    The problem is the lack of general capacity and potential for upgrades along the entire South Ring from the Kinsale Rd roundabout to the Dunkettle Interchange. The Douglas flyover (J8-J9) and the Jack Lynch Tunnel from J10-J11 will always have to remain 2 lane and thus will be massive chokepoints along the route, especially when Dunkettle is upgraded. The degrading of journey times is likely due to this and not to do with the M28 itself. The only cure is routing end to end traffic around the North Ring when opened and improving public transport especially considering there is a decent rail link out the N20 and N25 corridors and the issue just being the atrocious links within the city itself.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Golfer50 wrote: »
    Agreed, but I was merely making the point that once again Ireland needs a derogation because we are road obsessed.

    In most other countries, such motorways as this are built with years and are no longer topics of discussion. It's 2017 and we don't have a motorway between our 2nd and 3rd cities, and the road from the 2nd city to a busy port and industrial area carrying 29,000 vehicles daily is a glorified boreen completely unsuitable.

    Given its length, there are a lot of N28 journeys that could be made via alternative means but the Port and industrial areas do warrant a significant road upgrade. Carrigaline commuting wouldn't be a good case for building this. Kinsale commuters don't exactly have a decent road either, Carrigaline is just lucky it's on the road to the Port.
    So you are trying to make a point that a port motorway is more than a motorway to a port? I don't honestly know of any motorway that doesn't have junctions. The proposed M28 will of course have junctions because its piggy backing and taking the existing road route. . . . .

    Nothing stopping them from shutting most of those junctions if it was a Port motorway. The fact that there is a slip road to a housing estate means this is more than a Port motorway. If there was no Port it would be the same just without the blue signs.
    At present traffic southbound from Bloomfield has one option for Douglas, the Rochestown/R610.
    The only slip road is to Mount Oval and not a route for Douglas bound traffic.
    I don't understand your point about a Maryborough rat run, perhaps you are confusing north and south bound traffic?
    Your proposition that Carrs Hill interchange will give another route to Douglas for south bound traffic would mean an addition of approximately 2.5 kms to your journey from Bloomfield. I don't think people will do that.

    Apologies, I didn't mean Douglas itself, but there could be traffic using the Mount Oval slip as a rat run to access Rochestown etc. if there's significant queueing on the R610 sliproad. The Mount Oval slip really shouldn't have been built in the first place, it certainly wouldn't get past TII these days.

    People will add 2.5km to their journey if it's a faster route. The quickest route to most places would be via the city but people still use the South Ring to navigate the metro area.
    I believe they choose the route because there was a pre existing road in the northern section to work with. . . but squeezing a motorway with such heavy predicted traffic, through what is a heavily populated area, adding to the noise and nuisance already present (fact), and culminating in a single carriageway towards the Jack Lynch Tunnel at Bloomfield is hardly going to win a design award in my opinion.

    The existing route is the route that would overall be the most efficient and effective. There is very little space along the existing N40 to add another freeflow junction and the Kinsale Road and Bandon Road junctions are clogged enough as is. The existence of the freeflow Bloomfield Trumpet Interchange also is a significant plus in utilising the existing N28 roadbed.

    While people in the area may want it routed via the N27 or N71 realisitically these ideas are impractical and wouldn't solve any of the issues on the N28.

    The single carraigeway is being upgraded, this will be DC all the way to the N40.

    Cork is a heavily populated area. There is no way to route it through wilderness considering where it has to go.

    The noise when the original road was planned and built (I was here) and the noise reality now are vastly different. You cannot say that just because there is noise here already, people should suck it up. As I pointed out previously, present noise far exceeds TII's targets for a new build and the EIS admits that this route means they cannot do anything to achieve levels even near their own targets! That can't be right.

    Indeed, the methodologies used in this EIS to graph noise levels north of the Rochestown Road fall well short in my opinion - a point I'll be making strongly in my submission!

    I'm not just saying you should suck it up. But if the M28 didn't go ahead, they won't be covering the existing N28 in grass and returning it to the wild. The existing noise will remain. The limit will remain 100km/h so there will be no increase in noise that way and there'll be less noise of people sitting in traffic and beeping the horn at each other trying to fight their way down the hill onto the mess that is the N40 every morning.


  • #113
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Is there any cycling infrastructure being proposed as part of this?


  • #114
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    Is there any cycling infrastructure being proposed as part of this?

    http://www.n28cork-ringaskiddy.com/EIS/vol2/Chapter%203%20-%20Description%20of%20the%20Proposed%20Road%20Development.pdf


  • #115
    tipperary
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 447 ✭✭tipperary


    marno21 wrote: »
    The problem is the lack of general capacity and potential for upgrades along the entire South Ring from the Kinsale Rd roundabout to the Dunkettle Interchange. The Douglas flyover (J8-J9) and the Jack Lynch Tunnel from J10-J11 will always have to remain 2 lane and thus will be massive chokepoints along the route, especially when Dunkettle is upgraded. The degrading of journey times is likely due to this and not to do with the M28 itself. The only cure is routing end to end traffic around the North Ring when opened and improving public transport especially considering there is a decent rail link out the N20 and N25 corridors and the issue just being the atrocious links within the city itself.

    Agreed there are plenty other choke points on the road for which the North Ring is the only feasible solution, but I often see a backup on this part of the interchange even when there is no queueing on the N40. The junction is sometimes operating beyond capacity as it is, a problem that will become exacerbated with the projected increase in traffic using the junction - which is reflected in the journey times quoted in the EIS. Would be interesting to see what the impact of this many vehicles queuing for over 6 minutes will be in terms of queue lengths, and associated impacts on other junctions on the road, but unfortunately the relevant appendix to the EIS is not included on the website.


  • #116
    AugustusMinimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,561 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    I'd imagine that given capacity, the Bloomfield interchange is probably the best placed junction to receive traffic compared to say Kinsale or the Bandon Roundabouts which couldn't handle extra traffic.


  • #117
    billyduk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 172 ✭✭billyduk


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    Is there any cycling infrastructure being proposed as part of this?

    It's illegal to cycle on a motorway so no. It will probably be less hazardous to cycle on the N28 Carrs Hill down through Douglas (where there are cycle lanes to the city) once the M28 is built.

    The Cork CoCo are also upgrading the current greenway from Passage to the city (which runs along along the old railway line from the city though Blackrock, Mahon, Rochestown and Passage) and extending it to Crosshaven via Monkstown, Rafeen and Carrigaline. That will be an excellent cycle/walking 25km route.


  • #118
    billyduk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 172 ✭✭billyduk


    As a resident of Rochestown, I welcome the motorway. I've also never had the steering group knock on my door so I have no idea how they can claim to represent me.

    The main congestion on the Rochestown exit is caused by Traffic coming from the Rochestown road (Douglas side) and cars stopping at the end of Clarkes Hill to turn right.

    Signalling the junction at the end of the exit ramp will enable this to be managed appropriately.

    Putting lights and a dual lane approaching the end of Clarkes Hill from the Douglas side is just common sense. This will free traffic up in that area during evening peak times.

    The removal of the Broadale entrance to the N28/M28 is a non issue as the new Junction further south will be of a better standard and serve the people of Maryborough hill and Garryduff better than the existing on ramp.

    Those claiming that the traffic coming from Ringaskiddy/Shanbally is minimal obviously don't frequent that road. I have to go from Rochestown to Carrigaline frequently and trying to get on to the N28 at Rafeen is a joke. This will only get worse with the introduction of increased port traffic, not to mention the Janeville development in Carrigaline.


  • #119
    DylanGLC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 157 ✭✭DylanGLC


    Hopefully this can get planning permission in November(!!!). When would construction start, late 2018?


  • #120
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    DylanGLC wrote: »
    Hopefully this can get planning permission in November(!!!). When would construction start, late 2018?
    Is it confirmed that ABP will be ruling in November? Construction is likely to start around 2020 given the current form of dripfeeding the funding to advance civil works on these projects.

    The N22 Macroom Bypass was given planning in 2015 and will likely start in 2019. The same with the N4 Collooney-Castlebaldwin being greenlit in 2014 and starting in 2019 also.

    The 8 projects with planning in the Capital Plan will likely eat up construction funding through to 2020.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    marno21 wrote: »
    Is it confirmed that ABP will be ruling in November? Construction is likely to start around 2020 given the current form of dripfeeding the funding to advance civil works on these projects.

    The N22 Macroom Bypass was given planning in 2015 and will likely start in 2019. The same with the N4 Collooney-Castlebaldwin being greenlit in 2014 and starting in 2019 also.

    The 8 projects with planning in the Capital Plan will likely eat up construction funding through to 2020.
    Is there another thread for this?

    They have been talking about this bypass for over 20 years now.

    What will the routing of it be?


  • #122
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    KC161 wrote: »
    Is there another thread for this?

    They have been talking about this bypass for over 20 years now.

    What will the routing of it be?
    Big thread here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055297495


  • #123
    kub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,555 ✭✭✭kub


    They had better get the finger out on this motorway because the Port authorities are expecting all container traffic to be operational in Ringaskiddy at the start of 2020.

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/tivoli-docks-redevelopment-plan-includes-4000-houses-456659.html


  • #124
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    kub wrote: »
    They had better get the finger out on this motorway because the Port authorities are expecting all container traffic to be operational in Ringaskiddy at the start of 2020.

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/tivoli-docks-redevelopment-plan-includes-4000-houses-456659.html
    It will be very safe and result in total peaceful silence and 100% pure air were these trucks hurtling down the single lane N28 Sli Carrigdhoun as at present.

    Submissions to ABP close next week (18th August). Oral hearing to follow and decision to be made in 2018. If approved, funding needs to be found to proceed to advance works & construction.

    Hopefully sense is seen and Cork can finally join the 21st century.


  • #125
    Aontachtoir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 574 ✭✭✭Aontachtoir


    I used to live on the Douglas side of Maryborough Hill. Would be delighted to see this go through - major benefits for whole region.


  • #126
    AugustusMinimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,561 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    Chaos this morning with Carr's Hill closed due to an accident and no decent alternative route available.

    The "Steering Group" are waxing lyrical about how Douglas will be destroyed with traffic. A new Lidl has recently been given planning permission in the centre of Douglas which is likely to add greatly to the problem and yet not a peep out of them.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Last day for submissions to ABP was last Friday so it's time to wait for a decision on the matter.

    With a bit of luck sense will be seen.. another crash like todays (which wouldn't happen if you were shoving 27000 vehicles a day down a boreen) will see more and more trucks diverted through residential areas. Have the local geniuses thought about this? And the 3km tailbacks through Rochestown today?


  • #128
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Some "insightful" information from the Steering Group here: https://www.facebook.com/M28-Steering-Group-175111606272101/

    I won't comment on it because I don't want to get banned but I hope ABP's shredder is ready for business.


  • #129
    Aontachtoir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 574 ✭✭✭Aontachtoir


    marno21 wrote: »
    Some "insightful" information from the Steering Group here: https://www.facebook.com/M28-Steering-Group-175111606272101/

    I won't comment on it because I don't want to get banned but I hope ABP's shredder is ready for business.

    Marno, you seem to have more experience with this "Steering Group" than myself. Do you know why they seem to believe constructing a motorway to divert traffic away from Douglas onto a road with no exits in Douglas will result in more traffic in Douglas?


  • #130
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,537 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Aontachtoir wrote: »
    Marno, you seem to have more experience with this "Steering Group" than myself. Do you know why they seem to believe constructing a motorway to divert traffic away from Douglas onto a road with no exits in Douglas will result in more traffic in Douglas?

    The alleged representative on here, once grilled, admitted that his sole concern was his property value and that any means possible to "protect" that would be used.


  • #131
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Aontachtoir wrote: »
    Marno, you seem to have more experience with this "Steering Group" than myself. Do you know why they seem to believe constructing a motorway to divert traffic away from Douglas onto a road with no exits in Douglas will result in more traffic in Douglas?

    To be honest; I don't. I also don't understand why they are still running with several arguments that have been conclusively disproven on here and in the officially published EIS; some of which we have explained to them about how the condition will IMPROVE after the M28 is built but they don't seem to want to accept them. It seems at this stage they are just doing it for the sake of it and are recruiting large volumes of people by brainwashing them.

    The primary representative on here argued until he was conclusively defeated and then just turned to straight out lies and abuse until he was politely shown the door.
    L1011 wrote: »
    The alleged representative on here, once grilled, admitted that his sole concern was his property value and that any means possible to "protect" that would be used.

    His property value will likely increase after the M28 is built because of the less traffic congestion in the area after it opens. In most places house values increase due to more attractive commuting options and better access after opening.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    This is going to cause alot of hassle.

    M28 still not needed say the residents who object?

    https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/907949424814559233


  • #133
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    R.I.P to the cyclist.


    http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/cyclist-dies-after-collision-with-tractor-in-co-cork-805821.html


  • #134
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Cork Truck Driver wrote: »
    R.I.P to the cyclist.


    http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/cyclist-dies-after-collision-with-tractor-in-co-cork-805821.html
    3rd death on Cork's pathetic national road network this week.


  • #135
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    marno21 wrote: »
    3rd death on Cork's pathetic national road network this week.

    Both roads are awaiting motorway upgrades.

    Over on the journal.ie people are blaming the tractor driver.

    Is this not another reason for the people opposed to this to actually support it?

    I travel that road weekly, it definitely shouldn't be a 100 zone, even though the tractor obviously couldn't do it.

    My aunt lives in Carrigaline, she said it's more dangerous than the Forrest road on the opposite side of the town.


  • #136
    Baldilocks
    Registered Users Posts: 114 ✭✭Baldilocks


    Can anyone advise when the decision is due from An Bord Pleanala? It's September if I remember correctly


  • #137
    Golfer50
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Golfer50


    ABP site says . .
    Status: Case is due to be decided by 21-12-2017


  • #138
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    What happens then? Proceeds to planning?


  • #139
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Cork Truck Driver wrote: »
    What happens then? Proceeds to planning?
    Planning is done.

    Advance works, CPO and tender are the key parts. Availability of funding could mean a late 2019/2020 start if approved.

    Of course the lovely residents of Rochestown will likely file an appeal which will delay


  • #140
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    marno21 wrote: »
    Planning is done.

    Advance works, CPO and tender are the key parts. Availability of funding could mean a late 2019/2020 start if approved.

    Of course the lovely residents of Rochestown will likely file an appeal which will delay

    How did those residents get in with their fundraiser to challenge the legality of the project?

    It's badly needed and all they want is money to shut up.

    Are the CPO's complicated?


  • #141
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Cork Truck Driver wrote: »
    How did those residents get in with their fundraiser to challenge the legality of the project?

    It's badly needed and all they want is money to shut up.

    Are the CPO's complicated?
    They are still going; I didn't realise but there's an Oral Hearing on the project soon in Carrigaline: https://www.facebook.com/M28-Steering-Group-175111606272101/

    CPOs would be fairly straightforward.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    Oral hearing on the M28 scheduled for next month.

    http://www.eveningecho.ie/corknews/Oral-Hearing-on-Ringaskiddy-Motorway-to-be-held-next-month-9cb133c4-7fec-4fc2-83ec-711ce92607a9-ds


  • #143
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Cork Truck Driver wrote: »
    Oral hearing on the M28 scheduled for next month.

    http://www.eveningecho.ie/corknews/Oral-Hearing-on-Ringaskiddy-Motorway-to-be-held-next-month-9cb133c4-7fec-4fc2-83ec-711ce92607a9-ds

    That article would genuinely make you want to drive your head through the wall.

    No wonder Buttimer lost his seat if this is his carry on.

    Where was Ger Harrington when the N28 Sli Carrigdhoun was built in the 90s? Surely that's responsible for the destruction of the Mulcon Valley? Given that the new road is simply being built on top of it?


  • #144
    boardsuser1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,196 ✭✭✭boardsuser1


    marno21 wrote: »
    That article would genuinely make you want to drive your head through the wall.

    No wonder Buttimer lost his seat if this is his carry on.

    Where was Ger Harrington when the N28 Sli Carrigdhoun was built in the 90s? Surely that's responsible for the destruction of the Mulcon Valley? Given that the new road is simply being built on top of it?

    I had a headache reading it.

    Buttimer is living in a bubble, i met him canvassing during the last general election and he was highly confident of getting back it, some slap in the face for him.

    All he is doing is trying to get these people onside in a huge electoral area to get back into the Dail.

    Ger Harrington isn't a young man by no means and would have been more than able to speak out on Mulcon Valley, i'd be curious as to why not then but he will now.

    The Ambassador is about 2 miles from where i live, i think i'll make a visit if i'm not working that day.

    Any other boardsies interested?

    I'll buy the coffee's ;)


  • #145
    Golfer50
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Golfer50


    Does anybody know what the format is for an oral hearing? The letter from ABP says that written submissions already received should be taken as read. As the closing date for such submissions has already passed, what exactly will happen in the Ambassador Hotel?

    I believe the Rochestown Park was deemed unsuitable because of the noise of the trucks passing :)


  • #146
    Golfer50
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Golfer50


    http://www.pleanala.ie/publications/2012/oh_procedures.htm

    Thank you Google.


  • #147
    Kevwoody
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭Kevwoody


    It's kind of ironic than the residents are complaining about poor transport links to the north side of the city, for one measly meeting, yet are trying to block one of the most important infrastructure projects for Cork City's growth.


  • #148
    Kevwoody
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭Kevwoody


    Golfer50 wrote: »
    http://www.pleanala.ie/publications/2012/oh_procedures.htm

    Thank you Google.


    I suspect you knew the answer to your question before you even asked here.


  • #149
    Golfer50
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Golfer50


    Kevwoody wrote: »
    I suspect you knew the answer to your question before you even asked here.

    Eh?


  • #150
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Golfer50 wrote: »
    Eh?
    Golfer50, not sure if I asked you this before..

    Can I ask what your objections are please?


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Cork Truck Driver wrote: »
    I had a headache reading it.

    Buttimer is living in a bubble, i met him canvassing during the last general election and he was highly confident of getting back it, some slap in the face for him.

    All he is doing is trying to get these people onside in a huge electoral area to get back into the Dail.

    Ger Harrington isn't a young man by no means and would have been more than able to speak out on Mulcon Valley, i'd be curious as to why not then but he will now.

    The Ambassador is about 2 miles from where i live, i think i'll make a visit if i'm not working that day.

    Any other boardsies interested?

    I'll buy the coffee's ;)
    Maybe Buttimer realises that the entire area that benefits from the M28 is his constituency, and he appears to be objecting to it.

    Try telling the family of the woman who sadly died on the jokeshop that is the N28 this year along with the many users of the N28 in Carrigaline, Shanbally etc along with the companies who have set up out that direction that he's not a fan.

    He's backing a "campaign" here but the campaign is a lot smaller than the people who stand to benefit from the M28 going ahead. Little do the campaign realise that they also stand to gain from the M28 but they're too blind to see it.

    Regarding the oral hearing; I'd have trouble justifying taking a day off work and a return N20 trip for it to be honest. Hopefully TII and RPS have good speakers there.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement