A21.1 Nodes
1 to 3
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Node 1 - 3 |
Green |
Yellow |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Segments |
Green
(Nodes 1 to 3) |
Yellow
(Nodes 1 to 3) |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMPACT ASSESSMENT (with
appropriate mitigation measures) |
COMPARISON |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Refer to Chapter |
Comments |
Impact |
Comments |
Impact |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 |
Landscape and aesthetics |
Crosses Local Scenic Area and scenic route |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses Local Scenic Area and scenic route |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Green and Yellow routes are through similar
landscape areas and the impact on both would be similar. Both routes would cross a Scenic Area, and
would cross the designated scenic route A25.
Visual impact would be to a similar number of properties. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 |
Cultural Heritage |
Moderate impact
on 1 AAP |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Major impact on 1 Recorded Monument |
Major Adverse |
F |
Both routes have moderate impact on one area of
archaeological potential. Realignment
of existing road on approach to junction may have a direct effect on the Holy
Well (AH001) in Ballyvourney. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 |
Surface Water Quality and Drainage |
No change to flood risk |
Minor Adverse |
F |
No change to flood risk |
Minor Adverse |
F |
There would be no change to flood risk by either route. Both rivers cross one unclassified
tributary of the River Sullane. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Geology |
Short length of high embankment |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Good cut/fill balance |
Moderate Adverse |
E+ |
The yellow route does not include any high embankment, a
short length of which is present on the green route. The yellow route also
has a very good overall cut and fill balance compared with the green route. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Hydrogeology |
Aquifer - Moderately productive locally |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Aquifer - Moderately productive locally |
Minor Adverse |
D |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
8 |
Ecology |
Large part of one site of high ecological value (Cascade
Wood ) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Large part of one site of high ecological value (Cascade
Wood ) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Both routes have a major adverse impact on Site 1b
(Cascade Wood), which is of high ecological value and may correspond to the
Annex I habitat ‘Old Sessile Oak Woodland’. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 |
Air Quality |
7 properties within 200m |
Minor Adverse |
D |
7 properties within 200m |
Minor Adverse |
D |
With respect to air quality there is no difference
between the Yellow and Green routes within this section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10 |
Noise and Vibration |
13 residential properties within 300m |
Minor Adverse |
D |
12 residential properties within 300m |
Minor Adverse |
D |
With respect to noise and vibration there is no
difference between the Yellow and Green routes within this section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11 |
Planning |
Crosses Area of Scientific Interest (D25) |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Crosses Area of Scientific Interest (D25) |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Both routes bisect a designated Scenic Area, and Cascade
Wood, which is designated as an area of scientific importance (D25) within
the South Cork County Development Plan. They both also cross the Ballyvourney
to Mullaganish road, designated in the South Cork Plan as scenic route A25. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
12 |
Socio-Economics |
Increase in distance and journey times |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Increase in distance and journey times |
Minor Adverse |
D |
The routes will bypass Ballyvourney, which will result
in the loss of passing trade to local businesses but the environment within
the village will be improved by reduced traffic including reduction in heavy
goods vehicles. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13 |
Demolition and loss of amenity |
Loss of Cascade Wood amenity |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Loss of Cascade Wood amenity |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
The local population uses Cascade Wood as an
amenity. Both routes would require
landtake through this area and divide the wood. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
14 |
Agriculture |
Total of 9.14ha |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Total of 5.3 ha |
Minor Adverse |
D+ |
The affect on agricultural land will be similar for both
routes, with both routes passing through similar quality agricultural land
consisting of reclaimed grassland and rocky scrub areas. However, the Green route would have a
slightly greater landtake. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
Mineral Resources |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No Impact |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
17 |
Construction Impacts |
Traffic disruption on existing N22 |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Traffic disruption along N22 between tie-in and node 1. |
Major Adverse |
F |
The construction of the tie-in on the existing N22 will
cause some disruption to traffic. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
+ indicates greater preference for route section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
OTHER INFORMATION* |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
16 |
Road Alignment |
Limited by: tie-in to existing N22, properties around
Ballyvourney, Sullane river and St Gobnait's wood to south, and hilly terrain
to north. |
Limited by: tie-in to existing N22, properties around
Ballyvourney, Sullane river and St Gobnait's wood to south, and hilly terrain
to north. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
18 |
Scheme Cost Estimate (€/1000) |
8,027 |
|
|
9,628 |
|
|
Construction Cost, Contingency, Land Cost and Design & Supervision excl. VAT |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
(includes €1,798k to upgrade the existing N22 from the
tie-in to the improved N22) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
19 |
Traffic figures |
2024 AADT = 10,200 |
2024 AADT = 10,100 |
Standard single carriageway. (see chapter 22). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scheme length (km) |
2.0 |
|
|
1.1 + 0.7 to
upgrade N22 to Node 1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Demolition: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of houses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of businesses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 0m - 50m |
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 50m - 100m |
2 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 100m - 200m |
4 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 200m - 300m |
6 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No of Crossings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
river/stream |
1 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
national roads |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
regional roads |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
minor roads |
3 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
farm accesses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of road bridges/underbridges |
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Earthworks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Cut m3 |
58,200 |
|
|
254,900 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
fill m3 |
57,900 |
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
* Data taken from feasibility design - subject to
amendment at later design stages |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A21.2 Nodes
3 to 6
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nodes 3 - 6 |
Green |
Green/Link1/Yellow |
Yellow |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Segments |
Green
(Nodes 3 to 6) |
Green
(Nodes 3 to 4) |
Yellow
(Nodes 3 to 6) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMPACT ASSESSMENT (with
appropriate mitigation measures) |
COMPARISON |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Refer to Chapter |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 |
Landscape and aesthetics |
Crosses Local Scenic Area and scenic route proposals
result in noticeable change to view from Clondrohid and scattered properties |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Landscape mostly moderate, although crosses through
local Scenic area |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Landscape mostly moderate, although crosses through
local Scenic area Significant change to views from Ballymakeery and some
properties in Macroom |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Yellow route would affect the views from residential
areas in Ballyvourney and Macroom, whereas
the Green and Green/Link/Yellow routes would influence the views from
only one residential area (Clondrohid and Macroom respectively). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 |
Cultural Heritage |
Major impact on 3 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F |
Major impact on 1 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Major impact on 4 recorded Monumnts |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
The
Green/Link/Yellow route would affect the least sites and monuments. The Green route would affect the greatest
number of sites and monuments. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 |
Surface Water Quality |
Crosses Class A rivers (x2) |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Cross Class A River (x4) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Cross Class A river (x1) |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
The Yellow route exerts the least impact, crossing 1
Class A river only. The Green /Link Yellow route is also considered to
represent a localised and limited increase to the flood risk of the Foherish
River |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Geology |
|
Major Adverse |
F |
The Green/Link/Yellow route has the greatest length of
high embankment and deep cutting. It
also crosses the greatest length of soft ground. |
Major Adverse |
F |
|
Major Adverse |
F |
The Yellow route has shallower cuttings, crosses less
soft ground and has a better cut and fill balance than the Green route. The
Yellow also has more high embankment compared to the Green route. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Hydrogeology |
Moderatively productive locally to west and generally
unproductive to the east |
Minor Adverse |
D+ |
Moderatively productive locally to west and generally
unproductive to the east |
Minor Adverse |
D++ |
Moderatively productive locally to west and generally
unproductive to the east |
Minor Adverse |
D |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
8 |
Ecology |
Large part of 1 site high value (Annex) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Large part of 1 site high value (Annex) |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Small part of 1 site high value (Annex) |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
The Green route and the Green/Link/Yellow route would
each pass through a site of high, or potentially high ecological value, which
may correspond to Annex 1 habitat “Old Sessile Oak Woodland”. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 |
Air Quality |
57 properties within 200m |
Moderate Adverse |
E++ |
70 properties within 200m |
Moderate Adverse |
E+ |
102 properties within 200m |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
There would be more receptors affected by the
Yellow. Green and Green/Link/Yellow
have a similar number of properties along each route. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10 |
Noise and Vibration |
94 residential properties within 300m |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
130 residential properties within 300m |
Major Adverse |
F |
230 residential properties within 300m |
Major Beneficial |
A |
For the Yellow route, there are high numbers of
residential properties within 300m of the route, which are already subject to
noise from the existing N22. The
noise impact on these properties is likely to decrease due to the noise
absorbing capabilities of modern road surfaces. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11 |
Planning |
Area of Scientific Interest (D8) |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Areas of Scientific Interest (D25) |
Moderate Adverse |
E+ |
Crosses Scenic
Areas |
Moderate Adverse |
E++ |
All of the
routes provide a by-pass for the town of Macroom, supporting local and county
policies. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
12 |
SocioEconomics / Businesses |
Isolation of Ullanes West |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Isolation of Ullanes West |
Moderate Adverse |
E++ |
Split Clonfadda Village |
Moderate Adverse |
E++ |
All routes would
result in a loss of passing trade to business situated along the existing
N22, however, appropriate signage on the Yellow route, which would run close
to the existing N22 may mitigate this. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13 |
Demolition and Loss Of Amenity |
Close proximity to residential property |
Minor Adverse |
D+ |
Close proximity to residential property. |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Close proximity to residential property |
Minor Adverse |
D+ |
The ‘Curra’ is a local road used as walking route
between Clondrohid and Killaclug. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
14 |
Agriculture |
Landtake = 74.51 |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Landtake = 76.72 |
Moderate Adverse |
E+ |
Landtake = 78.03 |
Moderate Adverse |
E++ |
The Yellow route would impact on the lowest quality land
with the least landtake. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
Mineral Resources |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No effect on quarrying operations |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
17 |
Construction Impacts |
Construction of major river crossing and crossings of
major and minor existing roads. A
4.75km length between the existing N22 and node 6 would be required to
accommodate phasing of the works and construction of standalon Macroom
bypass. |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Construction of major river crossing and crossings of
major and minor existing roads. A 1.5km length between the existing N22 and
Node 5 would be required to accommodation phasing of the works and provide
standalone Macroom bypass. |
Major Adverse |
F |
Construction one major river crossing and disruption to
traffic on major and minor existing roads, including N22 |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
It has been assumed that the road project could be
constructed in 3 phases. All routes
would involve construction of a major river crossing and disruption to
existing traffic. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
+ indicates greater preference for route section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
OTHER INFORMATION* |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
16 |
Road Alignment |
Relaxation to crest curves. |
Relaxation to crest curves. |
Relaxation to crest curves. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
18 |
Scheme Cost Estimate (€/1000) |
80,435 |
67,674 |
56,194 |
Construction Cost, Contingency, Land Cost and Design & Supervision excl. VAT |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(includes €24,597k for the tie-in of the existing N22 to
Node 6 for complete Macroom bypass) |
(includes €6,819k for the tie-in of the existing N22 to
Node 5 for complete Macroom bypass) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
19 |
Traffic Figures |
2024 AADT = NOT MODELLED |
2024 AADT = 10,300 |
2024 AADT = 12,800 |
Standard single carriageway - Nodes 3 to 4a/5a. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scheme length (km) |
14.7 |
15.2 + 1.6 to complete Macroom bypass to N22 |
15.6 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Demolition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of houses |
0 |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of businesses |
0 |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 0m - 50m |
2 |
2 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 50m - 100m |
16 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 100m - 200m |
39 |
|
|
57 |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 200m - 300m |
37 |
|
|
60 |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of Crossings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
river/stream |
14 |
|
|
16 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
national roads |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
regional roads |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
minor roads |
18 |
|
|
15 |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
farm accesses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of road bridges /underbridges |
0 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Earthworks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Cut m3 |
1,006,300 |
|
|
1,091,500 |
|
|
833,700 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
fill m3 |
672,200 |
|
|
560,200 |
|
|
388,200 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
*Data taken from feasibility design - subject to
amendment at later design stages. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A21.3 Nodes
6 to 16 (Northern Routes)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Node 6 - 16 |
Green |
Red |
Green/Link3/Red |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Segments |
Green
(Nodes 6 to 16) |
Yellow
(Nodes 6 to 7) |
Green
(Nodes 6 to 9) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMPACT ASSESSMENT (with
appropriate mitigation measures) |
COMPARISON |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chapter Ref. |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 |
Landscape and Aesthetics |
Passes through designated Lee Valley Area of Scenic
Importance |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Passes through scenic Lee Valley. |
Major Adverse |
F |
Passes through designated Lee Valley Area of Scenic
Importance. |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Green route passes along the reservoir shores for
the shortest distance. The route that
would take the proposed road closest to residential areas and for the
greatest distance along the reservoir shores would have the greatest visual
impact. On this basis, the order of
preference for the routes would be: Green, Red, Green/Link/Red. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 |
Cultural Heritage |
Major impact 3 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Major impact 9 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F |
Major impact 3 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
The red route has the least number of archaeological
sites directly affected, but is the least preferred as it is in an area of
high archaeological potential, due to the large number of sites in the
area. This suggests a denser
archaeological landscape and a greater potential for sub-surface
archaeological sites. The Green/Link/Red route would be preferred as it would
have a major impact on fewer monuments and sites than the Green route. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 |
Surface Water Quality and Drainage |
Crosses Class A Rivers (x2) |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Crosses Class A Rivers (x2) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses Class A Rivers (x1) |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
All routes represent an increased risk of flooding to
properties adj. to the River Bride for which suitable mitigation will be
required. Both the Red and
Green/Link/Red routes cross the Kame River and its floodplain., this represents
an increased risk of flooding for properties for the Red route which is
therefore least preferred. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Geology |
Passes close to the closed landfill site at Shanakill,
measures should be adopted to ensure that impact due to construction near the
landfill is mitigated. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Short length of high embankment (23.5m maximum). |
Major Adverse |
F |
Short length of high embankment (23.5m maximum). Passes close to the closed landfill site
at Shanakill, measures should be adopted to ensure that impact due to
construction near the landfill is mitigated. |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Green route has a shorter length of high embankment
(15m maximum height). This route
passes close to the closed landfill site at Shanakill. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Hydrogeology |
Generally moderately productive with approx. 20% mod.
Productive locally |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Generally moderately productive. Western section
generally unproductive |
Minor Adverse |
D+ |
Generally moderately productive with approx. 10% mod.
Productive locally |
Minor Adverse |
D |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
8 |
Ecology |
Large part of 1 site of high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Large part of 1 site of high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Large part of 1 site of high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F |
All the routes must cross the river Bride which is one
of the sites proposed for designation as an SAC by the Irish NGOs. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 |
Air Quality |
107 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
146 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F |
104 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Quality parameters for NOx would be
exceeded for the least distance on the Green route. The Green and the
Green/Link/Red route also have the
lowest numbers of properties along their length. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10 |
Noise and Vibration |
166 residential properties within 300m |
Major Adverse |
F |
257 residential properties within 300m |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
183 residential properties within 300m |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Red route is likely to experience the lowest
percentage increase in noise levels (from ambient), followed by the
Green/Link/Red route and then Green route. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11 |
Planning |
Crosses Lee Valley scenic & Rec area |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Crosses Area Scientific Importance (D47) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses Lee Valley scenic & Rec area |
Major Adverse |
F |
All the route options cross one or other of the Lee
Valley reservoirs contravening Cork CC policies on preserving these
shorelines and lakeside routes free from development. In addition to crossing the reservoirs,
Red and Green/Link/Red routes run alongside the reservoir for a number of
kilometres, such that a longer stretch of road would be visible from the
opposite shoreline. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
12 |
Socio-Economics |
Separation of neighbouring communities Isolation of some
residents |
Major Adverse |
F |
Next to Bealick Mill Impact to setting of wooded picnic
area (near Ummera) and Farran Woods |
Moderate Adverse |
E++ |
Isolation of some Residents. |
Moderate Adverse |
E+ |
All routes will result in loss of passing trade
currently attracted to businesses along the existing N22 and in the town of
Macroom. The Green/Link/Red route
would have the least effect on separation of communities. The Red route would result in increased
visibility of the tourist attraction Bealick Mill from the National road,
which may encourage tourists to stop in the area. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13 |
Demolition and Loss of Amenity |
Close to residential property. |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Crosses southern boundary of Lee Valley Golf
Course. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Crosses southern boundary of Lee Valley Golf
Course. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
All routes would be in close proximity to residential
and commercial property and may affect the EMC car park where the scheme ties
into the Ballincollig bypass. The Red
and Green/Link3/Red routes cross the southern boundary of the Lee Valley Golf
Course. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
14 |
Agriculture |
Landtake = 121.22 |
Major Adverse |
F |
Landtake - 118.14 |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Landtake 119.61 |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
The Green route would affect the highest quality land
and would also have the greatest land-take. The Red route would affect the
lowest quality land, and would have the lowest land-take. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
Mineral Resources |
Passes through two quarries. |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Passes through two quarries |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Passes through two quarries |
Severe Adverse |
G |
The Green route would
have an affect on Classis West and also sterilise areas of proposed
extraction at O’Neil’s quarry near Clashanure. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
17 |
Construction Impacts |
Construction of more than one major river crossings and
major disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22.
A 3km length of road between Nodes 6 and 7a would be required to accommodate
phasing of the works and construction of stand-alone Macroom bypass. |
Severe Adverse |
G++ |
Construction of more than one major river crossing and
major disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22. |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Construction of more than one major river crossing and
major disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Severe Adverse |
G+ |
It has been assumed that the road project could be
constructed in 3 phases. Green route
is preferred route as there is the least degree of construction required
close to the shores of the Reservoir(s) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
+ indicates greater preference for route section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
OTHER INFORMATION* |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
16 |
Road Alignment |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
18 |
Scheme Cost Estimate (€/1000) |
140,971 |
|
|
131,037 |
|
|
125,026 |
|
|
Construction Cost, Contingency, Land Cost and Design & Supervision excl. VAT |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(including €16,583k to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes
6 to 7a) |
(including €5,785k to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes
7 to 7a) |
(including €16,583k to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes
6 to 7a) |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
19 |
Traffic Figures |
Macroom to Coachford: 2024 AADT = 15,100 |
Macroom to Coachford: 2024 AADT = 16,300 |
2024 AADT = NOT MODELLED |
Wide single carriageway. (see chapter 22). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scheme length (km) |
24.3 + 2.9 to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes 6 to 7a |
23.7 + 0.9 to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes 7 to 7a |
23.9 + 2.9 to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes 6 to 7a |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Demolition: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of houses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of businesses |
0 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 0m - 50m |
7 |
|
|
14 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 50m - 100m |
34 |
|
|
43 |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 100m - 200m |
66 |
|
|
89 |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 200m - 300m |
59 |
|
|
111 |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of Crossings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
river/stream |
9 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
national roads |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
regional roads |
2 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
minor roads |
29 |
|
|
31 |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
farm accesses |
8 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of road bridges /underbridges |
2 |
|
|
14 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Earthworks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Cut m3 |
1,387,400 |
|
|
515,900 |
|
|
419,100 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
fill m3 |
222,000 |
|
|
1,178,400 |
|
|
914,300 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
*Data taken from feasibility design - subject to
amendment at later design stages. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A21.4 Nodes
6 to 11 (Southern Routes)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Node 6 - 11 |
Yellow |
Yellow/Link4/Blue |
Blue |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Segments |
Yellow
(Nodes 6 to 11) |
Yellow
(Nodes 6 to 8) |
Yellow
(Nodes 6 to 7) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMPACT ASSESSMENT (with
appropriate mitigation measures) |
COMPARISON |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chapter Reference |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 |
Landscape and aesthetics |
Affects views from Macroom & Lissardagh |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Affects views from Macroom |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Affects views from Macroom |
Major Adverse |
F |
All routes cross the Lee Valley in an area, which is not
designated but is an important landscape area. The Yellow route would affect views from Macroom and Lissarda,
although roads are already a feature of the landscape in this area. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 |
Cultural Heritage |
Major impact 3 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F |
Major impact 4 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F |
Major impact 3 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Blue route through Mashanaglass would impact upon a
large area of high archaeological potential along with many sites and
monuments. Yellow and
Yellow/Link4/Blue routes would affect similar numbers of sites, although the
Yellow/Link4/Blue route would affect slightly more. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 |
Surface Water Quality and Drainage |
Crosses Class A river (x3). |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Crosses Class A river (x3) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses Class A river (x1) |
Major Adverse |
F |
All routes cross the Carrigadrohid reservoir. The Blue and Yellow/Link4/Blue routes have
potential to affect flooding to properties, with Yellow/Link4/Blue having the
potential to affect the greatest number of properties. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Geology |
Has a length of very high embankment and would result in
a large fill material import requirement. |
Major Adverse |
F |
Results in a slight deficit of material and passes
though a short length of soft ground.
|
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Good cut and fill balance and does not go through any
soft ground. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Hydrogeology |
70% generally mod productive; 10% karst; 20% generally unproductive |
Minor Adverse |
D |
70% generally mod productive; 10% karst; F0% generally unproductive |
Minor Adverse |
D |
15% generally unproductive; 85% generally moderately
productive |
Minor Adverse |
D+ |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
8 |
Ecology |
Small part 2 sites high ecological value |
Moderate Adverse |
E+ |
Small part 2 sites high ecological value |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Large part 1 site high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F |
All routes would pass through 2 sites of high or
potentially high ecological value. However, whereas the Yellow and
Yellow/Link/Blue routes would take small sections of these sites only, the
Blue route would impact on a large part of a coniferous and deciduous
woodland (Area 55d). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 |
Air Quality |
134 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F |
111 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
55 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
All routes would exceed quality standards for NOx
between nodes 7a/7b and node 11.
The Yellow route has the greatest number of properties along its
length. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10 |
Noise and Vibration |
199 residential properties within 300m |
Major Beneficial |
B+ |
172 residential properties within 300m |
Minor Adverse |
D+ |
103 residential properties within 300m |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
For the Yellow route, there are high numbers of residential
properties within 300m of the route, which are already subject to noise from
the existing N22. The noise impact on
these properties is likely to decrease due to the noise absorbing
capabilities of modern road surfaces. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11 |
Planning |
Crosses Area of Scientific Interest (D47) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses Area of Scientific Interest (D47) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses Area of Scientific Interest (D47) |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
All the routes cross one or other of the Lee Valley
reservoirs contravening Cork CC policies on preserving these shorelines and
lakeside routes free from development.
In addition to crossing the reservoirs, the Yellow route runs
alongside the reservoir for a number of kilometres, such that a longer
stretch of road would be visible from the opposite shoreline |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
12 |
Socio Economics |
Next to Bealick Mill which would increase its visibility
to passing tourist traffic. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Next to Bealick Mill which would increase its visibility
to passing tourist traffic. |
Moderate Adverse |
F+ |
Next to Bealick Mill which would increase its visibility
to passing tourist traffic. |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Blue route would isolate the greatest number of
residents, notably the communities at Mashanaglass. All routes would result in a loss of passing trade to
businesses in Lissarda and along the existing N22, appropriate signage along
the Yellow route, and to a lesser extent the Yellow/Link4/Blue route, may
mitigate this. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13 |
Demolition and loss of amenity |
Close proximity to residential and commercial property. |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Close proximity to residential and commercial property. |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Demolition of one residential property. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
All routes would be in close proximity to existing
residential and commercial property and pass close to Bealick Mill. The Blue route would also require
demolition of one residential property. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
14 |
Agriculture |
Landtake = 79.93 |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Landtake =79.11 |
Moderate Adverse |
E+ |
Landtake = 70.24 |
Moderate Adverse |
E++ |
The quality of land affected by the Blue and the
Yellow/Link4/Blue route would be similar, and lower than that affected by the
Yellow route. The Yellow route would
also have the greatest land-take and would be the least preferred. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
Mineral Resources |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No Impact |
No Impact |
C |
No effect on quarrying operations. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
17 |
Construction Impacts |
Construction of more than one major river crossing and
disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Severe Adverse |
G+ |
Construction of more than one major river crossing and
disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Construction of more than one major river crossing and
disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Severe Adverse |
G++ |
The Yellow/Link/Blue route requires the greatest degree
of construction close to the shores of the Reservoir(s) and the greatest
disruption to traffic on the N22 and other existing major roads. The Blue route require the least degree of
construction close to these shores and the least disruption to traffic. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
+ indicates greater preference for route section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
OTHER INFORMATION* |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
16 |
Road Alignment |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
18 |
Scheme Cost Estimate (€/1000) |
89,708 |
|
|
95,357 |
|
|
93,688 |
|
|
Construction Cost, Contingency, Land Cost and Design & Supervision excl. VAT |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
(includes €5,785 to complete Macroom bypass nodes 7 to
7a) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
19 |
Traffic Figures |
2024 AADT = 16,400 |
2024 AADT = NOT MODELLED |
2024 AADT = 16,400 |
Wide single carriageway. (see chapter 22). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scheme length (km) |
13.3 |
|
|
13.2 |
|
|
12.2 + 0.9 to complete Macroom bypass nodes 7 to 7a |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Demolition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of houses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of businesses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of properties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 0m - 50m |
17 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 50m - 100m |
90 |
|
|
34 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 100m - 200m |
177 |
|
|
73 |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 200m - 300m |
114 |
|
|
61 |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of Crossings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
river/stream |
5 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
national roads |
1 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
regional roads |
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
minor roads crossed |
16 |
|
|
20 |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
farm accesses |
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of road bridges/underbridges |
7 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Earthworks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Cut m3 |
1,216,240 |
|
|
858,540 |
|
|
958,900 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
fill m3 |
755,800 |
|
|
789,000 |
|
|
450,600 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
*Data taken from feasibility design - subject to
amendment at later design stages |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A21.5 Nodes
11 to 16 (Southern Routes)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Node 11 - 16 |
Yellow |
Blue |
Yellow/Link6/Blue |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Segments |
Yellow
(Nodes 11 to 16) |
Blue
(Nodes 11 to 15) |
Yellow
(Nodes 11 to 12) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMPACT ASSESSMENT (with
appropriate mitigation measures) |
COMPARISON |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chapter
Reference |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
Comment |
Rank |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 |
Landscape and aesthetics |
Route passes close to Farnanes |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Route passes close to Killumney, Cloughduv and Aherla |
Major Adverse |
F |
Route passes close to Killumney |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
The Yellow and Yellow/Link/Blue crosses though the Bride
Valley between nodes 12 and 15 west of Ovens. The Blue route will affect views from Killumney, Cloughduv and
Aherla and is therefore the least preferred. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 |
Cultural Heritage - Archaeology |
Moderate impact 2 Rec Monuments |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Major impact 2 rec Monuments (1= Kilcrea) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Moderate impact 2 Rec Monuments |
Moderate Adverse |
E* |
The proximity of the Blue route to Kilcrea Friary and
graveyard would seriously compromise/affect the setting of this nationally
important site. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 |
Surface Water Quality |
Crosses Class A River Bride (x1) |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Crosses Class A River Bride (x2) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses Class A River Bride (x1) |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
All routes represent a widespread increase in flood risk
to agricultural land and a number of properties close to the River
Bride. It is likely that the effects
on flood risk can be more easily mitigated on the Blue route than the Yellow
or Yellow/Link/Blue routes. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Geology |
Requires importation of additional fill material for
embankment construction, required in order to maintain road surfaces above
flood levels. |
Major Adverse |
F |
Crosses over soft ground. |
Major Adverse |
F |
Requires importation of additional fill material for
embankment construction, required in order to maintain road surfaces above
flood levels. |
Major Adverse |
F |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Hydrogeology |
Moderately productive locally to the west; karst and
fissure flow to the east |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
karst and fissure flow |
Major Adverse |
F |
Moderately productive locally to the west; karst and
fissure flow to the east |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
8 |
Ecology |
Small part of 1 site high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F** |
Large part of 1 site high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F |
Small part of 1 site high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F* |
Between Nodes 11 and 16, the Yellow route crosses fewer
of the Bride tributaries than the Blue route. Similarly, the relative distance between the Yellow route and
the River Bride is greater. The
Yellow and the Yellow/Link/Blue routes would take only a small part of an
area of high or potentially high ecological value, the Blue route would take
a large part of a marshy grassland site (Area 73). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 |
Air Quality |
150 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F |
107 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
131 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Both the Yellow and the Blue route would exceed quality
standards for NOx between nodes 11 and 16. The Yellow/Link6/Blue route is assumed to
also exceed NOx quality standards for this section,
although no traffic, and hence no air quality data, is available for this
section of route. The Yellow route
has the greatest number of properties along its length. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10 |
Noise and Vibration |
199 residential properties within 300m |
Minor Adverse |
D |
183 residential properties within 300m |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
178 residential properties within 300m |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
For the Yellow route, there are high numbers of
residential properties within 300m of the route, which are already subject to
noise from the existing N22. The
noise impact on these properties is likely to decrease due to the noise
absorbing capabilities of modern road surfaces. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11 |
Planning |
Crosses area rich in gravel deposits (deep north vein) |
Major Adverse |
F |
Area rich in gravel deposits |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Area rich in gravel deposits (mostly avoid as stick to
original alignment -shorter distance) |
Major Adverse |
F |
All the routes cross notable areas of productive mineral
deposits which may be sterilised, conflicting with Cork C.C. policies to
protect mineral resources in the county.
The Blue route would traverse the significantly shallower southern
vein than the Yellow and
Yellow/Link6/Blue routes |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
12 |
Socio Economics |
Splits village near Kilcrea. |
Major Adverse |
F |
Severance of roads to Knockanemore and Donovan Pit. |
Major Adverse |
F |
Splits village near Kilcrea. |
Major Adverse |
F |
All routes would cause some separation for a number of
properties in the Carrigane area east of Ovens. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13 |
Demolition and loss of Amenity |
Close to residential property. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Close to residential property. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Close to residential property. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
14 |
Agriculture |
Landtake = 82.03 |
Major Adverse |
F |
Major Adverse Impact |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Landtake = 83.64
|
Major Adverse |
F+ |
The Blue route would affect the lowest quality land, and
so despite the fact that it would have a greater land-take than the Yellow
route, it would be preferred. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
Mineral Resources |
Sterilises two potential areas of mineral extraction |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Sterilises two potential areas of mineral extraction.
Possible safety implications from blasting |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Sterilises an area of potential mineral deposits. |
Severe Adverse |
G |
The Yellow and the Yellow/Link/Blue routes would
potentially have the most impact on mineral resources, as both these routes
cross the deeper northern gravel deposits.
In contrast, the Blue route traverses the shallower southern
deposits. The Yellow route will
affect more existing and potential quarrying activity including some deeper
gravel deposits close to Knockanemore. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
17 |
Construction Impacts |
Construction of major river crossing and disruption to
traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Construction of more than one major river crossing and
major disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Construction of major river crossing and disruption to
traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22. Route is closer to the Bird River than the
Yellow route |
Major Adverse |
F |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
+ indicates greater preference for route section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
OTHER INFORMATION* |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
16 |
Engineering Relaxations and Departures |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
18 |
Scheme Cost Estimate (€/1000) |
55,297 |
|
|
61,763 |
|
|
55,724 |
|
|
Construction Cost, Contingency, Land Cost and Design & Supervision excl. VAT. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
19 |
Traffic Figures |
2024 AADT = 15,000 |
2024 AADT = 14,800 |
2024 AADT = NOT MODELLED |
Wide single carriageway. (see chapter 22). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scheme length (km) |
13.7 |
|
|
140.0 |
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Demolition: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of houses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of businesses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No of properties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 0m - 50m |
12 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 50m - 100m |
48 |
|
|
27 |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 100m - 200m |
90 |
|
|
61 |
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 200m - 300m |
49 |
|
|
70 |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of Crossings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
river/stream |
9 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
national roads |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
regional roads |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
minor roads |
12 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
farm accesses |
2 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of road bridges /underbridges |
6 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Earthworks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Cut m3 |
367,400 |
|
|
201,000 |
|
|
451,100 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
fill m3 |
193,900 |
|
|
255,600 |
|
|
221,100 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
* Data taken from feasibility design - subject to
amendment at later design stages. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A21.6 Nodes
6 to 16 (Preferred Northern and Southern Routes)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nodes 6 - 11 |
Green |
Yellow |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Segments |
Green
(Nodes 6 to 16) |
Yellow
(Nodes 6 to 16) |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMPACT ASSESSMENT (with
appropriate mitigation measures) |
COMPARISON |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Refer to Chapter |
Comments |
Impact |
Comment |
Impact |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 |
Landscape and Aesthetics |
Passes through designated Lee Valley Area of Scenic
Importance |
Major Adverse |
F |
Affects views from Macroom & Lissardagh & Farnanes |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
The Green route would require a longer reservoir
crossing which would dominate the landscape.
The Yellow route is preferred as the existing road is already a
significant feature of the landscape. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 |
Cultural Heritage |
Major impact 3 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Major impact 3 recorded Monuments |
Major Adverse |
F |
Similar comparison, Green assessed as slightly less
impact. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 |
Surface Water Quality and Drainage |
Crosses Class A Rivers (x2) |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Crosses Class A river (x4) (including Bride) |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Yellow route assessed as slightly more impact due to
the greater length of the Bride that could be affected by construction and
accidental spillages. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Geology |
Passes close to the closed landfill site at Shanakill,
measures should be adopted to ensure that impact due to construction near the
landfill is mitigated. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
Major Adverse Impact |
Major Adverse |
F |
The Yellow route would require the import of fill
material |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 |
Hydrogeology |
Generally moderately productive with approx. 20% mod.
Productive locally |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Moderately productive flow with some karst. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
The Green route is seen as less impact as it does not
cross the karst feature |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
8 |
Ecology |
Large part of 1 site of high ecological value |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Small part 3 sites high ecological value |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
The routes are similar in effect with the Green route
preferred as it would generally avoid the River Bride. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 |
Air Quality |
107 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
284 residential properties within 200m |
Major Adverse |
F |
There are a greater number of properties close to the
Yellow route which has a detrimental affect. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10 |
Noise and Vibration |
166 residential properties within 300m |
Major Adverse |
F |
398 residential properties within 300m |
Major Beneficial |
B+ |
As the existing route runs along the edge of the bride
valley the noise increase is much
less for the Yellow route |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11 |
Planning |
Crosses Lee Valley scenic & Rec area |
Major Adverse |
F++ |
Crosses Areas of Scientific Interest (D30 & D47) |
Major Adverse |
F |
The affect on the reserves in the Bride valley make the
Yellow route less preferable than the Green. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
12 |
Socio-Economics |
Separation of neighbouring communities Isolation of some
residents |
Major Adverse |
F |
Next to Bealick Mill |
Major Adverse |
F+ |
Major impact on communities on both routes. Seen as slightly more impact on the Green
route due its more rural setting. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13 |
Demolition and Loss of Amenity |
Close to residential property. |
Minor Adverse |
D |
Close to residential property. |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
14 |
Agriculture |
Landtake = 121.22 |
Major Adverse |
F |
Landtake = 161.96ha |
Moderate Adverse |
E |
The land affected by the Yellow route is of lower
quality than that affected by the Green route. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
Mineral Resources |
Passes through two quarries. |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Sterilises two potential areas of mineral extraction, |
Severe Adverse |
G |
Similar impacts from both routes. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
17 |
Construction Impacts |
Construction of more than one major river crossings and
major disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Severe Adverse |
G+ |
Construction of more than one major river crossings and
major disruption to traffic on existing major and minor roads, including N22 |
Severe
Adverse |
G |
Similar impacts from both routes. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
+ indicates greater preference for route section. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
OTHER INFORMATION* |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
16 |
Road Alignment |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
Relaxations to horizontal & vertical. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
18 |
Scheme Cost Estimate (€/1000) |
140,971 |
|
|
145,005 |
|
|
Construction Cost, Contingency, Land Cost and Design & Supervision excl. VAT. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(including €16,583k to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes
6 to 7a) |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
19 |
Traffic Figures |
Macroom to Coachford: 2024 AADT = 15,100 |
|
|
Macroom to Crookstown: 2024 AADT = 16,400 |
|
|
Both wide single carriageway. (see chapter 22). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scheme length (km) |
24.3 + 2.9 to complete the Macroom Bypass Nodes 6 to 7a |
27.1 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Demolition: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of houses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
No. of businesses |
0 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 0m - 50m |
7 |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 50m - 100m |
34 |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 100m - 200m |
66 |
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
within 200m - 300m |
59 |
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of Crossings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
river/stream |
9 |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
national roads |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
regional roads |
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
minor roads |
29 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
farm accesses |
8 |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of road bridges /underbridges |
2 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Earthworks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Cut m3 |
1,387,400 |
|
|
1,583,640 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
fill m3 |
222,000 |
|
|
949,700 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
*Data taken from feasibility design - subject to
amendment at later design stages. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||